Review

Improving Mist Eliminator Performance in Gas-Liquid Separators

I G Wenten*, Anang Satria Chandranegara
*(Department of Chemical Engineering, Laboratory of Downstream Processing, Institut Teknologi Bandung, Indonesia
Email: igw@che.itb.ac.id)

ABSTRACT
Mist elimination or the removal of the entrained liquid droplets from a gas stream, is one of the most commonly
encountered processes regardless of the unit operation. Mist eliminator device installed in the top of separators can
remove entrained liquid from gas phase that are not removed by the inlet device or gas gravity settling section of the
separators. Mist eliminator needs to be designed properly to optimize the separation efficiency. Modification has been
done for years to improve performance of mist eliminator and the future direction shows interesting progress in mist
eliminator technology for better separation efficiency. Recent study shows dual mist eliminator based on integrated
vane-cyclone could perform great performance in separation of liquid from 200 MMscfd natural gas stream.
Meanwhile, ceramic membrane technology for mist eliminator has been tested on pilot scale and shows promising
result in condensate recovery from natural gas stream.

Keywords – Droplets capture and recovery, Gas-Liquid Separation, Mist Eliminator Technology, Process
Intensification

Contents
1 Introduction .................................................................................................................................................... 2
2 Mist eliminator technologies .......................................................................................................................... 3
2.1 Wire mesh ............................................................................................................................................... 3
2.2 Cartridge filter ......................................................................................................................................... 4
2.3 Vanes ...................................................................................................................................................... 5
2.4 Cyclones .................................................................................................................................................. 7
2.5 Combined mist eliminator....................................................................................................................... 9
3 Separation performance ................................................................................................................................. 9
4 Emerging Mist Eliminator Technology .......................................................................................................... 10
4.1 Modified mist eliminator ...................................................................................................................... 10
4.2 Novel dual mist eliminator .................................................................................................................... 11
4.3 Membrane mist eliminator ................................................................................................................... 12
5 Conclusions ................................................................................................................................................... 12
Acknowledgements .............................................................................................................................................. 13
References ............................................................................................................................................................ 13
 in figure 1.a, where vane is used as inlet device to
1 Introduction provide good gas distribution and slug separation
In gas-liquid operation, separator development has [3]. Another configuration is shown in figure 1b,
become topic of interest for years to separate liquid where vane-wire mesh-vane system is installed
from gas stream. A separator is essentially a vessel inside horizontal vessel to provide better
whose interior is kept at a prescribed separation separation. Improper configuration design of
pressure and temperature. The three principles used separation device causes uneven gas distribution
to achieve physical separation are momentum, and affects the performance of mist eliminator.
gravity settling and coalescing. Any separator may This is illustrated in Peng et al experiment [4], in
employ one or more of these principles, but the which visualization of the model shows the
three phases must be immiscible and have different uniform gas distribution around the vane, and the
densities for separation to occur. Some oil and gas influence of feedback on the performance of gas
separations are simple while others are very cyclones which can cause vortex distortion.
complex.
(a)
Separators may be vertical cylindrical, monotube
and dual-tube horizontal, or spherical, depending
on their design. Horizontal Separator is the most
common separator used to separate gas from the
large volume of low-volume liquid. This type of
separator is also often used to handle liquid slug
from the collector and is generally used as the
initial separation equipment at the gas processing
plant. Vertical separator is commonly used for gas
separation process of relatively large liquid
volume. Typically, this separator installed on the
oil wells. Different from the horizontal, vertical
separator is less good at dealing with slug problems
[1].

In the gas-liquid separation using a gravity

separator, the fine droplets will not fall by gravity
force alone. This fine droplets lead to carry over
(b)
that can cause decrease in process efficiency or
damage of the downstream equipment. These
droplets are typically less than 150-500 micron in
size and usually much smaller. It is generally not
economic to separate these droplets by gravity
alone by making the separator larger [2].

In order to separate mist that not settled out by inlet

device or gravity settling section in separators, mist
eliminator device is installed in the way of the gas
stream to remove entrained liquid from gas. Mist
eliminator can be a standalone tool or an integrated
device inside vessel. The important thing to notice
in the use of mist eliminator inside vessel is the
inner device configuration. Typically, the mist
eliminator inside vessel was preceded by a separate
device near vessel inlet that serves the bulk liquid
and ensures the equitable distribution of the gas to
enter into the mist eliminator. An example of
device configuration inside vertical vessel is shown
Figure 1. Example of mist eliminator device
configuration inside vessel. (a) vane-mesh-cyclone
configuration in vertical separator. (b) vane-mesh-
vane configuration in horizontal separator [3]
However, mist eliminator is often considered as
commodity items and is specified without attention
to available technologies and design approaches.
There are different types of modern mist eliminator
using different separation principles such Brownian
motion, inertial impaction or centrifugal force
rather than simple droplet settling by gravity to
achieve efficient removal of small droplets. This
engineered mist eliminator may reduce liquid
carryover by a factor of one hundred or more
relative to a standard unit, drop head losses by 50%
or more, and could even increase capacity by
factors of three or four [5,6].
