You are on page 1of 4
Chemical Engineering Science 60 (2005) 289 – 292 Shorter Communication <a href=www.elsevier.com/locate/ces Measurement ofthe size, shape and orientation ofconvex bodies Dennis J. Brown , G.T. Vickers , Alan P. Collier , Gavin K. Reynolds Department of Chemical and Process Engineering, The University of Sheffield, Sheffield S1 3JD, UK Department of Applied Mathematics, School of Mathematics and Statistics, The University of Sheffield, The Hicks Building, Sheffield S3 7RH, UK Received 17 March 2004; received in revised form 2 July 2004; accepted 6 July 2004 Available online 15 September 2004 Abstract Different types of solid bodies (particles) with specific shape and size are needed for industrial processes. For spherical particles, ‘sizer’ measurements are usually reported as sphere diameters. For non-spherical particles, particle shape and especially orientation must be taken into account. Particles of a specific shape will present different views when looked at from different directions. We have employed a Camsizer instrument to measure the distribution of projected area under different physical conditions for solid cylindrical particles: • Under ‘ideal’ conditions, corresponding to a uniform distribution of particle orientation, measurements agreed with predictions. The celebrated theorem ofCauchy applies only to this case. • For two other situations, measured and predicted results differed. However, from the experimental data it was possible to infer the particle orientations and hence theoretically predict the projected area distribution. Excellent agreement between theory and practice was then restored. 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Keywords: Particle shape; Cylinder; Projected area; Orientation 1. Particle shape The shapes ofparticles used in practice have been vari- ously described as spherical, sharp-edged irregular, thin and flaky or fibrous ( Davies, 1975 ). It is this shape which domi- nates the way in which particles rest on a fixed surface, move in a fluid and interact and react physically and chemically. Independently ofthe particle property actually measured, the particle size is usually reported as a linear dimension. This may be the diameter ofthe sphere having the same prop- erty, the sphere equivalent diameter or SED ( International Standard, 1998 ). However, SED values for anisodiametric particles have been shown to lack agreement when differ- ent physical criteria are used to measure a given sample Corresponding author. Tel.: +44-114-222-3718; fax: +44-114-222- 3789. E-mail address: g.vickers@shef.ac.uk (G.T. Vickers). 0009-2509/$ - see front matter 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.ces.2004.07.056 ( Jennings and Parslow, 1988 ). In addition, errors have fol- lowed the use ofthe ‘equivalent sphere’ approach to the calculation ofparticle volumes from ‘spheres ofequivalent area’ and particle areas from ‘spheres of equivalent volume’ ( Vickers and Brown, 2001 ). In an evaluation ofmethods for predicting the drag coefficient on particles of different shapes, the best mean error of16% was obtained by using equal volume sphere diameter and sphericity together (see Chhabra et al., 1999 ). The effect of particle shape and orien- tation on settling rates is not well understood: asymmetrical particles may exhibit sliding, oscillating, gliding or turbulent motion ( Heiskanen, 1993 ). 2. Calculations of particle projected area When individual three-dimensional particles are viewed from a distance, they present a two-dimensional image on a " id="pdf-obj-0-2" src="pdf-obj-0-2.jpg">

