HELSINKI UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY ENE-47.

153

PARTICULATES #1
• Introduction
• Ash-forming elements in fuels
• Particulate emission standards
• Options for particulate control emissions
• Gravity settlers
• Gas cyclones
• Electrostatic precipitators
see: www.hut.fi/~rzevenho
www.hut.fi/~rzevenho/
/gasbook

HELSINKI UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY ENE-47.153

Particulate (emissions) control : why ?

• Regulations considering environmental / health hazard

• Protection of gas turbines / expansion turbines

• Protection / avoid problems with other gas clean-up

equipment

• The particulate solid or the gas may be a valuable product

• Dust explosion risks.

1
 HELSINKI UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY ENE-47.153

Ashes and solid residues during typical

pulverised coal combustion

HELSINKI UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY ENE-47.153

Typical size distribution for fly ash and

bottom ash from pulverised coal combustion

2
 HELSINKI UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY ENE-47.153

Ash-forming elements and ash formation #1

Coalification Mineral impurities during combustion

or gasification

HELSINKI UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY ENE-47.153

Ash-forming elements and ash formation #2

Pulverised coal combustion Fluidised bed coal combustion

3
 HELSINKI UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY ENE-47.153

Ash-forming elements and ash formation #3

Biomass fuels

HELSINKI UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY ENE-47.153

Ash content of fuels (dry %-wt)

Fossil fuels Biomasses & waste derived fuels
Coal, lignite 5 - 40 Wood 0.1 - 0.5
Bark 2-8
Oil < 0.1 Straw 4-8
Natural gas -
Light fuel oil < 0.01 Sewage sludge 15 - 20
Heavy fuel oil ~0.04 Car tyre scrap 5-8
Munical solid waste (MSW) 5 - 25
Refuse derived fuel (RDF) 10 - 25
Peat 4 - 10 Packaging derived fuel (PDF) 5 - 15
Auto shredder residue (ASR) ~25
Petroleum coke, “petcoke” ~1 Leather waste ~5
Estonian oil shale ~40
Orimulsion™ ~1.5 Black liquor solids 30 - 40

Problem: “Ash content of fuel” ⇐ Ash forming elements ⇒ Fly ash, bottom ash

4
 HELSINKI UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY ENE-47.153

Ash production from western US coal

combustion in a 500 MWelec
pulverised coal power plant
Bituminous Wyoming Powder Montana Powder
River Basin River Basin
Coal ash content, %-wt 9.5 4.8 3.7
Bottom ash, ton/year 24560 17280 8600
Fly ash, ton/year 98260 69100 34390
Total ash, ton/year 122820 86380 42990

HELSINKI UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY ENE-47.153

Particulate emission standards Finland (1997)

Type of plant New / Plant size Emission standard Comments
Existing (MWthth) (mg/m33STP
STP dry 6% O22)
Combustion plant New 1-5 540 Guideline
lignite, peat,
wood, straw
Combustion plant New 5-50 (248-11*P)/3 Guideline,
lignite, peat, P=plant size in MWth
wood, straw
Utility, hard coal New 1-5 405 Guideline
Utility, hard coal New 5-50 172-2.1*P Guideline,
P=plant size in MWth
Utility, hard coal New 50-300 50 Guideline
Utility, hard coal New > 300 30 Guideline
Utility, hard coal Existing all see comments guideline for new plant
used as target for
existing plants

5
 HELSINKI UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY ENE-47.153

Particulate emission standards EU (1988)

Type of plant New / Plant size Emission standard Comments
Existing (MWthth) (mg/m3STP dry 6% O22)
Combustion, coal New * 50-500 100
Combustion, coal New * > 500 50
* construction licence after July 1 1988

World bank, coal: 50 mg/m³

mg/m³STP @ 6% O2 or 99.9%
Waste incinerators: Finland 1.8.94: 10 mg/m³
mg/m³STP @ 10% O2
Soon EU15: 10 mg/m³
mg/m³STP @ 10% O2

Cement kilns: Finland 1.1.01: 50 mg/m³

mg/m³STP @ 10% O2
Future EU15: 30 mg/m³
mg/m³STP @ 10% O2

HELSINKI UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY ENE-47.153

Removal of particulates from (flue) gases

1. Methods based 2. Methods based
on external forces on barriers
Gravity settlers Bag filters
Decreasing Ceramic barrier filters
particle Cyclones Granular bed filters
size & centrifuges
Wet scrubbers
Electrostatic
precipitators

