C H A P T E R 8

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

APTI 413: Control of Particulate Matter Emissions

Student Manual
Chapter 8

Chapter 8
 C H A P T E R 8

APTI: 413 CONTROL OF PARTICULATE MATTER EMISSIONS, 5TH EDITION

Student Manual

 C2 Technologies, Inc.
11815 Fountain Way • Suite 200
Newport News, VA 23606
Phone 757.591.8900 • Fax 757.595.4169

The preparation of this manual was overseen by the organizations of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the
National Association of Clean Air Agencies (NACAA*), and the revision of materials was coordinated and managed by the
Tidewater Operations Center of C2 Technologies, Inc., Newport News, Virginia.

Valuable research and feedback was provided by an advisory group of subject matter experts composed of Dr. Jerry W.
Crowder, TX; Dr. Tim Keener, OH; Dr. Douglas P. Harrison, LA., and Mr. Tim Smith, Senior Air Quality Specialist, EPA,
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards.

Acknowledgements and thanks are also extended to Rutgers University, especially Francesco Maimone, Co-Director of the
Rutgers Air Pollution Training Program, which hosted the pilot of the revised materials, and the additional reference sources
that can be found throughout the manuals.
*The National Association of Clean Air Agencies (NACAA) represents air pollution control agencies in 53 states and territories and over
165 major metropolitan areas across the United States.

State and local air pollution control officials formed NACAA (formerly STAPPA/ALAPCO) over 30 years ago to improve their effectiveness
as managers of air quality programs. The associations serve to encourage the exchange of information among air pollution control officials,
to enhance communication and cooperation among federal, state, and local regulatory agencies, and to promote good management of our
air resources.
 C H A P T E R 8

Table of Contents
Wet Scrubbers ......................................................................... 1
Overview .................................................................................. 1
8.1 Operating Principles ........................................................... 1
Collection Mechanisms ................................................................... 1
Inertial Impaction....................................................................................... 2
Brownian Motion ....................................................................................... 3
Static Pressure Drop ....................................................................... 3
Gas Cooling .................................................................................... 6
Liquid Recirculation......................................................................... 7
Liquid-to-Gas Ratio ......................................................................... 7
Liquid Purge Rates ......................................................................... 8
Alkali Addition ................................................................................. 9
Wastewater Treatment.................................................................. 11
Mist Elimination............................................................................. 11
Chevrons....................................................................................... 11
Mesh and Woven Pads ................................................................. 12
Tube Bank..................................................................................... 13
Cyclones ....................................................................................... 13
Fans, Ductwork and Stacks .......................................................... 16
Fans .............................................................................................. 16
Ductwork ....................................................................................... 17
Stacks ........................................................................................... 17
Wet Scrubber Capabilities and Limitations.................................... 17
8.2 Wet Scrubber Systems..................................................... 18
Spray Tower Scrubbers ................................................................ 19
Mechanically Aided Scrubbers...................................................... 20
Orifice Scrubbers .......................................................................... 21
Packed Bed Scrubbers ................................................................. 21
Ionizing Wet Scrubbers ................................................................. 23
Fiber Bed Scrubbers ..................................................................... 24
Moving Bed Scrubbers.................................................................. 25
 C H A P T E R 8

Tray Scrubbers ............................................................................. 26

Catenary Grid Scrubbers .............................................................. 28
Condensation Growth Scrubbers .................................................. 29
Venturi Scrubbers ......................................................................... 30
Rod Deck Scrubbers ..................................................................... 33
Collision Scrubbers ....................................................................... 33
Ejector Scrubbers ......................................................................... 34
8.3 Performance Evaluation ................................................... 35
Empirical Evaluation...................................................................... 35
Pilot Scale Tests ........................................................................... 36
Mathematical Models .................................................................... 36
Counter-Current Spray Tower Scrubbers ............................................... 36
Packed Bed Scrubbers ........................................................................... 38
Tray Scrubbers ....................................................................................... 39
Venturi scrubbers.................................................................................... 40
Instrumentation ............................................................................. 42
Advantages and Disadvantages ................................................... 44
Review Questions............................................................................... 46
Review Question Answers ..................................................... 49
Review Problems ................................................................... 51
Review Problems ................................................................... 51
Review Problem Solutions ..................................................... 52
References............................................................................. 56
 A P T I 4 1 3 : C O N T R O L O F P A R T I C U L A T E M A T T E R E M I S S I O N S
C H A P T E R 8 Chapter

8
This chapter will take
approximately 2.75 hours
Wet Scrubbers
to complete.
Wet scrubbers are a diverse set of control devices that can be used to collect
O B J E C T I V E S both particles and gases, but usually not simultaneously at high efficiency for
Terminal Learning Objective
both. This is because particulate scrubbers are designed to generate high
At the end of this chapter, inertial forces or electrostatic forces on particles to drive them into droplets or
the student will be able to sheets of liquid. Gas absorbers are designed to have high liquid surface areas
evaluate the performance and relatively long residence times to maximize the absorption of contaminants
of the different wet into liquid droplets or sheets. Despite the fundamental operating differences,
scrubbers’ efficiency in
removal of particulate most particulate scrubbers have at least modest efficiencies for gaseous
matter. contaminant removal, and most gaseous absorbers have modest efficiencies for
Enabling Learning Objectives the removal of particulate larger than approximately 3 micrometers. In this
8.1 Summarize the chapter we will focus on wet scrubbers used for particle collection.
operating principles of wet
scrubber mechanisms in
the particle capture Overview
process. Wet scrubbers use a three-step process for the treatment of particulate-laden gas
8.2 Identify the major types streams:
of wet scrubbers
mechanisms.
• Particle capture in either droplets, liquid sheets, or liquid jets
8.3 Use performance • Capture of the liquid droplets entrained in the gas stream
evaluation equations to • Treatment of the contaminated liquid prior to reuse or discharge
determine efficiency of wet
scrubber mechanisms.
Particle capture is accomplished in a contacting vessel, such as a venturi scrubber, a tray
Checks on Learning tower scrubber, or a spray tower scrubber. Mist eliminators built into the scrubber
Problem Examples vessel, or provided as a separate vessel, are used to collect the entrained water droplets
and
End of Chapter
after the scrubber. Clarifiers, vacuum filters, or settling ponds are used to treat the
wastewater stream from the scrubber. Particle size is an important factor in all types of
scrubbing systems. This is because they all use the same basic collection mechanism--
inertial impaction, which is highly dependent on particle size.

8.1 Operating Principles

Collection Mechanisms
The mechanisms involved in collecting particulate matter in various wet scrubber
designs include:

1
A P T I 4 1 3 : C O N T R O L O F P A R T I C U L A T E M A T T E R E M I S S I O N S
C H A P T E R 8

• Impaction
• Brownian motion
• Electrostatic attraction
• Thermophoresis
• Diffusiophoresis

The primary mechanism by which particles are collected in wet scrubbers is impaction.
Because of the limited residence time in most scrubbers, Brownian motion is typically
not significant. Those collectors, like the venturi scrubber, that can collect submicron
particles at high efficiency, make up for the lack of particle mass by using impaction at
high velocities.

Some wet scrubbers use enhancements to improve their ability to collect small particles
without incurring higher pressure drops. One of these enhancements is electrostatic
charging. By creating particles and droplets of opposite polarities, the collection
efficiency is improved by electrostatic attraction. Scrubber performance can also be
enhanced by promoting condensation. The not only results in the growth of
submicron particles, but also sweeps them toward condensing surfaces by the
mechanisms of thermophoresis and diffusiophoresis.

Inertial Impaction
Recalling the discussion in Chapter 4, impaction occurs when a particle has too much
inertia to avoid a target that it is approaching. It crashes into the target instead of
flowing around it on the gas streamlines. If the particle is retained by the target (in this
case, a droplet), a successful impaction has occurred. The efficiency of particle
collection by impaction is proportional to the inertial impaction parameter shown in
Equation 4-1.

(8-1) Cc d p2 ρ pVr
ΨI =
18µ g d d

where:
ΨI = inertial impaction parameter (dimensionless)
Cc = Cunningham slip correction factor (dimensionless)
dp = physical particle diameter (cm)
ρp = particle density (gm/cm3)
Vr = relative velocity between particle and droplet (cm/sec)
dd = droplet diameter (cm)
µg = gas viscosity (gm/cm sec)

This equation indicates that impaction effectiveness is related to the square of the
particle diameter. Impaction is much more efficient for large particles than for small
particles, especially those particles less than 0.5 µm. Impaction rapidly becomes less
efficient as the particle size decreases into the submicron range. To overcome this

2
A P T I 4 1 3 : C O N T R O L O F P A R T I C U L A T E M A T T E R E M I S S I O N S
C H A P T E R 8

inherent limitation, the differences in droplet and particle velocities must be high when
most of the particulate matter is in the submicron range.

The impaction parameter indicates that impaction is directly proportional to the

difference in the velocities of the particle and the droplet or liquid sheet target. There
are substantial differences among the various types of scrubbers with respect to this
relative velocity term. Furthermore, the difference in velocity does not remain constant
throughout some types of scrubbers.

For example, in venturi scrubbers there is a very large difference between particle
velocity and droplet velocity at the inlet to the throat. However, a fraction of a second
later, when the gas stream reaches the throat outlet, the droplets have accelerated to a
velocity approaching that of the particles in the gas stream. Accordingly, impaction is
most efficient at the inlet to the throat, before the droplets have accelerated. In packed
bed scrubbers, the difference in particle and target velocities is very low due to the low
gas velocity. This difference remains relatively constant throughout the bed. As a result,
impaction is very limited and is dependent partially on the height of the bed.

The effectiveness of impaction is inversely related to the diameter of the target. Small
water droplets serve as better targets than large droplets. The formation of small
droplets is favored by droplet atomization in high-velocity gas streams and droplet
atomization in high-pressure nozzles. Low surface tension conditions in the liquid also
favor small droplet size distributions.

Brownian Motion
Brownian motion, or diffusion, is the particle movement caused by the impact of gas
molecules on the particle. Only very small particles are affected by the molecular
collisions, since they posses little mass and, therefore, little inertial tendency. Brownian
motion begins to be effective as a capture mechanism for particles less than
approximately 0.3 µm, and it is significant for particles less than 0.1 mm. Most
industrial sources of concern in the air pollution field do not generate large quantities
of particulate matter in the less than 0.1 µm size range. Therefore, in most cases,
Brownian motion is not a major factor influencing overall scrubber collection
efficiencies.

Static Pressure Drop

The static pressure drop across scrubbers is due to the frictional losses of the gas
stream moving through the ductwork and the scrubber, the energy required to
accelerate the gas, and the energy required to accelerate and atomize (if applicable) the
liquid stream. The energy losses for all of these are related to the square of the gas
velocity, as indicated in Equation 8-2.

(8-2)
∆P ∝ v 2
where:

3
A P T I 4 1 3 : C O N T R O L O F P A R T I C U L A T E M A T T E R E M I S S I O N S
C H A P T E R 8

∆P = static pressure drop

v = gas velocity in scrubber

For scrubber systems using primarily impaction for particle capture, there is a logical
relationship between the efficiency and the static pressure drop. The efficiency should
decrease as the static pressure drop increases. This is because the effectiveness of
impaction is directly proportional to the difference in the velocities of the rapidly
moving particles and the slow-moving liquid droplets or sheets. High static pressure
drop values are associated with high gas velocities through the scrubber. Due to the
logical association between static pressure drop and efficiency, the easily measured
static pressure drop has been used as an indirect indicator and predictor of
performance for a number of years.

A number of correlations have been published that relate emissions to the static
pressure drop across the scrubber. Three of these correlations are reproduced in
Figures 8-1, 8-2 and 8-3 in order to demonstrate their characteristics.

Emissions data for flooded disc scrubbers (a type of adjustable throat venturi that is no
longer manufactured) serving lime kilns at four separate Kraft pulp mills are shown in
Figure 8-1. The data scatter is evident. A 90% confidence interval would demonstrate
considerable variability, even near the mean pressure drop value of approximately 9 in.
WC. It is difficult to use correlations of this nature to make accurate estimates of
performance.

Figure 8-1. Emissions versus pressure drop for flooded disc scrubbers
serving lime kilns (Walker and Hall, 1968)

Figure 8-2 is a plot of the emissions versus the static pressure drops of conventional

4
A P T I 4 1 3 : C O N T R O L O F P A R T I C U L A T E M A T T E R E M I S S I O N S
C H A P T E R 8

venturi scrubbers serving a number of different coal thermal dryers. There is no

apparent correlation in these data.

