Separation Science and Technology

ISSN: 0149-6395 (Print) 1520-5754 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/lsst20

Investigations on various characteristics of novel

cyclone separator with helical square fins

Mahesh Dasar & Ranjit S. Patil

To cite this article: Mahesh Dasar & Ranjit S. Patil (2019): Investigations on various
characteristics of novel cyclone separator with helical square fins, Separation Science and
Technology, DOI: 10.1080/01496395.2019.1650770

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/01496395.2019.1650770

Published online: 11 Aug 2019.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 71

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=lsst20
SEPARATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
https://doi.org/10.1080/01496395.2019.1650770

Investigations on various characteristics of novel cyclone separator with helical

square fins
Mahesh Dasar and Ranjit S. Patil
Department of Mechanical Engineering, BITS PILANI - K K Birla Goa Campus, Goa, India

ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

Cyclone separators are very energy intensive devices primarily used in power and process Received 30 April 2019
industries to separate the particles from hot gases. Hence in the present study, the barrel wall Accepted 29 July 2019
of the cyclone separator was modified by fixing the helical square fins of sizes 5, 7.5, and KEYWORDS
10 mm, with 30 and 50 mm pitch variations to improve its separation efficiency. Hence in the Finned cyclone separator;
present study, various fluid dynamic characteristics which affect the separation efficiency such fluid dynamic characteristics;
as axial and tangential velocities, axial pressure drops were investigated. Computational separation efficiency; square
results were validated using the published experimental data for the non-finned cyclone fins
separator and further CFD simulations were performed for novel finned cyclone separators.
It was observed that for the particles’ sizes below 3 µm, finned cyclone separator with fin size
10 mm and pitch 50 mm was giving separation efficiency more than other 5 finned cyclone
separators. Also 5 to 10% improvement in the separation efficiency was observed over the
separation efficiency of the non-finned cyclone separator. Since main function of separating
the particles from gas was unaffected rather it was improved using finned cyclone separator(s)
which is important in a view of reducing serious fine particulate matter (PM2.5) emissions
causing serious health issues.
Abbreviation: CFD: Computational fluid dynamics; DPM: Discrete phase modeling;RSM: Reynolds
stress turbulence model

Introduction separation efficiency decreases with increase in its dia-

meter, gas outlet duct diameter, gas inlet area.[9–11] Avci
Cyclone separators are used in the process and power
and Karagoz[12] have proposed a mathematical model to
industries to separate the particles from high volume of
predict the separation efficiency.
very hot gases. Due to these hot gases their wall tempera-
Karagoz and Kaya[13] reported about heat transfer which
ture remains very high causing heat losses to surround-
increases at all surfaces with the inlet velocity and decreases
ings due to various modes of heat transfer such as
toward to cone apex. Nag and Gupta[14] reported about the
radiation, convection. A greater percentage of this heat
effect of solid circulation rate, gas superficial velocity and
loss can be recovered at the cyclone separator and used
pressure in the cyclone separator on the heat transfer per-
further for water heating.[1] Energy conservation in this
formance of fins suspended in the drum. Bodo[15] has used
way helps to improve the efficiency of boilers.[2]
exterior fins on the top gas outlet to enhance the heat
Therefore, proper arrangements are required to imple-
transfer. Mariani et al.[16] have reported about the para-
ment to use the cyclone separators as heat exchangers.
meters such as vortex length finder and its conicity angle to
Also, it is very important to study on fluid dynamic
improve the separation efficiency and to reduce the exit gas
characteristics of modified cyclone separators since these
temperature maintaining nearly same pressure drop.
characteristics affect its heat transfer performance.[3]
Wasilewski[17] reported about the effect of inlet tempera-
Various fluid dynamic characteristics are reported in the
ture on the separation efficiency of the cyclone separator. It
literature based on CFD simulations.[4–8] Process or
was decreasing with increase in inlet temperature.
power industries do use the cyclone separators to separate
Thulasiraman and Pitchandi[18] have reported about the
the particles from the gas hence its performance is eval-
heat transfer rate variation with inlet velocity of air. It was
uated using collection (separation) efficiency. Two phase
observed that heat transfer rate increases with increase in
flow behavior and its effect on collection efficiency is
inlet velocity of the air. Mikulčić et al.[19] have reported
reported in the literature.[9–11] For the cyclone separators,

CONTACT Ranjit S. Patil ranjitp@goa.bits-pilani.ac.in Department of Mechanical Engineering, BITS PILANI - K K Birla Goa Campus, Goa, India
Color versions of one or more of the figures in the article can be found online at www.tandfonline.com/lsst.
© 2019 Taylor & Francis
2 M. DASAR AND R. S. PATIL

about the concentration of particles and pressure drop to models (RSM).[25] RSM is most suitable for complex
understand the swirling two phase flow inside the cement 3-D flows with strong streamline curvature, swirl and
cyclone and to improve the heat exchange phenomena. rotation.[26] To model the changing strain rate, the
Wasilewski and Duda[20] have reported about 57 geometric linear pressure strain sub-model was used. For the
configurations of cyclone separators. They proposed that near wall treatment of gas flow, scalable wall function
structural changes may be applied to traditional cyclone was used since using the log-law it can resolve near wall
separators as a solution to the continuously decreasing physics for arbitrarily refined meshes.
allowable limits of dust concentration in atmospheric For an incompressible fluid flow, the equation of
emissions. continuity and balance of momentum are given as[27]:
Thus, literature review[2–20] provides sufficient infor-
@
ui
mation on separation efficiency, heat transfer perfor- ¼0 (1)
mance and fluid dynamic characteristics of non-finned @xi
cyclone separators through studies performed either 
@
ui @
ui 1 @P @ 2 ui @
experimentally or numerically. Also, studies on turbu- j
þu ¼ þv  Rij (2)
@t @xj ρ @xi @xj @xj @xj
lent behavior and heat transfer performance by adding
fins to the cyclone separator were reported in the where,
literature.[14,15] These fins were either suspended in i is the mean velocity,
u
the drum of the cyclone separator or mounted on the xi is the position,
vortex finder.  is the mean pressure,
P
However, effects of fixing the novel helical square ρ is the constant gas density,
fins on the inner surface of barrel (cylindrical drum v is the kinematic viscous,
portion of the cyclone separator) wall on the various Rij is the Reynolds stress tensor,
0
fluid dynamic characteristics such as axial velocities, ui ¼ ui  ui is the ith fluctuating velocity component.
tangential velocities, axial pressure drops, and separa- The Reynolds Stress Model transport equation[28]
tion efficiency have not been reported yet through can be written as:
experimental or numerical study. Note that the separa-
tion efficiency is the function of fluid dynamic charac- @
0 0 @
0 0

