Are you sure?
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
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 efﬁcient 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 hightemperature 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 ﬂowing gas stream and presumably slide down the
wall, although some particles may be reentrained 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 ﬁnder tube does not create the vortex or the swirling ﬂow. Its function
is to prevent shortcircuiting from the inlet directly to the outlet. Cyclones will work
without a vortex ﬁnder, although the efﬁciency 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 deﬁnition, 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 deﬁned by Newton’s 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 conﬁguration,
shown in Figure 21.2a, reduces efﬁciency. Ensure that particles are given a head
start in the right direction by using the conﬁguration shown in Figure 21.2b.
21.1.1 F
ACTORS
A
FFECTING
C
OLLECTION
E
FFICIENCY
Several factors that affect collection efﬁciency can be predicted. Increasing the inlet
velocity increases the centrifugal force, and therefore the efﬁciency, but it also
increases the pressure drop. Decreasing the cyclone diameter also increases centrif
ugal force, efﬁciency, and pressure drop. Increasing the gas ﬂow rate through a given
cyclone has the effect of efﬁciency shown in Equation 21.2:
(21.2)
where
Pt = penetration (Pt = 1 –
η
)
η
= particle removal efﬁciency
Q = volumetric gas ﬂow
FIGURE 21.1
Schematic of standard cyclone.
Pt
Pt
Q
Q
2
1
1
2
0 5

(
'
`
J
J
.
9588ch21 frame Page 306 Wednesday, September 5, 2001 10:07 PM
© 2002 by CRC Press LLC
Interestingly, decreasing the gas viscosity improves efﬁciency, 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:
µ
= 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 efﬁciency improvement. However, decreasing the gas
temperature also decreases the volumetric ﬂow rate, which affects efﬁciency as
described above in Equation 21.2.
Finally, particle loading also affects efﬁciency. 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 conﬁguration.
Pt
Pt
2
1
2
1
0 5

(
'
`
J
J
µ
µ
.
Pt
Pt
L
L
2
1
1
2
0 18

(
'
`
J
J
.
9588ch21 frame Page 307 Wednesday, September 5, 2001 10:07 PM
© 2002 by CRC Press LLC
Figure 21.3 shows generalized efﬁciency relationships for highefﬁciency con
ventional and highthroughput 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. Highefﬁciency cyclones tend to have long, narrow bodies,
while highthroughput 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 efﬁciency 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 efﬁciency relationships.
N
H
L
L
e b
c
+

(
`
J
1
2
9588ch21 frame Page 308 Wednesday, September 5, 2001 10:07 PM
© 2002 by CRC Press LLC
(21.6)
where
d
px
= diameter of a particle with x% removal efﬁciency
µ
= viscosity
FIGURE 21.4
Cyclone dimensions.
TABLE 21.1
Typical Cyclone Dimensions
High Efﬁciency 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 ﬁnder 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
µ
π ρ ρ
.
9588ch21 frame Page 309 Wednesday, September 5, 2001 10:07 PM
© 2002 by CRC Press LLC
W = inlet width
N
e
= number of effective turns
V
i
= inlet velocity
ρ
p
= density of particle
ρ
g
= density of gas
21.1.3 L
APPLE
’
S
E
FFICIENCY
C
ORRELATION
Unfortunately, the theoretical efﬁciency 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% efﬁciency). To
better match data with reasonable accuracy, the efﬁciency of other particle diameters
can be determined from Lapple’s empirical efﬁciency correlation,
1
which is shown
in Figure 21.5. This correlation can be set up for automated calculations using the
algebraic ﬁt given by Equation 21.7:
(21.7)
FIGURE 21.5
Lapple’s efﬁciency curve.
η
j
p
pj
d
d
+

(
'
`
J
J
1
1
50
2
9588ch21 frame Page 310 Wednesday, September 5, 2001 10:07 PM
© 2002 by CRC Press LLC
where
η
j
= collection efﬁciency of particle with diameter j
d
p50
= diameter of particles with 50% collection efﬁciency
d
pj
= diameter of particle j
Lapple’s efﬁciency curve was developed from measured data for cyclones with
the “standard” dimensions shown in Table 21.1. The efﬁciency 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 efﬁciency.
