Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 24

Eloise Jackson and Jigar Patel

Gas Cyclones

Eloise Jackson and Jigar Patel

Department of Chemical Engineering,

Loughborough University,

UK

1
Eloise Jackson and Jigar Patel

Summary
From this experiment it was found that the overall collection efficiency increased with
increasing gas flowrate , the highest efficiency was found to be 43% and this was at
the maximum flowrate tested, which was 18m3/hr. The lowest efficiency was 6.7%
which was at 6m3/hr. As well as an increase in flowrate the pressure drop across the
cyclone also increased. When scaling this laboratory cyclone to an industrial sized
cyclone, the efficiency decreased from 43% to 37% suggesting that a cyclone of a
smaller diameter is more efficient.

Graphs for grade efficiency against Stokes number did not show the expected unique
relationship. Each flowrate should have shown the same curve, however this was not
the case. It is likely the main reason for this was due to the agglomeration of particles.
The analysis of particles from the Malvern Mastersizer showed particles that were
between 100 and 200 micrometers, however when looking at the particles under a
microscope, the biggest sized particles that could be seen were 16 micrometers in
diameter. It was evident that smaller particles were sticking together which could have
caused the Mastersizer to show such big particles.

To our manager it would be recommended to use cyclones of smaller diameter, this


would increase the efficiency. A further way to improve efficiency is to have multiple
smaller cyclones, for example in the commonly known Dyson Vacuum cleaner, but
this does come with the disadvantage of a greater pressure drop. Another
recommendation would be to also use a flowrate no higher than 18m3/hr. This is due
to the fact efficiency does not increase after this flowrate but would increase the cost
for no extra efficiency.

2
Eloise Jackson and Jigar Patel

Contents
Summary ................................................................................................................................................. 2
Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 4
Theory ..................................................................................................................................................... 5
This graph shows as the stokes number increases the grade efficiency will also increase. ................... 7
Methods and Apparatus ......................................................................................................................... 8
Apparatus ................................................................................................................................................ 9
Results and Discussion .......................................................................................................................... 10
Scale-up ................................................................................................................................................. 12
Error ...................................................................................................................................................... 14
Conclusion ............................................................................................................................................. 16
References ............................................................................................................................................ 17
Appendices............................................................................................................................................ 18

3
Eloise Jackson and Jigar Patel

Introduction
The gas cyclone is a flow device which enables the separation of a dispersed phase
(solid particle) from a gas (air for example). (Svarovsky, 1993)[2].

There are two types of gas cyclones, either the uniflow cyclone where gas enters at
one end of the cylindrical body and leaves at the other end. Or the reverse flow cyclone
which has a tangential inlet and consists of a cylindrical section, adjoined to a conical
section below. The clean outlet gas leaves through a centrally located pipe at the top
of the cyclone and extends into the cyclone body a reasonable distance. The outlet
solid particles leave through a central orifice at the apex of the conical section. The
uniflow type has of limited use in industry and therefore the report shall focus on the
more commonly used reverse flow cyclone (Svarovsky, 1993)[2]. The following
diagram below illustrates its principle of operation:

Figure 1: Schematic diagram of a gas cyclone (Svarovsky, 1993)[2]

The various types of inlet of a gas cyclone include tangential, axial, helical or spiral
(figure 2). These all achieve the same flow type within the cyclone. Below is a figure
to help establish cyclone type:

Figure 2: Types of inlet (Svarovsky, 1993) [2]

The use of the gas cyclone extends back many years, with their origins likely to have
been lost in the mists of time. However their uses were beneficial in the flour milling
industry, in World War II as a wood imbert gasifier and in the agricultural sector. And
4
Eloise Jackson and Jigar Patel

now as an important piece of equipment in the mining industry. The above mentioned
examples have the use of gas cyclones in a wide range of fields showing its huge
diversity making it a popular piece of equipment for separation (Perdu, 2011[1]).

If a company should wish to reduce their expenditure, for instance in catalytic cracking
– then the gas cyclone is the perfect choice for the separation of the catalyst from the
air as otherwise it would be lost.

