Chayamiti Research

NATIONAL UNIVERSITY
OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
FACULTY OF INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGY
DEPARTMENT OF CHEMICAL ENGINEERING
FINAL YEAR RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT PROJECT
STUDY AND EVALUATION OF WET CYCLONIC

SCRUBBER SYSTEM IN SUGAR DUST COLLECTION
PRESENTED BY : ASIEL CHAYAMITI N0031058M
ACADEMIC SUPERVISOR : MRS 0. KUIPA
SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE BACHELOR OF

ENGINEERING HONOURS DEGREE IN CHEMICAL ENGINEERING
2008
Research and Development Project
STUDY AND EVALUATION OF WET CYCLONIC SCRUBBER SYSTEM IN SUGAR DUST COLLECTION
ABSTRACT
In this project, a theoretical study of the design and operating principles of wet cyclonic
scrubbers is extensively covered focusing mainly on particulate matter control. The factors
that affect the collection efficiency of cyclonic scrubbers are comprehensively discussed.
An investigation was also carried out to evaluate a typical wet cyclonic scrubber system at
Hippo Valley Estates (HVE) where the system is used for sugar dust control. It was
observed during the investigations that during the drying of sunsweet sugar to a moisture
content of less than 0.2%, substantial amounts of dust were generated and escaped from the
B-line rotary drum drier thereby polluting the Drier house area. This showed that the
operational performance of the dust extraction system at the drier house was impaired and
there was a need to restore an efficient operation. Theoretical calculations of critical
parameters such as pressure drops, gas inlet velocities, scrubbing liquid flowrates and
liquid-to-gas (L/G) ratio were carried out to ascertain whether they conformed to
recommended ranges. The investigations revealed that the causal factors for the
inefficiency were mainly due to poor operating practices complemented by absence of a
sound monitoring system to control the extraction system. Ways of improving the system
were therefore suggested.
2
Research and Development Project Submitted in Partial fulfillment of B.Eng Chemical Engineering (Hons) Degree 2007/2008
Chayamiti Asiel N003 1058M
DEDICATIONS
To my mom and siblings
3
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
First of all I would like to express my deepest gratitude to my academic supervisor Mrs O.
Kuipa for her guidance, kindness and patience. It was a privilege for me to be her student. I
deeply enjoyed having her as a mentor while studying on this subject.
The author would also like to extend his thanks to HVE Production Manager, Mr Baldwin
Muzondo for allowing me to carryout the investigations at Hippo Valley Estates Mill.
Special thanks are due to all those in the Process department at Hippo Valley Estates mill
especially the Production Manager, Mr B Muzondo and Process Engineers, Mr C Marau
and Mr E Dzirove for their unwavering support and guidance in carrying out investigations
at the plant. Without these people this project would not have been so successful.
Appreciation is also extended to the NUST department of chemical engineering staff who
contributed significantly to the author’s understanding of a variety of chemical engineering
processes.
I would also like to thank all the friends who in one way or another provided me with
opportunities to unwind. In particular, I would like to thank Samuel Mashila, Joseph
Mafusire, Kennedy Choga and Tapiwa Pisirai for being there for me.
Finally, I would like to convey my gratitude to my mom and siblings Benias, Modester and
Obvious for their unceasing support, encouragement and understanding during the period
that I have been busy with this work.
4
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT
DEDICATIONS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
LIST OF TABLES
LIST OF FIGURES
1.0 INTRODUCTION……………………………………………………………………..8
1.1 Background………………………………………………………………………….8
1.2 Research objectives………………………………………………………………….8
1.3 Project justification/Economics……………………………………………………..9
2.0 SCRUBBER SYSTEMS OPERATION REVIEW.………………………………...10

2.1 Introduction…………………………………………………………………………….10
2.2 Operating principles of scrubbers ..……………………………………………………10
2.2.1 Particle collection mechanism...……………………………………………………..10
2.2.1.1 Impaction………………………………………………………………………11
2.2.1.2 Diffusion……………………………………………………………………….11
2.2.1.3 Interception…………………………………………………………………….12
2.2.2 Types of scrubbers…………………………………………………………………...11
2.2.2.1 Wet cyclonic scrubbers………………………………………………………...12
2.2.2.2 Venturi scrubbers………………………………………………………………13
2.3 Configuration and Operation of wet cyclonic scrubber……………………………14
2.3.1 Design System Configuration………………………………………………………..14
2.3.1.1 Liquid Storage and Delivery System…………………………………………. 15
2.3.1.2 Scrubbing Liquid Injection System……………………………………………16
2.3.1.3 Waste Liquid Collection and Disposal………………………………………...17
2.3.1.4 Dust-laden gas delivery system………………………………………………..17
2.3.2 System Performance…………………………………………………………………17
2.3.2.1 Liquid-to-gas ratio……………………………………………………………..17
2.3.2.2 Gas inlet velocity………………………………………………………………18
2.3.2.3 Pressure drop…………………………………………………………………..18
2.3.2.4 Particle size distribution and Loading…………………………………………18
2.3.2.5 Droplet size…………………………………………………………………….19
2.4 System design…………………………………………………………………………20
2.4.1 PM Distribution and Loading…………………………………………………..…20
2.4.2 Collection Efficiency………………………………………………………………21
2.4.3 Water Usage……………………………………………………………………….22
2.4.4 Electrical Power Usage…………………………………………………………….23
2.5 Cost information………………………………………………………………………24
2.5.1 Total Capital Investment………………………………………………………….24
2.5.1.1 Purchased Equipment costs……………………………………………………..24
2.5.1.2 Direct and Indirect Installation Costs……………………………………..……24
2.5.2 Annual Costs………………………………………………………………...……25
2.5.2.1 Direct Annual Cost………………………………………………………….….26
2.5.2.2 Indirect Annual Cost……………………………………………………………27
5
3.0 SUGAR DUST EXTRACTION SYSTEM AT HVE……………………………….29

3.1 Introduction………………………………………………………………………….…29
3.1.1 Problem statement……………………………………………………………….…29
3.1.2 Objectives………………………………………………………………………….29
3.2 Overview of the sugar drying process………………………………………………... 30

3.2.1 Generation of dust………………………………………………………………..30
3.2.2 Layout of wet cyclonic scrubber system………………………………………….… 30
3.2.3 Design configuration and Operating parameters…………………………………….30
3.2.3.1 Dust-laden gas delivery system ……………………………………………….30
3.2.3.2 Cyclones………………………………………………………………………..30
3.2.3.3 Water injection ……………………………………………….………………..31
3.2.3.4 Water recirculation system…………………………………………………….31
3.2.2.5 Monitoring equipment…………………………………………………………31
3.3 Research Methodology………………………………………………………………...31
3.3.1 Estimating pressure drop across the scrubber……………………………………31
3.3.1.1 Pressure drop calculations……………………………………………………32
3.3.2 Saltation velocity…………………………………………………….…………..33
3.3.3 Gas Inlet flowrate………………………………………………….……………..34
3.3.4 Water recirculation flowrate……………………………………………….…….34
3.3.5 Liquid-to-gas ratio………………………………………………………………35
4.0 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION…………………….…………………….………….36

4.1 Analysis of results………………………………………………………….…………. 36
4.2 Possible causes of inefficiency….………………………………………………….….37
4.3 Possible ways of improving the system…………………………………………….….38
5.0 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION………………………………………………….40
6.0 RECOMMENDATIONS…………………………………………………………….41
7.0 REFERENCES……………………………………………………………………....42
8.0 APPENDICES………………………………………………………………………..43
APPENDIX 1A ….…… HVE Sugar Dust extraction system

APPENDIX 1B…………Sweet water recirculation system
APPENDIX 1C…………Melt tank configuration
APPENDIX 2………..…Equipment design specifications (fan, pumps and cyclones)
APPENDIX 3A…………Calculations for water recirculation pressure drop
APPENDIX 3B…………Pressure drop calculation across cyclones
APPENDIX 4……. …….Water recirculation system modification
APPENDIX 5…….. ……Proposed water recirculation control system
6
APPENDIX 6……………Pressure drop measurement set-up.

