Feature Report

Capital Costs
Quickly Calculated
Estimating capital costs early can prevent
unnecessary expenditures on dead-end projects
Gael D. Ulrich and Palligarnai T. Vasudevan
University of New Hampshire

A
chemical executive once noted
that his firm derives one-third
of its income from products that
are less than ten years old. In-
deed, existing companies thrive and
new ones proliferate through innova-
tion and product improvement. They
depend on scientists and engineers
working in the trenches or at the
bench to drive development. Yet, most
potential innovations never succeed.
Engineers who can separate lucrative
concepts from duds early on are worth
their weight in gold. Mastery of the in-
formation in this article can help you
become one of those engineers.
Its important to define promising
projects quickly so that money is not
wasted on dead ends. Economic evalu-
ation should begin at conception and
continue in parallel with research and
pilot studies before design and devel-
opment expenses begin to balloon.
Costs of prolonging a project and se-
curing more detail increase exponen-
tially with time. Clearly, if the project
is a loser, the sooner it is abandoned,
the better. Any engineer with practi-
cal experience can cite projects that
were supported far beyond the point
of viability.
One can construct the economic pro-
file for a manufacturing process from
a few basic data, such as raw material
prices, labor, and other costs. Details
on how to put these together are ex-
plained in Chapter 6 of Ref. [1]. Sev-
eral vital manufacturing expenses
hinge on capital.
This article describes how to esti-
mate that capital quickly and with an
46 Chemical Engineering www.che.com April 2009
accuracy of about +30 to 20%. This
range is good enough to define feasi-
bility before a lot of money is spent on
advanced development activities.
The sticker price of a process is tech-
nically known as fixed capital, what
one would pay if a manufacturing line
could be bought in the same way that a
house, automobile, or washing machine
is purchased. It is fixed because (a) it
represents real equipment that cannot
be converted easily to another asset,
and (b) once built, it must be paid
whether the plant operates or not.
Unlike consumer goods and appli-
ances that are bought directly and
put into service immediately, process
equipment is usually custom designed
in advance, then built and installed
by specialists. Thus, a development
team is faced with predicting the fu- Variation of cost with size
ture price of a process that doesnt Relationships between cost and capac-
exist. Fortunately, through the ef- ity are part of everyday experience. If,
forts of generations of cost engineers, for example, one were transporting
translation of technical specifications people in taxicabs and one cab held
into future expenses can be done with four persons (excluding driver), the
amazing accuracy. capital cost to convey eight people is
With a process flow diagram and twice that of carrying four. For 20 to
using short-cut design techniques, an 30 people, a bus or van could be used
engineer can size major equipment, where equipment cost is no longer di-
draw purchase prices from graphs rectly proportional to number of peo-
such as Figure 2, and build a capital ple. This can be expressed mathemati-
cost estimate. cally as follows:
Purchase prices are, by necessity
from the past. To estimate for the fu- (1)
ture, engineers must scale from one
size or capacity to another and from
one time to another. Then, to assess where CP,v,r is the purchase price of
total capital, they must add costs for the equipment in question, which has
installation. How to go from flow sheet a size or capacity of v in the year r,
to final capital is described below. and CP,u,r is the purchase price of the
 Scaling by the six-tenths rule

T
his photo shows a Portland cement plant in Devils Slide,
Utah. The first operation on this site began production in
1907. Its capacity of 110,000 metric tons per year (m.t./
yr) was tripled with an expansion in 1948. A third factory, the
one shown here, was completed in 1997 (635,000 m.t./yr
capacity). According to a 1909 letterhead, company capital
at the time was $2.5 million. Using that as a basis, assum-
ing a size-capacity exponent equal to 0.8, and escalating for
inflation [Equation (11)], the 1948 estimated grass-roots fixed
capital would have been $2.5 million 30.8 x (80/12) =
$40 million. Similarly, the 2004 value extrapolated from these
numbers would be $40 million 20.8 (400/80) = $350
million. According to local tax records, the 2004 evaluation
is slightly greater than $100 million. This reveals the danger
of extrapolating over large time periods with no correction for
improved technology. For a more realistic estimate, a 2 million
m.t./yr cement plant in the northeastern U.S. was reported to
cost $300 million in 1998. Based on this number, the calculated
grass-roots value of the Utah plant would be $300 million
(0.635/2)0.8 (400/390) = $120 million. (Photo courtesy
John Sommers of Holcim [U.S.], a wholly owned subsidiary of
Holcim Ltd., Switzerland. Used with permission.) 

