Comparisons between “sand blast” and “centripetal effect accelerator” type erosion testers

There are two major types of erosion testing devices that are used throughout the world for quantifying particle impact erosion against a solid surface. The first of these uses pressurised air to accelerate abrasive particles through a nozzle so that they impinge upon a target specimen. The second adopts a rotating disc to accelerate abrasive particles using the centripetal effect so that they impinge upon a series of targets arranged around the periphery of the disc. This paper reports the findings of a collaborative project that was designed to compare the performance and results obtained from a rig of each of the two types mentioned above. The sand blast type rig was provided by The Department of Powder Science Technology (POSTEC) at The Telemark Technological Research and Development Centre (TEL-TEK), Porsgrunn, Norway while the centripetal effect accelerator was provided by The Wolfson Centre for Bulk Solids Handling Technology, University of Greenwich, London, UK. The test programme included tests against a wide range of materials that are commonly used in pneumatic handling facilities. (Pneumatic handling is a means of conveying and transporting powders and granular solid materials in bulk in industrial process plant, through pipelines using a gas as the carrier medium.) Olivine sand was used as the abrasive and it was projected against the test specimens at velocities and concentrations commensurate with those seen in pneumatic conveyors. In all instances the materials used in the test programme were taken from the same batch so that scatter of experimental results due to specimen variation was minimised. The paper contains a series of recommendations for erosion testing equipment. A discussion based on the results and their applicability to the prediction of wear in pneumatic conveyors concludes the paper.

Signposts in the sand: Key issues for e-moderators

E-learning is a vision that has sparked a wide-ranging enthusiasm for moderators, course designers and learners. Asynchronous conferencing is currently central to this vision. Some educators assume that supporting learners who use this medium is the same as supporting them in the classroom. However, this is not the case. This paper outlines the current research into providing signposts that enable us to improve the training and support offered to new e-moderators and e-course designers. It suggests a classification of roles and tasks that together with an e-course framework will help to maximize the benefits of e-learning and enable all participants to migrate successfully to the new environment.