Wear 270 (2011) 598605

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Wear
j our nal homepage: www. el sevi er . com/ l ocat e/ wear
An effective modeling tool for studying erosion
J. Wu

, L.J.W. Graham, D. Lester, C.Y. Wong, T. Kilpatrick, S. Smith, B. Nguyen

CSIRO Process Science and Engineering, PO Box 56, Highett, Victoria 3190, Australia
a r t i c l e i n f o
Article history:
Received 12 April 2010
Received in revised form
16 December 2010
Accepted 21 January 2011
Available online 3 February 2011
Keywords:
Erosion
Wear
Particles
Paint
Multilayer paints
a b s t r a c t
Visual erosionexamples basedonthat occurredintheminerals andoil andgas industries areillustratedby
a paint modeling technique. The visual paint patterns were used to illustrate erosion damage hot spots.
This provided an insight into the underlining uid dynamics process involved with erosion damages. This
insight allows design changes to be made to reduce erosion, illustrated by examples in this paper. The
patterns of erosion damages on paints were found to be similar to that occurred with metal materials.
This was supported by a similarity in measured erosion angular erosion distribution with cylindrical
samples. Error analysis suggested that spatial variations in velocity across a material surface accounted
for most of the error in the paint modeling technique.
Due to its low cost and rapidity, the technique is particularly suitable for developing and optimizing
the design of ow geometries to reduce erosion, without the need to change the materials used.
2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction
Particulateerosiononmaterial surfaces is commoninmanypro-
cess industries, particularly in the minerals processing industry.
To reduce erosion due to solid particle impact on the surfaces of
materials in multiphase ow equipment, it is general practice to
use wear-resistant materials or coatings/surface hardening treat-
ments. This paper focuses onresearchaimedat reducingthesurface
erosion of materials through ow geometry modication, without
changing the materials used or their properties. As erosion rate
is a function of particle velocity and particle impingement angle
[15] for any given material and physical properties of particles,
this uid dynamics-based approach can be effective for erosion
reduction.
Erosion is often found to be unevenly distributed, and localized
deep material loss or holing can lead to functional failure, even
if most of the equipment remains undamaged. Fig. 1 shows typ-
ical examples of equipment erosion experienced in the minerals
industry. It is reasoned that the geometry of an equipment can be
modied to alter the ow eld so that erosion is more evenly dis-
tributed, thereby reducing local maximum erosion rates and thus
extending the functional life of equipment.
To achieve erosionreductionvia a uid-dynamics approach, it is
essential to model or simulate changes in both erosion rate and dis-
tributionas afunctionof anygeometrical modications. Tothis end,
a computational uid dynamics (CFD) erosion modeling technique

Corresponding author. Tel.: +61 3 9252 6173; fax: +61 3 9252 6252.
E-mail address: Jie.Wu@csiro.au (J. Wu).
has beendeveloped[6] that incorporates experimentally measured
erosion data for cylinders in-pipe ow. However, it is clear from
our work thus far that it remains a major challenge to reliably pre-
dict erosion patterns via CFDalone, particularly for highly complex
multiphase ows such as those with time-dependent vortices, and
therefore physical experiments to assess any new design concept
are still required to validate CFD predictions.
Materials are often characterized as either ductile or brittle,
according to their differing erosion rate versus angle of attack
curves [3]. For ductile materials, the erosion rate reaches a max-
imum value at impact angles of 1030

(dened as the acute

angle between particle impingement direction and material sur-
face), whereas hard, brittle materials experience maximum wear
at greater impact angles. For example, the maximum erosion rate
of a brittle alumina-based ceramic material is in the range of 70
90