6
HELSINKI UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY ENE-47.153

Parameters determining particulate control

Process Particle

Temperature Size distribution

Pressure Shape
Gas flow Surface properties
Concentration Chemical composition :
- carbon content
- alkali content
- tar content
- sulphur content
Melting point, softening point
Chemical stability

HELSINKI UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY ENE-47.153

Particulate removal efficiencies needed

for various coal firing methods

7
 HELSINKI UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY ENE-47.153

Efficiencies of several particulate control devices

HELSINKI UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY ENE-47.153

An inertial separator: a settling chamber

8
 HELSINKI UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY ENE-47.153

A gas cyclone
more than a useful pre-separator ?
Advantages
Simple, cheap and compact
Large capacity
Disadvantages
Large pressure drop
Low efficiency
“Catch” removal problems
No removal below ~5 µm
Problems above ~ 400 °C

HELSINKI UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY ENE-47.153

Cyclones:
processes
determining
separation

9
 HELSINKI UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY ENE-47.153

A “standard” cyclone (Lapple)

W De

H High Conventional High

S efficiency throughput
Lb Height of inlet
H/D 0.5 ~0.44 0.5 0.75 ~ 0.8
Width of inlet
W/D 0.2 ~ 0.21 0.25 0.375 ~ 0.35
Diameter of gas exit
D De/D 0.4 ~0.5 0.5 0.75
Length of vortex finder
S/D 0.5 0.625 ~ 0.6 0.875 ~0.85
Lc Length of body
Lb/D 1.5 ~1.4 2.0 ~1.75 1.5 ~1.7
Length of cone
Lc/D 2.5 2 2.5 ~2.0
Diameter of dust outlet
Dd/D 0.375 ~ 0.4 0.25 ~ 0.4 0.375 ~ 0.4
Dd

HELSINKI UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY ENE-47.153

Removal efficiency for Lapple cyclone

Number of gas turns
“Cut size”:
(i.e. revolutions) before entering
the vortex finder:

Lc 9η gasW
Lb + d =
50

2 2π NVin ( ρ solid − ρ gas )

N=
H
Grade efficiency: Typical material properties:
dynamic gas viscosity :
1 ηgas ≈ 1.8×10-5×(T/293)2/3 Pa.s
Eff (d p ) = 2 densities :
 d 50  ρsolid = typically 500 … 3000 kg/m³
1+   ρgas = 1.2 kg/m³ at 20°C, 1 bar (air)
 dp 

10
 HELSINKI UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY ENE-47.153

Forces on particles in cyclones

Centrifugal force Force balance gives equilibrium
mp’ ω² r = mp’ vt² / r radial position:

1. mp’ vt² / r = 3 π vr dp ηF
2. vr ≈ vi A/ (2π
(2πr h)
r R (h=length of cylindrical section)
3. vtrn = viRn, n ~ 0.5....0.55
Drag force (Stokes) gives
3 π vr dp ηF
(r/R)n = πhρsvid2p/(9 Aη
AηF)
into cyclone with for capture: large r/R needed
velocity vi ,
inlet area A

HELSINKI UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY ENE-47.153

Advanced (?) gas cyclone designs

Cyclone with
vortex collector
pockets
←

Aerodyne rotary
flow cyclone
→

11
 HELSINKI UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY ENE-47.153

Typical lay-out
of a wire-and-
plate ESP

HELSINKI UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY ENE-47.153

Electrostatic precipitators(ESPs)
Where (conventional pulverised coal combustion):
Before (wet) scrubber for SO2 control
Before (hot side) or after (cold side) air preheat
Usually before SCR for DeNOx (“hot side, low dust”)
Before (hot side) or after (cold side) air preheat
Alternative:
baghouse filter, because 1) higher efficiency and
2) less effect of particle electric properties
4 process steps:
1. Particle charging
2. Particle movement relative to gas flow
3. Particle collection at deposition surface
4. Particle removal from deposition surface (often discontinuous)

12
HELSINKI UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY ENE-47.153

ESP : basic principle, efficiency

HELSINKI UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY ENE-47.153

Tubular ESP :
basic design
features

13
 HELSINKI UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY ENE-47.153

Electric field in ESP, configuration factor

equipotential
equipotentiallines
lines field
fieldintensity
intensity Electric field, E (V/m),
and electric potential, φ (V):
E=-∇φ

Electric field as function of

distance x from wire :

E(x) = ∆U /x F
electric
electricfield
fieldlines
lines ∆U = voltage difference
wire-in-tube : F= ln (R/r) F= “configiration factor of
the electrode system”
system”

