New Journal and we have not received input yet 25 (2021) 100997

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Thermal Science and Engineering Progress

journal homepage: www.sciencedirect.com/journal/thermal-science-and-engineering-progress

CFD modeling of the forces in the wet scrubber acting on particulate matter
released from biomass combustion
Tayebeh Darbandi *, Mikael Risberg, Lars Westerlund
Energy Engineering, Div. Energy Science, Luleå University of Technology, 971 87 Luleå, Sweden

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: The flue gas from biomass combustion contains particulate matter, which is a considerable precarious constituent
Biomass combustion cause of serious health issues. The wet flue gas cleaning method is one of the most efficient solutions for small-
Flue gas cleaning scale boilers (≈100 kW) and small particles. In this study, the forces on particulate matter in a wet flue gas
Diffusiophoresis
cleaning process using an absorption solution have been studied with the implementation of compiled user-
Thermophoresis
Wet scrubber
defined function code in Ansys Fluent 19.2®. The forces governing the wet cleaning process as well as the
Particulate matter corresponding conditions of the system have also been studied. Drag, buoyancy, diffusiophoresis, and thermo­
phoresis forces have been analyzed as the most important forces acting on particulate matters. Simulations have
been conducted for velocities, particle sizes, temperatures, and water vapor mass fractions within the same range
as experiments in order to acquire trends for particle collection for these variables.
Moreover, the influence of diffusiophoresis force was compared to that of the thermophoresis force under
different conditions. It was unveiled that the diffusiophoresis force had a significant effect on nanoparticle
collection. The impact of diffusiophoresis is increased by the ascending gradient of temperature as well as water
vapor mass fraction. Simulations declare that the thermophoresis force effect is small compared to the dif­
fusiophoresis force effect in the particle collection process. Thereby, one could conclude that the diffusiophoresis
force governs the collection of particulate matter in the wet scrubber method. The model validation is confirmed
by comparing the results with previous empirical models.

Introduction
In the past few decades, considering the development of industries
and growth of urban areas, biomass has been proved to be an appealing
fuel due to its renewability and availability. Small biomass-fired boilers
for heating and small industries are outstanding examples of biomass
applications[1,2]. Around the world, fireplaces are used in numerous
residential areas in villages and urban areas, for instance in Sweden,
Norway, Finland, Germany and China [3]. However, critical problems
encountered by these boilers and fireplaces are related to the emission of
particulate matter (PM) and haze pollution. The PM emitted by biomass
contains particles with a diameter range of 1 nm to 100 µm. Tar, char,
flying ash, residues, elemental carbon (EC), and black carbon (BC) that
would not burn completely are examples of PM [2,4]. Furthermore, the
HRAPIE project run by World Health Organization (WHO) reported that
PM2.5 in 2015 was the 5th largest mortality factor in the world and
could play a critical role in causing 4.2 million premature deaths glob­
ally each year [5]. Consequently, WHO has issued a new and rather
stricter air quality limit of 25 µg/m3 and 50 µg/m3 for mean emission of
PM2.5 and PM10, respectively, for a time frame of 24 h [6]. For the
abovementioned reasons, it is necessary to clean flue gases before being
released into the atmosphere.
Over the past decade, some investigations have attempted to develop
methods for cleaning flue gas as well as the existing ones in the market,
which could be divided into two categories: 1) wet techniques (e.g.,
scrubbers, wet electrostatic scrubbers(WESP)) and 2) dry techniques (e.
g., dry electrostatic precipitator(DESP), Filters, cyclones). In dry
methods, the cleaning process is done without using any liquid, based on
either inertia principle, electro properties of flue gas components, or
filters. Cyclones are suitable for separating particles larger than 10 μm.
The DESP system is based on electrical charge over the pollutant parti­
cles, high collection efficiency and a wide range of operating tempera­
ture are the advantages of this method. However, because of the high
price, this method is not suitable for small-scale boilers. Filters can
separate particulates and gaseous impurities from flue gases, based on
the mass force with high efficiency. The main limitation of this category
is that the flue gas must be dry, which makes it an improper candidate

* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: Tayebeh.Darbandi@ltu.se (T. Darbandi), Mikael.Risberg@ltu.se (M. Risberg), Lars.Westerlund@ltu.se (L. Westerlund).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsep.2021.100997
Received 12 January 2021; Received in revised form 16 June 2021; Accepted 16 June 2021
Available online 21 June 2021
2451-9049/© 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
T. Darbandi et al.
Nomenclature
Symbol Description Units
Ct Constant, 1.14 [–]
CA Mass force coefficient [.]
Cm Constant, 2.1 [–]
Cs Constant, 1.17 [–]
D12 Diffusion coefficient [–]
dp Particle diameter [m]
dij Deformation tensor [s-1]
Fi, Drag Drag force [Pa kg m− 3]
Fi, Ptrss Pressure force [Pa kg m− 3]
Fi, Virt Virtual mass force [Pa kg m− 3]
Fi, History History force [Pa kg m− 3]
Fi, Buoy Buoyancy force [Pa kg m− 3]
Fi, Therm Thermophoresis force [Pa kg m− 3]
Fi, Brown Brownian force [Pa kg m− 3]
Fi, Diffusion Diffusiophoresis force [Pa kg m− 3]
g Gravitational force [m s− 2]
K Constant coefficient of Saffman’s lift force, 2.594 [–]
KB Boltzmann constant [–]
Kn Knudsen numbers [–]
Kt Thermal conductivity [W m− 2 K− 1]
m1 Mass of water vapor molecules [Kg]
m2 Mass of flue gas [Kg]
for cleaning biomass outlet gas.
The wet methods use water/liquid agents to remove particulates
from flue gas. WSEP is on the basis of dust absorption in liquid and
collecting the contaminated liquid. In this technique, membrane
collection electrodes are commonly used, which spreads water uni­
formly and reduces the used water. WSEP can be used to remove high
resistive particulates, although this method is too expensive for small-
scale boilers. The wet scrubber method has been proposed for small-
scale biomass boilers due to their ability to clean the different ranges
of particulate matter, simple design, and maintenance[2].
In the investigated method, the flue gas after the boiler/furnace is
exposed in a scrubber to an agent, and the PM:s and contaminants are
attached to the agent droplets. Using a hygroscopic solution has two
advantages, increased particle collection, and heat recovery from the
flue gas. Drying of the flue gas decreases heat losses and stronger forces
acting on particles towards the liquid surface. Increased efficiency can
be achieved by using fillings in the scrubber in order to increase contact
area and a fresh liquid surface towards the gas flow The resulting liquid
can be cleaned from particles through a filter[2]. Earlier work indicates
that even submicron particles are collected in filter cartridges with a
one-micron rating. Absorbed water from the flue gas is separated from
the solution by heat supply due to boiling point elevation in a generator.
The technique consists mainly of an absorber (scrubber) with liquid
distributed from the top and gas flow in countercurrent direction and a
generator, a pump is circulating the liquid in the absorber and to the
generator[7]. Earlier studies have shown consistent results for cleaning
flue gases by wet scrubber technique, and collection efficiency of
33–44% has been obtained for all particle sizes [8]. The question raised
in previous research work was how submicron particles could be
collected and not just follow the gas flow through the scrubber. Which
diverse forces during process conditions stand for the main collection of
these particles?
Several studies have attempted to come up with a model that ex­
plains the behavior of fine particle extraction using wet scrubbing
techniques. Lackowski et al. [9] carried out a review study on the wet
scrubber method and focused on a model that could describe the single
droplet capture process for particles. A large number of alternative
2
Thermal Science and Engineering Progress 25 (2021) 100997
md Particle mass [Kg]
Re Reynolds number [–]
r Radius of the particle [m]
T0 Local fluid temperature [K]
T Absolute temperature [K]
up Particle velocity [m s–1]
u Flue gas velocity [m s–1]
up,i Linear particle velocity [m s–1]
uDif Diffusiophoresis velocity [m s–1]
Vp Volume of the particle [m–3]
ρp Particle density [kg m–3]
ρ Gas density [kg m–3]
µ Fluid viscosity [Pa s]
ν Kinematic viscosity gas [m2 s–1]
λ Mean free path of the fluid [m]
ξ0 Zero-mean, unit-variance-independent Gaussian random
numbers [–]
ΔT/Δx Temperature gradient [K m–1]
ΔC/Δx Concentration gradient [mol m–4]
∂u/∂xi Velocity gradient tensor [s–1]
∂τij /∂xj Shear stress in the x-direction [Pa m–1]
∂P/∂xi Pressure gradient [Pa m–1]
( )
d u − up /dt Relative acceleration of particle compared with fluid
[m s–2]
approaches have been developed by studying particle capture by single
droplets [7]. Furthermore, the forces acting on the single-particle are
characterized as Brownian force, thermophoresis, diffusiophoresis,
electrical forces, gravity, and lift force [10]. Tyndall [11] was the first to
describe thermophoresis as a force that pushes the submicron particles
in a gas, through collision with gas molecules and the acquisition of
velocity, in the direction of a lower temperature. After that, an equation
was derived by Spark et al.[12] for the thermophoresis force exerted on
fine particles in a low-density flow. Tsai et al.[13] examined the accu­
racy of a thermophoresis equation reported by Talbot et al.[14], and
compared it with experimental results. They concluded that Talbot’s
equation is practical for laminar and turbulent flows. Thereby, the
Talbot equation could be practical to predict the thermophoresis effect
on operational conditions. Horst et al. [15] analyzed the influence of
diffusiophoresis and thermophoresis force on particle movement. The
effect of vapor concentration gradient was introduced as a dif­
fusiophoresis force, based on the tendency of the nanoparticles at the
presence of a concentration gradient to move toward the side with a
lower concentration. They showed diffusiophoresis force has a larger
effect on particle motion in the gas stream than thermophoresis force.
Later on, Spark et al.[12] demonstrated the substantial impact of
scrubber temperature and vapor concentration on scrubber efficiency.
They studied the influence of diffusiophoresis on single droplet particle
collection efficiency and proposed that the vapor concentration gradient
could be determined as a water vapor pressure gradient in a liquid
scrubber. They also reported that negative diffusiophoresis (droplet
evaporation) could cause a dwindle the ability of scrubber in the
cleaning process.
A challenging problem in this research area is that no theoretical
studies have been conducted on the movement of PM in the presence of
different forces and under different operational conditions. Moreover,
researches have not been performed in the past to investigate how
different sizes of submicron particles move in the flow stream and how
they are affected by various forces in real conditions in indoor fireplaces
and small boilers (≈100 kW).
In the present study, we have explored the main forces affecting
particle performance during different conditions. The main objective
T. Darbandi et al.
has been to investigate which forces cause the capture of nanoparticles
in a wet scrubber.
Methodology
In a wet scrubber, the flue gas carries the PM to the absorber. The PM
in the flue gas deviates from the streamlines due to the different forces