If environmental regulations need to be upheld then a gas cyclone may wish to be


considered. It offers a surplus of advantages over other separation devices such as
air filters and electrostatic precipitators. These include the fact a gas cyclone has no
moving parts, and if a problem was to ever arise, the gas cyclone is made up of few
parts so the problem would be easy to locate and no more than a couple of items
would need to be replaced at one time. Also known for their ability to operate in any
climate conditions, they offer an advantage for any company wishing to operate in
extreme conditions if needed, or to have the knowledge that it can deal with these
conditions if needs be. Examples of where gas cyclones have proved useful in the
past extend from areas melting materials at high temperatures to areas working where
humidity is high. A gas cyclone is adaptable to the situation it is needed for; available
in different sizes and forms to suit the need of a company. Investing in this device can
enhance your manufacturing productivity (Perdu, 2011[1]).

Theory
Cyclones operate by using inertial forces via a turning movement to divide solid
particles into categories. Upon entry in to the cyclone, the incoming substance spins
5
Eloise Jackson and Jigar Patel

into a vortex as seen in figure 3, due to the filter design. Bigger particles are
transported to the outer barriers of the cyclone and since the main axial flow is at the
outer edge of the cyclone is downwards, the heavier particles are pushed and
deposited through the orifice into another section below, for example a dust collector
(Svarovsky, 1993)[2]. Smaller particles are released at the top since the main axial flow
is upwards in the centre of the cyclone. Some gas will be transferred from the outer
vortex into the inner vortex along the length of the cyclone body.

Figure 3: Gas flow in a gas cyclone (Svarovsky, 1993)[2]

Particles can be collected by diffusion, inertia, bounce and sieving (Holdich, 2002)[7].
The method for particle collection in this experiment is inertia. Inertia is the change of
momentum (Holdich, 2002)[7] and its value may be calculated by the use of Stokes
number (Stk):

𝑥 2 𝑣𝜌𝑠𝑜𝑙𝑖𝑑 (1)
𝑆𝑡𝑜𝑘𝑒 𝑛𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 (𝑆𝑡𝑘) = ( )
9𝜇𝐷
This is where:

𝑥 = Particle diameter
V= Inlet velocity
𝜌𝑠𝑜𝑙𝑖𝑑 = Density of solid
𝜇 = fluid/air viscosity
𝐷= Cyclone diameter

An assumption made when using this formula is that the cyclone diameter is the
characteristic dimension for the whole system.

The grade efficiency is the separation efficiency for a given particle size and this would
be calculated by using the equation:

(2)
6
Eloise Jackson and Jigar Patel

𝑀𝑎𝑠𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑝𝑎𝑟𝑡𝑖𝑐𝑙𝑒𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑠𝑖𝑧𝑒 𝑥 𝑖𝑛 𝑔𝑟𝑎𝑑𝑒 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑓𝑖𝑛𝑒𝑠


𝑀𝑎𝑠𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑝𝑎𝑟𝑡𝑖𝑐𝑙𝑒𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑠𝑖𝑧𝑒 𝑥 𝑔𝑟𝑎𝑑𝑒 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑓𝑒𝑒𝑑

The fine is the amount of powder collected after capture by the cyclone. The particle
grades can be acquired by particle analysis machines such as a Malvern
Mastersizer.

Both Stokes number and grade efficiency give a unique relationship that can be
applied for different conditions for the same particle sizes.

Figure 4: Graph of grade efficiency against Stokes Number, (Holdich, 2002)[7]

Figure 4 shows the unique relationship between Grade efficiency and Stokes
number that is expected to be achieved. As the Stokes number increases the
grade efficiency also increases. This relationship should be the same i.e
regardless of the operating conditions.

7
Eloise Jackson and Jigar Patel

Methods and Apparatus


The glass beads were initially ground into a powder. The estimated mass of this
powder was 28grams. This was to provide a sample feed and also four six gram
samples to test 4 different flowrates. The flowrates that were chosen to be tested were
6, 10, 14 and 18m3/hr. Approximately six grams of powder was loaded into the silo
and to prevent the solids escaping a bung was placed on top of the Silo.

The air flowrate was then turned on and adjusted to the specified flowrate. The
pressure drop across the cyclone was measured by using a manometer, which was
filled with water. To input the powder into the cyclone a rotary air lock valve was
manually opened until all the powder entered the system. It was important that the
solid was not deposited in one load as this could lead to deposition in the pipe. The
time taken for the powder to enter the underflow of the cyclone was approximately 3
seconds. There was also some powder that did not enter the dust collector; this was
blown out of the top of the cyclone into a vacuum bag.

