Professional Documents
Culture Documents
a
,4
Ac
b
B
C
CP
dp
d~
D
Dc
De
f
g
G
h
H
K
l
n
Ne
P
Qg
r
S
SP
T
ut
v
v~
vt
w
wj,
wt*
NOMENCLATURE
gas inlet height
inside surface area exposed to spinning gas
particle collecting surface of cyclone
gas inlet width
dust outlet dia.
cyclone geometry coefficient
modified cyclone geometry coefficient
particle dia.
size of particle collected with 50 per cent efficiency
cyclone dia.
cyclone dia. cm.
cyclone gas exit duct dia.
see equation (7)
acceleration of gravity
friction factor, 0.005
cylinder height
overall height
constant, see equation (3)
distance vortex extends below gas exit duct
vortex exponent, see equation (6)
equivalent number of turns gas makes in cyclone
pressure drop coefficient, see equation (31)
gas throughput
radial distance to vortex centerline from point in vortex
gas outlet duct length
modified cyclone inertia parameter
absolute temperature
see equation (14)
gas velocity through cyclone inlet
see equation (14)
tangential gas velocity
particle migration velocity to cyclone wall
particle terminal settling velocity
terminal settling velocity of critical particle
* Present address: Harvard School of Public Health, 55 Shattuck Street, Boston, Massachusetts
02115, U.S.A.
t Present address: Chemspec, 32 Morvi House, 28/30 Goa Street, Bombay-l, India.
527
528
Y
AH
Ap
~e
q
/
,~
vc
pG
pL
pe
~v
1. INTRODUCTION
CYCLONES are probably the most widely used dust collecting devices. They are
relatively simple and inexpensive to fabricate, operate with moderate pressure losses,
and if properly applied, give long troublefree service. Efficiency is generally good for
dusts where particles are larger than about 5 ~m in dia. Cyclones are frequently
used as final collectors where large particles are to be caught. They can also be used
as precleaners for a more efficient collector such as an electrostatic precipitator,
scrubber or fabric filter.
To design a new cyclone system, or upgrade an existing one, it is necessary to
predict cyclone performance accurately. Over the years, a number of methods have
been developed to predict cyclone pressure drop and efficiency. All make assumptions
regarding the characteristics of gas and particle motion within the cyclone. The
accuracy of the performance equations depends upon how well the assumptions made
in their development reflect the actual operating conditions within the cyclone.
In this paper, several frequently used methods for predicting cyclone pressure drop
and efficiency will be reviewed. One pressure drop and one efficiency equation will
be selected for further analysis. An optimization of cyclone geometry will be made,
and the results will be presented to enable the selection of a theoretically best cyclone
design for a dust collection problem where certain design criteria have been set.
Although many different types of cyclones are used, the present discussion is
limited to cyclones of the cone-under-cylinder layout with tangential gas inlet as
shown in FIG. 1. This is the type most frequently used for industrial gas cleaning.
In this design, particle-laden gas enters the cyclone tangentially through the gas inlet
duct and forms a vortex within the cyclone body. In the region below the gas exit
duct, but above the bottom of the vortex, the spinning gas stream moves radially
inward into a "central core" of low pressure which extends below the gas exit duct.
Upon reaching the central core, the cleaned gas moves up and out of the cyclone
through the gas exit duct. Collected dust moves along the cyclone walls to the dust
exit due to the downward movement of gas at the cyclone walls, aided somewhat by
gravity if the cyclone is installed vertically. Tangential gas velocity, vt, has been found
by SHEPHERDand LAPPLE (1939); FIRST (1950); ALEXANDER(1949) and others, to be
related to radial distance r from the vortex centerline raised to the power n by:
vt
r" = constant.
(1)
I--
529
--I
Here, n is called the vortex exponent. This relationship does not hold within the
cyclone's central core. ALEXA~qDEg (1949) has stated that the distance the vortex
extends into the cyclone depends only on gas inlet and outlet dimensions. Theoretically
then, the vortex need not reach the bottom of the cyclone.
A cyclone's geometry is described if each of the eight dimensions shown in FIG. 1
is known. However, it is often more convenient to state dimensions by expressing
them in dimensionless form, as a multiple of dia., D. The dimensions of the cyclone
are then specified by dia., D and 7 dimension ratios, a/D, b/D, De~D,S/D, h/H, H/D
and B/D. This permits a comparison of the geometric similarity of several cyclones
through a consideration of their dimension ratios, without introducing absolute
magnitude to the cyclone comparison.