acting on it. Phenomena such as thermophoresis and diffusiophoresis
cause the particles to hit the wet surfaces and be collected. The PM was
assumed in the present study to consist of spherical particles with di­
ameters from 50 to 1500 nm since the main part of particles from
biomass boilers are in this region [16].
The particle tracking was accomplished using the Lagrangian equa­
tion, and the forces acting on a single particle in the gas stream were
studied. In flue gases, the volume fraction of particles is less than 1e-7,
therefore, it can be assumed that the particle is dispersed.
Forces on the particle in a gas flow
By using Newton’s second law, the forces acting on dispersed parti­
cles could be explained as follows [17]:
md
dui,d
= Fi,Drag + Fi,Press + Fi,Virt + Fi,History + Fi,Buoy + Fi,Lift + Fi,Therm
dt
+ Fi,Turb + Fi,Brown + Fi,Diffusion
where ui,d and md are the linear particle velocity and the particle
mass, respectively, Fi, Drag is the drag force due to fluid resistance, Fi, Press
is the pressure force caused by the pressure gradient, Fi, Virt stands for the
virtual mass force due to the changing acceleration of the fluid, Fi, History
is the Basset force or history force due to changes in the boundary layer
around the particle, Fi, Buoy denotes the buoyancy force arising from
gravity, Fi, Lift is the Saffman and Magnus lift force due to velocity
changes and particle circulation, Fi, Therm expresses the thermophoresis
force arising from a temperature gradient, Fi, Turb is the turbulence force
due to turbulence variation, Fi. Brown denotes the Brownian force
resulting from molecular collision, and Fi, Diffusion represents the dif­
fusiophoresis force.
Eq. (1) is a generic equation developed to model a particle in the flue
gas. In order to obtain a correct prediction of the particle movement in
an absorber, one has to investigate the conditions for each force and the
effect of each force on the particle motion. Depending on the PM and
flue gas conditions, some of the forces in Eq. (1) may be ineffective and
can be neglected. Firstly, the drag force arising from the fluid resistance
must be included. This force acts in the opposite direction to the di­
rection of the relative motion of the particle and is defined based on
Stokes’ drag law for particle flow in flue gas(Eq. (12)) [18].
The second term on the right-hand side of Eq. (1) denotes the pres­
sure force, which appears owing to a pressure gradient over the particle
surface.
( )
∂P ∂τij ρ ∂u
Fi,Press = Vp − + = ( )upi (2)
∂xi ∂xj ρp ∂xi
Since the scrubber system has a small pressure gradient, the pressure
force can be neglected. The next force on the right-hand side of the
equation, the virtual mass force or apparent force, is caused by a change
in the flue gas acceleration around the particle and has a significant
effect when the fluid density is higher than the particle density. How­
ever, in the wet scrubber process investigated in this study, the flue gas
density is lower than the PM density, and this force tends to be omitted
[19].
(
1 ρ d u − up
) mixed forms of physical interface processes where particles are tracked
Fi.Virt = (3)
2 ρp dt
Further, the history force or Basset force does not affect the particle
motion in the system due to the relatively constant velocity of the flue
Thermal Science and Engineering Progress 25 (2021) 100997
gas and particles in the main direction through the scrubber [1720].
duslip
FA = − CA VP ρp (4)
dt
The next term on the right-hand side refers to the buoyancy force,
which is generally determined from the density difference between the
phases multiplied by the particle volume and by the gravitational ac­
celeration Eq. (7). The next term denotes the lift force, and to investigate
whether the lift force affects the particle movement, the particle size is to
be considered. Since the lift force does not act on nanoparticles and the
particle size in the model is 50 nm-1500 nm, the lift force can be
neglected [21,22].
1
2Ku2 ρdij ( )
Fi,Lift = 1 uf − up (5)
ρp dp (dlk dkl )
4
In contrast, the thermophoresis force causes particle movement
through the absorber. This force is a result of the temperature gradient in
the scrubber unit and guides the PM from a high-temperature region to a
low-temperature area Eq. (8). In contrast, the turbulence force is not
able to change the PM’s direction in the flue gas cleaning system. The
turbulence force depends on the time required by the particle to pass
through a turbulent eddy. Thus, this force can be analyzed by dividing
the force by the particle density. Since the density of flue gas is much
lower than that of PM, the turbulence effect may be neglected. The
(1) Brownian force does not play a role because this force arises from par­
ticle collision and momentum transfer[23 17].
√̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
12πμdp KT
Fi,Brown = ξ0 (6)
Δt
The last term on the right-hand side of Eq. (1) introduces the dif­
fusiophoresis force, which is considered to be a consequence of the water
vapor concentration gradient in the absorber. Eq. (11) Diffusiophoresis
guides the particle from an area with a high water vapor content to an
area with lower such content.
The computational fluid dynamics model
With CFD technique, one can examine the effect of each force on a
particle and thereby determine its contribution to the deviating of the
particle path from the gas stream. Thus, the main goal of the work can be
achieved. Trends in particle separation and the effect of different vari­
ables have been investigated to create an idea of its strength. The present
study assumed the PM to consist of spherical particles with diameters
from 50 to 1500 nm, which are typical particle sizes found in flue gases
from small-scale biomass combustion boilers [24]. It should not be seen
as an optimization attempt for the absorber but only an indication of the
effect of the variable.
The CFD software Ansys Fluent 19.2® was used to perform the
simulations, and the model used was two-dimensional, steady-state and
pressure-based. In the simulations, the equations of mass, species, en­
ergy, and momentum conservation were solved as governing equations.
The pressure-based solver was used with a second-order upwind dis­
cretization scheme, and the simulations were assumed to be converged
when the residuals’ continuity decreased to 10− 15.
The flow in the simulation volume was treated as a two-phase flow of
PM and flue gas. The system was modeled with Euler-Lagrange ap­
proaches [25]. The flue gas phase was set as the carrier phase, while the
PM phase represented the dispersed phase. The flue gas flow was
calculated with the Eulerian method. Moreover, since the Lagrange
framework gives a complete model for the particle level, it can solve
individually. Along with this, the gas phase was treated as a continuous
flow phase and was modeled by solving the Navier-Stokes equation [17].
Considering this model to be sufficient for the near-wall region, where
viscosity has a strong effect, the K-omega SST model was used to
3
T. Darbandi et al.
describe the turbulence. A y+ value around one is required to obtain a
correct result close to the wall. The flow inside the volume is assumed to
be turbulent since the flow before an absorber are normally turbulent
and therefore will be turbulent in the domain considered.