Exponential
TABLE 1. TYPICAL EXPONENTS FOR EQUIPMENT COST
AS A FUNCTION OF CAPACITY* size-capacity relations

E
Size Capacity Exponent xponential size-capacity relationships are useful for
range unit a individual equipment items and for entire processing
plants. The fixed capital of a component or plant hav-
Agitators 1200 kW 0.7 ing one capacity is scaled to that of another capacity by
Blowers, centrifugal 508,000 kW 0.9 using Equation (1). This practice is known popularly as
Centrifugal pumps 0.01270 kW 0.3 the sixth-tenths rule because 0.6 is a common expo-
nent. Although quick and easy to use, this rule has limita-
Compressors, reciprocating 102,000 kW 1.0
tions. One must know, at least, the capital cost of a plant
Belt conveyors 1050 m 0.8 or component at one capacity. The range in exponents is
Crushers 101,000 kg/s 0.8 quite large, so one should have experience or know cost
estimates for at least two capacities to go on.
Drum dryers 2100 m2 0.6
The six-tenths rule is valuable for rapid order-of-magni-
Dust collectors tude plant cost estimates where inaccuracy can be toler-
Bag filter 21,100 m3/s 0.9 ated. It is also useful for predicting product price as a
Multicyclone 0.140 m3/s 0.6
function of capacity when a capital estimate is available
Electrostatic precipitators 51,200 m3/s 0.8 at only one rate.
Evaporators, falling-film 30320 m2 1.0 There is a danger of extrapolating with the six-tenths
Filters, plate and frame 1170 m2 0.75
rule beyond its range of validity. For example, accord-
ing to Equation (1), prices decrease with equipment size.
Heat exchangers, floating 10900 m2 0.6 This is reasonable and logical. But, with precision items,
head costs level off when a certain minimum size is reached.
Jacketed vessels 1800 m3 0.6 Savings in materials are offset by more labor required to
Electric motors 108,000 kW 0.9 make miniature equipment. Prices might even go up as
size decreases further, changing a to a negative number.
Refrigeration units 510,000 kJ/s 0.6
Extrapolation to larger capacities is risky when predic-
Vibratory screens 1130 kW 0.6 tions create equipment that is too large to be fabricated
Tanks or shipped. When any maximum size is exceeded, mul-
Floating roof 20070,000 m3 0.6 tiple equipment items become necessary and the scaling
Spherical, 05 barg 505,000 m3 0.7 exponent a becomes unity. Holland and Wilkinson avoid
*Exponents were determined from slopes of the curves in our collection of data this problem by specifying the size range (Ref. [2], Table
found in Figures 361 of Chapter 5, Ref. [1]. Results are included here primar- 950) for which Equation (1) is valid. You are safe using
ily for illustration. It is much better to use the curves themselves in a cost
estimate. graphs such as Figure 2 if you stick with existing curves
and dont extrapolate.

same type of equipment in the same
year but of capacity or size u. In the
twin taxicab example, u is 4, v is 8, and
the size exponent a is unity. Although
a is 1 for multiple taxicabs, it is usu-
ally less than unity when relating cost
to size in a bus or van.
The same is true for chemical process
equipment. This is easily demonstrated
by comparing costs of two storage
tanks. Assume they are spherical, made
of identical materials, but of different
capacity. The volume of tank u is
(2)
The volume of tank v can be similarly
expressed. Dividing Equation (2) by
its analog for tank v, the volume or ca-
pacity ratio is
(3)
Chemical Engineering www.che.com April 2009
Costs of tanks are proportional not to
the volume, however, but to surface
area or the quantity of metal plate used
in fabrication. The area of tank u is
 (4)
The area ratio of v versus u is
(5)
At Cs dollars per square meter of tank
47
 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020
5,000
Slopes correspond to
Feature Report 4,000 inflation rates as indicated
20%
3,000 10%

surface, purchase prices of the tanks 5% Nelson-Farrar Index

2,000
are given by the following: 2%
(6) 0%

(7) Marshall & Swift

1,000

Cost index, I
Their relative cost, found by combin- 900
800
ing Equations (6) and (7), is Chemical Engineering
700
Plant Cost Index
600
(8)
500

Radius ratio can be replaced with ca- 400

pacity ratio via Equation (3): (CE Index = 400 is the
300
basis for cost data
(9) in Figure 2)