Figure 8-2. Emissions versus pressure drop for venturi scrubbers serving coal
driers (Engineering Science, 1979)

Only the data shown in Figure 8-3 appear to have a correlation with a minimum
amount of variability. These data were taken at three side-by-side venturi scrubber
systems serving similar metallurgical furnaces. Furthermore, the tests used to compile
the data were performed over a short time period, thereby avoiding variations due to
changes in scrubber operating conditions.

Figure 8-3. Emissions versus pressure drop for venturi scrubbers serving Q-BOF
processes

The underlying cause of the data scatter apparent in Figures 8-1 and 8-2 is differences

5
A P T I 4 1 3 : C O N T R O L O F P A R T I C U L A T E M A T T E R E M I S S I O N S
C H A P T E R 8

in the particle size distribution from plant-to-plant over time. The correlation of
emissions with static pressure drop is based on the assumption that the particle size
distribution is a constant. This is rarely accurate when data from different plants or
processing units are combined into a single correlation. The acceptable correlation
shown in Figure 8-3 appears to be one of the few cases in which data from different
units can be combined into a single correlation. Overall, the inability to account for
possible variations in the inlet particle size distribution to the scrubber is the major
limitation of these types of correlations.

Some variations in particle size distribution are common in all processes due to slight
changes in raw materials, operating conditions, and process loads. However, problems
such as vapor nucleation and solids release during droplet evaporation can cause major
changes in the quantity of particulate matter in the difficult-to-control size range of 0.1
to 1 µm.

Certain operating problems in wet scrubbers can also increase emissions without
affecting the static pressure drop across the unit. For example, gas-liquid
maldistribution in the throat of a venturi scrubber can cause dramatically increased
emissions with little, if any, change in the observed static pressure drop. Changes in the
effectiveness of particle impaction into the droplet targets can also affect performance.
Reduced capture effectiveness can be caused by changes in the surface tension of the
droplets or by the presence of non-wettable materials coating the surfaces of the
particles.

Correlations based on scrubber static pressure drop must be used with caution due to
the possible shifts in particle size distribution and changes in emissions that can occur
without significant changes in the static pressure drop. Caution is also warranted with
correlations for devices that enhance their performance with other mechanisms besides
impaction.

Gas Cooling
Process gases that are at elevated temperature are usually passed through an
evaporative cooler before entering the scrubber. The primary purpose of the
evaporative cooler is to reduce the gas temperature to protect temperature-sensitive
components in the scrubber vessel, mist eliminators and other components. For
example, it is common for the scrubber vessels to have corrosion-resistant liners that
can volatilize at temperatures exceeding 400°F to 1,000°F. Some scrubber vessels and
many mist eliminators are fabricated with fiberglass reinforced plastics (FRP) that have
temperature limitations of 180°F to 250°F. The evaporative cooler is provided to
ensure that the gas temperatures in the scrubber vessel, mist eliminator, and other
portions of the system do not exceed their design limitations even if the liquid
recirculation system in the scrubber fails.

The evaporative cooler provides a secondary benefit in particulate matter control

systems. By cooling the gas stream prior to particulate matter removal, the evaporation
of droplets in the scrubber vessel is significantly reduced. The mass flux of water vapor

6
A P T I 4 1 3 : C O N T R O L O F P A R T I C U L A T E M A T T E R E M I S S I O N S
C H A P T E R 8

away from evaporating droplets impedes particle capture by the droplets. Accordingly,
the minimization of evaporation has a beneficial impact on the particulate matter
collection efficiency.

Liquid Recirculation
The scrubbing liquid is recirculated to minimize the amount of liquid that must be
treated and discharged. The scrubbing liquid is collected in the sump of the scrubber
and mist eliminator delivered by gravity to a recirculation tank having a liquid residence
time of several minutes. This provides sufficient time to introduce alkali additives, if
necessary, to adjust the pH back to the proper range. The recirculation pump
recirculates the liquid back to the scrubber vessel from this tank. Centrifugal pumps are
used almost exclusively.

Some scrubber systems use spray nozzles to atomize the scrubbing liquid. The full
cone nozzle is used most frequently because it projects droplets across an entire
circular area. This is necessary in many types of scrubbers to obtain effective gas-liquid
contact. The droplets produced by full cone nozzles usually have mean diameters of
100 to 1,000 micrometers and are typically log-normally distributed.

Liquid-to-Gas Ratio
The rate of liquid flow to a scrubber is often expressed in terms of the liquid-to-gas
ratio, with units of gallons of liquid per 1,000 actual cubic feet of gas flow. In some
performance relationships, the liquid and gas rates are expressed in the same units,
giving a dimensionless liquid-to-gas ratio. Most wet scrubber systems for particle
collection operate with liquid-to-gas ratios between 4 and 20 gal/1,000 acf. Higher
values do not usually improve performance, and they may have a slightly adverse
impact due to changes in the droplet size distribution formed in the scrubber. Low
values can have a highly adverse impact because there are simply too few impaction
targets available. At low liquid-to-gas ratio conditions, a portion of the particle-
containing gas stream may pass through the collection zone without encountering a
liquid target.

The liquid-to-gas ratio can be defined based either on the inlet or outlet gas flow rates.
It can also be defined based on either actual or standard gas flow rates. In this course,
the liquid-to-gas ratio is defined as:

(8-3)
L Inlet liquid flow (gpm )
=
G Outlet gas flow rate (1,000 acfm)

The outlet gas flow rate is used because this value is readily measured as part of an
emission test program. It is considerably easier to obtain an accurate flow measurement
at the scrubber outlet, where particulate matter loading in the gas stream is reduced and
good sampling ports are available. Most scrubber inlet ducts are not well suited for gas
flow rate testing.

7
A P T I 4 1 3 : C O N T R O L O F P A R T I C U L A T E M A T T E R E M I S S I O N S
C H A P T E R 8

It is helpful to confirm that the liquid-to-gas ratio to be used on a scrubber system is

above the minimum level necessary to ensure proper gas-liquid distribution. As noted
above, in most gas-atomized scrubbers, this minimum value is approximately 4
gal/1,000 acf. In other type of scrubbers, the value is as low as 2 gal/1,000 acf.
Calculation of the liquid-to-gas ratio is illustrated in the following example.

Example 8-1 What is the design liquid-to-gas ratio for a scrubber system that has
an outlet gas flow rate of 15,000 acfm, a pump discharge rate of 100
gpm, and a liquid purge rate of 10 gpm? The purge stream is withdrawn from the
pump discharge side.

Solution

L Inlet liquid flow ( gpm)

=
G Outlet gas flow rate (1,000 acfm)

Inlet liquid flow = 100 gpm – 10 gpm = 90 gpm

L 90 gpm gal gal

= = 0.006 = 6 .0
G 15,000 acfm acf 1,000 acf

Liquid Purge Rates

A small portion of the recirculating liquid in a scrubber system must be purged for
treatment. The treated liquid can then be returned to the system or replaced with
make-up water. The liquid purge rate necessary to ensure long term proper
performance of a system depends on one or more of the following factors.

• The rate of particulate matter capture

• The maximum concentration of suspended solids acceptable in the
scrubber system
• The rate of dissolved solids precipitation in the recirculated liquid due to
the accumulation of calcium and/or magnesium ions
• The rate of chloride or fluoride ion accumulation in the scrubber liquid

Example 8-2 illustrates the calculations involved in evaluating the necessary liquid
purge rate based on the particulate matter capture rates and maximum suspended
solids levels.

Example 8-2 Estimate the liquid purge rate and recirculation pump flow rate for
a scrubber system treating a gas stream of 30,000 acfm (inlet flow)
with a particulate matter loading of 0.8 grains per acf. Assume that the scrubber
particulate matter removal efficiency is 95% and the maximum suspended solids level

8
A P T I 4 1 3 : C O N T R O L O F P A R T I C U L A T E M A T T E R E M I S S I O N S
C H A P T E R 8

desirable in the scrubber is 2% by weight. Use a liquid-to-gas ratio of 8 gallons (inlet)

per thousand acf (outlet) and an outlet gas flow rate of 23,000 acfm.

Solution

Calculate the inlet particulate mass:

ft 3  0.8 grains  lb  lb
Inlet mass = 30,000  3   = 3.43
min  ft  7,000 grains  min

lb
Collected mass = 0.95 (Inlet mass) = 3.26
min

Purge solids of 3.26 lb/min are 2% of the total purge stream, therefore:
lb
3.26
Purge stream = min = 163.0 lb
0.02 min

A stream with 2% suspended solids has a specific gravity of about 1.02,

therefore:
 lb water  lb
Purge stream density =  8.34 (1.02 ) = 8.51
 gal  gal

lb
163.0
Purge stream flow rate = min = 19.2 gal
lb min
8.51
gal

 ft 3  gal  gal

Inlet liquid flow rate =  23,000  8  = 184.0
3 
 min  1,000 ft  min

gal gal gal

Pump flow rate = 184.0 + 19.2 = 203.2
min min min

Alkali Addition
An alkali addition system is used on wet scrubber systems that collect acidic particulate
matter or treat gas streams that have acidic gases or vapors that could absorb in the
liquid stream. The most common acid gases include sulfur dioxide, hydrogen chloride,
and hydrogen fluoride. Carbon dioxide formed in most combustion processes is also
mildly acidic.

The most common alkalis used for neutralization of acidic material in scrubbers
include lime, soda ash, and sodium hydroxide. In some cases, limestone and nahcolite

9
A P T I 4 1 3 : C O N T R O L O F P A R T I C U L A T E M A T T E R E M I S S I O N S
C H A P T E R 8

are used. With the exception of sodium hydroxide, all of these materials are typically
stored and fed to the recirculation tank in a powder form. Sodium hydroxide is usually
fed in solution. The rate of addition of alkali is controlled by a pH meter that is usually
mounted in the scrubber recirculation tank or the recirculation pipe leading to the
scrubber vessel.

The alkali requirements are usually calculated based on the quantities of acidic gases
captured and the molar ratios necessary for the following reactions:

SO3 + Ca(OH)2
CaSO4 + H2O Reaction 8-1

2HCl + Ca(OH)2
CaCl2 + 2H2O Reaction 8-2
2HF + Ca(OH)2
CaF2 + 2H2O Reaction 8-3

Example 8-3 Calculate the amount of calcium hydroxide (lime) needed to

neutralize the HCl absorbed from a gas stream having 50 ppmv
HCl and a flow rate of 10,000 scfm. Assume an HCl removal efficiency of 95%.

Solution

Calculate HCl absorbed in the scrubbing liquid:

50 ft 3 HCl ft 3 HCl lb − mole HCl

50 ppmv = 6 3
= 0 . 00005 = 0.00005
10 ft total ft total lb − mole total

 lb − mole  lb − mole HCl 

HCl absorbed = 10,000 scfm  0.00005 (0.95)
 385.4 scf  lb − mole total 

lb − mole
= 0.00123
min

 1 lb − mole Ca (OH) 2  lb − mole HCl 

Ca (OH) 2 required =   0.00123 
 2 lb − mole HCl  min 

lb − mole  lb Ca (OH ) 2  min 

= 0.00062  74  60 
min  lb − mole  hr 

lb
= 2.75
hr

10
A P T I 4 1 3 : C O N T R O L O F P A R T I C U L A T E M A T T E R E M I S S I O N S
C H A P T E R 8

Wastewater Treatment
There are a wide variety of wastewater treatment systems for particulate matter wet
scrubbers. Some small scrubbers at large industrial facilities discharge directly to the
plant wastewater system, rather than using a dedicated system. Small scrubbers
collecting nontoxic particulate matter, such as those at asphalt plants, sometimes use a
small two-zone settling pond for wastewater treatment. In these cases, the effluent
overflowing the second zone of the pond is returned to the scrubber system.

A small wastewater treatment system is usually installed for large wet scrubber systems.
A clarifier is used for removal of the suspended solids that will settle by gravity. The
overflow from the clarifier is returned to the scrubber recirculation tank. The clarifier
underflow containing the concentrated solids is often sent to a rotary vacuum filter for
removal of the suspended solids. The sludge from the rotary vacuum filter is sent to a
landfill for disposal.

In some cases, a flocculent is added to the clarifier to optimize solids removal.

However, addition of flocculates must not exceed the levels that cause an increase in
the liquid surface tension. This can have an unintended detrimental effect on
particulate removal efficiency of the scrubber by decreasing the effectiveness of particle
impaction into the liquid droplets and by changing the droplet size distribution formed
in the scrubber.

