Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 11

Critical Review

Wet Electroscrubbers for State of the Art Gas Cleaning


A N A T O L J A W O R E K , * , W A M A D E V A B A L A C H A N D R A N ,
A N D R Z E J K R U P A , J A N U S Z K U L O N , , A N D
MARCIN LACKOWSKI
Institute of Fluid Flow Machinery, Polish Academy of Sciences, 80-952 Gdansk,
Fiszera 14, POLAND, Department of System Engineering, Brunel University,
Uxbridge, MIDDX UB8 3PH, UK

Current trends observed in air pollution control technology and for a Stokes number lower than 5 (i.e., low particle-
are closely related to the development of new, more collector relative velocity).
efficient hybrid systems, i.e., those, which simultaneously
utilize two or more physical mechanisms for dust or
1. Introduction
gaseous contaminants removal. These systems can operate
Removal of particles smaller than a few micrometers from
more economically than conventional devices, especially
indoor or industrial gases presents a serious problem.
in the removal of PM2.5 particles. The electrostatic scrubber Particles of this size, such as smoke, fine powders, or oil
(electroscrubber), discussed in this paper, is one of mist, which are usually hazardous to human health, are not
such types of devices, which combines advantages of easy to remove by conventional methods. Existing filters,
electrostatic precipitators and inertial wet scrubbers, and cyclones, or inertial wet scrubbers, which employ inertial
removes many shortcomings inherent to both of these forces to remove particulate contaminants are ineffective in
systems operating independently. The electroscrubber is cleaning the gases from fine particles. This is because the
a device in which Coulomb attraction or repulsion forces motion of such particles is mainly governed by drag and
between electrically charged scrubbing droplets (collector) molecular forces, and inertial force plays a diminishing role
and dust particles are utilized for the removal of particles with decreasing particle size. Tighter fibrous filters can help
in finer particles removal, but they operate at a high-pressure
from a gas. Unlike wet electrostatic precipitators in
drop. Nozzle or Venturi scrubbers require liquid droplets of
which particles are precipitated only on the collection high velocity, but the pressure drop is also large in such
electrode, in electroscrubbers, the collection of dust particles devices. Water consumption in nozzle scrubbers is about
takes place in the entire precipitator chamber. Compared 0.05 L/m3, and in Venturi scrubbers from 0.5 to 1.5 L/m3 (1).
to inertial scrubbers, the electroscrubbers can operate Dry electrostatic precipitators use electrostatic forces, but
at lower droplet velocities, but the collection efficiency for charging of particles smaller than 1 m is inefficient, and the
a single droplet can be larger than 1. The paper reviews collection efficiency sharply drops with decreasing particle
the state-of-the-art of wet electrostatic scrubbing size. The re-entrainment of fine particles from the collection
(electroscrubbing) technique used for gas cleaning from electrode can also be observed (2 (chapter 22), 3, 4). Irrigated
dust or smoke particles. Three groups of problems are electrostatic precipitators can only partially solve the problem
of particle re-entrainment. In such precipitators, the dust
discussed: (1) The fundamental problems concerning the
particles are charged similarly to conventional electrostatic
charged dust particle deposition on a charged collector, precipitators, but the collection electrodes are washed instead
usually a drop, with a focus on different models describing of rapped. Washing removes problems with back-corona
the process. (2) The experimental works of fundamental discharge, but the issue of fine particle charging still remains
importance to our knowledge referring to the scrubbing unsolved. Therefore, an effective control of particles in the
process, which can be used for validating the theory. (3) The size range from 0.01 to 2 m, known in the literature as
laboratory demonstrations and industrial tests of different Greenfield gap (4), is still a great challenge for engineers.
constructions of electroscrubbers designed for effective To solve these problems, wet electrostatic scrubber which
gas cleaning. The electroscrubber is not designed to replace combines advantages of dry and irrigated electrostatic
wet or dry electrostatic precipitators but can be used as precipitators, and conventional inertial scrubbers, was
proposed by Penney (5). In electrostatic scrubbers, dust
a complementary device following the last stage of
particles and scrubbing droplets are electrically charged to
conventional electrostatic precipitator, which helps to the same or opposite polarities. The charged droplets capture
remove submicron particles. It was shown in the paper the oppositely charged dust particles due to Coulomb
that a higher collection efficiency of an electroscrubber attraction forces, or, when the charges are of the same
could be obtained for higher values of Coulomb number (i.e., polarity, the particles and droplets are repelled to the chamber
higher electric charges on the collector and particle), walls. Hereinafter in this paper, the scrubber using electro-
static forces will be referred to as electroscrubber and the
* Corresponding author phone: +48 586995151; fax: +48 precipitation process as electroscrubbing. Since the wet
583416144; e-mail jaworek@imp.gda.pl.
Polish Academy of Sciences. electroscrubber is designed to remove fine particles, it cannot
Brunel University. replace wet or dry electrostatic precipitators, but can be used
Present address: School of Electronics, University of Glamorgan, as complementary device following the last stage of con-
Pontypridd, Rhondda Cynon Taff, CF37 1DL, UK. ventional electrostatic precipitators.
10.1021/es0605927 CCC: $33.50 2006 American Chemical Society VOL. 40, NO. 20, 2006 / ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY 9 6197
Published on Web 09/19/2006
FIGURE 2. Coordinate frame for the droplet-particle system.

placed on the theoretical background of electroscrubbing.


Finally, the comparison of various concepts of electroscrub-
bers, together with the theoretical, numerical, and experi-
mental results of the collection efficiency is also presented.
FIGURE 1. Vertical type of electroscrubber.
2. Theoretical Background
Three main designs of electroscrubbers have been pre-
sented in the literature: 2.1. Particle Trajectories. In order to solve the problem of
(1) Vertical scrubbers in which dusty gas flows upward or particle deposition on a collector drop, authors make many
downward, and charged droplets are sprayed at the upper simplifications in the models presented in the literature. The
part of the chamber. most important, is that the complex set of interacting particles
(2) Horizontal scrubbers in which the gas flows horizon- and droplets is reduced to a two-body system, and an
tally, and charged spray is injected cross-flowing to the gas interaction of either the particle or the collector with other
stream. objects is ignored. The second simplification is that both
(3) Venturi scrubbers, positioned vertically or horizontally, objects are spherical and their shape is not distorted during
with the charged spray injected into the throat of Venturi the motion. This assumption implies that the equations of
nozzle. motion valid for idealized objects can be applied, and the
An example of a vertical scrubber with gas flowing upward gas flow about the droplet can be described by the stream
is shown in Figure 1. function specific to rigid sphere. The third assumption is
Five electroscrubber systems based on various combina- that the particle is much smaller than the droplet, and that
tions of charging the dust particles and droplets have been the flow field in the vicinity of the droplet is not distorted by
reported in the literature: the particle. Other most frequently encountered simplifica-
(1) Droplets and particles are charged oppositely (5, 7-9). tions are that the drop does not evaporate, the water vapor
The particles are deposited onto the droplets due to the does not condense on the particles, and the transfer of
Coulomb force. momentum, mass, and electric charge of particles to the
(2) Droplets and particles are charged to the same polarity collector droplet can be neglected. Wall effects, such as flow
(10-12). The repulsive force of the space charge of the droplet field disturbance or particle diffusion to the chamber walls
cloud drives the particles onto the chamber walls where they are also ignored, and it is assumed that the particle and the
are washed out. collector are flowing in free space.
(3) Nearly equal number of positively and negatively The problem of electroscrubbing is usually considered as
charged droplets are sprayed (13). The positively charged an interaction of fine particles and much larger spherical
droplets capture negatively charged particles due to attractive collectors (a drop). The trajectory of a particle of mass mp
Coulomb force, and finally, they coagulate with negatively is given by the following Newton vector differential equation:
charged droplets.
b
dw
(4) Particles are charged to either polarity and the droplets mp FS + B
)B Fe + B
FB + B
FT + B
F D + mp b
g (1)
are uncharged (13). The particles are deposited onto the dt
droplets due to an image charge on the droplet.
(5) Droplets are charged to either polarity while the parti- where mp is the particle mass, w b is the particle velocity, BFS
cles remain uncharged (14-18). The particles are deposited is the aerodynamic drag, and B F e, B
FB, B
FT, B
FD are the electrical,
onto the droplets due to an image charge induced on the Basset, thermophoresesis, and diffusiophoresis forces, re-
particle. spectively. mpg represents the gravitational force. The left-
Although highly efficient inertial and turbulent scrubbers hand side of eq 1 is the inertial force of the particle. For this
are now available, the problem with small particles (<1 m), problem, the system of coordinates is shown in Figure 2. The
which can penetrate through electrostatic precipitators or coordinate center is placed in the center of the collector.
other filters, is still unsolved (16). New environmental legis- Only the drag, electrical, and gravitational forces on the
lations regarding the PM2.5 compel engineers to face this particle are drawn in this figure for simplicity.
problem, and search for an effective method, which would The electrostatic force on the particle with image-charge
allow removal of such particles from exhaust gases. Wet effects included is as follows:
electroscrubbers, similar to the integrated systems proposed
by Chang (17), which belong to the category of hybrid systems,
can offer a solution to the problem of gaseous contaminants
removal.
Fe ) -
Q p Qc
40r 2
+
RpQc2 p - 1
3  + 2
40r p ( r4
(r - Rp2)2
2
-1 +
)
( )
2
The paper provides a comprehensive review of the state- RcQp c - 1 r 4
of-the-art of wet electroscrubbing technique used for gas 3  + 2
- 1 (2)
40r c (r - Rc2)2
2
cleaning from dust or smoke particles. Special emphasis was