.
Erosion of metals is the major problemaddressed by this paper,
as metals are widely used in the mineral processing industry. Met-
als suchas mildsteels, aluminumandtitaniumoftenexhibit ductile
or mixed ductile/brittle behavior [1]. Thus it is reasonable to con-
sider using paint as a model material for visualizing the erosions
on metals, as paint exhibits similar ductile behavior [7].
Wuet al. [8] andNoui-Mehidi et al. [9] haveshownthefeasibility
of using the multilayer paint technique to produce accelerated and
highly visible erosion damage in various ow geometries, to assist
inthe development of improvedgeometrical designs that minimize
erosion. This paper expands onthese previous results, and provides
a summary of the basic technical procedures and an error assess-
ment of the paint modeling technique, as well as further examples
of its use in developing improved designs.
0043-1648/$ see front matter 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.wear.2011.01.016
J. Wu et al. / Wear 270 (2011) 598605 599
Fig. 1. Typical examples of erosion developed in minerals industry equipment: (a)
axial ow impeller after operating in a slurry autoclave; (b) slurry screen after a
ltration operation; and (c) cooling plate after operating in a slurry ow.
The objective of this paper is to present erosion solution cases,
developed from applying the paint modeling technical through
laboratory or site testing, with validation by error analysis and
cylindrical sample measurements.
Fig. 3. Schematic of experimental test rig: air/solids ow test loop, pipe section
diameter 100mm, typical test section air velocity 80m/s. Robushi E106 75kW
blower. Temperature and pressure are ambient. Solid particles used were sands,
glass particles of 50500m.
2. Experimental setup and technique
2.1. Erosion test rigs
Two experimental ow loops were set up, as shown schemati-
cally in Figs. 2 and 3. The slurry owtest loop (Fig. 2), consisted of a
3000-L agitated slurry holding tank, a Warman 32 slurry pump,
an Emerson magnetic owmeter. Typically silica sand (Gareld
sand) of d
50
=200m were used as erodent particles. Tap water
was used as the liquid phase. Asolid concentration of 7% (w/w) was
used in the tests. Sand/water slurries were recirculated at typical
velocity range of 010m/s. The test section pipe ID was 53mm.
In the air/solids ow test loop (Fig. 3), sand or glass particles
of d
50
=50, 500m diameters were recirculated at a maximum
velocity of 80m/s, using a Robushi E106 75kW blower. The solids
were fed and removed through a cyclone separation/hopper feed
system. For these experiments, the nominal diameter of the test
pipe sections was 100mm.
A mixing tank similar to that depicted in Fig. 2 was also used
to study erosion development on rotating impellers. Mixing tank
diameter was 0.390m, and agitator speed typically from 0 to
500rpm. Agitator diameter was in the range 0.1600.190m. Sands
or glass particles with d
50
in the range of 100200m were typi-
cally used in the mixing tank.
2.2. Paint application procedure
For the purpose of illustration, our practice of applying spray
paint for erosion modeling is introduced here. To produce a quali-
tative illustration of erosion using the multilayer paint technique,
the paint had to be evenly distributed so that thickness variation
Fig. 2. Schematic of experimental test rig: slurry owtest loop. This rig consisted of a 3000-L agitated slurry holding tank, a Warman 32 slurry pump, an Emerson magnetic
owmeter, and associated pipe ID of 53mm.
600 J. Wu et al. / Wear 270 (2011) 598605
across the material surface was minimal. It was therefore necessary
to reduce any gravity-induced ow of wet paint lm on a mate-
rial surface, or part thereof, inclined to the horizontal plane. This
was achieved by using a very ne paint spray, and applying the
successive layers at intervals that allowed drying between each
application.
Typically, multiple layers of paint each 4060m thick were
sprayed onto a test material surface using a paint air-gun system.
A probe, e.g. a Fischer Dualscope MP20 thickness gauge, or other
was used to measure the depth of each paint layer, as well as the
total paint thickness before and after each test. Paint lmthickness
measurements allowanassessment of uniformity of the painting. It
can also provide a quantitative measure, which is helpful in some
cases.
2.3. Erosion modeling
To validate the paint modeling technique to a variety of
materials, more accurate measurements of the effect of particle
impingement angle were conducted. These useda similar approach
to [6] where a cylindrical metal sample (10mm diameter) was
mountedacross aslurrypipeow(50mmindiameter) that enabled
the full range of particle impact angles to be tested in a single
experiment.
Erosion measurements of metal samples were conducted using
a purpose-built erosion measurement facility similar to that
described in [10], consisting of a collet chuck for holding cylindri-
cal samples, a 200-step stepper motor drive and a Schaevitz gauge
head (precise linear variable differential transducer (LVDT)).
Painted cylinders were also tested for comparison with the
metallic samples. Paint thickness measurements on the cylindrical
samples were made in a separate rig using the Fischer Dualscope
MP20 gauge, which was mounted in a drill chuck so that the probe
could be traversed around the cylindrical sample.
3. Results
3.1. Validating paint erosion modeling technique
Fig. 4(a) shows the results of a test on a rotating cylindrical rod
placed horizontally in a slurry pot (Fig. 4(b)). It can be seen that
a double-wedge erosion pattern developed along the rod surface.
Note that the angular location of the axes (approximately 2030

