REDUCE EMISSIONS FROM BRICK KILN THROUGH STEAM JETS

ABID AYUB

Reg. No.

Session 2016-18

Department of Mechanical Engineering

Faculty of Engineering

Mirpur University of Science & Technology (MUST)

Mirpur, (AJK),

Pakistan

i
REDUCE EMISSIONS FROM BRICK KILN THROUGH STEAM JETS

By

ABID AYUB

Reg. No.

A Thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirement

for the degree of

MASTER OF SCIENCE

IN

MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

Session 2016-2018

Department of Mechanical Engineering

Faculty of Engineering

Mirpur University of Science & Technology (MUST)

Mirpur, (AJK),

Pakistan

(April, 2018)

ii
 CERTIFICATION

I hereby undertake that, this research is an original one and no part of this thesis falls under
plagiarism. Otherwise if found at any stage, I will be responsible for this consequence.

Student’s Name: ABID AYUB Signature:

Registration No:

Date:

Certificate that the contents and form of thesis entitled “Reduce brick kiln emission through
steam jets” submitted by “Abid Ayub” have been found satisfactory for the requirement of
degree.

Supervisor:

(Engr. Dr. Yamine Younis)

External Examiner:

Chairman:

Dean:

Director Advance Studies

& Research:

iii
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS……………………………………………………………………. iv

LIST OF FIGURES………………………………………………………………………….. vi

LIST OF TABLES…………………………………………………………………………… vii

LIST OF SYMBOLS AND UNITS…………………………………………………………. viii

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS……………………………………………………………….. viii

ACKNOWLEDGMENT…………………………………………………………………….. ix

ABSTRACT…………………………………………………………………………………... x

CHAPTER 1………………………………………………………………………………….. 1

1.1 AIR POLLUTION……………………………………………………………………….. 1

1.2 BRICK KILN AIR POLLUTION……………………………………………………… 1

1.3 PROBLEM STATEMENT……………………………………………………………… 3

1.4 AIM AND OBJECTIVES……………………………………………………………….. 3

1.5 THESIS OUTLINE………………………………………………………………………. 4

CHAPTER 2………………………………………………………………………………….. 5

LITERATURE REVIEW…………………………………………………………………… 5

CHAPTER 3………………………………………………………………………………….. 11

3.1 EXPERIMENTAL SETUP……………………………………………………………... 11

3.1.1 Boiler…………………………………………………………………………….. 11

3.1.2 Exhaust Chimney………………………………………………………………... 11

3.1.3 Exhaust Chamber………………………………………………………………... 13

3.1.4 Separator………………………………………………………………………… 14

iv
3.2 ARRANGEMENT OF NOZZLES……………………………………………………... 14

3.2.1 Arrangement of one nozzle……………………………………………………… 14

3.2.2 Arrangement of two nozzles…………………………………………………….. 15

3.2.3 Arrangement of three nozzles…………………………………………………… 16

3.2.4 Arrangement of four nozzles……………………………………………………. 18

3.3 FLOWCHART OF METHODOLOGY……………………………………………...... 19

CHAPTER 4…………………………………………………………………………………. 21

4.1 CASE-I: ONE NOZZLE ARRANGEMENT………………………………………….. 21

4.2 CASE-II: TWO NOZZLES ARRANGEMENT………………………………………. 24

4.3 CASE-III: THREE NOZZLES ARRANGEMENT…………………………………... 27

4.4 CASE-IV: FOUR NOZZLES ARRANGEMENT…………………………………….. 29

4.5 SUMMARY………………………………………………………………………………. 32

CHAPTER 5………………………………………………………………………………….. 34

5.1 CONCLUSIONS…………………………………………………………………………. 34

5.2 RECOMMENDATIONS………………………………………………………………… 35

5.3 LIMITATIONS…………………………………………………………………………… 35

REFERENCES………………………………………………………………………………. 36

v
 LIST OF FIGURES

Figure No. Title page

Figure- 1: Brick kiln under operational condition………………………………………….... 2

Figure- 2: Experimental Setup………………………………………………………………. 12

Figure- 3: Exhaust Chimney………………………………………………………………… 13

Figure- 4: Exhaust Chamber………………………………………………………………… 13

Figure- 5: Arrangement with one nozzle……………………………………………………. 15

Figure- 6: Arrangement with two nozzles…………………………………………………... 16

Figure- 7: Arrangement with three nozzles…………………………………………………. 17

Figure- 8: Arrangement with four nozzles………………………………………………….. 18

Figure- 9: flowchart of methodology……………………………………………………….. 20

Figure- 10: Time Vs PM2.5 for Case-I……………………………………………………… 23

Figure- 11: Pressure Vs PM for Case-I……………………………………………………… 23

Figure- 12: Time Vs PM2.5 for Case-II……………………………………………………... 26

Figure- 13: Pressure Vs PM2.5 for Case-II………………………………………………….. 26

Figure- 14: Time Vs PM2.5 for Case-III…………………………………………………….. 28

Figure- 15: Pressure Vs PM2.5 for Case-III…………………………………………………. 39

Figure- 16: Time Vs PM2.5 for Case-IV……………………………………………………... 31

Figure- 17: Pressure Vs PM2.5 for Case-IV………………………………………………….. 32

vi
 LIST OF TABLES

Table No. Page

Table- 1: Specification of measuring devices……………………………………………….. 14

Table- 2: Specification of Prototype………………………………………………………… 19

Table- 3: Variation in PM2.5 with one nozzle arrangement at different time interval……… 22

Table- 4: Variation in PM2.5 with two nozzle arrangement at different time interval…….. 25

Table- 5: Variation in PM2.5 with three nozzle arrangement at different time interval…….. 27

Table- 6: Variation in PM2.5 with four nozzle arrangement at different time interval……… 30

vii
 LIST OF SYMBOLS AND UNITS

PM Particulate matter µg/m3

p Pressure psi

t time min

Pmax Pressure maximum psi

L Length m

LIST OF ABBRIVIATIONS

WHO World Health Organization

BC Black carbon

PM Particulate matter

SPM Suspended particulate matter

MEA Monoethanolamine absorber

viii
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

First of all, I would like to thank Almighty ALLAH for providing me with strength and
capability to complete the objectives put forth in this thesis.

I would like to thank Professor Dr. Muhammad Yamin Younis for providing an opportunity to
work in a friendly and helpful environment. He gives me a continuous and steadfast support in
understanding the concepts and giving guidance.