6198 9 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY / VOL. 40, NO. 20, 2006
where Qp and Qc are the charges on the particle and the relatively easy. However, advances in computational tech-
droplet, respectively, Rp and Rc are the radii of the particle nique made it possible to include an additional vector equa-
and the droplet, respectively, r is the distance between the tion of motion of the collector (droplet):
particle and the droplet centers, 0 is the permittivity of the
free space, and p, c are the relative permittivities of the b
dv
mc F dc + B
)B F e + mc b
g (5)
particle and the collector, respectively. dt
The first term in eq 2 is the Coulomb force between two
point charges placed in the particle and the collector centers. Unlike a rigid sphere, the drag coefficient for a droplet moving
The second term is the force on the particle due to the image in a gas decreases due to internal circulation of liquid within
charge induced on the particle by the charged collector. The the droplet. This liquid circulation decreases the friction
third term is the force caused by the charge induced on the forces over the droplet surface and causes the boundary layer
collector by the charged particle. The image forces in eq 2 to be thinner, and shifts its separation toward the rear
are reduced only to the first two terms of much complex stagnation point. The internal liquid circulation delays also
infinite recurrent series. To simplify the diagram in Figure the onset of flow separation past the sphere and the wake
2, the image forces were not distinguished from the electrical formation with increasing Reynolds number. Hadamard and
force Fe. The effect of image forces is only important when Rybczynski (27) considered, independently, the decreased
both objects are close to each other. It was shown by Jaworek friction forces between flowing gas and a liquid drop (Table
et al. (18), using numerical simulation, that the image forces 2, Supporting Information). In the case of a droplet falling
only slightly participate in the total force between the droplet with terminal velocity, Hamielec and Johnson (28) deter-
and the particle for particles smaller than 3 m. Similar results mined, theoretically, the drag coefficient and terminal velocity
were obtained by Tripathi and Harrison (19) who observed of the drop, and concluded that the model agrees with
a sharp decrease in the collection efficiency for small charged measurements for Re < 80. However, their model does not
particles approaching an uncharged droplet. The image forces reduce to the Hadamard-Rybczynski solution for Re f 0. All
can be important for large particles, even if the particles and equations in Table 2 (Supporting Information) modify the
droplet are charged with the same polarity (18), or when drag coefficient by less than 1% for water droplet in air, and
either the droplet or particle is only charged to a few ele- for this reason, this effect is usually not considered in
mentary charges (20). modeling electroscrubbing.
The aerodynamic drag force on the particle is usually The Basset history force BFB in eq 1 is a result of interaction
presented in the following form: of a sphere with its wake during an acceleration of the sphere.
Michaelides and Feng (29) solved an equation of motion of
Cd a viscous sphere in an unsteady flow including an effect of
B
FS ) F R 2|u
b-w
b |(u
b-w
b) (3)
2Cc g p Basset force, and determined the force on the sphere.
Mordant and Pinton (30) carried out experiments with solid
where u is the gas velocity in the undisturbed region (far spheres of diameter from 0.8 to 4 mm, settling under gravity
from the collector), Fg is the gas density, Cc is the Cunningham in a fluid at rest, for the Reynolds number 40 < Re < 7000.
slip correction factor (21-23), and Cd is the drag coefficient. These experiments showed that, at short times, the Basset
The Cunningham slip correction factor is a function of force is proportional to t-1/2, as predicted by Stokes equation,
Knudsen number, which is the ratio of mean free path of but at longer times, the force is better approximated by an
gaseous molecules to the particle radius. For Kn < 0.1 it is exponential function e-t/, where is a characteristic time
close to 1, but sharply increases with increasing Kn. The drag constant. The Basset force has to be considered for Re < 4000.
coefficient Cd is an experimental factor, which was approxi- To the best of our knowledge, no author has investigated the
mated by various equations summarized in Table 1 for rigid effect of the Basset force on particle trajectory and collection
spheres, and in Table 2 for liquid droplets (cf. Supporting efficiency in electroscrubbers. Effects of other forces on the
Information). There were also attempts to determine the drag collection efficiency will be discussed in Section 2.2.
coefficient theoretically from the flow field and pressure The flow field about a spherical collector required for
distribution on the sphere surface. But these results are only determining particle trajectories and collection efficiency can
valid for Reynolds numbers, be determined from the Navier-Stokes equations. For an
incompressible fluid, the flow field can be expressed in non-
2Fg R|u0 - v| dimensional form, in terms of stream function () given by
Re ) (4)
g
1 1
ur ) u )- (6)
based on the diameter 2R of the sphere, usually lower than r r z r z
2, and sharply depart from the standard curve with the
Reynolds number increasing (cf., Figure S1 in the Supporting and vorticity:
Information). Higher order expansions were also used (24,
25). For the 10th order approximation (24), the results are u r uz
)- + (7)
in agreement with the experimental data up to the Reynolds r z
number Re < 30, but using even 24 terms (25) does not
guarantee further convergence of the expansion. In Table 1 where ur and uz are the components of the gas velocity vectors
(Supporting Information), only the fourth-order Liao (24) around the collector, normalized to gas velocity in undis-
expansion has been presented. Comparison of experimental turbed region.
and numerical results with the standard curve presented by For the purpose of modeling electroscrubbing processes,
Clift et al. (26) (Figure S1) indicates that better approximations the Navier-Stokes equations were solved by Dau (31),
are those based on the experimental data, although they are Schmidt and Loffler (32), and Adamiak et al. (33) (cf., Section
arbitrary functions of Re number. A drag coefficient resulting 2.2). In less rigorous simulations, a two-dimensional axi-
from approximation of experimental data is, therefore, symmetric flow around the collector is assumed, and
recommended for modeling the electroscrubbers. approximate equations are usually used. In this case, the
In early, simplified approaches to electroscrubbing pro- vector equation can be converted to a scalar form, and the
cesses, the collector was assumed to be stationary, and in gas velocity vector components can be determined from the
this case, the problem of particle motion could be solved following equations (26):