Comparing all the above mentioned forces acting on the PM, it was
established that diffusiophoresis, thermophoresis, the buoyancy force
and the drag force have the greatest effect in the scrubbing system. The
buoyancy force is explained by [26]
( )
Fi,Buoy = Vp ρp − ρ .g (7)
where ρp and ρ denote the particle and the gas density, respectively,
while Vp represents the volume of the particle and g is the gravitational
force.
Brock et al.[26,14] developed the following expression for the
thermophoresis force:
( )
6πμνdp Cs K + Ct dλp
1 ΔT
FTherm = − ( )( ) (8)
λ λ mp T0 Δx
1 + 3Cm dp 1 + 2K + 2Ct dp
where the constants Ct, Cm and Cs are 1.14, 2.18 and 1.17, respec­
tively, µ is the fluid viscosity, ν represents the kinematic viscosity of the
flue gas, and K denotes the thermal conductivity of the gas divided by
the thermal conductivity of the particle (kg/kp). Moreover, dp denotes the
particle diameter, λ stands for the mean free path of the fluid, T0 rep­
resents the local fluid temperature, and, finally, ΔT represents the tem­
Δx
perature gradient.
uDif = − D12
n(m2 − m1 ) ΔC
(9)
ρ Δx
The other significant force is diffusiophoresis. Derjaguin et al.[27]
developed the initial equation of the diffusiophoresis velocity (Eq. (9))
based on an expression presented by Chapman and Cowling[28]for the
particle size, r ≥ λi(r is the radius of the particle and λi is the mean free
path of the gas mixture)
where uDif is the diffusiophoresis velocity, m1 and m2 are the masses
of the molecules of component1 (water vapor) and component 2 (flue
gas except water vapor), respectively, n is the total number of molecules
per unit volume, D12 is the diffusion coefficient of component 1 in
component 2, ρ is the density of the total flue gas, and ΔC Δx refers to the
concentration gradient of the water vapor. Eq. (9) holds for Knudsen
numbers (Kn = λ/r) less than 0.5 and Derjagan et al. [27] verified the
equation with experiments.
The force acting on the particles in a fluid due to diffusiophoresis is
explained according to Stoke’s law as follows:
FDif = 6πμruDif (10)
where µ is the fluid viscosity. Equation (9) and (10) give the dif­
fusiophoresis force [27]:
n(m2 − m1 ) ΔC
FDif = 6πμr(− D12 ) (11)
ρ Δx
Diffusiophoresis is not implemented by default in the commercial
CFD codes. Thus, we have implemented diffusiophoresis by user-defined
function code (UDF) to the model. The expression of the diffusiophoresis
force includes the drag force. Therefore, the drag force was excluded (set
to zero through the UDF (user-defined function)) in the simulations
(default included in the software). For the thermophoresis force, the
drag force must be included, and this was achieved through a UDF. The
drag force between the fluid and the particle is determined by Eq. (11):
18μ CD Re
FDrag = (12)
ρp dp2 24
where CD is the drag coefficient calculated for a spherical particle, dp
represents the particle diameter, ρp denotes the density of the particle,
4
Thermal Science and Engineering Progress 25 (2021) 100997
and Re refers to the Reynolds number, which is obtained as follows [29]:
⃒ ⃒
ρdp ⃒up − u⃒
Re = (13)
μ
where up and u are the particle velocity and the flue gas velocity,
respectively.
The geometry of a local part of the absorber was created using Ansys
Design Modeler. The computational volume (the width multiplied by the
height) was 3.0 by 10.0 mm and was chosen so that the effect of various
forces acting on a particle when passing through the volume could be
analyzed. In order to establish a stable gas stream, the injection point
was chosen to be 1.0 mm above the inlet boundary and in the horizontal
direction in the middle of the volume. The wall simulates a fluid build-
up surface that occurs in the absorber.
The mesh of the computational domain consisted of 75,000 quadri­
lateral elements. To estimate the discretization error, a mesh refinement
test was performed for reference conditions (described at the end of this
sub-section). The parameter that was studied was the water vapor mass
fraction in the point (x = 2 mm and y = 5 mm) of the computational
domain. The mesh was generated into by12,500 elements, 75,000 ele­
ments, 250,000 elements, and 1,000,000 elements. The results for the
water vapor mass fraction for these meshes was 0.08757463,
0.0884183, 0.0887234 and 0.08890346, respectively.
Eventually, the results obtained using different element sizes showed
that mesh development after 75,000 elements with a size of 0.02 mm
does not have any significant effect on the outcome. The discretization
error was estimated at 0.5% for the 75000-element mesh compared to
the 1000000-element mesh. The 12,500 elements mesh gave an error
larger than 1%. Consequently, a mesh consisting of 75,000 elements
linearly ordered in a rectangular structure was selected.
The model is illustrated in Fig. 1(b). The boundary conditions consist
of a stationary wet wall (the liquid surface in the absorber) specified to
act as a trap of the particles when they hit it. The velocity inlet boundary
condition was used to define the flow properties. A pressure-based
boundary was chosen for the outlet. The other vertical boundary,
which is parallel to the wall, was considered as a free stream. It had the
same conditions as the velocity inlet and acted as comparable flue gas.
The free-stream surface was interpreted as adiabatic in thermal cir­
cumstances. In the simulated scrubber system, the gas flow composition
was specified as a mixture of oxygen, carbon dioxide, nitrogen, and
water vapor, while the mass fraction of the mixture species was specified
at the inlet surface. The mass fraction was calculated through stoichio­
metric calculation and with a mole fraction of oxygen is 13% in the flue
gas. The particle was assumed to be inert with a density of 600 kg/m3.
The flue gas density, specific heat, thermal conductivity, and mass
diffusivity of the flue gas were determined according to the incom­
pressible ideal gas, the mixing law, the mass-weighted mixing law, and
the kinetic theory approach, respectively. A single particle was injected
with the same temperature and velocity as the temperature and velocity
of the local flue gas. Since the volume fraction of PM in flue gases from
biomass combustion are typically below 1e-7 the particle–particle
interaction and particle–fluid are neglectable and one way coupling
between the continuous phase and particles are used. As the particle is
not affecting the continuous phase, the PM size could be several orders
of magnitude smaller than the mesh.
The flow conditions were defined according to the conditions pre­
vailing for real flue gas cleaning by a scrubber with an absorption so­
lution according to a reference case [30]. The influence of different
variables, such as the temperature, the mass fraction of water, the flue
gas velocity, and the particle size, was investigated. Based on earlier
experiments, the inlet conditions for the flue gas were set to a temper­
ature of 180 ◦ C and a velocity of 1.09 m/s. The inlet flue gas was spec­
ified as a mixture containing water vapor (with a mass fraction of 0.11),
oxygen (with a mass fraction of 0.15), nitrogen (with a mass fraction of
0.66) and carbon dioxide (with a mass fraction of 0.08). The wall (wet
T. Darbandi et al. Thermal Science and Engineering Progress 25 (2021) 100997

