You are on page 1of 7

Separation and Purification Technology 85 (2012) 171–177

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Separation and Purification Technology

journal homepage:

Prediction of gas-particle separation efficiency for cyclones: A time-of-flight model

Bingtao Zhao ⇑
School of Energy and Power Engineering, University of Shanghai for Science and Technology, 516 Jungong Road, Shanghai 200093, China

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Modeling the particle separation efficiency has been a topic of interest since the air cyclones was intro-
Received 3 April 2011 duced for gas-particle separation in the fields of environmental science and chemical engineering. In this
Received in revised form 2 October 2011 work, a new simple time-of-flight model is theoretically developed to predict the particle separation effi-
Accepted 4 October 2011
ciency in cyclones. In this model, the equivalent volume method is employed to geometrically modify the
Available online 17 October 2011
cylindrical-conical type cyclone as a right cylindrical cyclone in order to overcome the nonuniform effect
on the particle separation distance. Based on the analysis of the gas flow pattern and the particle dynam-
ics in the cyclone separator, the differential equation for the time-of-flight model is established according
to the principle of particle mass balance. The model can be finally expressed as a simple explicit function
Separation efficiency including the main cyclone dimensions and operating parameters, without the need for solving complex
Time-of-flight equation of mathematical physics. The influences of the short-circuit flow near the bottom of cyclone
Residence time outlet duct and the exchange flow between outer and inner vortex flow are comprehensively considered
to revise the effective residence time of gas flow, a key parameter in the present model. By comparisons
with experimental data as well as other classical separation models for the cyclones with different geo-
metrical configurations and operating conditions, the results show that the present model has a relatively
high predicted accuracy with the mean squared error of 0.0158. It is demonstrated that the present model
has considerable availability for predicting the particle separation efficiency for cyclone separators.
Ó 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction to cyclone design by Chan and Lippmann [6] and Moore and
McFarland [7]. The time-of-flight model assumes that the particles
Cyclone separators are widely used in the fields of air pollution enter the cyclone in a certain radial distance from the cyclone axis,
control and gas-particle separation for aerosol sampling and indus- and must travel outward from this position to the wall to be
trial applications. With the advantages of relative simplicity to fab- collected. The representative research on this theory was contrib-
ricate, low cost to operate and good adaptability to extremely uted by Leith and Licht [8] and Clift et al. [9]. A recent report on
harsh conditions, cyclone separators have become one of the most time-of-flight model was reported by Zhao [10], but his model
important particle removal devices which are preferably utilized in was based on the combination of the critical particle size and
both environmental and chemical engineering. boundary layer separation. In the 1980’s, a hybrid collection model
In order to describe the performance of cyclone separators, was proposed by Dietz [11]. This model considered both particle
many gas-particle separation theories were developed using interchange between the outer and inner vortices across cyclone
different methods with different simplifications and assumptions. and particle migration to the wall. Subsequently, the assumption
All these can be roughly divided into the pure theory, the semi- of this model was justified and extended by Mothes and Löffler
empirical theory and the numerical simulation. The former two in- [12]. Other different hybrid theories also included the particle dif-
clude the equilibrium-orbit model, time-of-flight model and hybrid fusion model by Li and Wang [13] and the boundary layer model
model, etc.; the later mainly refers to the computation fluid for small cyclone by Kim and Lee [14]. In recent years, with the
dynamics (CFD) approach. In detail, the equilibrium-orbit model, development of modern CFD techniques it is now possible to com-
as an early methodology of particle separation, determines the par- putationally simulate the gas-particle fluid flow and separation in
ticle size for which centrifugal force is exactly balanced by the drag cyclone separators. Boysan et al. [15], Zhou and Soo [16] and Grif-
force. Correspondingly, the collection efficiency for the critically fiths and Boysan [17] promoted this approach to comprehensive
sized particle is often assumed to be 50%. This model was succes- applications. Although the CFD approach can provide the relatively
sively developed by Lapple [1], Barth [2] and Muschelknautz and accurate predictions, it usually needs to solve the complex govern-
Trefz [3], Dirgo and Leith [4] and Iozia and Leith [5], and applied ing equations and spend huge computational cost. From this
perspective, simple, accurate and acceptable models for cyclone
⇑ Tel.: +86 21 55272740; fax: +86 21 55273704. separation efficiency are still required.
E-mail address:

1383-5866/$ - see front matter Ó 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
172 B. Zhao / Separation and Purification Technology 85 (2012) 171–177


a cyclone inlet height (m) t time, (s)

b cyclone inlet width (m) t res total gas residence time (s)
B particle outlet diameter (m) vi gas velocity at cyclone inlet (m/s)
c particle concentration (kg/m3) vh tangential gas velocity (m/s)
c0 initial particles concentration (kg/m3) v hw tangential gas velocity at cyclone wall (m/s)
Cc Cunningham correction factor vr radial gas velocity (m/s)
dp particle diameter (m) v rp radial particle velocity (m/s)
D cyclone body diameter (m) z axial coordinate direction (m)
De gas outlet diameter (vortex finder diameter) (m)
h cyclone cylinder height (m) Greek letters
H cyclone height (m) g particle separation efficiency
l natural vortex length (m) g^ predicted particle separation efficiency
P characterized angular momentum parameter in Mothes l gas dynamic viscosity (Pa s)
and Löffler model qg gas density (kg/m3)
Q incoming volumetric gas flowrate (m3/s) qp particle mass density (kg/m3)
Q df gas flowrate of outer downward flow (m3/s)
Q sf gas flowrate of shortcircuit flow (m3/s) Subscripts
Q uf gas flowrate of inner upward flow (m3/s) i cyclone inlet
r radial coordinate direction (m) p particle
Rw cyclone body radius, Rw ¼ D=2 (m) r radial coordinate directions
Rw equivalent (modified) cyclone radius (m) w near the wall
Re gas outlet radius (vortex finder radius), Re ¼ De =2 (m) h tangential coordinate directions
S gas outlet duct length (m)

In most theories the actual cyclone body diameter (cylindrical
diameter) is usually considered as the characteristic dimension to ðD  BÞðS þ l  hÞ
Dc ¼ D  ð3Þ
calculate the separation efficiency. However, for a conventional Hh
cylindrical-conical type cyclone, the distance that particles move or
to the cyclone wall is significantly different between the cylindrical "  2 #
and the conical part of cyclone. It is directly related to the particle pD2 h pD2 ðH  hÞ B B
separation and collection capability. In addition, the previous V cs ¼ þ 1þ þ for l > H  S ð4Þ
4 4 3 D D
time-of-flight models [8,9] did not take fully into account the effects
of the short-circuit flow near the bottom of cyclone outlet duct and
exchange flow between outer and inner vortex flow on the effective  1=2
residence time. In order to describe gas-particle separation in cy- V cs
Rw ¼ ð5Þ
clone separators as accurate and simple as possible, this work fo- pH
cuses on developing a simplified theoretical model for predicting
where l is called as the natural vortex length of cyclone separator. It
cyclone efficiency based on the time-of-flight model. The model is
is defined as the vertical distance from the bottom of the vortex
established based on the revised cyclone diameter and effective res-
idence time. Subsequently, the availability of the model is evaluated
by comparison with experimental data and other classical theories
under the different cyclone geometries and operating conditions.

2. Theoretical approach

2.1. Geometrical model


The geometry of conventional cyclone separator is shown in

Fig. 1. To avoid the nonuniform effect on particle collection dis- b
tance caused by difference between cylindrical and conical shape,
the cylinder-conical geometry is equivalently modified as a right

cylinder cyclone according to the principle of conservation of effec-

tive volume, as shown in Fig. 2. According to the figure, the equiv-
alent cyclone radius can be calculated by:
"  2 #
pD2 h pD2 ðS þ l  hÞ Dc Dc
V cs ¼ þ 1þ þ for l 6 H  S ð1Þ
4 4 3 D D

