COMPARISON OF DIFFERENT COLLECTION EFFICIENCY MODELS FOR VENTURI SCRUBBERS USING A GENERAL SOFTWARE

Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

83 tayangan

COMPARISON OF DIFFERENT COLLECTION EFFICIENCY MODELS FOR VENTURI SCRUBBERS USING A GENERAL SOFTWARE

Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

- Venturi Scrubber With Mist Eliminator
- Venturi Scrubber Design Equations Formulas Calculator
- Ventury Scrubber Design Method
- Venturi Scrubber Theory & Experiment
- Croll Reynold's Scrubber Catalogue
- Ventury Scrubber Paper
- Scrubber Manual(1)
- Venturi Scrubbers1
- Factors Influencing Venturi Scrubber Performance
- Wet Scrubber Design
- Maximizing Wet Scrubber Performance
- estimation
- Bracing
- Water Resources Engineering 3rd Edition Chin Solutions Manual
- 320c Plano Hidraulico
- Prediction of Venturi Scrubber Grade Efficiency Curves Using The
- Set Exam
- Venturi Scrubbers2
- Design Evaluation of Particulate Wet Scrubbing Systems
- Turbo Sonic Scrubber

Anda di halaman 1dari 10

SOFTWARE

N.D. Charisiou, N. Argiropoulos, K. Papageridis and M.A. Goula

1

Laboratory of Alternative Fuels and Environmental Catalysis (LAFEC)

Department of Pollution Control Technologies (PCT)

Technological Educational Institute of Western Macedonia (TEI WM)

Kozani, Koila, 50100, Greece

Email: mgoula@teikoz.gr

1

ABSTRACT

Venturi scrubbers are used widely for removing particles from gases because of their many

attractive features: they remove sub-micrometer particles efficiently; they are compact and simple

to build, so that initial investment costs are small in comparison to other types of particle collection

devices; and they function well in problematic situations such as hot or corrosive atmospheres and

when sticky particles must be collected.

A typical venturi scrubber consists of a converging section, throat section into which the scrubbing

liquid is injected, and relatively longer diverging section where much of the energy recovery and

particulate collection occurs. At the scrubber injection position, a high relative velocity between the

scrubbing liquid and gas causes atomization of the liquid into a distribution of fine droplets.

Impingement of gas upon a pool of liquid causes the atomization and entrainment of liquid drops.

The predominant mechanism for particles greater than about 0.3 micron diameter has been shown to

be inertial impaction.

The literature contains a number of models to predict venturi scrubber efficiency and pressure drop.

These models are useful in optimizing and designing new venturi scrubbers as well as predicting the

effects of changing parameters in existing ones. Some models are explicit, analytical expressions

that have straightforward solutions. Others are more complex and require numerical solution with a

computer. In regards to collection efficiency, among the most widely used are those developed by

(i) Calvert et al (1972) and Johnstone et al (1954). A popular model for the calculation of pressure

drop is that developed by Young et al (1978).

The purpose of the present work was to develop a generic software that allows the user to calculate

the predicted venturi scrubber efficiency and pressure drop using the models mentioned above, over

a wide range of operating conditions. It has been designed using MATLAB, as it is easy to use by

the untrained, while among others, it allows the use of excel spreadsheets and the production of

AutoCad drawings.

Keywords

Venturi scrubbers, Collection Efficiency, Particle Collection

1. INTRODUCTION

In the last four decades, the technical community has expanded its responsibilities to society

to include the environment, with particular emphasis on air pollution from industrial sources. One

of the most common air pollution abatement devices used are venturi scrubbers (Figure 1). Such

systems can be used either for the collection of particulate material from gas streams or for the

control of Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs). The advantages of these systems include high

collection efficiencies for relatively small particles and low capital and maintenance costs. The

main cost is associated with the operating fans that are used to overcome the venturis relatively

high pressure drop (Naseh et al, 2006; Pulley, 1997; Silva et al, 2009).