Fig. 1. (a) Forces act on the particulate matter in the flow of flue gas. (b) Scheme of the volume model.

surface) imposed a constant temperature of 60 ◦ C, and the mass fraction
of the water on the wall was specified to 0.0405. A particle (300 nm) was
injected through the inlet with a velocity and a temperature identical to
those in the local flue gas conditions [30]. This will be referred to as the
“reference case” in the following.
Results and discussion
The particle collection was studied with the presence of dif­
fusiophoresis and thermophoresis. In the first step, the effect of each
force was calculated separately, and the influence of different parame­
ters was investigated considering the reference conditions. The drag
force and buoyancy force were also included in the simulations.
Thermophoresis force
Simulations were performed with different gas temperatures at the
inlet (100–300 ◦ C) and with a constant surface temperature of 60 ◦ C on
the wall. All the other variables were set according to the reference case.
The effect of the temperature gradient on the particle path is presented
in Fig. 2 (a) and Fig. 2 (b).
An increased temperature gradient bends the particle path more.
However, for the investigated temperatures, the thermophoresis force
bends the particle path less than 1 µm, no particle was collected. Fig. 2
(b) illustrates the path of the PM when thermophoresis is introduced for
the reference conditions. This figure shows that the particle does not hit
the wall and will not be collected with the presence of this force in the
investigated volume.
The simulation results for a particle size of 300 nm with all