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.
η
j
p
pj
B
d
d
+

(
'
`
J
J
1
1
50
9588ch21 frame Page 311 Wednesday, September 5, 2001 10:07 PM
© 2002 by CRC Press LLC
(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 conﬁguration parameter
Q = volumetric gas ﬂow
ρ
p
= particle density
C
′
= cunningham slip correction factor
µ
= gas viscosity
The geometric conﬁguration parameter is estimated based on the cyclone con
ﬁguration. 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 efﬁciency. In the Leith and Licht model, a larger
geometric conﬁguration parameter results in a higher predicted efﬁciency.
TABLE 21.2
Geometric Conﬁguration 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 ﬁnder S/D 0.625 0.5 0.5
Dust outlet diameter D
d
/D 0.25 0.375 0.4
Geometric conﬁguration paramater K 402.9 551.3 699.2
η − −
( )
1 exp Ψd
p
M
M
m
+
1
1
m D
T
c
− −
( )

(
`
J
]
]
]
1 1 0 67
283
0 14
0 3
.
.
.
Ψ
′ + ( )
]
]
]
2
1
18
3
2
KQ C m
D
p
C
M
ρ
µ
9588ch21 frame Page 312 Wednesday, September 5, 2001 10:07 PM
© 2002 by CRC Press LLC
21.1.5 C
OMPARISON
OF
E
FFICIENCY
M
ODEL
R
ESULTS
Efﬁciency 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 conﬁguration. Figure 21.7
shows cyclone efﬁciency curves as a function of particle diameter based on several
sources. Each curve is based upon the same gas ﬂow and gas and particle conditions.
The lowest efﬁciency is predicted by Lapple’s curve for a standard cyclone. Inter
estingly, the Leith and Licht model for the same standard cyclone predicts a signif
icantly higher efﬁciency. The Leith and Licht model for the higher efﬁciency 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 signiﬁcant predicted performance improvement. Perhaps the vendors
were being overoptimistic about their designs, or perhaps there have been signiﬁcant
improvements in cyclone design over the years. It does point out that performance
guarantees for cyclones must be written with speciﬁc 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 efﬁciency curves.
9588ch21 frame Page 313 Wednesday, September 5, 2001 10:07 PM
© 2002 by CRC Press LLC
(21.10)
where
∆
P = pressure drop
ρ
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 conﬁguration 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 conﬁguration 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 conﬁguration 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 speciﬁcation is wellwritten and
can be documented for the expected conditions.
∆P
g
V N
c
g i H
1
2
2
ρ
N K
D
D
H P
e

(
'
`
J
J ∆ 1
2
N K
HW
D
H P
e
∆ 2 2
9588ch21 frame Page 314 Wednesday, September 5, 2001 10:07 PM
© 2002 by CRC Press LLC
21.3 SALTATION
The previous discussion of efﬁciency and pressure drop leaves the impression that
continually increasing the inlet gas velocity can give incrementally increasing efﬁ
ciency. However, the concept of “saltation” by Kalen and Zenz
7
indicates that, more
than just diminishing return with increased velocity, collection efﬁciency 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 ﬂuid 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
µ
= gas viscosity, lbm/ftsec
ρ
p
= particle density, lbm/ft
3
ρ
g
= gas density, lbm/ft
3
W = width of inlet opening, ft
The maximum collection efﬁciency 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 efﬁciency 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 efﬁciency, 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
.
. .
.
.
.
µ
ρ ρ
ρ
9588ch21 frame Page 315 Wednesday, September 5, 2001 10:07 PM
© 2002 by CRC Press LLC
reduces efﬁciency. and pressure drop. but it also increases the pressure drop.2a. Because the operating principle of a cyclone is based on using centrifugal force to move particles to the cyclone wall.FIGURE 21.1 FACTORS AFFECTING COLLECTION EFFICIENCY Several factors that affect collection efﬁciency can be predicted.1.2) . Increasing the gas ﬂow rate through a given cyclone has the effect of efﬁciency shown in Equation 21. Increasing the inlet velocity increases the centrifugal force.2b. 21. Decreasing the cyclone diameter also increases centrifugal force. a simple mistake in the piping conﬁguration. and therefore the efﬁciency. efﬁciency.5 (21. Ensure that particles are given a head start in the right direction by using the conﬁguration shown in Figure 21.2: Pt 2 Q1 = Pt 1 Q 2 where Pt = penetration (Pt = 1 – η) η = particle removal efﬁciency Q = volumetric gas ﬂow © 2002 by CRC Press LLC 0. shown in Figure 21.1 Schematic of standard cyclone.
