Journal of the Air Pollution Control Association

ISSN: 0002-2470 (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/uawm16

Pressure Loss in Venturi Scrubbers

Shui-Chow Yung , Harry F. Barbarika & Seymour Calvert

To cite this article: Shui-Chow Yung , Harry F. Barbarika & Seymour Calvert (1977) Pressure
Loss in Venturi Scrubbers, Journal of the Air Pollution Control Association, 27:4, 348-351, DOI:
10.1080/00022470.1977.10470432

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/00022470.1977.10470432

Published online: 13 Mar 2012.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 2447

Citing articles: 15 View citing articles

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

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=uawm20
APCA NOTE-BOOK
References
1. G. L. Hobart, Hines Oil Co., Topsham,
ME, private communication.
2. D. B. Turner, Workbook of Atmospheric
Dispersion Estimates, P.H.S. publication
999-AP-26, U. S. Dept. of Health Educa-
tion and Welfare, Cincinnati, 1969.
3. V. Sharma, "An area source model for
urban air pollution application," Atmos,
Environ. 10:1027 (1976).
4. S. R. Hanna, "A simple method of calcu-
lating dispersion from urban area
sources," J. Air Poll. Control Assoc. 21:
774 (1971).
5. Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission
Factors, 2nd ed., U. S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Research Triangle
Park, 1975.
6. M. Feldstein, in Combustion-Generated
Air Pollution, ed. E. S. Starkman, Plenum
Press, New York, 1971. pp. 291-318.
Dr. Butcher is a professor of
Chemistry and Mr. Buckley is a
teaching fellow at Bowdoin College,
Brunswick, ME 04011.

Pressure Loss in Venturi Scrubbers

Shui-Chow Yung, Harry F. Barbarika and Seymour Calvert

Air Pollution Technology, Inc.
San Diego, California

Venturi scrubbers are used extensively for the collection of The pressure drop for gas flowing through a venturi
small particles. The major limitation on their use is that they scrubber is due to the friction loss along the wall of the
have high pressure drops which result in high operating costs. scrubber and the acceleration of liquid drops. Friction loss
With a better understanding of the fundamentals of the op- depends largely upon the geometry of the scrubber. Acceler-
eration of this type of scrubber, the pressure drop could be ation losses, which are frequently predominant in the venturi
optimized for a given level of particle collection. scrubber pressure drop, are fairly insensitive to scrubber ge-
ometry and in most cases can be predicted theoretically.
Currently, there are several correlations available, both
theoretical and experimental, for the prediction of pressure
Nomenclature drop in a venturi scrubber. Correlations by Matrozov,1 Ya-
cD = drag coefficient, dimensionless mauchi, et al.,2 Volgin, et al.,3 Gleason, et al.,4 and Hesketh5
d = diameter, cm are experimental correlations. Matrozov's correlations and
gc = conversion factor Volgin's correlation were obtained mainly on small size venturi
It = throat length, cm scrubbers. Yamauchi's correlation was based on experimental
p = pressure, dyne/cm2 data taken from a venturi scrubber with high temperature gas
Q = volumetric flow rate, cm3/sec flow (100°-900°C). Hesketh's correlation is an experimental
u = velocity, cm/sec correlation he obtained after he had evaluated data obtained
from many fixed throat venturi scrubbers.
X
= axial coordinate, cm Equations proposed by Yoshida, et al.,6-7 Calvert,8 Tohata,
z et al.Q Boll,10 Behie and Beeckmans11 are theoretical corre-
Greek lations. All of the equations were derived from the equations
a = surface tension, dyne/cm of motion and momentum balance. Geiseke's equation ac-
P = density, g/cm3 counts for the mass transfer between liquid and gas. Boll's
M = viscosity, poise equation10 is similar to that of Geiseke's except Boll had ne-
Subscripts glected the mass transfer between phases. Equations by To-
hata, et a/.,9 Yoshida, et al.,6'7 and Boll10 contain terms at-
d = liquid drop tributed to wall friction. While Tohata, et al.,9 and Yoshida,
G = gas et al.,6'7 have used different values for the friction factors in
L = liquid the convergent, throat and divergent sections, Boll10 suggested
1,2 = throat entrance and exit, respectively a single value, 0.027, for all sections.
Dimensionless numbers Of all the equations, Calvert's equation8 is the easiest to
NRe = Reynolds number based on drop diameter apply. Calvert derived his equation by use of Newton's law and

