You are on page 1of 5

Paper for the 55

Conference on Glass problems
From the mid 1970's, I have worked on improving the thermal conditioning of glass for container
production. As glass thermal homogeneit in forehearths has !een improved, !etter go!s have
!een produced and production "gures have increased.
#owever, when the glass leaving the forehearth appears to !e homogeneous, the go!s produced
have not alwas !een perfect. $ making the glass conditioning in the channel slightl worse,
!etter go!s could !e produced. %he conclusion from this was that the thermal condition of the
glass deteriorated as it &owed through the spout.
$etter insulation applied around the !owl and some changes to the !owl shape helped this
situation, !ut did not cure the pro!lem.
%he nature of the glass &ows in the standard !owl design had !een studied ! phsical modelling
at a ver earl stage in this work. A few ears ago, I was asked to come up with new, improved
designs for glass conditioning e'uipment and it was onl then, that the potential of the new !owl
shape !ecame apparent.
%his paper descri!es the development of this new !owl shape, from the initial idea, through the
processes of assessment, to the development of a complete range of !owl si(es.
he Problem
)hen glass enters the !owl from the forehearth, irrespective of the tu!e speed and direction,
more glass will go under the tu!e from the forehearth side of the !owl than from the front. %his
di*erence in &ow rate will produce a di*erence in temperature in the !owl throat and also
contri!ute to the uneven wear of the tu!e seat. As this wear increases, the &ow di*erences will
!ecome larger.
%he deep region in the !owl entrance will, due to the lower &ow rates and poorer insulation,
create a cold glass region which will contri!ute to the thermal in+homogeneit of the go!s.
%he "rst step taken to improve the !owl design was to widen the entrance, keeping the entrance
depth constant. %he e*ect of this change was to widen the glass &ow front as it entered the !owl.
%his made the &ows more uniform under the tu!e on the entr side of the !owl, !ut did little to
improve the &ow at the front.
%o make the glass &ow round the !owl, a shoulder was added to the front, creating the ,-0o
smmetric well. In this "rst sketch of the new !owl design, I !lended all of the ad.acent surfaces
with each other and sloped all of the straight faces.
At this time I was !eing urged to produce a drawing of the new concept which could !e
presented at an imminent sales and development meeting.
After a little more thought, we decided to keep to a simpler shape with more hori(ontal and
vertical surfaces. )e considered that this design would !e .ust as e*ective, and that the wider
!owl entrance was not needed, due to the introduction of the ,-0/ shoulder.
Des()n Mo&ell(n)
At this stage, phsical models of the standard and the cascade !owls were constructed, in two
depths, and studies were made of their &ow characteristics. From this work, the !ene"ts for glass
conditioning seemed to !e greater with the deeper design.
%he studies showed us that, with the standard !owl, glass entering the !owl near to the surface
is pulled round the !owl ! the tu!e, and its temperature can onl !e a*ected ! the !owl "ring
as long as it remains near the surface.
0lass entering from the !ottom of the channel 'uickl moves awa from the "ring and loses heat
to the generall under insulated !ottom of the !owl entrance.
)ith the cascade !owl design , glass from all depths in the channel remains closer to the surface
until well into the !owl, and will therefore !e !etter controlled. As the glass moves around the
!owl, it slowl moves downwards until it enters the lower well.
%he cross section of this lower well is smaller than in the standard !owl, and so the glass falls
faster. %he time taken for the glass to move through the lower part of the !owl is much shorter
than in the standard !owl, less heat is lost ! the glass and temperatures will !e more uniform.
%his ta!le summari(es the changes in glass residence times for the two designs of !owl. %he
residence times in the lower (one 1or well2 of the cascade !owl are much shorter than in the
standard !owl. %hese shorter times would reduce the conduction heat losses, and the resulting
temperature di*erences would !e smaller.
Res'lts from Factor* r(als
%he "rst cascade !owls were installed on colored glass feeders in the container industr, and
these feeders are still operating with the new !owl.
%he "rst cascade !owl was installed in 3.4.5. 6edfearn, $arnsle, 7ngland in 8ecem!er 1991, and
the ne9t two in :aint+0o!ain, ;au9rot, France in late 199<. %he success of these installations has
!een indicated ! man repeat orders for this tpe of !owl design.
A num!er of changes were o!served on these "rst installations, the most signi"cant of which, in
chronological order, were=+
1. %he curling of the go!s was reduced.
<. >old glass near the !ottom of the tu!e in the standard !owl was 1?/ > hotter in the
cascade !owl and the di*erences around the !owl were reduced.
,. %he lower "ring level used in the !owl reduced the amount that the glass reheated as it
moved around the !owl. %he <@/> reheat for the standard !owl was reduced to 1</> in the
cascade !owl.
@. 8uring a ver long .o! change on the cascade !owl, glass fro(e in the ori"ce ring and it
took a long time to melt out. $ut after the glass was &owing, the go!s !ecame sta!le
much 'uicker.
?. %he tu!e speed could !e reduced without signi"cantl changing the go! weights. A
reduction in speed from 10 rpm to ? 635, caused the weights of the go!s to change !
onl <g, or 1.? A.
-. Bne cascade !owl was installed on half of a tandem feeder, the other half using a
standard !owl, and !oth feeders fed a 1- section machine. $oth feeders were !eing
supplied with the same glass conditions and the short term weight variations were lower
on the cascade !owl side.
7. %he machine was "tted with the #ee go! weight control sstem which essentiall records
the volume of each measured go!. A comparison !etween these measurements was taken
over 1, minutes. %he standard deviation of the standard !owl variations is <.<7 times
worse than the deviation on the cascade !owl.
C. %he longer term variations in !owl temperatures are represented ! the variations in tu!e
height produced ! the go! weight control sstem. Again, the variations are signi"cantl
!etter on the cascade !owl feeder.
9. >old glass in the !owl entrance was eliminated, with the top+to+!ottom temperature
di*erences !eing reduced from 10?/> to <?/>. %he side+to+side temperature di*erences
were also more smmetric and were reduced from 100/> to 1?/>.
10.A signi"cant reduction in certain !ottle defects was achieved.
11.After 17 months service in 3.4.5., the "rst cascade !owl was changed. $ lowering the
tu!e it was found that the glass &ow could !e stopped. %he tu!e seat was !adl worn, !ut
the damage was ver uniform around the seat, and the wear of the upper shoulder was
minimal. %he uniformit of the wear supports the modelling predictions that the &ows
under the tu!e would !e smmetric.
E+pan&(n) the Ran)e of Des()ns
At the time, we did not have the facilities to carr out a mathematical analsis in , dimensions of
the &ow and temperatures within this new !owl design. )e were therefore not aware of the most
suita!le parameters to use for the design of a whole range of !owls.
)e had hoped that a small range of designs would satisf the market needs, as the cascade !owl
did appear to have a wider operating range than the standard design.
%he glass container industr is renowned for the variet in e'uipment used and the di*erent
was in which that e'uipment is operated. Bne factor ma !e a!le to operate a feeder outside
its original speci"cation, whereas another factor ma !e unsuccessful. %his ma !e due to
di*erences in local operating conditions, 'ualit re'uirements or the production e9pertise.
)e initiall thought that, as the "rst designs worked well, we onl had to appl scaling factors to
the design to create a complete range of !owls. %his approach ma have worked in some cases
!ut it was hardl !ased on sound technical reasoning, nor did we feel completel in control over
the design process.
)e "rst !ecame aware of potential pro!lems when a customer "tted a larger tu!e to a cascade
!owl that had worked well on another line. )e had not anticipated an pro!lems with the larger
tu!e !ut, on this line, the tu!e had to !e raised so high that the improvements e9pected from
the cascade design were not there.
he %ol't(on
)e "rst considered the various control volumes within the !owl. 0lass has to &ow through
various gates on its wa to the ori"ce, and the sum of the viscous resistances of these gates
controls the glass &ow rate.
)ith the standard !owl the ma.or control volume is the gap !etween the tu!e and the tu!e seat,
!ut with the cascade !owl there is an additional resistance within the annulus outside the tu!e
and inside the well. %he e*ective viscous resistances of these regions can !e calculated using
standard e'uations, and from this the relative &ows can !e determined.
%o compare the operating conditions for a cascade !owl with a standard !owl, it is necessar to
e'uate the relative tu!e heights for the same &ow rates.
)e "rst had to ensure that, to maintain the ma9imum pull, the tu!e height would not have to !e
raised too much.
Dsing a tu!e height of @0 mm 11.?E2 as a reference point, we calculated a well diameter which
would ensure that the tu!e height would not increase ! more than 10 A 1or @ mm2. %his choice
of reference point ma seem to !e purel ar!itrar, !ut if a di*erent reference height had !een
chosen then a di*erent EA increaseE value would have !een used.
If this predicted movement in tu!e height is too small, as would !e the case for a ver large well
diameter, then the thermal and &ow !ene"ts of this design would !e signi"cantl reduced.
%he upper (one depth is normall "9ed at 1?0 mm 1-E2, which matches the standard forehearth
glass depth.
%he upper (one diameter is chosen to ensure a shoulder width around the well of !etween 7?
and 1<? mm. In most cases this produces a diameter larger than the !owl entr width.
%he throat dimensions are usuall de"ned ! the customer and are related to the diameter of the
tu!e and the ori"ce ring e'uipment !eing used.
,ar(at(ons on the Bo-l Des()n