ρui uj þ ρuk ui uj
teristics such as axial velocities, tangential velocities, @t @xY
k
axial pressure drops. ¼ Dij þ Pij þ ij þ εij þ S; (3)
Therefore, present paper investigates the effects of
novel square fins mounted on the inner surface of the where, the left two terms are the local time derivative of
conventional 2D2D type cyclone separator on its separa- stress and convective transport term, respectively. The
tion efficiency. It also investigates about important fluid right-side terms are:
dynamic characteristics, which directly affect the separa- The stress diffusion term:
tion efficiency such as axial pressure drop, axial and 
  
tangential velocities. Results obtained were compared @ 0 0 0 0 0 @ 0 0
Dij ¼  ρui uj uk þ p uj δjk  μ uu ;
with the data obtained for non-finned cyclone separator. @xk @xk i j
(3a)
Numerical method The shear production term:
 
Commercial code ANSYS-Fluent 15.0 (research version) 0 0 @uj 0 0 @ui
was used to simulate the complex swirling two-phase flow Pij ¼ ρ ui uk þ uj uk ; (3b)
@xk @xk
in the cyclone separator. The Reynolds stress model
(RSM) was used for modeling turbulence, because k-ε The pressure-strain term:
models are not able to resolve rapidly changing strain Y  0 0
@ui @ui
rate and anisotropic stresses of the highly swirling flow ¼ p þ ; (3c)
in the cyclone separator.[4,5,7,8,21,and22] In the recent
ij @xj @xi
research on turbulence modeling, RSM was proposed for The dissipation term:
high swirling flow simulations.[23] RSM was employed to
0
study the effects of variables related to operational condi- @u @uj
0

tions, particle sizes and cyclone separator’s geometry.[24] εij ¼ 2μ i ; (3d)
@xk @xk
In general, industrial simulations of turbulent flows
were conducted using Reynolds stress turbulence and the source term: S
 SEPARATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY 3

 
Discrete phase model ρp dp u  up 
Rep ¼ (9)
When the centrifugal force, which will be acting on μ
the particles is larger than the inward drag force cre- The drag coefficient CD is a function of the relative
ated by gas, the particles will hit the walls and forced Reynolds numbers of the following form:
downward. In other case, if the force is less than the

inward drag, the particles will move upward along the CD ¼ 24 Rep For 0 < Rep  1
gas. When the force is equal to the drag force the 

particles will rotate in equilibrium and move down- CD ¼ 24 Rep 1 þ 0:15Re0:687
p For 0 < Rep
ward and then hit the slant walls and are collected. In  1000 (10)
Ansys-Fluent 15.0, Eulerian-Lagrangian approach was
used as the Discrete Phase Model (DPM) to model the
two-phase flow in the cyclone separator. DPM model Modeling
is useful to calculate the separation efficiency when the
volume fraction of solid is less than 10% in the two- Cyclone separator was modeled with height of the barrel
phase flow having gas as the primary phase. To count and height of the conical section equals to twice the
0
the effect of velocity fluctuations (ui ) on the forces barrel diameter is known as a Lapple[30] 2D2D type
acting on the particles, the Discrete Random Walk cyclone separator which is regarded as the high separa-
model is used as shown in equations (4) and (5). tion efficiency cyclone separator[31] and is the bench
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi mark for design of the cyclone separator in many indus-
0 0 0
ui ¼ ζ ui uj (4) tries. A Lapple 2D2D type cyclone separator Fig. 1(a)
with dimensional parameters shown in Table 1 was used
where for the investigation in the present study. Figure 1(a)
ζ isffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
q normally
ffi distributed random number, shows the non-finned conventional cyclone separator
0 0
ui uj are local root mean square of velocity and Fig. 1(b) shows geometry of the square fin. square-
fluctuations. shaped helical fins (Fig. 1(b)) were attached on the inner
Values of velocity fluctuations that prevail during surface of the circular barrel wall of conventional 2D2D
the lifetime of a turbulent eddy (τ e ) is given by type cyclone separators as shown in the Fig. 1(c) and
Fig. 1(d). As shown in Fig. 1(b), helical fin with rectan-
τ e ¼ TL lnðrÞ (5)
gular cross section of 10 × 5 mm will be the solid portion
where, r is the random number between 0 and 1, (made of insulating material, bricks etc) fixed helically
and TL ¼ 0:3k=ε, where 0.3 is time scale constant (CL) on the inner surface of the barrel wall which was form-
recommended for RSM model. ing a base to the hollow square cross section with height
Particle tracking method was used to simulate the equals to fin size(s) (5, 7.5, and 10 mm) will be used to
isolated particle’s flow in the cyclone separator. The circulate the water. The fins will vary with their sizes and
separation efficiency can be obtained once the trajec- pitch sizes. Fin size of 5 mm with pitch sizes 30 and
tories of all the particles fed into the cyclone separator 50 mm, fin size of 7.5 mm with pitch sizes 30 and
are determined by Zhao et al.[29] In terms of the 50 mm and fin size of 10 mm with pitch sizes 30 mm
Eulerian-Lagrangian approach, the equation of parti- and 50 mm of height 275 mm below the mixture inlet
cle motion is given by were modeled on the inner wall of the cylindrical por-

 tion of the cyclone separator as shown in Fig. 1(c) and
dupi
gi ρ p  ρ Fig. 1(d). The main aim of changing the fin size and
¼ FD ui  upi þ
dt ρp (6) pitch size is to find the optimized set of fin size and pitch
in term of collection efficiency and other fluid dynamic
characteristics.
dxpi
¼ upi (7)
dt

Meshing
where FD ui  upi is the drag force per unit particle
mass Unstructured hybrid meshes were created using ANSYS
ICEMCFD 15.0 software. Hexahedral elements were
18μ CD Rep
FD ¼ (8) created at the core of cyclone separator and to capture
ρp dp2 24
boundary layer physics prismatic elements were created
4 M. DASAR AND R. S. PATIL

Figure 1. (a). Non-finned 2D2D type cyclone separator geometry. (b). Geometry of square fin attached on the inner surface of 2D2D type
cyclone separator’s barrel wall. (c). Geometry of square finned cyclone separator with pitch size 30 mm and fin size from left 5, 7.5, and
10 mm. (d). Geometry of square finned cyclone separator with pitch size 50 mm and fin size from left 5, 7.5, and 10 mm.
 SEPARATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY 5

Figure 1. Continued.