200
and substituted into Equation (8) to US Bureau of Labor Statistics-
yield Hourly Earning Index
(Chemical & Allied Products)
(10)
100
1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020
Comparing Equations (1) and (10), Year
we see that the size exponent a is 2/3. Figure 1. A history of selected cost indices pertinent to chemical processing
In other words, doubling the size of a
spherical storage tank increases its TABLE 2. TYPICAL COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH PURCHASE AND
price by about 60%. INSTALLATION OF A HEAT EXCHANGER* IN A PROCESS MODULE
Exponents for various individual
Direct Project Expenses Cost Fraction of f.o.b. **
equipment items are listed in Table 1. equipment
For our purposes, the form of Equa-
Direct materials
tion (1) is more important than the ex-
pression itself. It tells us that plotting Equipment f.o.b. price, CP $10,000 1.0CP
capacity versus cost on log-log coordi- Materials used for installation 7,100 0.71CP
nates will yield a straight line of slope Direct labor 6,300 0.63CP
a. That is the basis for the format of Total direct materials and labor $23,400 2.34CP
Figure 2. Plots such as this one have
several advantages over equations. Indirect Project Expenses
1. The range of valid sizes is defined by Freight, insurance, taxes 1,400 0.14CP
lengths of curves. Construction overhead 4,400 0.44CP
2. Exponent a can be estimated by a Contractor engineering expenses 2,600 0.26CP
quick glance at the curves (45 deg. Total indirect project costs $ 8,400 0.84CP
slope represents an exponent of 1.0,
Bare module capital, CBM $31,800 3.18CP
for example; 30 deg. an exponent of
about 0.6, and so on). Contingency and Fee
3. Changes in a are visually obvious Contingency 4,800 0.48CP
through curvature of a line. Fee 1,000 0.10CP
(Fee-based software, such as that de-
Total contingency and fee $ 5,800 0.58CP
scribed in Ref. [3] can be used when
machine computation is preferred Total module capital $37,600 3.76CP
*Purchase
over reading from a chart.) price, $10,000; ** f.o.b. = free on board

Adjusting for inflation/deflation Index, and Salary Survey Index are For example, if the purchase price of
Predesign estimates are usually made indicators of inflationary trends in the equipment of capacity v in year r is
for products of the future but must general economy. Similar indices are CP,v,r, its price in year s is:
be assembled from prices of the past. available for chemical engineers to
Because of inflation or deflation, the scale equipment capital from one time (11)
price of a pump or filter will change as period to another.
it sits on a warehouse shelf. The Con- To use an inflation index, I, sim-
sumer Price Index, Wholesale Price ply include its ratio in Equation (1). A predicted cost index for year s is
48 Chemical Engineering www.che.com April 2009
 6
10
Shell and Tube Heat Exchangers
CE Plant Cost Index = 400 (Jan - 2004)

Multiple double-pipe

5
10 Floating head
Teflon tube
Scraped-wall

Fixed tube sheett

Purchased equipment cost, Cp ($)

and U-tube
4
10
Kettle reboiler
Bayonet

3 Double-pipe Hairpin
10
multitube
All Except Teflon Tube Teflon Tube
Shell /Tube FM Shell F M
cs/cs 1.00 cs 1.0
cs/Cu 1.25 Cu 1.2
Cu/Cu 1.60 ss 1.3
2
10 cs/ss 1.70 Ni 1.4
ss/ss 3.00 Ti 3.3
cs/Ni 2.80 Max. pressure,
Ni/Ni 3.80 7 bara
a cs/Ti 7.20 F p = 1.0
CBM = CP x FBM
Ti/Ti 12.0
10
0.1 1 10 100 1,000 10,000
Exchanger surface area, A (m2)