348 Journal of the Air Pollution Control Association

assumed that all liquid drops were accelerated to the gas ve-
locity in the throat and that none of the drop momentum was
converted to pressure in the diffuser. Since, in industrial
venturi scrubbers, liquid drops do not have sufficient resi-
dence time to accelerate to the gas velocity in the throat,
Calvert's equation predicts a higher pressure drop than is
experimentally measured except at low liquid rates, where the
frictional losses for the gas alone are significant. This paper
presents a modification to Calvert's equation which takes into
account the fact that liquid drops are not fully accelerated to
the gas velocity in the throat.
Mathematical Model
To simplify the problem, we will neglect the pressure loss
due to wall friction and pressure recovery by the gas in the
divergent section. This simplification is acceptable since wall
friction is compensated to some extent by the pressure re-
covery, For this case, the pressure loss in a venturi scrubber
is equal to the momentum expended to accelerate the liquid
in the venturi throat. Other assumptions are: (1) liquid is in-
troduced at the throat entrance with no axial velocity; (2)
liquid is atomized at the injection point and is uniform size
with Sauter mean diameter predicted by the Nukiyama and
Tanasawa equation:12
dd =
omm / q a. + Q Q597 r_2i_]«»/to «
where
(9)
The pressure loss in the venturi scrubber is then equal to:
AP = _ ^ f l d /SL\ (i _ X2 + V(jc4-jc2)°-r>) (10)
gc \QG'
Comparison of Model Predictions with Experimental Data
There are numerous venturi scrubber performance data
reports in the literature. However, most of these data are of
a limited value for testing the model. This is because some
important information such as scrubber geometry, water in-
jection method, etc., are generally not given in those reports.
In the following paragraphs, only those data which have been
obtained under controlled conditions and for a well-defined
scrubber system will be utilized to test the model.
Boll10 derived an equation to predict the pressure drop in
a venturi scrubber. He obtained some pressure drop data on
a prototype venturi scrubber to confirm his equation. The
cross-sectional dimensions of the venturi scrubber throat was
35.6 X 30.5 cm. The lengths of the convergent section, throat,
and divergent section were 91.4, 30.5, 337.8 cm respectively.
The convergence angle was 25° and the divergence angle was
(1)
7°.

(3) the flow is one-dimensional, incompressible and adiabatic;

(4) liquid fraction at any cross-section is small. 2.0
I I I I
A momentum balance around a control volume of differ-
ential length yields:
1.8 - o 1.27 cm nozzles
dP=-
W^ (2)
— A
1.91 cm nozzles
Upon integration, we obtain 1.6

(3)
1.4
This equation gives the pressure expended to accelerate the
liquid from zero velocity to Ud2, the drop velocity at the throat
exit. If the drop is accelerated to the gas velocity, this equation 1.2
reduces to Calvert's equation.
The drop velocity at the throat exit can be predicted by
taking into account the acceleration of the drops from their d 1.0
initial velocity. A force balance on the liquid drop provides the
differential equation of motion for the drop.
dud 3PG 0.8
(4)
dz 4 PL
We will use the drag coefficient expression given by Hollands
and Goel13 as:

= CD1( UG
(5)
\UG -
a*3.2 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2
Liquid to gas ratio, £ / m 3 of gas
Eq. 5 approximates the "standard curve" in the Reynolds
numbers range from 10 to 500. Cm is the drag coefficient at Figure 1. Comparison of Boll's pressure drop data10 with predictions.
the point of liquid injection, i.e. at the throat entrance. It can
be obtained from the standard curve or by the following for-
mula given by Dickinson and Marshall.14 Figure 1 shows the comparison between Boll's data and
24 predictions by Boll's equation and the present model. The
CD1 = 0.22 + (1 + 0. (6) pressure drop is expressed in terms of the number of throat
velocity heads, i.e.:
By substituting Eq. (5) into Eq. (4) and after rearrangement,
we obtain: -AP
Number of velocity heads lost = (11)
Uddud PGUG'
(7)
pLd
Upon integration over the length of the venturi throat, we The range of gas velocity in the throat covered by Boll is
have 45.8-91.5 m/sec. The line representing the predictions by
Boll's equation is an average curve for the predicted pressure
Ud2 ~ (8) drops. Even though Boll's equation slightly underestimates