VOL. 40, NO. 20, 2006 / ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY 9 6199
dr 1 d 1 Other effects, like drop deformation, turbulence, and
ur ) ) u )r )- (8)
dt r 2 sin dt r sin rj swarm effects on the flow field about the sphere were con-
sidered by many authors (43-49, 2 (Chapter 24)). However,
At the collector surface, the velocity vector has to be set to these effects have never been incorporated into electro-
zero, and the boundary conditions for the stream function scrubbing models. From these considerations results that
are / ) 0, and /r ) 0. For further simplification drop deforms for larger Reynolds numbers, and cannot be
of the problem, the stream function is described by ap- further considered as a rigid sphere. Beard and Pruppacher
proximate equations, which are summarized in Table 3 in (50, 51) proposed Re ) 200 as critical Reynolds number of
the Supporting Information. droplet deformation. Ingebo (44), and Petrak (45) measured
The first approximation of the stream function was the drag coefficient for a solid sphere in turbulent flow, and
proposed by Stokes (34), who ignored the inertial force of determined that with increasing Reynolds number, the
the fluid, and the Navier-Stokes equation was reduced to measured drag coefficient can be an order of magnitude
below the standard curve. From the curves presented by
Clift et al. (ref 26, p 27), results that a droplet smaller than
p ) 2 b
u (9)
1 mm (Eotvos number ) 0.135) can be regarded as rigid
where is the kinematic viscosity of the fluid. sphere for Reynolds number Re < 1000. The droplet can be
Oseen (35, 36) has linearized inertial force in the Navier- distorted due to its motion in a flowing gas (52), and due to
Stokes equation for the Reynolds number Re < 2, ignoring an electric field. Hsiang and Faeth (53) determined experi-
the second-order perturbation velocities, and obtained an mentally that the deformation is less than 10% when the
approximation of the stream function for the creeping or Weber number is smaller than 1. Warnica et al. (54) have
viscose flow. Oseens approximation defines the flow field at analyzed photographs of droplets, taken in a turbulent flow,
large distances from the sphere, but close to the sphere and concluded that the droplet radii deviates by less than
surface, does not represent an actual flow. For this reason, 10% from the sphere for Reynolds number 10 < Re < 100,
this approximation seems to be inadequate for electroscrub- and Weber number 0.007 < We < 0.075. It should be noticed
bing simulation. that these critical values are higher than those met in
Approximations of the stream function for larger Reynolds electroscrubbers (except Venturi scrubbers), and the models
numbers have been proposed by Goldstein (37), Tomotika based on the motion of rigid sphere are, therefore, fully
and Aoi (38), Proudman and Pearson (39), and Hamielec justified.
and Johnson (28). Goldstein replaced spherical harmonics 2.2. Collection Efficiency. Collection efficiency is a
in Oseens approximation of the Navier-Stokes equation parameter used for assessment the ability of a cleaning device,
with Legendre polynomials. The approximations proposed regardless of its type, to remove particulate matter from the
by Goldstein, and Hamielec and Johnson predict laminar gas. In the case of electroscrubbers, the term collection
flow downstream the collector. Proudman and Pearson efficiency is used in a double sense. In the first sense, it
linearized the Navier-Stokes equation by using two approxi- means an overall collection efficiency, which is the ratio
mations, one for the vicinity of the sphere and other for of mass of particles min - mout removed by the scrubber to
remainder of the space. However, the results converge too the mass of particles at the scrubber inlet min:
slowly with increasing Reynolds number. For Reynolds
number Re > 16, the vorticity becomes negative over a part mout
K)1- (10)
of the rear side that indicates liquid circulation downstream. min
This critical Reynolds number differs from those presented
by other authors, which assume Re ) 20 (26). The stream The second concept of the collection efficiency charac-
function proposed by Tomotika and Aoi also predicts terizes the particle deposition on a single collector. In this
stationary vortices behind a sphere, however, this formula sense, the collection efficiency is the ratio of total number
is not accurate for small Reynolds numbers because it Nd of monodisperse particles deposited on the collector to
generates vortices for Re f 0. In order to determine the stream the number of particles Ns flowing through the projected
function, Keh and Yu (40) have solved the fourth order area of the collector:
differential equation of the fluid motion around a falling
sphere and determined the stream function for Re < 0.1. Nd
However, this formula is useless for electroscrubbing simu- K) (11)
Ns
lation where the Reynolds numbers are larger.
For the Reynolds numbers larger than Re > 1000, the
This parameter is sometimes called a collision efficiency,
viscose force becomes negligible compared with inertial force,
however, in this paper, following the tradition established
and the equations of motion can be linearized. This type of
by Kraemer and Johnstone (6) regarding electroscrubbers,
flow is known as potential flow. For this case, Lamb (41) has
the term collection efficiency will be used in the second
derived an approximation (cf., Table 3, Supporting Infor-
sense.
mation), which describes the flow field in front of a sphere
For a fixed spherical collector, the collection efficiency
with sufficient accuracy, but it does not predict vortices
(11) is usually determined from the equations of motion of
downstream. The particle deposition at the rear-side of the
the particle as the ratio of the surface Si perpendicular to the
collector cannot, therefore, be predicted using this formula.
gas velocity vector, crossed by the particles which are
Viswanathan (42), concerning particle deposition on a single
deposited on the collector, to the cross-section Sc of the
droplet concluded that the model of potential flow can be
collector.
used for Reynolds numbers Re > 80.
Some of the expressions from Table 3(Supporting Infor-
Si
mation) were tested by Jaworek et al. (7), with regard to K) (12)
scrubbing process modeling. The authors concluded that Sc
for small Reynolds numbers, Oseen, Lamb, Tomotika and
Aoi, and Proudman and Pearson approximations give similar This definition is, however, useless when the collector is in
results, but with increasing Reynolds number, two formulas: motion, and the surface Si changes with time and place. In
Tomotika and Aoi, and Proudman and Pearson become this case, the number of particles deposited on the collector
inadequate. cannot be determined unambiguously. Another method of

6200 9 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY / VOL. 40, NO. 20, 2006
calculation of the collection efficiency, which can be applied tices produced downstream, are almost identical to those
to a moving as well as fixed collector, was proposed by Jaworek recorded experimentally for charged and uncharged objects
and co-workers (55, 56). The collection efficiency was (66). For larger Reynolds numbers, the solution of the equa-
determined as the ratio of total volume Vd from which the tions became unstable, and the potential flow was assumed.
particles were deposited on a moving collector to the The method used by Viswanathan (67) allowed determin-
geometrical volume Vs swept by the collector: ing the flow field for Reynolds number up to 400, but these
results were obtained for uncharged droplets and particles.
Vd Viswanathan (67) also showed that up to 50% of particles
K) (13) can be deposited from the rear side of the collector.
Vs
For very small Stokes numbers, the numerical solution of
This definition differs from that proposed by Kraemer and the equations of motion also encounters difficulties. A small
Johnstone, and is insensitive to the starting point of the particle flowing along the stagnation line can never collide
trajectory, and relative particle-collector velocity. For mono- with the collector because the convergence of the equations
disperse particles, eq 13 can be interpreted as a number Nd is very slow. Michael (68), and Michael and Norey (69)
of particles present in the volume Vd, to the number Ns of determined the critical Stokes number Stcrit ) 1/12 for which
particles present in the volume swept by the collector. the inertial deposition diminishes, and all particles are flowing
Numerical calculations of the collection efficiency were based along the streamlines. Only interception and electrostatic
on particle trajectories determined from eq 1. forces can cause a particle to be deposited on the collector.
Theoretical models of particle trajectories deposited on Numerical determination of the collection efficiency is
a collector used for numerical calculations of the collection time-consuming, and for rough estimation of this parameter,
efficiency are reviewed in Table 4 in the Supporting Infor- some approximate formulas were, therefore, proposed in
mation. The results of modeling are usually shown as a the publications. For an uncharged collector and particle,
function of Stokes, Coulomb, and Reynolds numbers based such an approximation was determined by Langmuir and
on the collector diameter. The Stokes number represents an Blodgett (70), Walton and Woolcock (71), and Viswanathan
inertial deposition of a particle on the collector. In the consid- (42). For highly charged particle and droplet, the collection
erations of inertial or electroscrubbers, the Stokes number efficiency was estimated by Kraemer and Johnstone (6) from
is usually used in the form resulting from differential eq 1: the Coulomb number Kc:

2Cc R p2Fpu K ) 4Kc (16)


St ) (14)
9g Rc Because this equation was valid only for small Stokes
numbers, Nielsen and Hill (57, 58) proposed a formula to
The Coulomb number represents the electric forces between which the Stokes number was incorporated:
the particle and collector, related to the Stokes drag force:

CcQpQc K ) (2(-Kc)1/2 - 0.8St)2 (17)


Kc ) 2 2
(15)
24 0 gu0 Rc Rp However, the collection efficiency determined from eq 17
becomes negative for St > 2.5 and Kc ) 1.
Kraemer and Johnstone (6) determined the collection effi- Equation 1 used to determine the collection efficiency
ciency, taking into account the Coulomb, image, and Stokes predicts the particle trajectories in good agreement with the
forces as well as the space charge effects. Nielsen and Hill observations, but only for particles larger than about 1 m.
(51, 58) additionally considered an effect of external electric For smaller particles, additional forces at the molecular level
field and dipole moment. Beizaie and Tien (59) concluded have to be considered. Wang (63) included diffusion and
that the gravity is dominant for the particles co-flowing with thermodiffusion to the model of charged particle motion
gravity vector. Wang et al. (60, 61) considered the problem and concluded that these effects are important for the
of particle deposition on a collector falling in a flowing gas, collection of particles smaller than 0.1 m. Thermophoresis,
but their theoretical results were restricted only to two i.e., the motion of particles due to the temperature gradient,
dimensions. Additional forces due to external electric field is another mechanism operating in submicron size range.
produced by a pair of electrodes were considered by When cold droplets are sprayed into a usually warm exhaust
Sumiyoshitani (62), Wang (63), and Shapiro and Laufer (64). gas, the temperature gradient near the droplet drives the
From these results can be concluded that an external electric particles toward its surface (72). For very small particles, for
field can increase the collection efficiency when either which the Knudsen number, Kn, . 1, the force was deter-
collector or particle is only weakly charged or uncharged. In mined by Waldman and Schmitt (73), and for Kn 1 by
this case, the electric field produces polarization force driving Epstein (cf., ref 74). Viswanathan (67) has shown that for
the particle to the collector. In opposite situation, the field small Reynolds numbers (Rec ) 1.54), the thermophoretic
can cause a decrease in the collection efficiency. collection efficiency can be higher than 10, for the particles
More exact calculations of the collection efficiency in wide in the size range 0.1-10 m, the gas temperature 95 C, and
Reynolds number range were obtained by solving the Navier- droplet temperature 10 C. Results of numerical calculations
Stokes equation. Dau (31), and Schmidt and Loffler (32, 65) of the collection efficiency due to diffusiophoresis and
concluded from the results obtained for a fixed collector that thermophoresis were presented by Deshler (75). These forces
the rear-surface deposition takes place only for a turbulent are important only for small particles (<0.1 m) and low
flow. For laminar flow, even for large Reynolds numbers particle velocities (67, 75). Particles smaller than <0.01 m
(1000), the vortices generated downstream have only can be deposited onto the collector mainly due to the
negligible effect on particle deposition on the collector. Brownian motion (63, 76, 77), whereas the relative particle-
Navier-Stokes equations were solved by Adamiak et al. (33), collector velocity is of minor importance for such particles.
and Jaworek et al. (18, 66) who determined the particle Particle of spherical shape, and a spherical, undistorted
trajectories near a spherical collector in three dimensions. droplet are usually assumed in numerical models that might
The results were obtained for the Reynolds number based not be the case in real situation. Assumption regarding
on the collector diameter smaller than 130. It was shown sphericity of the particle is justified in the case of fly ash
that the trajectories obtained numerically, including vor- particles, which show a perfectly spherical shape (cf., for

VOL. 40, NO. 20, 2006 / ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY 9 6201
FIGURE 3. Collection efficiency for a single, uncharged spherical collector.

example, ref 78). When, however, the particles are non- for charged particle and collector were not hitherto published
spherical, join to form a cluster, or are porous, the drag and are shown in Figure 4. Theoretical curves obtained by
coefficient Cd can increase significantly, especially for Rey- Jaworek et al. (7) for Kc ) 0, and Adamiak et al. (33) for Kc
nolds number larger than 1000 ( ref 26, p 245). These effects ) 1 are also drawn in this plot. It should be emphasized that
can affect the collection efficiency of electroscrubbers, but the experiments were carried out in a limited range of Stokes
has not been considered in the literature. The effect of droplet number, with the Reynolds number kept constant. This is
distortion on the collection efficiency was considered by caused by the fact that both of these numbers cannot be
Viswanathan (67), and Adamiak et al. (79). From numerical changed independently because of the following relation:

()
simulations of the droplet distorted by an electric field it was
concluded (79) that the collection efficiency is higher than Rec Fg Rc 2

for a spherical one, but only for low Stokes numbers St < 0.8. )9 (18)
St Fp R p
Otherwise, the collection efficiency is lower.
We conclude that different mechanisms of particle depo- The ratio (18) is independent of gas velocity and gas viscosity,
sition on a collector (a droplet) can operate in different parti- and depends only on the particle/gas density and cross-
cle size and velocity ranges. Inertial deposition is dominant section ratios. This equation determines the relation between
for St > 10, i.e., for high relative velocities of particles and the Reynolds and Stokes numbers for given experimental
collecting droplets, for large droplets (>300 m), or large conditions. It is, therefore, not possible to change the Stokes
particles (>5 m) (7, 33, 74, 75, 80). Vortices downstream of number by variation of gas velocity, with the Reynolds
the collector, occurring for large Reynolds numbers can also number kept constant. The only practical way to change the
participate in the particle deposition (31, 81). The electrostatic Stokes number is to vary the particle or collector sizes, or the
deposition starts to play its role for Stokes numbers smaller particle density, which however, cannot assume unrealistic
than 5, and it only weakly depends on the Reynolds number values to cover the entire St number range. The collection
based on the collector diameter (7, 33, 66). For further efficiency is, therefore, usually determined experimentally
refinement of numerical models, the particle swarm effects, for St < 5.
particle shape, droplet distortion, and droplet contamination Four theoretical models for uncharged droplets are shown
should be considered. in Figure 3: Langmuir and Blodget (70), Le Dinh (83), Schmidt
and Loffler (84), and Jaworek et al. (7). The discrepancies
3. Fundamental Experiments between theoretical curves and measurements are large, even
Two groups of experiments regarding electroscrubbing can for the same Reynolds numbers. It can be noticed that the
be distinguished: those, which are aimed at learning about experimental points are usually above the theoretical curves,
fundamental processes taking part in the particle-collector independently of the model. The collection efficiency for
interaction, and those which investigate the bulk effects in large Reynolds numbers (>1000) is above all theoretical
gas cleaning devices, including their performance. This sec- curves. This suggests that the potential flow used for deter-
tion summarizes the first group of experiments. The second mination of the collection efficiency is not adequate for large
group is discussed in Section 4. Reynolds numbers, and underestimates its value. The
In the group of fundamental experiments, the collection measurements obtained by Dau and Ebert (81) did not follow
efficiency has been measured for a single collector (a droplet), this rule, and are below the theoretical curve. Only the results
fixed or falling. These experiments are summarized in Table obtained by Star and Mason (85), and Walton and Woolcock
5 of the Supporting Information. The results are usually (71), for Rec < 1000 fall within the theoretical curves.
presented in dimensionless form with Stokes, Reynolds, and The effect of electrical forces on the collection efficiency
Coulomb numbers as variables. For uncharged particle and is shown in Figure 4. The approximate equations, proposed
collector, a comparison of various experimental and com- by Kraemer and Johnstone (16), and Nielsen and Hill (17) are
putational results on the collection efficiency was carried also drawn in Figure 4. These formulas, however, give results
out by Jaworek and Smigielski (82). Figure 3 presents similar far from exact numerical simulations and experimental
results with some additional data. Analogous comparison results. The results shown in Figure 4 indicate that measure-

