Pressure Loss in Venturi Scrubbers
Pressure Loss in Venturi Scrubbers
Pressure Loss in Venturi Scrubbers
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
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
(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
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).
Robert W. Mcllvaine
The Mcllvaine Company
An analysis of air pollution control and instrumentation estingly, at least three of the patents cover equipment which
patents issued in the last twelve months leads to some rather is now actually in operation, because it often takes two years
startling conclusions. First, there may be some truth in the after a patent is filed before it is actually issued. The wet
speculation that foreign technology is rapidly gaining on the electrostatic precipitator described in the three U. S. Filter
U. S. Over 39% of all the air pollution control patents issued patents has been installed on coke ovens and other applica-
by the U. S. Patent Office were assigned to non-U.S. corpo- tions.
rations and individuals. One of these patents, 3,960,689, deals with the removal and
Secondly, despite the complaints about inadequate pro- recovery of sulfur dioxide from the gas stream by use of the
tection under present patent law, air pollution control com- precipitator, using an ammonium phosphate solution.
panies are flocking to the Patent Office in greatly increased Patent 3,958,958 deals with the Ceilcote Ionizing Wet
numbers. Approximately one air pollution control patent is Scrubber which recently has experienced increasing use. The
issued every day for a total of nearly 400/year. A patent search unit consists of a packed wet scrubber through which a
for the 1962-1972 period uncovered only 150 scrubber patents scrubbing liquid such as water is flowed vertically downward.
for an average of 15/yr. But, in the last twelve months, nearly The stream of gas to be treated is ionized prior to its flow
80 patents have been issued in this area alone. An increase of through the wet scrubber to provide particles in the gas stream
nearly 500%. with an electrical charge of a given polarity, usually negative.
The largest single subject area, incineration devices, com- Upon flow of the gas stream through the wet scrubber, the
prises 28% of all patents issued. This is shown in Table I. charged particles in the gas stream are carried into close
Incineration devices include nearly the whole gamut of proximity with, and are attracted to, the scrubbing liquid
automobile pollution control devices and this accounts for the and/or packing elements. This scrubber is currently being
unusually large percentage. SO2 removal systems represent installed on a refractory kiln.
a high percentage of the scrubber total. Specific test information is often included as in the TRW
Much technical information is available from patents, and patent, 3,958,959. This device uses charged droplets for col-
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. Table I. Patent subject areas.
Between May 25,1976 and June 1,1976, six patents were Equipment type % of Total
issued in the area of wet electrostatic precipitation. Three were
assigned to the U.S. Filter Company, one to the Ceilcote Scrubbers 23%
Company, one to Alvin M. Marks, and one to TRW. Inter- Fabric filters 11%
Electrostatic precipitators 7%
Adsorbers 5%
Incineration devices 28%
Mechanical & inertial collectors 6%
Mr. Mcllvaine is president of The Mcllvaine Company, Other control methods 15%
2970 Maria Avenue, Northbrook, IL 60062. Instrumentation 5%