A typical venturi scrubber consists of a converging section, throat section (Figure 2) into

which the scrubbing liquid is injected, and relatively longer diverging section where much of the

energy recovery and particulate collection occurs. At the scrubber injection position, a high relative

velocity between the scrubbing liquid and gas causes atomization of the liquid into a distribution of

fine droplets. Impingement of gas upon a pool of liquid can also cause the atomization and

entrainment of liquid drops, and this principle is used in several types of commercial venturi

scrubbers. Particulate matter is collected on liquid droplets by a number of collection mechanisms

operating simultaneously. These include inertial impaction, interception, diffusion, condensation,

humidification, and electrostatic precipitation (Table 1). However, the predominant mechanism for

particles greater than about 0.3 micron diameter has been shown to be inertial impaction (Miller, et

al, 1989; Rudnick et al, 1986; Wang et al, 2004; Yung et al, 1978).

Important process variables that affect particle capture include the particles size, the size of

liquid droplets, and the relative velocity of the particle and the liquid droplets, with particle size

being the most important parameter. In general, larger particles are easier to collect than smaller

ones. The key to effective particle capture in a wet scrubber is creating a mist of tiny droplets that

act as collection targets: usually, the smaller the droplet and the more densely the droplets are

packed, the better the ability to capture smaller-sized particles. Particle capture generally improves

with higher energy systems because energy is required to produce the mist of tiny droplets. Also, a

high relative velocity between particles and liquid droplets (the particles are moving fast compared

FIGURE 1: Typical Venturi scrubber

(Source: Cooper & Alley, 2004)

FIGURE 2: Cross section of a Venturi throat

(Source: Adopted from Theodore, 2008)

to the liquid droplets) promotes particle collection. For gaseous pollutant collection, the pollutant

must be soluble in the chosen scrubbing liquid. In addition, the system must be designed to provide

good mixing between the gas and liquid phases, and enough time (residence time) for the gaseous

pollutants to dissolve.

Other important considerations for both particulate and gaseous pollutant collection are the

amount of liquid injected into the scrubber per given volume of gas flow (referred to as the liquid-

to-gas ratio) and the removal of any entrained liquid droplets. The liquid-to-gas ratio is important to

provide sufficient liquid for effective pollutant removal. Also, the system must be designed to

remove entrained mists, or droplets, from the cleaned exhaust gas stream before it leaves the stack.

If not removed, the "captured" pollutants could be emitted from the stack.

TABLE 1: Particle collection mechanisms in venturi scrubbers

Mechanism Explanation

Impaction Particles too large to follow gas streamlines around a

droplet collide with it.

Diffusion Very tiny particles move randomly, colliding with

droplets because they are confined in a limited space.

Direct interception An extension of the impaction mechanism. The center

of a particle follows the streamlines around the

droplet, but a collision occurs if the distance between

the particle and droplet is less than the radius of the

particle.

Electrostatic attraction Particles and droplets become oppositely charged and

attract each other.

Condensation When hot gas cools rapidly, particles in the gas

stream can act as condensation nuclei and, as a result,

become larger.

Centrifugal force The shape or curvature of a collector causes the gas

stream to rotate in a spiral motion, throwing larger

particles toward the wall.

Gravity Large particles moving slowly enough will fall from

the gas stream and be collected.

The literature contains a number of empirical models to predict venturi scrubber efficiency

and/ or pressure drop, that are useful in optimizing and designing new venturi scrubbers as well as

predicting the effects of changing parameters in existing ones. For the calculation of collection

efficiency, some of the most popular models are those developed by Johnstone et al (1954), Calvert

(1972), Boll (1973), Young et al (1977) and Concalves et al (2004). For the calculation of pressure

drop the models developed by Calvert (1970), Boll (1973), Azzopardi (1991) and Pulley (1997) are

amongst the most widely used.

Some of the models mentioned above are explicit, analytical expressions that have

straightforward solutions. Others are more complex and require numerical solution with a computer.

A common feature in these models is that although most start from firm scientific concepts, they

give only qualitative results when predicting collection efficiencies or pressure drops. The

interaction of particulate matter having a given particle size distribution with water droplets having

another size distribution is not easy to express in quantitative terms. As a result of this complexity,

experimentally determined parameters are usually required in order to perform engineering

calculations (Theodore, 2008). Thus, caution should be exercised when using these models outside

the range of data used to develop them (Miller et al, 1989). Another factor then needs to be taken

into consideration is that few data have been available to confirm model predictions, so model

evaluation has been difficult (Rudnick et al, 1986; Silva A.M. et al, 2009).

