Cyclone Design

Cyclone Design
Cyclones are very common particulate control devices used in many applications,
especially those where relatively large particles need to be collected. They are not
very efcient for collecting small particles because small particles have little mass
that can generate a centrifugal force. Cyclones are very simple devices that use
centrifugal force to separate particles from a gas stream. They commonly are con-
structed of sheet metal, although other materials can be used. They have a low capital
cost, small space requirement, and no moving parts. Of course, an external device,
such as a blower or other source of pressure, is required to move the gas stream.
Cyclones are able to handle very heavy dust loading, and they can be used in high-
temperature gas streams. Sometimes they are lined with castable refractory material
to resist abrasion and to insulate the metal body from high-temperature gas.
A typical cyclone is illustrated in Figure 21.1. It has a tangential inlet to a
cylindrical body, causing the gas stream to be swirled around. Particles are thrown
toward the wall of the cyclone body. As the particles reach the stagnant boundary
layer at the wall, they leave the owing gas stream and presumably slide down the
wall, although some particles may be re-entrained as they bounce off of the wall
back into the gas stream. As the gas loses energy in the swirling vortex, it starts
spinning inside the vortex and exits at the top.
The vortex nder tube does not create the vortex or the swirling ow. Its function
is to prevent short-circuiting from the inlet directly to the outlet. Cyclones will work
without a vortex nder, although the efciency will be reduced.

21.1 COLLECTION EFFICIENCY

When a particle moves at a constant speed in a circular direction, the velocity vector
changes continuously in direction, although not in magnitude. This creates acceler-
ation resulting from a change in direction of the velocity, which is just as real and
just as much an acceleration as that arising from the change in the magnitude of
velocity. By denition, acceleration is the time rate of change of velocity, and
velocity, being a vector, can change in direction as well as magnitude. Force, of
course, is dened by Newtons Second Law (F = ma). Centrifugal force is given by:
(21.1)
where
F = centrifugal force
m = mass of particle
V = velocity of particle, assumed to equal inlet gas velocity
r = radius of cyclone body
21
F
mV
r
2

9588ch21 frame Page 305 Wednesday, September 5, 2001 10:07 PM
2002 by CRC Press LLC

Because the operating principle of a cyclone is based on using centrifugal force
to move particles to the cyclone wall, a simple mistake in the piping conguration,
shown in Figure 21.2a, reduces efciency. Ensure that particles are given a head
start in the right direction by using the conguration shown in Figure 21.2b.

21.1.1 F

ACTORS

A

FFECTING

C

OLLECTION

E

FFICIENCY

Several factors that affect collection efciency can be predicted. Increasing the inlet
velocity increases the centrifugal force, and therefore the efciency, but it also
increases the pressure drop. Decreasing the cyclone diameter also increases centrif-
ugal force, efciency, and pressure drop. Increasing the gas ow rate through a given
cyclone has the effect of efciency shown in Equation 21.2:
(21.2)
where
Pt = penetration (Pt = 1

= particle removal efciency
Q = volumetric gas ow

FIGURE 21.1

Schematic of standard cyclone.
Pt
Pt
Q
Q
2
1
1
2
0 5
j
(
,
\
,
(
.


Interestingly, decreasing the gas viscosity improves efciency, because drag
force is reduced. Centrifugal force drives the particle toward the wall of the cyclone,
while drag opposes the centrifugal force. The terminal velocity of the particle toward
the wall is the result of the force balance between the centrifugal and drag forces.
Increasing gas to particle density difference affects penetration as shown in
Equation 21.3:
(21.3)
where:

= gas viscosity. Note that decreasing the gas temperature increases the gas
density, but contrary to intuition, decreases the gas viscosity, which reduces drag
force and results in a small efciency improvement. However, decreasing the gas
temperature also decreases the volumetric ow rate, which affects efciency as
described above in Equation 21.2.
Finally, particle loading also affects efciency. High dust loading causes particles
to bounce into each other as they move toward the wall, driving more particles
toward the wall and their removal.
(21.4)
where L = inlet particle concentration (loading).

FIGURE 21.2

Inlet piping conguration.
Pt
Pt
2
1
2
1
0 5
j
(
,
\
,
(
.
Pt
Pt
L
L
2
1
1
2
0 18
j
(
,
\
,
(
.


Figure 21.3 shows generalized efciency relationships for high-efciency con-
ventional and high-throughput cyclones. It simply demonstrates that the dimensions
of the cyclones can be tuned to the application. Figure 21.4 and Table 21.1 illustrate
typical cyclone dimensions. Relative dimensions are based upon the diameter of the
body of the cyclones. High-efciency cyclones tend to have long, narrow bodies,
while high-throughput cyclones generate less pressure drop with fat bodies.