 1=2 B
V cs
Rw ¼ ð2Þ
pðS þ lÞ
Fig. 1. Schematic diagram of typical cyclone dimensions.
B. Zhao / Separation and Purification Technology 85 (2012) 171–177 173

component of the particle is the same as that of the gas stream,

Rw* Q and the radial gas velocity is neglected.
Re The tangential gas velocity distribution in separation region can
be obtained by a semi-empirical model proposed by Mothes and
z=0 Löffler [12] with considering the wall friction:
z v hw
v h ðrÞ ¼


S+l (if l H-S) or H (if l >H-S)

ðr=Rw Þ½1 þ Pð1  r=Rw Þ
where v hw is the tangential gas velocity in the vicinity of the real cy-
Qsf clone wall and P is the characterized angular momentum
Quf 0.9Q H-S (if l >H-S)
Under the initial assumptions the dynamical relationship acting
l (if l H-S) or

on the particle (the drag force obeys Stokes’ law) in the radial
direction is given by:
d r 18l dr v 2hp
þ 2
 ¼0 ð8Þ
dt C c qp dp dt r

Eq. (8) is not readily solvable, but an approximate solution can

2 2
be obtained by neglecting the second derivative d r=dt . Actually, it
Fig. 2. Schematic diagram of modified cyclone dimensions. is equivalent to considering that the particle moves outward with
the settling velocity in the radial direction [8–13]. Therefore, we
finder to the end of the vortex at which the outer vortex is reversed 2
or turned into the inner vortex. l is actually the effective vortex C c qp dp v 2hp ðrÞ
v rp ðrÞ ¼ ð9Þ
length in cyclone separator if it is less than the dimension H–S. 18l r
Otherwise, H–S should be the effective vortex length because it de-
pends on the geometrical dimensions of cyclone. Considering:
The most famous and widely used relation for estimating the v hp ¼ v h ð10Þ
natural vortex length is the Alexander’ formula [18]:
Eq. (9) then becomes:
!1=3 !
D 2
C c qp dp v 2h ðrÞ
l ¼ 2:3De ð6Þ v rp ðrÞ ¼ ð11Þ
ab 18l r
Afterward, Ji et al. [19], Büttner [20] and Qian and Zhang [21] where Cc is the Cunningham correction factor.
also proposed their expression for l, respectively. Ji’s correlation
gave qualitatively opposite trends with the experimental results
2.3. Separation efficiency
when used to examine the effects of De/D and D2/ab. Büttner
founded Alexander’s formula did not consider the influence of
To obtain the separation efficiency for cyclone separators, a con-
the inlet velocity on the natural vortex length, and suggested that
trol volume is considered as illustrated in Fig. 3. In this control vol-
l had a dependency to cyclone inlet Reynold number Rei. However,
ume, it is assumed that uncollected particles in any plane
this dependency may be obvious for the small cyclones but not for
perpendicular to the cyclone axis presents a status of complete
the industrial ones [22]. Qian et al. proposed a complex correlation
radial back-mixing, the boundary layer near the equivalent wall
which consists of 21 constant, linear, interaction and squared
is neglected and particles which move to the equivalent wall will
terms to determine l using the response surface methodology.
be trapped. If the particle concentration in the control volume is
Although including more cyclone parameters, his correlation does
c, then the particle flux toward the equivalent wall is cv rp ðRw Þ.
not consider the effect of cyclone scale and particle load on l. Actu-
Therefore, over a height dz the sedimentation rate of particles at
ally, the experimental result indicated that the natural vortex
the equivalent wall is 2pRw cv rp ðRw Þdz. Correspondingly, the rate
length is highly related to the vortex instability, vortex intensity,
of particles separated from the control volume is dðpR2 w cdzÞ=dt.
underflow, angular momentum of the spinning vortex core and
According to particle mass balance, we have:
even particle load, etc. [22,23], besides cyclone geometrical dimen-
sions. All these factors make it difficult to model the natural vortex dðpR2
w cdzÞ
length accurately. Although some semi-empirical correlations for ¼ 2pRw cv rp ðRw Þdz ð12Þ
natural vortex length have been attempted by different investiga-
After simplification and rearrangement, Eq. (12) becomes:
tors using different methods, none of the correlations fit all exper-
imental data perfectly well. In terms of acceptability, availability,
universality and simplicity, Alexander’s correlation is finally
R w*
selected to determine cyclone natural vortex length in the present