Mist Elimination
Essentially all scrubber vessels generate relatively large water droplets that are entrained
in the gas stream. Most of these droplets contain captured particles and must be
removed from the gas stream prior to discharge to the atmosphere. A mist eliminator
is used for this purpose. In addition to minimizing the carry-over of solids-containing
droplets to the atmosphere, mist eliminators also protect downstream equipment, such
as fans, from solids-containing droplets and minimize the amount of water lost from
the system. Mist eliminators are usually equipped with one or more sets of spray
nozzles to remove accumulated solids. Solids build-up is due to impaction of solids-
containing water droplets and due to the chemical precipitation of dissolved solids
from the scrubbing liquid. The four most common types of mist eliminators are
chevrons, mesh or woven pads, tube banks and cyclones. Static pressure drops across
them range from 0.5 in. WC to more than 4 in. WC.

Chevrons
Chevrons are simply zig-zag baffles that force the gas to turn sharply several times
while passing through. As the gas stream turns to pass through the baffles, droplets
impact on the baffles and run together to form large droplets that drain back into the
scrubber. Chevrons are usually designed with one to four changes in gas stream
direction, termed a pass. Separation efficiency increases with the number of passes. A
three-pass chevron mist eliminator is shown in Figure 8-4. Other common types of
chevrons have two- and four-pass arrangements. Each manufacturer has a variety of
designs for the chevron blades to minimize reentrainment and optimize the gas flow
range.

11
A P T I 4 1 3 : C O N T R O L O F P A R T I C U L A T E M A T T E R E M I S S I O N S
C H A P T E R 8

Figure 8-4. Chevron mist eliminator

Chevron mist eliminators can be installed in either a vertical or horizontal outlet

arrangement. In the vertical outlet design, liquid draining from the chevron blades is
opposed by the upward moving gas stream. In the horizontal outlet arrangement, the
liquid drains in a direction 90 degrees from the gas stream; therefore, less
reentrainment of collected droplets occurs.

Essentially all of the chevron mist eliminator designs are limited to gas velocities of less
than approximately 20 ft/sec. Many of the chevrons have optimum performance in
the 5 to 15 ft/sec range. At higher velocities, liquid on the blades can be driven toward
the outlet side of the chevron where it can be reentrained into the gas stream. Higher
velocities can occur in an operating system because of solids accumulation on the
blades.

Solids accumulation on the chevron mist eliminators can create high velocities by
restricting the amount of area open for gas flow. In applications where solids
accumulation is possible, mist eliminator sprays are installed to clean the chevrons on a
frequent basis. These sprays are activated on an hourly or shift basis, as necessary to
maintain the static pressure drop across the mist eliminator in the design range. In
most cases, the sprays are mounted on the inlet side. However, in cases especially
prone to solids accumulation, sprays are mounted on both the leading and trailing
sides. The sprays can be activated either by timers or by static pressure sensors. Clean
water is used for mist eliminator cleaning. The necessary water pressures depend on the
placement of the spray nozzles. Values of 5 to 20 psig are common.

Mesh and Woven Pads

Mesh pads are composed of randomly interlaced metal fibers and can be up to 6 inches
thick. As the gas stream turns to pass by the elements of the mesh, droplets impact on
the baffles and run together to form large droplets that drain back into the scrubber.
As in the case with the chevrons, there is a maximum gas velocity above which
reentrainment is possible. That maximum velocity is usually in the range of 10-23
ft/sec. A mesh pad mist eliminator pad is shown in Figure 8-5.

12
A P T I 4 1 3 : C O N T R O L O F P A R T I C U L A T E M A T T E R E M I S S I O N S
C H A P T E R 8

Clean exhaust gas

Exhaust gas
containing droplets

Figure 8.5. Mesh pad mist eliminator

Woven pads have complex, interlaced synthetic fibers that serve as impaction targets.
Mist eliminators composed of these materials are often layered. The inlet side layers are
open weaves that are capable of removing large quantities of large- diameter material
without overloading. The middle and outlet side layers have more compact weaves,
which have high removal efficiencies for the small liquid droplets. These units have
maximum velocities of 8 to 15 ft/sec, depending on the pad construction
characteristics.

Tube Bank
A tube bank mist eliminator is made of vertical or horizontal layers of offset cylindrical
tubes. As the gas stream turns to pass by each layer, droplets impact on the tubes and
run together to form large droplets that drain back into the scrubber. As in the case
with the chevrons and mesh and woven pads, there is a maximum gas velocity above
which reentrainment is possible. That maximum velocity is usually in the range of 12-
23 ft/sec. A tube bank mist eliminator is shown in cross-section in Figure 8-6.

OOOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOOO
Figure 8-6. Tube bank mist eliminator

Cyclones
The smaller droplet size distributions created in venturi scrubbers are usually collected
in a separate large diameter cyclone. As illustrated in Figure 8-7, the gas stream enters
tangentially at the bottom of the vessel and, depending on the gas velocity, turns one-

13
A P T I 4 1 3 : C O N T R O L O F P A R T I C U L A T E M A T T E R E M I S S I O N S
C H A P T E R 8

half to two revolutions prior to discharge. They have reasonable efficiency when
operated at close to the design inlet gas velocity. However, droplet removal decreases
rapidly at gas flow rates less than 80% or more than 120% of the design value.

Figure 8-7. Cyclonic mist eliminator in a venturi scrubber system

The gas flow rate sensitivity is the main disadvantage of cyclonic mist eliminators. The
cost of a stand-alone vessel is another major disadvantage. All of the other types of
mist eliminators can be installed in the outlet portion of the scrubber vessel and,
therefore, do not require their own vessel. The main advantage of the cyclonic mist
eliminator is its openness. As long as the cyclonic vessel drain is properly sized and
remains open, the mist eliminator is not vulnerable to plugging caused by excessive
carryover of solids-containing droplets from the scrubber vessel.

Due to the spinning action of the gas stream, it is often necessary to install anti-vortex
baffles in the stack in order to eliminate cyclonic flow conditions at emission testing
locations. It is also common to install liquid flow deflectors to prevent liquid collected
on the inner cyclone wall from flowing across the tangential inlet duct and being
reentrained into the gas stream.

There are definite limits to the gas velocity through the different types of mist
eliminators. As noted, at high gas velocities liquid can be forced toward the trailing
edge of the mist eliminator elements and reentrained in the gas stream. General
guidelines concerning the maximum velocities are presented in Table 8-1.

14
A P T I 4 1 3 : C O N T R O L O F P A R T I C U L A T E M A T T E R E M I S S I O N S
C H A P T E R 8

Table 8-1. Gas Velocities Through Mist Eliminators

Mist Eliminator Orientation Maximum Gas Velocity
Type ft/sec
Chevron Horizontal 15 – 20
Chevron Vertical 12 – 15
Mesh Pad Horizontal 15 – 23
Mesh Pad Vertical 10 – 12
Woven Pad1 Vertical 8 – 15
Tube Bank Horizontal 18 – 23
Tube Bank Vertical 12 – 16
Source: Shifftner and Hesketh (1983)
1. Kimre Inc.

The actual maximum velocities that apply to the specific type of mist eliminator should
be determined from the manufacturer's specification sheets. These data can then be
used to confirm that the mist eliminator is located in an area with gas velocities below
the maximum levels. The average gas velocity through the mist eliminator can be
calculated simply by dividing the actual gas flow rate by the cross-sectional area of the
mist eliminator, as shown in Equation 8-4. The calculation of the mist eliminator
velocity is illustrated in Example 8-4.

(8-4)
 min 
Gas flow rate (acfm) 
 60 sec 
Velocity =
Cross − sec tional area ft 2 ( )
Example 8-4 Estimate the gas velocity through a mist eliminator having a diameter of
6.5 feet, an average gas flow rate of 4,000 dscfm (dry standard cubic feet per minute), and a
peak gas flow rate of 4,760 dscfm. The peak gas stream temperature is 130°F, the static
pressure during peak flow in the vessel is –30 in. WC, and the barometric pressure is
29.4 in. Hg. The moisture content of the gas stream is 6% by volume.

Solution: The gas velocity should be evaluated under peak flow conditions because
this is the time when reentrainment is most probable.

Convert the gas flow rate to actual conditions:

dscfm 4,760 dscfm

scfm = = = 5,064 scfm
 100 − %H 2 O   100 − 6 
   
 100   100 

15
A P T I 4 1 3 : C O N T R O L O F P A R T I C U L A T E M A T T E R E M I S S I O N S
C H A P T E R 8

  1in. Hg 
Absolute pressure = 29.4 in. Hg + − 30 in. WC  = 27.19 in.Hg
  13 . 6 in . WC 

Absolute temperature = 130°F + 460° = 590°R

 590°R  29.92 in. Hg 

acfm = 5,064   = 6,227 acfm
 528°R  27.19 in. Hg 

2
πd 2 π(6.5 ft )
Area = = = 33.2 ft 2
4 4

ft 3  min 
6,227  
min  60 sec 
Velocity = = 3.13 sec
33.2 ft 2

Note that the amount of area blocked by mist eliminator blades or any support frames
is not taken into account in estimating the average velocity. Accordingly, the velocity
estimated is lower than the actual velocity through the mist eliminator. However, this is
taken into account when manufacturers publish their maximum velocity guidelines.

Fans, Ductwork and Stacks

The gas handling components of a particulate matter wet scrubber system must be
designed for the high negative static pressures that are present during routine operating
periods. These components must also be designed for the high levels of entrained
droplets, low pH levels, and highly corrosive gas concentrations that can be present
during scrubber and/or process upsets.

Fans
The fans used on particulate matter wet scrubbers are usually larger and require more
energy than fans for other comparably sized air pollution control systems because of
the considerably higher static pressures that must be generated to overcome the flow
resistance of the scrubber. Because of their ability to generate these higher static
pressures and because of their ability to withstand moderate solids and droplet loadings
in the gas stream, radial blade fans are the most commonly used. The fan wheel and
fan housing materials of construction are selected based on information concerning the
expected gas stream temperatures and the peak concentrations of potentially corrosive
materials. Drains are usually provided at the bottom of the fan housing to allow for the
removal of moisture accumulating due to droplet entrainment in the gas stream or due
to condensation of water vapor from the gas stream.

16
A P T I 4 1 3 : C O N T R O L O F P A R T I C U L A T E M A T T E R E M I S S I O N S
C H A P T E R 8

Ductwork
Ductwork requirements for high energy particulate wet scrubbers are also more
demanding than for other types of air pollution control systems. The ductwork must
be reinforced to prevent deflection and collapse if the static pressure is lower than –20
in. WC. Failure to adequately reinforce the ductwork could result in damage to welds.
Air infiltration through damaged welds could become severe due to the high negative
pressures. Severe air infiltration reduces the amount of gas captured at the process,
potentially resulting in fugitive emissions.

Stacks
Particulate matter wet scrubbers can have one or two stacks. The main stack is used to
disperse the effluent stream of the scrubber system. This stack must be fabricated from
materials that can withstand the contaminants that are emitted when scrubber or
process upsets occur. Bypass stacks are used upstream of the scrubber vessel when the
gas stream being treated is very hot. The bypass stack is usually sealed by a butterfly
damper or louver damper. These dampers must provide a tight gas seal to prevent air
infiltration into the scrubber system during routine operating periods. The bypass
damper is opened when there is a loss of liquid flow. Without liquid flow, the
temperatures in the scrubber vessel could exceed the design limitations of the scrubber
shell, mist eliminator, or corrosion resistant liners.

Wet Scrubber Capabilities and Limitations

Particulate matter wet scrubbers can provide high efficiency control in a wide variety of
industrial applications. Certain types of scrubber systems can provide simultaneous
control of both particulate matter and gaseous contaminants. Wet scrubbers are often
the control device of choice if there is the potential for embers or explosive gases and
vapors in the gas stream to be treated.

The main limitation that must be considered in a specific type of wet scrubber is the
particle control capability in the submicrometer size range. Many types of wet
scrubbers have very limited efficiencies when the inlet gas stream has particles that are
mostly in the difficult-to-control size range of 0.1 to 1.0 µm. A typical fractional
efficiency curve illustrating the range for performance for the various types of wet
scrubbers is shown in Figure 8-8.

The extent of the efficiency decrease in this size range depends primarily on the
intensity of the gas liquid contact in the scrubber vessel. Scrubber vessel types that use
high energies to develop large differences in the velocities of the particles and the liquid
targets have excellent inertial impaction efficiencies in the difficult to control size range.
Those scrubbers designed primarily for gaseous contaminant control have low
differences in particle-liquid velocities and little or no particle collection in the difficult-
to-control size range.

17
A P T I 4 1 3 : C O N T R O L O F P A R T I C U L A T E M A T T E R E M I S S I O N S
C H A P T E R 8

Figure 8-8. Wet scrubber fractional efficiency curve

Another limitation of wet scrubbers is the availability of water. Make-up water is

needed to replace water evaporated with the effluent gas stream, water lost as part of
the discharged wastewater, and water lost as part of sludge from rotary vacuum filters
or similar processing units. In arid climates, there might be insufficient water to use a
wet scrubber.