TABLE 1. CYCLONE STANDARD DESIGNS
Source
STAIRMAND (1951)
SWIFT (1969)
LAPPLE (1951)
SWIFT (1969)
STAIRMAND (1951)
SWIFT (1969)
Recommended duty
a/D
High emciency
High efficiency
General purpose
General purpose
High throughput*
High throughput
1
I
I
1
1
1
0.5
0.44
0.5
0.5
0.75
0.8
0.5
0.4
0.5
0.5
0.75
0.75
0.5
0.5
0.625
0.6
0.875
0.85
4.0
3.9
4.0
3.75
4.0
3.7
0.375
0.4
0.25
0.4
0.375
0.4
530
2. C Y C L O N E
PRESSURE
DROP
Loss due to expansion of the gas when it enters the cyclone chamber.
Loss as kinetic energy of rotation in the cyclone chamber.
Losses due to wall friction in the cyclone chamber.
Any additional frictional losses in the exit duct, resulting from the swirling
flow above and beyond those incurred by straight flow.
(5) Any regain of the rotational kinetic energy as pressure energy.
Most pressure drop theories consider factors two and three to be most important
in determining cyclone pressure drop. While it is not the purpose of this paper to
discuss the derivations of various pressure drop theories, the final working equations
reported by SHEPHERD and LAPPLE (1940); FIRST (1950); ALEXANDER (1949);
STArer,lAND (1949) and BARTrI (1956) will be presented. All express cyclone pressure
loss as a number of inlet velocity heads, AH. Inlet velocity heads can be converted to
pressure drop in terms of static pressure head, AP, by:
AP
I)02 PG AH
2g PL
(2)
ab
An = K--
De z
(3)
531
where K = 16 for a cyclone with standard tangential inlet, and K = 7.5 for a cyclone
with an inlet vane, i.e. where the inner wall of the tangential entry extends past the
cyclone inner wall to a point halfway to the opposite wall.
Fmsr (1950) Pressure drop equation
First presented the following expression for cyclone pressure loss, which while
similar to the Shepherd and Lapple equation, takes into consideration the additional
factors of cyclone diameter, D, plus cone and cylinder height, ( H - h) and h,
respectively.
ab {
an = ~
12[_Y
[h(n-
h)lD2]'/3J"
(4)
Here, Y, a constant, is 0.5 for a cyclone with no inlet vane, 1.0 for a neutral inlet
vane, and 2.0 for an inlet vane that expands the entering gas stream and touches the
gas outlet duct.
ALEXANDER(1949) Pressure drop equation
Alexander derived the following expression for pressure drop, assuming all pressure
losses are due to kinetic energy losses in the gas stream. His equation is"
1}
ab
46
( D~ 2hI
where
n=l--(1
(0"394D~)'l')(--~-T~ '3
2.5
\283/
(6)
and
0.8 _In(1 1
1 -- n
(7)
Here, Dc is the dia. of the cyclone in cm, and T is the absolute temperature in degrees
K.
STAIRMAND(1949) Pressure drop equation
Stairmand has presented a method of calculating the pressure drop through a
cyclone by:
6 H = 1 + 2 2 \
De
1 q- 2 \-~-ee2]
(8)
where
De
--
4' =
2(/)----
~ 112
b)/
De
q- "2(1)~ b) q
2GA
ab
4GA] x12
"~]
(9)
532
Here, G is a friction factor approximately equal to 0.005 and A is the inside surface
of the cyclone exposed to the spinning gas. A value for A can be calculated from:
~r (D 2 _ De2) %- rrDh %- zrDeS %- -~ (D %- B) (H -- h) 2 -+A = -~
(10)
Stairmand assumes that the total energy loss is due to losses in the cyclone vortex,
plus entrance and exit losses.
BARTH (1956) Pressure drop equation
Barth expresses cyclone pressure drop as a function of the sum of two factors,
Ee and ~l. The factor ~e reflects losses due to entrance to the cyclone and internal
friction and kinetic energy losses. The factor ~l results from losses at the gas outlet.
(11)
where
De{[1--(u,/v,)(~"e = ---~
S) (2~De)a] 2 -- 1}
4.4
eI = (ujvi)2/3 %- 1
u,
vi
--
(12)
(13)
(De/2) (D -- b)~r
2aba %- (H -- S) (D -- b) ~rh
(14)
a g 1 -- 1.2 b/D.