Fig. 2. (a) Effect of the temperature gradient on the particle movement with the presence of the thermophoresis force. The Y-axis shows how far the particle is
transported towards the wall from the injection point. All tested particle sizes (50, 300 and 1000 nm) ends up on the same line (b) The particle path in the volume
(reference case).

5
T. Darbandi et al.
investigated forces acting were compared with the thermophoresis force
along the particle path from injection to the wet surface in the X and Y
direction, respectively. The average magnitude of the thermophoresis
force was only 1–2‰ with all values in the range 0–4 ‰. Therefore,
thermophoresis was excluded from the remainder of the simulations.
Diffusiophoresis force
The next section of the study was concerned with the effect of
different parameters on the diffusiophoresis force and, as a consequence,
the particle collection. The effect of different inlet and wall tempera­
tures, the gradient of the water vapor mass fraction, the velocity, and the
particle size on the magnitude of the diffusiophoresis force was
investigated.
Effect of the temperature gradient on the diffusiophoresis force
The first set of analyses examined the impact of the flue gas tem­
perature gradient on the distance traveled by the particle in the Y-di­
rection before hitting the wall. In this part, the flue gas temperature was
varied between 100 ◦ C and 300 ◦ C, and the other parameters were set as
constant according to the reference condition. The temperature range
was chosen based on the conditions prevailing for a real biofuel boiler.
Fig. 3 (a) shows that an increase in the temperature gradient has a
positive impact on the diffusiophoresis force and augments the particle
collection. Therefore, by increasing the temperature gradient in the
absorber, the particle accelerates toward the cold wall and is collected.
This can be explained by the increased diffusion coefficient at higher
temperatures, which increases the water vapor concentration gradient.
Furthermore, the density of the gas is decreased by a temperature in­
crease, which causes a higher rate of diffusion [31].
Effect of the particle size
With the presence of diffusiophoresis, the diameter of the PM has a
substantial impact on the particle collection. To predict the effect of the
PM’s size on the diffusiophoresis force, PM sizes between 50 and 1,500
nm were chosen. The simulation results for the different effects of the
different particle sizes, using the reference case data, are shown in Fig. 4.
Fig. 4 shows that particles with a size from 50 nm to 900 nm hit the
wall, but diffusiophoresis influences larger particles less and larger
particles were not collected at the wall. This phenomenon can be
explained as a result of inertia, which is increased for larger particles.
This result is in agreement with other research work [32].
Fig. 3. (a)Effect of the temperature gradient on the particle collection with the presence of diffusiophoresis. (The travelled distance refers to the distance travelled by
the particle before it is collected by the wet surface.). (b) The particle path in the volume (white dashed line) for the reference case with the presence of
diffusiophoresis.
6
Thermal Science and Engineering Progress 25 (2021) 100997
Effect of the water vapor concentration gradient
The main parameter affecting the diffusiophoresis force in particle
collection using the wet scrubber method is the concentration gradient
of the water vapor in the absorber. Fig. 5 (a) illustrates the effect of the
mass fraction of the water vapor gradient in the flue gas on the particle
collection.
It can be observed that by increasing the mass fraction of the water
vapor gradient, the particle hits the wall at a position closer to the in­
jection point. The range of the mass fraction of the water vapor on the
wall was varied between 0.019 and 1. Due to the concentration gradient
of the water vapor in the flue gas, the diffusiophoresis force accrues and
makes a net velocity for the particle. Consequently, the particle is forced
into a region with a lower water vapor concentration. From this result,
one can conclude that by increasing the concentration gradient of the
water vapor, the particle will be collected faster [33].
Fig. 5 (c) illustrates the case of washing the flue gas with water, with
a mass fraction of the water vapor equal to one at the wall, which causes
the particle to be repelled from the wall. This shows that nanoparticles
will not be collected in a wet scrubber using water as the cleaning liquid.
Effect of the flue gas velocity
In the final part of the study, the impact of the velocity of the flue gas
being supplied to the absorber was investigated. The particle velocity at
the injection point was set to the same value as that in the local gas
conditions. Similar to the previous parts of the simulation, the reference
conditions were used for the other parameters. Fig. 6 (a) shows the effect
of different velocities on the particle collection with the presence of
diffusiophoresis.
As shown in Fig. 6 (a) and (b), by raising the flue gas velocity, the
particle passes through the volume faster and is collected at a higher
position on the wall. This finding was expected since the drag force ef­
fect is increased by a higher gas velocity. The drag force reduces the
diffusiophoresis force effect.
Validation
Experimental work measuring forces due to diffusion between a
water droplet and a solid particle was performed by Prokhorov et al.
[34]. They measured the diffusion-repulsive forces between an evapo­
rating drop and a silver-coated glass sphere. In Fig. 7, the repulsive force
is plotted (round markers) on the ordinate and the distance between the
drop and the particle on the abscissa. The environmental conditions
used were an air temperature of 70 ◦ C and relative humidity of 0% (a)
T. Darbandi et al. Thermal Science and Engineering Progress 25 (2021) 100997

Fig. 4. (a) Effect of the particle size on the particle collection with the presence of diffusiophoresis. (The travelled distance refers to the distance travelled by the
particle before it is collected by the wet surface.). (b) The figure shows the path of different particle size movements under the reference conditions.

Fig. 5. (a) Effect of the water vapor

mass fraction in the flue gas on the
particle collection with the presence of
diffusiophoresis. (The traveled dis­
tance refers to the distance traveled by
the particle before it is collected by the
wet surface.). (b) particle path when
the mass fraction of the water vapor on
the wall is 0.0405, and (c) present path
when the mass fraction of the water
vapor on the wall is 1.0. (The different
colors in the volume represent
different values of the mass fraction of
the water vapor.)