The ability to economically dispose of the wastewater stream in an environmentally

sound manner is another limitation of wet scrubbers in some locations. The purge
stream from the scrubber recirculation liquid stream might contain dissolved species
that have poor leachability characteristics in disposal ponds.

Wet scrubbers usually generate very visible plumes composed of condensed water
droplets. The highly visible water droplet plumes that can be quite persistent in cold
weather and high humidity conditions can cause visibility problems for nearby roads
and airports. Water droplet fallout from the plumes can, in unusual cases, cause
freezing problems on walking surfaces and roadways near the facility.

8.2 Wet Scrubber Systems

There are many equipment designs for contacting the liquid with the contaminated gas
stream. The capability of a particular design can be approximated from the gas stream
pressure drop across the scrubber. In general, higher pressure drops indicate more
aggressive contact between the liquid and the gas stream, causing smaller particles to be
collected with greater efficiency.

18
A P T I 4 1 3 : C O N T R O L O F P A R T I C U L A T E M A T T E R E M I S S I O N S
C H A P T E R 8

Scrubbers with static pressure drops less than about 5 in. WC are capable of efficiently
removing particles greater than about 5-10 µm in diameter. These are referred to as
low energy wet scrubbers. Medium energy wet scrubbers have pressure drops from 5
to 25 in. WC. These collectors are capable of removing micrometer-sized particles, but
are not very efficient on submicrometer particles. Removal of submicrometer particles
requires significant energy input, ranging from 25 to over 100 in. WC, depending on
the particle size. These collectors are referred to as high energy wet scrubbers. Not all
scrubber designs will conform to these generalized categories. Collectors that may
collect smaller particles than their pressure drop would indicate include electrostatically
enhanced scrubbers and condensation growth scrubbers.

Spray Tower Scrubbers

The spray tower scrubber shown in Figure 8-9 is an example of a low energy wet
scrubber. It is the simplest and least expensive type of wet scrubber. The scrubber
consists of an open vessel with an array of spray nozzles mounted on multiple headers
that are usually spaced about three feet apart. Full cone spray nozzles are used to
generate droplets with a mean size of several hundred micrometers. These type nozzles
provide complete coverage of the intended target area, which is necessary to ensure
maximum particle capture. As the droplets fall downward, they are contacted with the
particle-laden gas stream passing upward. The particles are collected by impaction onto
the droplets. Because of the inherent limitations in the relative velocity between the
droplets and the particles, spray tower scrubbers are effective only for particles greater
than about 5 µm in diameter. Despite this limitation, spray tower scrubbers are very
useful for treating gas streams having high concentrations of large diameter particulate
matter. They are also useful when it is necessary to control both particulate matter and
gaseous pollutants.

Figure 8-9. Spray tower scrubber

19
A P T I 4 1 3 : C O N T R O L O F P A R T I C U L A T E M A T T E R E M I S S I O N S
C H A P T E R 8

Spray scrubbers operate with a flange-to-flange static pressure drop of 1 to 3 in. WC.
The static pressure drop is due to the normal flow resistance associated with the inlet
ductwork, the mist eliminator (if present) and the outlet ductwork. The static pressure
drop is not directly related to the particulate matter removal efficiency of the scrubber.
Also, because of the relatively low volume occupied by the droplets, changes in the
liquid flow rate do not significantly change the pressure drop.

Because of the large size of the droplets produced in the spray tower, mist eliminators
may not be used. Instead, sufficient space is provided above the last spray header to
allow any droplets carried upward by a turbulent eddy the time to drop downward.

Mechanically Aided Scrubbers

A mechanically aided scrubber uses mechanical energy to accelerate the gas stream to
create conditions favourable for particle impaction. The fan-type mechanically aided
scrubber shown in Figure 8-10 has a single spray nozzle in the inlet gas duct. This
generates the liquid droplets that serve as the initial particle impaction targets. These
droplets also wet the fan blades that provide for additional impaction as the gas stream
is accelerated through the fan. The centrifugal force of the fan wheel moves the liquid
to the outside of the housing, providing mist elimination. The liquid is typically drained
from a sump in the outlet air discharge.

Figure 8-10. Mechanically aided scrubber

A mechanically aided scrubber is limited to a particle size range greater than

approximately 1 µm, giving it lower medium energy performance. This limit is due
partially to the maximum differences in particle and droplet velocities that can be
obtained in the co-current (liquid and gas streams move in the same direction) type of
scrubbing system. Because of the potential for plugging the closely-spaced fan blades,
application is further limited to gas streams with low particle concentrations.

20
A P T I 4 1 3 : C O N T R O L O F P A R T I C U L A T E M A T T E R E M I S S I O N S
C H A P T E R 8

Orifice Scrubbers
Another device that exhibits lower medium energy performance is the orifice scrubber
shown in Figure 8-11. In orifice scrubbers, the gas stream is forced through a pool of
scrubbing liquid using inlets of different designs. As the gas stream exits the pool it
entrains and atomizes the scrubbing liquid. Impaction of the particles on the entrained
droplets occurs as the gas stream continues to turn through the section above the inlet.
Additional turns of the gas stream provides for mist elimination before the gas stream
is discharged. Orifice scrubbers are usually less vulnerable to gas-liquid distribution
problems; however, it is more difficult to achieve high gas velocities in this type of
system, limiting their collection efficiency.

Figure 8-11. Orifice scrubber

(Reprinted courtesy of Joy Energy Systems)

Packed Bed Scrubbers

The packed bed scrubber is an example of a medium energy wet scrubber. In a typical
packed bed scrubber, scrubbing liquid is introduced above the bed and trickles down
over packing contained in one or more beds arranged in series. The beds can be in
either a vertical tower or in a horizontal vessel. The packing materials are designed to
provide the largest possible exposed liquid surface area per unit volume of bed, while
maintaining a reasonable pressure drop. Some common types of packing materials are
shown in Figure 8-12. Packings come in a variety of sizes and are constructed of
different materials. Although ceramic and metal packings are available, plastic packings
are used almost exclusively in air pollution applications.

21
A P T I 4 1 3 : C O N T R O L O F P A R T I C U L A T E M A T T E R E M I S S I O N S
C H A P T E R 8

Figure 8-12. Common types of packing materials

In the vertical packed bed scrubber shown in Figure 8-13, the contaminated gas stream
moves upward through the irrigated packing. This arrangement provides the best
collection of gases and vapors, but has the lowest collection efficiency for particles.
Because of hydrostatic limitations, there is a limit on the upward velocity that can be
used for a given quantity of liquid. This limit results in reduced impaction efficiency.
Removal efficiencies for particulate matter less than approximately 3 µm are very low.
In addition, a portion of the bed can become plugged if the particulate matter
concentration is high. The scrubbing liquid flowing downward over the packing moves
too slowly to purge out large quantities of particulate matter.

Figure 8-13. Vertical packed bed scrubber

22
A P T I 4 1 3 : C O N T R O L O F P A R T I C U L A T E M A T T E R E M I S S I O N S
C H A P T E R 8

Somewhat better particle removal performance can be achieved in the crossflow

packed bed scrubber shown in Figure 8-14. In the crossflow scrubber, the gas stream
passes horizontally through the bed, while the scrubbing liquid is distributed on the top
of the packing and passes downward. Since the hydrostatic limitations of the vertical
arrangement are not present, larger quantities of liquid and higher gas velocities can be
used. This provides a modest increase in collection efficiency and helps reduce
plugging problems. The bed is usually slanted, as shown, to account for the deflection
of the liquid by the gas stream and to reduce liquid entrainment as the gas exits the
lower portion of the packing.

Figure 8-14. Horizontal packed bed scrubber

The most effective use of the scrubbing liquid is to have it spread out as a thin film on
the surface of the packing. As long as this condition is maintained, increasing the liquid
flow rate does not significantly affect pressure drop. However, if the liquid begins to
accumulate in the spaces within the packing, the pressure drop will increase. This
condition generally results in reduced collection efficiency.

Ionizing Wet Scrubbers

The ionizing wet scrubber, shown in Figure 8-15, is the only type of scrubber that uses
electrostatic attraction as the primary technique for particle capture. Accordingly, it
achieves better performance on submicrometer particulate matter than its medium
pressure drop would indicate. The inlet gas stream passes through a short ionizer
section composed of a number of high voltage discharge electrodes separated by small,
grounded collection plates. The ionizer section is conceptually similar to a conventional
negative corona electrostatic precipitator field; however, it is designed to impart a high
negative electrical charge to the particles and not to collect them. The ionizer section
usually operates at secondary voltages of 20 to 30 kilovolts DC.

Following the ionizer section, the gas stream passes through a crossflow packed bed
section. Scrubbing liquid is distributed by means of a set of nozzles on the top and

23
A P T I 4 1 3 : C O N T R O L O F P A R T I C U L A T E M A T T E R E M I S S I O N S
C H A P T E R 8

front of the bed. The particles are captured in the liquid layers surrounding the packing
material due to the induced static charge in the liquid layers caused by the highly
charged particles. While these units are capable of the removing particles extending
into the submicrometer range, they are not intended for sources generating high
concentrations of submicrometer particulate matter. When necessary, scrubber
modules can be arranged in series. This provides multiple opportunities to capture the
particulate matter and minimizes problems caused by gas flow distribution at the inlet
of the scrubber.

Figure 8-15. Ionizing wet scrubber

Fiber Bed Scrubbers

Another lower medium energy device is the fiber bed scrubber. Fiber bed scrubbers
collect liquid particles using one or more vertical mesh pads composed of interlaced
synthetic fibers. Often, composite mesh pads are constructed using mesh of different
fiber diameters and densities. These scrubbers are designed exclusively in a crossflow
orientation, as shown in Figure 8-16. In the illustration, the number before each slash is
the fiber diameter in mils (thousandths of an inch) and the number after the slash is the
percent of open space in the pad. There are usually two to four separate beds in series.
An open weave pre-collector bed is used in applications where heavy droplet loadings
or large diameter droplets are expected in the gas stream. This type of scrubber is
capable of efficient particle removal down to sizes approaching 1 micrometer. It is
frequently used for the control of mists that can coalesce and drain from the mesh pad.
Scrubbing liquid can be sprayed either continuously or intermittently on the inlet side
of each of the mesh pads.

24
A P T I 4 1 3 : C O N T R O L O F P A R T I C U L A T E M A T T E R E M I S S I O N S
C H A P T E R 8

Figure 8-16. Four-stage fiber bed scrubber

(Reprinted courtesy of Kimre, Inc.)

The gas velocities through the fiber pad are usually maintained in the range of 5 to 12
feet per second, depending on the fiber diameters and fiber pad design characteristics.
The static pressure drop across each of the stages ranges from 0.5 in WC to
approximately 2 in. WC, depending on the gas velocities and the fiber pad
characteristics.

Moving Bed Scrubbers

Moving bed scrubbers are another type of medium energy contactor. Spherical, hollow
packing approximately the diameter of a ping-pong ball is used in a moving bed
scrubber. About half of the volume between two open supporting grids is filled with
this packing. As the gas flows upward through the packing, it fluidizes it. Liquid is
distributed across the top of the fluidized bed by spray nozzles. Highly turbulent
mixing occurs due to the motion of the packing material, aiding the formation of
droplets and liquid sheets that can serve as impaction targets.

Moving bed scrubbers were originally designed to control sources of very sticky
particulate matter; specifically, the organic aerosols emitted by Soderberg-type primary
aluminum electrolytic cells. Because of the turbulent movement of the packing, sticky
material deposited on the surface is continually removed. Moving bed scrubbers are
also tolerant of high suspended solids levels in the recirculation liquid that can cause
scaling problems on stationary packing. The turbulent contact between gases and
liquids created by the movement of the packing also facilitates gas absorption into the
scrubber liquid. Accordingly, reactive slurries of lime and limestone can be used if there
is a need to simultaneously control acid gases.

25
A P T I 4 1 3 : C O N T R O L O F P A R T I C U L A T E M A T T E R E M I S S I O N S
C H A P T E R 8

Moving bed scrubbers often have two or three beds in series in the same scrubber
vessel. In some cases, an additional bed is used at the top of the tower for mist
elimination. A conventional mist eliminator can also be used. There is no need for an
enlarged mist eliminator section, because the optimum velocity for the moving bed
scrubber is similar to the optimum velocity range for conventional mist eliminators.

Tray Scrubbers
Another example of a medium energy scrubber is the tray scrubber. Tray scrubbers are
vertical towers with multiple trays for contacting the gas and liquid streams. The liquid
stream enters from the top, flows across the tray and then down to the next tray, until
it reaches the bottom of the column. The gas moves upward through holes in the tray,
creating a bubbling action that provides for particle collection by impaction. Tray
scrubbers are usually selected for applications involving particulate matter greater than
approximately 1 µm. They have limited efficiency below 1 µm due to the limits to the
gas stream velocities through the openings in the trays.