Chemical Engineering Science 60 (2005) 289 – 292

Shorter Communication

Chemical Engineering Science 60 (2005) 289 – 292 Shorter Communication <a href=www.elsevier.com/locate/ces Measurement ofthe size, shape and orientation ofconvex bodies Dennis J. Brown , G.T. Vickers , Alan P. Collier , Gavin K. Reynolds Department of Chemical and Process Engineering, The University of Sheffield, Sheffield S1 3JD, UK Department of Applied Mathematics, School of Mathematics and Statistics, The University of Sheffield, The Hicks Building, Sheffield S3 7RH, UK Received 17 March 2004; received in revised form 2 July 2004; accepted 6 July 2004 Available online 15 September 2004 Abstract Different types of solid bodies (particles) with specific shape and size are needed for industrial processes. For spherical particles, ‘sizer’ measurements are usually reported as sphere diameters. For non-spherical particles, particle shape and especially orientation must be taken into account. Particles of a specific shape will present different views when looked at from different directions. We have employed a Camsizer instrument to measure the distribution of projected area under different physical conditions for solid cylindrical particles: • Under ‘ideal’ conditions, corresponding to a uniform distribution of particle orientation, measurements agreed with predictions. The celebrated theorem ofCauchy applies only to this case. • For two other situations, measured and predicted results differed. However, from the experimental data it was possible to infer the particle orientations and hence theoretically predict the projected area distribution. Excellent agreement between theory and practice was then restored. 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Keywords: Particle shape; Cylinder; Projected area; Orientation 1. Particle shape The shapes ofparticles used in practice have been vari- ously described as spherical, sharp-edged irregular, thin and flaky or fibrous ( Davies, 1975 ). It is this shape which domi- nates the way in which particles rest on a fixed surface, move in a fluid and interact and react physically and chemically. Independently ofthe particle property actually measured, the particle size is usually reported as a linear dimension. This may be the diameter ofthe sphere having the same prop- erty, the sphere equivalent diameter or SED ( International Standard, 1998 ). However, SED values for anisodiametric particles have been shown to lack agreement when differ- ent physical criteria are used to measure a given sample Corresponding author. Tel.: +44-114-222-3718; fax: +44-114-222- 3789. E-mail address: g.vickers@shef.ac.uk (G.T. Vickers). 0009-2509/$ - see front matter 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.ces.2004.07.056 ( Jennings and Parslow, 1988 ). In addition, errors have fol- lowed the use ofthe ‘equivalent sphere’ approach to the calculation ofparticle volumes from ‘spheres ofequivalent area’ and particle areas from ‘spheres of equivalent volume’ ( Vickers and Brown, 2001 ). In an evaluation ofmethods for predicting the drag coefficient on particles of different shapes, the best mean error of16% was obtained by using equal volume sphere diameter and sphericity together (see Chhabra et al., 1999 ). The effect of particle shape and orien- tation on settling rates is not well understood: asymmetrical particles may exhibit sliding, oscillating, gliding or turbulent motion ( Heiskanen, 1993 ). 2. Calculations of particle projected area When individual three-dimensional particles are viewed from a distance, they present a two-dimensional image on a " id="pdf-obj-0-8" src="pdf-obj-0-8.jpg">

Measurement ofthe size, shape and orientation ofconvex bodies

Dennis J. Brown a , G.T. Vickers b , , Alan P. Collier a , Gavin K. Reynolds a

a Department of Chemical and Process Engineering, The University of Sheffield, Sheffield S1 3JD, UK b Department of Applied Mathematics, School of Mathematics and Statistics, The University of Sheffield, The Hicks Building, Sheffield S3 7RH, UK

Received 17 March 2004; received in revised form 2 July 2004; accepted 6 July 2004 Available online 15 September 2004

Abstract

Different types of solid bodies (particles) with specific shape and size are needed for industrial processes. For spherical particles, ‘sizer’ measurements are usually reported as sphere diameters. For non-spherical particles, particle shape and especially orientation must be taken into account. Particles of a specific shape will present different views when looked at from different directions. We have employed a Camsizer instrument to measure the distribution of projected area under different physical conditions for solid cylindrical particles:

Under ‘ideal’ conditions, corresponding to a uniform distribution of particle orientation, measurements agreed with predictions. The celebrated theorem ofCauchy applies only to this case. For two other situations, measured and predicted results differed. However, from the experimental data it was possible to infer the particle orientations and hence theoretically predict the projected area distribution. Excellent agreement between theory and practice was then restored. 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Particle shape; Cylinder; Projected area; Orientation

1. Particle shape

The shapes ofparticles used in practice have been vari- ously described as spherical, sharp-edged irregular, thin and flaky or fibrous (Davies, 1975). It is this shape which domi- nates the way in which particles rest on a fixed surface, move in a fluid and interact and react physically and chemically. Independently ofthe particle property actually measured, the particle size is usually reported as a linear dimension. This may be the diameter ofthe sphere having the same prop- erty, the sphere equivalent diameter or SED (International Standard, 1998). However, SED values for anisodiametric particles have been shown to lack agreement when differ- ent physical criteria are used to measure a given sample

Corresponding author. Tel.: +44-114-222-3718; fax: +44-114-222-

3789.