from the frontal normal face) of the double-wedge corresponds to

where the angles of particle impingement produced peak erosion.
It can be estimated, based on CFD particle ow modeling by Lester
et al. [6] that this corresponds to particle impingement angles of
1020

, with some uncertainty due to a difference in the ow eld

studied with the CFD simulation. It can be therefore commented
that the double-wedge erosion pattern is consistent with observa-
tion that off-the-shelf paints exhibit ductile behavior [7,9].
Fig. 5(a) shows a comparisonof the erosiondepthversus angular
distribution curves for a spray painted sample and a range of gen-
erally ductile metal samples a low carbon steel (ASTM 106B) and
a harder steel (Bisplate 500) in which all data has been normal-
ized by the maximum. It should be noted that the sampling angle
has been converted to the actual particle impingement angle ,
with assistance from a CFD simulation that provided information
on particle impingement angle as a function of , using a proce-
dure described in detail in our paper on the CFD erosion modeling
approach [6].
The data presented in Fig. 5(a) shows that the maximum paint
erosion occurred at an impingement angle similar to those of the
steels, which is sufcient to conclude that the location of peak ero-
sion in these materials is reasonably well captured by the paint
Fig. 4. Paint erosion on a cylindrical rod after rotating in a slurry pot, (a) double-
wedge erosion pattern, visualised by paint layer, (b) slurry pot set up.
modeling technique. These results are in agreement with previ-
ously reported results [7,9], thus conrming the suitability of the
paint as a modeling tool.
3.2. Paint erosion modeling
3.2.1. Paint modeling full-scale comparison
For a number of years, the paint modeling technique described
in this paper has been used at CSIRO to conduct laboratory-
scale modeling of erosion development in full-scale industrial ow
equipment, and anecdotal evidence from industry appears to sup-
port our results. To illustrate, Fig. 6 presents images of the erosion
damage incurred on a Rushton turbine
1
after operating for less
than a year in a minerals industry slurry reactor, compared to the
paint erosion pattern that developed on a similar lab-scale tur-
bine. The severe erosion on the back of the blades and on the disc
just behind the blades of the full-scale impellers was remarkably
well represented in the paint erosion pattern that developed on the
model impeller. A detailed account of the paint modeling study on
impellers is presented in [8].
3.2.2. Erosions on pipe bends
Fig. 7 presents a comparison of the erosion (as determined
using a coordinate measuring machine (CMM)) on an aluminum
elbow, and the result of a multilayer paint experiment. It is evi-
dent that the paint erosion pattern is in reasonable agreement with
the aluminummaterial loss distribution, further strengthening our
condence that the erosion damage incurred on ductile metals in
1
Erosion on the full-scale 8-bladed turbines was similar to that shown here on
the 4-blade turbine, but is not include here due to poor photo quality.
J. Wu et al. / Wear 270 (2011) 598605 601
Fig. 5. (a) Comparison of results fromspray paint and metal sample erosion tests in
a cylinder incross-ow, as a functionof the particle impact angle () (samples tested
at a supercial velocity of 8.13ms
1
). (b) Sketch of cylinder geometry showing the
effect of particle path deviation, where is the sample angle, and is the actual
impact angle (in general / = (90)).
service can be successfully modeled by the multilayer paints tech-
nique. It is also interesting to comment that the paint modeling
showed some ne rippling erosion, which is not evident on the
aluminum elbow. The mechanism of this difference is not clear;
nevertheless it should be stressed again that paint modeling is an
approximation.
Fig. 8 displays a comparison between the qualitative paint ero-
sion patterns and the quantitative measurements of erosion on
a U-bend, which was tested in the air/solids loop at an air ow
velocity of 80m/s and with glass particles of 50010m. Prior to
testing, the U-bend pipe section was machined in half lengthways,
and the surfaces of each were then sprayed with layers (50m
thick) of paints: green, yellow, red and blue, fromthe material sur-
face outward. The two U-bend halves were bolted back together
and subsequently re-separated for qualitative visual assessment a
quantitative measurements. (For interpretation of the references
to color in the text, the reader is referred to the web version of
the article.) Fig. 8(a) shows an image of the paint erosion patterns
in each half of the U-bend, and Fig. 8(b) shows the distributions
of the measured loss of paint thickness, as determined using the
paint thickness gauge. It can be seen that the visual patterns are in
reasonable agreement with the quantitative measurements, con-
