Technical Considerations for Selecting Demister Material


Release time:

Sep 05,2025

[Summary]In flue gas treatment systems, the choice of material for demisters directly affects the equipment’s service life and operational stability. Currently, PP (polypropylene) and FRP (fiberglass reinforced plastic) are the two mainstream materials available on the market, and their performance differences primarily lie in three aspects: corrosion resistance, structural strength, and cost-effectiveness.

  In flue gas treatment systems, the choice of material for demisters directly affects the equipment’s service life and operational stability. Currently, PP (polypropylene) and FRP (fiberglass reinforced plastic) are the two mainstream materials available on the market, and their performance differences primarily lie in three aspects: corrosion resistance, structural strength, and cost-effectiveness.

  Corrosion Resistance Comparison

  PP material exhibits stable resistance to acidic media such as hydrochloric acid and sulfuric acid, making it suitable for applications with widely fluctuating pH levels. Its molecular structure effectively prevents the penetration of corrosive media; however, prolonged exposure to high-temperature oxidative environments (such as chlorine-containing exhaust gases) may lead to aging. FRP material, composed of a composite structure of resin and glass fibers, demonstrates greater stability in alkaline environments and under conditions involving organic solvents. Nevertheless, in strong-acid environments, an additional anti-corrosion coating is required.

  Mechanical strength and maintenance costs

  Due to the presence of a glass-fiber-reinforced layer, FRP material exhibits significantly superior impact resistance and rigidity compared to PP material. In scenarios where wind speeds exceed 5 m/s or mechanical vibrations are present, support components made from FRP are less likely to deform. Equipment made from PP material typically needs to compensate for its insufficient strength by increasing wall thickness or adding supporting frames, which can lead to a weight increase of 20% to 30% and indirectly raise transportation and installation costs. Both materials can be repaired on-site; however, the repair process for FRP is more demanding and requires the expertise of professional technicians.

  Differences in temperature adaptability

  The maximum continuous operating temperature for PP material is approximately 80℃, with a short-term peak tolerance of 100℃. For FRP materials, depending on the resin type, standard models can operate stably in environments up to 120℃, while specially formulated high-temperature-resistant models can withstand temperatures as high as 150℃. In high-temperature flue gas applications such as coal-fired boilers and metallurgical processes, FRP materials offer distinct advantages.

  Economic Decision-Making Reference

  The raw material cost of PP is approximately 60% to 70% of that for FRP. However, under conditions of high corrosion or high temperatures, the replacement frequency of PP may increase by a factor of two to three. It is recommended that users conduct a comprehensive assessment based on the actual composition of the medium (which can be determined through sampling and testing), the flue gas temperature profile, and their budget constraints. Some mist eliminators manufacturers offer hybrid material design solutions—for example, using PP as the main body combined with an FRP support structure—thus achieving a balance between performance and cost.

  It is important to emphasize that material selection must be based on specific operating conditions and parameters. We recommend consulting a third-party testing agency with CMA certification to obtain a report on the corrosivity of the medium, and then working together with the technical staff from the mist eliminator manufacturer to finalize the solution.


Keywords:

Defogger manufacturer