APPENDIX 7……………Wet Scrubber Daily operations logsheet.
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1………………….Operating Parameters for Particulate Wet Scrubbers

Table 2………………… Costs estimates for Instruments and controls, Taxes and Freight
Table 3…………………. Annual cost factors for cyclonic scrubbers
LIST OF FIGURES
Fig 2.1…………………..Wet cyclonic scrubber

Fig 2.2…………………..Venturi scrubber
Fig 2.3………………… Schematic of Cyclonic scrubber system
Fig 2.4…………………. Liquid to Gas Ratio as a Function of Particle Loading
Fig 2.5…………………. Particle Size Distributions for a PM Source
7
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 BACKGROUND
Sugar dust is one of the major pollutants in sugar industry and causes substantial loss in
revenue as the final product is dispersed in the air. The dust is generated during the drying
of sugar in rotary driers whereby abrasion of sugar crystals results in crystal breakage
thereby producing sugar fines. This is common for situations whereby the sugar is dried to
levels of moisture content less than 0.2%. Drying of sugar that has a large proportion of
small crystal fragments can also lead to excessive production of sugar dust, causing dust
pollution which creates a risk of explosions in factories, is unpleasant for personnel
working in that environment and is also an economic loss to the industry. The most
prevalent method to mitigate this dust problem in most sugar factories is the installation of
wet scrubber systems on the sugar dryers for dust collection. In this system, the dust is first
entrained and transported within an aspiration system which produces a stream of air. The
sugar is thereupon separated from the air stream using a wet scrubber. The dust so
recovered is recycled for reprocessing thereby yielding an additional recovery. However,
previous researches have shown that the dust problem is still far from over as most
factories are still facing serious challenges of dust problem. This warrants more research to
come up with better technologies or to improve operational performance of the existing
methods.
1.2 RESEARCH OBJECTIVES

This research project seeks among other things to;
• To gain an insight in the design and operating principles of wet cyclonic scrubbers.
• To establish fundamental factors in the design of an efficient wet cyclonic dust
collector.
• To investigate performance characteristics of wet cyclonic scrubbers
• To assess and quantify the resultant losses due to inefficient dust collection systems in
the sugar mills.
• To evaluate the operating performance of an existing wet scrubber system at Hippo
Valley Estates Sugar mill and establish causal factors for its inefficiency.
• To establish ways of improving wet cyclonic scrubber performance and suggest best
practice that provides efficient operation.
8
1.3 PROJECT JUSTIFICATION

Some industrial investigations have shown that most sugar factories are facing serious
sugar dust problem posing economic, environmental and social challenges to the sugar
industry. An industrial report by Julienne (1982) revealed that 0.2% per tonne of sunsweet
sugar processed is lost as sugar dust. Hippo Valley has an annual sugar production of
150000tons with a sales revenue of US$2.5 trillion. This would mean that 300tons of sugar
are lost as sugar dust per annum culminating in an economic loss of 0.2% of the total
annual sales revenue. This means that Hippo Valley Estates is a typical sugar manufacturer
currently facing a serious challenge on sugar dust containment. This is indicative of the
need sugar industry has for improving the existing operational systems. In light of this; the
design of an effective dust collection system should result in considerable annual revenue
gain of approximately US$50million and a higher safety and environmental standard as per
the provisions of IS014001. It is hoped that the investigations and findings of this project
would benefit the sugar industry in a number of ways chief among them;
• Higher total sugar recovery as sugar dust is collected and reprocessed thereby
gaining in total revenue.
• Air pollution reduction due to effective dust collection systems.
• Minimisation of the risk for a dust explosion in the factory which might cause
devastating fire outbreaks.
9
2.0 SCRUBBER SYSTEMS OPERATION REVIEW

2.1 INTRODUCTION
A wet scrubber is an air pollution control device that removes particulate matter (PM) and
acid gases from waste gas streams of stationary point sources. The basic process involved
in wet scrubbing is the contacting of a polluted gas stream with a scrubbing liquid to
transfer sufficient of the pollutants into the liquid stream to allow discharge to atmosphere
of the cleaned gas. The transfer of the pollutants from the gas stream into the liquid stream
is by capture of particulates by diffusion, interception, inertial impaction, and gravitational
settling. Wet scrubbers are particularly useful in the removal of particulate matter with the
following characteristics:
• Hygroscopic materials
• Combustible, corrosive and explosive materials;
• Particles which are difficult to remove in their dry form;
• Particulate matter in the presence of soluble gases; and
• Particulate matter in waste gas streams with high moisture content.
2.2 Operating principles of scrubbers

This section presents wet scrubber designs used for the control of PM with aerodynamic
diameter within the range 2.5-10µm emitted from stationary point sources. Commercially
available wet scrubbers employ a wide range of design variations, including several hybrids
of technologies. Only commonly applied scrubber designs such as cyclonic and venturi
scrubbers shall be addressed.
2.2.1 Particle collection mechanism

Particulates contact liquid droplets in wet scrubbers through several mechanisms. The
scrubbing mechanisms are represented by diffusion, interception, inertial impaction, and
gravitational settling. Among these mechanisms, inertial impaction remains an important
mechanism for capture of particles larger than 5.0 µm, while diffusion is essential for
capture of smaller particles (Ebert and Buttner, 1986; Gemci and Ebert, 1992).
10
2.2.1.1 Impaction
Impaction is the dominant collection mechanism for particles whose diameters are larger
than 5.0 µm in using wet scrubbers. When waste gas approaches a water droplet, it flows
along streamlines around the droplet. Particles with sufficient inertial force maintain their
forward trajectory and impact the droplet. Due to their mass, particles with diameters
greater than 5µm are generally collected using impaction. Turbulent flow enhances capture
by impaction [1]. The dimensionless parameter describing the impaction effect is the
Stokes number, Stk, defined as
ρ p d p2 (Usd −Usi )
Stk = ------------------------------------------------------(1)
18µD
where ρp is the particle density, dp is particle diameter and Usd and Usi are droplet falling
velocity relative to the gas and settling velocity of particle, respectively. In many cases, Usd
is much larger than Usi [2]. A large Stokes number implies a higher probability of
collection by impaction, and vice-versa. Licht (1988) calculated the impaction collection
efficiency for particles in operating wet scrubbers. His expression for the collection
efficiency due to impaction, is as follows:
2
⎛ Stk ⎞
η imp =⎜ ⎟ -----------------------------------------------------(2)
⎝ Stk + 0.35 ⎠
2.2.1.2 Interception
However, particles that pass sufficiently close to a water droplet are captured by
interception, capture due to the surface tension of the water droplet. Particles of roughly 1.0
to 0.1 µm in diameter are subject to interception. Increasing the density of droplets in a
spray increases interception. [3]
2.2.1.3 Diffusion
Diffusion is the dominant collection mechanism for small particles in using wet scrubbers.
Small particles attain a high diffusion coefficient because the diffusion coefficient is
inversely proportional to size. Very small-sized particles are subject to Brownian motion,
irregular motion caused by random collisions with gas molecules. These particles are
captured by the water droplets as they diffuse through the waste gas. Collection due to
diffusion is most significant for particles less than 0.5 µm in diameter [4].
11
2.2.2 Types of scrubbers

There are numerous types of wet scrubbers which remove both particulate matter and acid
gas. This section shall address the operation of most common types of wet scrubbers for
control of particulate matter of sizes above 2.5µm.
2.2.2.1 Wet cyclonic scrubbers

Cyclonic wet scrubbers use the features of both the dry cyclone and the spray chamber to
remove pollutants from gas stream. In these systems; the scrubbing liquid (usually water)
comes into contact with a gas stream containing dust particles. Generally, the exhaust gas
enters the chamber tangentially, is forced to swirl downward, then change directions, and
return upward in a tighter spiral. [3]. At the same time, the scrubbing liquid is sprayed from
nozzles from the top of the chamber .As the dust-laden gas swirls around the chamber,
pollutants are captured when they impact on liquid droplets, are thrown to the walls by a
centrifugal force, and washed back down and out. The "cleaned" gas leaves through the top
of the chamber. Droplets that remain entrained in the gas can be removed with a mist
eliminator. Figure 2.1 shows a diagram of a cyclonic wet scrubber with a tangential inlet.
Fig 2.1 Wet cyclonic scrubber [4]
Collection efficiencies for this type of scrubber are as high as 95% for particles greater than
5 µm, and from 60% to 75% for submicron particles [3]. Cyclonic scrubbers have high
collection efficiencies due to the greater relative velocity between the droplets and the gas
in a cyclonic chamber. Gas flow rates range from 1 to 47 m3/s and by introducing the gas
12
tangentially into the spray chamber, the cyclonic scrubber increases the gas velocities (thus,
particle velocities) to approximately 20 to 180 m/s. Exhaust gas velocities of 60 to 180 m/s
are equivalent to those encountered in a venturi scrubber [5,8]. However, cyclonic spray
scrubbers are not as efficient as venturi is because they are not capable of producing the
same degree of useful turbulence.
2.2.2.2 Venturi scrubbers
A venturi scrubber has a “converging-diverging” flow channel. In this type of system the
cross-sectional area of the channel decreases then increases along the length of the channel.
Figure 2.2 presents a venturi scrubber. The narrowest area is referred to as the “throat”. In
the converging section, the decrease in area causes the waste gas velocity and turbulence to
increase. The scrubbing liquid is injected into the scrubber slightly upstream of the throat
or directly into the throat section. The scrubbing liquid is atomized by the turbulence in the
throat, improving gas-liquid contact. The gas-liquid mixture then decelerates as it moves
through the diverging section, causing additional particle-droplet impacts and
agglomeration of the droplets. The liquid droplets are then separated from the gas stream in
an entrainment section, usually consisting of a cyclonic separator and mist eliminator [6].
Venturi scrubbers are more expensive than cyclonic scrubbers, but collection efficiencies
for fine particulate matter are higher. High gas velocities and turbulence in the venturi
throat result in high collection efficiencies, ranging from 70% to 99% for particles larger
than 1 µm in diameter and greater than 50% for submicron particles [3,8]. Increasing the
pressure drop in a venturi scrubber increases the efficiency, but the system’s energy
demand also increases leading to greater operational costs. Capital and O&M costs are
moderately higher than costs for cyclonic spray towers. Fig 2.2 shows a typical venturi
scrubber
13
Fig 2.2 Venturi scrubber [6]
2.3 Configuration and Operation of wet cyclonic scrubber
The basic cyclonic scrubber design is basically the same for most of the commercially
available designs. The primary difference however is on the energy requirements to operate
the system which is depended mainly on the properties of the dust and the gas particle
loading. Generally most cyclonic scrubbers operate at pressure drops in the range 1-5Kpa.
Typically an induced draft fan is installed either upstream or down stream of the cyclone
unit depending on the nature of the waste gas. In cases where there is need to treat large
volumes of waste gas, cyclones can be arranged in parallel and it becomes a multicyclone
unit which caters for high volumes of pollutants or dust [9].
The materials of construction for the cyclones depend chiefly on the properties of the waste
gas to be treated. Most system components are commonly made of stainless steel or carbon
steels that are known for their high corrosion resistance.
2.3.1 System design configuration