rming that the visual paint pattern does reect actual erosion
distribution, provided the paint layers are applied evenly.
Fig. 9(a) illustrates the severe erosion that developed in a
painted 102mmU-bend after 60s in the gas/solids owloop oper-
ating at an air ow rate of 80m/s and with particles of 500m at
a solids feed rate of 1.4kg/min. On the other hand, Fig. 9(b) shows
that hardly any erosion developed in a T-section of the same diam-
eter, under the same test conditions for the same period of time.
Fig. 6. Erosion on Rushton turbines (all after clockwise rotation): (a) full-scale 4-
blade impeller; (b) paint erosion on lab-scale 8-blade impeller.
This result is encouraging, as it suggests that the replacement of a
U-bend with a T-section would signicantly reduce erosion, while
providing the same function of redirecting the ow.
Fig. 10 illustrates the erosionthat developed ina horizontal pipe
(50mm diameter and 200mm long) after testing in a sand/water
slurry owing at 4m/s. It can be seen that the erosion patterns in
the top and bottom halves are very different, with the bottom half
exhibiting signicantly more erosion. It is noted that the critical (or
deposition) velocitybelowwhichsolids deposit tothepipebottom
was calculatedtobe 0.82m/s. This suggests that, althoughthe test
velocity of 4m/s was well above the deposition velocity, stratica-
tion of solids had occurred, with the possible formation of a sliding
bed of solids and increased solids concentration towards the pipe
bottom, which would have contributed to the increased erosion
observed in this section. It should be noted that the wear mecha-
nismwith abrasion by a sliding solids bed is different fromerosion;
increased erosion could be contributed by the change in the wear
mechanism. Paint technical has alimitationindifferentiatingwhich
mechanism is controlling here.
Fig. 11 displays the erosion that developed in a pipe section, in
which the slurry ow was via a tangentially located inlet pipe, and
it is clear that severe localized erosion occurred in the path of the
feeding jet. It was found (not shown here) that the erosion could be
drastically reduced by relocating the inlet away fromthe tangential
location, for example to the center of the pipe.
3.2.3. Vortex erosion on a T-section
Brown [11] reported that, within as little as 13 weeks of oper-
ation, a concentrated hole was being worn through steel blanks
inside T-junctions in slurry pipelines at Alcoas alumina renery
in Western Australia. He was able to simulate the erosion pattern
using CFD and to devise a new design that exhibited signicantly
602 J. Wu et al. / Wear 270 (2011) 598605
Fig. 7. (a) CMM map of aluminum elbow erosion, averaged over both halves of the
model. (b) Paint modeling of elbow erosion. Arrows indicate direction of ow.
reduced erosion rates. Fig. 12 illustrates the paint erosion pattern
on a blank inside a model T-junction after testing in the CSIROs
slurry ow test loop (Fig. 2). The paint erosion pattern is in good
agreement with the site observations and CFD simulations in [11].
3.2.4. Improved slurry agitator design
The severe erosion on the back of the blades of the two full-scale
Rushton turbines displayed in Fig. 6 had developed after operation
in a gold-processing slurry tank for less than a year. This extensive
damage was due to trailing edge vortices rolling over the blades [8].
In an extensive laboratory modeling programusing the paint tech-
nique, the effectiveness of alternative impeller designs has been
studied in reducing this erosion.
For the tests, a lab-scale model of each new trial design was
simultaneously tested against a lab-scale model of the existing
(benchmark) design, inidentical mixing tanks, under the same con-
ditions and over the same period of time. The results of one such
experiment are illustrated in Fig. 13, which shows that the erosion
that developed on the benchmark design (Fig. 13(a)) was signi-
cantly reduced in the newdesign (Fig. 13(b)), in which the disc had
been relocated to be ush mounted with the blades.
Fig. 8. Erosion in two halves of a U-bend test sample: (a) digital image of paint
erosion patterns; and (b) thickness gauge measurements of paint loss distribution,
where smaller values indicate greater paint loss.
Fig. 9. Erosion development on two 102mmdiameter return-owgeometries after
60s at an air ow velocity of 80m/s and with particles of 500m at a solids feed
rate of 1.4kg/min: (a) U-bend; and (b) T-section.
J. Wu et al. / Wear 270 (2011) 598605 603
Fig. 10. Typical pipe owerosion patterns after testing in a sand/water slurry ow-
ing at 4m/s.
4. Analysis and discussion
4.1. Error analysis
Due originally to Finnie [3], an erosion model of the following
form has been widely accepted in the literature:
E = kV
n
f (a) (1)
where E is mass eroded divided by total mass of particles imping-
ing on a surface; k is a constant that depends on material properties