There are several tray designs to contact the gas with the liquid. A typical impingement
tray scrubber is shown in Figure 8-17. The trays are metallic plates with numerous
holes approximately 3/16 inches in diameter. Small baffle plates are mounted directly
above each of the holes. Scrubbing liquid enters as a stream at the top of the unit.
Overflow weirs set the height of the liquid on each tray to approximately 1 to 1.5
inches. After passing across the tray, the liquid passes down a vertical passage called the
downcomer. A liquid seal at the bottom of each downcomer allows the liquid to flow
freely to the next tray while preventing the gas stream from short-circuiting up the
downcomer.

Figure 8-17. Impingement plate scrubber

26
A P T I 4 1 3 : C O N T R O L O F P A R T I C U L A T E M A T T E R E M I S S I O N S
C H A P T E R 8

The gas stream is accelerated as it passes through the impingement tray holes. The gas
jets atomize a portion of the liquid above the tray, creating droplets that serve as the
impaction targets. The gas velocity through the holes must be high enough to provide
for efficient atomization of the liquid and must have sufficient force to prevent liquid
from dripping through the holes. Excessive liquid dripping, termed weepage, reduces
collection efficiency, particularly for gases and vapors, and may limit the flexibility of
tray scrubbers to operate over a wide range of gas flows.

Sieve tray scrubbers are conceptually similar to impingement tray scrubbers, but do not
have baffle plates over the holes. These trays have larger holes, ranging from 0.25 to
1.0 inch in diameter, and are, therefore, less vulnerable to pluggage. However, the gas
velocities are slightly lower than impingement tray scrubbers, reducing the collection
efficiency.

Other designs include the float valve and bubble cap trays shown in Figure 8-18. These
designs are better able to handle variations in flow rate while reducing or eliminating
weepage problems. With valve trays, the gas stream flows up through small holes in the
tray and lifts up metal discs that cover the openings. These discs are restrained by legs
that limit vertical movement. The liftable discs act as variable orifices and adjust the
opening for gas flow proportional to the gas flow rate through the scrubber. The gas
stream in bubble cap trays enters through short vertical risers, turns 180° inside the cap
and then exits the cap through the liquid layer. This type of tray can handle wide ranges
of gas and liquid rates without adversely affecting efficiency.

Figure 8-18. Bubble cap and float valve trays

The performance of tray scrubbers is dependent on the physical condition of the tray
and the holes in the tray. Bowed or sloped trays will imbalance the height of the
scrubbing liquid. The gas stream will preferentially pass through the holes with the
lowest liquid height, because this is the low resistance path. The portion of the gas
stream that continues to pass through the holes with high liquid levels will be slow and
have reduced collection efficiency.

27
A P T I 4 1 3 : C O N T R O L O F P A R T I C U L A T E M A T T E R E M I S S I O N S
C H A P T E R 8

Plugging the holes in the tray must be avoided. Tray scrubbers are vulnerable to
plugging due to the small diameters of the holes. Suspended solids can accumulate in
these holes and harden, making it necessary to drill or rod them out. Due to the
vulnerability to solids accumulation, the liquor recirculation system and treatment
system are especially important. The suspended solids must be restricted to low levels
by use of clean scrubbing liquid, to the extent possible, and by effective treatment of
the recirculated liquor.

Catenary Grid Scrubbers

Catenary grid scrubbers, shown in Figure 8-19, are medium energy devices that have a
set of catenary or saucer-shaped wire mesh grids across a vertical tower scrubber. The
liquid is introduced above the top grid and flows downward from stage to stage
without the need for the side-mounted downcomers used on other types of tray tower
scrubbers. The mixing action of the gas stream and the liquid on the trays creates a
highly turbulent zone, causing droplet atomization. Particle impaction occurs on the
droplets.

Figure 8-19. Catenary grid scrubber

(Reprinted courtesy of CECO Filters, Inc.)

The superficial gas velocity through a catenary grid scrubber ranges from 12 to 20 feet
per second. The upper end of this range is slightly higher than most other types of tray
tower scrubbers. The static pressure drop ranges from as low as 4 in. WC to more than
40 in. WC, depending on the gas velocity and the liquid-to-gas ratio. Catenary grid
systems are more tolerant of high suspended solids levels in the recirculation liquid
than other types of tray tower scrubbers, and the relatively open wire mesh stages are
not highly prone to pluggage.

A conventional mist eliminator is used at the top of the catenary grid for the removal
of entrained water droplets. An expanded area must often be provided to ensure that
the gas stream velocities are slowed prior to entering the mist eliminator.

28
A P T I 4 1 3 : C O N T R O L O F P A R T I C U L A T E M A T T E R E M I S S I O N S
C H A P T E R 8

Condensation Growth Scrubbers

Condensation growth scrubbers are designed to improve particulate matter removal
efficiencies in the submicrometer particle size range. Large quantities of water vapor
are introduced into the gas stream and then cooled. Some of this water vapor
condenses on the surfaces of the submicrometer particles, increasing their size. The
particles are then collected in conventional scrubber downstream of the vessel used for
condensation growth.

Figure 8-20 is a simplified flowchart for a condensation growth scrubbing system. In

this system, water vapor is introduced by evaporating clean water injected into a very
hot gas stream. This approach can be used for incinerators and other processes
operating with inlet gas temperatures in excess of 1,800°F. For other processes, it is
necessary to inject low pressure steam to provide the necessary water vapor.

Figure 8-20. Condensation growth scrubber system

Following the evaporative cooling or steam injection step, the water vapor content can
range from 40% to 60% by volume. This water vapor is condensed in a vessel
upstream of the particle collection device. The amount of condensation is maximized
by cooling the scrubbing liquor recirculating through the system. Sensible heat can be
removed from the scrubber water by means of a small indirect heat exchanger or a
small cooling tower.

The grown particulate matter is typically removed in a medium energy scrubber, such
as a tray tower. However, depending on the resulting particle size distribution and on
the removal efficiencies required, a venturi or other type of scrubber capable of high
efficiency removal of small particulate matter may be necessary.

29
A P T I 4 1 3 : C O N T R O L O F P A R T I C U L A T E M A T T E R E M I S S I O N S
C H A P T E R 8

Venturi Scrubbers
The venturi scrubber is an example of a high energy wet scrubber, although it can also
be operated as a medium energy scrubber. The fixed throat venturi, shown in Figure 8-
21, is one of the most common designs. The gas stream entering the converging
section of the venturi is accelerated to a velocity between 200 and 600 feet per second
at the throat inlet. Liquid is injected into the throat and atomized into droplets with a
mean size of 50 to 75 micrometers by the impact of the gas stream. The size of the
droplets produced depends on the throat gas velocity and the liquid-to-gas ratio. These
droplets are initially moving relatively slowly, and it takes time for them to accelerate to
the same velocity as the particles entrained in the gas stream. Impaction occurs on the
droplets due to the large difference in the gas stream velocity and the velocity of the
accelerating droplets. The gas stream leaving the throat enters the diverging section.
Here, the velocity of the gas stream is gradually reduced and the velocities of the
particles and the droplets approach one another. Impaction does not occur efficiently
in this section because the particles and droplets are moving at similar velocities and in
the same direction.

Figure 8-21. Fixed throat venturi scrubber

The effectiveness of a venturi scrubber is related to the maximum difference in the

droplet and gas stream velocities. Because the fixed throat has a constant open area, the
actual gas velocity achieved in the throat section depends on the gas flow rate. Particle
collection efficiency is, therefore, gas flow rate dependent. Fixed throat venturi
scrubbers are used on sources where the gas flow rate is relatively constant or where
the particle size distribution is sufficiently large that some variation in gas velocity is
tolerable.

Proper liquid distribution is essential in obtaining optimum performance in a venturi

scrubber. Because of the high gas velocities, the residence time of the gas stream in the

30
A P T I 4 1 3 : C O N T R O L O F P A R T I C U L A T E M A T T E R E M I S S I O N S
C H A P T E R 8

venturi throat, where most collection occurs, is only 0.001 to 0.005 sec. Most of the
particles that penetrate the throat will pass through the remainder of the scrubbing
system uncollected. Obviously, portions of the venturi throat without any atomized
scrubbing liquid will have no capability for collecting particulate matter.

The venturi scrubber system shown in Figure 8-21 includes a flooded section in the
elbow directly below the venturi. This elbow leads from the diverging section to the
mist eliminator. This 6 to 12 inch deep section is termed a flooded elbow and provides
abrasion protection. Droplets that have accelerated to a high velocity in the venturi will
erode the bottom of this duct if it is not protected.

One option for dealing with varying gas flow rate while maintaining good efficiency is
the adjustable throat venturi shown in Figure 8-22. In this type of unit, moveable
dampers are used to vary the throat area in order to control the gas velocity. The
position of the dampers is usually set automatically to maintain a set pressure drop
across the unit, although in some units they are positioned manually. These damper
blades, and other types of flow restrictors, must be made of abrasion resistant materials
because of the high velocities through the throat.

Figure 8-22. Adjustable throat venturi scrubber

There is a wide variety of adjustable throat mechanisms. The simplest is a metal plate
that enters from one side of the venturi and extends across part of the throat. These
simple plates are usually manually operated. Another style of adjustable throat has a
flow restrictor that enters from the bottom of the throat as shown in Figure 8-22. As
this flow restrictor advances, the annular area is reduced, increasing the gas velocity.
The flow restrictor is raised or lowered by a hydraulic actuator.

31
A P T I 4 1 3 : C O N T R O L O F P A R T I C U L A T E M A T T E R E M I S S I O N S
C H A P T E R 8

Figure 8-23. Flow restrictor type adjustable throat venturi scrubber

It should be recognized that, if the flow rate is varying, so is the liquid-to-gas ratio. If
the variation in flow rate is large, the liquid-to-gas ratios at the extreme ranges of
operation may result in reduced collection efficiency. Systems with large flow rate
variation must also modulate the liquid flow in order to keep the liquid-to-gas ratio in
an acceptable range for optimum performance.

The venturi shown in Figure 8-22 uses spray headers at the inlet to the converging
section to distribute the liquid, resulting in the wetting of the walls. This technique is
called wetted approach and serves to protect the section from abrasion by the entering
particles. The liquid is sheared off the side walls and entrained in the gas stream as it
enters the throat. Alternatively, the liquid can be swirled down the converging section,
as shown in Figure 8-23, until the liquid is entrained. In addition, a centrally mounted
nozzle (not shown in Figure 8-22) is used in both designs to distribute liquid to the
center of the throat. Because of the very high gas velocities in the throat, it is difficult
for liquid droplets entrained from the wall to penetrate to the center.

The typical static pressure drop across a venturi scrubber varies from a low of 5 in. WC
to values exceeding 100 in. WC. High static pressure drops are used only in situations
demanding high efficiency removal of very small particulate matter. The static pressure
drop is related to the gas velocities in the throat and the quantity of scrubbing liquid
used. Because the energy for atomization comes from the gas stream, changes in the
liquid flow rate will cause significant changes in the pressure drop.

32
A P T I 4 1 3 : C O N T R O L O F P A R T I C U L A T E M A T T E R E M I S S I O N S
C H A P T E R 8

Rod Deck Scrubbers

Rod deck scrubbers are similar to venturi scrubbers in that they use high velocity gas
streams to atomize liquid droplets and to impact particulate matter. A gas stream
entering a rod deck scrubber is accelerated as it passes between the closely spaced rods
shown in Figure 8-24. The liquid is supplied by a set of spray nozzles above the rod
deck, positioned to fully irrigate the gas flow area. The high-velocity gases in the open
area between the rods further atomize the sprayed water droplets. After the rod deck,
the gas stream decelerates, turns, and passes into a mist eliminator vessel to remove the
entrained water droplets.

Figure 8-24. Rod deck scrubber

Multiple decks of rods can be used to improve particulate removal capability. The
decks can be equipped with actuators to modify the spacing between the decks and,
thereby, adjust the static pressure drop across the unit. The rods must be fabricated
from abrasion resistant materials due to the high-velocity conditions, and they must be
replaced when they have significantly eroded.

Collision Scrubbers
As noted above, the collection efficiency in a venturi scrubber is relatively low after the
throat section because the particles and droplets are moving at similar velocities. The
collision scrubber shown in Figure 8-25 avoids this by splitting the gas stream into two
separate streams. Each stream enters a venturi-like section for contacting the injected
scrubbing liquid. These two sections are arranged in an opposed manner so that gas
streams exiting each section collide. Within the collision zone, the droplets and
particles continue to impact due to the large difference in velocity. Collision scrubbers
use a gas recirculation system to deal with varying gas flow rate in order to ensure
adequate gas velocity in the venturi contactors.