(15)
533
v~
<
m
0
Z
<
e4
n
~
~~
~.1
c,,t
+ - m
534
DAVID LEITH
Method
Correlation coefficient
BARTH (1956)
STAIRMAND (1949)
SHEPHERD and LAPPLE (1940)
ALEXANDER (1949)
FIRST (1950)
0.80
0.77
0.77
0.55
0.53
The Alexander and First methods do not appear to be as good. The correlation
coefficients calculated are given in TABLE 3.
The Barth and Stairmand methods are complex and require knowledge of all cyclone
dimensions. The Shepherd and Lapple approach is simpler; it does not include all
dimensions. However, for these data, the Shepherd and Lapple method appears to
give results about as good as those produced by the more complicated calculation
methods.
3. C Y C L O N E
COLLECTION
EFFICIENCY
A cyclone's grade efficiency curve relates size of particles going to the cyclone to the
cyclone's efficiency on particles of that size. The grade efficiency curve for Stairmand's
high efficiency cyclone (see TABLE 1 for dimension ratios and TABLE4 for operating
conditions) is shown in FIG. 2. Note that efficiency continuously increases with
increasing particle diameter, and approaches 100 per cent asymptotically for sufficiently
large particles.
Various ways to calculate collection efficiency from theoretical considerations have
been developed, and will be discussed briefly in the following sections.
Critical size approach to cyclone efficiency
The efficiency of a cyclone is sometimes characterized by its particle "critical size"
(the size of particles calculated to be collected with 100 per cent efficiency), or by its
"cut size" (the size of particles calculated to be collected with 50 per cent efficiency).
As discussed above, actual collection efficiency approaches 100 per cent asymptotically
for larger particles. The critical size particle then, while calculable from theory, is not
observed experimentally.
535
I00
4-
8o
STAIRMANO
:>,
(1951)
6O
ptimized
design
u
40
uJ
20
I0
Particle
dio.,
15
/~m
Fxo. 2. Cyclone grade efficiency curves, high efficiency standard design and optimized design.
TABLE4. DZMENSZONSANDOPERATINGPARAMETERSFOREXPERIMENTALCYCLONES
Dimension ratio
STAIaMAND0951)
a/D
biD
S[D
De/D
hid
HID
BID
0.500
0.200
0.500
0.500
1.500
4.000
0.375
0.584
0.208
0.584*
0.500
1.333
3.167
0.500
Operating conditions
dia., D
particle density, pp
throughput, Qg
0.203 m
2.0 g c m - 3
0.0627 m a s- 1
0.305 m
1.6 gcm - a
0.288 m a s- 1
* Assumed value.
T h e Stokes' law t e r m i n a l settling velocity of critically sized particles, w~,*, can be
calculated according to BARTH (1956):
ws* =
Qog
2~r(H - - S ) v, 2
(16)
w.r* =
~'(H - - S ) v, 2 Op d,, 2
9 Qg I~G
(17)
536
I00
75
50
u
I.d
25
n' t
/ We*
wflwt* as is shown by Barth in Fro. 3. This figure was developed from experiments
run on a variety of cyclones.
In a similar manner, LAPPLE (1951) showed that actual efficiency increases
gradually with increase in the ratio of dp/dpc, as is shown in FIa. 4. Here, cyclone cut
particle size, dpc, is given by:
r
/.Lab i t / 2
dpc---- 3[2~r~-~pv~Ne ]
(18)
Here, Ne is the effective number of turns the gas makes in the cyclone, a constant
reported by FRIEDLANDER et al. (1952) as varying from 0.5 to 10, with a typical
value of 5.
~
o
oJ
OA
04
06
08
I0
~0
537
r- Qg
w"lJ"
= 1--exPL
(20)
The interior collecting surface of the cyclone, Ac, can be calculated from:
Ac = 7rDh q- ~ (D q- B) (H -- h) 2 q-
(21)
(22)
(23)
and where
De (D2~ ~/3
= 2.3 - ~ \ab]
(24)
and
d
D - - ( D - - B ) ( ( S q - 1 - - h ) / ( H - - h))
(25)
Here, l is the farthest distance the vortex extends below the gas exit duct as given by
ALEXANDER(1949), and dis the dia. of the conical section at that point. 7tis a modified
inertia parameter, reflecting the nature of the gas/particle system to be treated:
7t = pp dp2 vg (n + 1).