FIGURE 2. Purchased equipment costs for shell-and-tube and double-pipe heat ex-
a
changers. Bare module factors FBM are obtained from Figure 4 using material factors
given here and pressure factor Fp from Figure 3 (cs = carbon steel, ss = stainless steel)

divided by its historic value for year r becomes shrouded with piping, struc-
to form the escalation ratio. tural steel, insulation, instruments,
A number of different indices are and other paraphernalia to form a pro-
used by cost engineers. Three of them, cess module. Because of these added
developed specifically for chemical and steps, installed cost is several times
petroleum plants, are illustrated in greater than purchase price.
Figure 1. The Nelson-Farrar index ap- To obtain overall plant capital costs,
plies particularly to petroleum refinery one can sum purchase prices for all
construction, whereas the Marshall & the equipment items on the flowsheet
Swift (M&S) and Chemical Engineer- and multiply the total by a so-called
ing (CE) indices are overall chemi- Lang factor. In a paper mill, where the
cal industry averages. Up-to-date precise, high-speed machinery is ex-
M&S and CE values are published pensive, a larger fraction of total cost
monthly on the Economic Indicators is invested in the original purchase.
page of Chemical Engineering (see Installation, though costly, is a smaller
p. 72), where trends, historic values, fraction of purchase price than for
and other economic data are also dis- pumps and heat exchangers. Thus, the
played. That page is reprinted as the Lang factor itself is relatively small
last of each issue, changing as newer for a paper mill, about 2.5.
data accumulate. Because of its acces- In an oil refinery, process vessels and
sibility and accuracy, the Chemical En- equipment themselves are somewhat
gineering Plant Cost Index (CEPCI) is simpler, but installation of piping, in-
favored by us. (Further information on sulation, and instruments is more ex-
the CEPCI can be found in Ref. [48].) pensive, creating a larger Lang factor.
Holland and Wilkinson (pp. 968 of
Installation costs Ref. [2]) recommend values of 3.8 for
From plots such as Figure 2, one can a plant that processes primarily solids
determine purchase prices, CP,v,r, for (for instance, a cement plant); 4.1 for a
major equipment items that appear process containing both solid and fluid
on a process flow diagram. But, each streams (a fertilizer plant, perhaps),
item must be transported to the site and 4.8 for a fluid processing plant
and placed on a foundation where it such as an oil refinery.
Circle 44 on p. 70 or go to adlinks.che.com/23013-44
 1.5
Feature Report

Guthrie [9, 10] proposed individ- High pressure on shell side alone
ual module factors, unique to each or both tube and shell side

Pressure factor, Fp
equipment type. We like this tech-
nique because it is accurate, direct,
and relatively easy to use. In essence,
Guthries approach is an efficient and
accurate way to synthesize a Lang fac-
tor for any process.
For estimates of pre-design accu-
racy, one merely needs appropriate
installation factors. Cost charts that High pressure
on tube side only
include prices and installation factors
for any equipment likely to be found
on a chemical engineering flow sheet
are provided in Figures 361 of Ch. 5, 1.0
Ref. [1]. 10 100
Pressure, p (barg)
Installation expenses for a heat
exchanger are listed in Table 2. In FIGURE 3. Pressure factors (ratio of purchase price of a high pressure heat ex-
this case, the bare module value of a changer to one designed for conventional pressures)
$10,000 heat exchanger is $31,800. Its
bare module installation factor FBM is sources such as Ref. [1] where installa- heat transfer surface area contributes
therefore 3.18. tion factors are provided. Look, for ex- to capital cost. We find the January
It should be emphasized that one ample, at Figures 2, 3 and 4. Assume 2004 purchase price, CP, to be $10,000
need not go through the process de- we need to estimate what a floating from Figure 2. If shell and tubes are
Chem_Eng1-1_177x123_M_04.09 15.01.2009
scribed in Table 2 to use cost data from 16:36exchanger
head heat Uhr Seite 1
having 50 m2 made of carbon steel, FM is 1.0 from

On pages 2 to 31 we show how

you can turn a storage and shipping drum into
a process vessel in next to no time.
Everyone who opts for MLLER gets
an original. We offer more than just
a drum: our extensive range of acces-
rum and
Mller D Systems
sories makes it a multifunctional
vessel - systematically.
er
Contain Extendible whenever you want to fit
your concept and meet your needs
009
MA 2 ain
exactly. Dont take any chances: only
E
ACH
a Mller original embodies the expertise
rt / M
ankfu 5.2009 gained over more than a century.
in Fr - 15. Ask for our brochure Mller Drum and
11.5. 5-B6
from nd B Container Systems today.
3.1, ta
S
Hall
Mller GmbH, Industrieweg 5
D-79 618 Rheinfelden, Germany
Phone: + 49 (0) 76 23 / 9 69 - 0
Fax: + 49 (0) 76 23 / 9 69 - 69
E-mail: info@mueller-gmbh.com
A Company of the Mller Group