Fig. 11. Erosion in a pipe (50mm diameter) after 60min in slurry ow from a tan-
gentially located inlet pipe (19mm diameter): 200m sand particles at 10% (w/w),
85L/min inlet ow rate (5m/s supercial velocity at the inlet).
Fig. 12. Paint erosion on a blank inside a model T-junction tested in the slurry ow
loop.
(e.g. hardness); V is particle impingement velocity; n is an empiri-
cal coefcient (n=1.82.3 for ductile material, n=2.04.0 for brittle
materials); andis the particle impingement angle (f(a) is a dimen-
sionless function dependent on material).
When paint is used to model a metal material, the ratio of the
erosion E of the metal and that of paint can be expressed as:
E
E
p
=
k
k
P
V
nnp
f (a)
f
p
(a)
(2)
where subscript p denotes the paint. V=V(x, y, z) is the velocity
distribution which is a function of the material surface location.
Due tothe similarity inerosionversus impact angle results for paint
andmetals, as reportedinthis paper, it is reasonable to assume that
f(a)/f
p
(a) is a constant. Thus:
E
E
p
V(x, y, z)
nnp
(3)
Ideally, one would want a constant E/E
p
, so that the erosion dis-
tribution on a metal surface would be proportional to the erosion
distribution on a paint. However, it can be seen from Eq. (3) that
the proportionality E/E
p
varies with velocity, which is unlikely to
be constant over a space of (x, y, z).
It is proposed to dene the error in the paint erosion model as
a deviation of this proportionality, as expressed below, assuming
that a similarity in the erosion versus impingement angle f(a) is
valid:
(E/E
p
)
(E/E
p
)
0
(n n
p
)
V
V
(4)
604 J. Wu et al. / Wear 270 (2011) 598605
Fig. 13. Erosion on a lab-scale (impeller diameter 149mm) 8-blade radial turbine after 24h clockwise rotation in a 390-mm diameter slurry mixing tank at a shaft speed of
250rpm, with particles of 55150m at a solids loading of 40% (w/w) and tap water: (a) original (benchmark) design; and (b) improved design.
where subscript 0 denotes the averaged E/E
p
. As a quick calcu-
lation, for a velocity variation of 20%, and nn
p
<0.5 for ductile
materials, an error of 010% is found.
4.2. Discussion
The multilayer paint erosion modeling technique is a rapid,
low-cost visual tool for assisting laboratory-scale development
of erosion minimization solutions. Qualitative test results can be
obtained typically within a few hours using the slurry ow loop,
while signicantly less time, typically from seconds to minutes,
is required using the air/solids ow loop at higher velocities. The
technique represents a signicant advantage over testing on real
material samples, in terms of both material costs and time taken
to obtain meaningful results. It is particularly suitable for studying
the effects of geometrical design changes on both erosion rate and
distribution, and it is our view that real material erosion testing
should be reserved for the nal validation of optimum alternative
designs.
Paint modeling can be used not only as a qualitative visual
technique, but also as a quantitative technique if paint thickness
and distribution are carefully controlled. As most off-the-shelf
paints are ductile, they are suitable for simulating metals such as
aluminumand mild steels. It is nevertheless noted that this quanti-
tative feature is most useful ina comparative sense, andanyerosion
visualization should be assessed against a reference or benchmark
design.
It shouldbepointedout, however, that this approachis onlysuit-
able for materials showing similar erosion versus particle impact
angle properties as those of the paint layers. Fortunately, a wide
range of materials of engineering importance fall within this cat-
egory, including most metals such as aluminum, mild steels and
titanium alloys. It is very encouraging, as reported in this paper,
that the angular distributionof erosionaroundcylindrical test sam-
ples of various metal materials exhibited very similar behavior to a
painted cylinder sample. This conrmed that their erosion charac-
teristics as a functionof particle impingement angle are similar, and
provides a strong basis for adopting the paint modeling technique.
It should be also pointed that at a considerably higher impinge-
ment velocity the wear mode/erosion mechanism on target
materials may change, e.g. from ductile to brittle. Future work will
be required to fully clarify this effect, particularly in cases involving
gas/solids erosions, where high velocities are high.
Preliminary research at CSIRO suggests that it is possible to
model brittle materials using a ceramic paste. Fig. 14(a) illustrates
that, for ceramic paste applied to the surface of a cylindrical rod
mounted on the rotating arm in the slurry pot as mentioned in
the early section of this paper (refer to Fig. 4), that erosion devel-
oped along the mid-line of the cylinder surface, corresponding to
the peak erosion of particles impinging at 90