18/La D
(26)
538
80
o experimental (1951)
,.~
A;/
oo
....
/!//
g
_
- - - L . . . . . -,
/ 17/I
r /I,/,,,, / j
40
"
-----SPRouLLI"heory (,970)
oI//
/
0
I0
15
Por'hcle dlo., ~m
Fro. 5. Cyclone efficiency vs particle dia., STAIRMAND (1951). Experimental results and
theoretical predictions.
I00
/~
~
/,,~/
~
60
o~-
/
/
/
....
/ / ~ ~ - - - 40
/J /
expertmen'fol (1965)
.............
BARTH theory (1956)
LAPPLEtheory (,951)
I//iI /
SPROULLtheory (1970)
',t
(1972)1
20
/
0
I0
Per-lqcle die,
15
,u.m
FiG. 6. Cyclone efficiency vs particle dia., PETERSON and WHITBY (1965). Experimental
results and theoretical predictions.
(1951) and by PETERSONand WHITBY (1965). Operating parameters for these experimental cyclones are given in TABLE4. FIGURES5 and 6 compare computed efficiency
values with experimental values, and s h o w that at least for these data, the Leith and
CYCLONE
PERFORMANCE
With the exception of the Stairmand pressure drop equation, which applies to all
constructions, the pressure drop and efficiency equations discussed here have been
CyclonePerformanceand Design
539
developed with the typical cyclone of FIG. 1 in mind. Their application to other
designs such as cyclones with scroll type gas entries, cyclones with swirl vane entries,
or "straight through" cyclones in which the gas does not reverse direction, is unknown.
Several factors known from experience to have an influence on cyclone pressure
drop and efficiency are not reflected in the pressure drop and efficiency equations.
No equation accounts for the apparent increase in efficiency as observed by BAXTER
(1968), VAN EBBENHORSTTEI~GBERGEN(1965), and others, and decrease in pressure
drop noted by BRIGGS (1946) and SPROOLL(1966) associated with increasing dust
loading to the unit. The SI~EPHERDand LAPI'LE(1939, 1940) and ALEXANDER(1949)
pressure drop equations do not include vertical dimensions (S/D, h/D or H/D) as
having an influence on pressure drop, despite the fact that increasing length should
increase gas stream friction losses at the cyclone walls. All efficiency equations
assume that once a particle reaches the wall of the cyclone, it is collected. This is in
contrast to the observations of MORII (1968) that large hard particles bounce off
the cyclone walls back into the gas stream. It is also probable that some collected
particles, primarily in the smaller size ranges, will be reentrained from the collector
wall before being discharged through the dust exit duct. Smaller particles may be more
susceptible to reentrainment as they are only collected with difficulty in the first place.
It has been noted by STAIRMAND(1951) that cyclone efficiency increases if the cyclone
walls are wetted, as wetting presumably hinders particle bounce and reentrainment.
No efficiency equation accounts for the increase in collection efficiency noted by
STAmMAND (1951) and CAI'LAN(1968) associated with drawing off a fraction of the
gas throughput from the dust exit. The increase in efficiency associated with the
base draw-off has been attributed to a reduction in dust reentrainment near the dust
exit. Another effect of the draw off may be to induce the vortex to run the full length
of the cyclone, rather than ending some distance above the bottom of the cyclone as
has been reported by ALEXANDER(1949). A disadvantage of this practice is that the
gas drawn off, typically 5-15 per cent of the gas throughput, has to be recycled to the
cleaning equipment. The recycle results in a somewhat larger cleaning system being
required, as well as the installation of otherwise unnecessary auxiliary fans.
Although the pressure drop and efficiency equations do consider many factors
influencing cyclone performance, there are other factors still to be accounted for.
The results calculated through the use of these equations remain open to question,
although fundamental trends can be pointed out. With these limitations in mind,
it is possible to explore improving cyclone performance through a theoretical optimization of cyclone geometry. To do this it is necessary to select one pressure drop equation
and one efficiency equation for further analysis. The Shepherd and Lapple pressure
drop equation, equation (3) was selected as it is comparatively simple, yet yields
results about as accurate as the other more complex equations as discussed above.
The Leith and Licht efficiency equation, equation (22) was picked as it appears to
be the most accurate, and may best reflect actual conditions of particle and gas
motion within the cyclone.