In this paper, the mist eliminator technology will be
discussed in depth, to determine the performance of
mist eliminator so as to maximize their potential.
The development of mist eliminator technologies to
improve their separation efficiencies will also be
discussed, assuming other configuration in the
vessel has been designed in accordance with the
needs of mist eliminator.
2 Mist eliminator technologies
There are four general classes of mist eliminators:
wire mesh, vane-pack, fiber, and cyclone. Each of
classes will be further discussed in details. The
comparisons of these four classes are summarized
in Table 1.
Table 1 Comparisons of Mist Eliminator
In designing mist eliminator, trade-offs often need
to be made. High removal efficiencies, low
pressure drop, long service life or small size can be
achieve individually, but is difficult to achieve
simultaneously. Therefore, proper selection and
design of mist eliminator is very important to
obtain the most efficient and great performance in a
certain application. It will be further discussed
about separation mechanism of each type of mist
eliminator.
2.1 Wire mesh
Wire mesh pads are made of finely woven mats
arranged by stainless steel wire wrapped into a
tightly packed cylinder, as shown in figure 2.
Geometrical wire mesh structure can be random,
coated, or rolled up, adjusted with ease in
installation. The materials used for wire mesh can
be either stainless steel or polymers.
The liquid droplets impinge on the matted wires
and coalesce. The effectiveness of wire mesh
depends largely on the gas being in the proper
velocity range. If the velocities are too high, the
liquids knocked out will be re-entrained. If the
velocities are low, the vapor just drifts through the
mesh element without the droplets impinging and
coalescing. Wire mesh pads are not recommended
to be used in a gas stream which has high fouling
rates because it may be easily plugged. Wire mesh
pads are normally installed horizontally with gas
flow vertically upwards through the pad. The
separation performance of wire mesh is affected by
two important points which are the droplet removal
efficiency and gas handling capacity. Although
wire mesh is not able to accommodate high liquid
loading and need to replaced periodically, it is
preferably used in some application because of its
advantages such as easy to install, features low
pressure drop, have high separation efficiency for
3-10 µm droplets diameter, and have reasonable
capital cost.
Figure 2. Knitted Wire Mesh
Experimental studies related to performance of
wire mesh mist eliminator as a function of broad
ranges of operating and design conditions have
been developed. Various novel wire mesh
modeling show good relevance to the actual data. A
model to predict temperature depression
corresponding to the pressure drop in wire mesh
mist eliminator has been developed by Dessouky,
et al [7], to analyze the performance of wire mesh
mist eliminator, and develop systems installed in a
typical multistage flash desalination plant.
However, the effect of locating the mesh pad with
respect to the surface of the boiling or flashing
liquid should be studied further to obtain better
understanding of wire mesh mist eliminator
performance
Direct interception separation can be seen in wire
mesh application. Droplets that cannot be captured
efficiently by inertial effects due to small size, low
density, low velocity, etc. may nevertheless head so
close to the centerline of a strand that they brush
against the surface and adhere. In practice,
interception is indistinguishable from inertial
impaction and may be ignored in vanes and mesh.
This mechanism can be seen in Figure 3.
Figure 3. Droplet removal mechanism in wire mesh
(www.amistco.com)
2.2 Cartridge filter
Fiber mist eliminators can capture sub-micron
liquid droplet of 0.1 microns or even smaller that
commonly appear as smoke or nearly invisible haze
[8]. These units employ fine fibers, typically
cellulose, glass, or plastic, packed into a mat with
thickness of a few inches. Fiber mist eliminators
are mostly used in cylindrical form called candles
but are also available in flat panels.
Mist-laden gases pass horizontally through the
fiber-bed. The separated liquid drain downward on
the inside surface of the element, through the drain
leg, and are collected at the bottom of the vessel.
Then, clean gases exit at the top of the vessel.
There is not many study related to filter type mist
eliminator have been covered, however analysis of
pleat crowding and medium compression in pleated
cartridge filters has been studied by Wakeman, et al
[9].
A compact coalescer filter-membrane device for
sample gas streams for use with gas analyzers and
other clean-gas user device have been developed in
1998 [10] as a single device. This concept can be
applied in large scale mist elimination in vessel
with periodically filter replacement for continuous
operation. The true cost of cartridge filter change-
out and fiber installation pricing are examined in
detail by John Hampton and Guy Weismantel [11].
Brownian motion is the main mechanism for sub-
micron droplets in fiber mist eliminators (as shown
in Figure 4). It is the frequent random twitch
experienced by microscopic particles suspended in
a gas or liquid. The cause is momentary
inequalities in the number and speed of
surrounding molecules hitting the particle from
various directions. This tiny motion is enough to
throw small droplets out of gas streamlines and
against fibers that they would otherwise flow
around. Because the flow momentum is not
involved, capturing efficiency is not improved by
larger droplets, higher velocity, higher relative
liquid density, or lower gas viscosity as for vanes
and mesh. Instead, efficiency increases with higher
temperature, longer residence time in the mat, and
closer packing of fibers, and decreases with greater
droplet size and pressure.