The purpose of the present work was to develop a generic software that will allow its users

to calculate the venturi scrubber collection efficiency using one of the following models: (i) Calvert

et al (1972), and Johnstone et al (1954). For the calculation of pressure drop, the model developed

by Yung et al (1977) was incorporated into the software. These models were chosen based on an

extensive literature search, which revealed that to this day, they remain amongst the most widely

used for design purposes. The development of such a software is a necessary task mainly because

although one may find some excellent textbooks regarding the design of air pollution control

technologies (indicatively, Cooper and Alley, 2004; Wang et al 2004; Theodore, 2008), comparable

software are absent (Charisiou et al, 2011). Thus, it is hoped that the software developed herein will

prove a useful weapon in the arsenal of educators and/or students of air pollution abatement

technologies.

2. SOFTWARE DEVELOPED

2.1 Collection efficiency

2.1.1 Johnstone model

One of the more popular and widely used collection efficiency equations is that originally

suggested by Johnstone et al (1954).

0.5

( )

1

p

kR K

e

(1)

where is the collection efficiency, K

p

is the inertial impaction parameter (dimensionless), R the

liquid-to-gas ratio (gal/1000 acf or gpm/1000 acfm) and k the correlation coefficient, the value of

which depends on the system geometry and operating conditions (typically 0.10.2 acf/gal). The

inertial impaction parameter (K

p

) is given by Equation 2, where d

p

the particle diameter (ft),

p

the

particle density (lb/ft

3

), V

t

the throat velocity (ft/s),

G

the gas viscosity (lb/ft-s), d

d

the mean droplet

diameter (ft) and C the Cunningham correction factor (dimensionless). The mean droplet diameter

(d

d

) for standard air and water in a venturi scrubber is given by the NukiyamaTanasawa

relationship, shown in Equation 3. The overall collection efficiency of the system can be calculated

using Equation 4, where M

d

is the weight percent of the particles of a given diameter.

2

9

p p t

p

G d

Cd V

K

d

(2)

,

1.5

16, 400

1.45

d

t

d R

V

+

(3

)

( )

d d o

M

(4)

2.1.2 Calverts model

As in many of the available models for the design of venturi scrubbers, the Calvert et al

(1972) model, is based on the prediction of the penetration (Pt

d

) for a given particle diameter.

Penetration is defined as the fraction of particles (in the exhaust stream) that passes through the

scrubber uncollected. Penetration is the opposite of the fraction of particles collected (i.e. collection

efficiency,

d

), and is expressed as shown in Equation 5. The total penetration can be calculated as

shown in Equation 6.

1

d d

Pt

(5)

,

( )

o d d

Pt Pt M

(6)

According to Calvert et al (1972), the penetration can be calculated by the following Equation:

0.7

0.49 1

exp 0.7 1.4ln

55 0.7 0.7

p

L G L d

d p

G G p p

K f

Q V d

Pt K f

Q K f K

1 + _

+ +

1 ' ;

+

1 , ]

(7

)

where Q

L

and Q

G

are the liquid and gas volumetric flow rates respectively (dimensionless), V

G

is the

gas velocity at the throat (cm/s),

L

is the liquid density (g/cm

3

),

G

the gas viscosity (poise), and f is

a correlative parameter that ranges from 0.2 to 0.7. It should be noted that that for the correlation

parameter (f), Cooper and Alley (2004), suggest that the value 0.25 should be used for hydrophobic

particles, while 0.5 should be used for hydrophilic particles. The inertial impaction parameter (K

p

) is

given by the following Equation (please note that the first part in Equation 8 is identical to Equation

2 presented above):

2 2

, ,

9 9

p p p d w a p d

p

G d G d

C d V d V

K

d d

(8)

with d

p

in cm,

p

in g/cm

3

, V

p,d

the particle velocity relative to the droplet velocity, in cm/s (thus in

effect it equals V

t

),

G

in poise,

w

the density of water (in g/cm

3

) and d

a

the particles aerodynamic

diameter (in cm). The mean droplet diameter (d

d

) for standard air and water in a venturi scrubber, is

given by another form of the NukiyamaTanasawa relationship (in m) as follows:

( )

0.45

1.5 0.5

0.5

58, 600

597 1000

L L

d

G L G

L

Q

d

V Q

_

_ _

+

, ,

,

(9)

where the liquid surface tension (dynes/cm), and

L

the liquid viscocity (poise).