21.1.2 T

HEORETICAL

C

OLLECTION

E

FFICIENCY

The force balance between centrifugal and drag forces determines the velocity of
the particles toward the wall. Resident time of particles in the cyclone, which allows
time for particles to move toward the wall, is determined by the number of effective
turns that the gas path makes within the cyclone body. An empirical relationship for
the number of effective turns is provided in Equation 21.5:
(21.5)
where
N

e

= number of effective turns
H = height of the tangential inlet
L

b

= length of cyclone body
L

c

= length of cyclone lower cone
The theoretical efciency of a cyclone can be calculated by balancing the
terminal velocity with the residence time resulting from a distance traveled in the
cyclone. This force and time balance results in Equation 21.6:

FIGURE 21.3

Generalized efciency relationships.
N
H
L
L
e b
c
+
j
(
\
,
1
2


(21.6)
where
d

px

= diameter of a particle with x% removal efciency

= viscosity

FIGURE 21.4

Cyclone dimensions.

TABLE 21.1
Typical Cyclone Dimensions

High Efciency Standard High Throughput

Inlet height H/D 0.44 0.5 0.8
Inlet width W/D 0.21 0.25 0.35
Gas exit diameter D

e

/D 0.4 0.5 0.75
Body length L

b

/D 1.4 1.75 1.7
Cone length L

c

/D 2.5 2.0 2.0
Vortex nder S/D 0.5 0.6 0.85
Dust outlet diameter D

d

/D 0.4 0.4 0.4
d
x W
N V
px
e i p g
( )
,
,
,
]
]
]
] 100
9
0 5

.


W = inlet width
N

e

= number of effective turns
V

i

= inlet velocity

p

= density of particle

g

= density of gas

21.1.3 L

APPLE

S

E

FFICIENCY

C

ORRELATION

Unfortunately, the theoretical efciency relationship derived above does not correlate
well with real data. The relationship works reasonably well for determining the 50%
cut diameter (the diameter of the particle that is collected with 50% efciency). To
better match data with reasonable accuracy, the efciency of other particle diameters
can be determined from Lapples empirical efciency correlation,

1

which is shown
in Figure 21.5. This correlation can be set up for automated calculations using the
algebraic t given by Equation 21.7:
(21.7)

FIGURE 21.5

Lapples efciency curve.
j
p
pj
d
d
+
j
(
,
\
,
(
1
1
50
2


where

j

= collection efciency of particle with diameter j
d

p50

= diameter of particles with 50% collection efciency
d

pj

= diameter of particle j
Lapples efciency curve was developed from measured data for cyclones with
the standard dimensions shown in Table 21.1. The efciency curve can be tailored
for different industrial cyclone dimensions by adding a slope parameter, B, to the
correlation:
(21.8)
where B = slope parameter, typically ranging from 2 to 6.
Figure 21.6 illustrates the effect of the slope parameter, B. Note that the larger
value for B results in a sharper cut. Since more mass is associated with larger
particles, the sharper cut results in higher overall mass removal efciency.

21.1.4 L

EITH

AND

L

ICHT

E

FFICIENCY

M

ODEL

Other models have been developed to predict cyclone performance. One is the Leith
and Licht model

2

shown in Equation 21.9:

FIGURE 21.6

Effect of slope parameter, B.
j
p
pj
B
d
d
+
j
(
,
\
,
(
1
1
50


(21.9)
(21.9a)
(21.9b)
(21.9c)
where
d

p

= particle diameter in meters
D

C

= cyclone body diameter in meters
T = gas temperature, K
K = dimensional geometric conguration parameter
Q = volumetric gas ow

p

= particle density
C

= cunningham slip correction factor

= gas viscosity
The geometric conguration parameter is estimated based on the cyclone con-
guration. Table 21.2 shows relative dimensions for three types of cyclones: the
standard cyclone, the Stairmand design,

3

and the Swift design.

4

Note that the Stair-
mand and the Swift cyclones have smaller inlet openings than the standard design,
which means a higher inlet velocity for the same size body. This results in more
centrifugal force and increased efciency. In the Leith and Licht model, a larger
geometric conguration parameter results in a higher predicted efciency.

TABLE 21.2
Geometric Conguration Parameter

Standard Stairmand Swift

Inlet height H/D 0.5 0.5 0.44
Inlet width W/D 0.25 0.2 0.21
Gas exit diameter D

e

/D 0.5 0.5 0.4
Body length L

b

/D 2.0 1.5 1.4
Cone length L

c

/D 2.0 2.5 2.5
Vortex nder S/D 0.625 0.5 0.5
Dust outlet diameter D

d

/D 0.25 0.375 0.4
Geometric conguration paramater K 402.9 551.3 699.2

( )
1 exp d
p
M
M
m
+
1
1
m D
T
c

( )
j
(
\
,
,
,
]
]
]
1 1 0 67
283
0 14
0 3
.
.
.