33
A P T I 4 1 3 : C O N T R O L O F P A R T I C U L A T E M A T T E R E M I S S I O N S
C H A P T E R 8

Figure 8-25. Collision scrubber system

Ejector Scrubbers
The ejector scrubber shown in Figure 8-26 uses a single high-pressure spray nozzle to
inject liquid or steam into a venturi-shaped vessel. The reduced pressure created behind
the high-pressure jet is sufficient to induce a gas flow from the process being
controlled. The gas moving principles used in ejector scrubbers are identical to those
used in a laboratory aspirator. All the energy needed to operate the scrubbing system is
supplied by the liquid stream, rather than using energy supplied by a fan.

Inlet gas
High pressure stream
spray nozzle

Discharge
Figure 8-26. Ejector scrubber

34
A P T I 4 1 3 : C O N T R O L O F P A R T I C U L A T E M A T T E R E M I S S I O N S
C H A P T E R 8

Although it has a pressure rise, rather than a pressure drop, it gives performance
comparable to a high energy venturi scrubber. Particulate matter is impacted in the
droplets generated in the high-pressure nozzle. The differences in particle and droplet
velocities, necessary for impaction, are due to the high-velocity droplets in the relatively
slow-moving air stream. High energy ejector scrubbers can be used for both particulate
matter control and gaseous absorption and are often arranged in series in order to
generate the necessary static pressures for gas movement and to increase pollutant
removal efficiencies.

8.3 Performance Evaluation

There are three general approaches to evaluating the capability of a scrubber system: (1)
empirical evaluations based on previously installed scrubbers on similar sources, (2)
pilot scale tests, and (3) mathematical models.

Empirical Evaluation
Most scrubber manufacturers have extensive databases describing the performance of
their various commercial brands of scrubbers on different types of industrial sources.
These data provide a starting point in determining if a given type of scrubber system
will be able to meet the performance requirements specified by the purchaser. In
addition, site-specific information is considered. The most important site-specific data
is the inlet particle size distribution. Unfortunately, these data are often not available.
Accordingly, the design review is typically limited to the following factors:

• Average and maximum gas flow rates

• Average and maximum inlet gas temperatures
• Concentrations of corrosive materials present in the inlet gas stream
• Concentrations of potentially explosive materials present in the inlet gas
stream
• Availability of make-up water
• Purge liquid treatment and disposal requirements
• Process type, raw materials, and fuels
• Source operating schedule
• Area available for scrubber and waste water treatment
• Alkali supply requirements
• Particle size distribution (when available)
• Emission test data (when available)

This site-specific information is used in conjunction with the historical data base to
determine if the scrubber is applicable to the process. The data also provide a basis for
the design of the scrubber system components and for estimating the necessary static
pressure drop.

The primary advantage of this approach is that scrubber system evaluation is based on
actual emissions data obtained using test procedures identical to those to be applied to
the new scrubber system. The disadvantage is the inability, in many cases, to take into

35
A P T I 4 1 3 : C O N T R O L O F P A R T I C U L A T E M A T T E R E M I S S I O N S
C H A P T E R 8

account site-specific factors that could affect the particle size distribution. There can be
significant process-to-process differences in the generated quantities of particulate
matter in the difficult-to-control size range of 0.1 to 1 µm.

Pilot Scale Tests

Pilot scale performance tests can be conducted when there is uncertainty concerning
the applicability of a scrubber or the necessary operating conditions of a scrubber.
These tests are preferably conducted on the specific source to be controlled, so that the
actual particle size distribution and particle characteristics are inherently taken into
account. If this is an entirely new application that has not yet been built, a similar
existing unit can be tested. The tests are normally conducted using a small skid-
mounted scrubber system capable of handling a 500 to 2,000 acfm slip-stream that is
taken from the discharge of the process source. The performance of the pilot scale
scrubber system is typically determined using conventional USEPA reference method
emission tests.

The primary advantage of this approach is that the performance of a scrubber very
similar to the proposed unit can be evaluated on the actual gas stream. Furthermore, a
series of tests can be conducted relatively quickly to identify the optimal operating
conditions, such as liquid-to-gas ratio and static pressure drop. The main disadvantage
is that the tests are expensive. Pilot scale tests usually indicate slightly higher particulate
matter removal efficiencies than can be achieved by the full scale system because a
variety of non-ideal gas flow conditions are more significant on the larger systems.
Also, the particle size distribution in the pilot scale scrubber may be different than in
the actual effluent gas stream due to errors in the way the slip-stream is withdrawn
from the main duct or due to changes in the gas stream while passing down the
temporary ductwork to the pilot scrubber.

Mathematical Models
Mathematical models provide a means of estimating performance when empirical data
or pilot scale tests are not available. They also provide the permit reviewer with tools
for evaluating designs proposed by the source. Some of these are empirical models that
have been developed from experimental data. Others have been developed from basic
principles and are based on the particle and droplet movements expected in that type
of scrubber.

Counter-Current Spray Tower Scrubbers

An equation for estimating the collection efficiency of a single size particle has been
developed by Calvert et al for counter-current spray tower scrubbers:

(8-5)
 1.5 vtη I z   L 
−  
( )
 d d vt −v g   G 
ηi = 1 − e

36
A P T I 4 1 3 : C O N T R O L O F P A R T I C U L A T E M A T T E R E M I S S I O N S
C H A P T E R 8

Where:
ηi = collection efficiency for particle size i
vt = droplet terminal settling velocity (cm/sec)
ηI = single droplet collection efficiency due to impaction
(dimensionless)
z = scrubber height (cm)
dd = droplet diameter (cm)
vg = gas velocity (cm/sec)
L/G = liquid to gas ratio (dimensionless; i.e., liters/min per liters/min)

The collection efficiency of a single droplet due to impaction, ηI, is given by:

(8-6)
2
 ΨI 
η I =  
 ΨI + 0.35 

Where ΨI is the inertial impaction parameter for particle size i, defined by

Equation 8-1:
C c d 2p ρ p Vr
ΨI =
18µ g d d

Where:
ΨI = inertial impaction parameter (dimensionless)
Cc =Cunningham slip correction factor (dimensionless)
dp = physical particle diameter (cm)
ρp = particle density (gm/cm3)
Vr = relative velocity between particle and droplet (cm/sec)
dd = droplet diameter (cm)
µg = gas viscosity (gm/cm sec)

Data concerning the droplet diameter can be obtained from the spray nozzle
manufacturers, and the droplet terminal settling velocity can be calculated using the
procedures in Chapter 4. The remainder of the parameters necessary to perform this
calculation are based on readily available design data for the scrubber being analyzed.

Example 8-5 Estimate the collection efficiency of 4 µm diameter particles with a

density of 1.1 g/cm3 in a counter-current spray tower 3 meters high. The gas flow rate
is 140 m3/min at 20°C, the water flow rate is 115 l/min, and the gas velocity is 100
cm/sec. The mean droplet diameter is 500 µm, and the droplet terminal settling
velocity is 200 cm/sec. Assume a Cunningham correction of 1.0.

Solution:

37
A P T I 4 1 3 : C O N T R O L O F P A R T I C U L A T E M A T T E R E M I S S I O N S
C H A P T E R 8

Calculate the inertial impaction parameter:

2 g  cm cm 
(1.0)(4 x 10 −4 cm ) 1.1 3  200 − 100 
ΨI =  cm  sec sec 
= 0.109
 g 
181.8 x 10

−4
(
−4
 500 x 10 cm
cm ⋅ sec 
)
Calculate the single droplet collection efficiency:

2
 0.109 
ηI =   = 0.056
 0.109 + 0.35 

Calculate the particle collection efficiency:

   115 l  1 x 10− 3 m  

3
  cm 
1. 5 200  (0 .056 )(300 cm )    
   min  min  
−  sec  
  cm cm    m3 
( −4
)
 500 x 10 cm  200 sec −100 sec    140 
     min 
η = 1− e = 0.563 = 56.3%

Packed Bed Scrubbers

Calvert et al also developed an equation for estimating the collection efficiency
of a single size particle in a packed bed scrubber:

 πzΨI 
− 
(8-7) ηi = 1− e 
j+ j( )
2
(ε − Hd )d c

Where:
ηi = collection efficiency for particle size i
z = scrubber height (cm)
ΨI = inertial impaction parameter (dimensionless)
j = channel width as a fraction of packing diameter
(dimensionless)
ε = bed porosity (dimensionless)
Hd = liquid holdup (dimensionless)
dc = packing diameter (cm)

Here, the inertial impaction parameter is calculated using packing diameter instead of
droplet diameter. The channel width as a fraction of packing diameter, j, varies with
packing type but typically ranges from 0.165 to 0.192. Bed porosity, ε, can be obtained
from packing manufacturers and typically ranges from 0.57 to 0.94, depending on the
type of packing. Liquid holdup, Hd, is usually assumed to be zero.

38
A P T I 4 1 3 : C O N T R O L O F P A R T I C U L A T E M A T T E R E M I S S I O N S
C H A P T E R 8

Example 8-6 Estimate the collection efficiency of 4 µm diameter particles with a

density of 1.1 g/cm3 in a 3 meter deep packed bed containing 5 cm diameter
Raschig rings. The gas flow rate is 140 m3/min at 20°C, the water flow rate is 115
l/min, and the gas velocity is 100 cm/sec. Assume j = 0.165, ε = 0.75, and Hd =
0, and a Cunningham correction of 1.0.

Solution:
Calculate the inertial impaction parameter:

2 g  cm 
(1.0)(4 x 10 −4 cm ) 1.1 3 100 
ΨI =  cm  sec 
= 1.09 x 10 −3
 g 
181.8 x 10 −4 (5.0 cm )
 cm ⋅ sec 

Calculate the particle collection efficiency:


−
(
π(300 cm ) 1.09 x x10 − 3 ) 

η = 1− e
[ 2
]
 0.165−(0.165 ) (0.75−0 )(5.0 cm ) 
= 0.863 = 86.3%

Tray Scrubbers
An equation for estimating the collection efficiency of a single size particle in a
tray scrubber has also been developed by Calvert et al:

(8-8)
n
ηi = 1 − e −80 F ΨI 
2

 

Where:
ηi = collection efficiency for particle size i
F = foam density fraction (dimensionless)
ΨI = inertial impaction parameter (dimensionless)
n = number of trays (dimensionless)

For this device, the inertial impaction parameter is calculated using the gas velocity
through the holes in the plate and the diameter of the holes, rather than the
diameter of the drops. The foam density fraction typically ranges from 0.38 to
0.65.

Example 8-7 Estimate the collection efficiency of 4 µm diameter particles with a

density of 1.1 g/cm3 in a tray scrubber having 3 trays with 10 mm diameter holes. The
gas flow rate is 140 m3/min at 20°C, the water flow rate is 115 l/min, and the gas
velocity through the holes is 1,800 cm/sec. Assume F = 0.50 and a Cunningham

39
A P T I 4 1 3 : C O N T R O L O F P A R T I C U L A T E M A T T E R E M I S S I O N S
C H A P T E R 8

correction of 1.0.

Solution:
Calculate the inertial impaction parameter:

2 g  cm 
(1.0)(4 x 10 −4 cm ) 1.1 3 1,800 
ΨI =  cm  sec 
= 0.098
 g 
181.8 x 10 −4 (1.0 cm )
 cm ⋅ sec 

Calculate the particle collection efficiency:

3
ηi = 1 − e −80(0.50 ) (0.098)  = 0.997 = 99.7%
2

 

Venturi scrubbers
The venturi scrubber is referred to as a gas atomizing scrubber, meaning that the
energy for atomizing the liquid comes from the gas stream. Accordingly, the droplet
diameter produced in the atomization process depends on the throat gas velocity and
the liquid to gas ratio. A number of relationships have been developed to predict mean
droplet size. The relationship that has found the widest application in venturi
scrubbing, despite its dimensional inconsistency, is that of Nukiyama and Tanasawa,
which estimates the Sauter mean diameter. The Sauter mean diameter is the diameter
of a drop having the same volume/surface area ratio as the entire distribution. For an
air-water system, this droplet diameter is given by:

(8-9)
1 .5
16,400 Q 
dd = + 1.45 l 
vg  Qg 
 

Where:
dd = mean droplet diameter (micrometers)
vg = gas velocity (ft/sec)
Ql/Qg = liquid to gas ratio (gal/1,000 ft3)

A relatively simple relationship for estimating the collection efficiency for a single size
particle has been developed by Johnstone et al:

(8-10)
Ql
−k ΨI
Qg
ηi = 1 − e

40
A P T I 4 1 3 : C O N T R O L O F P A R T I C U L A T E M A T T E R E M I S S I O N S
C H A P T E R 8

Where:
ηi = collection efficiency for particle size i
k = constant (1,000 ft3/gal)
ΨI = inertial impaction parameter (dimensionless)
Ql/Qg = liquid to gas ratio (gal/1,000 ft3)

In this relationship, the inertial impaction parameter is calculated using the gas velocity
in the throat. The constant, k, is typically 0.1-0.2 1,000 ft3/gal.