2.2 Pressure drop

The pressure drop in venturi scrubbers can be calculated by the model developed by Young

et. al. (1977) by the following equation:

( )

2 4 2 2

1 2 X X X

Q

Q

V P

G

L

G L

+

,

_

(10

)

where P the pressure drop (dyne/cm

2

), and the dimensionless throat length, which can be

calculated by Equation 11 (where l

t

the venturi throat length, in cm). The drag coefficient, C

D

for

droplets with Reynolds numbers, Re, from 10 to 500 can be obtained by Equation 12 (Cooper and

Alley, 2004). The Reynolds number can be calculated using Equation 13 (where

G

the gas density,

in g/cm

3

).

3

1

16

t D G

d L

l C

X

d

+

(11)

,

( )

1/3

24 4

Re

Re

D

C +

(12)

,

Re

d G g

G

d V

(13

)

3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

As has been mentioned above, some of the best educational textbooks for air pollution

abatement technologies (e.g., Cooper and Alley, 2004; Wang et al 2004; Theodore, 2008), consider

the models chosen for the development of the software presented herein, useful in the training of

future engineers in the design of venturi scrubbers. Naturally, these models are not without flaws.

Further, of the numerous models developed in the past 30 years, some were bound to give more

accurate predictions. Thus, a short discussion, comparing the models used in this paper, with other

models reported in the literature is warranted.

Calvert et al (1970) presented the first model for pressure drop in venturi scrubbers,

however, they neglected wall friction and momentum recovery in the divergent section, so other

researchers tried to improve this model. Boll (1973) solved simultaneous equations of drop motion

and momentum exchange for variable cross section ducts with acceptable results, except for very

high and low liquid to gas ratios, where it did not show agreement with the experimental data.

Azzopardi and Govan (1984) considered momentum losses due to accelerating droplets entrained

from the film and the interfacial drag between the fast moving core and the slower moving liquid

film. However, they had little successes with this procedure (Nasseh et al, 2006). Pulley (1997)

carried out various experiments and suggested more effective variables such as drop size,

entrainment at liquid injection and entrainment and deposition along the venturi length. He also

compared pressure drop predictions from various models (amongst these were the models

developed by Young, Boll and Azzopardi) and concluded that the corrected proposed model of

Azzopardi et al. (1991) gave a better prediction of pressure drop for a wider variety of data.

Goncalves et al (2001) studied a large number of models for the prediction of pressure drop in

venturi scrubbers and concluded that all of them must be used with caution.

In regards to collection efficiency, Rudnick et al (1986), vigorously compared the models

developed by Calvert et al (1972), Boll (1973) Young et al (1978) and concluded that the model of

Yung et al (1978) is probably best for most applications because it is an explicit algebraic

expression and gave the best results of the models tested. The model of Calvert et al. (1972), while

also an explicit algebraic expression (and thus easy to use), is very dependent on the choice of the

correlative parameter, f, and thus should be used with caution. One of the latest attempts at

modeling the collection efficiency was undertaken by Concalves et al (2004) who studied the

atomization of the liquid jets injected transversally to a gas stream in a venturi scrubber. A

mathematical model was developed to predict the trajectory, breakup and penetration of the liquid

jets. With this model for liquid jet dynamics, Concalves et al (2004) calculated the spatial

distribution of droplets for the case where liquid was injected through a single orifice in a

rectangular venturi scrubber.