3) where: µ = gas viscosity. which reduces drag force and results in a small efﬁciency improvement. Interestingly. Pt 2 L1 = Pt1 L 2 0. © 2002 by CRC Press LLC . decreasing the gas viscosity improves efﬁciency. High dust loading causes particles to bounce into each other as they move toward the wall. which affects efﬁciency as described above in Equation 21. However. particle loading also affects efﬁciency.5 (21. decreasing the gas temperature also decreases the volumetric ﬂow rate. while drag opposes the centrifugal force.2 Inlet piping conﬁguration.18 (21. driving more particles toward the wall and their removal. Finally. decreases the gas viscosity. Note that decreasing the gas temperature increases the gas density. because drag force is reduced. Centrifugal force drives the particle toward the wall of the cyclone. Increasing gas to particle density difference affects penetration as shown in Equation 21. but contrary to intuition.FIGURE 21.3: Pt 2 µ 2 = Pt1 µ1 0. The terminal velocity of the particle toward the wall is the result of the force balance between the centrifugal and drag forces.2.4) where L = inlet particle concentration (loading).
3 shows generalized efﬁciency relationships for highefﬁciency conventional and highthroughput cyclones.2 THEORETICAL COLLECTION EFFICIENCY The force balance between centrifugal and drag forces determines the velocity of the particles toward the wall. while highthroughput cyclones generate less pressure drop with fat bodies. It simply demonstrates that the dimensions of the cyclones can be tuned to the application.1 illustrate typical cyclone dimensions. 21. Highefﬁciency cyclones tend to have long.3 Generalized efﬁciency relationships.1.FIGURE 21.5) number of effective turns height of the tangential inlet length of cyclone body length of cyclone lower cone The theoretical efﬁciency of a cyclone can be calculated by balancing the terminal velocity with the residence time resulting from a distance traveled in the cyclone. An empirical relationship for the number of effective turns is provided in Equation 21.4 and Table 21. Figure 21. is determined by the number of effective turns that the gas path makes within the cyclone body. which allows time for particles to move toward the wall. Figure 21.6: © 2002 by CRC Press LLC . Relative dimensions are based upon the diameter of the body of the cyclones. narrow bodies. Resident time of particles in the cyclone.5: Ne = where Ne = H = Lb = Lc = L 1 L + c H b 2 (21. This force and time balance results in Equation 21.
21 0.35 0.4 2.5 0.5 0. TABLE 21.6 0.5 0.FIGURE 21.5 1.0 0.25 0.6) where dpx = diameter of a particle with x% removal efﬁciency µ = viscosity © 2002 by CRC Press LLC .7 2.0 0.44 0.4 1.75 1.4 d px x 9µW = 100 π N e Vi ρp − ρg ( ) 0.4 Standard 0.75 2.4 Cyclone dimensions.85 0.5 (21.1 Typical Cyclone Dimensions High Efﬁciency Inlet height Inlet width Gas exit diameter Body length Cone length Vortex ﬁnder Dust outlet diameter H/D W/D De /D Lb /D Lc /D S/D Dd /D 0.8 0.4 High Throughput 0.