Figure 4. Droplet removal mechanism by Brownian
motion
2.3 Vanes
Vane eliminators force the gas flow to be laminar
between parallel plates that contain directional
changes. The changes in gas flow direction
combined with inertia of the entrained liquid
droplets cause impingement of the droplets onto the
plate surface, followed by coalescence and
drainage of the liquid to the liquid collection
section of the separator. Vane eliminators are sized
by their manufacturers to assure both laminar flow
and a certain minimum pressure drop. The example
of vane mist eliminator is shown in figure 5.
Figure 5. Double pocket stainless-steel vane
In vane operation, there are some terms that need to
be understood as follows [12]:
• Face Velocity, is the average speed at which
the gas and entrained liquid droplets enter the
separator module. Face velocity is defined as
the flow of air in volume per unit time divided
by the cross sectional area of the opening in
which the liquid entrainment separator module
is placed.
• Liquid loading, is the measure of the amount
of liquid entrained in the gas stream before
encountering the separator module.
• Carryover, is a measure of the amount of
liquid entrained in the gas stream after passing
through the separator module. The unit used in
this discussion is grains per cubic foot (g/L).
• Re-entrainment, refers to liquid removed from
the gas stream, accumulated on the liquid
entrainment separator surfaces, and then
reentrained in the gas stream. It is considered
part of the carryover.
In designing vane, gas velocity and liquid loading
is very crucial. Proper designed vane is needed to
minimize carryover and re-entrainment by
adjusting the face velocity. This can be done by
determining the cross section of vane.
A number of different vane pack designs are
available. Pack thicknesses are generally in the
range of 6-12 in. Vanes are usually arranged in a
zigzag or sinusoidal pattern, with vane spacing of
1-1.5 in typical. Vane packs typically have pressure
drops in the range of 0.5-3.5 in of water.
The performance of vane separators suffers
excessive liquid carryover when the liquid loading
is too high. Moreover, vane packs show a drop-off
of removal efficiency as pressure increases. This is
primarily a result of the decreasing allowable gas
velocity with increasing pressure caused mainly by
increased gas density. As gas velocity decreases,
droplet inertia decreases and the droplets tend to
follow the gas streamlines easier through the vane
passages, and exit the vane pack without being
captured. Turndown is generally more of an issue
with vane-packs, with droplet removal efficiency
decreasing measurably as velocity decreases from
design.
Various modifications were carried out to provide
better separation efficiency. Typical vane design is
shown in figure 6a. Improvement in fluid path lines
is made by developing vane into shaped curve
channel without angle as shown in figure 6b.
However this type of vane is very difficult to
construct. In lower gas velocity application, vane
can be equipped with a hook/drainage channel as
shown in figure 6c, where it has been proved in
increasing the separation efficiency for small
droplets. The new vane concept was proposed by
Koch co. which is called double pocket vane, as
shown in figure 6d. Double pocket vane provide
drainage channels as only slit-shaped to ensure
good gas flow pattern and better contact with the
wall, resulting in optimum separation efficiency.
 (a) (b) (c) (d)
Figure 6. Vane Types (a) Typical Vane; (b) Curve
Vane; (c) Vane with drainage channel (hook); (d)
Double-pocket vane [6]
Today, vane mist eliminators are available in a
variety of materials: polypropylene, fiberglass-
reinforced polymer (FRP), polysulfone and
stainless steel. Each has its own advantages and
disadvantages. Material selection has a direct effect
on operations and maintenance requirements, as
well as on capital and operating costs associated
with mist eliminators used especially in the
extreme conditions where high pressures, high
temperatures, high acidity and high liquid loading
are applied. The performance of each material is
shown in table 2.
Table 2. Mist eliminator performance profile [13]
The inertial impaction mechanism occurred in
vane-pack is shown in following figure.
Figure 7. Droplet removal mechanism in vane-pack
As shown in Figure 7, vanes bend the path of mist-
laden gas into relatively tight curves. As the gas
changes direction, inertia or momentum keeps mist
droplets moving in straighter paths and some strike
adjacent vanes. There, they are held by surface
forces and coalesce with other droplets, eventually
trickling down. If the vane material is wettable, a
surface film will promotes coalescence and
drainage. In the case of upward flow, coalesced
liquid disengages from the bottom of the vanes as
droplets large enough to fall through rising gas. In
the case of horizontal flow, the liquid trickles down
vanes to a drain below.
This separation mechanism is slightly different
from wire-mesh mist eliminator, where each strand
acts as an obstruction around which gas must flow.
In wire mesh, within a very short distance upstream
of a filament, the gas turns aside sharply, but some
mist droplets are unable to follow. They strike the
filament, adhere, and coalesce to form droplets that
are large enough to trickle down and fall away.
Based on the principle of inertial capture, it is easy
to understand the behavior of a vane or mesh mist
eliminator in terms of the efficiency with which it
captures mist droplets. There are several factors
determine whether the droplet strikes the surface or
turns and flows around with the gas, such as
droplet size, strand diameter or corrugation
spacing, gas velocity, liquid density relative to gas
density, gas viscosity, and pad density and
thickness.