April 1977 Volume 27, No. 4 349

APCA NOTE-BOOK
pressure drop at low values of liquid-to-gas ratio, the agree-
ment between his data and equation is considered to be sat-
isfactory.
Predicted pressure drops by the present model for throat
velocities of 45.8 and 91.5 m/sec are shown in Figure 1. Since
Boll operated his venturi scrubber in this throat velocity
range, the area bounded by these two theoretical lines repre-
sents the range of expected pressure drops. The fact that Boll's
theoretical curve, which is the average of the predicted pres-
sure drops, lies within this area signifies that the present
model and the more complicated Boll's equation predict
pressure drop with equal accuracy.
Figures 2 and 3 compare Brink and Contant's data15 and
data by Ekman and Johnstone16 with predictions. The venturi
scrubber used by Brink and Contant15 was a Pease-Anthony
venturi scrubber. The scrubber had a rectangular cross-sec-
tion. Its throat measured 15.2 X 86.4 cm with a straight section
30.5 cm long. The angle of the convergent section was 25°; the
divergent section had an angle of 2.2° for 152 cm following the
venturi throat and then an angle of 15°.
The model neglects the wall friction and the pressure re-
covery in the diffuser. Since these two factors do not exactly
cancel each other, the accuracy of the prediction by this model
depends on the actual values of these factors. At low liquid
flow rates, wall frictional losses are more significant, so that
the model might underestimate the pressure drop. The reverse
is true at high liquid flow rates. In either case, the predictions
by the present model are within ±10% of that predicted by
Boll's equation.
Acknowledgment
This study was supported by E.P.A. under Contract No.
68-02-1328, Task No. 13. Dr. Leslie E. Sparks was the project
officer.
1.4
i I i r 1 i l i
1.2
Boll's equation

2.5
I 0.8

0.6

0.4
o 2.0 o Data for radial
inward injection
Present model 0.2
A Data for radial
outward injection
I I I I I I 1 I I
0
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4
Liquid to gas ratio, £ / m 3
Figure 3. Comparison of Ekman and Johnstone's pressure drop data16 with
predictions.

o 90 spray jet
References
A 45 spray jet
1. V. I. Matrozov and O. Soobscheniya, Nauchno-Tekhnicheskikh
Rabotakh NIVIF, Nos. 6/7,152, 1953.
1.0 I I I 2. J. Yamauchi, T. Wada and H. Kamei, "Pressure drop across the
1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 venturi scrubbers," Kagaku Kogaku, 27: 974 (1963).
3
Liquid to gas ratio, £/m of gas 3. B. P. Volgin, T. F. Efimova, and M. S. Gofman, "Adsorption of
sulfur dioxide by ammonium sulfite-bisulfite solution in a venturi
Figure 2. Comparison of Brink and Contant experimental scrubber," Intern. Chem. Eng. 8: 113 (1968).
data15 with predictions. 4. R. J. Gleason and J. D. McKenna, paper presented at the 69th
National Meeting of AIChE, Cincinnati, OH, 1971.
5. H. E. Hesketh, "Atomization and Cloud Behavior in Wet
Scrubbers," US-USSR Symp. on Control of Fine Particulate
Emissions, Jan. 15-18, 1974. .
The venturi scrubber used by Ekman and Johnstone10 was 6. T. Yoshida, N. Morishima, and M. Hayashi, "Pressure loss in gas
a laboratory scale scrubber. The throat was 3 cm in diameter flow through venturi tubes," Kagaku Kogaku, 24: 20 (1960).
and 3.8 cm long. The convergent and divergent angles were 7. T. Yoshida, N. Morishima, M. Suzuki, and N. Hukutome,
25° and 7° respectively. "Pressure loss for the acceleration of atomized droplets," Kagaku
Kogaku, 29: 308 (1965).
As can be seen from these two figures, both Boll's equation 8. S. Calvert, "Source Control by Liquid Scrubber," Chap. 46 in Air
and the present model, which is much simpler to use, are in Pollution, Edited by Arthur Stern, Academic Press, New York,
good agreement with experimental data. 1968.
9. H. Tohata, T. Nakoda, and I. Sekiguchi, "Pressure losses on
venturi -mixers, "Kagaku Kogaku 28: 64 (1964).
Conclusions 10. R. H. Boll, "Particle collection and pressure drop in venturi
scrubbers," bid. Eng. Chem. Fundamentals, 12: 40 (1973).
Pressure loss in a venturi predicted by the present mathe- 11. S. W. Behie and J. M. Beeckmans, "On the efficiency of a venturi
matical model, Eq. 10, is in good agreement with available scrubber," Canadian J. Chem. Eng. 51:430 (1973).
12. S. Nukiyama and Y. Tanasawa, Trans. Soc. Mech. Engrs.
experimental data. Thus, the model can be used for venturi (Japan), 4 (14): 86 (1937); 4 (15): 137 (1938); 5 (18): 68 (1939); 6
scrubber design and optimization. (22): II-7 (1940).