The Shepherd and Lapple pressure drop equation does not consider any vertical
dimensions as contributing to pressure drop. From this equation, then, a tall cyclone
should have the same pressure drop as a short one, so long as inlet and outlet dimensions are the same. On the other hand, the Leith and Licht efficiency equation predicts
that the efficiency of a cyclone can be increased ad infinitum if vertical dimensions
540
H/D, hid and S/D are increased equally. To avoid obtaining unuseful results (make
cyclone as long as possible since this increases efficiency at no cost in pressure drop),
values of HID and hid must be fixed before cyclone geometry can be optimized.
This restriction does not compromise the fact that theory shows longer cyclones
should perform better. It does serve to anchor cyclone length so that the influence
of other geometric variables on performance can be examined.
It is helpful to understand the change in efficiency and pressure drop associated
with altering any one dimension of a cyclone. Stairmand's high efficiency, 8 in. dia.
cyclone was selected; its dimension ratios are listed in TABLE 1. The operating parameters for this cyclone are the same as given in TABLE4. The efficiency and pressure
drop this cyclone should exhibit when any selected dimension is decreased to 50 per
cent or increased to 150 per cent of its original value is shown in FIO. 7 for efficiency
and FIG. 8 for pressure drop. All dimensions other than the one being varied were
maintained at their normal (100 per cent) values. Although all dimensions enter the
efficiency equation, inlet height and width, a and b, exit duct dia., De and cyclone
dia., D, are the most important. FIGURE 7 shows the effect of changing a, b, De and
D only. Variations in other dimensions did not add or subtract more than 5 to the
87 per cent efficiency obtained with all dimensions at their original 100 per cent values.
iO0
90
80
c~
g
g
8
70
60
50
I00
50
Orlg,nal
length,
150
percent
541
40
20
a.
13
50
I
I00
Origmol leng'lh,
50
per cenl"
Qg
v~-~ab.
(27)
Before optimizing cyclone geometry, cyclone inlet height and width must be removed
from ~ and moved to C to put all geometry terms together. This can be done by
multiplying ~u by the dimensionless quantity ab/D2 and C by its reciprocal, D2/ab.
Now for any fixed value of ab~/D 2, representing particles of any properties and
gas of any viscosity passing through a cyclone of any diameter with any throughput,
efficiency will be greatest when the cyclone's geometry factor of CD2/ab is greatest.
The quantity CD2/ab contains explicitly or implicitly all seven cyclone dimension
ratios. When varying dimension ratios to maximize this quantity, constraints must be
placed on some of the ratios. This is done to make sure the cyclones described are
physically feasible and within the region where the efficiency equation applies. The
two constraints are:
a
h
~ -~.
(29)
542
DAWDLEIThand DILIPMEHTA
Equation (28) is necessary to keep the gas just entering the cyclone from short
circuiting to the gas exit duct without forming a vortex. Equation (23) for geometry
coefficient, C, was developed for only those cyclones where equation (29) is obeyed.
Combining equations (2, 3 and 27) yields:
ab = P
(30)
where
P =
gPL D 4 AP
8p~ Qo2 "
(31)
Equation (31) defines a cyclone pressure drop coefficient, P. Equation (30) shows how
the terms in P, pressure drop, dia. and throughput, interact with inlet and exit dimensions. To isolate the influence of dimensions from the influence of other factors, it is
necessary to keep P constant. The relationship between inlet and exit dimensions is
then fixed by equation (30).
The length of the vortex in the cyclone, S - k / , need not necessarily reach the
bottom of the cyclone. If it does not, the space between the bottom of the vortex
and the bottom of the cyclone will not be utilized for particle collection. If, on the
other hand, the vortex theoretically extends through the bottom of the cyclone,
excessive turbulence and dust pickup from the dust exit may result. Total cyclone
space utilization calls for the vortex just to reach the bottom of the cyclone:
H
S
l
= ~ q- ~ .
(32)
Solving equation (32) for the dimension ratio S/D with the aid of equations (24 and 30)
yields:
=-~--2.3
(33)
Equation (23) for geometry coefficient, C, shows that C and hence CD2/ab will
increase as both inlet height, a i d and the product of inlet height and width, ab/D 2,
decrease. Inlet height, a/D, appears alone in equation (23) while width, b/D, does not.
For a fixed product ab/D 2, then, C will increase by making a i d smaller and hence
b/D larger. To prevent a sudden contraction in the gas stream entering the cyclone
which might interfere with vortex formation or increase pressure drop, inlet width
b i d should be less than the space between the cyclone wall and the gas exit duct.