The software presented herein (Figure 3) enables the calculation of a venturi scrubbers

efficiency and pressure drop for the theoretical models described in section 2. The parameters that

are necessary in order to carry out the design are the following: (i) Gas and liquid characteristics

(temperature and pressure - viscosity and density are calculated by the software), (ii) Particle

characteristics (particle distribution and density) and (iii) Process characteristics (volumetric flow

rate and particle loading). Further, when using the Johnstone et al (1954) model the user must

choose a value for the correlation coefficient k (ranges between 0.10.2 acf/gal), while for the

Calvert et al (1972) model the user must know/decide whether the particles that need removing are

hydrophobic or hydrophilic, as this determines the value of the correlation parameter, f (0.25 and

0.5 respectively).

Figure 3: Graphic interface of the software developed Calvert et al (1972) model

FIGURE 4: Efficiency as a function of the

liquid-to-gas ratio

P=1atm, T=80

o

F,

L

=62.22lb/ft

3

,

L

=0.86cp, =71.7dynes/cm,

V

G

=32.68m/s, d

aj

=2.5, 7.5, 15, 35, 60,

80m, m

j

=8, 18, 23, 23, 20, 8%

f=0.5 (Calvert model)

k=0.2acf/gal (Johnstone model)

FIGURE 5: Efficiency as a function of the

gas velocity at the Venturi throat

P=1atm, T=80

o

F,

L

=62.22lb/ft

3

,

L

=0.86cp, =71.7dynes/cm, f=0.5,

Q

L

/Q

G

=1L/m

3

,

d

a

=2.5, 7.5, 15, 35, 60, 80m,

m

j

=8, 18, 23, 23, 20, 8%

f=0.5 (Calvert model)

k=0.2acf/gal (Johnstone model)

Figure 4 presents the predicted efficiency as a function of the the liquid-to-gas ratio for the

models included in the software that was developed in the present work. It can be observed that the

Johnstone model predicts much higher efficiencies even at low ratio values. Moreover, the

difference between the lowest and highest ration values is small, compared to the predictions

obtained using Calverts model. Figure 5, presents the predicted efficiency as a function of the gas

velocity at the venturi throat, In essence, the Johnstone et al (1954) model fails to make any

predictions (predictions close to 100%) regardless of the changes in the throat velocity. This may be

attributed to the large particle diameters chosen for these diagrams. This is better demonstrated in

Figure 6, which shows a curvature in the Johnstone model for particles up to 2m, while Calverts

model reaches peak values at 7m. It should be noted that in all three Figures, Calvert et al (1972)

model predictions are a lot closer to the curve one would normally expect. Figure 7 shows the

predicted efficiency as a function of the the liquid-to-gas ratio, Figure 8, presents the predicted

efficiency as a function of the gas velocity at the venturi throat, and Figure 9 the efficiency as a

function of particle diameter, in Calverts model, for different correlative parameter (f) values,

demonstrating the models dependence on it. This is in accordance to the available literature (see

above) and emphasises the need for caution when using the model.

FIGURE 6: Efficiency as a function of

particle diameter

P=1atm, T=80

o

F,

L

=62.22lb/ft

3

,

L

=0.86cp, =71.7dynes/cm,

V

G

=32.68m/s

f=0.5 (Calvert model)

k=0.2acf/gal (Johnstone model)

FIGURE 7: Efficiency as a function of the

liquid-to-gas ratio Calverts model

P=1atm, T=80

o

F,

L

=62.22lb/ft

3

,

L

=0.86cp, =71.7dynes/cm,

V

G

=32.68m/s

d

a

=2.5, 7.5, 15, 35, 60, 80m,

m

j

=8, 18, 23, 23, 20, 8%

4. CONCLUSIONS

In concluding, the software presented herein offers an easy way to calculate the efficiency

and pressure drop of a venturi scrubber. Some of the most widely used theoretical models for

venturi design have been incorporated in this software. Thus, a comparison of the results predicted

by the models with experimental results, will allow the user to either determine which model

provides the most accurate predictions or to choose the configuration most adapted to an operating

condition. However, in its current state, the software will prove more useful to educators and/or

students of air pollution abatement devices.