350 Journal of the Air Pollution Control Association

13. K. G. T. Hollands and K. C. Goel, "A general method for pre-
dicting pressure loss in venturi scrubbers," Ind. Eng. Chem.
Fundamentals 14: 16 (1975).
14. D. R. Dickinson and W. R. Marshall, "The rates of evaporation
of sprays," AIChEJ. 14:541 (1968).
15. J. A. Brink and C. G. Contant, "Experiments on an industrial
venturi scrubber," Ind. Eng. Chem. 50: 1157 (1958).
16. F. 0. Ekman and H. F. Johnstone, "Collection of aerosols in a
venturi scrubber," Ind. Eng. Chem. 43: 1358 (1951).
Air Pollution Control and Instrumentation Patents
Robert W. Mcllvaine
The Mcllvaine Company
An analysis of air pollution control and instrumentation
patents issued in the last twelve months leads to some rather
startling conclusions. First, there may be some truth in the
speculation that foreign technology is rapidly gaining on the
U. S. Over 39% of all the air pollution control patents issued
by the U. S. Patent Office were assigned to non-U.S. corpo-
rations and individuals.
Secondly, despite the complaints about inadequate pro-
tection under present patent law, air pollution control com-
panies are flocking to the Patent Office in greatly increased
numbers. Approximately one air pollution control patent is
issued every day for a total of nearly 400/year. A patent search
for the 1962-1972 period uncovered only 150 scrubber patents
for an average of 15/yr. But, in the last twelve months, nearly
80 patents have been issued in this area alone. An increase of
nearly 500%.
The largest single subject area, incineration devices, com-
prises 28% of all patents issued. This is shown in Table I.
Incineration devices include nearly the whole gamut of
automobile pollution control devices and this accounts for the
unusually large percentage. SO2 removal systems represent
a high percentage of the scrubber total.
Much technical information is available from patents, and
patents covering the same general area tend to be issued at the
same time. To illustrate this point, we have selected wet
electrostatic precipitator patents to explore in greater de-
tail.
Between May 25,1976 and June 1,1976, six patents were
issued in the area of wet electrostatic precipitation. Three were
assigned to the U.S. Filter Company, one to the Ceilcote
Company, one to Alvin M. Marks, and one to TRW. Inter-
Mr. Mcllvaine is president of The Mcllvaine Company,
2970 Maria Avenue, Northbrook, IL 60062.
April 1977 Volume 27, No. 4
Dr. Calvert is president and Drs. Yung and Barbarika are
associated with Air Pollution Technology, Inc., 4901 Morena
Boulevard, Suite 402, San Diego, CA 92117.
estingly, at least three of the patents cover equipment which
is now actually in operation, because it often takes two years
after a patent is filed before it is actually issued. The wet
electrostatic precipitator described in the three U. S. Filter
patents has been installed on coke ovens and other applica-
tions.
One of these patents, 3,960,689, deals with the removal and
recovery of sulfur dioxide from the gas stream by use of the
precipitator, using an ammonium phosphate solution.
Patent 3,958,958 deals with the Ceilcote Ionizing Wet
Scrubber which recently has experienced increasing use. The
unit consists of a packed wet scrubber through which a
scrubbing liquid such as water is flowed vertically downward.
The stream of gas to be treated is ionized prior to its flow
through the wet scrubber to provide particles in the gas stream
with an electrical charge of a given polarity, usually negative.
Upon flow of the gas stream through the wet scrubber, the
charged particles in the gas stream are carried into close
proximity with, and are attracted to, the scrubbing liquid
and/or packing elements. This scrubber is currently being
installed on a refractory kiln.
Specific test information is often included as in the TRW
patent, 3,958,959. This device uses charged droplets for col-
Table I. Patent subject areas.
Equipment type % of Total
Scrubbers 23%
Fabric filters 11%
Electrostatic precipitators 7%
Adsorbers 5%
Incineration devices 28%
Mechanical & inertial collectors 6%
Other control methods 15%
Instrumentation 5%
351