Table 1. Geometrical dimensions ratio of conventional 2D2D fins, which was used for the validation purpose. Overall
Lapple type cyclone. around 80% meshing is having quality ranging 0.9 to 1.
D H/D h/D De/D B/D S/D a/D b/D
200 mm 4 2 0.5 0.25 0.625 0.25 0.5
Simulation methodology and boundary conditions
at the wall. Tetrahedral elements were created to con- Reynolds Stress Model (RSM) viscous model with linear
nect the hexahedral elements and prismatic elements as pressure strain was used for modeling the pressure-strain
shown in Fig. 2(a-c). Three layers of prismatic cells terms in the present simulation. Wall boundary condition
were given at the wall with size 3 mm. Growth factor from k equation was enabled for solving the turbulent
selected was exponential, with initial height as 0.2 mm, kinetic energy (k) for normal stresses of linear pressure
prism angle 120 degree and with minimum prism qual- strain model, and wall reflect effects was enabled to
ity as 0.2. The fine mesh was used near the wall to enhance the wall treatment. A scalable wall function was
resolve near wall effects. The quality of the mesh mea- enabled for modeling the near wall treatment and model
sured is above 0.2 for all the six sets of the cyclone constants were kept default as it is. Upper gas outlet was
separators with fins and the cyclone separator without taken as pressure outlet boundary condition with
6 M. DASAR AND R. S. PATIL

(a).

(b).

(c).
Figure 2. (a-c). Cut section of meshed finned cyclone separator.

turbulence intensity 5% and hydraulic diameter 0.1 m.
Velocity inlet boundary condition was given to the
cyclone separator’s inlet with velocity magnitude 20 m/s
and 2.75% turbulence intensity with 0.06 m hydraulic
diameter.[8,31] The solid outlet and the cyclone separator’s
body, which reflects the particles were considered as the
wall boundary condition. For the solution controls 40 flow
courant number and explicit relaxation factor for momen-
tum and pressure was given as 0.08 and 0.6, respectively.
Initialization and other parameter setting were con-
sidered as shown in Table 2. Steady state solver with
RSM model was used in the present study since many
 SEPARATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY 7

Table 2. Parameter setting for the simulations. was used for the pressure velocity coupling. The
Name Condition Parameter Number QUICK for momentum and second order upwind spa-
Medium Air Density 1.225 kg/m3 tial discretization scheme was used for updating the
Viscosity 1.7894 × 10−5 kg/m-s
Boundary Inlet Velocity 20 m/s momentum, turbulent kinetic energy, turbulent dissi-
Condition Outlet Pressure 101325 Pa pation rate, and Reynolds’ stresses. The simulation was
Wall Stationary and no-slip –
Initialization Standard Turbulent kinetic 0.45 m2/s2 carried out for around 15,000 iterations. Boundary
energy conditions set selected were same for the cyclone
Turbulent dissipation 12.61 m2/s3
rate
separators with and without fins.
Calculation Steady Gravitational 9.81 m/s2
State acceleration

Grid independence and validation of numerical

researchers[8,18,32,33] have already implemented it.
Effect of outflow length on the flow field was reported
by Wang et al.[8] using steady and unsteady solver.
They reported that unsteady solver may affect the
flow field however its effect on the flow field was not
so significant. Subsequently, they have compared the
effects of steady state and unsteady state solver on axial
and tangential velocity profiles, which were in close
agreement as qualitatively and quantitatively. Hence,
in the present study, steady state solver was used using
very fine and good quality meshing with convergence
criteria set to 10−5. Hence, results obtained using
steady solver was in close agreement with the experi-
mental data of Wang et al.[8] as reported in Section 2.5.
The normal and tangential reflection coefficients were
set as 0.85 and 0.75, respectively. SIMPLEC scheme
data for non-finned cyclone separator
Dependency of numerical predictions on the grids for non-
finned cyclone separator[8] was studied. Non-finned
cyclone separator meshing was done on the ANSYS
ICEMCFD 15.0 with the same meshing parameters those
were used in the square finned cyclone separator. Three
mesh sizes were created as 337K nodes, 617K nodes and
1293K nodes for non-finned cyclone separator. Simulations
were carried out with the same solver settings for square
finned cyclone separators. Tangential velocity was obtained
at 650 mm above from the bottom of the cyclone separator,
and it is observed that grids size 617K nodes and 1293K
nodes give the closer tangential velocity profiles as shown in
Fig. 3, in comparison with 337K nodes grid. Hence, grids
with 617K nodes were chosen for the validation purpose to
minimize the computational time.

Figure 3. Grid independence test for the non-finned cyclone separator.

8 M. DASAR AND R. S. PATIL

Figure 4. Computational data validation.

Experimental data of Wang et al.[8] was used to
validate the numerical settings used in present study.
As shown in Fig. 4, the numerical data of present work
is validated since it was in close agreement to experi-
mental data of Wang et al.[8]
close results for tangential velocity as like the nodes
1240247 however 603K nodes were taking less computa-
tional time. Therefore, in the similar way nodes were
chosen for five sets as shown in Table 3.

Results and discussion

Grid independence test for finned cyclone
separator
Grid independency tests were carried out on all six sets of
the square finned cyclone separator since the geometry of
the finned cyclone separator will be keep changing by
square fin size and the pitch size. Three different meshes
were created for 6 square finned geometries. For 30 mm
pitch size and 5 mm fin size (Set-1), the numbers of
nodes taken were 333906, 603941, and 1240247. As
shown in Table 3, for Set-1, nodes 603941 (603K) were
chosen for the simulation purpose since they were giving
In this section, the effects of adding fins on the inner
surface of barrel wall of the cyclone separator on the
separation efficiency is explained. Since separation effi-
ciency is the function of axial velocity, axial pressure
drop, tagential velocity hence effects of adding fins on
these fluid dynamic parameters are also explained. Also
results on these paratmeters were compared among
non-fiined and finned cyclone separators. Additionally
effects of varying fin size and fin pitch is also explained
on these fluid dynamics characteristics.