The inlet gas flowrate was stopped after the powder had been collected. The dust in
the dust collector which was a conical flask was then detached from the cyclone. To
remove the powder from the flask, distilled water was added and the sample was
poured into a tube for analysis. Generally, the level of the powder and water in each
tube achieved the same height. The conical flask was then fully washed out into a
bucket to remove any remaining particles (which should be minimal) for the next test.
This was then repeated for the other three gas flowrates. A sample of the feed was
also taken and placed into a tube with distilled water.

A size analysis was then performed using a Malvern Mastersizer. Prior to the mixture
entering the Malvern Mastersizer the tubes were placed in an ultrasonic bath to
dislodge particles that may have been sticking together. The liquid and solid solution
was mixed with a pipette and then added to the Malvern Mastersizer for analysis.

8
Eloise Jackson and Jigar Patel

Apparatus

Manome
Rotame ter
Vacuu
ter m bag
Solids
Rul
in
er

Gas
in
Rotar
y Gas
valve cyclone
Dust
collect
Figure 5: Gas cyclone experiment apparatus or

9
Eloise Jackson and Jigar Patel

Results and Discussion


100

90

80

70
Grade efficiency (%)

60

50 18m3hr
14m3hr
40
10m3hr
30

20

10

0
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2

Stokes Number

Figure 6: Graph of Grade efficiency against Stokes Number

From the graph above (figure 6), it can be seen that as the Stokes Number increases
the grade efficiency also increases, this generally follows the increasing trend seen in
figure 4. However, initially it can be seen from the graph that as the volumetric flow
rate increases the grade efficiency’s also increase in comparison to one another.
However, this should not be the case since there should be a unique function between
Stokes Number and the grade efficiency. So ideally, each of the curves above should
be seen to be on top of another. This is due to the fact that at a smaller flow rate, the
majority of particles collected are smaller in size and the grade efficiency collection
should mirror that of when the flow rate is higher, the overall particle size will be bigger
but the overall grade efficiency in that should be the same as before.

All of the curves show a drop in grade efficiency at a stokes number of 0.005, this is
not a usual relationship and may be as a result of the agglomeration of particles which
shall be discussed in more detail later. The particles at this size could be more likely
to agglomerate therefore a decrease in grade efficiency.

10
Eloise Jackson and Jigar Patel

100

90

80

70
Overall efficiency (%)

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Gas flowrate (m3/hr)

Figure 7: Graph of overall efficiency versus gas flowrate.

The graph (figure 7) shows how the overall collection efficiency changes with
increasing flowrate. From the graph a clear trend can be seen that as the gas flowrate
increases the overall collection efficiency increases. There is a steady increase in the
overall collection efficiency but this trend does start to level off just before the
maximum flowrate tested 18m3/hr. The maximum efficiency found for this cyclone was
43% and the minimum efficiency was 6.7% efficiency. This shows that the operating
envelope for this cyclone should be between 16m3/hr and 18m3/hr. Between this range
is when the curve starts to level off showing that efficiency will not be any higher with
increasing the flowrate. If the cyclone was operated at higher gas flowrate than
18m3/hr then it would be a waste of money as the same overall efficiency would be
achieved. However, operating at a gas flowrate much lower would not give adequate
separation.

11
Eloise Jackson and Jigar Patel

Scale-up
1
0.9
0.8
Cumulative Undersize

0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
0 5 10 15 20 25
Particle Diameter

Figure 8: Graph of Cumulative Undersize versus Particle Diameter

Previously from figure 6, the relationship between stokes number and grade efficiency
is seen to increase with increasing flowrate. The data that best fitted the trend
expected was at 18m3/hr. It therefore means that it is possible to predict the collection
efficiency for one set of particles from a knowledge of efficiency for another set of
particles. Hence this can be used in the scale up of gas cyclones.