6202 9 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY / VOL. 40, NO. 20, 2006
FIGURE 4. Collection efficiency for a single, charged spherical collector and charged particles.

ments of the collection efficiency are much more scattered the theoretical curves underestimate the measured values of
for a charged collector than for uncharged one. Two trends the collection efficiency. For charged droplets and particles,
can, however, be inferred from this plot. The first one is of the experimental data are widely scattered on both sides of
increasing collection efficiency with decreasing Stokes theoretical curves. This can be attributed to high complexity
number and increasing Coulomb number. The second one of the scrubbing process that prevents theoretical models
is a diminishing effect of electrostatic forces with increasing from taking all variables affecting the particle deposition into
Stokes number. It should be noticed that the experimental consideration. It can, however, be concluded that the collec-
results are not available for the Stokes number larger than 2. tion efficiency increases with decreasing droplet diameter,
The collection efficiency measured by Schmidt (86) and and is higher for low relative velocities between particles
Wang (60, 61) was for small Coulomb numbers (<0.5), and and the droplets.
although it increases after particle and droplet charging, it
is still below 1. Hara et al. (87) obtained the results for a 4. Laboratory Demonstrations and Industrial Tests
constant Stokes number (a constant flow), which can be Regardless of the fundamental problems associated with
estimated to 1.8, and the Coulomb number varying in the collision of two charged or uncharged small objects in gaseous
range from 0.34 to 4, but the Reynolds number is unknown. environment, practical requirements spur researchers and
The collection efficiency determined experimentally was in engineers to construct and test the devices, which could more
the range of 1.3-4.8. Two central points from these mea- efficiently remove the particulate matter from gases. The
surements are close to numerical results for Kc ) 1, that technical details of laboratory and industrial wet-type
could validate the theoretical predictions (33). The measure- electroscrubbers presented in the literature are summarized
ments obtained by Smirnov (88) were originally presented in Table 6 of the Supporting Information.
against the Coulomb number, which ranged from 0.004 to The particles to be removed were usually charged in a
0.75, but the Stokes number was unknown, and it was only corona-discharge charger. In order to maximize the particle
estimated from experimental conditions mentioned by the charge, the ac chargers were also tested: the Masuda boxer-
author. Therefore, a straight-dashed line drawn in Figure 4 charger (91, 92) and Jaworek and Krupa (93, 94) alternating
indicates only the range of variation of the experimental electric field charger. The particle charging techniques and
results. The Stokes number in the experiments of Kraemer charging mechanisms were considered by Biskos et al. (95,
and Johnstone is not known, and their results are not 96). Chang et al. ( ref 2, Chapter 3) considered the field and
presented in Figure 4. diffusion charging of particles of arbitrary shape, however,
The experiments with falling droplets were carried out by these problems were not undertaken in the literature on
Lai et al. (89), Hara et al. (87), and Jaworek and co-workers electroscrubbing.
(7, 90). Lai and co-workers obtained the results for a charged The particles can be removed with an uncharged spray
collector and uncharged particles when only image forces (97, 98) or a spray charged in a corona discharge, inductively
were responsible for the particles deposition. For this reason, charged, or produced by electrospraying. When uncharged
the collection efficiency was not very high, but for small Stokes spray is used, the particles are deposited on the droplets due
numbers, it became higher for charged than for uncharged only to the space-charge effects and image forces of the par-
collector. The results obtained for falling droplet (7, 10) ticles charge on the droplets. An industrial-scale uncharged-
scattered around the theoretical curve because the Coulomb spray scrubber tested by Ricci (97) was capable of operating
and Stokes numbers were not constant, but varied due to at flow rates from 8500 to 58 000 m3/h. The collection
increasing velocity of the droplet. The results shown in Fig- efficiency was higher by about 25% for charged particles of
ure 4 are based on a constant gas velocity u0 in the channel, mean size 1 m than for uncharged ones. Removal of dust
and not on the actual velocity of the collector. particles by droplets charged in a corona discharge was tested
It was shown in this section that experimental results of by Xu et al. (98, 99), and Bologa et al. (100). Charging of
the collection efficiency are usually very different from the droplets in corona discharge is not an effective method
theoretical predictions. For uncharged droplets and particles, because the charge on the droplets is much smaller than

VOL. 40, NO. 20, 2006 / ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY 9 6203
that obtained by other methods. Another disadvantage is to energy required for particle charging. The main disad-
that the droplets are precipitated on the corona-electrode vantage with practical use of electroscrubbers, indicated by
isolators. In the wet electroscrubber developed by Xu et al. many authors, is the corrosion of metal elements, including
(99), a water steam was injected through the nozzles placed electrodes, and problems with wetting of isolators. Nowadays,
near the discharge electrodes. The steam condensed on fine the electroscrubber can be made from composite materials
particles and gaseous ions, forming the droplets, which were containing carbon fibers, which are corrosion resistant. The
able to capture dust particles. The authors noticed that many conductivity of such electrodes covered with water film is
harmful gases, such as H2S, NH3, SOx, and VOC, could also usually sufficiently high for current conduction. Wet electro-
be removed by this type of scrubber. The nozzles supplied scrubbers can be used for flow rates up to about 180 103
with steam were not clogged by impurities or scale, as they Nm3/h. For higher flow rates, they seem to be too expensive
could be when water was sprayed. Compared to traditional due to high power demands (103).
wet electrostatic precipitators, no wastewater was present in Electroscrubbers, which are mainly designed for sub-
this type of device. Water vapor condensation on electrically micron dust control, require lower water consumption and
charged fly ash particles was also used by Bologa et al. (100). offer lower pressure drop through the equipment than inertial
Mean size of the particles increased from about 100 nm to scrubbers. Electroscrubbers operate effectively at lower
about 1 m. particle-droplet relative velocities than inertial scrubbers.
Charging by induction takes place during a mechanical Compared to dry electrostatic precipitators, the dust control
atomization, when liquid film or jet is exposed to an electric in submicron size range is more efficient, and the back-
field. The induced charge remains on the droplets after the corona discharge does not occur.
jet break-up. It is usually 1 order of magnitude lower than
Future experimental work in electroscrubbing should be
the Rayleigh limit, but induction charging can be used when
aimed at searching the optimal droplet size and maximization
a large amount of water is required, for example, in Venturi
of its charge. Despite their low throughput, electrospray
scrubbers. A scrubber with inductively charged spray was
systems seem to be the optimal method for charged droplets
tested by Penney (5). The particles were charged in a corona
generation. Charging dust particle in submicron size range
discharge from a thin wire in a metal cylinder. The collection
also remains a challenge. Alternating electric field chargers
efficiency increased from 13.8% for uncharged spray, to 45%
could be recommended to meet this goal. Theoretical models
after charging the particles and droplets oppositely. In an
determining the collection efficiency should also be refined
industrial scale electroscrubber tested by Pilat et al. (101,
by taking into consideration the mutual interaction of
102) for the particles of 1 m mass-mean diameter, the
droplets, droplet deformation, and swarm effects in particle
collection efficiency increased from 69% for uncharged spray
dynamics. The reduction of energy and water consumption
to 94% after charging the droplets. Large scale, modular nozzle
by electroscrubbers is also an unsolved problem.
scrubber consisting of 250 vertical cylinders 300 mm in
diameter in which droplets were charged inductively was
developed by Metzler et al. (10, 11). The installation operated Acknowledgments
with a total gas flow rate of 470 103 m3/h. The droplets and This paper and scientific co-operation has been supported
particles were charged to the same polarity. In this case, the by the Polish State Committee for Scientific Research and
particles were repelled by the space-charge electric field to the British Council within the Polish-British Research
the chamber walls, and were washed out. Partnership Programme WAR/341/222.
Removal of cigarette smoke particles by a shower of
charged droplets was demonstrated by Balachandran et al. Supporting Information Available
(8, 15). The droplets were produced by a rotary atomizer and
charged by induction. The removal efficiency increased by Figures and tables show more detail. This material is
3-4 times for the droplets charged oppositely to smoke available free of charge via the Internet at http://pubs.acs.org.
particles as compared to the results obtained for uncharged
spray.
Electrospraying is the most effective method of charged Nomenclature
droplets production. The charge acquired by the droplets Cc Cunningham slip correction factor
can be close to half of the Rayleigh limit. Due to the space-
charge effects, droplets are self-dispersed in the spray Cd drag coefficient
chamber. Electrospray was applied in various scrubbing B
FB Basset force
installations. In a commercial hybrid scrubber tested by Lear
et al. (76), the collection efficiency was from 30 to 70%, and B
FD diffusiophoresis force
water consumption was 0.1-0.15 L/m3 for a flow rate 1700 B
Fe electrical force
m3/h. Hara et al. (87) investigated an electroscrubbing pro-
cesses and noticed that the Coulomb attraction increases B
FT thermophoresesis force
with a decrease in particle size. Krupa et al. (12) conducted B
FS aerodynamic drag
experiments in a small scale electroscrubber in which droplets
were generated by electrospraying. The collection efficiency
g gravity acceleration
was higher than 90%. In stationary conditions, the removal K collection efficiency
of smoke particles by an electrospray was tested by Jaworek
Kc Coulomb number
et al. (9). The suppression of smoke was 3 times higher than
in the case of uncharged droplets. However, a disadvantage mp particle mass
of the electrospraying technique is that the spraying process
mc collector mass
can be unstable due to small variations in physical properties
of the liquid, mainly its conductivity. nin particle concentrations at the inlet of a cleaning
This brief review of various types of electroscrubbers device
indicates that charging the droplets helps to increase the
nout particle concentrations at the outlet of a cleaning
overall collection efficiency. The most promising are tests
device
with electrosprays because electrospraying devices are very
simple and their energy consumption is negligible compared Nd number of particles deposited on the collector