As the gas enters vane channels, some of the
droplets (1 in Fig.8) dispersed in the continuous
phase could pass through the flow channel without
breakup, but secondary droplets could also be
generated by three mechanisms [14]:
(1) Breakup of droplets caused by interaction with
continuous phase (2 in Fig.8);
(2) Breakup of droplets by impingement on the
liquid film (3 in Fig.8);
(3) Breakup of the liquid film due to interfacial
shear stress (4 in Fig.8).
Figure 8. The generation of secondary droplets
There is a critical value of droplets diameter below
which the droplet separation efficiency would
decrease sharply for a given air velocity, and this
value decreases with the increase of air velocity. In
other words, increasing the air velocity is helpful
for removal of the smaller droplet. But it is also
important to note that the large droplets are prone
to splashing on the wall when increasing the air
velocity, resulting in introduction of finer droplets
which is more difficult to be separated. To solve
this problem, vane is modified by attaching
hook/drainage channel into vanes. The hooks help
to capture the droplets and increase air velocity at
the cross section where hook is affixed, thus makes
the mist eliminator reach high separation efficiency
even though the inlet velocity is low. However, it
is still possible for the fine secondary droplets
produced from splashing to be carried over through
the channel. [15] A numerical model for gas flow
and droplet motion in wave-plate mist eliminators
with drainage channels has been proposed by
Galletti, et al [16].
Recently developed hollow vane design with
interconnected liquid drainage passages is capable
of high gas handling capacities in a vertical upflow
orientation. Different from mesh pad, vanes
typically do not drain the separated liquid back
through the rising gas stream. Rather, the liquid can
be routed into a downcomer that carries the fluid
directly to the liquid holding section of the
separator. Vane packs are better suited to dirty or
fouling service as they are less likely to plug due to
their relatively large flow passages.
2.4 Cyclones
There are two types of cyclone in mist eliminators:
tangential cyclone and axial cyclone. Modifications
to both types of cyclones are shown in the figure 9,
in which figure 9a and 9b refers to the axial
cyclone, while the figure 9c to 9g refers to the
tangential cyclones. Tangential cyclone is
commonly used as standalone mist eliminator,
while axial cyclone is attached as internal device
inside vessel. The principles on gas-liquid cyclone
operation are similar with gas-solid cyclone
operation, but liquids pose some unique problems
and some advantages relative to solids collecting
cyclones. Unlike the particles feeding conventional
gas-solids cyclones, liquid particles feeding a gas-
liquid cyclone are normally greater in size and are
not porous. These two factors tend to make for an
easier separation. The droplets entering a gas-liquid
cyclone are also not likely to plug the cyclone as
sometimes occurs with statically charged or tacky
solids in a gas-solids cyclone [17].
Cyclone mist eliminators as internal device inside
vessel consist of multiple cyclone tube elements,
mounted into housing. The element diameter is
selected based on process considerations. The units
are provided in easily handled subassemblies,
which are installed through vessel main ways. The
most important benefits of this design are its very
high gas handling capacity combined with
excellent droplet removal efficiency even at
elevated pressure.
In new construction of high pressure separators,
cyclone mist eliminators often provide the lowest
overall cost solution by minimizing the diameter
and height requirements of the vessel. These very
significant vessel size and weight reductions may
lead to faster vessel delivery, lower transportation
cost, and installation cost savings. In retrofits,
where significant additional capacity is required,
cyclone mist eliminators extend the gas capacity
well beyond any other mist elimination technology
[6]. Cyclone also can acts as foam breaker in gas
liquid separation. It was reported that foam
generated at low superficial gas velocities and the
operational envelope for liquid carry-over is
significantly reduced, by using cyclone as mist
eliminator device in the air-waters applications.
Foam dissipation is observed at high superficial gas
velocities, above 6 m/s, due to lower liquid levels
below the inlet of the cyclone. [18]
(a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g)
Figure 9. Schematic diagram of cyclones
geometries;
(a) Axial cyclone with swirling baffle
(b) Axial cyclone with drainage channel in the
body
(c) Cylindrical cyclone
(d) Coned tangential cyclone
(e) Prolonged tube cyclone
(f) Direct symmetrical spiral inlet cyclone,
(g) Converging symmetrical spiral inlet cyclone
Collection efficiency depends on the flow regime
which is affected by the flow parameters such as
inlet velocity, temperature, viscosity and surface
roughness. In larger cyclones, flow is generally
fully turbulent and the effects of flow parameters
decrease with Reynolds number, whereas, in
smaller cyclones or at low velocities, flow is
laminar and the effects of flow parameters increase
[19].
The overall collection efficiency of a cyclone
decreases with increase in temperatures, especially
in the relatively high temperature range where the
decrease of the overall collection efficiency
becomes much steeper than in the low temperature
range. The overall collection efficiency of the
cyclone at high temperatures is fairly well
predicted by Shi’s approach, though the prediction
is still not sufficiently precise due to the neglect of
temperature effect on tangential velocity and the
influence of particle agglomeration. [20]
The probability of droplets coalescing increases as
the mass loading increase. The principle of
separation in the cyclone separator as a result of
coalescing is that small droplets, which cannot be
separated in the centrifugal field because of
insufficient centrifugal forces, coalesce with the
larger and easily separable droplets during their
residence in the cyclone, and then are separated
together from the gas. The particles with the
diameter above 10 μm can be easily removed by
the cyclone separator in low mass loading and low
gas velocities condition [21].