2.2. Gas-particle dynamics c

To simplify the analytical process, the following assumptions

are made: The particle is spherical in shape, the particle load is
so low that the motion of a particle is not influenced by the
presence of neighboring particle, the tangential and axial velocity Fig. 3. Control volume for particle separation model.
174 B. Zhao / Separation and Purification Technology 85 (2012) 171–177

Table 1
Geometrical dimensions and operating conditions of cyclones compared in this work.

Cyclones Cyclone I Cyclone II Cyclone III Cyclone IV Cyclone V Cyclone VI

Scale Moderate Large Large Large Small Small
D (m) 0.152 0.305 0.250 0.300 0.031 0.031
De/D 0.500 0.500 0.500 0.500 0.330 0.500
a/D 0.542 0.500 0.500 0.500 0.410 0.400
b/D 0.250 0.200 0.200 0.200 0.230 0.160
S/D 0.750 0.500 0.500 0.500 1.160 0.500
H/D 4.000 4.000 4.000 4.000 3.050 2.500
h/D 2.000 1.500 1.500 1.500 1.450 1.000
B/D 0.083 0.375 0.375 0.375 0.480 0.375
vi (m/s) 12.20 10.00 15.20 20.18 3.35 13.33
qp(kg/m3) 1420 870 876 2700 980 1050

Cyclone I: [24]; Cyclone II: [4]; Cyclone III: [5]; Cyclone IV: [10]; Cyclone V: [25]; Cyclone VI: [26].

100 passes through the region between the gas outlet (vortex finder)
5 wall and equivalent wall. When the incoming flow Q arrives at
8 4
the bottom of the gas outlet duct, about 4–16% with an average
Separation efficiency η (%)

80 of 10% of Q becomes short-circuit flow Qsf emitted from the gas

outlet duct [23] because of the radial pressure gradient. The resi-
60 6 dence time in this part should be:
1- Barth (1956)
2- Leith & Licht (1971) pðR2
w  Re ÞS
2 3 3- Dietz (1981) tres1 ¼ ð19Þ
40 Q
4- Mothes & Loffler (1988)
5- Li & Wang (1989) As a consequence of short-circuit flow, approximate 90% of the
7 6- Iozia & Leith (1990)
20 incoming flow Q continues to participate in the formation of the
7- Clift et al. (1991)
outer downward vortex flow and the inner upward vortex flow.
8- Present model
Experimental data If we assume that the interface between outer and inner vortex
0 as well as the interface between downward and upward flow are
0 2 4 6 8 10 all located at r = Re, and the flowrate exchanged between the outer
Particle size dp (μm) downward flow Qdf and inner upward flow Quf is linear [11,12],
then in the effective separation region the effective flowrate is lin-
Fig. 4. Comparison of present model with experimental data from Ref. [24] and early varied from 0.9Q at the location of z = S to 0 at the location of
other theoretical models. z = S + l (if l 6 H–S) or H (if l > H–S).Taking average value of 0.9Q/2
for calculation purpose, the residence time in this part should be:
dc 2v rp ðRw Þdt
¼ ð13Þ
c Rw pðR2 2
w  Re Þl
tres2 ¼ for l 6 H  S ð20Þ
Integrating Eq. (13) with the boundary conditions: c = c0|t=0 and
ð0:9Q Þ=2
t = tres|c=c, yields: or
c 2v rp ðRw Þtres pðR2 2
¼ exp  ð14Þ w  Re ÞðH  SÞ
c0 Rw tres2 ¼ for l > H  S ð21Þ
ð0:9Q Þ=2
According to the definition of the particle grade separation effi-
ciency in cyclone: Therefore, the total residence time tres can be estimated by:
g¼1 ð15Þ
Combining Eqs. (14) and (15), we finally obtain the grade sepa- 100
ration efficiency model:
Separation efficiency η (%)

