1

Experiment 3: Particulate Emission Control by Spray

Chamber
Group members:
1. Gloria lynn Michelle (55213116055)
2. Muhammad Hafiz Imran Bin Hasnul Nizam (55213116090)
3. Muhammad Shabran Bin Shuhaimi (55213116089)
4. Adwa Amirun Aiman Bin Abd Razak (55213116079)
VERY VERY
POOR GOOD EXCELL
CRITERIA POOR GOOD TOTAL
1 2 3 4 5
1.0 INTRODUCTION (10%) &
OBJECTIVES(5%)
1. State the background to the experiment
conducted.
2. Summary of theories including formulations
related to the experimental work.
3. State the objectives of the experiment
(point form)
2.0 METHOD (20%)
1. Explain step by step used in performing this
experiment. Pictures are best.
3.0 DATA & RESULTS (10%)
1. Include the raw data as taken in the lab
together with the re-copied data.
3.0 DISCUSSIONS (30%)
1. Explanations of the referred tables and/or
graphs are presented
2. Discuss on the findings and relations to the
theory and objective of experiment.
3.Must shows the sample of calculation if
necessary
4.Any citing must tally with those in the
REFERENCES
4.0 CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATION
(10%)
1) Answer your objectives.
2) Summary of the results relates to the
theory
3) Recommendation for future studies
5.0 REFERENCES (5%)
6.0 FORMAT (5%)
7.0 APPENDIX (5%)
 2

1.0 INTRODUCTION

The Spray Chamber System consists of mainly a spray (separation chamber, a water re-
circulation system, a feed container with a valve, an air blower, an outlet dust filter and an air flow
meter with control valve. It is made of durable clear PVC measuring approximately 0.3 m diameter
and 2 m tall. Five different spray nozzles have been installed inside the chamber to produce five
different droplet sizes. A mist eliminator at the top section of the chamber prevents any water
droplets from escaping. The water re-dreulation tank consists of a water tank water pump, liquid
flow meters, pressure gauge and regulator.

An air blower installed at the outlet is capable of drawing 138 ma/hr of air through the
system. Adjusting the inverter controls the air velocity, and instantaneously regulating the blower
speed. A valve is installed below the feed container to control the amount of dust particles sample
introduced into the air stream before being separated inside the chamber. A differential pressure
transmitter has been installed on the control panel for the purpose of pressure drop (DP) readings
across the separation chamber.

For this experiment only two different spray nozzle are being tested its efficiency. The first
nozzle droplet size is 520 µm and the second spray nozzle droplet size is 290 µm. Both of the
inlet particle weight is the same which is 300gm. Only the efficiency is calculated for each
nozzle to determine which particle size is the best to treat pollutants in the air.

1.2 OBJECTIVE

There is one objective in this experiment, which is:

 To determine the effect of droplet size upon separation efficiency of the spray chamber
unit, by using different nozzle.
 3

2.0 METHODOLOGY

1) All the valves are ensured to be closed except valve V9 are initially to be opened.

2) The Centrifugal Water Pump, P1 are switched on.

3) Isolation valve is opened and the control valve is adjusted to set the nozzle
pressure, PT1. The operation guide is based on Table 1.

Table 1: Operation Guide for AP03 Spray Chamber System

Set
Droplet Isolation Control
Nozzle Pressure, Flow meter
Size (µm) valve Valve
PT1

N1 520 V1 2 bar FM1 CV1

N2 290 V2 2 bar FM2 CV2

4) The water flow rate from flow meter FM1 and FM2 is recorded depending on the
nozzle to be tested ( Table1 )

5) The valve V9 is closed. The water level inside the spray chamber is let to increase
until it reached the desired level indicated by the line on the chamber. The valve
V9 is adjusted once to maintain the water height. The objective of this step is to
prevent the air sucked in by the blower flows from the bottom part of the chamber.

6) The air blower speed controller is set to its minimum. The blower is switch on.
Then, the air blower speed controller is adjusted so that the blower frequency is set
to 15 Hz.

7) 500g sand is poured into the feed vessel with the feed control valve, V11 fully
closed. Then, valve Vii is opened slightly so that the sample flows down steadily.
 4

8) Wait 2 minutes after all the sand has been delivered into the air stream to ensure all
dust is cleared from the pipeline then switched off the centrifugal water pump P1
and Centrifugal Air Blower.

9) Valve V9 is slowly opened to let dust-laden water in the spray chamber flow down
by gravity to dust collecting bucket.

10) When all water has flowed down from the chamber, let the dust settle down in the
bucket. The wet dust on the chamber wall is being ignored. The dust needed is the
dust trapped in the water.

11) The bucket is taken out carefully to avoid the dust sample from spill. The excess
water is drained. The dust is collected on a suitable oven tray. The wet dust sample
is heat up in an oven at 180oC for 2 hours until the sample becomes sufficiently dry.

12) The collected sample is weighed on a digital mass balance and the final weight is
recorded.

13) The efficiency is calculated:

weight of sample collected

Efficiency,    100%
weight of sample loaded

14) The chamber is cleaned by pumping water with a bigger nozzle to cleanse the sand.
The bucket is used to collect the drained sand. The feed pipeline is cleaned from
the wet sand by opened the feed pipeline. Then, the experiment is proceed for other
nozzle listed in Table 1.
 5

Figure 2: Spray Chamber operation

Figure 1: Material used- Fine sand

 6

3.0 DATA AND RESULTS

Table 2: Result sample 1 where Nozzle size - 520µm (Nozzle 1, N1)

Set Pressure, PT1 (Bar) 2

Air blower speed (Hz) 20
Weight of sample loaded (g) 300g
Weight of sample collected (g) 275g
Collection efficiency, η (%) 91.67%

Table 3: Result 2 where Nozzle size - 290µm (Nozzle 2 N2)

Set Pressure, PT1 (Bar) 2

Air blower speed (Hz) 20
Weight of sample loaded (g) 300g
Weight of sample collected (g) 182g
Collection efficiency, η (%) 60.67 %
 7

Calculation Details:

Efficiency of spray chamber were calculated using the formula below:

Actual weight of tray =1039g

Weight of sample 1 (Nozzle size - 520µm ( Nozzle 1, N1 ))
= 1314g-1039g
= 275g
Weigh of sample 2 (Nozzle size - 290µm ( Nozzle 2, N2 ))
= 1221g-1039g
= 182g
weight of sample collected
Efficiency,    100%
weight of sample loaded

i. NOZZLE N1 (520 µm droplet size):

275g
Efficiency, η = × 100%
300𝑔

= 91.67 %

ii. NOZZLE N2 (290 µm droplet size):

182𝑔
Efficiency, η = × 100%
300𝑔

= 60.67%
 8

4.0 DISCUSSION
This experiment was performed to determine the effect of droplet size upon separation
efficiency of the spray chamber unit by using different nozzle. There are two type of nozzles inside
the chamber to produce two different droplet sizes. Nozzle size of 290µm and 520µm was tested
to study the objective of the experiment where it was tested one after another.

During the experiment, 300g of sample of kaolin was weighed and put into the feeder. For
the first test, nozzle N1 with droplet size of 520 µm was tested for its collection efficiency. The
collected particulate matters for the first test is 275g. As for the second test, the nozzle N2 with
droplet size of 290 µm was tested. The result of particulate matters collected by using N2 was
182g. The spray chamber efficiency was calculated via using the formula below:

weight of sample collected

Efficiency,    100%
weight of sample loaded

Based on the readings recorded in Table 2.0 and Table 3.0, the efficiency of nozzle size of
520 µm is 91.67 % and 60.67% for nozzle size of 290 µm. It is obviously reveals that the
collection efficiency of nozzle size of 520 µm is higher than nozzle size of 290 µm. But this
result is actually oppose the theory, where the nozzle with bigger size should give least
collection efficiency compared to the smallest one. Since this experiment came out with
different results, it can be said that some factors was affected the operating mechanism of spray
chamber.

The first obvious error observed during the experiment is the air blower frequency was
37.69 Hz. According to the procedure, the frequency should be 20 Hz. The differences are
much larger. So, the speed of air blower might affected the efficiency of spray chamber. The
next error observed was, the unstable air flow rate. The air flow rate observed during the
experiment was 0.049 m/s but it is not stable. This might affected the velocity of air flow rate
in nozzles. The plugging in nozzles also might contributed for this error. If the nozzle is not
cleaned for a long time this situation will happens. The combination of unstable air flow rate
and plugging in nozzle surely affected the operation of spray chamber. Spray towers have low
 9

power consumption but have relatively low particulate collection efficiencies. The recirculated
water in the system must be thoroughly cleaned to prevent excessive nozzle fouling or
clogging. Nozzle cleaning and replacement are a major part of the maintenance required for these
units.

