Chemical Engineering and Processing 44 (2005) 279285

Air classification of solid particles: a review

M. Shapiro , V. Galperin
Laboratory of Transport Processes in Porous Materials, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering,
Technion-Israel Institute of Technology, Haifa 3200, Israel

Received 22 June 2003; received in revised form 14 January 2004; accepted 11 February 2004
Available online 1 July 2004

Abstract

An overview is given of modern air classification devices, their operation principles, features and parameters, as cut size, cleanness
and recovery. We outline the separation zones common to existing classifiers. In practice, various gravitational and centrifugal classifiers
are employed, including those with vertical and horizontal air streams, cascade classifiers, fluidized bed separators, inertial, vortex, rotor
classifiers, etc. Choice of the classifier type and designs is dictated by the technological requirements (throughput, cleanness, etc.) and the
properties of materials to be classified. Advantages and limitations of the classifiers and basic trends in their development are considered.
2004 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Air classification; Gravitational; Centrifugal; Particles

1. Introduction coarse fraction content in the coarse product Cc . Conversely,

Air classification is a technological method of separating
particulates according to their size, as represented by particle
equivalent diameter [1]. The latter may be either geometric
or hydrodynamic/aerodynamic equivalent diameter, depend-
ing on the size-measurement method used. The initial or
original (o) material is divided into two products: coarse (c)
and fine (f). Separation is characterized by a cut size d50 ,
which is a border between these fractions (see below defini-
tion of this quantity in terms of fraction cleanness and recov-
ery). Particles with sizes above d50 constitute coarse fraction
and those with sizes below d50 are fines. Due to various
stochastic factors (air turbulence, particle collisions), some
fines get into the coarse product and vice versa. Quality of
particle separation is characterized by mass contents of each
fraction in the suitable product. Denote the mass contents
of the coarse fraction (in per cent) in the feed, coarse and
fine products by Co , Cc and Cf , respectively. Similarly, Fo ,
Fc and Ff are the mass contents of the fine fraction in the
corresponding materials. Fractional cleanness is the mass
content of any useful fraction in the corresponding product,
namely, fine fraction content in the fine product Ff , and
Corresponding author. Fax: +972 48 294923.
E-mail address: mersm01@tx.technion.ac.il (M. Shapiro).
the content of fines in the coarse product Fc , or coarse in the
fines product Cf is fractional dirtiness. The mass balance
may be expressed as mo = mc + mf , where mo , mc and mf
are masses of initial, coarse and fine products, respectively.
Product yield is the mass of a suitable product relative to
the feed, i.e. coarse product yield is c = mc /mo , fine product
yield is f = mf /mo . It is clear that c + f = 1 or 100%.
Recovery of a certain fraction is the ratio between the
masses of any fraction in the suitable product and in the
original material. The recovery shows which part of useful
particles contained in the feed gets into a suitable product.
The coarse and fine fraction recoveries are expressed by
c = mc Cc /mo Co , f = mf Ff /mo Fo , respectively. Cleanness
and dirtiness characterize quality of the separated products.
In contrast, fraction recovery characterizes the separation
efficiency. In particular if the original product is composed
only of particles having cut size, its fraction recovery is 50%.
In continuous technological processes direct measurement
of products masses is difficult. The recoveries are usually
estimated by determination of the fraction content in sepa-
rated products. This may be done by analyzing their probes,
e.g. by sieving, sedimentation method etc. Using the frac-
tion contents, one can estimate the recoveries of coarse and
fine fractions by the following respective expressions: c
= Cc (Co Cf )/[Co (Cc Cf )], f = Ff (Fo Fc )/[Fo (Ff
Fc )]. Their average gives total separation efficiency: av

0255-2701/$ see front matter 2004 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.cep.2004.02.022
280 M. Shapiro, V. Galperin / Chemical Engineering and Processing 44 (2005) 279285
= 0.5(c + f ). The above definitions of c , f are suitable
when the cut size is given. Otherwise, c , f may be esti-
mated by grade efficiency curves [1].
2. Particle separation zones
An interior space of a classifying device, where solid
particles interact with air stream, is the separation zone.
Four basic separation zones are known, as described
by Rumpf [2], which include gravitational-counterflow,
gravitational-crossflow, centrifugal-counterflow and centri-
fugal-crossflow zone.