+ ( ) ,
,
]
]
]
2
1
18
3
2
KQ C m
D
p
C
M


21.1.5 C

OMPARISON

OF

E

FFICIENCY

M

ODEL

R

ESULTS

Efciency models are adequate for getting a fair idea of performance, but there can
be a rather wide variation in model predictions. Part, but not all, of the variation
can be explained by empirical factors for the cyclone conguration. Figure 21.7
shows cyclone efciency curves as a function of particle diameter based on several
sources. Each curve is based upon the same gas ow and gas and particle conditions.
The lowest efciency is predicted by Lapples curve for a standard cyclone. Inter-
estingly, the Leith and Licht model for the same standard cyclone predicts a signif-
icantly higher efciency. The Leith and Licht model for the higher efciency Stair-
mand and Swift cyclone designs shows incremental improvement over the standard
design. Vendor data also were collected for the same set of gas and particle condi-
tions, with signicant predicted performance improvement. Perhaps the vendors
were being overoptimistic about their designs, or perhaps there have been signicant
improvements in cyclone design over the years. It does point out that performance
guarantees for cyclones must be written with specic information about the gas and
particle properties, including the particle size distribution, to ensure that vendor
guarantees can be measured and substantiated after installation.

21.2 PRESSURE DROP

Pressure drop provides the driving force that generates gas velocity and centrifugal
force within a cyclone. Several attempts have been made to calculate pressure drop
from fundamentals, but none of them has been very satisfying. Most correlations
are based on the number of inlet velocity heads as shown in Equation 21.10:

FIGURE 21.7

Cyclone efciency curves.


(21.10)
where

P = pressure drop

g

= gas density
V

i

= inlet gas velocity
N

H

= pressure drop expressed as number of the inlet velocity heads
One of the correlations for number of inlet velocity heads is by Miller and
Lissman:

5

(21.11)
where
K

P1

= constant based on the cyclone conguration and operating conditions
D = diameter of the cyclone body
D

e

= diameter of the exit tube
A typical value for K

P

in the Miller and Lissman correlation is 3.2. For the
standard cyclone conguration described above, the Miller and Lissman correlation
results in 12.8 inlet velocity heads.
Another correlation for number of inlet velocity heads is by Shepherd and
Lapple:

6

(21.12)
where
K

P2

= constant for cyclone conguration and operating conditions
H = height of the inlet opening
W = width of the inlet opening
D

e

= diameter of the exit tube
The value for K

P

in the Shepherd and Lapple correlation is different, typically
ranging from 12 to 18. The Shepherd and Lapple correlation results in 8 inlet velocity
heads for the standard cyclone dimensions, 6.4 inlet velocity heads for the Stairmand
cyclone design, and 9.24 inlet velocity heads for the Swift cyclone design. As can
be seen, there is a substantial difference among the correlations. Again, it is best to
rely upon vendors experience when your own experience is lacking; however, to
enforce a performance guarantee, ensure that the specication is well-written and
can be documented for the expected conditions.
P
g
V N
c
g i H
1
2
2
N K
D
D
H P
e
j
(
,
\
,
( 1
2
N K
HW
D
H P
e
2 2


21.3 SALTATION

The previous discussion of efciency and pressure drop leaves the impression that
continually increasing the inlet gas velocity can give incrementally increasing ef-
ciency. However, the concept of saltation by Kalen and Zenz

7

indicates that, more
than just diminishing return with increased velocity, collection efciency actually
decreases with excess velocity. At velocities greater than the saltation velocity,
particles are not removed when they reach the cyclone wall, but are kept in suspen-
sion as the high velocity causes the uid boundary layer to be very thin. A correlation
for the saltation velocity was given by Koch and Licht:

8

(21.13)
where
V

s

= saltation velocity, ft/s
D = cyclone diameter, ft
V

i

= inlet Velocity, ft/s
g = acceleration of gravity, 32.2 ft/s

2

= gas viscosity, lbm/ft-sec

p

= particle density, lbm/ft

3
g
= gas density, lbm/ft
3
W = width of inlet opening, ft
The maximum collection efciency occurs at V
i
= 1.25V
s
, which typically is between
50 and 100 ft/s.
REFERENCES
1. Lapple, C. E., Processes use many collector types, Chem. Eng., 58, 5, May 1951.
2. Leith, D. and Licht, W., The collection efciency of cyclone type particle collectors
A new theoretical approach, AIChE Symp. Series, 126 (68), 1972.
3. Stairmand, C. J., The design and performance of cyclone separators, Trans. Ind.
Chem. Eng., 29, 1951.
4. Swift, P., Dust control in industry, Steam Heating Eng., 38, 1969.
5. Miller and Lissman, Calculation of cyclone pressure drop, presented at meeting of
American Soc. of Mech. Eng., New York, December 1940.
6. Shepherd, C. B. and Lapple, C. E., Flow pattern and pressure drop in cyclone dust
collectors, Ind. Eng. Chem., 32(9), 1940.
7. Kalen, B., and Zenz, F., Theoretical empirical approach to saltation velocity in cyclone
design, AIChE Symp. Series, 70(137), 1974.
8. Koch, W. H. and Licht, W., New design approach boosts cyclone efciency, Chem.
Eng., 84(24), 1977.
V D V g
W
D
W
D
s i
p g
g
( )
,
,
,
]
]
]
]
j
(
\
,
j
(
\
,
,
,
]
]
]
2 055 4
3
1
0 067 0 667
2
0 333
0 4
0 333
.
. .
.
.
.


Cyclone Design

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Cyclone Design

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Cyclone Design

9588ch21 frame Page 315 Wednesday, September 5, 2001 10:07 PM

You might also like