E-mail address: g.vickers@shef.ac.uk (G.T. Vickers).

0009-2509/$ - see front matter 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

doi:10.1016/j.ces.2004.07.056

(Jennings and Parslow, 1988). In addition, errors have fol- lowed the use ofthe ‘equivalent sphere’ approach to the calculation ofparticle volumes from ‘spheres ofequivalent area’ and particle areas from ‘spheres of equivalent volume’ (Vickers and Brown, 2001). In an evaluation ofmethods for predicting the drag coefficient on particles of different shapes, the best mean error of16% was obtained by using equal volume sphere diameter and sphericity together (see Chhabra et al., 1999). The effect of particle shape and orien- tation on settling rates is not well understood: asymmetrical particles may exhibit sliding, oscillating, gliding or turbulent motion (Heiskanen, 1993).

2. Calculations of particle projected area

When individual three-dimensional particles are viewed from a distance, they present a two-dimensional image on a

  • 290 D.J. Brown et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 60 (2005) 289 – 292

projection plane. For a sphere, this image is always a circle

but for other convex shapes it depends upon the orientation

ofthe particle, giving a spectrum ofimages. It has long

been known from the work of Cauchy (1908) that the mean

area ofthese projected images is one quarter ofthe total

surface area provided that the body is convex and that all

orientations are equally likely (henceforth referred to as a

‘uniform’ distribution). More recently, it has been explicitly

recognised that this mean value is but one property ofthe

probability density function (PDF) for the projected area

(Walters, 1947; Vickers, 1996; Brown and Vickers, 1998).

From the PDF, it is possible to calculate the probability

that any given range ofareas will actually be measured under

the assumption ofuniformity, which might well be appro-

priate under turbulent conditions. Any discrepancy between

measured and calculated distributions will reveal a bias in

the presentation ofthe particles to the measuring device.

The theoretical PDF has been found analytically for the

major shape classes ofgeneral ellipsoid, general cylinders

(so the including cubes) and some cones (Vickers and Brown,

2001).

Diameter (mm) 2.2 11.5 12.5 Length (mm) 1.8
Diameter
(mm)
2.2
11.5
12.5
Length
(mm)
1.8

Fig. 1. Scatter plot for the dimensions of the cylinders used.

  • 3. Measurements of projected areas

The projected area distributions for a collection of glass

beads were measured using a Camsizer . The beads were

fed from a hopper onto a horizontal vibrating channel and

fell over the end of the channel between a light source and

two digital full-frame CCD cameras. A basic camera reg-

istered the ‘shadow area’ distribution for large areas and a

zoom camera did the same for small areas. The digital im-

ages were processed in real time, with claimed linear mea-

surement limits from 15 m to 90 mm and high precision

obtained between 30 m and 30 mm. The movement ofin-

dividual beads could be followed.

The 152 test objects were cylindrical glass beads, each

ofwhich had a cylindrical central hole (but this was unim-

portant in the process). The arithmetic mean dimensions of

the cylinders (measured by a Zeiss Axiotech microscope)

were

length : 12.09 ± 0.19 mm ,

diameter : 2.07 ± 0.11 mm .

Fig. 1 is a scatter plot ofthe dimensions.

In a typical experiment, the beads were passed through the

system 18 times to give 2727 projected area values (9 short

ofthe possible maximum). For sampling with replacement,

the standard error ofthe 18 mean values was 1.9%.

  • 4. Formulae used in the calculation of PDF for cylinders

  • 1. Cylinders with a uniform distribution of orientations: The PDF for a cylinder of radius a and length l is f 1 , where

f 1 (x) =

0

a 2 2 +

2lax

2 2 x 2

0

a 2 2

2lax

2 2 x 2

(0 <x< 2la),

(2la < x < ),

(0 <x< a 2 ),

( a 2 <x< ),

where = 2 a 4 + 4a 2 l 2 , the maximum value ofthe

projected area. Cauchy’s theorem applies here and so the

mean value ofthe projected area is a(a + l)/2.