2.1. Gravitational-counterflow zone
The gravitational-counterflow zone exists in air stream ris-
ing up with velocity u inside a vertical chamber with parallel
walls (Fig. 1a). Particles experience gravity G and drag Fd
forces acting in opposite directions. Coarse particles, hav-
ing terminal settling velocity VTS larger than air flow ve-
locity, move downwards, against the air stream, and fines
rise with the stream. The cut size d50 is calculated from the
equilibrium G = Fd combined with zero particles absolute
velocity, i.e. VTS = u. Theoretically, the cut size particles
are indefinitely suspended in the separation zone. Practi-
Fig. 1. Separation zones: (a) gravitational-counterflow zone, (b) gravitational-crossflow zone, (c) centrifugal-counterflow zone, (d) centrifugal-crossflow
zone.
cally all particles are separated due to unavoidable stochastic
factors.
2.2. Gravitational-crossflow zone
A horizontal air stream entering this zone expands within a
chamber and converges towards the outlet (Fig. 1b). Particles
fed in the chamber with zero velocity accelerate horizontally
by the drag force Fd and also fall down. At the end of the
acceleration interval the horizontal velocity component vx of
all particles almost reaches the are flow velocity u and they
do not separate in this direction. Separation occurs due do
particles vertical motion across the air stream. Each particle
falls at its own terminal settling velocity. Accordingly, due
to the horizontal motion they land on the bottom at different
chamber locations: coarse-close to the inlet, smaller-close
to the outlet. Coarse fraction is gathered on the bottom of
the chamber, fines do not reach the bottom and are carried
away by the air flow through the outlet.
Thus, in the gravitational-crossflow zone particle separa-
tion is a two-dimensional process, where their trajectories
are in fact ballistic tracks. Unlike the counterflow zone, the
cut size depends not only on the particles terminal velocity,
but mainly on the chamber length and height. These param-
eters are chosen in such a way that particles with the cut
size land at the farthest point A of the bottom (Fig. 1b).
 M. Shapiro, V. Galperin / Chemical Engineering and Processing 44 (2005) 279285
2.3. Centrifugal-counterflow zone
This separation zone is characterized by a flat air vortex
prevailing in a cylindrical chamber with tangential inlet and
central outlet (Fig. 1c). In this vortex air rotates and flows
radially towards the chamber centre. The radial air move-
ment (radial sink flow type) serves as the particles separa-
tion track.
Particles fed tangentially with air stream are involved in
rotation. Due to the centrifugal (inertial) force Fc their tra-
jectories gradually deviate from the air streamlines. Sepa-
ration is governed by the balance between Fc and the drag
force component Fdr induced by the radial air movement.
Coarse particles drift towards the chamber walls, where they
fall down to the outlet. Fines move towards the chamber
axis where they are eventually carried out by the air stream.
Particles with cut size theoretically move with zero radial
velocity, but practically go to one of the products. As the
centrifugal force depends on the radial position, so does the
cut size d50 . This distinguishes the separation process in the
centrifugal-counterflow zone from the separation occurring
in the gravitational-counterflow zone. To keep the cut size
constant along the radial direction, the classifier should be
designed to provide constant tangential air velocity. This
feature is characteristic of the Archimedean spiral or free
vortex flow [2].
2.4. Centrifugal-crossflow zone
This zone may be created in an air vortex for example
in a cylindrical chamber with inlet and outlet placed on the
opposite sides of the chamber axis (Fig. 1d). The fed par-
ticles enter with the air stream through whirl blades, which
create a screw-type flow. The blade profiles should be de-
signed such that the radial component of the air velocity
everywhere vanishes. Particles rotate while drifting radially
towards the chamber walls with size-dependent velocities.
As they simultaneously proceed along the chamber axis they
reach the wall in different locations. Larger particles arrive
Fig. 2. Cascade classifiers: (a) zigzag, (b) shelf classifier, (c) with horizontal scavenging.
281
to the wall faster; smaller ones make it farther along the ax-
ial direction. The chamber is designed in such a way that
the cut size particles reach the periphery at its edge (point
A). The separation process in the centrifugal-crossflow zone
is similar to that in cyclones; so these devices have similar
design principles.