Systems are designed to achieve high operational performance at optimum capital and
operating costs. The cyclonic scrubber system is made up of many components that need to
be assembled in the correct manner to achieve an efficient operation. A typical set up of a
wet cyclonic scrubber system is shown in Fig 2.3
14
Discharge
Cyclonic
scrubber
Ductwork
From Dust
source
ID Fan
Water make up
Recirculation
tank
Pump
To disposal or
treatment
Fig 2.3 Schematic of Cyclonic scrubber system
Figure 2.3 presents the schematic of a cyclonic scrubber system. The basic system
components of a cyclonic scrubber are:
• Liquid storage system and delivery system;
• Liquid injection system;
• Dust laden gas delivery system.
• Waste liquid collection system and disposal;
Each of these components is discussed in the following sections.
2.3.1.1 Liquid Storage and Delivery System

The liquid storage and delivery system consists of a recirculation tank, pump, filters,
valves, piping, pressure gauges, and flow meters. Most systems are designed as recycle
systems meaning the spent scrubbing liquid is recirculated through the scrubber system.
Since the scrubbing liquid is recycled, the solids content of the liquid increases as
particulate matter is collected. The concentration of solids in a recycle system must be
15
maintained below a design limit or the spray characteristics of the system cannot be
maintained. To reduce the solids concentration, a portion of the liquid is bled from the
system and fresh scrubbing liquid is added. The tank must be sized to provide continuous
operation and minimize frequent changing of the liquid. A sensor in the tank monitors the
level of liquid. An automated system for adding liquid can be incorporated into the
scrubber design. However, oversizing the tank and automating the addition of make up
water increases the capital cost and complexity of the system. The increase in capital cost
must be weighed with the operating and maintenance cost for operating the liquid storage
and delivery system manually. After leaving the tank, the scrubbing liquid flows to a pump
to increase the pressure and flow rate to the values required for proper operation of the
cyclonic system. Pressure gauges and flow meters downstream of the pump monitor the
scrubbing liquid flow and pump operation. A feedback control system can be added to the
system to automate control of the pump.
2.3.1.2 Scrubbing Liquid Injection System

The injection system design promotes mixing of the dust laden gas and scrubbing liquid in
the cyclonic scrubber. There are two basic systems for injecting scrubbing liquid into a
cyclonic system: open pipe and spray nozzles. In an open pipe system, several small
diameter pipes feed the scrubbing liquid into the cyclone. The pipes inject the liquid along
the cyclone walls; the water flows downward, covering the walls of the cyclone. Open pipe
systems have lower capital and operating& maintenance costs than spray nozzles due to
their simpler design. Most cyclonic scrubber systems make use of spray nozzles for
injecting scrubbing liquid in the cyclonic scrubber. In cyclonic scrubbers, a ring of nozzles
is located on the top part of the cyclonic chamber and the nozzles create a fine droplet
spray pattern to ensure adequate liquid-PM contact. The droplets can be produced either
pneumatically or hydraulically using specially designed nozzles heads. Nozzles can be
constructed out of stainless steel or more specialized materials such as stellite and ceramic
[10]. Because nozzles are prone to plugging and abrasion in high PM load conditions, this
type of system requires clean liquid feed to avoid clogging [8]. The nozzles should be
designed to be removable for cleaning and replacement.
16
2.3.1.3 Waste Liquid Collection and Disposal
Spent scrubber liquid drains from the bottom of the cyclone chamber to the recirculation
tank. A portion of the liquid is bled from the system to limit the solids concentration to
20% to 30% by weight [11]. In sugar industry, the liquid can be bled back to re-processing.
In some applications, may contain hazardous material. Non- hazardous effluent can be
treated in an existing wastewater system .The liquid is separated from the solid waste, and
then the wastewater is reused or discharged. The remaining solid or sludge is land filled if
non-toxic and inert.
2.3.1.4 Dust-laden gas delivery system

An ID fan is generally required to make up for pressure lost in a low energy cyclonic
system. Fans marginally increase the capital cost of the cyclonic scrubber system but
greatly increase operating and maintenance costs due to the electrical power usage and
maintenance requirements of the fan. Power input for the fan ranges from 3 to 12 hp/28m3
[5]. The ID fan can be placed either upstream or downstream of the cyclonic wet scrubber.
The fan placement is dependent on the waste gas characteristics. For instance, applications
with high particulate loading place the fan downstream to avoid pitting of the fan blades.
To reduce corrosion and pitting, the fan can be manufactured out of stainless steel or coated
with special materials.
2.3.2 Scrubber System Performance

The parameters affecting the overall performance of a cyclonic wet scrubber are:
• Particle size distribution and loading;
• Waste gas flow rate, temperature and humidity;
• Gas velocity and pressure drop
• Liquid-to-gas (L/G) ratio
• Droplet size
2.3.2.1 Liquid-to-gas ratio

The liquid-to-gas ratio (L/G) is the volume of liquid injected per volume of waste gas
treated. In general, a higher L/G ratio increases collection efficiency since the density of
droplets across a given cross-section of the scrubber is higher. Liquid flow rates between
0.9 and 1.35 liters/m3 give optimum performance. L/G ratios in this range produce fairly
17
constant collection efficiencies given a constant pressure drop [12]. L/G ratios of greater
than 1.4 L/m3 do not improve the scrubber performance significantly. While increasing the
L/G ratio increases collection efficiency, operating costs are increased as well due to
greater scrubbing liquid and pump usage.
2.3.2.2 Pressure drop (∆P)

Differential pressure ∆P is the 1st performance indicator because it is indicative of proper
gas flow resistance and uniform flow distribution across the cyclones. Typical cyclonic
scrubbers operate within ∆P range of 0.5 –5Kpa [12]. Reading above or below the specified
range can indicate duct plugging which lowers the extraction performance of the system
2.3.2.3 Gas inlet velocity

The waste gas flow rate is the most important sizing parameter in a wet scrubber. The
higher the waste gas flow rate, the larger the scrubber system and volume of scrubbing
liquid required to treat the waste gas. The gas inlet velocities normally fall within the range
15-50m/s. The collection efficiency of a cyclonic scrubber is directly proportional to the
particle velocity relative to velocity of water droplet velocity [13].
2.3.2.4 Particle Size Distribution and Loading

The performance of a given scrubber type is highly dependant on the size distribution of
the PM in the waste gas stream. The size distribution determines the capture mechanism,
impaction, interception or diffusion, that dominates. Most wet scrubber designs rely almost
exclusively on inertial impaction for particulate collection. Particles smaller than 0.1 µm
are captured primarily through diffusion mechanisms [7]. The collection efficiency
decreases exponentially with particle size. PM loading, also called dust loading is the mass
of PM per unit volume in the waste gas at the inlet of the scrubber. As PM loading
increases, the L/G ratio must increase to maintain the same collection efficiency. Figure 2.4
presents the L/G as a function of particulate loading. Higher PM loading also results in
higher solids content of the recycled scrubbing liquid. In order to maintain the solids
content, a greater volume of scrubbing liquid must be bled from the system as waste and a
greater volume of clean scrubbing liquid must be added to the system. Higher PM loadings
increase the operating costs of the system due to increased pump usage, scrubbing liquid
usage, and waste liquid disposal. Applications with high PM loadings also require more
18
maintenance, as particles can cause plugging of orifices and wear to parts such as nozzles
and fans.
L/G ratio vs Particle Loading
2.5
L/G ratio (L/m3)
1.5 Series2
0.5
0
35.71 178.6 357.1 535.7 714.3
Particle loading(g/m3)
Figure 2.4: Liquid to Gas Ratio as a Function of Particle Loading [13,20]
Higher PM loading also results in higher solids content of the recycled scrubbing liquid. In
order to maintain the solids content, a greater volume of scrubbing liquid must be bled
from the system as waste and a greater volume of clean scrubbing liquid must be added to
the system. Higher PM loadings increase the operating costs of the system due to increased
pump usage, scrubbing liquid usage, and waste liquid disposal. Applications with high PM
loadings also require more maintenance, as particles can cause plugging of orifices and
wear to parts such as nozzles and fans.
2.3.2.5 Droplet Size
There is an optimum droplet size for maximizing collection of PM. Smaller droplets have
a larger surface area to volume ratio, therefore, they capture more particles per volume of
liquid injected. However, if the droplet size becomes too small, the momentum of the waste
gas can be imparted to the droplet which decreases the relative velocity between the droplet
and particles. Lower relative velocity results in lower collection efficiency. Wet scrubbers
control the size of droplets using several techniques. In scrubbers using preformed droplets,
19
such as cyclonic spray towers, the droplet size is determined by the type of nozzle and the
system operating conditions. In venturi scrubbers, the droplet size is controlled by the L/G
and the gas velocity in the throat [17].
Table 2.1 below presents operating parameters for typical scrubber types
Scrubber Type Pressure L/G Ratio Liquid Gas Cut