The model used had the following parameters and details:

Inlet velocity 18m3/hr


Diameter 0.1m
Specific gravity 2.4
Viscosity 1.78x10-5
Table 1: Dimensions/Parameters of the model cyclone

It is wished to attain the collection efficiency of the gas cyclone with the following
parameters and details:

Inlet velocity 66ft/s


Diameter 5ft
Specific gravity 1.8
Viscosity 1.59x10-5
Table 2: Dimensions/Parameters of the scaled up cyclone

𝑉𝐴 𝜌𝐴 𝐷𝐵 𝜇𝐵 0.5 (3)
𝑥𝐵 = 𝑥𝐴 ( )
𝑉𝐵 𝜌𝐵 𝐷𝐴 𝜇𝐴

Using equation 3, the constant of proportionality (the transform value) between the
scaled up particle diameter and the experimental particle diameter was found to be
1.29.

12
Eloise Jackson and Jigar Patel

From figure 8 above the values can be transformed using the constant of
proportionality to give a collection efficiency of approximately 37%. This was 5% lower
efficiency than the cyclone that was tested in the lab.

In order to maximise efficiency of a gas cyclone then, it is useful to reduce the cyclone
diameter, reduce the outlet diameter, reduce the cone angle or increase the body
length. A method that is beneficial to be used, is to use multiple small cyclones. This
means that each of the cyclone diameters will be smaller in size meaning an overall
increase in efficiency. However, the disadvantage of this is a greater pressure drop.

If high capacity loads are being used then it is beneficial to have sequential cyclone
separators of varying size. The first cyclone could separate larger particles and the
second separator could separate the smaller particles. ‘For example, Columbus (1993)
found that the combination of a 2D2D cyclone followed by a 1D3D cyclone was very
efficient in reducing total emissions’ (MEEF 2006). However to the boss it would be
recommended to use a smaller cyclone and also more than one cyclone. However
there must be a balance between the number of smaller cyclones as the pressure drop
will increase with increasing number.

13
Eloise Jackson and Jigar Patel

Error
The main error in this experiment was caused by the agglomeration of the particles.
Once the particles were collected from the cyclone, water was added, the heavy
particles settled to the bottom and agglomeration of the particles took place. When the
sample was put into the Malvern Mastersizer for analysis, the results showed particles
that were between 100 and 200 micrometers in size which to an extent can be seen
in figure 10. When analysing the particle size under a microscope the biggest particle
that could be seen was 16 micrometers (figure 9), this further suggests that
agglomeration took place and the Malvern Mastersizer showed particles in excess of
16 micrometers represented in figure 10. Efforts made to try and stop the
agglomeration of particles included using an ultrasonic bath and using a surfactant,
however these methods both failed.

16
µm

Figure 9: Particles seen under a microscope

Figure 10: Particles seen under a microscope


14
Eloise Jackson and Jigar Patel

As well as agglomeration of particles, glass beads were left in the bottom of the
cyclone from the previous experiments. When attaching and removing the dust
collector some of the glass beads from the previous experiment would fall in, this could
change the size analysis of the particles for the particular flowrate. As well as the
collection at the bottom of the cyclones at lower flowrates there was collection of the
dust in the pipes, this will affect the flowrate acting on the rest of the particles entering
the system.

Another error that took place was that an estimate for the starting mass of the glass
beads had to be estimated, this was taken to be roughly 6 grams. This was estimated
by calculating the amount collected. To make the curve fit the points an iterative
solution was found.

15
Eloise Jackson and Jigar Patel

Conclusion
Stokes Number was originally used to plot a graph of Stokes Number against Grade
efficiency (Figure 6). In theory this should offer a unique relationship where Stokes
number should increase as grade efficiency increases. This should be the same
regardless of whether the variable in the formula change. The results for the grade
efficiency versus stokes number did not show the unique relationship that should be
achieved from this graph. However the curves do generally follow the trend of
increasing the Stokes number does increase the grade efficiency.

Overall from our results it was shown that increasing the flowrate subsequently
increases the grade efficiency. Operating the cyclone at higher gas velocities up to a
certain flowrate which is the optimum; then operating it at a higher flowrate would not
give a better efficiency and would therefore lead to a waste of costs. The optimum
flowrate was found to be 18m3/hr which gave an overall efficiency of 43%. The
operating envelope is approximately from 16m3/hr to 18m3/hr. The lowest efficiency
was found at 6m3/hr which was 6.7%.