3. Air classifiers types and designs
Numerous air classifier designs are described in the
literature [3,21]. No universal design method can be recom-
mended for separation of different materials, as each device
type has its specific technical requirements and suitable
for specific product. The separation zones described above
serve as a basis for systematizing air classifiers, which
may have several zones used in combination in the same
device.
Air classifiers may have external or internal aerodynamic
cycles. The former devices are constructed independently
of dust collectors and fans and connected to them via
pipelines. The internal-cycle (recirculating-air) devices
contain these elements in a single unit, and hence need
less production area and normally require lower invest-
ments. They have several technical shortcomings outlined in
subsection 3.5.
Air classifiers may also be distinguished by method of
powder feed. Particles may be fed either within air stream, or
separately by freely pouring them within the device. Other
systematizing may be done with respect to the air stream
form, classifier design features and operation mode (contin-
uous or batch).
Below we review principal schemes of most commonly
used air classifiers to summarize the most important features
of their design and operation. Modern trends of classifier
design account for stochastic nature of separation and aero-
dynamic parameters of equipment, creation of precise air
velocity field, repeated cleaning of both fractions, arrange-
ment of several classifying stages, etc.
282 M. Shapiro, V. Galperin / Chemical Engineering and Processing 44 (2005) 279285
3.1. Gravitational air classifiers
3.1.1. Counterflow classifiers with vertical (rising) flows
Early classifiers of such type [3] were constructed as verti-
cal chambers having within a rising air stream (Fig. 1a) with
particles fed from the top or from the side. Being inexpensive
and simple in construction and maintenance, these devices
have one important shortcoming. Namely, the fed particles
break air flow uniformity and create significant turbulence.
As such, coarse particles prevent fines from rising with the
air stream. This in combination with the single-stage oper-
ation mode underlies low separation efficiency of counter-
flow classifiers with rising flows. These classifiers are used
only for separation of coarse bulk materials, containing two
types of particles of well differing sizes, e.g. coarse sand or
pebbles of 110 mm mixed with dust 0.10.2 mm.
3.1.2. Crossflow classifiers with horizontal air stream
Separation in these devices known as winnowing ma-
chines [3], is achieved due to the difference between tra-
jectories of coarse and fine particles in the separation zone
(Fig. 1b). Their operation and efficiency are strongly af-
fected by the stochastic factors of the process, in particular
by uncertainties in feeding and particles aerodynamic inter-
actions. In most cases coarse particles prevent proper clas-
sification of fines. Separation efficiency of these devices is
usually low. They are normally used for separation of solid
particles according to densities (e.g. grain from peel), rather
than by size. Sometimes crossflow separation in horizontal
streams is used in combination with other separation prin-
ciples.
3.2. Cascade air classifiers
These devices, known as Zigzag classifiers [4], are cas-
cades of several inclined branch pipes of a rectangular cross
section arranged to form a vertical zigzag channel (Fig. 2a).
Air flowing from below scavenges the particles fed from
above in cross-current direction. The flow field within the
chamber has vortexes in the turn points, where the fines are
dragged by the stream, and the coarse particles cross it to-
wards the opposite wall and pour down. Separation occurs in
a cross-flow process. Sequential pipes arrangement enables
multiple scavenging to improve the separation efficiency.
Several types of Zigzag classifier are produced by Alpine
[5] for separation of ferruginous ore, fertilizers, plastic,
wooden dust, etc. at cut sizes ranging from 0.1 to 10 mm.
The number of parallel chambers varies from one to 16
with output ranging from 1 to 10 t/h.
Although multiple scavenging improves separation,
coarse particles crossing the air stream on each cascade step
collide and mix with fines. This precludes sharp separation
and decreases the efficiency. Another disadvantage of the
device is its high aerodynamic resistance (pressure drop of
about 2.53.5 kPa), resulting from the vortexes formed in
cascades turn points.
These shortcomings prevail also in Shelf cascade classi-
fier [6], where instead of pipes, inclined shelves are mounted
on the inner walls of a vertical vessel (Fig. 2b). Strong turbu-
lence prevailing under the shelves cause high pressure drops
(of up to 45 kPa) and high energy consumption of these
devices.