Drop (L/m3) Pressure velocities Diameter
(Kpa) (Kpa) (m/s) (µm)
0.12 - 0.75 0.0675 – 2.7 69-2758. 3.05 2-8

Spray Tower
Cyclonic
0.5 - 2.5 0.27 – 1.35 69- 400 32 - 42 2-3
Venturi
2.5 - 37 0.27 – 2.7 3.4 -13.8 27-121 0.2
Table 2.1 0perating Parameters for Particulate Wet Scrubbers [5,11]

Source:
2.4 Wet Scrubber System Design
2.4.1 PM Distribution and Loading
The design and performance of a given scrubber type is highly dependant on the properties
of the particulate matter in the waste gas stream. As discussed in section 2.3, the most
critical properties are particle size distribution and PM loading. There is a wide distribution
of both particle sizes and loading across industrial sources. Source-specific PM distribution
and loading determine the most efficient PM collection device on a case-by-case basis.
Because particles have various shapes and densities, particle size is usually expressed as
the aerodynamic diameter. The aerodynamic diameter of a particle is the diameter of a
sphere with the density of water that settles in still air at the same rate as the particle in
question. The size distribution is usually measured using a cascade impactor, which
separates particles by their aerodynamic diameter onto plates. The mass of particles on
each impaction plate is measured [7]. Figure 2.5 presents a typical PM particle size
distribution; the cumulative mass verses the particle size. Notice it is a log-normal
distribution. PM from industrial sources, generally have a log-normal distribution. The
20
geometric mean diameter is the aerodynamic diameter of the 50th percentile of PM on a

mass basis (also referred to as mass median particle diameter). By definition, the standard
deviation of a log-normal distribution is the ratio of the 84th percentile to 50th percentile
particle sizes on a mass basis:
d 84
σ=
d 85
where
σ = standard deviation,
d50 = mass fraction of the 50th percentile particle size, and
d84 = mass fraction of the 84th percentile particle size
Figure 2.6 Particle Size Distributions for a PM Source [20]
2.4.2 Collection Efficiency

Collection efficiency is the amount of PM removed from the gas stream by the wet
scrubber. Collection efficiency on a mass basis is given by:
mi − m o l i − l o
η= = …………………………………………….(3)
mi li
where
ηm = overall collection efficiency on a mass basis,
mi, o = total mass flow rate at inlet, outlet, and
li,o = particle loading at inlet, outlet.
21
Collection efficiency as a function of particle size distribution is the cumulative collection

efficiency for each particle size range given by:
j
η d = ∑η j m j …………………………………………………(4)
0
where
η d = overall collection efficiency,
η j = fractional efficiency for jth particle diameter range,
mj = mass fraction of jth particle diameter range, and
j = number of particle diameter ranges.
The mass fraction is defined by:
massofparticle int herangeof int erest

mj = ……………………………………………………….(5)
totalmass
Collection efficiency on a mass basis is generally higher than the collection efficiency on a
particle basis. This is because the larger size particles, which are generally more massive,
tend to be collected at higher efficiencies than smaller diameter particles. Therefore, it is
more common to express efficiency on a particle size basis than a mass basis.
2.4.3 Water usage

Most wet scrubbers systems recirculate the scrubbing liquid. In order to decrease the solids
content of the scrubbing liquid, part of the liquid is bled from the system and fresh water is
added. Cyclonic scrubbers typically have peak solids concentrations of 20 to 30% [3]. A
higher PM loading of the gas stream requires a higher bleed rate resulting in a greater
volume of liquid waste and higher disposal costs.
The mass flow of particulate matter into the scrubber liquid is:
m PM = ηLPM QI ………………………………………………………….(6)
where
mPM = mass flowrate of PM,

η = overall collection efficiency of the scrubber,
LPM = PM loading at the inlet, and
Qi = waste gas flow rate at the inlet.
22
Using the density of water, 1.0 kg/l and the design solids concentration, a bleed rate for the
scrubber liquid can be calculated as:
m PM
Qbleed = ……………………………………………………………….(7)
f soilds ρ H 2O
where
Qbleed = bleed rate, and
fsolids = mass fraction of solids in recirculation water.
The total flow rate of water required by the system, QT, is the sum of the water evaporated
and the bleed water given by:
QT ( H 2O ) = QWevap + Qbleed ………………………………………………………(8)
The total water consumed daily is given by:
VT ( H 20) = QT ( H 20 ) t ………………………………………………………………(9)
where
VT(H2O) - annual volume of water consumed, and
t - scrubber operating time per year.
2.4.4 Electrical Power usage

From the pressure drop across the system, the required fan brake horsepower can be
calculated using the following equation
∆PQI
HP fan = ………………………………………………………………(10)
6356η fan
where
HPfan = fan brake horsepower, hp,
η = efficiency of the fan, and
∆P = pressure of the fan, inH20.
The brake horsepower required for pump to recirculate the scrubbing liquid through the
system is calculated similarly as:
QI
∆Ppump L
G 1000
γ
HPpump = …………………………………………………(11)
3952.6η pump
where
Hpump = pump brake horsepower, hp,
η = efficiency of the fan,
∆Ppump = pressure of the pump, ft.
L/G = liquid to gas ratio, gal/1000 ft3,
Qi = flow rate at inlet, ft/min, and
γ = specific gravity of the scrubbing liquid.
23
2.5 Cost Information
The cost estimation methodology presented in this section provides a tool to estimate wet
cyclonic scrubber capital and annual costs. Costs can be adjusted to other years using the
Chemical Engineering Cost Index for wet cyclonic scrubbers.
2.5.1 Total Capital Investment
Total Capital Investment (TCI) includes costs associated with purchasing the scrubber unit
and direct and indirect costs associated with installing the unit. The equation for TCI is
given by:
TCI = PEC + DC + IC
where
PEC = purchased equipment costs

DC = direct installation costs
IC = indirect installation costs.
2.5.1.1 Purchased Equipment costs.
The Purchased Equipment Cost (PEC) of a cyclonic wet scrubber system is the sum of the
costs of the scrubber equipment, instruments and controls, taxes, and freight. The Table 2
below shows
Item Percentage of Equipment Cost

Instruments and Controls 10%
Taxes 3%
Freight 5%
Table 2.Costs estimates for Instruments and controls, Taxes and Freight.
2.5.1.2 Direct and Indirect Installation Costs
Direct installation costs include materials and labor costs associated with installing the wet
cyclonic scrubber unit. These costs include; auxiliary equipment (e.g., ductwork, fans,
recycle pump, piping and valves, basic instrumentation and controls), foundations and
supports, handling and erection, electrical, piping, insulation and painting. Indirect
installation costs include engineering and supervision, construction and contractor fees,
startup and testing, inventory capital, and any process and project contingency costs.
24
2.5.2 Annual Costs

Total annual cost (TAC) consists of direct costs and indirect costs. Therefore, TAC for
cyclonic scrubber systems is given by:
TAC = DAC + IAC
where
DAC = Direct Annual Costs, and
IAC = Indirect Annual Costs.
2.5.2.1 Direct Annual Cost
Direct annual costs (DAC) include variable and semivariable costs. Variable direct annual
costs account for purchase of utilities, electrical power, and water. Semivariable direct
annual costs include operating and supervisory labor and maintenance (labor and
materials).
DAC = AC Labour + AC ma int + AC elect + AC water

where
AClabor = annual labor cost,

ACmaint = annual maintenance cost,
ACelect = annual electricity cost, and
ACwater = annual water cost.
The labor costs are a function of the level of automation. Less labor is required for
automatic controls but there are significantly higher capital costs for fully automated
scrubber systems. Cyclonic scrubbers are assumed to require 2 to 8 hours of operating labor
per shift [14]. More labor hours may be required for systems with highly variable flow
rates, temperatures or pressures. Supervisory labor is assumed to be 15% of the operating
labor and maintenance labor per shift, approximately 1 to 2 hours. The cost of materials
required for maintenance is assumed to 100% of the maintenance labor cost. [14]
The amount of power and water utilized by the scrubber was estimated in section 2.4.4
Using the estimated power consumption for the fan and pump, HPfan and HPpump, the
annual cost of electricity is estimated from the following equation:
25
⎛ kW ⎞
AC elect = 0.7457⎜⎜ ⎟⎟(HPfan + HPpump )tCost E
⎝ hp ⎠
where
t = scrubber operating time per year, hours, and
CostE = cost of electricity in dollars per kW ($/kw).
The cost of water is estimated from the total volume of water, VT(H2O) calculated in Equation
9.
AC H 2O = VT ( H 2O )Cost H 2O
where
CostH2O = cost of water in dollars per gallon ($/m3).
2.5.2.2 Indirect Annual Cost
In general, IAC (fixed cost) includes property taxes, insurance, administrative charges,
overhead, and the capital recovery cost. Administrative costs, property tax, and insurance
are assumed to be percentages of the TCI [14]. Overhead is assumed to be equal to 60% of
the sum of operating, supervisory, and maintenance labor, and maintenance materials [14].
Capital recovery cost is based on the anticipated equipment lifetime and the annual interest
rate employed. Table 3 gives suggested factors of these items. An economic lifetime of 15
years is assumed for the wet scrubber system. For a 20-year life and an interest rate of 7
percent, the capital recovery factor, CRF, is equal to 0.1098. The system capital recovery
cost is then estimated by:
CRF = 0.1098TCI
26
The Table 3 below shows Annual cost factors for cyclonic scrubbers
Cost Item Factor
Direct Annual Cost, DC

