Sensor Selection - Getting It Right
For Flammable Gases
In gas detection terms, pellistors have been the Exploring the pros and cons of both technologies
primary technology for detecting hydrocarbons and the conditions under which IR sensors
since the 1960s. This is because they are, in should be seriously considered as an alternative
some circumstances, the most reliable and to pellistors will provide a useful resource for
cost-effective means of monitoring flammable those in the sector to use to their advantage
levels of combustible gases. This white paper within their own environment.
will explore the circumstances in which the
traditional usage of pellistors should not be
relied upon, and instead the situations where
infrared (IR) technology should be considered,
particularly across the oil and gas industry.
WHITE PAPER: Sensor Selection - Getting It Right For Flammable Gases
Infrared sensors’ weakness is that they are susceptible to
severe mechanical and thermal shock. They are also strongly
affected by gross pressure changes.
Which Gases Pose the Risk?
With a very real risk of explosion or fire in many industrial For those working in environments where flammable gases are
environments because of the presence of flammable gases or a threat, be they hydrocarbons, or other flammable gas, such as
vapours, it is important to protect workers from the dangers hydrogen or ammonia, gas detection is crucial to alert the user
prevalent in all given situations. to a hazard. Using the most appropriate sensor technology is
an essential part of ensuring safety.
The gases that pose these risks are frequently hydrocarbons,
and are composed of carbon and hydrogen atoms. A Although this paper primarily explores portable gas detectors
hydrocarbon references any of a class of organic chemicals and monitors, it is important to mention that similar analogues
made up of only the elements carbon (C) and hydrogen (H). apply for fixed point detection.
Within these gases, carbon atoms join together to create the
So let’s delve a little deeper into pellistor and IR technology,
framework of the compound, and the hydrogen atoms attach to
to provide further information on how to determine the right
them in many different configurations.
technology for the hazards in different environments.
The different hydrocarbon molecules vary in size, with the
smaller hydrocarbon gases being highly flammable. As the
molecular size increases, flammability decreases and the
compound properties go from volatile liquids to fuel oils,
lubricating oils and then to tars and waxes.
WHITE PAPER: Sensor Selection - Getting It Right For Flammable Gases
As part of a site-specific risk assessment, all parameters
should be considered to fully understand which the best
technology of choice should be.
Detection Technology Available
Pellistor sensors use the combustion of a gas to detect it, and sits between visible light and microwaves, and encompasses
so they provide a direct measure of flammability. A pellistor is frequencies that range from 0.003x1014 to 4x1014 cycles/
based on a Wheatstone bridge circuit (as shown in the diagram sec (or 1000 to 0.75μm). This technology can be employed in
below/Fig 1), and includes two “beads”, both of which encase different ways to detect flammable gases. Here, we will explore
platinum coils. One of the beads (the active bead) is treated NDIR technology, which is commonly used in personal gas
with a catalyst, which lowers the temperature at which the gas detection.
ignites around it.
NDIR is a term commonly used in the gas detection sector
This bead then becomes hot from the combustion, resulting to refer to NonDispersing Infrared, and tends to be the most
in a temperature difference between the active and other common type of sensor used to measure carbon dioxide, or
“reference” beads. This causes a difference in resistance, CO2. The sensor utilises an infrared (IR) lamp and directs
which can then be measured. As the amount of gas present is waves of light through a tube filled with a sample of air. This
directly proportional to it, it allows for the gas concentration to air then travels toward an optical filter in front of an IR light
be determined. It is necessary to note here, however, that an detector.
accurate measure of the gases present may not be achieved in
The carbon and hydrogen atoms that make up a hydrocarbon
this instance as it depends on calibration and the gas hazard
molecule are held together by covalent bonds (as shown in
mixture present. In high gas concentrations, the combustion
Figure. 3). These bonds have a natural frequency at which
process can be incomplete, resulting in a layer of soot on the
they vibrate. When exposed to infrared, the covalent bonds in
active bead.
hydrocarbon molecules absorb the IR of the same cycles/sec
While the use of combustion to detect flammable gases may that are the natural frequency of the bonds. The amount of IR
sound unwise, the design of pellistor sensors ensures the absorbed can be used to measure the concentration of gas
safety of the method. The hot bead and electrical circuitry are present.
securely contained within a flameproof sensor housing (as
In practice, two IR emitters within the sensor each generate a
shown in Figure 2), behind the sintered metal flame arrestor
beam of IR light (illustrated in Figure 4). Each beam is of equal
(or sinter) through which the gas passes. Due to being
intensity and is deflected by a mirror within the sensor onto a
confined within the sensor housing, an internal temperature of
photo-receiver, which measures the level of IR received. The
500°C is maintained allowing for the occurrence of controlled
“measuring” beam, with a frequency of around 3.3μm, is then
combustion. Safely isolated from the outside environment by
absorbed by the gas if it is present.This reduces the beam’s
the sinter, the pellister provides peace of mind for operators
intensity when it reaches the photo-receiver. The “reference”
due to its inbuilt safeguards.
beam (around 3.0μm) cannot be absorbed by hydrocarbon
Infrared technology sensors use the absorption of IR by gas molecules, and so arrives at the receiver undiminished.
hydrocarbon gas molecules in order to detect the presence of The %LEL of gas is ascertained by the difference in intensity
the gas. Infrared is part of the electro-magnetic spectrum that between the beams measured by the photo-receiver.
Fig 1 Wheatstone bridge circuit diagram Fig 2 Pelsistor sesor construction Fig 3 Methane; one carbon and four Fig 4 Operation of NDIR
hydrogen atoms linked by covalent technology sensor
bonds
WHITE PAPER: Sensor Selection - Getting It Right For Flammable Gases
As part of a site-specific risk assessment, all parameters
should be considered to fully understand which the best
technology of choice should be.
Drawbacks with Pellistors
Now that we have fully explored the way in which the available Silicon-based compounds, such as silicones, silanes and
technology works, it is necessary to look at the drawbacks of siloxanes, (henceforth referred to as “silicons” in this article for
said technology to ascertain which is the best choice for usage consistency) are widely used as defoamers and anti foamers,
in the detection of flammable gases. and are known to significantly increase efficiencies in many
production processes. Please refer to Figure 5. Silicons are
There are a couple of factors, particularly in oil and gas
used to reduce waste, maintenance costs and processing time.
applications, where pellistors should not automatically be
Problems reduced through the use of silicons include cavitation
assumed to be the right choice. Perhaps the most serious
in pumps to excessive process fouling.
drawback of pellistors is their susceptibility to poisoning (or
irreversible loss of sensitivity) or inhibition (also known as
reversible loss of sensitivity) by many chemicals found in the
industry.
Compounds containing silicon, lead, sulphur and phosphates at
just a few parts per million (ppm) can have a serious impact on
the functionality of pellistor performance.
WHITE PAPER: Sensor Selection - Getting It Right For Flammable Gases
Silicons - Potent Pellistor Poisoners
Even at very low levels, silicons can act as a poison to pellistor- Foam has a significant impact on capacity and efficiency of
based sensors. They do this by coating the catalytic surface, the oil production and refining processes, from the wellhead,
and preventing the catalysis of the reaction which is the basis through refining and even during shipment of the finished
of pellistor sensitivity. A case study that illustrates this point is product. Increased waste, maintenance costs and processing
that of a company who replaced a window pane of the room time are caused by process problems, ranging from cavitation
where they stored gas detection equipment. Silicon-based in pumps to excessive process fouling.
sealant of a standard type was used in the process, and as
Silicons are widely used as an antifoaming agent to eliminate
result, all their pellistor sensors failed their subsequent testing.
foaming and increase productivity, and so reduce production
Fortunately this company routinely tested all its sensors.
costs and save money. This extensive use of silicons needs
Without regular checks this incident could have led to serious
to be taken into account when assessing the gas detection
ramifications. As it was, the problem was picked up, and no
requirements at different points along the production, refining
one came to any harm.
and transportation process.
To understand more fully the issues of pellistor poisoning, let’s
delve further into the science of the process.
Different chemicals degrade pellistor performance at different
rates. The alumina bead structure used in pellistors is intended
to increase resistance. Hexamethyldisiloxane (HMDS) is a
volatile organosilicon compound used as a solvent, and as a
reagent in organic synthesis, used to investigate effectiveness.
In Chart 1 (shown below), the alumina bead significantly
improves performance over the platinum coil on its own.
Nevertheless, even at levels as low as 10 parts per million
(ppm) HMDS, the output of the pellistor with beads is
significantly impaired after just 20 hours of exposure. As time
progresses, the level of output degradation accelerates.
It seems reasonable to project that after 24 hours (just 3 8-hour
shifts), sensor output could easily be at 40% of what it should
be, or worse. This demonstrates why regular testing is required,
and why portable monitors used for personal safety and for
proving the area environment must be tested prior to use to
avoid serious harm.
Chart 1 Affects of 10ppm HMDS on sesor output
WHITE PAPER: Sensor Selection - Getting It Right For Flammable Gases
Pellistors Lack of Suitability
Pellistor-based sensors are also unsuitable for functions such Exposure to concentrations in the high percent of LEL of
as the filling or purging of tanks with either flammable or inert flammable gas will soot up the pellistor completely and
gases, where either low oxygen or high levels of flammable irretrievably. The LEL refers to the lower explosive limit , which
gases may cause them to fail. Pellistors burn gases to detect is the minimum concentration in air at which a gas is flammable.
them, but without oxygen, the gas doesn’t burn and so
With this in mind, pellistor sensors are not suited to detection
completely undermines the pellistor mode of detection.
at %vol levels. In all these instances, the failed pellistor would
Exposure to low levels of the target gas (such as 50% LEL or produce no output when exposed to gas, giving the dangerous
below) can actually assist in maintaining the cleanliness of the false impression of a safe environment. If relying on pellistor
beads, as it effectively ‘burns off’ soot. However this also throws detectors in environments where poisons, inhibitors or high gas
up issues, as the sooting caused by even a brief exposure to levels may be encountered, regular and frequent testing prior
higher gas levels can cause the zero to drift, affecting pellistor to use is the only way to ensure that performance is not being
performance, or even cracking the bead in some cases. degraded.