Example 8-8 Estimate the collection efficiency of a 1 µm diameter particle with a

density of 1.5 g/cm3 in a venturi scrubber having a throat gas velocity of 300 ft/sec and
a liquid to gas ratio of 8.0 gal/1,000 ft3. Assume a temperature of 68°F and a k of 0.15
1,000 ft3/gal.

Solution:
Calculate the mean droplet diameter:

16,400
dd = + 1.45(8.0 )1.5 = 87.5 µm
300

Calculate the Cunningham correction factor:

6.21 x 10 −4 T 6.21 x 10 −4 (293 K )

Cc = 1 + = 1+ = 1.18
dp 1µm

Calculate the inertial impaction parameter:

(1.18) 1 x 10 −4 cm 1.5 g 3  300 ft x 30.48 cm 
( )
2

ΨI =  cm  sec ft 
= 5.709
 g 
181.8 x 10

−4
(−4
 87.5 x 10 cm
cm ⋅ sec 
)
Calculate the particle collection efficiency:

1, 000 ft 3  gal 
−0.15 5.709  8.0 
gal  1, 000 ft 3 
ηi = 1 − e = 0.943 = 94.3%

A more sophisticated model of venturi scrubber performance has been developed by

Yung et al. A simplified version of this model is based on the assumption that the
droplets accelerate to the velocity of the gas stream prior to leaving the throat and is
termed the infinite throat model.

(8-11)

41
A P T I 4 1 3 : C O N T R O L O F P A R T I C U L A T E M A T T E R E M I S S I O N S
C H A P T E R 8

  0.7  −1 K po 
 4 K po + 4.2−5.02 K 0po.5  1+  tan 
  K po  0 .7 
−B   

 K po + 0.7 
 
ηi = 1− e  

Where:
ηi = collection efficiency for particle size i
B = liquid to gas flow rate ratio parameter (dimensionless)
Kpo = 2ΨI = inertial impaction parameter at throat velocity
(dimensionless)

(8-12)
 L  ρ  1
B =   l 
 G  ρ g  C Do


Where:
L/G = liquid to gas ratio (dimensionless)
ρl = liquid density (gm/cm3)
ρg = gas density (gm/cm3)
CDo = droplet drag coefficient at throat conditions (dimensionless)

(8-13)
24
C Do = 0.22 +
Re d
(
1 + 0.15 Re 0d.6 )

Where:
Red = Reynolds number of the droplet at the throat inlet
(dimensionless)

This technique is obviously more complex than that of Johnstone et al. However,
it is based on fundamental calculations that do not involve any loosely defined
constants and, when compared to experimental data, gives more accurate
estimates. An Excel spreadsheet is available from your instructor to ease some of
the pain in using this method.

Instrumentation
The selection and location of instrumentation is important in ensuring that the
particulate control system operates at its maximum capability. The types of instruments
that are used include static pressure gauges, temperature gauges, liquid flow rate gauges,
liquid pressure gauges, and pH gauges. Opacity monitoring instruments are not used
on particulate matter wet scrubber systems because the condensed water droplets often
present in the gas stream scatter light. It is not possible to differentiate between light
scattering due to particulate matter or due to water droplets.

42
A P T I 4 1 3 : C O N T R O L O F P A R T I C U L A T E M A T T E R E M I S S I O N S
C H A P T E R 8

The types of instruments that are necessary for a particulate matter wet scrubber
system depend, in part, on the size of the unit, the toxicity of the pollutants being
collected, the variability of operating conditions, and the susceptibility to performance
problems. Instruments in particulate matter wet scrubber systems usually include one
or more of the following monitors.

• Scrubber vessel static pressure drop

• Mist eliminator static pressure drop
• Inlet and outlet gas temperature
• Recirculation liquid flow rate
• Recirculation liquid pH

Static pressure gauges should be mounted in both the inlet and outlet ductwork of the
scrubber system. In these positions, the gauges can be used to determine the flange-to-
flange static pressure drop across the scrubber system. This value takes into account
the energy losses in the scrubbing section, the mist eliminator and in entering the exit
ductwork from the scrubber vessel. It may also be possible to install a static pressure
drop gauge across the scrubbing section, allowing the pressure drop of the scrubbing
section to be evaluated separately for the static pressure drop across the mist
eliminator. However, the presence of high levels of entrained liquid exiting the
scrubbing section can affect both the accuracy and reliability of these measurements.

The static pressure drop across the mist eliminator provides an excellent indicator of
the physical condition of the mist eliminator. The static pressure drop is strictly a
function of the geometry of the mist eliminator, the gas flow rate through the mist
eliminator, and the gas density. Accordingly, the static pressure drop should be a
relatively constant value, provided the flow rate is constant. If an increase in the
pressure drop occurs, it is likely due to the buildup of particulate matter or chemical
scale on the surface of the mist eliminator. Values well below the baseline range suggest
that part of the mist eliminator has fallen apart or otherwise been damaged. Structural
failure of the mist eliminator is possible because of the forces that can be imposed on
the surface when it is significantly blinded or because of corrosion-related weakening
of the supporting frame. Mist eliminators constructed of fiberglass-reinforced plastics
(FRP) and other synthetic materials can also suffer adhesive failure if there is a gas
temperature spike.

Temperature information is a useful indicator of gas-liquid distribution problems. If the

liquid distribution is not adequate, collection efficiency will be reduced. When the gas-
liquid distribution is good, the outlet gas stream temperature will be at the adiabatic
saturation temperature. This simply means that the gas stream will be saturated with
water vapor. The adiabatic saturation temperature can be easily determined with a
psychometric chart, if the inlet gas stream dry bulb temperature and absolute humidity
are known. Unfortunately, the absolute humidity of the entering gas stream is rarely
available. While it could be estimated, errors can significantly affect the value of the
saturation temperature determined from the psychometric chart, possibly leading to

43
A P T I 4 1 3 : C O N T R O L O F P A R T I C U L A T E M A T T E R E M I S S I O N S
C H A P T E R 8

erroneous conclusions. A more direct way to evaluate liquid distribution problems is to

look at the difference between the inlet and outlet gas temperatures. If that temperature
difference has decreased, liquid distribution problems are likely. It should be noted that
temperature difference is not an especially sensitive indicator of maldistribution in
venturi scrubbers. Impaction virtually ceases after the venturi throat; however, heat
transfer between the gas and liquid streams can continue until the gas stream passes
through the mist eliminator.

Monitoring the liquid flow rate is required by some New Source Performance
Standards (NSPS) and is also included in many operating permits for existing sources.
The rationale for these requirements is that scrubber performance is impaired when the
liquid recirculation rate is low. On moderate-to-large scrubbers, the liquid flow rate is
usually monitored continuously. The types of flowmeters include the following:

• Magnetic flowmeters
• Ultrasonic flowmeters
• Swinging vane flowmeters
• Rotameters
• Orifice meters

Smaller scrubbers may not have liquid flow rate gauges, but will typically monitor
supply header pressures. Supply headers are the pipes that deliver recirculated liquid to
nozzles in the scrubber. Unfortunately, supply header pressures are influenced by both
changes in liquid flow rate and by changes in the resistance of the delivery system,
making interpretation of the indications difficult. An increase in pressure can result
from an increase in flow rate or from solids build-up in the pipes or nozzles. Likewise,
a decrease in pressure can result from a decrease in flow rate or because the nozzle
orifices have eroded.

The recirculation liquid pH monitor provides essential information for scrubbers

handling acidic gas streams or collecting acidic particulate matter. The pH must usually
be maintained above approximately 5 to minimize vulnerability to corrosion damage. If
the pH exceeds levels of approximately 9, there is some vulnerability to chemical
precipitation (often termed scaling) of calcium and magnesium compounds. These
solids can build-up in spray nozzles and in the scrubbing vessels and mist eliminators
and disrupt gas-liquid distribution. pH monitors are often mounted in areas shielded
from high velocity, swirling liquid currents in the recirculation tank. They are also
mounted at an elevation and position in the tank where there is a minimal risk of
encapsulation in precipitated and settled solids.

Advantages and Disadvantages

Venturi Scrubbers
Advantages
High Collection Efficiency
Capable of Handling Flammable and Explosive Dusts
Can Handle Mists

44
A P T I 4 1 3 : C O N T R O L O F P A R T I C U L A T E M A T T E R E M I S S I O N S
C H A P T E R 8

Low Maintenance
Simple Design and Easy to Install
Provides Cooling for Hot Gases
Neutralizes Corrosive Gases and Dusts

Disadvantages
Waste Water Must be Treated
Collected Particulates are in Sludge Form
High Corrosion Potential
High Pressure Drop
May Require Protection Against Freezing
Final Exhaust Must be Reheated
Sludge Disposal May be Expensive

45
A P T I 4 1 3 : C O N T R O L O F P A R T I C U L A T E M A T T E R E M I S S I O N S
C H A P T E R 8

Review Questions
1. What is the average residence time of the gas stream in the throat of a venturi
scrubber throat?
a. 0.1 to 0.5 seconds
b. 1 to 10 seconds
c. 10 to 50 seconds
d. 0.001 to 0.005 seconds

2. What is the typical static pressure drop across a mist eliminator?

a. 0.1 to 0.4 in. WC
b. 0.5 to 4 in. WC
c. 4 to 8 psia
d. 4 to 8 kPa

3. There are more than fifteen categories of particulate matter scrubber designs. What
is one of the features that can be used to determine which categories are more efficient
for particles in the difficult–to-control size range?
a. Relative difference in velocities of the particles in the gas stream and the liquid
targets used for collection
b. Liquid-to-gas ratio
c. Droplet size distribution generated by the scrubber
d. Liquid surface tension maintained by use of flocculants

4. What is the purpose of the evaporative cooler or presaturator often used upstream
of a particulate wet scrubber? Select all that apply.
a. Protection of heat sensitive components in the scrubber vessel
b. Optimize inertial impaction into droplet targets
c. Increase the gas velocity through the scrubber
d. All of the above

5. What is the normal pH range in a particulate matter wet scrubber?

a. 1 to 5
b. 5 to 9
c. 9 to 11
d. 11 to 14

6. Select the factor(s) that often affect the necessary purge rate in a wet scrubber
system. Select all that apply.
a. Particulate loading in the gas stream being treated
b. Hydrogen chloride concentration in the gas stream being treated
c. Maximum suspended solids levels in the recirculated liquid stream
d. All of the above

7. What size range of droplets is usually controlled by a mist eliminator?

46
A P T I 4 1 3 : C O N T R O L O F P A R T I C U L A T E M A T T E R E M I S S I O N S
C H A P T E R 8

a. 0.1 to 1 micrometer
b. 1 to 50 micrometers
c. 20 to 1000 micrometers
d. 1,000 to 10,000 micrometers

8. What type of wet scrubber is primarily designed for the removal of gaseous air
contaminants? Select all that apply.
a. Packed bed scrubbers
b. Collision scrubbers
c. Mechanically aided scrubbers
d. Crossflow packed bed scrubbers

9. What type of wet scrubber is primarily designed for the removal of mists? Select all
that apply.
a. Fiber bed scrubber
b. Mesh bed scrubbers
c. Spray tower scrubbers
d. Impingement tray tower scrubbers

10. What is the most important factor affecting the ability of a particulate matter wet
scrubber to achieve high removal efficiencies?
a. Particle size
b. Static pressure drop
c. Droplet size distribution
d. Droplet surface tension

11. What is the difficult-to-control particle size range?

a. 0.1 to 1.0 micrometers
b. 1 to 5 micrometers
c. 5 to 20 micrometers
d. 20 to 50 micrometers

12. What is the main particle collection mechanism used in particulate matter wet
scrubbers?
a. Brownian motion
b. Electrostatic attraction
c. Inertial impaction
d. Coagulation

13. What variables can affect the adequacy of a correlation between scrubber static
pressure drop and the particulate matter removal efficiency? Select all that apply.
a. Particle size distribution
b. Adequacy of gas-liquid distribution
c. Droplet surface tension
d. Condensation of vapors in the scrubber
e. All of the above

47
A P T I 4 1 3 : C O N T R O L O F P A R T I C U L A T E M A T T E R E M I S S I O N S
C H A P T E R 8

14. What is the most difficult-to-collect particle size range for a venturi scrubber?
a. 0.01 to 0.1 µm
b. 0.1 to 1 µm
c. 1 to 10 µm
d. 10 to 100 µm