The relationship works reasonably well for determining the 50% cut diameter (the diameter of the particle that is collected with 50% efﬁciency).5 Lapple’s efﬁciency curve. W Ne Vi ρp ρg = = = = = inlet width number of effective turns inlet velocity density of particle density of gas 21.3 LAPPLE’S EFFICIENCY CORRELATION Unfortunately.1 which is shown in Figure 21. To better match data with reasonable accuracy.1.5. the theoretical efﬁciency relationship derived above does not correlate well with real data. the efﬁciency of other particle diameters can be determined from Lapple’s empirical efﬁciency correlation.FIGURE 21. This correlation can be set up for automated calculations using the algebraic ﬁt given by Equation 21.7) © 2002 by CRC Press LLC .7: ηj = 1 d 1 + p 50 d pj 2 (21.
typically ranging from 2 to 6.6 illustrates the effect of the slope parameter. Note that the larger value for B results in a sharper cut.FIGURE 21.1. B. B. One is the Leith and Licht model2 shown in Equation 21. the sharper cut results in higher overall mass removal efﬁciency. B.1.8) where B = slope parameter.4 LEITH AND LICHT EFFICIENCY MODEL Other models have been developed to predict cyclone performance.9: © 2002 by CRC Press LLC . to the correlation: ηj = 1 d 1 + p 50 d pj B (21. 21. The efﬁciency curve can be tailored for different industrial cyclone dimensions by adding a slope parameter. Since more mass is associated with larger particles.6 Effect of slope parameter. Figure 21. where ηj = collection efﬁciency of particle with diameter j dp50 = diameter of particles with 50% collection efﬁciency dpj = diameter of particle j Lapple’s efﬁciency curve was developed from measured data for cyclones with the “standard” dimensions shown in Table 21.
5 2.2 shows relative dimensions for three types of cyclones: the standard cyclone. TABLE 21.5 0.375 551. Table 21.21 0.4 Note that the Stairmand and the Swift cyclones have smaller inlet openings than the standard design.3 T m = 1 − 1 − 0.5 0.3 Swift 0.67D0.14 c 283 ( ) (21.5 0.2 Geometric Conﬁguration Parameter Standard Inlet height Inlet width Gas exit diameter Body length Cone length Vortex ﬁnder Dust outlet diameter Geometric conﬁguration paramater H/D W/D De /D Lb /D Lc /D S/D Dd /D K 0.9a) 0.625 0.5 2. In the Leith and Licht model.25 0.9 Stairmand 0.44 0.9b) K Qρp C′ (m + 1) 2 Ψ = 2 18 µ D3 C where dp DC T K Q ρp C′ µ M (21.4 2. °K dimensional geometric conﬁguration parameter volumetric gas ﬂow particle density cunningham slip correction factor gas viscosity The geometric conﬁguration parameter is estimated based on the cyclone conﬁguration.9c) = = = = = = = = particle diameter in meters cyclone body diameter in meters gas temperature. a larger geometric conﬁguration parameter results in a higher predicted efﬁciency.5 0.4 699. This results in more centrifugal force and increased efﬁciency. the Stairmand design. which means a higher inlet velocity for the same size body.2 © 2002 by CRC Press LLC .5 0.9) (21.4 1.0 2.2 0.η = 1 − exp − Ψ d M p M= 1 m +1 ( ) (21.0 0.3 and the Swift design.5 0.5 1.25 402.
with signiﬁcant predicted performance improvement. The Leith and Licht model for the higher efﬁciency Stairmand and Swift cyclone designs shows incremental improvement over the standard design.7 Cyclone efﬁciency curves. Most correlations are based on the number of inlet velocity heads as shown in Equation 21.1. but not all. or perhaps there have been signiﬁcant improvements in cyclone design over the years. but none of them has been very satisfying. to ensure that vendor guarantees can be measured and substantiated after installation. Perhaps the vendors were being overoptimistic about their designs. 21. Interestingly. The lowest efﬁciency is predicted by Lapple’s curve for a standard cyclone. Figure 21. the Leith and Licht model for the same standard cyclone predicts a significantly higher efﬁciency. Vendor data also were collected for the same set of gas and particle conditions. Part. of the variation can be explained by empirical factors for the cyclone conﬁguration. Several attempts have been made to calculate pressure drop from fundamentals.5 COMPARISON OF EFFICIENCY MODEL RESULTS Efﬁciency models are adequate for getting a fair idea of performance.10: © 2002 by CRC Press LLC . but there can be a rather wide variation in model predictions. Each curve is based upon the same gas ﬂow and gas and particle conditions.FIGURE 21. It does point out that performance guarantees for cyclones must be written with speciﬁc information about the gas and particle properties. including the particle size distribution.2 PRESSURE DROP Pressure drop provides the driving force that generates gas velocity and centrifugal force within a cyclone. 21.7 shows cyclone efﬁciency curves as a function of particle diameter based on several sources.