  • 2. Cylinders falling end-over-end (tumbling): In this case the axis ofthe cylinders is always at right angles to the camera and the appropriate PDF is now f 2 , where

f 2 (x) =

  

  

2

2 x 2

4

2 x 2

( a 2 <x< 2al),

(2al < x < ).

provided that a 2 < 2al . The celebrated result ofCauchy

referred to earlier does not apply to the tumbling case.

Indeed, the mean value ofthe projected area is 2a( a +

2l)/ . Hence the ratio ofthe total surface area to the

mean value ofthe projected area lies between and 2 /2

(depending upon the shape ofthe cylinders) rather than

being the Cauchy value of4.

  • 3. Cylinders which are always seen lengthways: There is now only one value for the projected area, namely 2al . Trivially, this is also the mean value and so the ratio ofthe total surface area to the mean projected area is (1 + a/l).

D.J. Brown et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 60 (2005) 289 – 292

291

0.1 0.0 0 10 20 30 (mm) 2 f
0.1
0.0
0
10
20
30
(mm) 2
f

x

Fig. 2. Strong vibration. PDFs ( f ) for the projected area (x) ofcylinders. The solid histogram shows the experimental results and the dashed his- togram the theoretical PDF for an isotropic distribution of orientations. The sketches on the left of this figure (and subsequent ones) show typical orientations ofthe cylinders.

To produce the theoretical distributions referred to in the

next section, the formulae given above were averaged over

all the different dimensions for each bead.

  • 5. Experimental results under different conditions

  • 1. Strong vibration ofthe feeder channel: The cylinders were bouncing as they left the feeder channel. Fig. 2 shows plots ofthe PDFs for the experimental (solid line) and the uniform distribution. The agreement between the two is good.

  • 2. Weak vibration ofthe feeder channel: Fig. 3 is a plot of the PDF (f) for the projected area (x) ofthe cylinders. The experimental results are shown by the solid line. The theoretical PDF is for tumbling. Clearly, the results are consistent with the cylinders falling end-over-end past the cameras. Further investigation revealed that the weak vibration had caused the long axes ofthe cylinders to be aligned on the feeder channel.

  • 3. Dropping single beads vertically using a funnel: Fig. 4 shows the experimental and theoretical results for this case. Again the agreement is satisfactory although a few ofthe cylinders showed signs ofrotating.

  • 6. Equivalent spheres revisited

When the orientations are uniformly distributed, the mean

value ofthe projected area is a(a + l)/2 and so the radius

ofthe equivalent sphere is a(a + l)/2. This allows the cal-

culation ofthe volume ofthe equivalent sphere and hence

0.1 0.0 f
0.1
0.0
f
2 0 10 20 (mm) 30 x Fig. 3. Weak vibration. PDFs ( f ) for
2
0
10
20
(mm)
30
x
Fig. 3. Weak vibration. PDFs ( f ) for the projected area (x) ofcylinders. The
solid histogram shows the experimental results and the dashed histogram
is the theoretical PDF for ‘tumbling’.
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
0
10
20
30
(mm) 2
x
f

Fig. 4. Vertical dropping. PDFs ( f ) for the projected area (x) ofcylin- ders. The solid histogram shows the experimental results and the dashed histogram the theoretical PDF.

the construction ofthe solid curve of Fig. 5. When the pre-

sentation ofthe cylinders to the camera is not uniform (i.e.

the orientations are not uniformly distributed over the sur-

face ofa sphere) then the mean value ofthe projected area

is likely to be different and hence the equivalent sphere has

a different radius. In general, if r is the radius ofthe equiv-

alent sphere then the mean projected area is r 2 and so

R V =

actual volume

a 2 l

3a 2 l

=

=

volume ofSED

4

3

r 3

4r 3 .

  • 292 D.J. Brown et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 60 (2005) 289 – 292

2.0 R V 1.0 log r 10 -1.0 0.0 1.0
2.0
R V
1.0
log
r
10
-1.0
0.0
1.0

Fig. 5. The ratio (R V ) ofthe actual volume to the SED volume against

the log ofthe aspect ratio,

r = l/(2a). The solid

curve is for uniform

orientations, the dot–dash line for ‘tumbling’ and the dashed line is for

‘dropping’.