2v rp ðRw Þt res 80
g ¼ 1  exp  ð16Þ

where v rp ðRw Þ is the particle settling velocity at the equivalent wall 60 1- Barth (1956)
and is calculated according to Eq. (11): 2- Leith & Licht (1971)
2 4 6 3 3- Dietz (1981)
! 40 4- Mothes & Loffler (1988)
C c qp dp v 2 
h ðRw Þ
v rp ðRw Þ ¼  ð17Þ 5- Li & Wang (1989)
18l Rw 8 6- Iozia & Leith (1990)
20 7 7- Clift et al. (1991)
where v h ðRw Þ can be calculated according to Eq. (7): 8- Present model
1 Experimental data
v hw 0
v h ðRw Þ ¼ ð18Þ 0 2 4 6 8 10
ðRw =Rw Þ½1 þ Pð1  Rw =Rw Þ
Particle size dp (μm)
tres is the total residence time of gas flow. To analyze tres the gas
flow distribution in the modified cyclone is also indicated in Fig. 2. Fig. 5. Comparison of present model with experimental data from Ref. [4] and other
It can be seen that the incoming flow Q is unchanged during it theoretical models.
B. Zhao / Separation and Purification Technology 85 (2012) 171–177 175

100 100

Separation efficiency η (%)

Separation efficiency η (%)

80 80

6 8 8 3
60 60 1- Barth (1956)
1- Barth (1956) 4
2- Leith & Licht (1971) 2- Leith & Licht (1971)
2 3 3- Dietz (1981) 2 7 3- Dietz (1981)
40 4 40
4- Mothes & Loffler (1988) 4- Mothes & Loffler (1988)
5- Li & Wang (1989) 6 5- Li & Wang (1989)
7 6- Iozia & Leith (1990) 6- Iozia & Leith (1990)
20 20 7- Clift et al. (1991)
7- Clift et al. (1991)
8- Present model 8- Present model
5 Experimental data
1 Experimental data 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 0 2 4 6 8 10

Particle size dp (μm) Particle size dp (μm)

Fig. 6. Comparison of present model with experimental data from Ref. [5] and other Fig. 8. Comparison of present model with experimental data from Ref. [25] and
theoretical models. other theoretical models.

100 The particle efficiency comparison between theoretical models

and experimental data are illustrated in Figs. 4–9, respectively.
The evaluation parameter, mean squared errors (MSEs) of effi-
Separation efficiency η (%)

80 ciency between theoretical models and experimental data which

3 P
are defined as E2g ¼ 1n ni¼1 ðgi  g
^ i Þ2 , are listed in Table 2. It can be
seen that, in these cases, one particular model may agree better
60 1- Barth (1956) with the specific experimental data than the other models but
6 7 2- Leith & Licht (1972)
none of the models can perfectly match the separation efficiency
4 3- Dietz (1981)
40 4- Mothes & Loffler (1988) for all cyclone separator with different geometrical designs and dif-
5- Li & Wang (1989) ferent operating conditions. The present model, however, still
2 6- Iozia & Leith (1990) shows considerable agreement with the experimental results,
20 7- Clift et al. (1991) although it also employs the assumption of completely radial
8- Present model back-mixing for particles. According to Figs. 4–9 and Table 2, it
1 Experimental data
0 can be found that at least in the experimental cases currently used,
0 2 4 6 8 10 the present model and some classical models including Barth,
Mothes & Löffler, Iozia & Leith and Li & Wang have the better per-
Particle size dp (μm) formance on prediction of cyclone efficiency than other models.
Comparably, a relatively moderate accuracy for efficiency predic-
Fig. 7. Comparison of present model with experimental data from Ref. [10] and
tion is given by the Leith and Licht’s model, a most popular cyclone
other theoretical models.
efficiency model. The prediction discrepancy may be attributed to
the rough estimation of residence time for gas flow. The separation
efficiency calculated by this model also appears to have underesti-
t res ¼ tres1 þ t res2 ð22Þ
mation for larger particles and overestimation for smaller size par-
ticles. The Clift et al.’s model revised the residence time for gas
3. Results and discussion flow as approximately twice as that of Leith and Licht, but it still