6204 9 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY / VOL. 40, NO. 20, 2006
Ns number of particles flowing through the pro- (7) Jaworek, A.; Krupa, A.; Adamiak, K. Submicron charged dust
jected area of the collector particle interception by charged drops. IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl.
1998, 34(5), 985-991.
p pressure (8) Balachandran, W.; Jaworek, A.; Krupa, A.; Kulon, J.; Lackowski,
M. Efficiency of smoke removal by charged water droplets. J.
Qc charge on the droplet (collector) Electrostatics. 2003, 58, 209-220.
(9) Jaworek, A.; Balachandran, W.; Lackowski, M.; Kulon, J.; Krupa,
Qp charge on the particle A. Multi-nozzle electrospray system for gas cleaning processes.
r distance between the particle and the droplet J. Electrostatics. 2006, 64, 194-202.
(10) Metzler, P.; Weiss, P.; Buttner, H.; Ebert, F.; Krames, J. Use of
centers electrostatic forces to remove dust in a nozzle scrobber. In 9th
Re Reynolds number International Symposium High Voltage Engineering, Graz,
Austria, 28 August, 1 September 1995,Graz, Austria, 7860-1-4.
Rc radius of the droplet (collector) (11) Metzler, P.; Weiss, P.; Buttner, H.; Ebert, F. Electrostatic
enhancement of the dust separation in a nozzle scrubber. J.
Rp radius of the particle Electrostatics 1997, 42 No. 1-2, 123-141.
(12) Krupa, A.; Jaworek, A.; Czech, T.; Lackowski, M.; Luckner, J.
Si surface perpendicular to gas velocity vector from
Dust particles removal by wet-type electrostatic scrubber.
which the particles are deposited on the Electrostatics 2003, Inst. Phys. Conf. Ser. 2003, 178, 349-354.
collector (13) Melcher, J. R.; Sachar, K. S.; Warren, E. P. Overview of electrostatic
devices for control of submicrometer particles. Proc. IEEE 1977,
Sc cross-section of the spherical collector 65(12), 1659-1669.
St Stokes number (14) Bologa, A. Use of charged liquid aerosols for increasing of the
efficiency of the process of dust precipitation. In 6th Interna-
t time tional Conference Electrostatic Precipitation, 18-21 June 1996,
Budapest; pp 227-231.
u gas velocity in the undisturbed region (15) Balachandran, W.; Krupa, A.; Machowski, W.; Jaworek, A. Smoke
precipitation by charged water aerosols. J. Electrostatics 2001,
ur radial component of gas velocity vector around 51-52, 193-199.
the collector (16) Huang, S. H.; Chen, C. C. Ultrafine aerosol penetration through
electrostatic precipitators. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2002, 36(21),
uz axial component of gas velocity vectors around 4625-4632.
the collector (17) Chang, J. S. Next generation integrated electrostatic gas cleaning
systems. J. Electrostatics 2003, 57(3-4), 273-291.
v velocity of the sphere (collector) (18) Jaworek, A.; Adamiak, K.; Balachandran, W.; Krupa, A.; Castle,
Vd volume from which the particles are deposited P.; Machowski, W. Numerical simulation of scavenging of small
particles by charged droplets. Aerosol Sci. Technol. 2002, 36(9),
on the collector 913-924.
Vs geometrical volume swept by the collector (19) Tripathi, S. N.; Harrison, R. G. Enhancement of contact
nucleation by scavenging of charged aerosol particles. Atmos.
b
w particle velocity Res. 2002, 62, 57-70.
(20) Tinsley, B. A.; Rohrbaugh, R. P.; Hei, M.; Beard, K. V. Effects of
image charges on the scavenging of aerosol particles by cloud
Greeks
droplets and on droplet charging and possible ice nucleation
processes. J. Atmos. Sci. 2000, 57(13), 2118-2134.
0 permittivity of the free space (21) Cunningham, E. On the velocity of steady fall of spherical
c relative permittivity of the droplet (collector) particles through fluid medium. Proc. Royal Soc. 1910, 83A, 357-
365.
p relative permittivity of the particle (22) Rader, D. J. Momentum slip correction factor for small particles
in nine common gases. J. Aerosol Sci. 1990, 21(2), 161-168.
g gas dynamic viscosity (23) Jennings, S. G. The mean free path in air. J. Aerosol Sci. 1988,
19(2), 159-166.
kinematic viscosity (24) Liao, S. J. An analytic approximation of the drag coefficient for
Fg gas density the viscous flow past a sphere. Int. J. Non-Linear Mech. 2002,
37, 1-18.
Fp particle density (25) van Dyke, M. Extension ofGoldsteins series for the Oseen drag
of a sphere. J. Fluid Mech. 1970, 44(2), 365-372.
stream function (26) Clift, R.; Grace, J. R.; Weber, M. E. Bubbles, Drops and Particles;
Academic Press: New York, 1978.
vorticity
(27) Rybczynski, W. Uber die fortschreitende Bewegung einer
flussigen Kugel in einem zahen Medium. Anzeig. Akad. Krakau
1911, 40-47.
Literature Cited (28) Hamielec, A. E.; Johnson, A. I. Viscous flow around spheres at
(1) Gemci, T.; Ebert, F. Dust collection efficiency of a wet scrubber intermediate Reynolds numbers. Can. J. Chem. Eng. 1962, 40,
determined by a 3-D simulation of the turbulent multiphase 41-45.
flow. In 8th Annual European Conf. Liquid Atomisation and (29) Michaelides, E. E.; Feng, Z. G. The equation of motion of a small
Spray Systems, 30 September-2 October 1992, Amsterdam; pp viscous sphere in an unsteady flow with interface slip. Int. J.
197-204. Multiphase Flow 1995, 21(2), 315-321.
(2) Handbook of Electrostatic Processes; Chang, J. S., Kelly, A. J., (30) Mordant, N.; Pinton, J. F. Velocity measurement of a settling
Crowley, J. M., Eds.; CRC: Boca Raton, FL, 1995. sphere. Eur. Phys. J. B. 2000, 18, 343-352.
(3) Ferge, T.; Maguhn, J.; Felber, H.; Zimmermann, R. Particle (31) Dau, G. Rear surface deposition of fine particles on spheres s
collection efficiency and particle re-entrainment of an elec- eddy deposition or electrostatic effects? Chem. Eng. Technol.
trostatic precipitator in a sewage sludge incineration plant. 1987, 10, 330-337.
Environ. Sci. Technol. 2004, 38, 1545-1553. (32) Schmidt, M.; Loffler, F. Calculation of Particle Deposition on
(4) Laakso, L.; Gronholm, T.; Rannik, U.; Kosmale, M.; Fiedler, V.; Charged Droplets. In 2nd European Symposium on Separation
Vehkamaki, H.; Kulmala, M. Ultrafine particle scavenging of Particles from Gases, 24-26 March 1992, Nurnberg, Germany.
coefficients calculated from 6 years field measurements. Atmos. (33) Adamiak, K.; Jaworek, A.; Krupa, A. Deposition efficiency of
Environ. 2003, 37, 3605-3613. dust particles on a single, falling and charged water droplet.
(5) Penney, G. W. U.S. Patent 2, 357, 354, 1944, Sept 5. IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl. 2001, 37(3), 734-750.
(6) Kraemer, H. F.; Johnstone, H. F. Collection of aerosol particles (34) Stokes, G. G. On the effect of the internal friction of fluids on
in presence of electrostatic fields. Ind. Eng. Chem. 1955, 47(12), the motion of pendulum. Trans. Cambridge Philos. Soc. 1851,
2426-2434. 9(II) 8-106.