Centrifugal force is a mechanism that occurs in the
cyclone separator. Gas was forced to bend in the
form of a spiral that resulted in the vortex flow. In
many systems, the gas/liquid mixture feeding the
cyclone enters through some upstream piping
wherein small droplets coalesce into larger drops,
in which the driving force for the coalescence of
colliding droplets being provided by surface
tension. Once the incoming liquid droplets are
centrifuged to the wall of the cyclone, they merge
with the liquid wall film to form a much larger
mass which is not easily removed or re-entrained
back into the gas phase. The liquid film falling
down due to gravity in case of vertical cyclone, or
due to larger internal pressure applied in case of
horizontal cyclone, and being separated as
underflow product. Meanwhile, the flow of gas will
come out as upperflow product from vortex finder,
as shown in figure 10.
Figure 10. Flow inside single inlet tangential
cyclone with cone
2.5 Combined mist eliminator
Dual mist eliminator has been proposed for last
decades in order to combine the benefits of each
mist eliminator and gain more efficient separation
process. Vane units can be especially valuable in
certain applications when used immediately
upstream or downstream of mesh pads. Amistco co.
has developed dual mist eliminator by combining
mesh and vane. There are two configurations
proposed by Amistco [8] as shown in Figures 11
and 12.
Figure 11. Configuration of mesh pad followed by
a vane unit [8]
Mounting a vane unit downstream of a mesh pad as
in Figure 11 combines the superior efficiency of
the mesh with the superior K-factor of the vanes.
When operated at or above the resulting design
velocity, the mesh pad serves as an agglomerator or
coalescer of fine mist droplets. Most liquid
captured in the mesh pad is re-entrained as larger
droplets whose sizes are well above the lower limit
of the vane unit. Higher velocity also improves the
mist elimination efficiency of the mesh. This
configuration is designed for processing feed gas
with low liquid loading and fine droplet.
Figure 12. Configuration of mesh pad with front
vane unit [8]
On the other hand, mounting a vane unit upstream
of a mesh pad as in Figure 12 combines the
superior efficiency of mesh in low liquid loading
applications with the superior load and solids
handling ability of vanes. This configuration using
vane pack as the main separation tool, then fine
droplets of the liquid carry over are captured
further by wire mesh afterward. This configuration
could provide good separation efficiency for feed
gas containing high liquid loading and larger
droplet diameters.
Dual mist eliminator has now become a common
with the increasing needs of high separation
efficiency. Combination for mist eliminator is not
only on the Vane and wire mesh, but now is
starting to be developed for several other types of
mist eliminator.
3 Separation performance
Design of mist eliminator cannot be separated from
the separator vessel condition. For Vane and wire
mesh, it is strongly influenced by 3 main factors:
buoyancy, drag force and gravity force. Buoyancy
and drag force depend on the gas density, the
density of the liquid, and gas velocity.
To simplify the calculation, K factor was made as a
substitute for drag coefficient, so that the general
equation becomes:
𝟏⁄
𝐕 = 𝐊[(𝛒𝐋 − 𝛒𝐕 )/𝛒𝐕 ] 𝟐
K is capacity factor, where its value is defined from
the experimental data for each mist eliminator
design to work properly. Typical K value is ranged
from 0.04 to 0.35 m/s.
Decision need to be made whether designing based
on low velocity to prevent high re-entrainment
which results in low separation efficiency, or make
the velocity higher to obtain higher droplet removal
efficiency in risk of high liquid carryover because
of secondary droplet generation. The relationship
between gas density and velocity in vane mist
eliminator can be seen in figure 13a, where the
minimum velocity required to separate a given
droplet size is shown. This velocity is limited by
the maximum curve (v max), resulting re-
entrainment area through the line.
(a)
(b)
Figure 13. Effect of gas density on the removal
efficiency (a) In vane pack (b) in Cyclone [6]
In contrast to the concept of separation in the
cyclone, the gas density is not so influential to the
velocity that is used to achieve high separation
efficiency, as seen in figure 13b. Thus cyclone has
no problem to be used in elevated pressure.
4 Emerging mist eliminator technology
4.1 Modified mist eliminator
A modification in wire mesh for horizontal vessel
has been patented using filament as coalescing
media. It is claimed that the apparatus permit vapor
load factors of up to about 10 times that in
conventionally designed separator vessel [22].
Another modification to optimize space in mist
eliminator was patented, where the coalescing
device is fibrous media made of polymers [23].
In vane technology, some manufacturers develop
vane-pack for higher capacity, called as double-
pocket vanes (Figure 5). This configuration offers
more efficient mist removal, especially at higher
pressures where the allowable velocity decreases
with the increasing gas density. Double pocket
hooks direct the collected liquid away the main gas
stream. Because the liquid is now isolated from the
gas stream and less subject to re-entrainment, gas
velocities can be more than doubled in both
horizontal and vertical gas flow configurations.