Operating labour
Operator 2 to 8 hours per shift
Supervisor 15% of operator
Maintenance
Labour 1 to 2 hours per shift
Material 100% of maintenance labour
Utilities (consumption rate) x (hours/yr) x (unit cost)

Fan
Pump
Water
Operating materials Application specific
Wastewater disposal Application specific
Indirect Annual Cost, IC

Administrative charges 2% of Total Capital Investment
Property Tax 1% of Total Capital Investment
Insurance 1% of Total Capital Investment
Overhead 60% of total labour and material cost
Capital Recovery 0.1098 x Total Capital Investment.
Total Annual Cost DC + IC
Table 3. Annual Cost Factors for Scrubbers [14]
The following are cost ranges expressed in (2007 US dollars) for a single wet cyclonic
scrubber under typical operating conditions, developed using an Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) cost –estimating spreadsheet (EPA, 1996) and referenced to the volumetric
flowrate of the waste stream treated. Flow rates higher than approximately 10m3/s usually
employ multiple cyclones operating in parallel. For purposes of calculating the example
cost effectiveness, flow rates are assumed to be between 0.5 and 50m3/s, the PM inlet
loading is assumed to be approximately 2.3 and 230g/m3 and the control efficiency is
assumed to be 90%. The costs do not include costs for disposal or transport of collected
material. Capital costs can be higher than in the ranges shown for application which require
expensive materials. As a rule, smaller units controlling a waste stream with a low PM
concentration will be more expensive (per unit volumetric flowrate and per quantity
27
pollutant controlled) than a large unit controlling a waste stream with a high PM
concentration.
• Capital Cost : $ 4600 to $7400 per m3/s

• Operating & Maintenance Cost : $ 1,500 to $18000 per m3/s annually
• Annualized Cost : $ 2800 to $ 29000 per m3/s annually
• Cost effectiveness : $ 0.47 to $440 per metric ton, annualized cost per ton per year of
pollutant controlled
According to Cooper (2004), wet cyclonic scrubber have been discovered to have low
capital costs as compared to other dust collection methods such as venturi scrubbers.
28
3.0 Sugar dust extraction system at HVE
3.1 Introduction
HVE uses cascade type rotary drum driers for drying both raw and sunsweet sugar with
each drier having a design capacity of 35tons/hr. The drying mechanism involves a
draught of ambient air at 25oC moving concurrently to the flow of moist sugar at 10m3/s.
An ID fan that also acts as the dust extraction fan provides the air draught. The inlet
moisture for sunsweet sugar ranges from 0.4-0.2 % with design outlet moisture content of <
0.15%. Moisture content is a critical quality parameter in sugar production as it affects the
storage or shelve life of the sugar. During operation of the rotary driers, particularly B-line
drier for sunsweet sugar, substantial amounts of sugar dust are produced. To mitigate dust
pollution, the driers in the Drier house are fitted with a dust extraction system.
3.1.1 Problem statement.
It was observed that the sugar dust extraction system at Hippo Valley Estates was not
operating effectively hence posing a challenge in terms of air pollution and substantial loss
in revenue as the final product is dispersed in the air. Some researches were conducted
previously by (Murefu and Musariri 2004) focusing on the B-line dryer and a redesign of
the system was implemented. However, the sugar dust problem has since persisted
indicating the need to check the adequacy of the current design setup. It is suspected that
the previous researchers limited their research on the operation of dry cyclones only,
overlooking the fact that the system is a wet scrubber system which involves the water
recirculation mechanism. It therefore warrants this researcher to carryout the investigations
basing on the operating principles of wet cyclonic scrubbers and factors that affect their
operation as discussed in previous sections above.
3.1.2 Objectives
The principal objectives of the investigations were to:
• establish the current performance of the dust extraction system.
• Identify areas where the performance could be improved.
• Make recommendations to improve the extraction performance.
29
3.2 Overview of the Sugar Drying Process
3.2.1 Generation of dust.

The dust is generated during the drying of sugar in the rotary driers whereby repeated fall
of the crystals causes abrasion of sugar crystals as they cascade in the driers. This results in
crystal breakage thereby producing a fine sugar powder which must be collected and
recovered. Some researches established that drying of sugar that has a large proportion of
small crystal fragments due to poor boiling methods could lead to excessive production of
sugar dust. Sunsweet sugar is susceptible to generation of more dust as compared to raw
sugar due to its high degree of dryness which is less than 0.2%. The amount of dust
produced could not be easily quantified due to unavailability of the necessary dust
sampling equipment.
3.2.2. Layout of wet cyclonic scrubber system

To mitigate sugar dust problem in the Drier house, wet cyclonic scrubbers were installed on
each of the 3 driers. However, the system which is currently operational is that for the B-
line drier which processes sunsweet sugar. The diagram in Appendix 1A. shows the layout
for the entire dust extraction system. It should however, be noted that the investigations in
this project shall be centred on the B-line drier only which is currently operational.
3.2.3 Design configuration and operating parameters

In this section a description of the current system set up shall be given focusing on the
components making up the system. Some of the data regarding to design specifications for
the cyclones and injection pipes could not be established. See Appendix 2. However,
theoretical predictions based on theoretical equations shall be used to determine operating
parameters.
3.2.3.1 Dust-laden gas delivery system

An induced draft fan of 600m3/min capacity and 63.50mmHg head is used as an extraction
fan. The fan serves both for dust suction as well as creating a countercurrent air draught in
the dryer for heat exchange.
3.2.3.2 Cyclones
The system uses 1D2D dual cyclones installed in parallel. The configurations are as shown
in Appendix 2. The manufacturer’s design capacity specifications regarding design
30
pressure drop across the scrubber, collection efficiency and gas flowrates could not be
established from the records. The researcher had to theoretically determine the current
operating parameters.
3.2.3.3 Water injection

The water injection system uses an open pipe system whereby several small diameter pipes
feed the scrubbing liquid into the cyclones. Water injection into the cyclonic scrubbers is
through open pipes of 10mm diameter and each cyclone has a water ring consisting of 12
of these small pipes. Typical water injection systems make use of nozzles.
3.2.3.4 Water recirculation system

Sugar solution is recirculated back from the melt tank to the cyclones using a centrifugal
pump of 15m delivery head and discharge of 0.03m3/s. The sugar solution recirculation
layout is as shown in Appendix 1B. The bleeding system is in such a way that the sugar
solution upon attaining a certain brix level, overflows from the melt tank into the melter.
Make up water at temperatures ranging from 75-80oC is used to replenish the overflow
from the tank.
3.2.3.5 Monitoring equipment

The current set-up does not have any monitoring equipment or control system that makes
control of the operations difficulty thereby compromising efficiency.
3.3 Research Methodology

In this project an investigation will be done to ascertain the causal factors for inefficiency
of the system and to redesign the system inorder to restore efficient dust extraction. The
focus shall be on the factors that affect performance of wet cyclonic scrubbers that were
discussed in previous sections primarily cyclone pressure drop, liquid - to- gas ratio, inlet
gas flowrate, particle size distribution. Investigations shall also be carried out to establish
the current operating practices and the control system.
3.3.1 Estimating pressure drop across the scrubber
A comparative analysis of the design pressure drop across the cyclonic scrubber and the
current operating pressure drop range had to be carried out. However, no data was available
31
from the manuals hence the researcher was to only check whether the installed fan
provided enough head to overcome the total pressure drop across the extraction system.
An experiment was supposed to be conducted to measure cyclone pressure drop at constant
inlet velocity using Pitot tubes to obtain the differential pressure from gas inlet and outlet.
However, due to unavailability of the testing equipment, the researcher had to use
theoretical equations to determine the pressure drops.
3.3.1.1 Pressure drop calculations
The total pressure drop across the system had to be calculated as the sum of the pressure
drop in ductwork and that across the cyclones. The dimensions for ducts and cyclones are
given in Appendix 2.
• Pressure drop ∆P in Ductwork

Total head loss = head loss due to friction + static head + head loss due to fittings
hTotal = h f + hstatic + h fittings ………………………………………………………(12)
The Daicy-Weisbach equation is applied to calculate head loss due to friction.
2
4 fLu
hf =
2 gd
…………………………………………………………..(13)
Where
hf - head loss due to friction
f – friction factor
L – length of pipe
u – fluid velocity
d – bore diameter
g - gravitational acceleration
u 2 8k ⎛ Q 2 ⎞
h fittings = k = ⎜ ⎟⎟...........................................................................................(14 )
2g g ⎜⎝ π 2 d 4 ⎠
hfittings - head loss due to fittings

K – friction coefficient
Q- volumetric flowrate
32
• Pressure drop ∆P across cyclones