Cascade principle was also combined with cross-count
horizontal scavenging [7] in a vertical vessel divided into
separation and precipitation chambers, separated by a per-
meable grid with concave shelves (Fig. 2c). Particles fed
from the top pour onto the upper shelf, glide down and fall
of its edge where they are scavenged by the cross-current
stream. Part of fines is carried into the precipitation chamber
and the rest of the mixture falls onto the next shelf for re-
peated separation. After multiple separations, coarse fraction
exits from the separation chamber and fines leave the pre-
cipitation chamber. The finest fraction exits with the stream
and is collected in cyclones or filters.
This design practically or to a considerable extent elim-
inates particles collisions in the separation zone, which
sharpens separation. As the flow field in the chamber has no
inherent vortexes the device has lower air resistance and en-
ergy consumption. Several prototypes of this classifier were
used in phosphate industry for separation of crushed phos-
phate ore at 1 mm cut size. One such plant with output of 25 t
per hour and pressure drop of 800900 Pa yielded 9698%
cleanness of fines and 7885% of coarse fraction [8].
3.3. Fluidized bed classifiers
In these devices classification occurs in the space over
a fluidized bed from which fine particles are carried away
with the air stream. The air velocity must essentially ex-
ceed the maximal fluidization velocity of fine fraction. These
classifiers operate on the gravitational counterflow separa-
tion principle with fluidized bed used to increase particles
residence time in the separator. Coarse particles can move
horizontally across the bed to the exit, which is another ad-
vantage of this device.
Fluidized bed classifiers may have straight or widening
forms. The latter (Fig. 3a) consist of a conical chamber with
a grid permeable for particles fed from below, inlet and
outlet pipes and a branch for coarse product. Air velocity
in the holes is high so that all the particles move far up-
wards into the cone, where the stream expands and the par-
ticles slow down. The coarse part returns to the grid and the
fines are carried away. The cones upper diameter is cho-
sen in such a way that the air velocity does not exceed the
coarse particles terminal velocity. These particles exit from
a pseudo-boiling layer formed above the grid through the
outlet branch. Pass-through grids allow arranging several
cones one over another i.e. to design multi-stage classifiers
(Fig. 3b). Each stage has its (coarse) product with size de-
pendent on the chamber diameter.
Classifiers with pass-through grids did not find wide use
in practice mainly because of their big size. For example, a
 M. Shapiro, V. Galperin / Chemical Engineering and Processing 44 (2005) 279285
Fig. 3. Fluidized bed classifiers: (a) single-stage, (b) two-stage, (c) and
(d) continuous operation.
three-stage air classifier of 600 kg/h is about 4.5 m tall. Ad-
ditionally, particles crushing resulting from impacts against
the grid, may affect the product quality.
In a later generation of fluidized bed classifiers the
feed is poured onto the grid from above (Fig. 3c, d), so
crushing is eliminated [9]. Several prototypes of such flu-
idized bed classifiers with cylindrical or conical chambers
of diameter 3501700 mm and throughput of 0.510 t/h,
were constructed for separation of sand, potassium chlo-
ride and ground phosphate particles with sizes from 50
to 1.5 mm [10]. The recovery of coarse fraction was
7592%.
Fig. 4. (a) Franken/Buell gravitational-inertial classifier, (b) Vortex classifier, (c) gravitationalcentrifugal classifier.
283
One disadvantage of the fluidized bed classifiers with
cylindrical chambers of large diameters (above 1 m) is for-
mation of dead zones within the fluidized bed far from the
axis, where the particles do not move. These zones are elim-
inated in FB classifiers with chambers of oblong (oval) form
(as in Fig. 3d) [11]. Such a device with 40 t/h throughput
and 160 m cut size was built in the Karatau phosphate
works milling plant. It yielded the fine product coarse frac-
tion cleanness of 86% and separation recovery of 78% [10].
Fluidized bed classification plant constructed in the
Technion (Fig. 3d) has 30200 kg/h feeder output, air flow
rate of up to 400 m3 /h allowing to change the cut from 50
to1000 m [12]. The efficiency is about 90% and above,
depending on the material. The grid of changeable slope
allows controlling the rate of discharge of coarse particles
out of the separator. Investigations showed good perfor-
mance stability of the classifier in the wide range (up to
four times) of feed rate. These devices have both products
recoveries higher at least by 1520% with respect to other
gravitational classifiers.
3.4. Inertial air classifiers
These devices are employed for fine powders (40400 m)
and also coarser particles. In the Franken or Vandenhoek in-
ertial separators [13,14] (Fig. 4a) particle-air mixture enters
from the top and falls down in the inlet pipe. The air turns
abruptly to the outlet pipe inclined by about 4550 and
carries the fine particles. Coarse fraction proceeds straight
down because of high inertia towards the discharge pipe.