1.1Lidded Dr
ums
th bungs
/ hopper
cans

Innovation in Stainless Steel

Drums wi
Hoppers
Silos
Containe
rs
www.mueller-gmbh.com

Valves
Butterfly
ucks
Drum Tr

Circle 43 on p. 70 or go to adlinks.che.com/23013-43
50 Chemical Engineering www.che.com April 2009
 30
25
Bare module factor, FBM
a
20
15
10
0
0 5
Pressure factor-material factor product, Fp x FM
FIGURE 4. Bare module factors are a function of material and pressure factors for
heat exchangers
the list in the lower right from Figure
2. If service pressure is below 10 barg,
the pressure factor, FP, is also 1.0,
and, of course, their product FP FM
is unity. For this value of the abcissa,
one reads a bare module installation
cs
factor FBM of 3.18 from the ordinate of
Figure 4. Thus, the heat exchangers
contribution to the cost of its process
module is $10,000 3.18 = $31,800
(the value derived in Table 2.)
Contingency and fee
To obtain total module cost, that is, the
total expense required to procure and
install the heat exchanger in the bat-
tery limits and to make it ready for op-
eration, contingency and fee must be
added. These, according to Guthries
data, are 15% and 3% of bare module
capital, respectively. Thus, as illus-
trated in Table 2, the cost of a $10,000
heat exchanger, after installation, is
$37,600 (3.18 1.18 = 3.76 times the
purchase price).
Auxiliary facilities
To derive the contribution of a heat
exchanger to a grass-roots plant, its
share of site development, auxiliary
building, and offsite capital must be
considered. Guthrie recommends an
added 30% above total module capi-
tal for auxiliaries. Thus, the capital
cost associated with a $10,000 heat
exchanger in a grass-root plant is es-
timated to be approximately $49,000.
The appropriate Lang factor is thus
4.9, near the number recommended
in Perry (pp. 968, Ref. [2]) for a fluid
processing plant.
Please visit us at ACHEMA 2009, Hall 8.0 Stand S41 - S45
10 15 20
Severe or extreme service
With compatible process streams,
carbon steel is normally the most eco-
nomical material from which to make
chemical equipment. But, corrosion,
erosion, and other harsh conditions,
often demand more expensive alloys.
Extreme temperatures and pressures
sometimes require extra-heavy vessel
walls or special materials.
To reflect demanding service condi-
tions, we developed special correction
a
factors (denoted FBM ) that are listed in
our cost charts. The purchase price of
an equipment item fabricated from the
most common or base material (usually
carbon steel) is multiplied by this spe-
cial bare module factor to yield the in-
stalled price of equipment constructed
from the material in question.
We describe how special bare mod-
ule factors are derived for piping in
Ref. [11]. Figures 3 and 4 were devel-
oped for heat exchangers in a similar
way. By following the path described
in Figures 2, 3 and 4, one finds that
ss
FBM for a stainless-steel shell-and-
tube exchanger is 5.8 (below 10 barg
service pressure). Thus, the 2004 bare
module cost of a 50 m2 floating head
exchanger is $10,000 5.8 = $58,000
if constructed of stainless steel. With
a current CE Plant Cost Index in the
range of 550, the bare module capital
of that heat exchanger today will be
approximately $58,000 (550/400) =
$80,000.
Summary and application
With more than 30 years experience
teaching process design and econom-
 Feature Report
Authors
Gael D. Ulrich (34R Prent-
iss St., Cambridge, MA
02140-2241; Email: gaelulrich
ics, we find that of the time and effort your path is likely to become more di- @gmail.com) is professor
required by students to estimate a rect and efficient. Even people in tech- emeritus of chemical engi-
neering at the University of
manufacturing cost, about 90% is con- nical service or sales will do their jobs New Hampshire, where he
sumed preparing a PFD and defining better when they understand the key joined the faculty in 1970.
He worked at Atomics Inter-
capital cost. Now that you have read factors that control expenses in their national Div. of North Ameri-
this article, we suggest that you apply business. In doing this exercise you can Aviation and Cabot Corp.
prior to entering teaching. He
your learning to a project near at hand. may discover you have been spending holds a B.S.Ch.E. and an M.S.Ch.E. from the
University of Utah and an Sc.D. from the Mas-
Define the capital and go the extra time on a worthless project and move sachusetts Institute of Technology. For the past
10% to estimate manufacturing eco- on to generating some of that gold you forty years, he has consulted for a number of
corporations and presided over a small contract
nomics for the product or process that are worth.  research firm for ten. Material in this article was
pays your salary. If you do research, Edited by Gerald Ondrey extracted from Ref. [1] published with coauthor
P. T. Vasudevan in 2004.
Palligarnai T. Vasudevan
References is Robert C. Davison profes-
sor of chemical and environ-
1. Ulrich, G.D. and Vasudevan, P.T., Chemical 6. Matley, J., CE Plant Cost Index Revised, mental engineering at the
Engineering Process Design and Economics, Chem. Eng., pp. 153156, April 19, 1982. University of New Hamp-
A Practical Guide, 2nd edition, Process Pub- 7. Matley, J. (1985), CE Cost Indexes Set Slower shire (Chemical Engineering
lishing (ulrichvasudesign.com), 2004. Pace, Chem. Eng., pp. 75-76 (April 29, 1985. Department, Kingsbury Hall,
2. Perry, J. H., Green, D.W. and Maloney, J.O., Rm W301, 33 College Road,
8. Vatavuk, W.M., Updating the CE Plant Durham, NH 03824; Phone:
Chemical Engineers Handbook, 7th Edi- Cost Index, Chem. Eng., pp. 6270, January,
tion, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1997. 603-862-2298; Email: vasu@
2002. unh.edu) where he joined the
3. Vasudevan, P.T., and Agrawal, D., A Software 9. Guthrie, K.M., Data and Techniques for Pre- faculty in 1988. He worked
Package for Capital Cost Estimation, Chem. liminary Capital Cost Estimation, Chem. for a large petrochemical company for seven
Eng. Educ., 33, pp. 254256, 1999. Eng., pp. 114142, March 24, 1969. years prior to entering teaching. For the past 26
4. Hall, R.S., Matley, J., and McNaughton, K.J., 10. Guthrie, K.M., Process Plant Estimating, years, he has worked in the areas of catalysis
Current Costs of Process Equipment, Chem. Evaluation and Control, Craftsman, Solano and biocatalysis. He is currently collaborating
Eng., pp. 80116, April 5, 1982. Beach, California, 1974. with researchers in Spain in the areas of hy-
5. Kohn, P.M., CE Cost Indexes Maintain drodesulfurization and enzyme catalysis. Va-
11. Ulrich, G.D. and Vasudevan, P.T., Short-cut sudevan holds a B.S.Ch.E. from Madras, India,
13-Year Ascent, Chem. Eng., pp. 189190, Piping Costs, Chem. Eng., pp. 4449, March
May 8, 1978. a M.S.Ch. E. from SUNY at Buffalo and a Ph.D.
2006. Ch.E. from Clarkson University.
MIXING AND DRYING AT ITS BEST!