Making b/D as large as possible without overstepping this limit leads to:
~) =
--
(34)
With biD fixed, a/D can be found by combining equations (30 and 34):
a
2
-D = P(De/D) z [1 -- (De~D)]"
(35)
543
The substitution of equations (30-35) into equation (23) yields an expression for
-4-(1-
(~_e)2)(2.3
p1/3 (~_e)S/3)A- h
H].
(36)
Examination of equation (36) shows that CD2/aband hence collection etficiency can
be made as large as desired by increasing HID and h/D, as pointed out above. Sometimes cyclone height will be limited by available space for installation. If space is not
a problem, when applying the present means of analysis, it is prudent to limit H/D
and hiD to values where the pressure drop and efficiency equations have been shown
to be valid by comparison with experimental data. Reasonable limits might be:
H
h
= 5
(37)
= 3.
(38)
= 0.375
(39)
4oo!
544
200
1130
u
~o
o
2o
,oi
I I I II
i
~0
J I I I I I
20
50
tO0
200
"P"
! i ]",, F T't-,LI
I ;
i
I
o
, ]
s/o
iS , '
--~ -c-i
O8
O6
o/o
8,,D-- o37~1
I i
oe/o
IN
0,4
02
i~
I~
It
E
c3
I'/
0 I
oo8
0 06
tO
20
50
Cyclone
geometry
I O0
coefhclenf,
200
500
"C"
Fro. 10. Cyclone geometry coefficient, C, vs dimension ratios for optimized cyclones.
equation (22). Gas inlet
inlet height and width,
values of HID = 5, h/D
sion ratios been chosen,
velocity,
a and b,
= 3 and
different
545
(40)
where
[Pe dp2] 1/(2n+2) ~--- [,r]l/(2n+2)
SP =- L1 - ' ~ J
(41)
and
Qg
I/(2n + 2)
CP -- [
LCDu
a-'# D a (n + 1)
(42)
Here the effect of particle and gas properties have been combined into SP, a power of
particle relaxation time, ~-. Relaxation time is that time necessary for a particle to
reach 63 per cent of its terminal settling velocity in a quiescent gas. Note that SP
is not totally independent of dia., D, as the value of n in the exponent is related to D
through equation (6). For most cyclones, n can be taken as about 0.7 without too
much error.
The quantity CP contains the terms relating to optimized cyclone geometry,
CDZ/ab, dia., D and throughput, Qg. Cyclones with the same value of CP will have
the same efficiency on identical particles (particles with the same SP). FIGURE 11
shows different combinations of throughput, Qg, and dia., D, which can be used to
accomplish a given value of CP, for a pressure drop of 7.5 cm of water column.
~ -
~ . 4 m 3s-I
]
E
.
3.2
AP --7.5cm
I
0.8
"o
0.6
o
U
0.4
0.1
02
0.!
20
Cp I
4.0
S- I / ( 2 n + 2 )
FIG. 11. Cyclone dia., D, vs CP with gas throughput and inlet velocity as pammetcxs, and
pressure drop of 7.5 cm water column.
A.~.7/5----n
546
FIGURES 12 and 13 are similar figures, but where pressure drop is 12.5 and 17.5 cm
of water column, respectively. A gas density of 0.012 g cm -3 was used in these three
figures. At any point on FIGS. 11-13, sufficient information is pinpointed to enable
a value for pressure drop coefficient P to be calculated. With P known, the geometry
of the cyclone can be determined as outlined above.
FIGURES 11-13 show the interplay of gas velocity, cyclone diameter, and pressure
drop with collection capability. As an example, consider the design of a cyclone to
have a CP value of 20 s -~/(2"+2). This corresponds to an efficiency of 67 per cent
5 [
I
08
E
06
o
O4
O2
O.t
0
20
CP,
40
S -I/(2nt
2)
Fio. 12. Cyclone dia., D, vs CP with gas throughput and inlet velocity as parameters, and
pressure drop of 12.5 cm water column.
on a 3/zm dia. particle of density 2 g c m - 3 , using equation (40). For a gas throughput
of 0 . 4 m 3 s -1, TABLE 5 lists three sets of design data, taken from FIGS. 11-13,
representative of cyclones operating at 7.5, 12.5 or 17.5 cm of water column pressure
drop, respectively. A comparison of the three sets of data reveals that a higher pressure
drop cyclone will have a smaller dia. The designer can now exercise his economic
judgement. With the cost of fans and power as well as material costs at hand, he can
determine which of the three cyclones is most economical to build and operate for
his application.