In order to evaluate the availability and usability of the new

100 5
model, the separation efficiency curves for different cyclones are
computed and compared with the experimental data in the present
Separation efficiency η (%)

work. These cyclones, investigated by Beeckmans and Kim [24], 80

Dirgo and Leith [4], Iozia and Leith [5], Zhao [10], Kim and Lee
[25] and Xiang et al. [26], include different scales which are config-
60 1- Barth (1956)
ured with the different geometrical dimensions and operated in
8 4 2- Leith & Licht (1971)
different work conditions. Specifically, the diameter of the cyclones
2 3- Dietz (1981)
ranges from 0.031 to 0.305 m and the inlet velocity ranges from 40 4- Mothes & Loffler (1988)
1 7
3.35 to 20.18 m/s, as shown in Table 1. Besides the present model, 5- Li & Wang (1989)
other representative cyclone separation models are employed for 3 6- Iozia & Leith (1990)
20 7- Clift et al. (1991)
comparison and evaluation. These models were developed using
8- Present model
different methods with different simplified assumptions, including 6 Experimental data
the model of Barth [2], Leith and Licht [8], Dietz [11], Mothes and 0
Löffler [12], Li and Wang [13], Iozia and Leith [5] and Clift et al. [9]. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
All models were coded and implemented on a computer with the Particle size dp (μm)
following configurations: processor, Inter(R) Core(TM)2 Duo CPU
P8700 (2.53 GHz); memory, 4.00 GB (DDR2-800 2  2 GB); hard Fig. 9. Comparison of Present Model with Experimental Data from Ref. [26] and
drive, 400 GB (5400 rpm). Other Theoretical Models.
176 B. Zhao / Separation and Purification Technology 85 (2012) 171–177

Table 2
Comparison of mean squared error (MSE) of efficiency between theoretical model and experimental data.

E2g Cyclone I Cyclone II Cyclone III Cyclone IV Cyclone V Cyclone VI All

[2] 0.0492 0.0202 0.0159 0.0126 0.0158 0.0129 0.0187

[8] 0.0139 0.0994 0.0542 0.0273 0.0036 0.0637 0.0480
[11] 0.0344 0.0615 0.0152 0.0324 0.0095 0.0197 0.0264
[12] 0.0096 0.0266 0.0075 0.0007 0.0317 0.0282 0.0198
[5] 0.0381 0.0277 0.0053 0.0081 0.0059 0.0062 0.0128
[13] 0.0457 0.0198 0.0163 0.0090 0.0029 0.0154 0.0162
[9] 0.1034 0.1451 0.0901 0.1187 0.0575 0.0306 0.0829
Present model 0.0123 0.0316 0.0045 0.0055 0.0008 0.0326 0.0158

Cyclone I: [24]; Cyclone II: [4]; Cyclone III: [5]; Cyclone IV: [10]; Cyclone V: [25]; Cyclone VI: [26].