However, the fact that the results did not show a unique relationship is likely to be due
to the agglomeration of the particles. This was a major error since the maximum size
particle found under a microscope was 16 micrometers, but the Malvern Mastersizer
registered particles greater than 100 micrometers. It is likely that there was nothing
wrong with the actual samples obtained, merely the performance of the Mastersizer in
dealing with the glass particle agglomeration.

Scaling up of the model cyclone to an industrial size cyclone (measurements displayed


previously) gave us a transform value of 1.29. Scaling up using this transform value
lead to a decrease in efficiency.

Recommendations lead towards a decrease in diameter of the cyclone which in turn


leads to a decrease in the cone angle of the cyclone. So overall the best
recommendation is the use of a number of smaller cyclones. However this comes with
the problem of a greater pressure drop. But as can be seen in everyday life, the Dyson
vacuum cleaner is a prime example of a number of smaller cyclones aiding grade
efficiency.

16
Eloise Jackson and Jigar Patel

References
[1] Perdu A, 2011, ‘What are cyclone separators?’, Ezine Articles. [online] Available at
<http://ezinearticles.com/?What-Are-Cyclone-Separators?&id=1247246> [Accessed
18th May 2011]

[2] Svarovsky L, 1993, Gas Cyclones. [online] Available at


th
<http://www.svarovsky.org/fps2/GASCYC.pdf> [Accessed 18 May 2011]

[3] Houben J J H, 2006, Wall Depositions in Gas Cyclones, Eindhoven University of


Technology. [online] Available at <http://www.mate.tue.nl/mate/pdfs/7751.pdf>
[Accessed 18th May 2011]

[4] Columbus. 1993. A theoretical study of the hydraulic cyclone, International


Chemical Manufacturer, Vol34, pg473-489.

[5] Slideshare, 2009, Cyclones and Inertial separations, Design Theory Cyclones
http://www.slideshare.net/Shambhudayal/design-theory-cyclones

[6] MEEF, 2006, Plastic Recycling – Cyclones. [online] Available at <http://www.eng-


forum.com/recycling/Plastic_Reycling_Cyclone.htm> [Accessed 22nd May 2011]

[7] Holdich RG Professor, 2002, Fundamentals of Particle Technology, MidlandIT,


Shepshed, UK.

17
Eloise Jackson and Jigar Patel

Appendices
Data for the cyclone operated at 18m3/hr

Size range Volume in % Cumulative volume


0.78-0.91 0.15 0.15
0.91-1.06 0.25 0.4
1.06-1.24 0.4 0.8
1.24-1.44 0.62 1.42
1.44-1.68 0.92 2.34
1.68-1.95 1.28 3.62
1.95-2.28 1.78 5.4
2.28-2.65 2.43 7.83
2.65-3.09 3.22 11.05
3.09-3.6 4.15 15.2
3.6-4.19 5.21 20.41
4.19-4.88 6.43 26.84
4.88-5.69 7.6 34.44
5.69-6.63 8.62 43.06
6.63-7.72 9.49 52.55
7.72-9 10.17 62.72
9-10.48 9.67 72.39
10.48-12.21 8.68 81.07
12.21-14.22 7.01 88.08
14.22-16.57 5.31 93.39
16.57-19.31 3.55 96.94
19.31-22.49 2.07 99.01
22.49-26.20 0.98 100
Table 3 shows the size analysis of particles for a flowrate of 18m3/hr

V (m/s) 2.54614895
Density of glass 2400
(kg/m3)
Viscosity of air 1.78E-05
Diameter of cyclone 0.1
(m)
Table 4 shows the values used to calculate Stokes number of particles for flowrate of 18m3/hr

Lower Upper Mean(micrometer) Diameter(meters) Stokes


limit(micrometer) limit(micrometer)
0.78 0.91 0.845 0.000000845 0.0002724
0.91 1.06 0.985 0.000000985 0.0003701
1.06 1.24 1.15 0.00000115 0.0005045
1.24 1.44 1.34 0.00000134 0.0006849
1.44 1.68 1.56 0.00000156 0.0009283
1.68 1.95 1.815 0.000001815 0.0012566
1.95 2.28 2.115 0.000002115 0.0017063
2.28 2.65 2.465 0.000002465 0.0023177
2.65 3.09 2.87 0.00000287 0.0031419
3.09 3.6 3.345 0.000003345 0.0042680
3.6 4.19 3.895 0.000003895 0.0057869
4.19 4.88 4.535 0.000004535 0.0078449
4.88 5.69 5.285 0.000005285 0.0106542
5.69 6.63 6.16 0.00000616 0.0144742