This vane configuration can increase twofold
capacity than the conventional type and excellent
droplet removal of 8 micron in size can be achieved
because of its higher velocity.
Various modification in vanes geometry are still
being developed to improve the separation
performance, several development related to
modified vane morphology, for example umbrella
vane concept [24] and cyclonic vane concept
incorporating centrifugal force through a spiral
channel [25]. However, little of them have been
commercialized since industrial vane has been
dominated by original and easy to assembled vane
with a little modification.
The extensive research in cyclone mist eliminator
is still being carried out. Movafaghian et al. [18]
studied the hydrodynamic flow behavior in a gas-
liquid cylindrical cyclone compact separator. In
2002, Matsubara et al. [26] had invented a cyclone-
type gas-liquid separator which has a gas-lead
through pipe penetrating an upper end wall of
cyclone chamber and extending downward to have
a gas outlet in the cyclone chamber.
The improvement in cyclone collection efficiency
is possible by recycling a portion of the product
stream. As the recycle ratio is increased,
significant improvement occur in the overall
efficiency primarily because of enhanced collection
of particles around the cut diameter size. The
improvement comes at the expense of higher
pressure drop and power consumption and
increased cyclone size [27]. Another way to
improve the performance of cyclones is to arrange
several cyclones in series with higher pressure drop
as trade off [28].
There are various modifications of cyclones to
improve the separation efficiency. However,
modifications on the cyclone body into spiral guide
body, circumferential groove body, and vertical
groove body cyclones do not give significant result
on droplet separation performance, even tend to
decrease the efficiency of separation. [29].
Modifications are also done on cone, where smaller
diameter of the underflow will increase the
efficiency of cyclone as the increase in pressure
drop [30]. Prolonged cone provoke unstable flow
field near the bottom of the view finder. The flow
field is not fully developed and stable in the
cylinder region due to the sharp transition to a
conical section [31]. On the other hand, when a
prolonged vertical tube attached into the
conventional cyclone, the swirl will enter into the
tube, and make separation goes further. This makes
the tangential velocity, axial velocity and turbulent
kinetic energy are reduced greatly, and the vortex
end located at the bottom of the vertical tube.
However, there is an optimal vertical tube length
exiting in the prolonged cyclones [32].
Another modification is done by attaching vane and
mesh into cyclone, and had been proven to increase
cyclone separation efficiencies. Vane would act as
small droplets coalescer while the next level of
separation was conducted by cyclone [33,34]
A new kind of cyclone with symmetrical spiral
inlet (SSI) including direct symmetrical spiral inlet
(DSSI) and converging symmetrical spiral inlet
(CSSI) was developed as can be seen in figure 9.
Despite that the multiple inlet increases the
complicity and the cost of the cyclone separators,
the cyclones with SSI, especially CSSI, can yield a
better collection efficiency, obviously with a minor
increase in pressure drop. It is possible to obtain a
better performance cyclone by means of improving
its inlet geometry design [35].
A cyclone separator in high pressure operation can
be modified using supplemental water to produce a
virtual flow restriction that acted to maintain high-
pressure and to prevent gas from escaping with the
separated particles. The slurry thus produced may
be pumped, and can be continuously and easily
conveyed away. Over a range of practical operating
points, the separator showed very high collection
efficiencies >90%, low-pressure drop, and robust
operation [36]. Creutz, et al [37] also propose a tool
based on a rotational pump impeller with axial gas
removal, for separating transient two phase gas-
liquid flows. Another modification in cyclone has
been developed to make three-phase separator
hydrocyclone which generates two-underflows can
be used to separate three phase based on their
density [38-40].
4.2 Novel dual mist eliminator
As mentioned previously, dual mist eliminator
concept may offer much greater separation
efficiency performance by combining the
advantages of each mist eliminator.
The interesting mist eliminators systems used for
dual concept are the vane pack and cyclone mist
eliminators. This dual mist eliminator brings
together the advantages of vanes in high loading
factor and low pressure drop with the advantages of
cyclone in high separation efficiency for higher gas
and liquid capacity. In 2009, Wenten has invented
a combined vane-cyclone configuration for mist
eliminator to obtain better separation result and
lower droplet re-entrainment. Vane would act as
small droplets coalescer while the next level of
separation was conducted by cyclone. Therefore,
gas velocity containing liquid droplets can be kept
at the optimum velocity for efficient separation as
there is always a changing in gas stream
momentum. Thus, droplet removal efficiency can
be increased significantly. Moreover, dual mist
eliminator concept can tackle the poor performance
of downstream unit operations by reducing the
liquid carryover. This separator internal concept
has been applied commercially in natural gas plant
to separate 492.4 barrel/day liquid from 200
MMscfd feed gas stream. The result shows
significant separation performance where 99,9% of
liquid could be separated from gas stream. [41]
 Thus membrane technology as mist eliminator
shows promising result [42].