Axial velocity
Table 3. Mesh used for the square finned cyclone separator.
Pitch Fin Chosen Identification Axial velocity in the downward direction highly influ-
size size number of name Y+ value ences on the transportation of particles toward the solid
Fin shape (mm) (mm) nodes henceforth measured
outlet of the cyclone separator and hence its separation
Square fin 30 5 603K Set-1 31.70
7.5 618K Set-2 40.92 efficiency. Figure 5 shows the axial velocity profiles of 6
10 630K Set-3 33.96 sets of square finned cyclone separators and non-finned
50 5 566K Set-4 32.32
7.5 581K Set-5 22.60 cyclone separator in the radial direction at various loca-
10 584K Set-6 36.31 tions along the height of the cyclone separator. Three
 SEPARATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY 9

(a) (b)

(c) (d)

(e) (f)

(g)

Figure 5. (a). Axial velocity variation in the radial plane of cyclone separator with square fin size 5 mm and pitch size 30 mm. (b).
Axial velocity variation in the radial plane of cyclone separator with square fin size 7.5 mm and pitch size 30 mm. (c). Axial velocity
variation in the radial plane of cyclone separator with square fin size 10 mm and pitch size 30 mm. (d). Axial velocity variation in the
radial plane of cyclone separator with square fin size 5 mm and pitch size 50 mm. (e). Axial velocity variation in the radial plane of
cyclone separator with square fin size 7.5 mm and pitch size 50 mm. (f). Axial velocity variation in the radial plane of cyclone
separator with square fin size 10 mm and pitch size 50 mm. (g). Axial velocity variations for various fin sizes and fin pitches at
500 mm above the solid outlet.
10 M. DASAR AND R. S. PATIL
locations were selected such as 300, 500 and 700 mm
above the solid outlet of the cyclone separators. It was
observed that the axial velocity profiles are qualitatively
similar to those obtained by B Wang[8] and[34–37] for the
non-finned cyclone separator.
It is observed from Fig. 5(a-f) that due to swirling
flow in the cyclone separator centrifugal force were
generated hence particles were forced toward the wall;
subsequently, they were moving in the downward direc-
tion (due to their weight and friction with wall) in the
regime of around 45 mm measured from the wall of the
cyclone separator in the upper cylindrical portion of the
cyclone separator. In this regime, it was observed that at
700 mm location above the solid outlet, axial velocity in
the downward direction was maximum around 5 m/s for
the non-fined cyclone separator. Also, it was more than
corresponding axial velocity (less than 1 m/s) observed
for the finned cyclone separator.
It was also observed that at a given location, for
example say at 300 mm above the solid outlet, as shown
in Fig. 5(a-f) axial velocity in the downward direction was
around 6 m/s measured at 60 mm from the center of the
cyclone separator to the right-hand side wall. It was
around 4.5 m/s measured at 60 mm from center to left
as shown in Fig. 5(a-f). Note that incoming air+particles’
mixture was hitting first on the right wall of the cyclone
separator hence it has its velocity more near right hand
side wall which subsequently decreases toward left side
wall due to the frictional effects due to plane non-finned
wall or finned wall surface when flow was swirling from
the right side wall to left side wall.
In general, as shown in Fig. 5(a-f), axial velocity in
the downward direction was decreased due to frictional
effects with plane non-finned wall or finned wall sur-
face while moving from 700 mm location to 500 mm
location. However, at 500 mm location, cylindrical
regime was ended and conical regime of the cyclone
separators was started since then increase in axial velo-
city in the downward direction was observed (such as at
300 mm location above the solid outlet) due to slanted
edges of the conical portion of the cyclone separator.
Comparison of axial velocity variations due to fin
size and fin pitch at 500 mm above the solid outlet is
presented as shown in Fig. 5(g). It is observed that for
a given pitch, change in fin size from 5 to 10 mm has
little impact on axial velocity variation. However, it is
observed that for all the sizes of fin with 30 mm pitch
gives slightly higher axial velocity measured at the core
(in the range of −10 mm to +10 mm) of the cyclone
separator than that of all the sizes of fin with 50 mm
pitch as shown in Fig. 5(g). However, collection effi-
ciency (as reported in Section 3.4) was observed to be
more for fins with 50 mm pitch than that of 30 mm
pitch for the particle sizes below 3 µm since fins with
50 mm pitch have comparatively more axial velocity (as
shown in Fig. 5(g)) in the downward direction near the
wall where the particles’ concentration was high.
Axial pressure drop
Figure 6 shows the axial pressure drop (ΔP) which was
calculated along the height of the cylindrical portion of
the selected cyclone separators. Axial pressure drop was
calculated by taking the difference of total pressure
measured at 208 and 493 mm distance measured from
the top gas outlet of all cyclone separators.
From Fig. 6, it is observed that pressure drop for the
finned cyclone separators (0.287–0.348 kPa) was more
than that calculated for non-finned cyclone separator
(0.183 kPa) due to increased friction because of attached
fins on the inner surface of the cylindrical (drum) portion
of the cyclone separator. This also represents that there
will be comparatively more energy loss in the finned
cyclone separators which is compensated by increase in
separation efficiency around 10% observed with finned
cyclone separators as shown in Fig. 8(a-b). With finned
cyclone separators, separation efficiency was improved
around 10% for the very fine particles (below 3µm)
which otherwise creates serious environmental pollution
and health issues due to fine particulate matter (PM 2.5).
Additionally, as shown in Fig. 6, energy losses due to
pressure drop in the finned cyclone separators can be
minimized by reducing the pressure drop by increasing
the fin pitch from 30 to 50 mm, since it further helps to
improve the separation efficiency as shown in Fig. 8(a-b)
as explained in the Section 3.1(effect of pitch variation on
separation efficiency and axial velocity) and Section 3.3
(effect of pitch variation on separation efficiency and
tangential velocity). Also, energy loss due to pressure
drop in the finned cyclone separators may also be com-
pensated by using them as heat exchanger and hence
saving the heat (energy) losses which generally takes
place from their hot circular walls. In these ways, finned
cyclone separators with 50 mm pitch and10 mm fin size
can be recommended over other cyclone separators con-
sidered in the study, which gives highest separation effi-
ciency (as shown in Fig. 8(a-b)) and less pressure drop
than any cyclone separator with 30 mm pitch as shown in
Fig. 6.
As shown in Fig. 6, for a given pitch, it is observed
that with increase in fin size from 5 to 10 mm, pressure
drop increases slightly due to slight increase in surface
area (because of addition of fins) and friction.
Also, for a given fin size, it is observed that with
increase in fin pitch from 30 to 50 mm, pressure drop
decreases due to decrease in number of turns of helical