On its way this material undergoes repeated separation in a
secondary air flow carrying fines into a curvilinear cham-
ber. Then they exit via the outlet pipe with blades mounted
for better air distribution. These classifiers, manufactured
by Buell Co., are used for separation of pulverized lime-
stone at cut size of 150 m with feeds from a few pounds
to 600 t/h [15]. In the Buells variant of this device [14]
blades have different angles to increase the efficiency. Such
devices were used for separation of 151000 m particles.
In the Buell separators the secondary air stream interferes
with the primary stream causing the fine particles moving
284 M. Shapiro, V. Galperin / Chemical Engineering and Processing 44 (2005) 279285
in the curvilinear chamber to mix with fed material. This
was eliminated by adding a branch pipe in the centre of the
curvilinear chamber to provide a separate exit of fines [16].
One such 20 t/h classifier was tested in phosphate works to
separate 50400 m fraction from ground phosphorite. It
had coarse product cleanness of 91% and recovery of 77%.
3.5. Centrifugal air classifiers
Two main types of these classifiers are known, distin-
guished by method of creating air rotation. In vortex clas-
sifiers the air is rotated by stationary vanes (or tangential
pipes); in rotor classifiers this is done by rotating blades. The
latter devices may have open or closed aerodynamic cycle.
3.5.1. Vortex air classifiers
Vortex air classifiers have centrifugal-counterflow separa-
tion zone. Alpine A-G manufactures several such classifiers
on the basis of the Rumpfs developments. One device of
this type (Fig. 4b) is designed as a flat horizontal cylinder
containing a vortex chamber. Particle-laden air passes via in-
clined vanes into the chamber, through which the air moves
along a spiral trajectory, carrying the fines out. Coarse parti-
cles are drawn to the wall region and exit via a screw outlet.
These classifiers are used for separation of fine powders, e.g.
limestone, quartz, pigments, etc. at cut sizes of 5100 m
[1,17].
3.5.2. Gravitationalcentrifugal air classifiers
Gravitationalcentrifugal air classifiers are two-stage de-
vices having gravitational and centrifugal separation zones,
with air circulation in most cases induced by orientable
blades. The feed enters the classifier in the air stream into
a widening cone (Fig. 4c), where the coarsest fraction is
removed by gravitational separation. The stream with re-
maining material moves up into the centrifugal zone via the
blades having changeable angle to adjust the cut size. Fines
are carried away with the stream, whereas the coarse parti-
cles move to the wall and descend to the exit. These devices
Fig. 5. (a) Rotor classifier, (b) classifier with profiled blades, (c) circulating air classifier.
with throughputs of up to about 20 t/h are widely used in
cement and coal milling plants [18].
3.5.3. Rotor classifiers
Rotor classifiers utilize rotating blades for air circu-
lation. In one such classifier [19] (see Fig. 5a) particle
laden air enters from below and rises upward into a con-
ical vessel, containing a drive-activated rotor with a cone
and rotating blades. These blades whirl the air to create a
centrifugal-counterflow separation zone in the upper part
of the vessel. The cut size is controlled by adjusting the
drives rotational velocity. These devices with throughputs
of up to 1.5 t/h are used for separation of fine quartz powder,
cement, ground limestone etc. at cut sizes of 20100 m
and coarse product recovery of 7080%. Similar classifiers
were developed by Hosokawa Co. [17] for separation of
ground coal, talc, aluminum oxide, etc. A variant of rotor
classifiers (Blade Classifier) [20] has profiled blades similar
to axial compressors (Fig. 5b). The space above the blades
is arranged to form a centrifugal-crossflow zone, (rather
than the counterflow zone, characteristic of the Hosokawa
classifiers). In this zone particle separation occurs as de-
scribed in Section 2.4. Among the various blade profiles
tested, the highest efficiency was registered for that pro-
viding the solid body air rotation. The blade classifiers
allow separation 2060 m powders, e.g. quartz, pigments,
alumina with 7080% both products recovery.