VOL. 40, NO. 20, 2006 / ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY 9 6205
(35) Oseen, C. W. Uber die Stokessche Formel und uber eine (62) Sumiyoshitani, S. Three-dimensional model for analyzing charge
verwandte Aufgabe in der Hydrodynamik. Arkiv for Matematik, carrier motion around a charged spherical object in the presence
Astronomi och Fysik 1911, 6(29), 1-20. of flow and electric field. Aerosol Sci. Technol. 1996, 24(4), 279-
(36) Oseen, C. Neuere Methoden und Ergebnisse in der Hydrodynamic. 289.
Leipzig, 1927. (63) Wang, P. K. Collection of aerosol particles by a conducting sphere
(37) Goldstein, S. The steady flow of viscous fluid past a fixed spherical in an external electric field s continuum regime approximation.
obstacle at small Reynolds numbers. Proc. R. Soc. 1929, 123 A, J. Coll. Interface Sci. 1983, 94(2), 301-318.
225-235. (64) Shapiro, M.; Laufer, G. The effect of electrostatic field direction
(38) Tomotika, S.; Aoi, T. The steady flow of viscous fluid past a on the diffusion of charged dust particles from the flowstream
sphere and circular cylinder at small Reynolds numbers. Q. J. to a sphere. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 1984, 99(1), 256-269.
Mech. Appl. Math. 1950, 3(2), 140-161. (65) Schmidt, M.; Loffler F. Investigations of fine particle separation
(39) Proudman, I.; Pearson, J. R. A. Expansion at small Reynolds using an electrostatic nozzle scrubber. J. Aerosol Sci. 1992, 23(1),
numbers for the flow past a sphere and a circular cylinder. J. 773-777.
Fluid Mech. 1957, 2, 237-262. (66) Jaworek, A.; Adamiak, K.; Krupa, A.; Castle, P. Trajectories of
(40) Keh, H. J.; Yu, J. L. Migration of aerosol spheres under the charged aerosol particles near a spherical collector. J. Electro-
combined action of thermophoretic and gravitational effects. statics 2001, 51-52, 603-609.
Aerosol Sci. Technol. 1995, 22, 250-260. (67) Viswanathan, S. Numerical study of particle collection by single
(41) Lamb, H. Hydrodynamics; Cambridge: New York, 1932. water droplets. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 1999, 38, 4433-4442.
(42) Viswanathan, S. An improved single droplet collection efficiency (68) Michael, D. H. The steadymotion of a sphere in a dusty gas. J.
for the intermediate flow regime. Part. Sci. Technol. 1998, 16, Fluid Mech. 1968, 31(1), 175-192.
215-227. (69) Michael, D. H.; Norey, P. W. Particle collision efficiencies for a
(43) Taylor, T. D.; Acrivos, A. On the deformation and drag of a sphere. J. Fluid Mech. 1969, 32(3), 565-575.
falling viscous drop at low Reynolds number. J. Fluid Mech. (70) Langmuir, I.; Blodgett, K. B. Mathematical investigation of water
1964, 18, 466-476. droplet trajectories. General Electric Research Laboratory, report
no. RL225; General Electric: New York, 1946.
(44) Ingebo, R. D. Drag coefficients for droplets and solid spheres in
clouds accelerating in airstreams; Technical Note 3762; National (71) Walton, W. H.; Woolcock, A. The suppression of airborne dust
Advisory Committee for Aeronautics: Washington, DC, 1956. by water spray. Int. J. Air Pollut. 1960, 3(1-3), 129-153.
(72) Phillips, W. F. Thermal collection of aerosol particles on larger
(45) Petrak, D. Der Stromungswiederstand frei beweglicher Einzel-
liquid droplets. Phys. Fluids 1976, 19(9), 1301-1304.
und Schwarmkugeln bei turbulenter Anstromung entgegensetzt
zur Bewegungsrichtung. Chem. Technol. 1976, 28(10), 591-595. (73) Waldmann, L.; Schmitt, K. H. Thermophoresis and diffusio-
phoresis of aerosols. Aerosol Science; Davies C. N., Eds; Academic
(46) Petrak, D.; Erdmann, H. -J.; Hadrich, Th. Effects of number
Press: New York, 1966.
density on the drag coefficient of solid particles in gases. In 3rd
(74) Dorman, R. G. Dust Control and Air Cleaning; Pergamon Press:
International Conference Multiphase Flow, June 8-12, 1998;
Elmsford, NY, 1974.
ICMF98: Lyon, France, 1998.
(75) Deshler T. Measurement of the rate at which submicron aerosol
(47) Hsiang, L. P.; Faeth, G. M. Near limit drop deformation and
particles are scavenged by water drops. J. Aerosol Sci. 1985,
secondary breakup. Int. J. Multiphase Flow 1992, 18(5), 635-
16(5), 399-406.
652.
(76) Lear, C. W.; Krieve, W. F; Cohen, E. Charged droplet scrubbing
(48) Hofler, K.; Schwarzer, S. Navier-Stokes simulation with constraint
for fine particle control. J. Air Pollut. Control Assoc. 1975, 25(2),
forces: Finite-difference method for particle-laden flows and
184-189.
complex geometries. Pys. Rev. E 2000, 61 No. 6, 7146-7160.
(77) Shahub, A. M.; Williams, M. M. R. Brownian collision efficiency.
(49) Datta, S.; Deo S. Stokes flow with slip and Kuwabara boundary J. Phys. D 1988, 21(2), 231-236.
conditions. Proc. Indian Acad. Sci. (Math. Sci.) 2002, 112(3),
(78) Jaworek, A.; Czech, T.; Rajch, E.; Lackowski, M. Laboratory studies
463-475.
of back-discharge in fly ash. J. Electrostatics 2006, 64.
(50) Beard, K. V.; Pruppacher, H. R. A determination of the terminal (79) Adamiak, K.; Jaworek, A.; Krupa, A. Deposition of small dust
velocity and drag of small water drops by means of wind tunnel. particles on distorted liquid droplets in an electric field.
J. Atmos. Sci. 1969, 26(9), 1066-1072. Boundary Elements v. XXIV; Brebia C.A., Tadeu A., Popov V.,
(51) Pruppacher, H. R.; Beard, K. V. A wind tunnel investigation of Eds.; WIT Press: Southampton, 2002; pp 465-474.
the internal circulation of and shape of water drops falling at (80) Air pollution control, Part I; Strauss, W., Ed.; J. Wiley & Sons:
terminal velocity in air. Quart. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc. 1970, 96, New York, 1971.
247-256.
(81) Dau, G.; Ebert, F. Determination of aerosol deposition on the
(52) Azzopardi, B. J.; Hewitt, G. F. Maximum drop sizes in gas-liquid front and wake side of spheres by gas-chromatography. J. Aerosol
flows. Multiphase Sci. Technol. 1997, 9(2), 109-204. Sci. 1987, 18(2), 147-157.
(53) Hsiang, L. P.; Faeth, G. M. Drop deformation and breakup due (82) Jaworek, A.; Smigielski, J. Efficiency of drop deposition on an
to shock wave and steady disturbances. Int. J. Multiphase Flow object in a two-phase flow. Inz. Chem. Proc. 2000, 21(4), 783-
1995, 21(4), 545-560. 799 (in Polish).
(54) Warnica, W. D.; Renksizbulut, M.; Strong, A. B. Drag coefficients (83) Le Dinh, P. H. Le depoussierage par manches filtrantes. Rev.
of spherical liquid droplets. Part 2: Turbulent gaseous field. Gen. Therm. 1964, 25, 57-69.
Exp. Fluids 1995, 18(4), 265-276. (84) Schmidt, M.; Loffler, F. Experimentelle Untersuchungen zur
(55) Jaworek, A. Limiting trajectories of dust particles approaching Erzeugung eines elektrostatisch geladenen sprays. Chem. Ing.
a charged spherical collector. Trans. Inst. Fluid Flow Mach. 1995, Tech. 1994, 66(4), 543-546.
99, 113-125. (85) Starr, J. R.; Mason, B. J. The capture of airborne particles by
(56) Jaworek, A.; Krupa, A.; Adamiak, K. Particle trajectories and water drops and simulated snow crystals. Q. J. Royal Meteorol.
collection efficiency of submicron particles on a charged Soc. 1966, 92( 394), 490-499.
spherical collector. In IEEE Ind. Appl. Soc. Annual Meeting, 5-10 (86) Schmidt, M. Theoretische und experimentelle Untersuchungen
Oct. 1996, San Diego, CA, 1996; pp 2036-2043. zum Einfluss elektrostatischer Effecte auf die Nassentstaubung.
(57) Nielsen, K. A.; Hill, J. C. Collection of inertialess particles on Dissertation. Universitat Karlsruhe, 1993.
spheres with electrical forces. Ind. Eng. Chem. Fundam. 1976, (87) Hara, M.; Sumiyoshitani, S.; Akazaki, M. Fundamental Processes
15(3), 149-157. of Fine Particle Collection by Charged Water Droplets. 2nd
(58) Nielsen, K. A.; Hill, J. C. Capture of particles on spheres by inertial International Conference Electrostatic Precipitation, Kyoto, Nov.
and electrical forces. Ind. Eng. Chem. Fundam. 1976, 15(3), 1984.
157-163. (88) Smirnov, V. V. Electrostatic collection of aerosol particles on a
(59) Beizaie, M.; Tien Ch. Particle deposition on a single spherical sphere at intermediate Reynolds numbers. J. Aerosol Sci. 1976,
collector. A three-dimensional trajectory calculation. Can. J. 7, 473-7.
Chem. Eng. 1980, 58(2), 12-24. (89) Lai, K. Y.; Dayan, N.; Kerker, M. Scavenging of aerosol particles
(60) Wang, H. C.; Stukel, J. J.; Leong, K. H. Charged particle collection by a falling water drop. J. Atmos. Sci. 1978, 35(4), 674-682.
by an oppositely-charged accelerating droplet. Aerosol Sci. (90) Jaworek, A.; Krupa, A. Principles of charged droplets scrubbing.
Technol. 1985, 5(4), 409-421. Materials Sci. 1990, 16(1-3), 33-38.
(61) Wang, H. C.; Stukel J. J.; Leong K. H. Particle deposition on (91) Masuda, S. State of Art of Precharging. In 2nd International
spheres by inertial and electrostatic forces. Aerosol Sci. Technol. Conference Electrostatic Precipitators, Kyoto, Nov. 1984, 177-
1985, 5(4), s. 391-408. 185.