WHITE PAPER: Sensor Selection - Getting It Right For Flammable Gases
Pellistor technology is considerably less expensive than IR
technology, which is a good indicator of the comparative
simplicity of the detection technology.
Imperfect Infrared
Infrared technology is superior to pellistors in all of the Some fixed systems employ heaters to overcome this last
circumstances highlighted so far. This is because the mode problem, but this option tends to be too power-hungry for
of operation means that IR technology is not susceptible to routine use on portable units. However, the choice of sensor
poisoning or inhibition. should not default to a pellistor under these circumstances as
there could still be poisons or other factors that would severely
Therefore in environments where silicons, lead, sulphur or
impact pellistors. As part of a site-specific risk assessment, all
phosphate-based compounds may be encountered, IR sensors
parameters should be considered to fully understand which the
are the sensor of choice, and can be used with confidence,
best technology of choice should be.
when pellistors’ performance could not provide the same peace
of mind. Pellistor technology is considerably less expensive than IR
technology, which is a good indicator of the comparative
As mentioned, the sooting of pellistors which is caused by
simplicity of the detection technology. IR sensors require the
exposure to high levels of flammable gas, can partially or
use of digital techniques, such as complex signal processing
completely impair its effectiveness. IR sensors do not suffer
and thermal compensation, in order to obtain the gas reading.
the same fate and so are not affected under these conditions.
This adds to the production cost further.
This feature, combined with their effectiveness in low/no O2
environments, makes IR sensors ideal for tank filling and In working environments where either technology would
purging applications where flammable or inert gases may be in be suitable, the issue of cost will be an important selection
the high percent volume levels and O2 levels are low. criterion. While IR technology is more costly to purchase,
pellistor maintenance costs are liable to be greater, because
IR technology provides fail-safe detection. In normal operation,
the sensors tend to require more frequent replacement. The
IR is emitted and received. If either beam fails, the system
total cost, including the on-going testing and maintenance,
will register a sensor failure. In normal pellistor operation,
should be considered on a site-specific basis to determine the
conversely, a lack of output is ordinarily an indication that there
most cost-effective option, coupled with the fail-safe benefits.
is no gas present, but this could also be the result of a fault.
Again, the importance of testing is raised again here, with
this being the only way in this instance to confirm whether a
pellistor is functioning as it should be.
Although IR has enhanced functionality compared to the
pellister in the circumstances we have explored thus far, it is
important to note that IR technology is not always the best
choice in every situation.
For example, if absorption by hydrogen molecules is at the
wrong frequency, IR sensors will not detect the gas. Hydrogen
is highly flammable, and either a pellistor or an electrochemical
H2 sensor is required if it is a possible hazard. Infrared sensors’
weakness is that they are susceptible to severe mechanical
and thermal shock. They are also strongly affected by gross
pressure changes. In circumstances where the mirror can
become heavily affected by condensation, the IR beam can
deflect away from the photo-receiver.
WHITE PAPER: Sensor Selection - Getting It Right For Flammable Gases
Across any site there may be an array of diverse environments
in which the utilisation of different sensors is advisable. There
is also scope within different areas that will see a combination
of risks that require both a pellistor and IR sensor in one
device.
Making the Right Choice
When assessing the best sensor technology to use in your Ultimately, the prime objective for safety is to select the
personal gas monitors, there are many factors to consider. best detection technology for the hazard and the operating
Risks to assess, as explored in this paper, include poisoning, environment. This paper provides guidance on the performance
inhibition or sooting, the exposure to high flammable gas levels, of both pellistor and IR sensors that should enable the users of
low oxygen environments and the need to detect hydrogen. gas detectors to assess the best technology for their hazards
Lifetime ownership costs is also a factor that should be and operating environment.
considered in line with an organisation’s budgeting.
The final decision comes down to the line managers and
Across any site there may be an array of diverse environments teams working within the environment on a day to day basis.
in which the utilisation of different sensors is advisable. There is However, for those keen to seek a second opinion and to
also scope within different areas that will see a combination of assess the best sensors which can ensure the safety of their
risks that require both a pellistor and IR sensor in one device. environment and workforce, please reach out to a member of
Crowcon’s team to find out more.