Finally, I would like to thank family, friends and people, who helped in any way, especially my
parents for always being there for me through thick and thin.

ix
 ABSTRACT

The removal of particulate matter (PM) from emission emitted from brick industry in a
technological-economical-environmental manner is very essential to meet the pollution
standards. It is therefore very important to remove these pollutants by a low energy dissipation
method. In the present investigation a system for removal of PM from brick kiln has been
designed and fabricated by using steam jets. Experiments were conducted with different number
of nozzle arrangement against a different range of steam pressure. Resulted showed that with one
steam nozzle arrangement the average amount of PM2.5 at pressure 15psi reduces to 674μg/m3
from 983μg/m3. However, with two, three and four nozzle arrangement the reduction of
particulate matter were 584 μg/m3 from 976μg/m3, 551μg/m3 from 976μg/m3 and 531μg/m3 from
982μg/m3 respectively at pressure 10psi. However as the pressure of steam goes down further the
amount of the PM2.5 gradually increases and at 0psi the amount of pollutant particles goes to
normal values.

x
 CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

1.1 AIR POLLUTION

Air pollution means the harmful pollutants that are release into the air. These pollutants are
injurious to human health and the global wholly. Air pollution is responsible for acid rain, ozone
depletion, smog, global warming, climate change and other such phenomena. Air pollution effect
all living organisms such as humans, animals and food crops and may damage the natural or built
environment. Most of diseases in the world are directly or indirectly connected with polluted
environment.

According to the World Health Organization (WHO) guideline limits of air quality about 90% of
the population living in cities worldwide is breathing air that harmful to human health [1].
WHO’s most recent environmental burden of disease estimation, that at least 12.6 million people
die each year because of preventable environmental causes [2]. In 2015, 5.9 million children
under age of five died globally cause by pneumonia, prematurity, neonatal sepsis, congenital
anomalies, diarrhea, injuries and malaria diseases. Our environment is partially responsible for
these diseases and conditions [3]. Air pollution has adverse effect on climate, the temperature of
the global increasing about 0.85oC from last 130 years. Each of the last 3 decades has been
successively warmer than any past decade since 1850. In Europe the deaths of more than 70,000
people cause by the heat wave of summer 2003 [4]. Air pollution is responsible for one in eight
deaths of total global, in 2012 around 7 million people died as a result of unhealthy environment.
Middle and low-income countries in the Western Pacific and South-East Asia Regions had the
major air pollution-linked burden in 2012, about 2.6 million deaths linked to outdoor air
pollution and 3.3 million deaths related to indoor air pollution and [5].

1.2 BRICK KILN AIR POLLUTION

The brick industry is quickly developing in the world to meet the increasing brick demand for
construction. But it has adverse environmental effects include global warming, climate change,
poisoning of land, ozone depletion, increased erosion, humus from soil and deletion of
nutrients [6]. Brick kiln air pollution is produced both through the fugitive emissions as well as

1
the stack emission. Most of brick manufacturing industries used old techniques; these techniques
are thermally less efficient because of improper method of firing which produce various harmful
gases and particulate. Mainly brick kilns emission consists of gases like CO, CO2, SO2, H2S, and
NOx etc. It is estimate that during production of 3.5 billion bricks per year, 1.8 million tons of
CO2, 302,000 tons of CO, 15,500 tons of SO2, 23,300 tons of PM2.5 and 6000 tons of black
carbon (BC) was emitted into atmosphere [7]. The emission of SO2 from brick kiln received
significant attention. Recently, SO2 in developing countries consider as a main air pollutant,
where it is responsible for urban pollution and acid rain precipitation [8]. The small amount of
NOx in the atmosphere, generate O3 and obtains solar radiation [9].

Network of brick kilns in Pakistan is usually distributed in both rural and urban areas. In
Pakistan about 7000 brick kilns units are operating. World Health Organization declares
Peshawar and Quetta amongst the top ten most polluted cities across the globe [10, 11].

Figure- 1: Brick kiln under operational condition

2
1.3 PROBLEM STATEMENT

In the atmosphere pollutants like black carbon (BC), PM2.5 and PM10 not only injurious to
human health but also responsible for climate change, global warming and unhealthy
environment. BC consider as a second forcing agent for world climate change after carbon
dioxide [12]. Both PM10 and PM2.5 also adversely affect the climate with effect on
precipitation, cloud formation and the earth radiation budget [13, 14, 15].

Brick industries are one of the major contributors of particulate matters and black carbon.
Burning of low grade carbonaceous fuels such as coal, wood, rubber and plastics garbage are
known to be leading cause of these harmful pollutants.

Various devices have been built up to combat this problem like scrubbers and precipitators etc.
Emission of these particulates matter and gaseous pollutants can be minimized by improving the
quality of fuel and design of brick industry. But these mitigation ways for emissions are not
economical which increase overall cost of brick industry. So there is a need of better alternative
mitigation mechanism for pollutants which is practical and affordable for brick industry owners.

1.4 AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

Reduce emissions from brick kiln through steam jets

Aims:

 Emission reduction from brick kiln

 Improving the quality of air in urban environment
 Provision of low cost pollution control methods for brick kiln emission

Objectives:

 Design of an efficient emission control system using steam jets

 Study the effect of steam flow rate on emission control from brick kiln
 Study the impact of number of nozzle and their arrangement on the mixing enhancement
with PM from brick kiln

3
1.5 THESIS OUTLINE

The present research thesis is mainly focused on the reduction of harmful particles included in
brick kiln emission using steam jets. It includes the complete description of literature review,
experimental setup, methodology, and detail analysis of results.

4
 CHAPTER 2

LITERATURE REVIEW

Air pollution is worst problem all over the world. It is serious alarming for our environment and
health. In these days clean environment is first priority all over world. Researchers and scientists
have developed different techniques for control of different gases and particulate matter (PM)
from different sources of industrial zone. Following is the detail literature review of the previous
work done on these techniques by different researchers.

A novel spray cum bubble column scrubber with twin-fluid atomizer for chemical process
industry was investigated by Mohan [16]. Experimental were conduct separately for bubble
section and spray section and combining both. Experimental results showed that without any
additive or pre-treatment the high percentage removal of particulate matter achieved. Theoretical
predicted values were compared with experimental results with quite good agreement. From
results it was indicated that about 75-99% removal efficiency was achieved by using the noval
spray cum scrubber. In the past, various wet scrubbing techniques were used for the removal of
particulate matter in industrial emission. The modifications enhance the scrubbing efficiency of
wet scrubbers. Meikap [17] conducted an experiment on modified multi-stage bubble column
with liquid to gas flow rate ratio of 5.5m3/1000. Results indicated 100% removal efficiency of
fly ash.

The technique of bubble column for scrubbing of fly ash has been less efficient as compared to
venturi scrubber and spray scrubber. So mostly work reported on removal of fly-ash and SO2
using venturi scrubber and spray columns [18-20]. Meikap [21] investigated the performance of
modified bubble column scrubber for removal of fly-ash using water as the scrubbing medium. It
has been investigated that highly removal efficiency of fly ash was attained. Results indicate that,
in most causes the removal efficiency of fly ash is more than 95% but in many causes its
approach to 99.5%. The use of this technology in Indian thermal power plant shows excellent
results and meets the stringent air quality standard. For better performance, the attempt has been
made for the installation above wet scrubber in Indian thermal power plants and ceramic
industries to combat pollutant particles control.