, and typical of brittle

behavior. Incontrast, the double-wedge erosionpatternthat devel-
oped on a painted rod (Fig. 14(b)) corresponded to the peak erosion
occurring at particle impingement angles of 3040

(Fig. 5(b)), typ-

ical of ductile behavior. A current difculty with ceramic paste,
however, is applying it evenly across a material surface, and fur-
ther work in this area is required before ceramics can be utilized in
erosion studies on brittle materials.
Fig. 14. Erosion patterns on coated cylindrical rods on a rotating arm after testing
in a slurry pot (see Fig. 4): (a) ceramic paste; and (b) multilayer paint.
J. Wu et al. / Wear 270 (2011) 598605 605
Given the rapid progress with CFD modeling, and its increasing
popularity, one may question the relevance of the paint modeling
technique. However, our experience suggests that it is still a major
challenge in CFD to model complex multiphase ow and its effect
on erosion at the material surface. It would therefore be prudent to
use physical experimental validation to validate CFD simulations,
before recommending full-scale implementation of any new ow
design concepts.
Akey message here is that the rapid, low-cost, multiplayer paint
erosion technique is of considerable benet in the development of
improved owdesigns that reduce erosion. It is particularly advan-
tageous in identifying and overcoming localized peak erosion, or
hot spots, such as holing due to vortices or sharp bends. Practical
applications based on this approach offer tremendous savings to
industry in terms of both material costs and equipment downtime.
As an example for its practical signicance, it is worth to mention
that an improved slurry heat exchanger was developed and imple-
mented in a RioTintos mineral processing plant. The new design
which provided extended wear service life by an order of magni-
tude has since been patented and adopted by the manufacturer in
its products for world wide distribution.
Inpassing, it shouldbenotedthat microerosiontexturepatterns
which were conventionally studied with assistance of SEM photos
was not considered, since only relatively large-scale erosions, and
their locations were concerned, and visualized by the paint erosion
damage patterns.
Finally, it is worthwhile discussing the error inherent in the
paint modeling technique. As mentioned, ideally the ratio of paint
erosion over real material erosion would be a constant, so that the
erosion distribution on a material surface is proportional to that on
the paint. In reality, the variation in velocity across a surface con-
tributes to a deviation in the paint erosion pattern away from the
erosionona real material (Eq. (3)), assumingthat the erosionversus
particle impingement angle curves are similar for both materials.
This deviation may, however, be very small if the index n used in