Table 1 The dependence of R V upon the method ofpresentation

Condition ofcylinders

Mean projected area

R V

Uniform distribution

Tumbling

Vertical dropping

a(a

+ l)

2

2a( a + 2l)

2al

3l/a

2(1 + l/a) 3/2

3 3 l/a

8 2( + 2l/a) 3/2

3

8

a

2l

Table 1 shows the values of R V and how it has been cal-

culated for the three orientation distributions (corresponding

to the situations ofrandom, tumbling and dropping). From

this information, the other two curves in Fig. 5 were drawn.

When the aspect ratio, r (the ratio oflength to diameter),

is unity, the values ofthe three functions in Fig. 5 are 0.82,

0.86 and 1.04. For the particles used in our experiments, r

is about 6 and the values are now 0.54, 0.70 and 0.43. The

use ofequivalent-sphere values alone leads to ambiguity

ofinterpretation which may be removed when information

about orientation is added.

7. Conclusions

Which is the recommended way to measure the distribu-

tion ofsize and shape for a collection ofconvex particles?

A first stage is to sample the material and sieve it to pro-

vide sub-samples ofdifferent size ranges. These should be

examined by eye under the microscope and their size and

shape measured, using a micromanipulator or similar device

as needed. Theory should then be used to predict the pro-

jected area distribution under the assumption ofa uniform

distribution oforientations. Ifthe measurements are not in

agreement with the predictions, then attention should be fo-

cused on the measurement environment. Are there features

which suggest the manner in which the orientations may not

be uniformly distributed, due to the measuring device itself

or the application? The cause ofthe discrepancy may be

found by feeding the device with test particles.

The procedure just outlined will sometimes be impracti-

cal. In particular, it may not be possible to insert test par-

ticles into the (industrial) environment. In this case, it will

still be necessary to determine (or at least have some quanti-

tative information on) the orientation distribution of the par-

ticles. Ifthis is not uniform, then some correction will have

to be made to avoid the use ofbiased data. Another common

problem is that more than one particle may be in the field

ofview ofthe camera, but we do not follow this further.

For simplicity, we have only considered circular cylinders.

In fact the PDF (under the assumption of a uniform distri-

bution of orientations) has been found for various shapes

(Vickers and Brown, 2001), particularly ellipsoids (with the

three axes having any values). Indeed, by approximating the

shape ofany convex body by a collection ofplane areas, its

PDF may be found.

Acknowledgement

We thank Professor Michael Hounslow for his advice and

encouragement.

References

Brown, D.J., Vickers, G.T., 1998. The use ofprojected area distributions in particle shape measurement. Powder Technology 98, 250–257. Cauchy, A., 1908. Oevres Complètes d’Augustin Cauchy, 1er Sér, Tome II. Gauthier-Villars, Paris, pp. 167–177. Chhabra, R.P., Agarwal, L., Sinha, N.K., 1999. Drag on non-spherical particles: an evaluation ofavailable methods. Powder Technology 101,

288–295.

Davies, R., 1975. A simple feature-space representation of particle shape. Powder Technology 12, 111–124. Heiskanen, K., 1993. Particle Classification, Chapman & Hall, London. (Chapter 2), ISBN 0412493004. International Standard, ISO 9276H: 1998. (E)—Presentation ofresults of particle size analysis, Part 1: graphical representation. Jennings, A.R., Parslow, K., 1988. Particle size measurement. Proceedings ofthe Royal Society A 419, 137–149. Vickers, G.T., 1996. The projected areas ofellipsoids and cylinders. Powder Technology 86, 195–200. Vickers, G.T., Brown, D.J., 2001. The distribution ofprojected area and perimeter ofconvex solid particles. Proceedings ofthe Royal Society A 457, 283–306. Walters, A.G., 1947. The distribution ofprojected areas offragments. Proceedings ofthe Cambridge Philosophical Society 43, 343–347.