Reentrainment of collected dust from the cyclone wall may become a problem if
the velocity of the gas at the wall depends on the velocity of the gas in the inlet to
the cyclone. Reentrainment may not be a problem if the inlet velocity is below
3-4 m s -1. As shown in FIGS. 11-13, cyclones with smaller dia. can achieve higher
values of CP and therefore higher collection efficiency, than can larger dia. cyclones
with the same inlet velocity. Where collection efficiency requirements are high, it may
.6.4
rn3s"1
=17.5cm
\
r I A !\Xo.8
tl X \ , ~
'/'\ )
4
o.a
._o
A3.a
L,~
547
0.2
0.4
0.08
0
40
20
CP, $-t/(2n+2)
Fro.
13. Cyclone dia., D, vs CP with gas throughput and inlet velocity as parameters, and
pressure drop of 17.5 cm water column.
dia.
(m)
Inlet velocity
(m s- ~)
Geometry coefficient
(dimensionless)
7.5
12.5
17.5
For all designs:
CP = 20 s -1/(2"+2)
Qg = 0.4 m a s -1
0.63
0.49
0.41
3.1
3.3
3.5
205
135
105
be better to use a number of smaller dia. cyclones in series to process a given gas
throughput, rather than risk reentrainment from a single, larger cyclone.
5. C O M P A R I S O N
OF STANDARD
DESIGN
The theoretical efficiency of a cyclone dimensioned through the use of the cyclone
o p t i m i z a t i o n p r o c e d u r e can be c o m p a r e d with existing, o r state o f the a r t design
p r o c e d u r e s . This c a n be d o n e b y c o m p a r i n g the g r a d e efficiency curve o f a wellestablished " h i g h efficiency" cyclone o f s t a n d a r d design, with the curve f o r a n optim i z e d cyclone o f t h e s a m e diameter, o p e r a t i n g at the s a m e pressure d r o p , with t h e
s a m e gas t h r o u g h p u t on d u s t o f the s a m e density. A s an e x a m p l e o f a s t a n d a r d high
548
efficiency cyclone, Stairmand's high efficiency design was selected. Its grade efficiency
curve was given in FIG. 2. Operating parameters at which this curve was developed
were given in TABLE4.
For identical operating conditions, equation (31) shows that the pressure drop
coefficient, P, of an optimized cyclone will be 31.5. FIGURE9 shows that for this value
of P, a cyclone with geometry coefficient of 100 should be used. Dimension ratios
for a cyclone with this C value can be taken from FIG. 10. The value of C calculated
using the dimension ratios of Stairmand's high efficiency cyclone is 55. The optimized
cyclone has a C value 82 per cent greater than that of the standard design.
The grade efficiency curve for the optimized cyclone can now be calculated from
equation (22) after determination of IF values for a number of particle diameters.
FIGURE 2 shows the theoretical grade efficiency curve of the optimized cyclone, as
well as the experimentally determined curve of the Stairmand cyclone. There is an
improvement in efficiency through use of the optimized cyclone. Note, however,
that the overall height of the optimized cyclone is 5 D, while that of Stairmand is 4 D.
An alternative route to the grade efficiency curve for the optimized cyclone can
be taken through use of FIG. 11. Here, for dia. and throughput equivalent to
Stairmand's values, a CP value of 27 S - 1 / ( 2 n + 2 ) c a n be identified. Values of S P
calculated from equation (41) can be used with this CP to obtain the same optimized
cyclone grade efficiency curve, using equation (40).
The theoretical pressure drop calculated for the Stairmand cyclone using the
Shepherd and Lapple pressure drop equation is 9.71 cm of water column. This is
considerably above the experimental value of 7.60 cm, which was used above to
calculate P and determine the design of the optimized cyclone to be compared with
Stairmand's. The Stairmand cyclone and its optimized counterpart might also be
compared at the same theoretical pressure drop of 9.71 cm of water. Had the comparison been made at the same theoretical pressure drop, the collection efficiencies
calculated for the optimized cyclone would have been better than those calculated
above. The comparison at 7.60 cm pressure drop, illustrated in FIG. 2, therefore gives
a conservative estimate of collection efficiency for an optimized cyclone design.