The pressure drop is calculated using the Stairmand equation (Leith 1989)
EU ρVin2
∆P = .................................................................................................(15)
2
Where
Eu – Euler number
ρ - fluid density
Vin – fluid inlet velocity
2
⎛ 2(D − b ) ⎞ ⎛⎜ 4ab ⎞
⎟ ....................................................................(16 )
Eu = 1 + 2q ⎜⎜ 2
− 1⎟⎟ + 2
⎠ ⎜⎝ πD x ⎟
2
⎝ Dx ⎠
0. 5 0.5
⎛ Dx ⎞ ⎛ Dx 4A G ⎞
⎜⎜ ⎟ + ⎜⎜ + r ⎟⎟
⎝ 2(D − b ) ⎟⎠ ⎝ 2(D − b ) ab ⎠
q=− ...............................................................(17 )
⎛ 2 ArG ⎞
⎜ ⎟
⎝ ab ⎠
Where
Ar - total wall area of the cyclone body
G - (f/2) wall friction factor
The calculations for the pressure drops are shown in Appendix 3B. The calculated
value for the total pressure drop across the dust extraction system was found to be 7.67
Kpa. The ID fan with a design head of 63.50mm Hg has a pressure drop of 8.46 Kpa.
3.3.2 Saltation velocity
This is defined as the gas velocity necessary to pick particles and transport them in a pipe
without settling. It is therefore important to determine it to check whether the inlet velocity
is adequate enough to overcome any plugging in the ducts.
⎡ ⎛ ⎞ ⎤
⎢ ⎜ bD ⎟ ⎥
VS = 2.055ω ⎢ ⎝ C ⎠ 2
⎥ DC0.0067Vi 3 ............................................................................(18)
⎢⎛ ⎞ 3⎥
1
⎢ ⎜1 − b D ⎟ ⎥
⎣⎝ C ⎠ ⎦
33
Where
⎡ 4 gµ (ρ p − ρ f )⎤ 3
1
ω=⎢ ⎥ ......................................................................................................(19)
⎣⎢ 3ρ 2f ⎦⎥
рp – particle density in lb/ft3
рf – fluid density
b- cyclone inlet width, ft
Dc – cyclone diameter
Vi – gas inlet velocity
ω – function of fluid and particle properties
Due to unavailability of the suitable mesh sizes to measure dust particle sizes, the
researcher had to use values from literature.
3.3.3 Gas Inlet flowrate.
The gas inlet flowrates could not be experimentally determined due to unavailability of
testing equipment hence the inlet flowrate from the drier into the extraction duct is assumed
to be the ID fan capacity of 10m3/s. Theoretical calculations found out that the inlet gas
flowrates into each cyclone would be 5m3/s with a gas velocity of 16.67m/s.
3.3.4 Water recirculation rate
The current set up does not have any flowmeters or pressure gauges installed to indicate
flowrates, as a result the values had to be theoretically estimated basing on the pump’s
delivery head and discharge rate. The water injection rate into the cyclones was found to be
0.0035m3/s under a head of 3m with each outlet discharging 0.00029m3/s at a velocity of
3.71m/s. The water discharged from the cyclones flows back to the melt tank by gravity
and the current pipe layout made it difficult to theoretically determine the liquid flowrate. It
is therefore assumed that cyclones discharge rate is equal to water injection rate
considering that there is no accumulation in the cyclones. This gives an overall flowrate of
0.0075m3/s. The calculations are shown in Appendix 3A.
34
3.3.5 Liquid -to-gas ratio (L/G)
(L/G) is the volume of liquid injected into the cyclone per volume of dust-laden gas
treated. It is calculated as the ratio of liquid volumetric flowrate to gas volumetric flowrate.
⎛ L ⎞ QLiquid
⎜ ⎟= ...............................................................................................................(20)
⎝ G ⎠ Q gas
where
Qliquid – liquid flowrate
Qgas- gas flowrate
Hence for the cyclonic scrubber system, the L/G is
⎛ 3 .5 L 3 ⎞
( )
L ⎜
=⎜ m ⎟ = 0 .7
G ⎜ 0.5 L ⎟⎟
⎝ m3 ⎠
Therefore for a single cyclone the calculated value for L/G is 0.7L/m3.
35
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
4.1 Analysis of Results

The calculated pressure drop across the dust extraction system was found to be 7.64 Kpa
which is less than the extraction fan delivery pressure of 8.64kPa .See Appendix 3B. It can
therefore be concluded that the installed extraction fan is theoretically correctly sized.
However, an experimental measurement of the pressure drop could have enabled a
comparative analysis to verify that the theoretical predictions of pressure drops are in
excellent agreement with experimental measurements. Nevertheless, a conclusion can be
derived from this theoretical value that the problems bedeviling the system are not a result
of an incorrectly sized fan. The gas flowrate into from the drier into the extraction system
was found to be 10m3/s with each cyclone processing 5m3/s of dust- laden gas. Gas
velocities into each cyclone were found to be 16.67m/s which compares well with typical
theoretical values for cyclonic scrubbers. The calculated saltation velocity was found to be
9.695m/s and the gas velocity was 16.67 which proves that the system can handle the dust.
The calculations carried out also revealed that the scrubbing liquid flowrate is 0.0075m3/s
with each cyclone having a liquid injection rate of 3.5l/s. See Appendix 3A. The liquid-to-
gas L/G ratio was found to be 0.7 L/m3 and this ratio lies within the recommended range of
0.9-1.35 which gives optimum performance. L/G ratios of greater than 1.35 L/m3 do not
improve the scrubber performance significantly.
From the results obtained in this investigation, it shows that theoretically the critical
operating parameters lies within the recommended ranges for a good operational
performance. This shows that the causes of the inefficiency are primarily operational which
can be attributed to absence of control and monitoring system. There is no monitoring
equipment such as flowmeters and pressure gauges to check on liquid flowrates and
pressure drops across the cyclones. Currently there is no brix measurement system to
determine when to bleed the liquid from the system and add make up water. This warrants
us to conclude that the water recirculation system is affected mainly by clogging due to too
viscous a sugar solution to such an extent that there will be insufficient water injection into
the cyclones.
36
4.2 Possible causes of inefficiency

In summary the escape of dust from the drier and through the cyclone vortex pathfinder can
be attributed to the following:
1. Insufficient water injection into the cyclone due to plugging or clogging of the
water recirculation system particularly the 10mm diameter injection pipes. This
lowers the L/G ratio drastically thereby affecting negatively the cyclone collection
efficiency resulting in dust escaping into the atmosphere through the vortex
pathfinder. Dust capture by impaction mechanism is dependent on both droplet size
and falling velocity .The open pipe system might be failing to produce a fine droplet
spray with suitable droplet velocity for high dust particle capture by impaction
resulting in lower collection efficiency.
2. Blockage of water recirculation system by highly viscous sugar solution due to
absence of a proper bleeding system and a water make-up mechanism to keep the
recycling liquid within acceptable concentration ranges for good fluid flow.
3. The escape of dust from the drier through manholes and discharge outlet is
attributed to the fact that the drier is operated whilst the manholes are open to allow
ambient air to be drawn into the drier for heat exchange. The suction effect of the
fan therefore decreases as the distance from the fan increases resulting in dust
escaping at the far end of the drier where suction pressure is minimum. Typical
rotary drum driers have hot and cold air draughts blown in through air inlet ducts
with the rest of the drier sealed. This helps in increasing the suction pressure in the
drier.
37
4.3 Possible ways of improving the system
1. To ensure that there is a steady and continuous flow of scrubbing liquid in the
recirculation system, monitoring equipment should be installed in the system. There
is need for a water flowmeter and pressure gauge on the feed pipe to the cyclones.
This would show if there are blockages along the pipe shown by a decrease in
flowrates and corrective measures would be taken. A level indicator should be
installed on the Melt tank to monitor solution levels indicating whether the return
duct from the cyclones is clogged or not. The researcher proposes a control system
as shown on the PID diagram on Appendix 5.
2. The Brix of the sugar solution should be maintained between 20-30% and if it
exceeds this range, the solution attains high viscosity that retards the rate of flow of
the solution in the pipes. When brix levels exceed 30%, fresh water should be added
and the overflow goes to the melter. Such an operation can be achieved by installing
a brix control system or by taking periodic samples to test the solution brix to
establish when to add fresh water to dilute the sugar solution. Appendix 5 shows a
possible brix control monitoring system setup. However due to high capital costs
and maintenance costs it is suggested that periodic sampling is more economical as
compared to installation of brix meters.
3. The current set up was found to have the feed inlet pipe to the melt tank to be at a
lower position relative to the overflow pipe. This implies that during addition of
fresh water to the melt tank, the feed pipe would be sealed without any water from
the cyclones entering the melt tank. Depending on the residence time of the sugar
solution in the feed pipe, this favored accumulation and ultimate blockages of the
feed pipe. The researcher proposes blanking the current feed inlet and joining the
discharge pipes from the cyclones and the drier to a common line which is at 1.12m
from the base of the tank. This reposition is shown on the diagram on Appendix 4B.
4. To monitor the pressure drop across the cyclones, pressure gauges or probes can be
installed on the gas inlet duct and outlet duct and regular readings can be taken. To
check on conformance to set operating values pressure drop measurements can be
periodically taken to check for any deviation from the optimum range. ∆P reading
above or below the specified range can indicate tube plugging or uneven flow
distribution The ∆P is recorded daily. As the pressure drop approaches the extremes
38
of the indicator range, a mechanical measurement is taken to confirm the reading

because plugging may cause inaccurate readings. A possible pressure drop
measurement set up is as shown on Appendix 6
5. A particle size analysis needs to be conducted to check whether the suction pressure
of the fan at the extreme end of the drier gives the required saltation velocity to dust
particles with the current set up of operating the drier semi-sealed.
6. In an effort to improve the water injection distribution and velocity in the cyclones,
a nozzle spray system may be another option because they produce the best water
droplet atomization as compared to open pipes. They also provide the best dust
capture per gallon of water. Installation of correctly sized nozzles complemented by
a meticulous maintenance system might improve the collection efficiency of the wet
cyclonic scrubber. However, the limitation of this option is that nozzles are
susceptible to clogging quickly if the water is not free from non-soluble material
and if the operation is not continuous. Further research has to be done to weigh this
option against the open pipe system.
7. For a meticulous control and monitoring sytem, all operational and maintenance
activities should be recorded periodically in a log sheet as shown in Appendix 7.
39
5.0 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
From the theoretical results obtained, it shows that the wet cyclonic scrubber system at
Hippo Valley Estates meets the standard design requirements as evidenced by its design
operating parameters which falls within the recommended ranges. However, the major
causes for ineffective operation of the system emanate from a flawed water recirculation
system. The system does not have a scrubbing liquid bleeding system which would keep
the sugar solution concentration between 20% and 30% required for a continuous and
smooth recycle system. It is suspected that this posed a clogging problem and with the
absence of flowmeters, the problem could not be identified in time for correctional and
maintenance measures to be instituted. The ultimate blockage of water injection pipes
would result in a low liquid to gas ratio (L/G) in the cyclones therefore rendering the
scrubber inefficient to effectively capture the dust particles. It can therefore be concluded
that the challenges being currently faced can be attributed to poor operating practices. This
could be attributed to absence of a sound monitoring and process control system during
operation. However, an experimental approach to the investigations would have given a
better understanding of the current operational status. This was hampered by the
unavailability of the necessary testing equipment.
40
6.0 RECOMMENDATIONS.
The researcher basing on the theoretical results obtained recommends that to restore or
maintain high operational efficiency, there should be a redesign of the scrubbing water
bleeding system as suggested in Appendix 5. The sugar dust extraction sytem should also
have an automated process control system to enable a sound monitoring approach to be
instituted. The proposed control sytem PID diagram and control mode setup should be as
suggested in Appendix 5 & 6 respectively. A daily operation log sheet complemented by a
preventive and maintenance checklist as shown in Appendix 7 would enable operations to
be closely monitored thereby ensuring high efficiency of the sugar dust extraction system.
Implementation of the suggested possible solutions can yield better results.
41
7.0 REFERENCES
[1] Semrau, K.T., “Practical Process Design of Particulate Scrubbers”, in Industrial Air
Pollution Engineering, V. Casaseno, ed., McGraw Hill, New York, 1980.
[2] Stairmand, C.J. The design and performance of cyclone separators. Transactions of
Chemical Engineers 29,1951
[3] Schifftner, K.C. and H.E. Hesketh,Wet Scrubbers (2nd Edition), Technomic publishing,
Lancaster, PA, 1996.
[4] http://www.en.wikipaedia.org/wiki/ cyclonic scrubbers accessed 10/2008.
[5] Davis, W.T. Ed., Air Pollution Engineering Manual (2nd Edition), Air and Waste
Management, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, 2000.
[6] Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. (EPA), "Stationary Source Control Techniques
Document for Fine Particulate", EPA Document No. EPA-452/R-97-001, Office of Air
Quality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC, September 30, 1997.
[7] Cooper, C.D. and F.C. Alley, Air Pollution Control: A Design Approach, Waveland
Press, Inc., Prospect Heights, IL, 1994.
[8] Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. (EPA), Air Pollution Technology Fact Sheet,
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC, 1990.
[9] Avallone, E. and T. Baumeister, Mark's Standard Handbook for Mechanical Engineers,
McGraw Hill, New York, 1996.
[10] Advanced Air Technologies, Inc., technical information on scrubbers,
www.aatinc.com/scrubbing_zone.htm, 2002.
[11] Vatavuk, William, Estimating Costs of Air Pollution Control, Lewis Publishers,
Chelsea Michigan, 1990.
[12] Cheremisinoff, Paul. N., Ed., Air Pollution Control and Design for Industry, Marcel
Dekker, Inc., New York, 1993.
[13] Hesketh, H.E., “Fine Particulate Collection Efficiency Related to Pressure Drop,
Scrubbant and Particle Properties, and Contact Mechanisms,” Journal of Air Pollution
Control Association, vol. 24, no. 10, 1974.
[14] Vatavuk, William, Estimating Costs of Air Pollution Control, Lewis Publishers,
Chelsea Michigan, 1990.
[15] Leith, D. and W. Licht, 1972. The collection efficiency of cyclone type particle
collectors – A new theoretical approach. AIChE Symposium Series
42
[16] First, M.W., 1950. Fundamental Factors in the Design of Cyclone Dust Collectors.
Ph.D. dissertation. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University.
[17] Stairmand, C.J. 1949. Pressure drop in cyclone separators. Industrial and Engineering
Chemistry.
[18] Lapple, C.E. and H.J. Kamack, “Performance of Wet Dust Scrubbers”, Chemical
Engineering Progress, vol. 51, March 1955.
[19] Semrau, K.T., “Practical Process Design of Particulate Scrubbers”, in Industrial Air
Pollution Engineering, V. Casaseno, ed., McGraw Hill, New York, 1980.
[20] Schifftner, Kenneth C. Air pollution Control Equipment Selection Guide, Lewis
Publishers, Washington D.C., 2002.
43
44
APPENDIX 3A
Water Recirculation system
Pipe Fluid
Flow Q Length L Friction
Section diameter 3 velocity u Re e/d Head loss Fittings Head loss Total Head loss (m)
(m /s) (m) factor
(m) (m/s)
hf (m) hcont (m) hstatic(m) Type Qty K hfitting
suction
0.-1 0.1524 0.03 1.52 3.13E+05 0.9 0.000295 0.0042 0.012 0.9 90 deg Elbows 1 0.60 0.071
Gate valves 1 0.15 0.018
Sub Total 0.012 0.9 0.089 1.000
Discharge
1_2 0.1016 0.03 3.43 469906.61 17.73 0.000443 0.0044 1.8 90 deg Elbows 3.0 0.60 1.1
45 deg Elbows
Tee 2.0 1.8 2.2
Gate valves 1.0 0.15 0.09
2_3 0.1016 0.015 1.713 234953.3 2.8 0.000443 0.0047 0.08 90 deg Elbows
45 deg Elbows
Tee
Gate valves 1.0 0.15 0.022
2_ 4 0.1016 0.015 1.713 234953.3 2.0 0.000443 0.0047 0.1 Tee 1.0 1.8 0.3
4_5 0.1016 0.0075 0.856 117476.7 3.3 0.000443 0.00490 0.024 Tee 1 1.8 0.1
4.-8 0.1016 0.0075 0.856 117476.7 0.2 0.000443 0.00490 0.00144 Tee 1 1.8 0.1
5.-6 0.0381 0.00347 3.043 156524.0 0.4 0.00118 0.0055 0.109 0.146 Gate valve 1 0.15 0.07
5.-7 0.0381 0.00347 3.043 156524.0 0.4 0.00118 0.0055 0.109 Gate valve 1 0.15 0.07
8.-9 0.0508 0.00347 1.712 117414.4 0.8 0.0009 0.0054 0.1 Gate valve 1.0 0.15 0.02
8.-10 0.0508 0.00347 1.712 117414.4 0.8 0.0009 0.0054 0.1 0.04 Gate valve 1.0 0.15 0.02
SubTotal 2.15 0.18 6.2 3.5 12.0

TOTAL 13.0
Outlet Duct
1.-2 0.1524 2.80 0.00030 90 deg Elbows 2.0 0.15
2.-3 0.1524 2.6 0.00030 Tee 2.0 1.8
3.-5 16.0 90 deg Elbows 1.0 0.15

4.-5
4.-6 0.1524 3.2 0.0003
Total
o
Data (Brix 25, Purity 85, Temp 75 C)
sugar solution density ρ 1076 kg/m3

Pipe roughness e 4.50E-05
sugar solution viscosity µ 7.97E-04 kg/m/s
APPENDIX 3B
Calculating Pressure Loss
Project: B-line drier sugar dust extraction system

Date: 27/12/07
Piping Material: Stainless steel
Pressure Drop in Ductwork
Pipe Gas
Flow Q Length Friction Head loss System head loss Total head loss Total Pressure Loss -
Section diameter velocity u e/d Re Head loss hf Quantity K
(m3/s) L(m) factor (f) hstatic Components (m) (m) Path (Pa)
(m) (m/s)
Inlet Duct
1 10.0 12.73 1.4 4.50E-05 879708.8 0.0032 0.1 90 deg Elbows 0.1
1 45 deg Elbows
2 1 10.0 12.73 2.7 4.50E-05 879708.8 0.0032 0.3 90 deg Elbows 2.0 0.6 9.9 10.2
Outlet Duct
3 0.6 10.0 35.4 32.2 0.000075 1466181 0.0033 45.1 19.0 90 deg Elbows 2.0 0.6 76.5 140.6
45 deg Elbows 5.0 0.4 127.5 127.5
Tee 2.0 1.8 229.5 229.5
Total 507.8 6127.66
Cyclone Pressure Drop
a b De Dc h H B Uin Ar Eu Pressure Drop Total Pressure Drop

0.6 0.5 0.6 1.1 1.1 3.2 0.6 16.67 13.01 4.5 768.7 1537.32
7664.98
Total Pressure drop across the extraction system 7664.98Pa

7.7 Kpa
Constants
3
Air density ρ 1.23 kg/m
Pipe Roughness e 4.50E-05 m
µ
-1 -1
Dynamic viscosity 1.78E-05 kgm s
-1 -1 -1
Gas constant R 287 kj kg k
2
Gravitational acc g 9.81 m/s
The EngineeringToolBox.com Appendix 1-3 25-04-08