4HE0ELLBOW
AVA Americas, LLC
4HE/UTSTANDING%LBOW
Phone: +1(704)248-2767
-ATERIALFLOWING
info@ava-americas.com 4HE0ELLBOW2ESISTS7EAR THROUGHTHE0ELLBOW

.ATURALLY
www.ava-americas.com
ACCUMULATESINTHE
AVA-Huep GmbH u.Co.KG POCKETORIMPACT
Phone: +49 81 52 93 92 - 0 ZONEANDMOVES
info@ava-huep.com SLOWLYUPWARDAND
Horizontal mixers
Batch mixers
www.ava-huep.com OUT)NCOMINGMATE
Continuous mixers
RIALISDEFLECTEDAT
Horizontal dryers Vertical dryers DEGREESWITHMINI
Batch dryers Conical dryers
MUMRESISTANCEAND
NOIMPACTDAMAGE

Continuous dryers WEARRESISTANT 4HE0ELLBOWISAVAIL

ELIMINATESSTREAMERS
Horizontal dryers
REDUCESFINES
ABLEINSIZESTO
MMMM
IMPACTZON

Conical mixers
Vertical mixers
)NSTAINLESSSTEELCAST
IRONANDALUMINUM
E

Hall 6.0 . Booth-No. D26-D28 0ELLETRON#ORPORATION

2UNNING0UMP2D
,ANCASTER0! 
53!
4 
& 
INFO PELLETRONCORPCOM
WWWPELLETRONCORPCOM

Circle 41 on p. 70 or go to adlinks.che.com/23013-41 Circle 46 on p. 70 or go to adlinks.che.com/23013-46

52 Chemical Engineering www.che.com April 2009