Finnies model is similar for boththepaint andreal material. Further
research is required to clarify this.
5. Conclusion
This paper presents extensive case examples and solutions on
erosion patterns developed on industrial equipments with assis-
tance of a rapid and low-cost multilayer paint modeling technique.
The technical was found suitable for visualizing the erosion distri-
bution on material surfaces exposed to particulate-laden ows. An
error analysis and validation of the technique via comparisons with
other experimental techniques and full-scale equipment showthat
the technique is suitable for use in the development of improved
ow geometrical designs that reduce peak erosion, without the
need to change the traditional materials used, or their properties.
The technique has beenshowntoprovide a reasonable model of the
erosionbehavior of ductile materials, rangingfromlowcarbonsteel
to white iron and has been tested in a variety of mineral processing
equipment.
Acknowledgements
The authors are grateful for the support of CSIRO Minerals
DU Flagship, Alcoa World Alumina, BHP Billiton/Worsley Alumina,
Rio Tinto Alcan and Tyco Flow Control, who sponsored this work
through the AMIRA International Collaborative Research Project
P931 Reduced Erosion in Multiphase Flow Equipment. We also
wish to acknowledge Huping Luo of Chevron for collaboration
and support, and Lawrence Cheung of CSIRO for the artwork and
photos.
References
[1] I.M. Hutchings, Wear by particulates, Chem. Eng. Sci. 42 (1987) 869878.
[2] J.A.C. Humphrey, Fundamentals of uid motion in erosion by solid particle
impact, Int. J. Heat Fluid Flow 11 (1990) 170195.
[3] I. Finnie, Erosion of surfaces by solid particles, Wear 3 (1960) 87103.
[4] Y. Zhang, Y.-B. Cheng, S. Lathabai, Erosion of alumina ceramics by air- and
water-suspended garnet particles, Wear 240 (2000) 4051.
[5] L.J.W. Graham, D.R. Lester, J. Wu, Quantication of erosion distributions in
complex geometries, Wear 268 (2010) 10661071.
[6] D.R. Lester, L.A. Graham, J. Wu, High precision suspension erosion modeling,
Wear 269 (2010) 449457.
[7] G.I. Parslow, D.J. Stephenson, J.E. Strutt, S. Tetlow, Paint layer erosion resistance
behaviour for use ina multi-layer paint erosionindicationtechnique, Wear 212
(1997) 103109.
[8] J. Wu, B. Nguyen, L.J.W. Graham, Y. Zhu, T. Kilpatrick, J. Davis, Minimising
impeller slurry wear through multilayer paint modeling, Can. J. Chem. Eng.
83 (2005) 835842.
[9] N. Noui-Mehidi, L.J. Graham, J. Wu, B. Nguyen, S. Smith, Study of erosion
behaviour of paint layers for multilayer paint technique applications in slurry
erosion, Wear 264 (2008) 737743.
[10] H.McI. Clark, K.K. Wong, Impact angle, particle energy and mass loss in erosion
by dilute slurries, Wear 186187 (1995) 454464.
[11] G.J. Brown, Erosion prediction in slurry pipeline Tee-junctions, Appl. Math.
Model. 26 (2002) 155170.