3.5.4. Circulating air classifiers
Circulating air classifiers are widely used, mainly in ce-
ment industry. One type of such devices produced by Sturte-
vant [22] (Fig. 5c) consists of two coaxial exterior and inte-
rior vessels. Particles entering the device from the top onto
the plate are scattered within the interior vessel by a rotat-
ing plate. There they rotate and move to periphery. The fan
creates a circulating air flow that rises within the interior
vessel and descends within the intermediate space between
the two. The air stream returns into the inner vessel through
the vanes. Coarse particles fall down in the inner vessel be-
 M. Shapiro, V. Galperin / Chemical Engineering and Processing 44 (2005) 279285
ing separated as in the centrifugal-crossflow separation zone
(see Fig. 1d). When the air abruptly turns to the vanes, fines
proceed down to their exit. Air-particle motion within the
intermediate space is similar to that in cyclones.
These classifiers may process up to 800 t/h of bulk solids
[22]. They have rather poor dust/air separation in the inter-
mediate zone, resulting in particle accumulation, which re-
duces their efficiency. Cut size control in these devices is
difficult.
4. Conclusions
Choice of the classifier type is dictated by product re-
quirements, technological and economic factors. Rational
design and improving separation quality is done by creating
a well-defined and stable air flow, reducing turbulence, elim-
inating particles collisions, controlling feed and repeated
cleaning of both fractions. Among gravitational type clas-
sifiers, fluidized-bed based devices provide stable operation
and sharp separation in the cut size range of 501000 m.
Smaller-size particles may be separated by rotor classifiers,
enabling easy cut-size control and providing products re-
coveries up to 80%.
References
[1] H. Rumpf, Particle Technology, Chapman and Hall, London, 1990.
[2] H. Rumpf, Fortschritte und Probleme auf dem Gebiete der Wind-
sichtung, Staub, vol. 47, 1956.
[3] A. Taggart, Handbook of Mineral Dressing, John Willey & Sons,
USA, 1950.
285
[4] F. Kaiser, Der Zickzack-Sichter ein Windsichter nach neuen Prinzip,
Chemie-Ing.-Techn. 35, 1963.
[5] Zerkleinerungsmaschinen, Windsichter, Extruder, Alpine Prospekt
017/2R, 1968.
[6] M. Barsky, Powder Fractionation, Nedra, Moscow, 1980.
[7] V. Galperin, et al., Device for Separating Bulk Materials, USSR
Patent No. 1619535, 1984.
[8] V. Galperin, et al, Dry Classification of Phosphate Ore in Chilisai
Phosphate Field, Chem Industry, 12, Moscow, 1988.
[9] A. Vasilenchuk, et al., Gravitational Air Classifier with Fluidized
Bed, USSR Patent 228641, 1968.
[10] V. Galperin, et al., Industrial tests of the Air Classifiers with Flu-
idized Bed, Proceedings of Mines and Chemistry Institute for Raw
Materials, issue 57, Moscow, 1985.
[11] V. Galperin, Gravitational Air Classifier with Fluidized Bed, USSR
Patent 1619535, 1984.
[12] V. Galperin, M. Shapiro, Separation of Solid Particles in a Fluidized
Bed Air Classifier, Powder Handling and Processing, 11, No. 2,
AprilJune 1999.
[13] J.F. Franken, Apparatus for Classifying Particulate Material, USA
Patent 3006470, 1961.
[14] J.P. Vandenhoeck, Classifier with gas flow distributor, USA Patent
3006470, 1961.
[15] Buell, A Division of Fisher-Klosterman, Inc., http://www.fjinc.
com/Buell/cat1.html 2003.
[16] V. Galperin, et al., Air Classifier, USSR Patent 608568, 1978.
[17] Hosokawa, http://www.hosokawa.com.web/powderequip/
CLASSIFIERS/HTM, Powder and Particle Processing, 2003.
[18] G.K. Smyshliaev, Air Classification in Mineral Processing, Nedra,
Moscow, 1969.
[19] V. Rybin, S. Bockshtein, Investigation of Impingement-Vortex Clas-
sifier, Proceedings of the Institute of Building Materials, Gosstrojiz-
dat, 1960.
[20] M. Dubinsky, V. Galperin, Blade Air Classifier, USSR Patent 177766,
1965.
[21] I. Klumpar, et al., Air Classifiers, Chemical Engineering, 3 March,
1986.
[22] Sturtevant Inc., Whirlwind Air Classifiers, http://www.sturtevant.com,
2003.