typically ranging from 12 to 18. however.24 inlet velocity heads for the Swift cyclone design. 6. there is a substantial difference among the correlations. For the standard cyclone conﬁguration described above. Another correlation for number of inlet velocity heads is by Shepherd and Lapple:6 N H = K ∆P 2 where K∆P2 H W De HW De2 (21. the Miller and Lissman correlation results in 12.2.11) where K∆P1 = constant based on the cyclone conﬁguration and operating conditions D = diameter of the cyclone body De = diameter of the exit tube A typical value for K∆P in the Miller and Lissman correlation is 3.12) = = = = constant for cyclone conﬁguration and operating conditions height of the inlet opening width of the inlet opening diameter of the exit tube The value for K∆P in the Shepherd and Lapple correlation is different.8 inlet velocity heads. As can be seen. Again.4 inlet velocity heads for the Stairmand cyclone design. © 2002 by CRC Press LLC . and 9. it is best to rely upon vendors’ experience when your own experience is lacking.10) = = = = pressure drop gas density inlet gas velocity 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 D N H = K ∆P1 De 2 (21. The Shepherd and Lapple correlation results in 8 inlet velocity heads for the standard cyclone dimensions. to enforce a performance guarantee.∆P = where ∆P ρg Vi NH 1 ρ V2 N 2gc g i H (21. ensure that the speciﬁcation is wellwritten and can be documented for the expected conditions.
AIChE Symp. 1974. ft The maximum collection efﬁciency occurs at Vi = 1. 4. Chem. © 2002 by CRC Press LLC . which typically is between 50 and 100 ft/s. 8. Theoretical empirical approach to saltation velocity in cyclone design. Stairmand. 32(9). more than just diminishing return with increased velocity. Flow pattern and pressure drop in cyclone dust collectors. Eng. Calculation of cyclone pressure drop. A correlation for the saltation velocity was given by Koch and Licht:8 ρp − ρg Vs = 2. W.. C. 5. 6. E..067Vi0. REFERENCES 1. Eng.21. F. Eng. Ind. Chem. the concept of “saltation” by Kalen and Zenz7 indicates that. 1951. C. Kalen.055D0. W. C.. and Lapple. ft/s cyclone diameter. but are kept in suspension as the high velocity causes the ﬂuid boundary layer to be very thin.25Vs. B. The design and performance of cyclone separators. presented at meeting of American Soc. Processes use many collector types. Koch. J. May 1951. Series. Lapple. 70(137).. 32. Shepherd. 7. Miller and Lissman. H. and Zenz. 1972. Leith..2 ft/s2 gas viscosity. Eng. 5.. 1940. Eng. and Licht. The collection efﬁciency of cyclone type particle collectors — A new theoretical approach. 3. ft/s acceleration of gravity. lbm/ftsec particle density. collection efﬁciency actually decreases with excess velocity. 1977. AIChE Symp. Trans. 1969. Series.667 4gµ 3ρ2 g where Vs = D = Vi = g = µ = ρp = ρg = W = ( ) 0. New York. 29. P.. December 1940. Ind... C. 126 (68). Steam Heating Eng. However. W.. 2.13) saltation velocity. particles are not removed when they reach the cyclone wall. 84(24). 58. lbm/ft3 gas density. and Licht. Chem.3 SALTATION The previous discussion of efﬁciency and pressure drop leaves the impression that continually increasing the inlet gas velocity can give incrementally increasing efﬁciency.. of Mech.. Swift. lbm/ft3 width of inlet opening.4 D 0. 38. Chem.. B. At velocities greater than the saltation velocity. New design approach boosts cyclone efﬁciency.333 1 − W D (21. D. ft inlet Velocity..333 W 0. E. Dust control in industry.
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
Use one of your book credits to continue reading from where you left off, or restart the preview.