The principle of ceramic membrane unit is shown

Figure 14. Dual vane cyclone mist eliminator
installation inside 200 MMscfd separator vessel
in figure 15. Gas enters the membrane lumen where
there are fibers capturing liquid droplets from gas
stream in each membrane channel. Liquid droplets
captured flowing through the bottom of lumen and
collected in header pipe at the bottom of membrane
module. Gas will pass through the membrane pores
and exit at the upper part of shell of membrane
module.

4.3 Membrane mist eliminator

Ceramic membrane technology application as a
gas-liquid separator unit is a strategic approach.
The high membrane selectivity may capture and
separate the droplets up to 0.1 microns. Moreover,
with high packing density, membrane system
capacity per volume can be larger than that
conventional which give more compact system
dimension. In addition, membrane system is
backflushable which results in the continuous
system operations and longer life-term.
Economically, ceramic membrane technology can
reduce the potential of losses because of the down
time like that in conventional system. Thus,
ceramic membrane technology offers many
advantages in operational and maintenance such
that the process can be conducted more stable and Figure 15. Ceramic membrane gas filtration
under-controlled.
5 Conclusions
In 2009, Wenten has proposed ceramic membrane
as a novel technology for condensate separation Mechanical separation is simple in operation, has
from gas stream. For practical applications, minimum operating cost and high efficiency.
Therefore, mist eliminator has long been used and
membranes can be utilized in form of modules
trusted in the separation of liquid from gas. In
where each module consists of 19 ceramic
choosing the type of mist eliminator, we need to
membranes. This membrane module use stainless consider several factors: the capacity of gas, liquid
steel housing which can operate up to 40 bar loading, cost, efficiency, specification of dry gas,
pressure. One unit operation consists of several and the size of droplets. Configuration in the vessel
modules arranged in parallel on a skid with header also plays an important role to obtain optimum mist
pipe and bottom boot for condensate collection. For eliminator performance. Various modifications
optimal process, one module is required in have been developed to obtain high efficiency of
backflush or standby position thus whenever the various mist eliminators.
performance of one module membrane decrease
Dual mist eliminator based on integrated vane-
because of the droplet deposition, automatically the
cyclone shows great performance in separation of
standby membrane module will be operated to
liquid from 200 MMscfd natural gas stream.
replace the other module during backflushing. The Meanwhile, ceramic membrane technology for mist
pilot trial of this configuration has proved its eliminator has been tested on pilot scale and shows
capability to recover condensate from compressor promising result in condensate recovery from
discharge where cartridge filter and condensation natural gas stream.
failed to obtain any liquid from the gas stream.
 Requirement of liquid gas separation with high
efficiency in industry encourage more and more
research in mist eliminator to be further developed
into commercial products. With the competition
getting intense, the development of mist eliminator
technology in the future is interesting to notice.
Acknowledgements
GDP Filter co. is gratefully acknowledged for
providing funding on high performance mist
eliminator development and publication of this
paper.
References
[1] Younger, “Natural Gas Processing Principles and
Technology - Part II”. 2004
[2] Habib. I. Shaban. “A Study of Foaming and Carry-
Over Problems in Oil and Gas Separators”. 1995
[3] Trond Austrheim , Lars H. Gjertsen , Alex C.
Hoffmann. ”Experimental Investigation of the
Performance of a Large-scale Scrubber Operating
At Elevated Pressure on Live Natural Gas”. 2007
[4] Weiming Peng, Dorthe Christensen, Siri Jacobsson,
Eli Kvinnesland, Alex C. Hoffmann. “Studies of
the Flow in and Around Gas Dedusters and
Demisters Using Neutrally Buoyant Tracer”. 2008
[5] Gas Processors Suppliers Association (GPSA).
“Engineering Data Book”. 2004
[6] KOCH-Otto York. “Mist Elimination”. 2003
[7] Hisham T. El-Dessouky, Imad M. Alatiqi, Hisham
M. Ettouney, Noura S. Al-Deffeeri. “Performance
of Wire Mesh Mist Eliminator”. 1999
[8] AMISTCO. “Mesh & Vane Mist Eliminators for
Optimal Removal of a Wide Range of Liquid
Droplets from Gas Streams”. 2004
[9] R. J. Wakeman, N. S. Hanspal, A. N. Waghode and
V. Nassehi. “Analysis of Pleat Crowding and
Medium Compression in Pleated Cartridge Filters”.
2005
[10] Kenneth A. Perrotta and Dean Hoyt. “Integral
Coalescer Filter-Membrane Device to Provide a
Filtered Gas Stream and System Employing Such
Device”. 1998
[11] John Hampton and Guy Weismantel. “Examining
the True Cost of Cartridge Filter Change-out“.
2003
[12] Joseph H. Gavin and Frank W. Hoffman. “Droplet
Removal Efficiency and Specific Carryover for
Liquid Entrainment Separators”. 1981
[13] Bill Looney and Brian Baleno, “Comparing
Materials Used in Mist Eliminators“.2007
[14] Williama, L.R., Dykhon, L.A., Hanratty, T.J.,
“Droplet flux distributions and entrainment in
horizonal gas-liquid flows”, Int. J. Multiphase
Flow, 22,455-468(1996).