Figure 6. Axial pressure drop for non-finned cyclone separator and six sets of finned cyclone separators.
fin hence decrease in surface area of the helical fin and
corresponding friction. Effect of pitch variation on
separation efficiency, axial velocity, and tangential velo-
city is explained in the Sections 3.1 and 3.3.
Tangential velocity
Tangential velocity is the driving force, which results in
a centrifugal force that determines the particles’ density
near the wall of the cyclone separator. Figure 7(a-f) shows
the tangential velocity of the finned and non-finned
cyclone separators. Qualitatively the trends of the tangen-
tial velocity of the non-finned cyclone separators were
matching to those reported in the literature.[38–45]
The tangential velocity was measured at three different
locations 300, 500, and 700 mm above the solid outlet
along the height of cyclone separators. It was observed
that due to friction, the tangential velocity was decreased
as the flow moves down toward the solid outlet. Hence,
most of the particles were collected near to wall of the
cyclone separator at location 700 mm and above the solid
outlet since these locations are the close locations to the
mixture inlet where particles’ density was maximum.
In the cylindrical portion, it was observed that at the
location 700 mm above the solid outlet, finned cyclone
separators were having more tangential velocity than
those observed with non-finned cyclone separator. This
is one of the reasons that separation efficiency was
observed comparatively more for the finned cyclone
SEPARATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY 11
separators than that observed in case of non-finned
cyclone separator as shown in Fig. 8(a-b).
Comparison of tangential velocity variations due to fin
size and fin pitch at 500 mm above the solid outlet is
presented as shown in Fig. 7(g). It is observed that for
a given pitch, change in fin size from 5 to 10 mm has little
impact on tangential velocity variation. It is observed that
fin size 10 mm with pitch 50 mm gives higher tangential
velocity than other five selected finned cyclone separators
hence more particles were pushed toward the wall. This is
one of the reasons that collection (separation) efficiency
was also observed to be more for 10 mm fin size with
50 mm pitch as shown in Fig. 8(b).
Separation efficiency
The most important parameter of a cyclone separator is
the separation efficiency, which determines the func-
tional ability of the cyclone separator. The fraction of
solids separated at the solid outlet expressed as
a percentage of the total feed into the cyclone separator
is defined as the separation efficiency. When the parti-
cles enter the separation space (near to mixture inlet) in
the cyclone separator, each particle is influenced by an
outward directed centrifugal force and an inward direc-
ted drag force. Since cyclone separators usually handle
various sizes of particles, the particles above 3 µm gives
the 100% separation efficiency and the particles below
3 µm influences inward directed drag force joins the
12 M. DASAR AND R. S. PATIL

(a) (b)

(c) (d)

(e) (f)

(g)

Figure 7. (a). Tangential velocity profile of non-finned cyclone separator and square finned cyclone separator with fin size 5 mm and
pitch size 30 mm at the same locations. (b). Tangential velocity profile of non-finned cyclone separator and square finned cyclone
separator with fin size 7.5 mm and pitch size 30 mm at the same location. (c). Tangential velocity profile of non-finned cyclone
separator and square finned cyclone separator with fin size 10 mm and pitch size 30 mm at the same location. (d). Tangential
velocity profile of non-finned cyclone separator and square finned cyclone separator with fin size 5 mm and pitch size 50 mm at the
same location. (e). Tangential velocity profile of non-finned cyclone separator and square finned cyclone separator with fin size
7.5 mm and pitch size 50 mm at the same location. (f). Tangential velocity profile of non-finned cyclone separator and square finned
cyclone separator with fin size 10 mm and pitch size 50 mm at the same location. (g). Tangential velocity variations for various fin
sizes and fin pitches at 500 mm above the solid outlet.
 SEPARATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY 13

(a)

(b)
Figure 8. (a). Separation efficiency of non-finned cyclone separator and square finned cyclone separator with pitch size 30 mm.
(b). Separation efficiency of non-finned cyclone separator and square finned cyclone separator with pitch size 50 mm.

center flow and reduces the separation efficiency as
shown in Fig. 8(a and b).
The separation efficiency of the non-finned and
finned cyclone separators was obtained using DPM
model by injecting each time around 15000 particles
(ρ = 3320 kg/m3) for each particle size[8], but the
diameters used in the present study were 0.1, 0.5, 1, 2,
3, 4, 5, and 10 µm. It is observed that with increase in
particle size the separation efficiency was increased as
shown in Fig. 8(a-b), because coarser particles were
comparatively heavier hence collected at bottom solid
outlet of the cyclone separator. Also, particles above
14 M. DASAR AND R. S. PATIL

3 µm sizes were pushed at wall due to centrifugal force
acting on them from where they were moving down-
ward toward solid outlet due to swirling motion and
their own weight. Hence, separation efficiency was
observed to be almost same for the particles’ sizes
greater than 3 µm for all types of cyclone separators.
It is observed that finned cyclone separators give
separation efficiency more than that observed with
non-finned cyclone separator for the particles’ sizes
lower than 3 µm. This is because within a distance of
40 mm measured from the wall of the cylindrical por-
tion of finned cyclone separators had more tangential
velocity (Fig. 7(a-f)) hence more particles were
collected near their wall (Fig. 9(c)) than those observed
for the non-finned cyclone separator as shown in
Fig. 9(a). As observed in Fig. 5(a-f), although due to
helical fins, the axial velocity in the downward direction
very close to wall of the finned cyclone separators was
observed to be lesser than that observed for the non-
finned cyclone separator, however, particles were
flowing in the downward direction following helical
pathway of height equals to pitch between two conse-
cutive fins as shown in Fig. 9(c). This helps particles to
remain close to the wall of the conical portion of the
cyclone separator as shown in Fig. 9(d) rather than
detachment of some of them from the wall into the
center flow as shown in Fig. 9(b), which may take them
in the upward direction toward the top gas outlet.