18
Eloise Jackson and Jigar Patel

6.63 7.72 7.175 0.000007175 0.0196371


7.72 9 8.36 0.00000836 0.0266591
9 10.48 9.74 0.00000974 0.0361868
10.48 12.21 11.345 0.000011345 0.0490955
12.21 14.22 13.215 0.000013215 0.0666142
14.22 16.57 15.395 0.000015395 0.0904049
16.57 19.31 17.94 0.00001794 0.1227658
19.31 22.49 20.9 0.0000209 0.1666192
22.49 26.2 24.345 0.000024345 0.2260748
26.2 30.53 28.365 0.000028365 0.3069009
Table 5 shows the stokes number for 18m3/hr

Data for 18 Weight % feed Cumulative weight % Weight % fines Cumulative


m3/hr weight
0.78-0.91 0.26 0.26 0.15 0.15
0.91-1.06 0.36 0.62 0.25 0.4
1.06-1.24 0.51 1.13 0.4 0.8
1.24-1.44 0.73 1.86 0.62 1.42
1.44-1.68 1.04 2.9 0.92 2.34
1.68-1.95 1.47 4.37 1.28 3.62
1.95-2.28 2.04 6.41 1.78 5.4
2.28-2.65 2.8 9.21 2.43 7.83
2.65-3.09 3.75 12.96 3.22 11.05
3.09-3.60 4.91 17.87 4.15 15.2
3.6-4.19 6.18 24.05 5.21 20.41
4.19-4.88 7.34 31.39 6.43 26.84
4.88-5.69 8.4 39.79 7.6 34.44
5.69-6.63 9.25 49.04 8.62 43.06
6.63-7.72 9.85 58.89 9.49 52.55
7.72-9.00 10.29 69.18 10.17 62.72
9.00-10.48 9.33 78.51 9.67 72.39
10.48-12.21 7.9 86.41 8.68 81.07
12.21-14.22 6.01 92.42 7.01 88.08
14.22-16.57 4.17 96.59 5.31 93.39
16.57-19.31 2.47 99.06 3.55 96.94
19.31-22.49 0.95 100.01 2.07 99.01
Table 6 to show data for calculating grade efficiency for gas flowrate of 18m3/hr

Mass in grade Mass in grade Grad efficiency Grade efficiency


feed fines decimal
0.00156 0.000387525 0.248413462 24.84134615
0.00216 0.000645875 0.299016204 29.90162037
0.00306 0.0010334 0.337712418 33.77124183
0.00438 0.00160177 0.365700913 36.57009132
0.00624 0.00237682 0.380900641 38.0900641
0.00882 0.00330688 0.374929705 37.49297052
0.01224 0.00459863 0.375705065 37.57050654
0.0168 0.006277905 0.373684821 37.36848214
0.0225 0.00831887 0.369727556 36.97275556
0.02946 0.010721525 0.363934997 36.39349966
0.03708 0.013460035 0.362999865 36.29998652
0.04404 0.016611905 0.377200386 37.7200386
0.0504 0.0196346 0.389575397 38.95753968

19
Eloise Jackson and Jigar Patel

0.0555 0.02226977 0.401257117 40.12571171


0.0591 0.024517415 0.414846277 41.48462775
0.06174 0.026274195 0.425561953 42.55619534
0.05598 0.024982445 0.446274473 44.6274473
0.0474 0.02242478 0.473096624 47.30966245
0.03606 0.018110335 0.502227815 50.22278148
0.02502 0.013718385 0.548296763 54.82967626
0.01482 0.009171425 0.618854588 61.88545884
0.0057 0.005347845 0.938218421 93.82184211
Total mass Total mass Overall Efficiency 0.430497225
0.60006 0.258324165 Efficiency percentage 43.0497225
Table 7 to show further data for calculating grade efficiency for gas flowrate of 18m3/hr