In spray towers or spray chambers, gas streams are fed into a chamber and contacted with
scrubbing liquid produced by spray nozzles. The droplet size is controlled to optimize particle
contact and droplet separation from the gas stream. Chambers can be oriented for cross-flow,
countercurrent flow, or concurrent (co-current) flow. Chambers may also include baffles to
improve gas-liquid contact.

The collection efficiency of spray chamber can be relate to the Kleinschmidts equation :

-fE
No = 1 – e

Where,

N0 = Overall collection efficiency

f = Fraction of inlet gas/air swept by the drop

E = Particle collection efficiency of a single droplet

According to this equation, the collection efficiency is directly proportional to the fraction
(f) of inlet gas /air swept by the drop and particle collection efficiency of a single droplet, E .
Increase of f and E will increase the collection efficiency. Fraction f and E can be describe in
following equation:
 10

f = 6.12 x 104 H.FL

DFG
H = Distance of the droplet travels with respect to incoming gas/air
FL = Liquid flow rate
FG = Incoming Gas/air flow rate
D = Droplet diameter

The smaller the droplet diameter and incoming gas/air flow rate, the higher the fraction of
inlet gas/air swept by the drop. The higher the distance of the droplet travels with respect to
incoming gas/air and liquid flow rate, the higher the fraction of inlet gas/air swept by the drop.

E = (Y0 + rp)2
Rd2
Y0 = the initial Y position measured from drop centerline of the particle center trajectory that just
graze the droplet
rp = particle radius
Rd = droplet radius

The smaller the droplet radius, the higher the particle collection efficiency of a single
droplet and vice versa. Hence, the nozzle size 290 µm must give higher collection efficiency
compared to 520 µm. Spray chamber is an inexpensive pollution control device. It is effectively
remove large particles and highly soluble gases. But, may create water (or liquid) disposal
problem and relatively inefficient at removing fine pollutants.
 11

5.0 CONCLUSION & RECOMMENDATIONS

As a conclusion, the best spray nozzle size is the 290 µm because of the efficiency of the
spray nozzle is more than the 520 µm. This is because of the surface area contact of the
particulate and the water sprinkle is much more compared to the spray nozzle that has a larger
droplet size. For an industrial scale, where the pollutants are finer particles, a smaller droplet
size are recommended since it has a much higher efficiency.

For this experiment, it is recommended that the nozzle must be cleaned regularly to avoid
any plugging in it. The controller of air blower speed must undergo inspection to obtain the desired
frequency during the actual experiment. The air flow meter also needs to check regularly or need
to replace the new air flow meter in case it is damaged, where it can provide stable airflow readings.

6.0 REFERENCES
1. A Homburg;W Henstchel. Influence of Spray Chamber in Industrial Pollution
Treatment,1989

2. Choongsik Bae; J Yu. Effect of Different Diameter Size of Nozzle in Spray Tower, 2002

3. Elemental Scientific. Cyclonic spray chamber. Available on worldwide page

http://www.icpms.com/products/cyclonic.php.
4. Guilham Caulmette; CP Lienemann.Sensivity Improvement in Air Pollution Control
Instrumentation,2009

5. Inorganic venture. Nebulizers, Spray Chambers and Torches. ICP Operations Guide: Part
5 by Paul Gaines, Ph.D. Available on worldwide page
http://www.inorganicventures.com/nebulizers-spray-chambers-and-torches

6. P.H Bruckner et.al. Performance Evaluation of a Cyclonic Spray Chamber for ICP-
MS,1994

7. Rao, C. S. “Environmental Pollution Control Engineering”, 2nd Edition, New Age

International, New Delhi, 2006.

 12

8. Spellman, F. R. “The Science of Air Concepts and Applications” 2nd Edition, Taylor and

Francis (CRC Press), 2008.

9. Yuri M.Wright; Jane Margari. Simulation and Experiment of Large Spray Column onto the
Dust Particles, 2006