presents relatively poor prediction for cyclone efficiency because it can be accurately modeled. Moreover, due to the limitation of
did not take into consideration the effect of conical shape on the assumptions, the present model is merely suitable to be applied
average distance that particles move to the wall. As important hy- in the dilute, instead of dense gas-particle two-phase flow separa-
brid multi-region models, the Dietz’s and Mothes & Löffler’s mod- tion in cyclones. In the later occasion, the effects of particle load,
els applied the different simplified methods to develop their agglomeration and collision on separation performance can not
models, respectively. For the large and moderate scale cyclones, be easily ignored.
the Mothes and Löffler’s model has good performance on
prediction of cyclone separation efficiency while the Dietz’s model 4. Conclusions
provides the low prediction on separation efficiency due to not
considering the effect of radial particle dispersion and re- A new simple theoretical separation model is proposed to deter-
entrainment at the interface of adjacent region. But for the small mine the collection efficiency for cyclone separators. The model
cyclones, on account of both the short natural vortex length and considers the effects of the cyclone geometrical shape and the
the weak turbulent dispersion the Dietz’s model appears to be effective residence time affected by the short-circuit flow and the
superior to the Mothes and Löffler’s model. As a whole, the particle exchange flow on the gas-particle separation process. The result
separation efficiencies by the present model are consistent with demonstrates that the present model has considerable usefulness
that by the Iozia and Leith’s model, a modified Barth’s model, and reliability when compared with the experimental data as well
which also shows the enormous usefulness for the cyclone separa- as several classical models on the prediction for cyclone efficiency.
tor with the different operating conditions in the present cases. Nevertheless, additional work is still necessary to improve the
This result may be related to the model parameters (particle cut present model and make it more efficient and extensive, particu-
diameter and slope exponent) which are obtained from the fitting larly in the operating conditions of high temperature, high pres-
for large number of experimental data using regression analysis. sure and high particle load, etc.
Additionally, although the Li and Wang’s model gives a similar pre-
diction with the Barth’s model, further investigation indicates that Acknowledgement
it is in conflict with the experimental and other theoretical results
when being used to exame the effect of variation of cyclone outlet This work was sponsored by Shanghai Natural Science Founda-
diameter on separation efficiency [27]. Since this model simplified tion (No. 08ZR1415100).
the cyclone flow as 2D (tangential and radial direction) curved
channel flow, the increasing gas outlet diameter shortens the radial References
separation distance of the curved channel. As a consequence, their
model gives a high prediction on separation efficiency. In fact, [1] C.E. Lapple, Gravity and centrifugal separation, Am. Ind. Hyg. Assoc. Q. 11
(1950) 40–48.
however, increasing gas outlet diameter increases the possibility
[2] W. Barth, Design and layout of the cyclone separator on the basis of new
of particle escape from gas outlet duct via short-circuit flow, result- investigations, B.W.K. 8 (1956) 1–9.
ing in the decrease of separation efficiency. [3] E. Muschelknautz, M. Trefz, Pressure drop and separation efficiency in
It should be noted that in cyclone the particle dispersion and re- cyclones, VDI-Heat Atlas Lj (1992) 1–8.
[4] J. Dirgo, D. Leith, Cyclone collection efficiency: comparison of experimental
entrainment caused by turbulence and particle concentration gra- results with theoretical predictions, Aerosol Sci. Technol. 4 (1985) 401–415.
dient also affect the separation efficiency. In this work, due to using [5] D.L. Iozia, D. Leith, The logistic function and cyclone fractional efficiency,
the assumption of the radial back-mixing, particles can be regarded Aerosol Sci. Technol. 12 (1990) 598–606.
[6] T. Chan, M. Lippmann, Particle collection efficiencies of air sampling cyclones:
as having no radial concentration gradient and be treated as uni- an empirical theory, Environ. Sci. Technol. 11 (4) (1977) 377–382. doi:10.1021/
form distribution. Therefore, particle turbulent dispersion coeffi- es60127a003.
cient in the cyclone [12,13,28,29] is not included in the present [7] M.E. Moore, A.R. McFarland, Performance modeling of single-inlet aerosol
sampling cyclones, Environ. Sci. Technol. 27 (9) (1993) 1842–1848.
simplified model. Actually, smaller particles with less centrifugal doi:10.1021/es00046a012.
force may be more easily influenced by turbulence within cyclone [8] D. Leith, W. Licht, The collection efficiency of cyclone type particle collectors: a
and be much more uniform in radial distribution, while larger par- new theoretical approach, in: air pollution and its control, AIChE Symp. Ser. 68
(1972) 196–206.
ticles with large centrifugal force have a significant concentration [9] R. Clift, M. Ghadiri, A.C. Hoffmann, A critique of two models for cyclone
gradient from cyclone wall to core [4,30]. As a result, for some cy- performance, AIChE J. 37 (1991) 285–289.
clone designs and operating conditions, e.g., experimental data [10] B. Zhao, Development of a new method for evaluating cyclone efficiency,
Chem. Eng. Proc. 44 (2005) 447–451.
from Dirgo and Leith (Fig. 5), the predicted efficiency curve appears
[11] P.W. Dietz, Collection efficiency of cyclone separators, AIChE J. 27 (1981) 888–
to have a relatively little steepness for larger particles. 892.
In addition, extremely high turbulence may enhance the parti- [12] H. Mothes, F. Löffler, Prediction of particle removal in cyclone separators, Int.
cle re-entrainment effect near the wall, resulting in the decrease Chem. Eng. 23 (1988) 231–240.
[13] E. Li, Y. Wang, A new theory of cyclone separators, AIChE J. 35 (1989) 666–669.
of cyclone efficiency to some extent. It is expected that the present [14] C.H. Kim, J.W. Lee, A new efficiency model for small cyclones considering the
model will be improved if the accurate re-entrainment mechanism boundary-layer effect, J. Aerosol Sci. 32 (2001) 251–269.
B. Zhao / Separation and Purification Technology 85 (2012) 171–177 177