End Weight (g) End weight (kg) Density of glass (kg/m3) Volume of glass at end
(m3)
2.5835 0.0025835 2400 1.07646E-06
Initial weight (g) Initial weight Density of glass (kg/m3) Volume of glass at start
(kg) (m3)
6 0.006 2400 0.0000025
3
Table 8 to showing data used for 18m /hr

Data for the cyclone operated at 14m3/hr

Data for 14 Volume in % Cumulative


m3/hr
0.78-0.91 0.2 0.2
0.91-1.06 0.29 0.49
1.06-1.24 0.43 0.92
1.24-1.44 0.62 1.54
1.44-1.68 0.88 2.42
1.68-1.95 1.21 3.63
1.95-2.28 1.65 5.28
2.28-2.65 2.24 7.52
2.65-3.09 2.97 10.49
3.09-3.60 3.86 14.35
3.6-4.19 4.9 19.25
4.19-4.88 6.05 25.3
4.88-5.69 7.19 32.49
5.69-6.63 8.19 40.68
6.63-7.72 8.99 49.67
7.72-9.00 9.5 59.17
9.00-10.48 9.74 68.91
10.48-12.21 8.96 77.87
12.21-14.22 7.5 85.37
14.22-16.57 5.92 91.29
16.57-19.31 4.2 95.49
19.31-22.49 2.68 98.17
22.49-26.2 1.5 99.67
26.2-30.53 0.33 100
Table 9 shows the size analysis of particles for a flowrate of 14m3/hr

V (m/s) 1.980338072
Density of glass 2400
(kg/m3)
20
Eloise Jackson and Jigar Patel

Viscosity of air 0.0000178


Diameter of 0.1
cyclone (m)
Table 10 shows the values used to calculate Stokes number of particles for flowrate of 14m3/hr

Table 11 shows the stokes number for 14m3/hr


Lower Upper mean Diameter(m) Stokes
limit(micrometer) limit(micrometer) diamter(micrometer)
0.78 0.91 0.845 0.000000845 0.000211837
0.91 1.06 0.985 0.000000985 0.000287846
1.06 1.24 1.15 0.00000115 0.000392359
1.24 1.44 1.34 0.00000134 0.000532718
1.44 1.68 1.56 0.00000156 0.000722
1.68 1.95 1.815 0.000001815 0.00097733
1.95 2.28 2.115 0.000002115 0.001327116
2.28 2.65 2.465 0.000002465 0.001802694
2.65 3.09 2.87 0.00000287 0.002443722
3.09 3.6 3.345 0.000003345 0.003319558
3.6 4.19 3.895 0.000003895 0.004500938
4.19 4.88 4.535 0.000004535 0.006101585
4.88 5.69 5.285 0.000005285 0.008286632
5.69 6.63 6.16 0.00000616 0.011257695
6.63 7.72 7.175 0.000007175 0.015273265
7.72 9 8.36 0.00000836 0.020734837
9 10.48 9.74 0.00000974 0.028145306
10.48 12.21 11.345 0.000011345 0.038185376
12.21 14.22 13.215 0.000013215 0.051811051
14.22 16.57 15.395 0.000015395 0.070314915
16.57 19.31 17.94 0.00001794 0.095484515
19.31 22.49 20.9 0.0000209 0.12959273
22.49 26.2 24.345 0.000024345 0.175835931
26.2 30.53 28.365 0.000028365 0.238700673

21
Eloise Jackson and Jigar Patel

Data for 14 Weight % feed Cumulative weight % Weight % fines Cumulative


m3/hr weight

0.845 0.26 0.26 0.2 0.2


0.985 0.36 0.62 0.29 0.49
1.15 0.51 1.13 0.43 0.92
1.34 0.73 1.86 0.62 1.54
1.56 1.04 2.9 0.88 2.42
1.815 1.47 4.37 1.21 3.63
2.115 2.04 6.41 1.65 5.28
2.465 2.8 9.21 2.24 7.52
2.87 3.75 12.96 2.97 10.49
3.345 4.91 17.87 3.86 14.35
3.895 6.18 24.05 4.9 19.25
4.535 7.34 31.39 6.05 25.3
5.285 8.4 39.79 7.19 32.49
6.16 9.25 49.04 8.19 40.68
7.175 9.85 58.89 8.99 49.67
8.36 10.29 69.18 9.5 59.17
9.74 9.33 78.51 9.74 68.91
11.345 7.9 86.41 8.96 77.87
13.215 6.01 92.42 7.5 85.37
15.395 4.17 96.59 5.92 91.29
17.94 2.47 99.06 4.2 95.49
20.9 0.95 100.01 2.68 98.17
24.345 100.01 1.5 99.67
Table 12 to show data for calculating grade efficiency for gas flowrate of 14m3/hr