HELSINKI UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY ENE-47.153

ESP configuration factor

a. Wire-in tube
b. Wire-plate
c. Multiple wire - plate

δ=d/r , i.e.
relative electrode spacing

14
HELSINKI UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY ENE-47.153

ESP : particle charging #1,

using corona discharge (uni-polar,
uni-polar, one direction)
Diffusion charging
Small particles ( < 1 µm)
charge qmax ~ 108 e dp Note: charge e = 1.6 ×10-19 C

Field charging (Pauthenier

(Pauthenier (1932)
Larger particles ( > 1 µm)
relative dielectric constant, εr
dielectric constant of vacuum, ε0 = 8.854×10-12 C/(V m)
charge qmax ~ 12 π E1 dp² ε 0 ε r / (ε
(ε r + 2)
E-field E1 in charging zone ~ 3×106 V/m

HELSINKI UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY ENE-47.153

Field charging, diffusion charging and

particle surface regions

15
 HELSINKI UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY ENE-47.153

Classical particle charging theory calculations

HELSINKI UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY ENE-47.153

ESP : particle charging #2,

particle drift velocity
Alternative methods for charging :
1) Uni-polar
Uni-polar (+ or -) : bi-polar
bi-polar corona
Uni-directional ↔ bi-directional
2) Uni-directional bi-directional field charging
3) Pulsed corona techniques
4) Impact (contact, tribo,...)
tribo,...) charging

Electrical mobility, ve, of charged particle, in E-field E2 ~ 104 V/m:

Coulomb force = Stokes' drag force
qpE2 ≈ 3π3π ve η gas dp, with ηgas = dynamic gas viscosity (Pa.s)
Result 1: diffusion charging : ve ≈ 108 e E2 / ( 3 π ηgas ) ~ 0.01 m/s
Result 2: field charging : ve ≈ E1E2 ε 0 dp/ (η
(η gas(εr + 2)) ~ 0.1 - 1 m/s

16
 HELSINKI UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY ENE-47.153

ESP efficiency : Deutsch equation

Set-up: vertical gas flow, velocity ugas, plate
height H, spacing D
Mass balance for particle concentration, c: H cx+ ∆x
uga D L ( cx - cx+∆x ) = ve ½( cx + cx+ ∆ x ) ∆x L
= mass removed ∆x ve
ve = charged particle electrical mobility
⇒ ugasD dc/dx
dc/dx = - ve c cx
Integrate, c = cin at x = 0, to position x :
c(x) = cin exp ( - ve x / (u
(ugas D)) x ugas
cout = cin exp ( - ve A / Qgas) @x=H
for gas flow Q (m³/s) and plate area A = 2 LH D
(2 sides !!!!!)
L
Efficiency ηESP = 1 - exp ( - ve A / Qgas ) Deutsch Equation
Corrected (Matts Öhnfeldt) : η ESP = 1 - exp - (v
(Matts--Öhnfeldt) (ve A / Qgas )k k = 0.4...0.6

HELSINKI UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY ENE-47.153

ESP and fly ash resistivity

Fly ash sulphur,

sulphur, temperature Moisture
(300 °F ~ 150 °C, 200 °F ~ 95 °C, 450 °F ~ 220 °C)

17
 HELSINKI UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY ENE-47.153

Particle resistivity and electric drift velocity

HELSINKI UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY ENE-47.153

“Rebouncing” of
particles with (too) high
conductivity

18
 HELSINKI UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY ENE-47.153

Difficult conditions for

ESP (→)
and options for
improvement (↓)

HELSINKI UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY ENE-47.153

ESP performance in relation to fuel-sulphur:

the effect of fuel switching

(PRB is coal from Powder River Basin,

Western USA)

19
 HELSINKI UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY ENE-47.153

ESP : flue gas conditioning (EPRICON)

HELSINKI UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY ENE-47.153

Typical cold-side ESP for coal fly ash:

design data

Temperature 120 - 200°C Power / collector area

Gas flow velocity 1 - 3 m/s ash resistivity 104-107 ohm.cm ~ 43 W/m2
Gas flow / collector area 15 - 125 s/m ash resistivity 107 - 108 ohm.cm ~ 32 W/m2
Plate-to-plate distance 0.15 - 0.4 m ash resistivity 109-1010 ohm.cm ~ 27 W/m2
Electric drift velocity 0.02 - 2 m/s ash resistivity ~1011 ohm.cm ~ 22 W/m2
Corona current / collector area 50 - 750µA/m2 ash resistivity ~1012 ohm.cm ~ 16 W/m2
Corona current / gas flow 0.05 - 0.3 J/m3 ash resistivity ~1013 ohm.cm ~ 11 W/m2

20