7
T. Darbandi et al. Thermal Science and Engineering Progress 25 (2021) 100997

Fig. 6. (a) Effect of the flue gas velocity on the particle collection with the presence of diffusiophoresis. (The traveled distance refers to the distance traveled by the
particle before it is collected by the wet surface.). (b)Particulate matter path for different gas velocity magnitudes: A) 0.3 (m s− 1), B) 0.6 (m s− 1), C) 0.9 (m s− 1), D)
1.0 (m s− 1), E) 1.5 (m s− 1), F) 2(m s− 1).

Fig. 7. Diffusion forces between a droplet and a sphere at a) 40%, and b) 0% relative humidity (Experimental Result is showed by Symbol, And CFD result is showed
by the blue line). (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)

and 40% (b), respectively. The water droplet had the same temperature
as the air. The particle had a radius of 1.0 mm (a large particle), which is
much larger than the free mean path. To calculate the force during this
particular case, the force was calculated as
nm2 ΔC
FDif = 6πμr(− D12 ) (14)
ρ Δx
Taken into account, the area increases when one moves away from
the droplet, the calculated force from CFD simulations is presented as
solid lines in Fig. 7. The simulations predict a repulsive force in good
agreement with measured values.
Conclusions
The present study was designed to determine the influence of
different forces on particle collection in the wet scrubber, as well as to
specify the most effective force in the wet scrubber particle collection
process. Based on real conditions, it was concluded that diffusiophoresis
is the leading force for collecting nanoparticles in a wet scrubber. The
thermophoresis force contributes only weakly to the particle motion.
Furthermore, it was found that the mass fraction gradient of the water
vapor and the temperature gradient have a significant effect on the
diffusiophoresis force and the particle collection. By increasing the mass
fraction of the water vapor in the flue gas, the particle was collected
faster and the same behavior was also seen for an increase in the tem­
perature gradient. However, when the wall is wet with only water, the
particle is repelled from the wall, and it has been shown that a wet
surface with only water does not have the ability to collect particles.
Moreover, the results have indicated that an increase in the velocity
and the particle size has a negative effect on the particle collection.
Increasing the velocity and the particle size augments the drag force,
which weakens the effect of the diffusiophoresis force on the particle
collection.
In summary, it can be generalized that by decreasing the velocity and
by increasing the water vapor mass fraction gradient and the tempera­
ture gradient in the system, the particle collection efficiency will in­
crease. Moreover, a wet surface with water does not have the ability to
clean the PM. These findings have substantial implications for our un­
derstanding of how particle collection works for PM in flue gas during
the wet cleaning process.