Mass in grade Mass in grade Grade


feed fines efficiency
0
: 0.0003809
0.00216 0.000552305 25.56967593
0.00306 0.000818935 26.7625817
0.00438 0.00118079 26.9586758
0.00624 0.00167596 26.85833333
0.00882 0.002304445 26.12749433
0.01224 0.003142425 25.67340686
0.0168 0.00426608 25.39333333
0.0225 0.005656365 25.1394
0.02946 0.00735137 24.95373388
0.03708 0.00933205 25.16734088
0.04404 0.011522225 26.16309037
0.0504 0.013693355 27.16935516
0.0555 0.015597855 28.10424324
0.0591 0.017121455 28.97031303
0.06174 0.01809275 29.30474571
0.05598 0.01854983 33.1365309
0.0474 0.01706432 36.00067511
0.03606 0.01428375 39.61106489
0.02502 0.01127464 45.06250999

22
Eloise Jackson and Jigar Patel

0.01482 0.0079989 53.97368421


0.0057 0.00510406 89.54491228
0 0.00285675 100
Total mass Total mass Efficiency
0.5985 0.19045 31.82121972
Table 13 to show further data for calculating grade efficiency for gas flowrate of 14m3/hr

End Weight (g) End weight (kg) Density of glass (kg/m3) Volume of glass at end
(m3)
1.9045 0.0019045 2400 7.93542E-07
Initial weight (g) Initial weight Density of glass (kg/m3) Volume of glass at end
(kg) (m3)
6 0.006 2400 0.0000025
3
Table 14 to showing data used for 14m /hr

Data for the cyclone operated at 10m3/hr

Data for 10 m3/hr Volume in % Cumulative


0.05-0.06 0.03 0.03
0.06-0.07 0.05 0.08
0.07-0.08 0.08 0.16
0.08-0.09 0.12 0.28
0.09-0.11 0.15 0.43
0.11-0.13 0.2 0.63
0.13-0.15 0.26 0.89
0.15-0.17 0.33 1.22
0.17-0.20 0.42 1.64
0.20-0.23 0.53 2.17
0.23-0.27 0.63 2.8
0.27-0.31 0.66 3.46
0.31-0.36 0.59 4.05
0.36-0.42 0.46 4.51
0.42-0.49 0.34 4.85
0.49-0.58 0.24 5.09
0.58-0.67 0.15 5.24
0.67-0.78 0.09 5.33
0.78-0.91 0.15 5.48
0.91-1.06 0.23 5.71
1.06-1.24 0.37 6.08
1.24-1.44 0.59 6.67
1.44-1.68 0.89 7.56
1.68-1.95 1.28 8.84
1.95-2.28 1.82 10.66
2.28-2.65 2.52 13.18
2.65-3.09 3.33 16.51
3.09-3.60 4.26 20.77
3.6-4.19 5.24 26.01
4.19-4.88 6.4 32.41
4.88-5.69 7.47 39.88
5.69-6.63 8.27 48.15
6.63-7.72 8.88 57.03
7.72-9.00 9.4 66.43
9.00-10.48 8.74 75.17

23
Eloise Jackson and Jigar Patel

10.48-12.21 7.73 82.9


12.21-14.22 6.19 89.09
14.22-16.57 4.65 93.74
16.57-19.31 3.12 96.86
19.31-22.49 1.85 98.71
22.49-26.2 0.93 99.64
26.2-30.53 0.37 100.01
Table 15 shows the size analysis of particles for a flowrate of 10m3/hr

V (m/s) 1.414527194
Density of glass (kg/m3) 2400
Viscosity of air 1.78E-05
Diameter of cyclone (m) 0.1
Table 16 shows the values used to calculate Stokes number of particles for flowrate of 10m3/hr

24

Вам также может понравиться