5
Wet flue gas desulfurization technologies [22], particularly wet scrubber using limestone as the
scrubbing medium provide excessively removal efficiency of SO2 about 95% with good
reliability. A study on the simulated model for removal of SO2, Nx and Hg from a coal flue gas
was conducted by Huston [23]. In this model wet calcium carbonate used as a scrubbing agent.
Addition of the oxidizing salt (sodium chlorite) enhanced the efficiency of scrubber for multiple
pollutants. The results indicated 100% removal of SO2 and carbon species from the coal flue gas.
But the scrubbing of NOx species about 60% at nearly completes oxidation of NO. The sodium
chlorite salt has been less effective as an oxidant in the absence of NO and SO 2 in the flue gas.
The oxidation of Hg and NO was nearly about 50% and 80% respectively in the case with no
SO2 in the simulated model of flue gas.

The technology of turbulent wet scrubber is widely used for scrubbing of particulate matter and
multiple gases emitted from different industrial zone. But Laitinen [24] had reported that with
non-electrical forces conventional wet scrubber shows excellent result for removal of pollutant
particles size ranging from 0.01 to 1 µm. Byeon [25] designed and developed a modified
turbulent wet scrubber (MTWS) for scrubbing of polluted particles emission from coal based
furnace. Experiments were conducted against pressure drop to estimate the efficiency of MTWS
for removal of particulate and ammonia gas from coal furnace emission. Result indicated that
within given time MTWS shows significant efficiency for scrubbing of ammonia gas had
concentration of 45 ppm in flue gas with optimum conditions like water level of 58 cm and gas
flow rates of 3.5m3/s. Similarly, MTWS shows high performance for scrubbing of particles at the
submicron level with feeding rate of fly ash about 140 mg/min and same level of water and gas
flow rate as mentioned in above case.

Huang et al. [26] performed an experiment for removal of particulate matter from a gas stream
using high-voltage discharge plasma technology. To determine the particles removal efficiency,
a particle counting device was used for measured the concentrations of the PM at inlet and outlet
of the system. The experimental results indicate that when the discharge voltage was increased
the particles removal efficiency of the system was also increased. This system performed against
different range of discharge voltage and frequencies. Results showed that the removal efficiency
of the system rose high about 93.1% for 0.3mm particles when the discharge voltage and
operating frequency was 20 kV and 60 Hz respectively. But at operating frequencies of 60 Hz to

6
180 Hz with discharge voltage of 8 kV and 10 kV the removal efficiency of the system for
pollutant particles was almost zero. Chae [27] studied the approach of non-thermal plasma on
treated diesel exhaust particulate matter. The results indicated that the particulate matter of diesel
exhaust oxidize at low temperature. Yao [28] also studied the application of uneven dielectric
barrier discharge reactors for removing particulate matter from exhaust of diesel engines.

Number of techniques [29, 30] for scrubbing of NOx from exhaust emission in various stationary
sources using non-thermal plasma chemical hybrid on laboratory scale has been studied by
different researchers. Fujishima at el. [31] was designed and developed a pilot scale
plasma-chemical hybrid system for removal of NOx from emission of multi fuel boiler. This
system has two processes; first is NO oxidation by ozone produced from plasma ozonizers and
the second is scrubbing of NO2 using a NA2SO3 chemical as the scrubbing medium. The system
was performed using mixed oils (waste vegetable oil and mixture of heavy oil) as a combustion
fuel. For stable combustion the mixing percentage of waste vegetable and heavy oil was about 20
and 50 respectively. The emission contains CO2, NO and O2 during the firing of mixed oils were
nearly same as those in firing of heavy oils when the flow rate of flue gas was 1000 Nm3/h.
Furthermore, it is estimated from the experiment results that continuously 300 min firing of
mixed oil with gas flow rate of 870 Nm3/h the system was attained 90% efficiency for the
removal of NOx.

When 90% removal efficiency of SO2 is required the wet scrubber are preferred. These systems
[32, 33] provide a wide range of chemical reagents as scrubbing liquid, such as sodium chlorite
and sodium hydroxide etc. Flagiello [34 carried out an experiment on wet scrubber for scrubbing
of SO2 using sea water as a scrubbing reagent. The experiments were conducted against different
range of liquid to gas ratio and concentration of SO2 in flue gas. Three different scrubbing
reagents were also investigated in these experiments such as seawater, solution of NaOH and
seawater and distilled water. In order to analyze the packed column tests, SO2 equilibrium
absorption tests at low concentrations (100–2000 ppm) are carried out in a feed batch reactor,
using the same absorbing solutions tested in column tests. The experimental results showed that
using seawater as the scrubbing reagent improved the efficiency of wet scrubber for removal of
SO2 about 98% when liquid to gas ratio was 2.91 kg·kg−1 and concentration of SO2 in flue gas

7
was about 500 ppm. In this same condition, the scrubbing efficiency of wet scrubber was about
85% when solution of NaOH and distilled water used as the scrubbing reagents

Number of techniques [35-37] has been developed to reduce the emission of SO2. Wet ammonia
based flue gas desulphurization has been considered as an effective technology for control of
SO2. Johsonstone [35] studied on the vapor liquid equilibrium on the solution of ammonia sulfur
dioxide water system. Edwards [36] extensively studied the thermodynamics of ammonia carbon
dioxide water system. Young [37] was performed an experiment on rotating-stream tray
scrubber (120 mm in diameter) for SO2 removal with coal slime slurry temperature about 57.5°
C and particles size less than 250 µm. Main objectives of this experiment is the studying, effect
of liquid-to-gas ratio, slurry retention time, slurry solid content, height of cylindrical baffle and
superficial gas velocity. Efficiency of SO2 removal increased about 10 point of percent, when
liquid to gas ratio (L/G) was increased 6L/m3 to 8L/m3. But the increase of removal efficiency
with SO2 L/G was no linear. When the retention time was longer, the slurry in the tank was
more, resulting relative high value of pH, so the SO2 removal efficiency increased. High pH
value with grater solid content was beneficial to SO2 absorption. SO2 removal efficiency
increased with the increased of slurry solid content. Efficiency of SO2 increased about 10 point
of percent when the cylindrical height was increased from 30 mm to 55 mm. With the increased
of gas velocity the efficiency of SO2 removal also increased.