(a) (b) (c) (d)

Figure 9. (a) Particle tracking of 1000 particles with particle diameter 1.5 micron with non-finned cyclone separator. (c) Particle
tracking of 1000 particles with particle diameter 1.5 micron with square finned cyclone separator of set 6 (50 mm pitch, 10 mm size).

Figure 10. Reverse flow locations of cyclone separators (refer Table 3 for sets 1–6).
Thus, more solid particles were collected at the bottom
of finned cyclone separator (Fig. 9(d)) than that in case
of non-finned cyclone separator (Fig. 9(b)). Hence,
helical pathway formed due to fins in the finned
cyclone separators helps to improve the separation
efficiency (i.e. collecting more particles at the solid
outlet) over the non-finned cyclone separator for the
very fine particles below 3 µm.
As shown in Fig. 10, it is observed that reversal of the
air took place from the point where total pressure
becomes higher than total pressure at gas outlet, which
is observed at a height 0.45 m above the solid outlet in the
conical region of non-finned cyclone separator, which
was higher than any finned cyclone separators. As
shown in Fig. 8(a-b), separation efficiency for the particles
below 3 µm of the finned cyclone separator with fin size
7.5 mm and pitch size 30 mm was observed to be more
than any other cyclone separators since in this particular
finned cyclone separator, the reversal of the air in the
upward direction took place at lowest height 375 mm
above the solid outlet. Because of this larger numbers of
particles were gathered together closer to solid outlet
where their axial velocity in the downward direction
SEPARATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY 15
(can be judged from Fig. 5(a-f)) was more than those
particles located in the conical region at higher height
above the solid outlet. This is very important achievement
in view of pollution related to PM 2.5 that large number of
very fine particles (below 3 µm) can be captured at solid
outlet with the help of square finned cyclone separator
with fin size 10 mm and pitch size 50 mm.
Conclusions
Cyclone separators used in power or process industries
are very energy intensive devices. Looking forward
toward minimizing the energy losses from their wall,
cyclone separator may be used as heat exchanger by fixing
water wall via fixing the helical fins square in cross section
on the inner wall of the cyclone separators. However, it is
very important that any extra arrangement made in this
way to make use of cyclone separators as heat exchanger,
one should be very careful that its separation efficiency
should not be altered or decreased since separating the
particles from the gas is the main function of the cyclone
separator.
16 M. DASAR AND R. S. PATIL

In view of this, present study observes significant Nomenclature

changes in the fluid dynamic characteristics of the finned
cyclone separators. The axial velocity in the downward A Cyclone separator’s inlet height (mm)
B Cyclone separator’s inlet width (mm)
direction in the dense particles’ region near the wall was
B Cyclone separator’s outlet diameter (mm)
observed to be lesser in case of finned cyclone separators dp Particle Diameter (µm)
than that in case of non-finned cyclone separator, how- D Cyclone separator’s body diameter (mm)
ever, it is compensated by collecting more particles in the De Cyclone separator’s vortex finder diameter (mm)
gap (pitch) between the turns of helical fin. Additionally, g Acceleration of gravity (m/s2
gi Acceleration due to gravity in i direction (m/s2)
the tangential velocity was improved with finned cyclone
h Cyclone separator’s barrel wall height (mm)
separators, which help to push the particles toward the H Cyclone separator’s height (mm)
wall which further move in the downward direction k Turbulent kinetic energy (m2/s2)
toward solid outlet helps to improve the separation effi- K Fluctuating kinetic energy (m2/s2)
ciency. Also, axial pressure drop in the cylindrical portion G Buoyancy production
Mt Turbulent Mach number
of the cyclone separators with fins (0.287–0.348 kPa) was
p Pressure (Pa)
observed to be more than that of non-finned cyclone P Stress production
separator (0.183 kPa) which represents the energy loss Rij Reynolds stress tensor
however it is compensated by improvement in the separa- Re Reynolds number
tion efficiency around 5 to 10% and reducing the heat t Time (s)
u Mean components of velocity (m/s2)
losses from the hot wall of the cyclone separator using fins
ui Flow velocity component in ith direction (m/s)
in case if cyclone separators will be used as heat exchanger u
0
Fluctuating components of velocity (m/s2)
by passing the water through fins. The height of reverse ui
0
Fluctuating velocity component in ith direction (m/s)
flow above the solid outlet was considerably higher for upi Particle velocity in ith direction (m/s)
non-finned cyclone separator (454 mm) than finned x Coordinate system
cyclone separators (375–411 mm). Hence, many particles
were moving upward along with gas (air) flow via central
core and therefore the separation efficiency was consider- Greek symbols
ably decreased for particle diameters below 3 µm in case of
non-finned cyclone separators. Thus, finned cyclone δ Kronecker factor
separators help to reduce the environmental pollution by ε Turbulent dissipation rate (m2/s3)
μ Dynamic viscosity (Pa.s)
capturing very fine particles (particulate matter (PM) ρ Density (kg/m3)
below 2.5 micron) causing serious health related issues. ρp Particle density (kg/m3)
Finned cyclone separators used in the present study shows
considerable improvement in the separation efficiency in
the range of 5 to 10% over the non-finned cyclone separa- Dimensionless numbers
tors for the particle sizes below 3 microns.
It is observed that for a given fin size, axial pressure CD Drag coefficient
drop reduces with increase in pitch size from 30 to 50 mm Rep Relative Reynolds number
hence reduces energy losses due to pressure drop. Axial
and tangential velocities are not much affected by chan-
ging fin sizes for a given fin pitch. However, axial velocity Subscripts
near the wall in the downward direction and tangential
velocity were observed to be more in case of cyclone i; j; k 1,2,3
separator for 50 mm fin pitch with 10 mm fin size than p Particle

other five selected finned cyclone separators. Also, for this

finned cyclone separator, height of reverse flow above the
solid outlet was considerably lower (375 mm) than any
other finned cyclone separators. Hence, its separation
efficiency was also observed to be more than other five
finned cyclone separators. Pertaining to these findings, it
is recommended to consider cyclone separator with
50 mm pitch and fin size 10 mm to achieve the highest
the separation efficiency.
Acknowledgements
Authors do acknowledge the financial support received
through 3 years funded project granted by Science &
Engineering Research Board (SERB), Department of
Science and Technology (DST) Government of India and
all necessary support received from Birla Institute of
Technology and Science (BITS) Pilani – K K Birla Goa
campus.

Funding
This work was supported by the Science and Engineering
Research Board, DST, GOVERNEMENT OF INDIA [SB/FTP/
ETA-0007/2014].
References
[1] Nwokolo, N.; Mamphweli, S.; Makaka, G. An
Investigation into Heat Recovery from the Surface of
a Cyclone Dust Collector Attached to a Downdraft
Biomass Gasifier. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2016, 98,
1158–1164. DOI: 10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2016.01.014.
[2] Gupta, A. V. S. S. K. S.; Nag, P. K. Prediction of Heat
Transfer Coefficient in the Cyclone Separator of a CFB.
Int. J. Energy Res. 2000, 24, 1065–1079.
[3] Nag, P. K.; Singh, N. K. Heat Transfer in the Cyclone
Separator of a Circulating Fluidized Bed. In Preprints
of CFB-5, 5th International Conference on Circulating
Fluidized Beds, Beijing, P.R. China, HM II, 1996.
[4] Azadi, M.; Azadi, M.; Ali, M. A CFD Study of the
Effect of Cyclone Size on Its Performance Parameters.
J. Hazard. Mater. 2010, 182(1–3), 835–841. DOI:
10.1016/j.jhazmat.2010.06.115.
[5] Hoekstra, A. J.; Derksen, J. J.; Van Den Akker, H. E. A.
An Experimental and Numerical Study of Turbulent
Swirling Flow in Gas Cyclones. Chem. Eng. Sci. 1999,
54, 2055–2065. DOI: 10.1016/S0009-2509(98)00373-X.
[6] Shi, L.; Bayless, D. J. Comparison of Boundary
Conditions for Predicting the Collection Efficiency of
Cyclones. Powder Technol. 2007, 173(1), 29–37. DOI:
10.1016/j.powtec.2006.11.022.
[7] Wan, G.; Sun, G.; Xue, X.; Shi, M. Solids Concentration
Simulation of Different Size Particles in a Cyclone
Separator. Powder Technol. 2008, 183(1), 94–104.
DOI: 10.1016/j.powtec.2007.11.019.
[8] Wang, B.; Xu, D. L.; Chu, K. W.; Yu, A. B. Numerical
Study of Gas–Solid Flow in a Cyclone Separator. Appl.
Math. Modell. 2006, 30(11), 1326–1342. DOI: 10.1016/
j.apm.2006.03.011.
[9] Dietz, P. W. Collection Efficiency of Cyclone Separator.
AIChE J. 1981, 27, 882–892. DOI: 10.1002/aic.690270603.
[10] Trefz, M.; Muschelknautz, E. Extended Cyclone Theory for
Gas Flows with High Solid Concentrations. Chem. Eng.
Technol. 1993, 16, 153–160. DOI: 10.1002/ceat.270160303.
[11] Zhou, L. X.; Soo, S. L. Gas-solid Flow and Collection of
Solids in a Cyclone Separator. Powder Technol. 1990,
63, 45–53. DOI: 10.1016/0032-5910(90)80006-K.
[12] Avci, A.; Karagoz, I. Effects of Flow and Geometrical
Parameters on the Collection Efficiency in Cyclone
Separators. J. Aerosol Sci. 2003, 34, 937–955. DOI:
10.1016/S0021-8502(03)00054-5.
[13] Karagoz, I.; Kaya, F. CFD Investigation of the Flow
and Heat Transfer Characteristics in a Tangential
Inlet Cyclone. Int. Commun. Heat Mass Transfer.
2007, 34, 1119–1126. DOI: 10.1016/j.icheatmasstransfer.
2007.05.017.
[14] Nag, P. K.; Gupta, A. V. S. S. K. S. Fin Heat Transfer
Studies in a Cyclone Separator of a Circulating
Fluidized Bed. Heat Transfer Eng. 1999, 20, 28–34.
DOI: 10.1080/014576399271556.
SEPARATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY 17
[15] Bodo, K. Cyclone Separator Vortex Finder with Exterior
Heat Fins. Canadian Patent File, 780525, 304031, 1977.
[16] Mariani, F.; Risi, F.; Grimaldi, C. N. Separation
Efficiency and Heat Exchange Optimization in a
Cyclone. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2017, 179, 393–402.
DOI: 10.1016/j.seppur.2017.02.024.
[17] Wasilewski, M. Analysis of the Effects of Temperature
and the Share of Solid and Gas Phases on the Process
of Separation in a Cyclone Suspension Preheater. Sep.
Purif. Technol. 2016, 168, 114–123. DOI: 10.1016/j.
seppur.2016.05.033.
[18] Thulasiraman, M.; Pitchandi, K. Influence of Inlet
Velocity of Air and Solid Particle Feed Rate on
Holdup Mass and Heat Transfer Characteristics in
Cyclone Heat Exchanger. J. Mech. Sci. Technol. 2015,
29, 4509–4518. DOI: 10.1007/s12206-015-0950-z.
[19] Mikulcic, H.; Vujanovic, M.; Ashhab, M. A.; Duic, N.
Large Eddy Simulation of a Two-phase Reacting Swirl
Flow inside a Cement Cyclone. Energy. 2014, 75,
89–96. DOI: 10.1016/j.energy.2014.04.064.
[20] Wasilewski, M.; Duda, J. Multicriteria Optimisation of
First-stage Cyclones in the Clinker Burning System by
Means of Numerical Modelling and Experimental
Research. Powder Technol. 2016, 289, 143–158. DOI:
10.1016/j.powtec.2015.11.018.
[21] Elsayed, K.; Lacor, C. The Effect of Cyclone Inlet
Dimensions on the Flow Pattern and Performance.
Appl. Math. Modell. 2011, 35, 1952–1968. DOI:
10.1016/j.apm.2010.11.007.
[22] Hanjalic, K.; Launder, B. E. A Reynolds Stress Model of
Turbulence and Its Application to Thin Shear Flows.
J. Fluid Mech. 1972, 52(4), 609–638. DOI: 10.1017/
S002211207200268X.
[23] Parekh, J.; Rzehak, R. Euler–Euler Multiphase CFD-