8
T. Darbandi et al.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank Interreg Nord for their funding and
for providing the possibility of carrying out this research work. More­
over, we extend our thanks to our academic partners at Luleå University
of Technology for their cooperation, which was important for the
completion of the study.
References
[1] T. Zadravec, B. Rajh, F. Kokalj, N. Samec, CFD modelling of air staged combustion
in a wood pellet boiler using the coupled modelling approach, Therm. Sci. Eng.
Prog. 20 (2020) 100715, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsep.2020.100715.
[2] R. Singh, A. Shukla, A review on methods of fl ue gas cleaning from combustion of
biomass, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. J. 29 (2014) 854–864, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.rser.2013.09.005.
[3] M.A. Bari, G. Baumbach, B. Kuch, G. Scheffknecht, Air pollution in residential areas
from wood-fired heating, Aerosol Air, Qual. Res. 11 (6) (2011) 749–757, https://
doi.org/10.4209/aaqr.2010.09.0079.
[4] S. Vedal, S. Vedal, Ambient Particles and Health : Lines that Divide Ambient
Particles and Health, J Air Waste Manag. 47 (2012) 551–581, https://doi.org/
10.1080/10473289.1997.10463922.
[5] D. Segersson, K. Eneroth, L. Gidhagen, C. Johansson, G. Omstedt, A. Engström,
B. Forsberg, Health Impact of PM 10, PM 2. 5 and Black Carbon Exposure Due to
Different Source Sectors in Stockholm, Gothenburg and Umea, Sweden, J. Environ.
Res. 14 (2017) 11–14, https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph14070742.
[6] nitrogen dioxide and sulfur dioxide.
[7] A. Wang, Q. Song, Q. Yao, Thermophoretic capture of submicron particles by a
droplet, Atmos. Environ. 147 (2016) 157–165, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
atmosenv.2016.10.001.
[8] L. Westerlund, R. Hermansson, J. Fagerström, Flue gas purification and heat
recovery: A biomass fired boiler supplied with an open absorption system, Appl.
Energy. 96 (2012) 444–450, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2012.02.085.
[9] A. Jaworek, W. Balachandran, A. Krupa, J. Kulon, M. Lackowski, Wet
Electroscrubbers for State of the Art Gas Cleaning, Environ. Sci. Technol. 40 (20)
(2006) 6197–6207, https://doi.org/10.1021/es060592710.1021/es0605927.s001.
[10] A. Guha, Transport and Deposition of Particles in Turbulent and Laminar Flow,
Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 40 (1) (2008) 311–341, https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.
fluid.40.111406.102220.
[11] J. Tyndall, Sicientific Addresses, On dust and smoke, New Heaaven, Charles C.
Chatfield & CO, Conn, 1871.
[12] E. Sparks, Leslie, M, Pilat, Effect of diffusiophoresis on particle, ATMOS Env. 4
(1970) 651–660.
[13] C.-J. Tsai, J.-S. Lin, S.G. Aggarwal, D.-R. Chen, Thermophoretic Deposition of
Particles in Laminar and Turbulent Tube Flows, Aerosol Sci Techno. 38 (2) (2004)
131–139, https://doi.org/10.1080/02786820490251358.
Thermal Science and Engineering Progress 25 (2021) 100997
[14] L. Talbot R.K. Cheng R.W. Schefer D.R. Willis 101 4 1980 737 758.
[15] T.W. Horst, A review of particle transport in a condensing steam environment,
Atmos. Sci. Environ. Radiol. Sci. 848 (1967) 3–51.
[16] C.J.J.M. de Best, H.P. van Kemenade, T. Brunner, I. Obernberger, Particulate
emission reduction in small-scale biomass combustion plants by a condensing heat
exchanger, Energ Fuel. 22 (1) (2008) 587–597, https://doi.org/10.1021/
ef060435t.
[17] B. Andersson, R. Andersson, E. Hightech, M. Mortensen, N. Defence, R. Sudiyo,
G. Mada, Computational Fluid Dynamics for Engineers (2019) 10–13.
[18] S.L. Lee, Particle drag in a diluie turbulent two-phase suspension flow, J Multiph.
Flow. 13 (1987) 247–256.
[19] C. Bautsch, H. Fahlenkamp, Detailed simulation of wet flue gas desulphurisation
scrubbers with CFD, in: ICLASS, Kyoto, Japan, 2006. https://doi.org/ICLASS06-
238.
[20] C. Yang, Z.-S. Mao, Fluid flow and mass transfer on particle scale (2014), https://
doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-08-099919-7.00002-0.
[21] E.R. Rad M.R. Farajpour Dynamics analysis of microparticles in inertial
microfluidics for biomedical applications JCAMECH. 50 2019 157 164 https://doi.
org/10.22059/JCAMECH.2019.281000.391.
[22] N.I. Kolev Multiphase Flow Dynamics 3 2012 Springer Berlin Heidelberg Berlin,
Heidelberg.
[23] Z.-Q. Yin, X.-F. Li, F.-B. Bao, C.-X. Tu, X.-Y. Gao, Thermophoresis and brownian
motion effects on nanoparticle deposition inside a 90◦ square bend tube, Aerosol
Air Qual. Res. 18 (7) (2018) 1746–1755, https://doi.org/10.4209/
aaqr.2018.02.0047.
[24] K. Wang, S. Nakao, D. Thimmaiah, P.K. Hopke, Emissions from in-use residential
wood pellet boilers and potential emissions savings using thermal storage, Sci.
Total Environ. 676 (2019) 564–576, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
scitotenv.2019.04.325.
[25] P. Kozołub, A. Klimanek, R. Białecki, W.P. Adamczyk, Numerical simulation of a
dense solid particle flow inside a cyclone separator using the hybrid Euler-
Lagrange approach, Int. J. Multiph. Flow. 31 (2017) 170–180, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.partic.2016.09.003.
[26] ANSYS Inc., ANSYS® Academic Research Mechanical, Release 19R2 Help System,
Coupled Field Analysis Guide, ANSYS, Inc., (2019) 18.
[27] B.V. Derjaguin, Y.I. Yalamov, A.I. Storozhilova, Diffusiophoresis oF Large Aerosol
Particles, J. Colloid. 22 (2) (1966) 117–125.
[28] S. Chapman T.G. Cowling The mathematicaal theory of non-uniform gases 1991),
1953. Cambridge University Press 3 edition (January 25.
[29] H. Ounis, G. Ahmadi, J.B. McLaughlin, Brownian diffusion of submicrometer
particles in the viscous sublayer, J. Colloid Interface Sci. 143 (1) (1991) 266–277,
https://doi.org/10.1016/0021-9797(91)90458-K.
[30] L. Westerlund, R. Hermansson, J. Fagerström, Flue gas purification and heat
recovery : A biomass fired boiler supplied with an open absorption system, Appl.
Energy. 96 (2012) 444–450, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2012.02.085.
[31] P.J. Whitmore, Thermo and diffusiophoresis small aerosol particles p. j. whitmore
for, J. Aerosol Sci. 12 (1981) 1–9.
[32] L. Cui, X. Song, Y. Li, Y. Wang, Y. Feng, L. Yan, Y. Dong, Synergistic capture of fine
particles in wet flue gas through cooling and condensation, Appl. Energy. 225
(2018) 656–667, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2018.04.084.
[33] A. Baron, K. Paul, Willeke, Aerosol Measurement Principles, Techniques and
Applications, J. Aerosol Med. 6 (1993) 317–319, https://doi.org/10.1089/
jam.1993.6.317.
[34] P.S. Prokhorov, L.F. Leonov, Investigation of long-range diffusion forces between
water droplets and non-volatile particles, Discuss. Faraday Soc. 30 (1960)
124–129, https://doi.org/10.1039/DF9603000124.