A number of improvements could be done in the future to make the software more efficient

by:

(i) Allowing the user to enter the desired collection efficiency or pressure drop in order to

obtain the proposed liquid to gas ratio and/or gas entrance velocity,

(ii) Introducing additional models for the calculation of collection efficiency (e.g. those

developed by Boll (1973), Young et al (1977), Concalves et al (2004)),

(iii) Introducing additional models for the calculation of pressure drop (e.g. those developed by

Boll (1973), Pulley (1997)).

Furthermore, one may also try to incorporate additional wet scrubbing configurations (e.g.

spray towers).

REFERENCES

1. Azzopardi B.J. and A.H. Govan (1984), The modeling of Venturi scrubbers Filtration and

Separation, Vol. 23, pp. 196200.

2. Azzopardi B.J., S.F.C.F. Teixeira, A.H. Govan and T.R. Bott (1991) An improved model

for pressure drop in Venturi scrubbers, Transactions of the Institute of Chemical

Engineers, B69, pp. 5564.

FIGURE 8: Efficiency as a function of the

gas velocity at the Venturi throat

Calverts model

P=1atm, T=80

o

F,

L

=62.22lb/ft

3

,

L

=0.86cp, =71.7dynes/cm,

Q

L

/Q

G

=1L/m

3

, d

aj

=2m

FIGURE 9: Efficiency as a function of

particle diameter Calverts model

P=1atm, T=80

o

F,

L

=62.22lb/ft

3

,

L

=0.86cp, =71.7dynes/cm,

Q

L

/Q

G

=1L/m

3

, V

G

=50m/s

3. Boll R.H. (1973) Particle collection and pressure drop in Venturi scrubbers Industrial &

Engineering Chemistry Fundamentals, Vol 12(1), 40-50.

4. Calvert S., (1970) Venturi and other atomizing scrubbers efficiency and pressure drop,

AIChE Journal, Vol. 16, pp. 392396.

5. Calvert S., D. Lundgren and D.S. Mehta (1972) Venturi scrubber performance Journal of

Air Pollution Control Association, Vol. 22, pp. 529-532.

6. Charisiou N.D., G. Tsevrenis, M.A. Goula (2011) Software development for the design of

control equipment for particulate pollutants, Proc. Int. Conf. on Environmental Science

and Technology VII, pp. A295-A302.

7. Goncalves J.A.S., D. Fernandez Alonso, M.A. Martins Costa, B.J. Azzopardi and J.R. Coury

(2001) Evaluation of the models available for the prediction of pressure drop in Venturi

scrubbers Journal of Hazardous Materials, Vol. B81, pp. 123140.

8. Goncalves J.A.S., M.A.M. Costa, M.L. Aguiar and J.R. Coury (2004) Atomizatin of liquids

in a PeaseAnthony Venturi scrubber. Part II. Droplet dispersion Journal of Hazardous

Materials, Vol. 116, pp. 147157.

9. Cooper C.D. and F.C. Alley (2004) Air pollution control: A design approach Waveland

Press, Inc.

10. Johnstone H.F., R.B. Feild and M.C. Tassler (1954) Gas absorption and aerosol collection

in a Venturi atomizer, Industrial and Engineering Chemistry, Vol. 46, pp. 16011608.

11. Miller R.L., D.M. Jain and M.P. Sharma (1990) Modeling Venturi scrubber performance

for particulate collection and pressure drop Chemical Engineering Communications, Vol.

89, pp. 101-112.

12. Nasseh S., A. Mohebbi, Z. Jeirani and A. Sarrafi (2006) Predicting pressure drop in Venturi

scrubbers with artificial neural networks Journal of Hazardous Materials, Vol. 143, pp.

144-149.

13. Pulley R.A. (1997) Modeling the performance of Venturi scrubbers Chemical

Engineering Journal, Vol. 67, pp. 9-18.

14. Rudnick S.N., J.L.M. Koehler, K.P. Martin, D. Leith and Cooper D.W. (1986) Particle

collection efficiency in a Venturi scrubber: comparison of experiments with theory

Environmental Science and Technology, Vol. 20(3), pp. 237-242.