simulation with Full Reynolds Stress Model
and Anisotropic Bubble-induced Turbulence. Int.
J. Multiphase Flow. 2018, 99, 231–245. DOI: 10.1016/
j.ijmultiphaseflow.2017.10.012.
[24] Prabhansu; Rajmistry, S.; Ganguli, S.; Chandra, P.;
Karmakar, M. K.; Chattergee, P. K. Numerical
Analysis of Gas-Solid Behavior in a Cyclone Separator
for Circulating Fluidized Bed System. J. Appl. Fluid
Mech. 2017, 10(4), 1167–1176. DOI: 10.18869/acad-
pub.jafm.73.241.26951.
[25] Slack, M., . D.; Prasad, R. O.; Bakker, A.; Boysan, F. 2000.
Advances in Cyclone Modelling Using Unstructured
Grids. Trans IChemE 78(Part–A) DOI: 10.1205/
026387600528373.
[26] Modeling Turbulent Flow, Introductory Fluent
Training. 2006. www.southampton.ac.uk/~nwb/lec
tures/… /Turbulence_Notes_Fluent-v6.3.06.pdf
[27] Safikhani, H.; Akhavan-Behabadi, M. A.; Shams, M.;
Rahimyan, M. H. Numerical Simulation of Flow Field
in Three Types of Standard Cyclone Separators. Adv.
Powder Tech. 2010, 21, 435–442. DOI: 10.1016/j.
apt.2010.01.002.
[28] Shun, R.; Li, Z. Q. 2002. Simulation of Strong Swirling
Flow by Use of Different Turbulence Model. Power
Eng. 22(3).
[29] Zhao, B.; Su, Y.; Zhang, J. Simulation of Gas Flow
Pattern and Separation Efficiency in Cyclone with
Conventional Single and Spiral Double Inlet
18 M. DASAR AND R. S. PATIL
Configuration. Trans IChemE. Part A. Chem. Eng.
Res. Des. 2006, 84(A12), 1158–1165. DOI: 10.1205/
cherd06040.
[30] Lapple, C. E.;. Processes Use Many Collector Types.
Chem. Eng. 1951, 58, 144–151.
[31] Mothilal, T.; Pitchandi, K.; Velukumar, V.;
Parthiban, K. CFD and Statistical Approach for
Optimization of Operating Parameters in a Tangential
Cyclone Heat Exchanger. J. Appl. Fluid Mech. 2018, 11
(2), 459–466. DOI: 10.29252/jafm.11.02.27791.
[32] Udaya Bhaskar, K.; Rama Murthy, Y.; Ravi Raju, M.;
Tiwari, S.; Srivastava, J. K.; Ramakrishnan, N. CFD
Simulation and Experimental Validation Studies on
Hydrocyclone. Miner. Eng. 2007, 20, 60–71. DOI:
10.1016/j.mineng.2006.04.012.
[33] Rama Murthy, Y.; Udaya Bhaskar, K. Parametric CFD
Studies on Hydrocyclone. Powder Technol. 2012, 230,
36–47. DOI: 10.1016/j.powtec.2012.06.048.
[34] M’Bouana, N. L. P.; Lia, D.; Yangjia, T.; Yang, T.; Lu, H.
Numerical Simulation of Gas and Particle Flow in
Cyclone Separators. AIP Conf. Proc. 2013, 1547, 545–554.
[35] Farzad, P.; Seyyed, H. H.; Goodarz, A.; Khairy, E. Impacts
of the Vortex Finder Eccentricity on the Flow Pattern and
Performance of a Gas Cyclone. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2017,
187, 1–13. DOI: 10.1016/j.seppur.2017.06.046.
[36] Dzmitry, M.; Anders, G. A.; Tord, S. L. Effects of the
Inlet Angle on the Flow Pattern and Pressure Drop of
a Cyclone with Helical-roof Inlet. Chemical Engineering
Research and Design. 2015, 102, 307–321. DOI:
10.1016/j.cherd.2015.06.036.
[37] Sakura, G. B.; Andrew, Y. T. L. CFD Simulation of Cyclone
Separators to Reduce Air Pollution. Powder Technol. 2015,
286, 488–506. DOI: 10.1016/j.powtec.2015.08.023.
[38] Cortes, C.; Gil, A. Modeling the Gas and Particle Flow
inside Cyclone Separators. Prog. Energy Combust. Sci.
2007, 33, 409–452. DOI: 10.1016/j.pecs.2007.02.001.
[39] Faqi, Z.; Guogang, S.; Yuming, Z.; Hui, C.; Qing, W.
Experimental and CFD Study on the Effects of Surface
Roughness on Cyclone Performance. Sep. Purif.
Technol. 2018, 193, 175–183. DOI: 10.1016/j.
seppur.2017.11.017.
[40] Kumar, V.; Jha, K. Numerical Investigations of the
Cone-shaped Vortex Finders on the Performance of
Cyclone Separators. J. Mech. Sci. Technol. 2018, 32
(11), 5293–5303. DOI: 10.1007/s12206-018-1028-5.
[41] Bunyawanichakul, P.; Kirkpatrick, M. P.; Sargison, J. E.;
Walker, G. J. Numerical and Experimental Studies of the
Flow Field in a Cyclone Dryer. J. Fluids Eng. 2006, 128,
1240–1250. DOI: 10.1115/1.2354523.
[42] Akiyama, O.; Kato, C. Numerical Investigations of
Unsteady Flows and Particle Behavior in a Cyclone
Separator. J. Fluids Eng. 2017, 139, 913021–9130211.
DOI: 10.1115/1.4036589.
[43] Jafari, P. H.; Misiulia, D.; Hellstrom, J. G. I.;
Gebart, B. R. Modeling of Particle-laden Cold Flow in
a Cyclone Gasifier. J. Fluids Eng. 2019, 141,
0213021–02130213.
[44] Zhou, H.; Hu, Z.; Zang, Q.; Wang, Q.; Lv, W.
Numerical Study on Gas-solid Flow Characteristics
of Ultra-light Particles in a Cyclone Separator.
Powder Technol. 2019, 3441, 784–796. DOI: 10.1016/
j.powtec.2018.12.054.
[45] Zhang, J.; Zha, Z.; Che, P.; Ding, H.; Pan, W.
Influences of Inlet Height and Velocity on Main
Performances in the Cyclone Separator. Part. Sci.
Technol. 2018. DOI: 10.1080/02726351.2018.1423589.