6. CONCLUSION
Several means for calculating cyclone pressure drop and collection efficiency are
available. Based on a comparison between experimental data drawn from the literature
and theoretical calculations, the pressure drop calculation methods proposed by
BARTH (1956); STAIRMANO(1949) and by SHEPHERDand LAPPLE(1939, 1940) appear
superior to the methods proposed by ALEXANDER(1949) and by FIRST (1950). The
Shepherd and Lapple approach is the simplest to use of all the methods considered
here, and yields results about as accurate as any. Based on a limited comparison
between literature data and theoretical calculations, the LEITH and LICHT (1972)
method for predicting cyclone collection efficiency appears to be more accurate than
the methods of BARTH(1956) ; LAPPLE( 1951) or SPROULL(1970).
In the past, cyclones have been designed on the basis of past experience rather than
through use of an analytical design procedure. No pressure drop or collection
efficiency theory takes into account all the factors known to influence cyclone
performance. However, bearing these limitations in mind, the Shepherd and Lapple,
549
and Leith and Licht theories were used with an optimization method to yield an
analytical method for designing cyclones to meet any set of specified design criteria.
For one set of criteria, any of several optimized cyclones may be used. The designer
must choose between the alternatives by deciding which is most economically feasible
for his application. The efficacy of the present design method is checked by comparing
a cyclone designed by this method with a standard cyclone design. The unit designed
by the present method has better efficiency characteristics, while operating under the
same conditions.
REFERENCES
ALEXANDERR. McK. (1949) Fundamentals of cyclone design and operation. Proc. Australas Inst.
Min. Met. (New Series) 152-3, 203-228.
BARTH W. (1956) Design and layout of the cyclone separator on the basis of new investigations.
Brenn. Warme Kraft 8, 1-9.
BAXTERW. A. (1968) Source Control by Centrifugal Force and Gravity. K. J. CAPLAN.In Air Pollution,
Vol. III (Edited by STF.RNA. C.). Academic Press, New York.
BRIOOS L. W. (1946) Effect of dust concentration on cyclone performance. Trans. A.LCh.E. 42, 511.
CAPLAN K. J. (1968) Source control by centrifugal force and gravity. In Air Pollution, Vol. III
(Edited by STERN A. C.). Academic Press, New York.
Fms'r M. W. (1950) Fundamental factors in the design of cyclone dust collectors. Doctoral thesis,
Harvard University.
FRIEDLANDERS. K., SILVERMANL., DRINKERP. and FIRST M. W. (1952) Handbook on Air Cleaning,
U.S.A.E.C. Washington (AECD-3361 ; NYO-1572).
LAPPLE C. E. (1951) Processes use many collector types. Chem. Engng. 58, 144-151.
LEITH D. and LICHT W. (1972) Collection efficiency of cyclone type particle collectors, a new
theoretical approach. A.L Ch.E. Symposium Series: Air-1971.
MILLER I. and FREUND J. E. (1965) Probability and Statistics for Engineers. Prentice-HaU, New
Jersey.
MORII Y., SUGANUMAA. and TANAKAS. (1968) On collection efficiency of gas cyclone on coarse
particle range. J. Chem. Eng. Jap. 1, 82-86. (In English.)
PETERSONC. M. and WHrrav K. T. (1965) Fractional efficiency characteristics of unit type collectors.
A S t t R A E J. 7(5), 42-49.
SHEeHERD C. B. and LAPPLE C. E. (1939) Flow pattern and pressure drop in cyclone dust collectors.
Ind. Eng. Chem. 31, 972-984.
SHEeHERD C. B. and LAPPLE C. E. (1940) Flow pattern and pressure drop in cyclone dust collectors.
Ind. Eng. Chem. 32, 1246-1248.
SPROULL W. T. (1966) Effect of dust concentration upon the gas-flow capacity of a cyclonic collector.
A.P.C.A.J. 16, 439--441.
SPROULL W. T. (1970) Air Pollution and Its Control. Exposition Press, New York.
STAIRMANDC. J. (1949) Pressure drop in cyclone separators. Engineering, 16B, 409-411.
STAmMAND C. J. (1951) The design and performance of cyclone separators. Trans. Instn. Chem.
Engrs. 29, 356-383.
STERN A. C., CAPLANK. J. and BUSH P. D. (1955) Cyclone Dust Collectors, Am. Petrol. Inst. Report.
SWIFT P. (1969) Dust control in industry--2. Steam Heat. Engr. 38, 453-456.
VAN EnnENHORSXTENGnERGENH. J. (1965) Comparative studies with cyclones. Staub 25(11), AA A9"