15. Silva A.M., J.C.F. Teixeira and S.F.C.F Teixeira (2009) Experiments in large scale Venturi

scrubber: Part II. Droplet size Chemical Engineering and Processing: Process

Intensification, Vol 48(1), 424-431.

16. Theodore L. (2008) Air pollution control equipment, John Wiley & Sons Inc.

17. Wang L.K., W. Lin and Y.T. Hung (2004) Catalytic oxidation in: Handbook of

Environmental Engineering, Volume 1: Air Pollution Control Engineering, ed. L.K.

Wang, N.C. Pereira and Y.T. Hung, Humana Press Inc: Totowa, NJ, USA, pp. 369-394.

18. Yung S.C., H.F. Barbarika and S. Calvert (1977) Pressure loss in Venturi scrubbers

Journal of the Air Pollution Control Association, Vol. 27, pp. 348-351.

19. Yung S.C., S. Calvert and H.F. Barbarika (1978) Venturi Scrubber Performance Model

Environmental Science and Technology, Vol. 12(4), pp. 456-459.

- Venturi Scrubber With Mist EliminatorDiunggah olehandy123hi
- Venturi Scrubber Design Equations Formulas CalculatorDiunggah olehblueboy
- Ventury Scrubber Design MethodDiunggah olehPukhraj Daga
- Venturi Scrubber Theory & ExperimentDiunggah olehTian Fung Wang
- Croll Reynold's Scrubber CatalogueDiunggah olehvarunpassi
- Ventury Scrubber PaperDiunggah olehManjunath Hardcheese
- Scrubber Manual(1)Diunggah olehRahul Sonkamble
- Venturi Scrubbers1Diunggah olehsandulupeni
- Factors Influencing Venturi Scrubber PerformanceDiunggah olehDave Dumont
- Wet Scrubber DesignDiunggah olehsumit_waghmare
- Maximizing Wet Scrubber PerformanceDiunggah olehHESuarez
- estimationDiunggah olehLatifa Traya
- BracingDiunggah olehIbrahem Hakam
- Water Resources Engineering 3rd Edition Chin Solutions ManualDiunggah olehhutaq
- 320c Plano HidraulicoDiunggah olehJorge Calderon Rojas
- Prediction of Venturi Scrubber Grade Efficiency Curves Using TheDiunggah olehDamian Stevens
- Set ExamDiunggah olehManoj Kumar
- Venturi Scrubbers2Diunggah olehmkmusa
- Design Evaluation of Particulate Wet Scrubbing SystemsDiunggah olehAnonymous MVHQ97KEoP
- Turbo Sonic ScrubberDiunggah olehjosedalceggio1955
- 7S_EjectorVenturiScrubDiunggah oleh3556996
- Packed Tower ScrubbersDiunggah olehPaul Jameson
- 0680 Air Pollution Engineering Manual Part1 1973Diunggah olehgfrank9970
- venturiscrubberDiunggah olehsujayan2005
- ScrubberDiunggah olehMuhammad Jajar Pambudi
- AirPol Venturi Scrubber BrochureDiunggah olehjosedalceggio1955
- Lesson 5 Packed Tower ScrubbersDiunggah olehinsomniaticstat
- Specifying Venturi Scrubber Throat Length for.pdfDiunggah olehChristopher Lloyd
- CFD Simulation of Dust Particle Removal Efficiency of a Venturi Scrubber in CFXDiunggah olehCristian Martínez