Meng-lin Li et al. [38] designed a 20 kg/hr ritual money combustion chamber. A 20 m3/min wet
scrubber was used in this experiment for removal of total solid particulates (TSP) from the
emission of ritual money combustion chamber. Test results indicated that, TSP removal
efficiency of wet scrubber varied linearly with the liquid scrubbing rate (QL) and a 70% TSP
removal was achieved at a QL of 60 L/min.

S. Nazir et al. [39] developed a simulated model for CO2 capture using post combustion
technique of Monoethanolamine (MEA) Absorber for bricks kiln. Flue gases enter the absorber
from the bottom to top through the absorber, where it interacts in counter clock fashion with
amine solvent MEA. The amine solvent MEA absorbed CO2 which was separated in the stripping
unit and the regenerated solvent is re-used in the absorber unit. In Pakistan this technique was
firstly used in brick industry. Result shows that 35072.65 tons CO2 is captured in all brick kilns
in Pakistan annually.

8
An experiment to estimate the particle removal efficiency of the turbulent scrubber with
different gas flow rates and liquid heads above the nozzle was conducted by Kyu et al.
[25]. Turbulent wet scrubber technique use in power plant for control of particulate matter.
Particles larger than 1 µm were removed very efficiently, at nearly 100%, depending upon the
flow rate, the concentration of the dust-laden air stream, and the water level in the reservoir. But
turbulent wet scrubbers are high-energy scrubbers. Jung and lee [40] were the first researchers to
carry out an analytical study on the collection of small particle by a system consisting of multiple
fluid spheres, such as water droplets or gas bubbles. Meikap et al. [41] achieved a removal
efficiency of 95% to 99% for particulate matter size ranging from 0.1 µm to 100 µm in a
modified multistage bubble column scrubber.

S. Adhikari et al. [42] performed an experiment with three ratios, 40%, 50% and 60% as internal
fueling by charcoal in bricks. Each of ratios 20,000 bricks was prepared and its energy
performance, emissions and bricks qualities were monitored. Result shows that the average
specific energy consumption in the 60% internal fueling of charcoal is found to be less in
comparison with other three ratios of 40%, 50% and with non-internal fuel. It was also
monitored that up to 42% less emission of suspended particulate matter (SPM) was found in 60%
internal fueling than in non internal fueling.

Through this extensive literature review, it has been observed that almost all previously used
techniques are not economical and affordable for brick manufacturing industry due to their costly
installation and high energy consumption. Therefore, it required more cheap techniques those
can be adopted in brick industry without exceedingly the overall operational cost. This thesis
focused on, design of a low cost and efficient pollution control methods for brick kilns emission.
The main objective of this thesis is the reduction of harmful particles included in brick kiln
emission using steam jets. This technique is very low cost, low energy consuming and easy to
install in brick industry.

9
 CHAPTER 3

EXPERIMENTAL SETUP AND METHODOLOGY

In this chapter description of the experimental setup and the methodology involved in this
research work will be discussed. The objective of current research thesis to provide the
economical and practical solution for the reduction of pollution from brick kiln emission. To
conduct the initial system for given solution a prototype system is used. The prototype is
developed according to actual brick kiln environment. However the size of the system is 3 times
small then actual environment to have better controlled environment setup during experiment.

3.1 EXPERIMENTAL SETUP

The scheme of experimental setup fabricated to study the effect of pressure and number of
nozzles arrangements on particular matter is illustrated in Figure-2.

The setup consists of mainly a boiler for steam generation, exhaust chimney, separator and
exhaust chamber. A short description of the above-mentioned parts of the setup is presented
below.

3.1.1 Boiler

A boiler is an enclosed vessel which utilized heat energy to generate steam from water. The
boiler considered for this setup is 0.61m in diameter and 1.21m in height. Normally this boiler is
designed to withstand the maximum pressure of 100psi but for present work it is used for 50psi
pressure due to safety reasons. The pressure inside the steam boiler is monitored by the pressure
gauge mounted at the top surface of the boiler. For combustion purpose, a gas burner is installed
to supply the heat energy necessary for steam generation from feed water. The boiler is also
equipped with a steam valve whose main function is to regulate the flow of steam. Steam is fed
into the chimney from boiler through a pipe of 0.006m diameter.

3.1.2 Exhaust chimney

The exhaust chimney is a main part of this prototype. The top section of the chimney has a
tapered shape with a top diameter of 0.12m and a bottom diameter of 1.21m. It has a length of
4.57m. The structure of the chimney is made up of iron bar and thick layer of polymer is

1
wrapped around the structure of the chimney which provides proper insulation. Steam from the
boiler is fed into the chimney through a steam pipe. This pipe passed through an opening in the
side wall of chimney which is 0.61m above from the base of the bottom section of the chimney.

Figure-2: Experimental setup

2
3.1.3 Exhaust chamber

Exhaust Chamber is also a rectangular shape box with 0.61m length and width and 0.30m height.
In exhaust producer coal is used as fuel which is burnt and produce a large amount of exhaust
gases mainly carbon particulate matter. A smoke pipe of 0.15m diameter connects exhaust
producer and chimney. It is connected to chimney at 0.30m above from the base of the chimney
and exhaust gases from exhaust producer goes into chimney through this pipe.

(a) (b)

Figure-3: (a) Exhaust chimney (b) Exhaust chamber

3
3.1.4 Separator

The separator is a rectangular shape box, having width 0.76m and height 2.43m placed at the top
section of the chimney. Like exhaust chimney, separator is also fabricated with iron bar and a
thick layer of polythene is wrapped around the iron bars which ensures insulation. The main
purpose of this separator is to preclude the steam exhaust mixture from air disturbance and, as a
result better measurement of result data is possible.

Table-1: Specification of measuring devices

Devices Model/specification

Particle counter Hp-5800D

Pressure gauge EN837-1

3.2 ARRANGEMENT OF NOZZLES

In order to get a better mixing of exhaust steam, this prototype is tested with different number of
nozzle arrangements against a range of steam pressure. For better emission control results, for
different types of nozzle arrangements with an operating range of steam pressure are studied and
discussed below.

3.2.1 Arrangement with one nozzle

The complete arrangement of all parts in this prototype with a single nozzle is show in Figure-5.
The steam is fed into the exhaust chimney from the boiler through a steam pipe having diameter
of 0.006 m. This pipe passed through an opening in the side wall of chimney which is 0.61 m
above from the base of the chimney and turned upward about 0.05 m at an angle of 90o from the
center of the chimney. A nozzle having a diameter of 0.004 m is mounted at the end of the steam
pipe. The pressure of steam is controlled with valve provided at the top surface of the boiler. On
the other hand, exhaust goes inside the chimney from exhaust chamber through another pipe
having diameter of 0.15 m. The opening of the exhaust pipe inside the chimney is exactly at the
center of the chimney and 0.30 m above from chimney base.

4
 Figure-5: Arrangement with one nozzle

3.2.2 Arrangement with two nozzles

The arrangement of brick kiln prototype with two nozzles arrangement is shown in Figure-6. As
described in aforementioned case that steam is fed into the chimney from boiler through a steam
pipe which turn upwards about 0.05 m at an angle of 90o from the center of chimney. Unlike case
with one nozzle, nozzle is not mounted at the end of the main pipe, but two secondary pipes
having same length of 0.15 m are connected to the main pipe. The arrangement of these two
pipes with main pipe is shown in figure. The angle between these two-secondary pipes is 180°,
while the angle between this secondary and main pipe is 90°. At a distance of 0.15 m from the
main pipe, these two secondary pipes turn upwards about 0.05 m at angle of 90°. At the end of
these two secondary pipes, nozzles are mounted having the diameter of 0.004 m.

5
 (a)

(b)

Figure-6: (a) Arrangement with two nozzles (b) Specifications of two nozzles

3.2.3 Arrangement with three nozzles

The arrangement of prototype with three nozzles arrangement is shown in figure-7. In this case
all the arrangements are same as for case two nozzles except the number of secondary pipes. In
this case three secondary pipes having same length of 0.15 m are connected to the main pipe.

6
The arrangement of these three pipes with main pipe is presented in figure. The angle between
these two-secondary pipe is 120°, while angle between the secondary and main pipe is 90°.

(a)

(b)

Figure-7: (a) Arrangement with three nozzles (b) Specifications of three nozzles

7
3.2.4 Arrangement with four nozzles

The arrangement of prototype with four nozzles arrangement is shown in Figure-8.In this case all

(a)

(b)

Figure-8: (a) Arrangement of four nozzles (b) Specifications of four nozzles

8
the arrangements are same as for case three nozzles except the number of secondary pipes. In
this case four secondary pipes having same length of 0.15 m are connected to the main pipe. The
arrangement of these four pipes with main pipe is presented in figure. The angle between these
two-secondary pipes is 90°, while the angle between the secondary and main pipe is also 90°. At
each end of the secondary pipes, nozzle having a diameter of 0.004 m is attached. The steam is
discharged through each nozzle and with the help of these four nozzles arrangement, a right
amount of steam is thrown inside the chimney which cover the large area of chimney. In
contrast, the exhaust is entered into the chimney through an exhaust pipe whose opening inside
the chimney is exactly in the center and 0.30 m above from chimney base and 0.30 m below
from the main steam pipe. The distance between exhaust pipe and steam pipe is 0.30 m for the
purpose of better exhaust steam mixing inside the chimney, because the exhaust particles
removal phenomena is based on impaction.

Table-2: Specification of prototype

Main Parts Size

Exhaust Chimney 0.12 m x 1.21 m x 4.57 m

Boiler 0.61 m x 0.61 m x 1.21 m

Separator 0.76 m x 0.76 m x 2.43 m

Exhaust Chamber 0.61 m x 0.61 m x 0.30 m

3.3 Flowchart of methodology

Flowchart is a diagram that represents a workflow or process, showing the steps as boxes and
their order by connecting them with arrows. The general structure of this study is represented by
flow diagram as shown in figure-9.

Firstly, a high-quality 3D model of the complete setup is generated using AutoCAD 3D Plant
software. After designing the setup, a prototype of this setup is constructed following the design
requirements. Practical testing of this setup is also done with different scenarios and results are

9
recorded against each individual case. From the results comparison, important conclusion based
on the present research work is to be made.

Designing
Fabrication Experiment Comparison
(Auto-cad 3D plant) of Results

Recommendations

Figure-9: Flowchart of methodology

10
 CHAPTER 4

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

In previous chapters, the theory about the particulate matter (PM), experimental setup and
methodology involved has been explained. Building on this knowledge, this chapter presents the
results obtained during the experimentation. The purpose of doing the experiments is to estimate
the PM that have been removed from the exhaust gas at different pressure and number of nozzles
arrangements.

4.1 CASE-I: ONE NOZZLE ARRANGEMENT

Single nozzle is mounted at the end of the steam pipe inside the chimney. Initially, the exhaust
gas from the exhaust chamber is entered into the chimney through a pipe whose opening is
0.30 m above from the chimney base. Steam is also generated inside the boiler about 50 psi
pressure, but it is not fed into the chimney initially. The amount of PM2.5 is first computed with
the help of the particle counter device placed right above the separator when only exhaust gas
was available inside the chimney. Then, steam is fed into the chimney through steam pipe and it
started mixing with the exhaust gas entering from the exhaust chamber.

Pressure drop inside the boiler is recorded after 1 min interval, and at that time, amount of PM2.5
is recorded. With the passage of time, pressure drop occurred continuously inside the boiler and
PM2.5 is recorded at every 1 min time interval till the pressure inside the boiler reached to zero.
In addition, five more readings are to be taken following the aforementioned procedure and
average amount of PM2.5 is computed from the given values at each interval.

The results of PM2.5 for one nozzle at different pressure and time are presented in table-3. From
table-3, it can be observed that initially, when steam did not interact with exhaust gases the
average amount of particle calculated was 983 μg/m3. This amount of PM2.5 is reduced to
674 μg/m3 with time progression till 3 min and this amount again started to increase from 3 to
6 min. This reduction in PM2.5 occurred because when steam interacts with exhaust gases and
some particles of PM2.5 trapped by the water droplets formed due to pressure drops. These
droplets are high dense and settled down at the bottom of the chimney.

11
Table-3: Variation in PM2.5 with one nozzle arrangement at different time of interval

t(min) 0 1 2 3 4 5 6

p(psi) 50 30 20 15 10 5 0

992 871 803 666 734 828 971

973 897 812 689 753 819 962

989 878 821 677 749 834 985

PM2.5µg/m3
978 887 818 681 757 821 967

985 883 793 673 738 817 981

981 894 832 661 744 833 975

Average of
983 885 813 674 745 825 973
PM2.5µg/m3

Figure-10 shows a plot between PM2.5 and time. It is apparent from figure-10, that amount of
PM2.5 is decreased from time 0 to 3 min and it is started to increase from 3 to 6 min due
reduction of steam. The maximum reduction in PM2.5 is occurred at 3 min which can be
observed from the figure-10.

The amount of PM2.5 is plotted against pressure is shown in figure-11. It can be observed from
the figure-11, that PM2.5 decreased continuously from pressure 50 psi to15 psi and again started
to increase from 15 to 0 psi. The maximum reduction in PM2.5 is occurred at 15 psi which can
be observed from the figure-11. This maximum reduction is due to water droplets form at
pressure drop. These dense droplets mixed with exhaust particles and settled down at the bottom
of the chimney.

12
Figure-10: Time Vs PM2.5 for Case-I

Figure-14: Pressure Vs PM2.5

Figure-11: Pressure Vs PM2.5 for Case-I

13
4.2 CASE-II: TWO NOZZLES ARRANGEMENT

Two secondary pipes having same length of 0.15 m are connected to the main pipe. At the end of
these two secondary pipes, nozzles are mounted inside the chimney. Initially, the exhaust gas
from the exhaust chamber is entered into the chimney through a pipe whose opening is 0.30 m
above from the chimney base. Steam is also generated inside the boiler about 50 psi pressures,
but it is not fed into the chimney initially. The amount of PM2.5 is first computed with the help
of the particle counter device placed right above the separator when only exhaust gas was
available inside the chimney. Then, steam is fed into the chimney through steam main pipe
which is further entered into the two secondary pipes and finally discharged through nozzles
installed at the end of these two secondary pipes. Steam mixed with the exhaust gas entering
from the exhaust chamber.

Pressure drop inside the boiler is recorded after 1 min interval, and at that time, amount of PM2.5
is recorded. With the passage of time, pressure drop occurred continuously inside the boiler and
PM2.5 is recorded at every 1 min time interval till the pressure inside the boiler reached to zero.
In addition, five more readings are to be taken following the aforementioned procedure and
average amount of PM2.5 is computed from the given values at each interval.

The results of PM2.5 for two nozzles case at different pressure and time are presented in table-4.
From table-4, it is quite obvious that average amount of particulate matter calculated, without
any interaction of steam with exhaust gas, was about 976 μg/m3. When time approaches to 3 min,
pressure drops occurred and reached to 10 psi, meanwhile, the amount of particulate matter
recorded was about 584 μg/m3. It is noteworthy that removal efficiency for PM2.5 has been
increased 8.67% as compared to the one nozzle setup. This significant reduction in PM2.5 in two
nozzles setup due to the fact that both nozzles are placed 0.15 m away from the center of the
chimney, provided more exhaust gas and steam contact. In addition, two nozzles setup also
enhance the turbulence inside steam which boost the captured by impaction.

14
Table-4: Variation in PM2.5 with Two Nozzles Arrangement at different time interval

t(min) 0 1 2 3 4 5

p(psi) 50 30 20 10 5 0

974 864 662 589 740 951

983 851 675 575 729 965

968 873 651 594 747 959

PM2.5µg/m3
987 868 649 583 731 948

976 849 669 578 738 966

969 857 658 588 725 957

Average of
976 860 660 584 735 959
PM2.5µg/m3

The amount of PM2.5 plotted against time can be seen in figure-12. The amount of PM2.5
plotted against time can be seen in figure-12. It can be observed from the figure-12, that amount
of PM2.5 decreased continuously from 0 to 3 min and again increased from 3 to 5 min due to
continually reduction of steam. It is also quite obvious from the figure that maximum reduction
in PM2.5 is occurred at 3 min.

Figure-13 shows a plot between PM2.5 and pressure. It is apparent from the figure-13, that
amount of PM2.5 is decreased from pressure 50 psi to 10 psi and it is started to increase from
10 psi to 0 psi. The maximum reduction in PM2.5 matter is occurred at 10 psiwhich is apparent
from the figure-13.

15
Figure-12: Time Vs PM2.5 for Case-II

Figure-13: Pressure Vs PM2.5

Figure-13: Pressure Vs PM2.5 for Case-II

16
4.3 CASE III: THREE NOZZLES ARRANGEMENT

In this arrangement three secondary pipes having same length of 0.15m are connected to the
main pipe. At the end of these three secondary pipes, nozzles are mounted inside the chimney.
The angle between these three-secondary pipes is 120°, while the angle between the secondary
and main pipe is 90°. The whole procedure of experimentation is same as described for two
nozzles arrangement.

The results of PM2.5 for three nozzles case at different pressure and time are provided in table-5.

Table-5: Variation in PM2.5 with Three Nozzles Arrangement at different time interval

t(min) 0 1 2 3 4 5

p(psi) 50 30 20 10 0 0

970 819 643 543 710 930

982 801 661 556 728 958

963 824 630 549 713 941

PM2.5µg/m3
975 809 657 563 734 963

989 833 638 551 703 934

978 821 652 547 723 953

Average of
976 817 646 551 718 943
PM2.5µg/m3

From table-5, it can be observed that average amount of PM2.5 calculated without any
interaction with steam was about 976 μg/m3. When time approaches to 3 min, pressure drops
occurred and reached to 10 psi, meanwhile, the amount of PM2.5 recorded was about 551 μg/m3.
The removal efficiency of three nozzle setup for PM2.5 has been increased 12.07% as compared
to the single nozzle setup and 3.4% as compared to the two nozzles setup. This reduction in
PM2.5 for three nozzles setup due to the fact that these nozzles are placed 0.15 m away from the
center of the chimney in a circular fashion, provided more exhaust gas and steam contact. In

17
addition, three nozzles setup enhance the turbulence inside steam which boost the captured by
impaction.

Figure-14 shows a plot between PM and time. It is apparent from the figure-14, that amount of
PM2.5 is decreased from time 0 to 3 min and it is started to increase from 3 to 5 min. The
maximum reduction in PM2.5 is occurred at 3 min which can be observed from the figure.

The amount of PM2.5 is plotted against pressure is shown in figure-15. It can be observed from
the figure-15, that PM2.5 decreased continuously from pressure 50 psi to 10 psi and started to
increase from pressure 10 psi to 0 psi.

Figure-14: Time Vs PM2.5 for Case-III

18
 Figure-15: Pressure Vs PM2.5 for Case-III

4.4 CASE-IV: FOUR NOZZLES ARRANGEMENT

Four secondary pipes having same length of 0.15m are connected to the main pipe. At the end of
these three secondary pipes, nozzles are mounted inside the chimney. The angle between these
four-secondary pipes is 90°, while the angle between the secondary and main pipe is also 90°.
The whole procedure of experimentation is same as described for two and three nozzles
arrangement.

The results of PM2.5 for four nozzles arrangement at different pressure and time are provided in
Table-6.

19
Table-6: Variation in PM2.5 with four nozzles arrangement at different time interval

t(min) 0 1 2 3 4 5

p(psi) 50 30 20 10 0 0

969 773 628 528 698 909

981 753 613 540 713 931

988 761 634 519 691 914

PM2.5µg/m3
973 747 619 533 701 923

996 768 641 547 721 918

988 781 625 523 727 938

Average of
982 763 626 531 708 922
PM2.5µg/m3

From table-6, it can be observed that average amount of PM2.5 calculated without any
interaction with steam was about 982 μg/m3. When time approaches to 3 min, pressure drops
occurred and reached to 10 psi, meanwhile, the amount of PM2.5 recorded was about 531 μg/m3.
The removal efficiency of four nozzle setup for PM2.5 has been increased 14.47% as compared
to the one nozzle setup, 5.8% as compared to the two nozzles setup and 2.4% as compared to the
three nozzles setup. This reduction in PM2.5 in four nozzles setup due to the fact that these
nozzles are placed 0.15 m away from the center of the chimney in a circular fashion, provided
more exhaust gas and steam contact. In addition, four nozzles setup also enhance the turbulence
inside steam which boost the captured by impaction.

The amount of PM2.5 plotted against time can be seen in figure-16. It can be observed from the
figure-16, that amount of PM2.5 decreased continuously from 0 to 3 min and again increased
from 3 to 5 min. It is also quite obvious from the figure that maximum reduction in PM2.5 is
occurred at 3 min.

20
Figure-17 shows a plot between PM2.5 and pressure. It is apparent from the figure-17, that
amount of PM2.5 is decreased from pressure 50 psi to 10 psi and it is started to increase from
10 psi to 0 psi. The maximum reduction in PM2.5 is occurred at 10 psi which is apparent from
the figure-17. The increase in removal efficiency of particulate matter in four nozzles setup due
to the fact that these nozzles are placed 0.15 m away from the center of the chimney in a circular
fashion, provided more exhaust gas and steam contact. In addition, four nozzles setup enhance
the turbulence inside the steam which boost the captured by impaction.

Figure-16: Time Vs PM2.5 for Case-IV

21
 Figure-17: Pressure Vs PM2.5 for Case-IV

Summary of the chapter

Different number of nozzles arrangements in the setup is to be made to estimate the amount of
particulate matter that has been removed from the exhaust gas. Firstly, the average amount of
particulate matter is calculated when exhaust gas dose not interact with steam. Results suggested
that the removal efficiency of four nozzles setup for particulate matter has been increased
14.47% as compared to the one nozzle setup, 5.8% as compared to the two nozzles setup and
2.4% as compared to the three nozzles setup. This particulate matter removal phenomena based
on impaction. When steam interacts with exhaust gases and some particles of PM2.5 trapped by
the water droplets formed due to pressure drops. These droplets are high dense and settled down
at the bottom of the chimney. The increase in removal efficiency of particulate matter in four
nozzles setup due to the fact that these nozzles are placed 0.15 m away from the center of the

22
chimney in a circular fashion, provided more exhaust gas and steam contact. In addition, four
nozzles setup enhance the turbulence inside the steam which boost the captured by impaction.

23
 CHAPTER 5

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 CONCLUSIONS

Brick industry is very important in developing economy, however due to use of low grade
carbonaceous fuels, it is source of pollutant emission. Along with other pollutant particles, its
emission contain PM2.5, that is more dangerous than heavier particles (PM10, PM5 etc) because
they tend to stay longer in the air. There are many techniques that deal with reduction of these
pollutant particles, however they too expensive for small scale industry such as Brick industry.
Therefore, it required more cheap techniques those can be adopted in brick industry without
exceedingly effect the overall operational cost.

Therefore, current research thesis is mainly focused on the reduction of harmful particles
included in brick kiln emission using steam jets. A prototype system was designed and fabricated
that was consisted of boiler, exhaust chamber, exhaust chimney etc. Experiments were conducted
with different number of nozzle arrangement having different range of pressure to analyze the
mixing of pollutant particles with steam to settle-down before emission from brick kiln chimney.

 One steam nozzle arrangement at brick kiln chimney at 15psi pressure reduces the
pollutant particles quantity to 674 μg/m3 from 983 μg/m3.
 At 10 psi pressure, two steam nozzle arrangements at brick kiln chimney reduce the
pollutant particles quantity to 584 μg/m3 from 976 μg/m3, with three steam nozzles
arrangement pollutant particles quantity reduced to 551 μg/m3 from 976 μg/m3 and using
four steam nozzles arrangement the pollutant particles quantity reduced to 531 μg/m3
from 982 μg/m3 respectively. The 10 psi pressure with different nozzles arrangement
(two, three and four) provide more optimal outcome for conducted experiments.
 As the pressure of steam goes down the amount of the pollutant particles gradually
increases and at 0 psi the amount of pollutant particles goes to normal values 983 μg/m3.
The experiment results showed that as the number of steam nozzles increases at optimal
pressure the emission of pollutant particles decreases. The optimal pressure provide the
enough moisture to absorb the pollutant particle to make them more dense, that can easily
settle-down at bottom of exhaust chimney

24
5.2 RECOMMENDATIONS
 For current study the pressure and time factors are considered further temperature and
velocity of steam parameters can be considered to analyses the impact of exhaust gases.
 Weather conditions can be taken into account for further experiment work as the speed of
air, rain and other weather condition direct impact the exit of pollutant particles from
exhaust chimney.

5.3 LIMITATION

 The prototype system is only check with continually pressure drop at different interval of
time. At 10psi system showed optimum result but we can’t maintain that pressure for
long time due to system limitation.
 The limit of particle counter device is 1000 µg/m3 so we can maintain the exhaust
amount below this limit for check the effect of steam jets on the exhaust pollutants.

25
 REFERENCES

1- WHO (report 2016), “Ambient air pollution: a global assessment of exposure and burden of
disease”
2- WHO (report 2016), A. Pruss-Ustun, J. Wolf, C. Corvalan, R. Bos and M. Neira “Preventing
disease through healthy environments: A global assessment of the burden of disease from
environmental risks”
3- Who (report 2015), “Don’t pollute my future! The impact of the environment on children’s
health”
4- J.M. Robine, S.L. Cheung, S. Le Roy, H. Van Oyen, C. Griffiths, J.P. Michel “Death toll
exceeded 70,000 in Europe during the summer of 2003”
5- WHO (report 2012), “7 million premature deaths annually linked to air pollution”
6- K. Bales (2012), “Disposable People: New Slavery in the Global Economy” University of
California Press, California, UK. ISBN-13: 978-0520272910.
7- S.K. Guttikunda, B.A. Begum, Z. Wadud, “Particulate Pollution from Brick Kiln Clusters in
the Greater Dhaka Region, Bangladesh” Air Quality, Atmosphere & Health, 6, pp. 357-365
(2012).
8- J. Cofala, M. Amann, F. Gyarfas, W. Schoepp, J.C. Boudri, L. Hordijk, “Cost-Effective
Control of SO2 Emission in Asia” Journal of Environment Management, 72, pp. 149-161 (2004).
9- L. Tang (2009), “Regional and Local Surface Ozone Variations in Relatin to Meteorological
Conditions in Sweden” PhD Thesis, Department of Earth Science, University of Gothenburg,
Gothenburg.
10- Abu-Allaban, Abu-Qudais (2011) “Impact Assessment of Ambient Air Quality by Cement
Industry” A Case Study in Jordan Taiwan Association for Aerosol Research ISSN: 1680-8584.
11- N. Adhikari (2012) “Measuring the Health benefit from reducing air pollution Katmandu
valley, Nepal” Published by the South Asian Network for Development and Environmental
Economics (SANDEE).
12- O. K. Gustafsson, M. Zencak, Z. Sheesley, R. J. Granat, E. Praveen, P. S. Leck, R. C. Rodh,
“Brown clouds over south Asia biomass or fossil fuel combustion” Science, 323, pp. 495-498
(2009).
14- B. Stevens, G. Feingold, “Untangling aerosol effects on clouds and precipitation in a
buffered system” Nature, 461, pp. 607-613 (2009).