[15] Li Jia, Huang Suyi and Wang Xiaomo. “Numerical
Study of Steam-Waters Separators with Wave-
Type Vanes”. 2007
[16] Chiara Galletti, Elisabetta
Brunazzi,LeonardoTognotti. “A Numerical Model
for Gas Flow and Droplet Motion in Wave-Plate
Mist Eliminators with Drainage Channels”. 2008
[17] Alex C. Hoffman and Louis E. Stein. “Gas Cyclone
and Swirl Tubes”. Springer. 2008
[18] S. Movafaghian, J.A Jaua-Martureta, R.S. Mohana,
O. Shohama, G.E. Kouba. “The Effects of
Geometry, Fluid Properties and Pressure on the
Hydrodynamics of Gas-Liquid Cylindrical Cyclone
Separators”. 2000
[19] Atakan Avci and Irfan Karagoz. “Effects of Flow
and Geometrical Parameters on the Collection
Efficiency in Cyclone Separators”. 2003
[20] Jianyi Chen and Mingxian Shi. “Analysis on
Cyclone Collection Efficiencies at High
Temperatures”.2003
[21] Zhongli Ji, Zhiyi Xiong, Xiaolin Wu, Honghai
Chen, Hongxiao Wu. ”Experimental Investigations
on a Cyclone Separator Performance at an
Extremely Low Particle Concentration”. 2008
[22] Douglas MacKenzie, Arnold Toews. “Apparatus
and Method for Enhanced Droplet Collection in
Gas Flow”. 2007
[23] Brian W. Schwandt, Barry M. Verdegan, Roger L.
Zoch, Jeffrey A. Fedorowicz, Kurt M.A. Badeau,
Robert E. Muse, Peter K. Herman. “Space
Optimized Coalescer”. 2007
[24] Li Shan-Hong, Li Cai-Ting, Zeng Guang-Ming, Li
Si-Min, Wang Fei, Wang Da-Yong. “CFD
Simulation on Performance of New Type Umbrella
Plate Scrubber”. 2007
[25] Donald E. Tilton, Charles L. Tilton. “Entrained
Droplet Separator”. 1994
[26] Kazuki Matsubara, Yoshitaka Nishio, Teruaki
Kitano, Takaaki Kato. “Cyclone Type Gas-Liquid
Separator”. 2002
[27] Pradeep R. Trasi and William Licht’. “Effect of
Recycle on Cyclone Performance“. 1984
[28] Guogang Sun, Jianyi Chen and Mingxian Shi.
“Optimization and Applications of Reverse-Flow
Cyclones”. 2005
[29] H. T. Kim, K. W. Lee, M. R. Kuhlman.
“Exploratory Design Modifications for Enhancing
Cyclone Performance”. 2001
 [30] Rongbiao Xiang, S.H. Park, K.W. Lee. “Effects of
Cone Dimension on Cyclone Performance”. 2000
[31] Jin W. Lee, Hoe J. Yang, Dong Y. Lee. “Effect of
the Cylinder Shape of a Long-Coned Cyclone on
the Stable Flow-Field Establishment”. 2006
[32] Fuping Qian, Jiguang Zhang, Mingyao Zhang.
“Effects of the Prolonged Vertical Tube on the
Separation Performance of a Cyclone”. 2006
[33] S. Y. Ng, G. H. Priestman and R. W. K. Allen.
“Investigation of Flooding, Re-Entrainment and
Grade Efficiency in Axial Flow Cyclones”. 2006
[34] Daniel P. Birmingham, Gregory C. Rush. “High
Efficiency Gas Scrubber Using Combined
Coalescing Media and Centrifugal Cyclone”. 2001
[35] Bingtao Zhao, Henggen Shen, Yanming Kang.
“Development of a Symmetrical Spiral Inlet to
Improve Cyclone Separator Performance”. 2004
[36] Timothy F. Miller. “A High-Pressure, Continuous-
Operation Cyclone Separator Using a Water-
Generated Flow Restriction”. 2001
[37] M. Creutz and D. Mewes. ”A Novel Centrifugal
Gas-Liquid Separator for Catching Intermittent
Flows”. 1998
[38] Stephen Showalter, Edward G. Kosteski. “Three-
Phase Cyclonic Fluid Separator”. 2007
[39] Stephen Showalter. “Three-Phase Cyclonic Fluid
Separator with a Debris Trap”. 2007
[40] Mahmoud M. Ahmed, Galal A. Ibrahim, Mohamed
G. Farghaly. “Performance of a Three-Product
Hydrocyclone”. 2008
[41] I G wenten, Anang S, “Peningkatan Performa
Pemisahan Droplet Likuid dari Aliran Gas dengan
Kombinasi Vane-Siklon”, Proceeding of Chemical
Engineering Conference on Soehadi Reksowardojo
ITB, Bandung, 26-27 October 2010
[42] Chaidir Amin, I G. Wenten, “Improving Mist
Eliminator Performance in Gas-Liquid Separators”,
personal communication at IATMI, 12 – 15 August
2008.

View publication stats