48
A P T I 4 1 3 : C O N T R O L O F P A R T I C U L A T E M A T T E R E M I S S I O N S
C H A P T E R 8

Review Question Answers

1. What is the average residence time of the gas stream in the throat of a venturi
scrubber throat?
d. 0.001 to 0.005 seconds

2. What is the typical static pressure drop across a mist eliminator?

b. 0.5 to 4 in. WC

3. There are more than fifteen categories of particulate matter scrubber designs.
What is one of the features that can be used to determine which categories are more
efficient for particles in the difficult–to-control size range?
a. Relative difference in velocities of the particles in the gas stream and the
liquid targets used for collection (all answers are correct, but ‘a’ is the best
answer)

4. What is the purpose of the evaporative cooler or presaturator often used upstream
of a particulate wet scrubber? Select all that apply.
a. Protection of heat sensitive components in the scrubber vessel
b. Optimize inertial impaction into droplet targets

5. What is the normal pH range in a particulate matter wet scrubber?

b. 5 to 9

6. Select the factor(s) that often affect the necessary purge rate in a wet scrubber
system. Select all that apply.
d. All of the above

7. What size range of droplets is usually controlled by a mist eliminator?

c. 20 to 1000 micrometers

8. What type of wet scrubber is primarily designed for the removal of gaseous air
contaminants? Select all that apply.
a. Packed bed scrubbers
d. Crossflow packed bed scrubbers

9. What type of wet scrubber is primarily designed for the removal of mists? Select all
that apply.
a. Fiber bed scrubber
b. Mesh bed scrubbers

10. What is the most important factor affecting the ability of a particulate matter wet
scrubber to achieve high removal efficiencies?
a. Particle size

49
A P T I 4 1 3 : C O N T R O L O F P A R T I C U L A T E M A T T E R E M I S S I O N S
C H A P T E R 8

11. What is the difficult-to-control particle size range?

a. 0.1 to 1.0 micrometers

12. What is the main particle collection mechanism used in particulate matter wet
scrubbers?
c. Inertial impaction

13. What variables can affect the adequacy of a correlation between scrubber static
pressure drop and the particulate matter removal efficiency? Select all that apply.
e. All of the above

14. What is the most difficult-to-collect particle size range for a venturi scrubber?
b. 0.1 to 1 µm

50
A P T I 4 1 3 : C O N T R O L O F P A R T I C U L A T E M A T T E R E M I S S I O N S
C H A P T E R 8

Review Problems

1. Calculate the liquid-to-gas ratio for a scrubber system with a gas flow rate of 4,000
ft3/sec and a recirculation liquor flow rate of 2,000 gal/min. Is this value in the normal
range for a particulate matter wet scrubber?

2. Estimate the liquid purge rate for a scrubber system treating a gas stream of 25,000
scfm with a particulate matter loading of 1.0 grains per scf. Assume that the scrubber
particulate matter removal efficiency is 97% and the maximum suspended solids level
desirable in the scrubber is 3% by weight.

3. A chevron mist eliminator is 8 ft in diameter. The gas flow rate through the
scrubber system has been measured at 60,500 acfm.
a. What is the average velocity through the mist eliminator?
b. What is the average velocity if 40% of the mist eliminator is completely blocked due
to solids accumulation? Is this velocity within the normal operating range of a vertically
mounted chevron mist eliminator?

4. Estimate the collection efficiency of 5 µm diameter particles with a density of 2.0

g/cm3 in a counter-current spray tower 2.5 meters high. The gas velocity is 100
cm/sec and the mean droplet diameter is 800 µm. Assume a Cunningham correction
of 1.0.

5. Using the relationship of Johnstone et al, estimate the collection efficiency of a 0.5
µm diameter particle with a density of 1.5 g/cm3 in a venturi scrubber having a throat
gas velocity of 500 ft/sec and a liquid to gas ratio of 10.0 gal/1,000 ft3. Assume a
temperature of 68°F and a k of 0.15 1,000 ft3/gal.

51
A P T I 4 1 3 : C O N T R O L O F P A R T I C U L A T E M A T T E R E M I S S I O N S
C H A P T E R 8

Review Problem Solutions

1. Calculate the liquid-to-gas ratio for a scrubber system with a gas flow rate of 4,000
ft3/sec and a recirculation liquor flow rate of 2,000 gal/min. Is this value in the normal
range for a particulate matter wet scrubber?

Solution
 ft 3  sec  ft 3

Gas flow rate =  4,000  60  = 240,000
 sec  min  min

gal
2,000
Liquid-to-gas ratio = min = 8.33 gal
1,000 ft 3 1,000 ft 3
240
min

This is within the normal range of 4-20 gal/1,000 acf.

2. Estimate the liquid purge rate for a scrubber system treating a gas stream of 25,000
scfm with a particulate matter loading of 1.0 grains per scf. Assume that the scrubber
particulate matter removal efficiency is 97% and the maximum suspended solids level
desirable in the scrubber is 3% by weight.

Solution

Calculate the inlet particulate mass:

ft 3  1.0 grains  lb  lb
Inlet mass = 25,000  3   = 3.57
min  ft  7,000 grains  min

lb
Collected mass = 0.97 (Inlet mass) = 3.46
min

Purge solids of 3.46 lb/min are 3% of the total purge stream, therefore:

lb
3.46
Purge stream = min = 115.3 lb
0.03 min

A stream with 3% suspended solids has a specific gravity of about 1.03,

therefore:

52
A P T I 4 1 3 : C O N T R O L O F P A R T I C U L A T E M A T T E R E M I S S I O N S
C H A P T E R 8

 lb water  lb
Purge stream density =  8.34 (1.03) = 8.59
 gal  gal

lb
115.3
Purge stream flow rate = min = 13.4 gal
lb min
8.59
gal

3. A chevron mist eliminator is 8 ft in diameter. The gas flow rate through the
scrubber system has been measured at 60,500 acfm.
a. What is the average velocity through the mist eliminator?
b. What is the average velocity if 40% of the mist eliminator is completely blocked due
to solids accumulation? Is this velocity within the normal operating range of a vertically
mounted chevron mist eliminator?

Solution for Part a:

Q
V=
A

2
πD 2 π(8 ft )
A= = = 50.3 ft 2
4 4

 ft 3  min 
 60,500  
 min  60 sec  ft
V= 2
= 20.0
50.3 ft sec

Solution for Part b:

Aopen = 0.6A = 0.6(50.3) = 30.2 ft2

 ft 3  min 
 60,500  
 min  60 sec  ft
V= 2
= 33.4
30.2 ft sec

This is not within normal operating range.

4. Estimate the collection efficiency of 5 µm diameter particles with a density of 2.0

g/cm3 in a counter-current spray tower 2.5 meters high. The gas flow rate is 200
m3/min, the water flow rate is 150 l/min, the gas velocity is 100 cm/sec, and the mean

53
A P T I 4 1 3 : C O N T R O L O F P A R T I C U L A T E M A T T E R E M I S S I O N S
C H A P T E R 8

droplet diameter is 800 µm. Assume a temperature of 20°C and a Cunningham

correction of 1.0.

Solution

Calculate the droplet terminal settling velocity:

Determine the flow region:

0.33
 g ρp ρg 
K = dp 
 µ2 
 g 
0.33
 cm  g  g 
  980 2 
1.0 3 1.2 x 10 −3 
cm 3  
= 8 00 x 10 − 4 cm  
sec  cm 
= 25.0
  g 
2

 1.8 x 10
−4
 
  cm ⋅ sec  

Therefore, the flow region is transition.

0.153 g 0.71ρ 0p.71d 1p.14

vt =
µ 0g.43ρ 0g.29
0.71 0.71
 cm   g 
0.153 980  1.0 3  800 x 10 cm
−4
( 1.14
)
=  sec   cm 
= 327.5
cm
0.43 0.29
 −4 g   −3 g  sec
1.8 x 10  1.2 x 10 
 cm ⋅ sec   cm 3 

Calculate the inertial impaction parameter:

(1.0 )(5 x 10 − 4 cm )2  2.0

g 
3 
327.5
cm
− 100
cm 

ΨI =  cm  sec sec 
= 0.439
 g 
181.8 x 10 −4
(−4
 800 x 10 cm )
 cm ⋅ sec 

Calculate the single droplet collection efficiency:

2
 0.439 
ηI =   = 0.310
 0.439 + 0.35 

Calculate the particle collection efficiency:

54
A P T I 4 1 3 : C O N T R O L O F P A R T I C U L A T E M A T T E R E M I S S I O N S
C H A P T E R 8

 l   3 
  cm    −3 m 
 1.5  327.5  (0.310 )( 250 cm )    150 min   1 x 10 min 
 sec    
−  
  cm   

( −4

) cm
 800 x 10 cm  327.5 −100
sec

sec   
200
m3 

min
 
η = 1− e = 0.792 = 79.2%

5. Using the relationship of Johnstone et al, estimate the collection efficiency of a 0.5
µm diameter particle with a density of 1.5 g/cm3 in a venturi scrubber having a throat
gas velocity of 500 ft/sec and a liquid to gas ratio of 10.0 gal/1,000 ft3. Assume a
temperature of 68°F and a k of 0.15 1,000 ft3/gal.

Solution

Calculate the mean droplet diameter:

16,400 1.5
dd = + 1.45(10.0 ) = 78.7 µm
500

Calculate the Cunningham correction factor:

6.21 x 10 −4 T 6.21 x 10 −4 (293 K )

Cc = 1 + = 1+ = 1.36
dp 0.5 µm

Calculate the inertial impaction parameter:

(1.36 )(0.5 x 10 −4 cm )2 1.5 g 

3 
500
ft
x 30.48
cm 

ΨI =  cm  sec ft 
= 3.048
 g 
181.8 x 10 − 4 ( −4
 78.7 x 10 cm )
 cm ⋅ sec 

Calculate the particle collection efficiency:

1, 000 ft 3  gal 
− 0.15 3.048  10.0
gal  1, 000 ft 3 

ηi = 1 − e = 0.927 = 92.7%

55
A P T I 4 1 3 : C O N T R O L O F P A R T I C U L A T E M A T T E R E M I S S I O N S
C H A P T E R 8

References

Calvert, S., J. Goldschmid, D. Leith, and D. Mehta. Scrubber Handbook. Vol. l, Wet
Scrubber System Study. EPA-R2-72-118a. 1972.

Engineering Science. Scrubber Emissions Correlation Final Report. U.S. EPA Contract
68-01-4146, Task Order 49. 1979.

Ensor, D.S. Ceilcote Ionizing Wet Scrubber Evaluation. EPA 600/7-79-246. 1979.

Johnstone, H.F., R.B. Field and M.C. Tassler, I. & E.C., 46, 1601 (1954).

Myers, J.R., and D. McIntosh. The Dynawave Scrubber: a Highly Efficient Gas Cleaning.
Paper presented at the American Institute of Chemical Engineers Midwest
Regional Meeting. St. Louis, MO. February, 1991.

Nukiyama, S., and Y. Tanasawa, Trans. Soc. Mech. Engrs. (Japan), 4, 86, 138 (1938);
5, 63, 68 (1939); 6, II-7, II-8 (1940).

Radian Corporation. Economic and Technical Evaluation of a Hydro-Sonic Free-Jet

Scrubber for a Hazardous Waste Incinerator. Report DCN 87-213-071-05. 1987.

Richards, J. Wet Scrubber Inspection and Evaluation Manual. PA 340/1-83-022. 1983.

Schifftner, K. Flux Force Condensation Scrubbers for Utilization on Municipal Solid Waste
Incinerators. Paper presented at the Joint American Society of Mechanical
Engineers/IEEE Power Generation Conference. Dallas, TX. October, 1989.

Schifftner, K.C., and H.E. Hesketh. Wet Scrubbers. Ann Arbor Science. Ann Arbor,
MI. 1983.

Schifftner, K.C., and R.G. Patterson. Engineering Efficient Hospital Waste Incinerator
Scrubbers. Paper presented at the First National Symposium on Incineration of
Infectious Wastes. Washington, D.C. May, 1988.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1982. Control Techniques for Particulate

Emissions from Stationary Sources. Vol. 1, Wet Scrubbers. EPA 450/3-81-005a.

Walker, A.B., and R.M. Hall. Operating Experience with a Flooded Disc Scrubber: a New
Variable Throat Orifice Contactor. Journal of the Air Pollution Control Association
18:319-323. 1968.

Yung, S., S. Calvert, and H.F. Barbarika. Venturi Scrubber Performance Model. EPA
600/2-77-172. 1977.

56