[15] F. Boysan, W.H. Ayers, J.A. Swithenbank, A fundamental mathematical [23] A.C. Hoffmann, L.E. Stein, Gas Cyclones and Swirl Tubes: Principles, Design and
modelling approach for cyclone design, Trans. Inst. Chem. Eng. (London) 60 Operation, 2nd Ed., Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, New York, 2007.
(1982) 222–230. [24] J.M. Beekmans, C.J. Kim, Analysis of the efficiency of reverse flow cyclones, Can.
[16] L.X. Zhou, S.L. Soo, Gas–solids flow and collection of solids in a cyclone J. Chem. Eng. 55 (1977) 640–643.
separator, Powder Technol. 63 (1990) 45–53. [25] J.C. Kim, K.W. Lee, Experimental study of particle collection by small cyclones,
[17] W.D. Griffiths, F. Boysan, Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) and empirical Aerosol Sci. Technol. 12 (1990) 1003–1015.
modeling of a number of cyclone samplers, J. Aerosol Sci. 27 (1996) 281–304. [26] R. Xiang, S.H. Park, K.W. Lee, Effects of cone dimension on cyclone
[18] R.M. Alexander, Fundamentals of cyclone design and operation, Proc. Aust. performance, J. Aerosol Sci. 32 (2001) 549–561.
Inst. Mining Metall. (New Series) 152–153 (1949) 203–228. [27] B. Zhao, Development of a dimensionless logistic model for predicting cyclone
[19] Z. Ji, X. Wu, M. Shi, Experimental research on the natural turning length in the separation efficiency, Aerosol Sci. Technol. 44 (2010) 1105–1112.
cyclone, Proceedings of Filtech Europa ’91 Conference, Karlsruhe, Germany 2 [28] A. Ogawa, Diffusion of the fine solid particles in the turbulent rotational air
(1991) 583–589. flow in the vortex chamber, Bull. JSME 27 (226) (1984) 763–772.
[20] H. Büttner, Dimensionless representation of particle separation characteristic [29] R. Salcedo, M.A. Coelho, Turbulent dispersion coefficients in cyclone flow: an
of cyclones, J. Aerosol Sci. 30 (10) (1999) 1291–1302. empirical approach, Can. J. Chem. Eng. 77 (1999) 609–617.
[21] F. Qian, M. Zhang, Study of the natural vortex length of a cyclone with response [30] H. Mothes, F. Löffler, Investigation of cyclone grade efficiency using a light
surface methodology, Comput. Chem. Eng. 29 (10) (2005) 2155–2162. scattering particle size measuring technique, J. Aerosol Sci. 13 (1982) 184–185.
[22] A.C. Hoffmann, R. de Jonge, H. Arends, C. Hanrats, Evidence of the ‘natural
vortex length’ and its effect on the separation efficiency of gas cyclones, Filtr.
Sep. 32 (8) (1995) 799–804.