All of the data presented so far has related to the design of cascade !owls which conform to our
standard design of feeder. $ut some designs are more diFcult to accommodate, in particular
where the centre distance, from the channel .oint to the ori"ce centre, is too small. )e are
currentl considering three variations to the design which can !e applied to these feeder
1. Introduce a &at face into the channel .oint side of the well. #ori(ontal &ow rates will
increase as the glass passes the restriction, and the vertical glass &ows will !e reduced.
Geither of these e*ects should change the glass temperatures signi"cantl as the onl
occur for a fraction of the time.
<. >ut awa the entr side of the well and make the channel front face complete the well.
%he onl potential pro!lem here is the e*ect of the ver small dead region on either side
of well entr.
,. 5ove the channel .oint !ackwards, to make room for the well. %his is o!viousl the !est
technical solution, !ut the cost could !e much higher as it involves modi"cations to the
last forehearth !lock and ma!e the casing.
In m paper, I have descri!ed the work carried out to improve the operation of e'uipment which
is vital to the operation of a glass container production line.
%his concept could, e'uall, !e applied to the manufacture of tu!ing, ta!leware, %.;. tu!es and
lamp !ul!s. 7ver!od is striving for greater consistenc in glass temperature and &ow rates to
improve their production eFciencies. %his design has shown that it has attri!utes which are
!ene"cial, when applied speci"call to the container industr.
I have shown how an idea, which is "rst rationali(ed on paper, is assessed using modelling
techni'ues. A prototpe design is then tested under glass, and "nall a famil of similar products
suita!le for most customer's needs, is developed.
%o conclude, I would like to thank the customers who helped us in the initial assessment of this
new concept. I feel that their need to improve their processes, plus the potential !ene"ts
indicated in the modelling studies, ensured that we were allowed to test the cascade !owl under

5ike :tanle, $.#.+F.17ngineering2 4td.
1<th Bcto!er 199@.