6206 9 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY / VOL. 40, NO. 20, 2006
(92) Masuda, S.; Washizu, M.;, Mizuno, A.; Akutsu, K. Boxer-Charger. (99) Xu, D.; Li, J.; Wu, Y.; Wang, L.; Sun, D.; Lin, Z.; Zhang, Y. Discharge
A Novel Charging Device for High Resistivity Powders. Confer- characteristics and applications for electrostatic precipitation
ence Electrostatic Precipitation, Leura, Australia, 21-24 August of direct current: corona with spraying discarge electrodes. J.
1978. Electrostatics 2003, 57(3-4), 217-224.
(93) Jaworek, A., Krupa, A. Airborne particle charging by unipolar (100) Bologa, A.; Paur, H. -R.; Wascher, T. Electrostatic charging of
ions in AC electric field. J. Electrostatics. 1989, 23, 361-370. aerosols as a mechanism of gas cleaning from submicron
(94) Adamiak, K.; Krupa, A.; Jaworek, A. Unipolar particle charging particles. Filtr. Sep. 2001, 38(10), 26-30.
in alternating electric field. Inst. Phys. Conf. Series no. 143, Bristol (101) Pilat, M. J.; Jaasund, S. A.; Sparks, L. E. Collection of aerosol
1995, 275-278. particles by electrostatic droplet spray scrubbers. Environ. Sci.
(95) Biskos, G.; Reavell, K.; Collings, N. Electrostatic characterisation Technol. 1974, 8(4), 360-362.
of corona-wire aerosol chargers. J. Electrostatics 2005, 63, 69- (102) Pilat, M. J. Collection of aerosol particles by electrostatic droplet
82. spray scrubbers. J. Air Poll. Contr. Ass. 1975, 25(2), 176-178.
(96) Biskos, G.; Reavell, K.; Collings, N. Unipolar diffusion charging
of aerosol particles in the transition regime. J. Aerosol Sci. 2005, (103) Parker, K. R. Effective capture of respirable-sized particulates
36, 247-265. using electrostatic precipitator. Eng. Sci. Educ. J. 2000, 9(1),
(97) Ricci, L. J. Electric spark of ionizers hikes scrubber efficiency. 33-40.
Chem. Eng. 1977, 52-58.
(98) Xu, D.; Liu Z.; Wu, G. Removal of the Aerosol Particles Formed Received for review March 14, 2006. Revised manuscript
in PPCP and EBDS by a Novel ESP. 7th International Conference received August 8, 2006. Accepted August 18, 2006.
Electrostatic Precipitation, 20-25 September, 1998, Kyongju,
Korea, 224-229. ES0605927

VOL. 40, NO. 20, 2006 / ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY 9 6207

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi