Expanded porous ceramic packing

[DrGreenT]

Though I am quite new here, I've been reading thoroughly on this forum for many years, almost always finding my answer right away. I have read all the rules we live by, novice readers section, etc. I've noticed that people are quite resistant to change (like the adoption of PTFE as an acceptable material), for good reason. I also see that it takes quite a large burden of proof to change people's views about accepted materials, so I hope this can be an open and reasonable conversation about what the burden of proof is in material suitability in distillation. The material in question is a form of expanded porous ceramic that goes by the name of Cermedia marinepure biofilter.



http://www.cermedia.com/MarinePureTechSheet.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" rel="nofollow

Chemically Inert

Hydrophilic Adsorbs water and stays wet longer

Low Pressure Drop

Unaffected by ozone

MarinePure bio-media is made from an ultra high surface area ceramic. The open and
extensive network of interconnected pores and channels offers little resistance to water flow. This
inorganic aluminosilicate product is light weight, robust and inert.

I am still waiting to hear back from the company by email for a proper MSDS. Edit: They returned my email and claim to not have an MSDS for the product, but that it is simply a "sodium aluminosilicate ceramic" with no hazards associated with the product.The closest comparison I have been able to find to this product thus far is alumninosilicate firebrick:



The MSDS for a standard refractory aluminosilicate firebrick can be seen here:

http://www.celsius-group.com/wp-content ... SDS_EN.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" rel="nofollow

Here is the part about chemical composition:


Here is the part about chemical/physical properties:


I have personally run the low-density blocks of Cermedia cut into 1/2" cubes in 30-32" of 3" packed column on my VM still for a couple cleaning/trial runs, and it significantly out-performed neatly packed SS wool in take-off rate, with both producing ~azeo. It did require thorough rinsing prior to use as it does contain a lot of dust, but naturally it is heavier than air and those particles would not/did not end up in the finished product.

The benefit of Cermedia is the extremely high surface area of the material, yet very minimal restriction to flow which makes it very suitable as a packing material, possibly moreso than SPP. It also has next to no thermal transfer properties, which might further help in separating fractions with appropriate column insulation? Here is a video demonstrating it's porosity:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gODPcUgs3Xo" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" rel="nofollow

So as far as I can tell, as long as the proper MSDS closely matches that of firebrick and other ceramics, it should be safe to use as a packing material. Thoughts?