- 1098214010373376Diunggah olehPacymo Dubelogy
- multi_asset_math_finance.pdfDiunggah olehPacymo Dubelogy
- Pricing_Options_Based_on_Trinomial_Markov_Tree.pdfDiunggah olehPacymo Dubelogy
- Worth readingDiunggah olehPacymo Dubelogy
- Ch07Diunggah olehPacymo Dubelogy
- this book is about Business Success Manual - Management & Leadership , it is wonderfulDiunggah olehraeissi
- Art And Discipline Of Strategic Leadership - Preview.pdfDiunggah olehPacymo Dubelogy
- SLGN2010-4Diunggah olehPacymo Dubelogy
- Ch05Diunggah olehPacymo Dubelogy
- Fon Simult1Diunggah olehsharath1199
- Trackless Mobile MachineryDiunggah olehPacymo Dubelogy
- Coal to Methanol to GasolineDiunggah olehPacymo Dubelogy
- Ch09Diunggah olehPacymo Dubelogy
- Ch06Diunggah olehPacymo Dubelogy
- linear-equations.xlsxDiunggah olehPacymo Dubelogy
- Linear EquationsDiunggah olehPacymo Dubelogy
- An Economic Study of Small Scale Cattle Fattening Enterprise OfDiunggah olehPacymo Dubelogy
- Shopping Bag Quantity AssumptionsDiunggah olehPacymo Dubelogy
- Sect 4 Injection MoldingDiunggah olehPacymo Dubelogy
- Plastics - Manufacturing MethodsDiunggah olehPacymo Dubelogy
- j.1541-4337.2010.00126.xDiunggah olehLili Chen
- Injection MoldingDiunggah olehPacymo Dubelogy
- Ch11Diunggah olehPacymo Dubelogy
- FeasibilityDiunggah olehPacymo Dubelogy
- SheepDiunggah olehPacymo Dubelogy
- cattle-feedlot-project.pdfDiunggah olehPacymo Dubelogy
- BACKYARD CATTLE FATTENING.pdfDiunggah olehPacymo Dubelogy
- Design of Pressure Vessel (Int & Ext)Diunggah olehapi-3824026
- 1. Principles of Cost ControlDiunggah olehPacymo Dubelogy

- Green Infrastructure - PhiladelphiaDiunggah olehGreen Action Sustainable Technology Group
- EciDiunggah olehshanky22
- Flue & Chimney BrochureDiunggah olehAirtherm Engineering Ltd
- 199839781-Wet-Scrubbers-022002.pdfDiunggah olehbaharuonlyhuman
- Air Pollution Traffic Rules in PrevensionDiunggah olehrajrudrapaa
- EUROPERFILDiunggah olehAlejandro Morales
- Euro IV Emission Norms PDFDiunggah olehNoel
- Breathing Air Quality in an Abrasive Blasting ContextDiunggah olehjoseph
- An Investigation on The Effect of HHO Gas and Injection Pressure on Constant Speed Diesel Engine: A ReviewDiunggah olehInternational Journal for Scientific Research and Development - IJSRD
- Adsorption onto activated carbon fiber cloth.pdfDiunggah olehrocotroncoso
- BS 4076 APP008Diunggah olehjomolt
- The Disadvantages of Fly AshDiunggah olehShariar Masud Towhid
- Pencegahan Pencemaran - 3.4Diunggah olehnur irfana mardiyah
- g001 Green Building General NotsDiunggah olehkhawaldeh jamal
- Intelligent buildings.pptDiunggah olehAnonymous Qnf6YdFX
- NewCoDiunggah olehChia
- Clean AirDiunggah olehrosebelle1906
- W1 L3 Air Pollution Control EQUIPMENTDiunggah olehZafirahAhmadFauzi
- 2 Green Technologies of ConcreteDiunggah olehTerence Wong
- TGN M15 - Monitoring PM10 and PM2.5Diunggah olehOzzySyaputra
- Air Quality in Europe - 2015 ReportDiunggah olehFabrícia Gonçalves
- Industrial Steam Generators.pdfDiunggah olehsertackcdg
- Biolubricants.pdfDiunggah olehAry Octaviani
- Franchescas Family Dining - PrintInspectionDiunggah olehLiz Shepard
- FORM-I Hazardous waste.docDiunggah olehsrijubasu1121
- 1716-ldg-eDiunggah olehRonald Aranha
- chemistry acid rainDiunggah olehapi-294237871
- sifat Trilene 77 MSDSDiunggah olehBaghus E Hariyanto
- Brochure CfcDiunggah olehJason Raquin Roque
- ozone depleation quizDiunggah olehMuhdAmirul

## Lebih dari sekadar dokumen.

Temukan segala yang ditawarkan Scribd, termasuk buku dan buku audio dari penerbit-penerbit terkemuka.

Batalkan kapan saja.