APPENDIX 2
DATA (Design specifications)
Fan Melt circulating Pumps

3
Capacity 600m /min 10m3/s Capacity 100000l/h at 80oC 0.03m3/s
Head 63.50mmHg 8464.55Pa Head 15m 15m
Speed 570rpm
motor/spd 60rpm
motor rating motor rating 7.5 Kw (Hp)
Cyclone Dimensions
De
a b De Dc h H B
Units
mm 600 500 600 1100 1100 3200 600
m 0.6 0.5 0.6 1.1 1.1 3.2 0.6
a S
Bore dia Fittings

b (mm) Type Qty
h
Dc
1000 90o elbow 2.0
inlet Duct
o
600 90 elbow 2.0
o
Outlet Duct 45 elbow 5.0
H Tee 2.0
Friction loss coefficients

Fitting K
90o elbow 0.6
o
45 elbow 0.4
Gate valve 0.15
Tee junction 1.8
B
Loss coefficient for sudden contraction
A2/A1 0.1 0.3 0.5 0.7 1.0
Cc 0.61 0.632 0.673 0.73 1
K 0.41 0.34 0.24 0.14 0
8.0 APPENDICES
APPENDIX 1A Sugar Dust Extraction System
Drier No 1
Drier No2 Drier No3
ID Fan
Make up
water
Melt
Tank
C Melter
APPENDIX 1B
0.8
Sweet-Water Recirculation system
d=1.5in
5
7 6
3.5
4
2.0 10 9
d=2in 8
d=4in 2
0.8
2.8
2.65
3.1
0.63 elevation 3
1
17.1
1
0.3
2.6 1.1
16.0 5
Melt
tank
3 4 d=6in
3.2
90o bend
6
APPENDIX 1C
Melt Tank Cyclone Dimensions

De
Melt Tank
0.81 1.12
0.52 a S
0.9 b
h
Dc
B
APPENDIX 2
DATA (Design specifications)
Fan Melt circulating Pumps

3
Capacity 600m /min 10m3/s Capacity 100000l/h at 80oC 0.03m3/s
Head 63.50mmHg 8464.55Pa Head 15m 15m
Speed 570rpm
motor/spd 60rpm
motor rating motor rating 7.5 Kw (Hp)
Cyclone Dimensions
De
a b De Dc h H B
Units
mm 600 500 600 1100 1100 3200 600
m 0.6 0.5 0.6 1.1 1.1 3.2 0.6
a S
Bore dia Fittings

b (mm) Type Qty
h
Dc
1000 90o elbow 2.0
inlet Duct
o
600 90 elbow 2.0
o
Outlet Duct 45 elbow 5.0
H Tee 2.0
Friction loss coefficients

Fitting K
90o elbow 0.6
o
45 elbow 0.4
Gate valve 0.15
Tee junction 1.8
B
Loss coefficient for sudden contraction
A2/A1 0.1 0.3 0.5 0.7 1.0
Cc 0.61 0.632 0.673 0.73 1
K 0.41 0.34 0.24 0.14 0
8.0 APPENDICES
APPENDIX 1A Sugar Dust Extraction System
Drier No 1
Drier No2 Drier No3
ID Fan
Make up
water
Melt
Tank
C Melter
APPENDIX 1B
0.8
Sweet-Water Recirculation system
d=1.5in
5
7 6
3.5
4
2.0 10 9
d=2in 8
d=4in 2
0.8
2.8
2.65
3.1
0.63 elevation 3
1
17.1
1
0.3
2.6 1.1
16.0 5
Melt
tank
3 4 d=6in
3.2
90o bend
6
APPENDIX 1C
Melt Tank Cyclone Dimensions

De
Melt Tank
0.81 1.12
0.52 a S
0.9 b
h
Dc
B
APPENDIX 4A
Before
1
0.3
0.5
2
2.6 16.0 5
Melt
tank
3 4 d=6in
3.2
90o bend
6
After
0.3
o
90o Bend 70
d=6in
Melt
tank 16m
o
30 90o elbow&
Tee joint
4C
4B
Melt Tank
To C-melter
Melt Tank
3.1m3 1.12
0.81
0.52
0.3
0.9
APPENDIX 5
FI PI
Make-up
water
PI
Melt Tank
LI
0.9 BIC
APPENDIX 6
Pressure drop measurement set up
Orifice meter
Fan
Differential pressure Differential pressure

transducer transducer
Data
logger PC
APPENDIX 7
WET CYCLONIC SCRUBBER SYSTEM

DAILY OPERATIONS LOG SHEET
PARAMETER LIMITS READINGS
Scrubber system pressure drop (mmH2O)
Water recirculation rate (m3/h)
pH level
Conductivity
Makeup water flowrate (m3/h)
Blowdown rate (m3/h)
Supply water pressure (kpa)
Visible emissions (excluding water vapor)
Date
Time
Technician
COMMENTS (INCLUDING CORRECTIVE ACTION)

WET SCRUBBER SYSTEM
PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE CHECKLIST
DATE: TECHNICIAN:
WEEKLY PROCEDURES: RESULTS ACTION TAKEN
Check pump & fan motor for unusual

Vibration, noise, or heat
Inspect system for leaks
Check system dampers for proper operation
Check chemical metering pumps & probes for
proper operation
MONTHLY PROCEDURES: RESULTS ACTION TAKEN
Inspect spray nozzle distribution pattern

Inspect/clean flow strainer
Check fan housing drain
Check condition of fan bearings, belts, &
seals
Inspect fan impeller & blades for solids
buildup or erosion
QUARTERLY PROCEDURES: RESULTS ACTION TAKEN
Inspect packing for breakage & settling

Check piping for erosion or plugging
SEMI-ANNUAL PROCEDURES: RESULTS ACTION TAKEN
Calibrate instrumentation
Inspect sump, packing, & ductwork for solids
buildup
Inspect tower internals for corrosion or
breakage
Inspect ductwork, fan, & structural supports
for deterioration/damage
COMMENTS:

Chayamiti Research

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Chayamiti Research

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

NATIONAL UNIVERSITY

OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY

FACULTY OF INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGY

DEPARTMENT OF CHEMICAL ENGINEERING

FINAL YEAR RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT PROJECT

STUDY AND EVALUATION OF WET CYCLONIC

PRESENTED BY : ASIEL CHAYAMITI N0031058M

ACADEMIC SUPERVISOR : MRS 0. KUIPA

SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE BACHELOR OF

To my mom and siblings

2.0 SCRUBBER SYSTEMS OPERATION REVIEW.………………………………...10

3.0 SUGAR DUST EXTRACTION SYSTEM AT HVE……………………………….29

3.2 Overview of the sugar drying process………………………………………………... 30

4.0 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION…………………….…………………….………….36

5.0 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION………………………………………………….40

APPENDIX 1A ….…… HVE Sugar Dust extraction system

APPENDIX 6……………Pressure drop measurement set-up.

Table 1………………….Operating Parameters for Particulate Wet Scrubbers

Fig 2.1…………………..Wet cyclonic scrubber

1.2 RESEARCH OBJECTIVES

1.3 PROJECT JUSTIFICATION

• Air pollution reduction due to effective dust collection systems.

2.0 SCRUBBER SYSTEMS OPERATION REVIEW

2.2 Operating principles of scrubbers

2.2.1 Particle collection mechanism

2.2.2 Types of scrubbers

2.2.2.1 Wet cyclonic scrubbers

Fig 2.1 Wet cyclonic scrubber [4]

2.2.2.2 Venturi scrubbers

Fig 2.2 Venturi scrubber [6]

2.3 Configuration and Operation of wet cyclonic scrubber

2.3.1 System design configuration

Fig 2.3 Schematic of Cyclonic scrubber system

2.3.1.1 Liquid Storage and Delivery System

2.3.1.2 Scrubbing Liquid Injection System

2.3.1.3 Waste Liquid Collection and Disposal

2.3.1.4 Dust-laden gas delivery system

2.3.2 Scrubber System Performance

2.3.2.1 Liquid-to-gas ratio

2.3.2.2 Pressure drop (∆P)

2.3.2.3 Gas inlet velocity

2.3.2.4 Particle Size Distribution and Loading

L/G ratio vs Particle Loading

Figure 2.4: Liquid to Gas Ratio as a Function of Particle Loading [13,20]

2.3.2.5 Droplet Size

Scrubber Type Pressure L/G Ratio Liquid Gas Cut

0.12 - 0.75 0.0675 – 2.7 69-2758. 3.05 2-8

Table 2.1 0perating Parameters for Particulate Wet Scrubbers [5,11]

2.4 Wet Scrubber System Design

2.4.1 PM Distribution and Loading

geometric mean diameter is the aerodynamic diameter of the 50th percentile of PM on a

Figure 2.6 Particle Size Distributions for a PM Source [20]

2.4.2 Collection Efficiency

Collection efficiency as a function of particle size distribution is the cumulative collection

The mass fraction is defined by:

massofparticle int herangeof int erest

2.4.3 Water usage

mPM = mass flowrate of PM,

QT ( H 2O ) = QWevap + Qbleed ………………………………………………………(8)

The total water consumed daily is given by:

2.4.4 Electrical Power usage

2.5 Cost Information

2.5.1 Total Capital Investment

PEC = purchased equipment costs