26
14- M. Wang, S. Ghan, M. Ovchinnikov, X. Lius, R. Easter, E. Kassianov, Y. Qian, H. Morrison,
“Aerosol indirect effect in a multi-scale aerosol-climate model PNNL-MMF” ACP Journal, 11,
pp. 5431-5455 (2011).
15- V. Ramnathan, M. V. Ramana. G. Roberts, D. Kim, C. Corrigan, C. Chung, D. Winner,
“Warming trends in Asia amplified by brown cloud solar absorption” Nature, 448, pp. 575-579
(2007).
16- B. R. Mohan, B. C. Meikap, “Performance characteristics of the particulate removal in a
noval spray-cum-bubble column scrubber” Chemical Engineering Research and Design Journal,
87(1), 109-118 (2009).
17- B.C. Meikap, G. Kundu and M.N. Biswas, “Modeling of a novel multistage bubble column
scrubber for flue gas desulfurization” Chemical Engineering Journal, 86, pp. 331–342 (2002).
18- M.N. Biswas, “Studies on gas dispersion in liquid in horizontal co-current flow” Ph.D.
thesis, Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur, India, (1975).
19- K.C. Mehta, M.M. Sharma, “Mass transfer in spray column” British Chemical
Engineering, 15, pp. 440–1444 (1970).
20- J.S. Klingspor, “Improved spray dry scrubbing through grin-ding of EGD recycles material”
JAPCA, 37, pp. 801–806 (1987).
21- B.C. Meikap, M.N. Biswas, “Fly-ash removal efficiency in a modified multi-stage bubble
column scrubber” Separation and Purification Technology, 36(3), 177-190 (2004).
22- R.K. Srivastava and W. Jozewicz, “Flue gas desulfurization” The State of the Art Journal of
the Air & Waste Management Association, 51(12), 1676−1688 (2001).
23- Nick D. Hutson, Renata Krzyzynska, Ravi K. Srivastava, “Simultaneous removal of SO2,
NOx and Hg from coal flue gas using a NaCLO2 enhanced wet scrubber” Indian Engineering
Chemical Research, 47(16), 5825-5831 (2008).
24- A. Latinen, K.Vaaraslathi, J. Kestinen, “sub-micron particle removal efficiency of
electrically enhanced wet scrubber” ICESPX Journal, (Paper 6A4) (2006).
25- Seung-Hyeok Byeon, Byeong-Ku Lee, B. Raj Mohan, “Removal of ammonia and particulate
matter using a modified turbulent wet scrubbing system” Separation and Purification
Technology, 98(98), 221-229 (2012).
26- Cheng-Hsiung, Chung-liang Chang, “Particulate Matter Removal from a Gas Stream Using
High-Voltage Discharge Plasma” Separation Science and Technology, 43(5), 1260-1271 (2008).

27
27- J.O. Chae, “Non thermal plasma for diesel exhausts treatment” Journal of Electrostatics, 57,
pp. 251-262 (2003).
28- S. Yao, C. Fushimi, L. Madokoro and K. Yamada, “Uneven dielectric barrier discharge
reactors for diesel particulate matter removal” Plasma Chemistry and Plasma Processing, 26,
pp. 481-493 (2006).
29- T. Yamamoto, C.L. Yang, Z. Kravets, and M. Beltran, “Plasma-assisted chemical process for
NOx Control” Transactions on Industry Applications, 36(3), 923–927 (2000).
30- C.L Yang, T. Yamamoto, M. Beltran, and Z. Kravets, “Corona-induced chemical scrubber
for the NOx emission” Environmental Progress, 17(3), 183–189 (1998).
31- H. Fujishima, Y. Yoshioka and T. Kuroki, “Operational test of pilot-scale-chemical hybrid
NOx reduction system” Mechanical engineering JSME journal, 3(3) (2016).
32- M. Schultes, “Absorption of SO2 with sodium hydroxide solution in packed columns”
Chemical Engineering Technology, 21(2), 201-209 (1998).
33- S. Ebrahimi, C. Picioreanu, R. Kleerebezem, JJ.Heijnen and MC. Van Loosdrecht
“Rate-based modelling of SO2 absorption into aqueous NaHCO3/Na2CO3 solutions
accompanied by desorption of CO2” Chemical Engineering Science, 58(16), 3589-3600 (2003).
34- D. Flagiello, A. Erto, A. Lancia, F. Di Natale, “Experimental and modeling analysis of
seawater scrubber for SO2 removal from flue gas” Fuel journal, 214, pp. 254-263 (2018).
35- H.F. Johnstone “Equilibrium partial vapor pressures over solution of the ammonia-sulfur
dioxide-water system” Industry Engineering Chemistry, vol. 27, pp. 587-59, 1935.
36- T.J. Edwards, Newman, J. Prausnitz, “Thermodynamics of aqueous solutions containing
volatile weak electrolytes” AICHE Journal, 21, pp. 248-259 (1975).
37- J. Young, Z. Qin, H.E. Chuan, C. Qian-Qiao, “Study of a model of wet Ammonia-Based
flue gas desulphurization” International Conference on Energy and Environment Technology,
3, pp. 110-114 (2009).
38- Meng-lin Li “Performance study on the dust removal from ritual money incineration vent
gases by a spray chamber” National institute of environmental engineering, Sun yat-sen
University, Guangdong Sheng, China.
39- Sulman Nazir, Modusser Tufail, Muhammad Waqas and Moinuddin Ghauri “Department of
Chemical Engineering, COMSATS Institute of Information Technology, Lahore , Pakistan.

28
40-C. H. Jung and K. W. Lee, “Filtration of fine particles by multiple liquid droplet and gas
bubble system” Aerosol Science Technology, 29(5), 389-401 (1998).
41- B. C. Meikap, M. N. Biswas, “Fly-ash removal efficiency in a modified multi-stage bubble
column scrubber” Separation Purification Technology, 36, pp. 177-190 (2004).
42- S. Adhikari, S.B. Dangol, and R.M. Byanju “Central Department of Environmental Science,
Tribhuvan University, Nepal.

29