Saint Louis University

School of Engineering & Architecture

Department of Chemical Engineering

Code: ___2485_________ Reporter: ___CALLANTA, Shannine_________

Course No.: ____CHE 512____ Members: ___DE GUZMAN, Cherrie Erich___
Schedule: _7:30-10:30 MW_ ___DOMALANTA, Marcel Roy_____
Group No.: _______6________ ___ESPERANZATE, Paul __________
___ HAFALLA, Charlotte__________

Date Performed: ________ August 9, 2017__________

Date Submitted: ___August 14, 2017_______________

Experiment No.: _____1_______

Experiment Title: _______________Screening__________________________________

CRITERIA POINTS SCORE

1. Report Format and Neatness
2. Objectives
3. Theoretical Background
4. Equipment and Apparatus
a. List of Equipment and apparatus and its uses
b. Experimental Set-up
5. Procedure
6. Data and Results
7. Interpretation of Results
8. Recommendations and Conclusions
9. Sample Computations
10. Answers to Study Questions
11. Appendices
a. Graphs Accompanying Data and Results
b. References
TOTAL

Instructor: ___Engr. Jonalyn A. Kimpay___________

OBJECTIVES

1. To separate the granular substance particles that are smaller than the screen opening from the

larger particles.

2. To determine the cumulative in each screen.

3. To graphically represent the relationship between the particles diameter vs. mass fraction and

particle size vs. cumulative mass fraction.

4. To distinguish the sample by determining the specific surface, particle population and average

particle size of the sample.

THEORETICAL BACKGROUND
EQUIPMENT AND APPARATUS

A. List of Equipment and Apparatus and its Uses

Name Illustration Purpose

Mortar and The mortar was the vessel that was

Pestle used in which the chalks were crushed

with a pestle. The pestle was used to

crush the chalk in a mortar.

Digital The digital balance was used to

Balance accurately weigh the necessary

materials such as the chalk and the

sieve series with or without chalk.

Brush The brush was used to clean the set-

up as well as making sure the

cleanliness of the sieve series was

maintained.

Sieve Series The sieve series was used in order for

the separation of different chalk size

particles to be divided. The sieve series

used was a stack of numbers 8, 14, 25,

and 35 mesh numbers.

 Sieve Shaker The sieve shaker was used to vibrate

the sieve series used in order to allow

separation of different chalk sizes. The

sieve shaker used was equipped with a

timer to allow constant time allowance

for the shaking.

B. Experimental Set-up

Figure for the experimental set-up

The experimental set-up consists of primarily the sieve series and she sieve shaker both in correspondence

with one another. The sieve shaker was the medium in which the sieve series was to be shaken at a certain

period of time until an allowance of lesser than one gram was attained in the bottom pan. Discussion of

procedure (see Procedure).

PROCEDURE

The students first weighed the necessary chalk to be crushed (400g) using the digital balance available in

the laboratory.

Weighing of the required mass of chalk to be analyzed

The properly weighed chalk was then crushed into fine particles by means of the mortar and pestle

borrowed from the laboratory. The crushed chalk was made to be sure that it would be not too small and

not too large for ease in the procedure.

Crushing of chalk into fine particles

The individual sieve screens were then properly cleaned with the brush to assure that there were no other

attached particles on the screens. After the cleaning, the individual screens were weighed properly using

the digital balance.

 Weighing of the individual empty screens

The sieve series was then nested in a way that all individual screens were to be stacked with the coarser

screen at the top (number 8 mesh) and the finest screen at the bottom (number 35 mesh). In sequence

from the top to the bottom goes from mesh number 8 to 14 to 25 and then 35 (with the pan at the bottom

of mesh 35 and the cover on top of mesh 8). The weighed amount of chalk was then placed on the top

screen and was sealed with the cover.

Stacking of the individual sieve screens in order with the weighed chalk

The set-up was then put in which the stacked sieve screens were placed in the sieve shaker and the timer

was then first set to 15 minutes for the first shaking of the screens. The start button was then pushed to

start the shaking.

 Experiment proper- shaking of the sieve stack with chalk inside

After shaking, the bottom pan was removed and weighed. After weighing for the first trial, the sieve stack

was then put in the sieve shaker and was allowed to shake for five minutes. After running the system for

five minutes, the bottom pan was then re-weighed and compared to the previous trial. The shaking of the

stack for five minutes was repeated until the difference of the previous trial and the current trial was below

1 gram. This indicates that the separation of chalk in terms of size was complete. The sieve stack was then

disassembled and the individual sieves were weighed accordingly. The weight and time were recorded and

proper computations and graphical representations were conducted. The cumulative plot of screen analysis

showing the mass fraction passing through the screens as a function of particle size and a plot screen

analysis showing the cumulative mass fraction smaller than Dpi as a function of particle size.

Weighing of individual sieve screen with screened chalk inside

Schematics of Procedure:

Weighing of Necessary Mass of Chalk

Crushing of Chalk

Weighing of
Crushed Chalk Cleaning of Sieve
Screens

Weighing of Stacking and

Empty Sieve putting weighed
Screens chalked

Input Sieve Stack on Sieve Shaker

Allow to shake for 15 min

Weigh Bottom Pan

Input Sieve Stack on Sieve Shaker

Allow to shake for 5 min

No Weigh Bottom Pan

Is mass difference of
pan lesser than 1 g?

Yes

Weigh individual Sieve Screen and

conduct data handling
DATA AND RESULTS

Mass of chalk before crushing: 400.23 g Total time of screening: 30 minutes

Mass of chalk before screening:399.45g Total time of screening

Mass of chalk after screening: 398.95 g including weighing: 38 minutes

Table 1 -1: Data for the experiment and the calculated cumulative mass fraction.

Screen Screen Ave Dpi, Mass Cumulative mass Aperture

Mesh opening mm fraction fraction
Dpi, mm Sample Sample
larger smaller cm Micrometer
than size than size
noted noted
8 2.36 0.8953 0.8953 0.1047 0.236 2360
12 1.40 1.88 0.0296 0.9249 0.0751 0.14 1400
24 0.71 1.055 0.0555 0.9804 0.0196 0.071 710
32 0.50 0.605 0.0042 0.9846 0.0154 0.05 500
pan 0 0.25 0.0142 0.9988 0.0012

Table 1 -2: Data for the determination of weight of the chalk for each mesh.

Screen Mesh Weight of Screen, Weight of Screen + Weight of chalk,

grams chalk, grams grams
8 464.13 821.76 357.63
12 429.91 441.72 11.81
24 391.39 413.55 22.16
32 402.83 404.52 1.69
Pan 494.09 499.75 5.66
INTERPRETATION OF RESULTS

For powdered chalk to be separated and classified to its particular particle size, the method of Screening

is used. The particle size can be inferred from the given screen opening in millimeters. It can be assumed

this way because the particles that can pass through a given opening shall suggest its size.

The data on mass fraction retained on each of the Tyler screen mesh from 8 to 32 and also the

pan, varies. Hence, when graphed by plotting the mass fraction against the particle size gives different

curves for different screen intervals. The coarsest mesh (8 mesh) have the largest amount of mass

fraction, showing almost ninety weight percent of the total mass of chalk used. This may have been due

to overloading of the screen since 400 g of crushed chalk was used in the experiment. Cramming of the

particles in the openings might have technically occurred. However, theoretically, the particles which

remain in the coarsest mesh have the largest particle size and the ones that remained in the pan which

fell through the finest mesh have the smallest particle size.

The cumulative mass fractions only indicate the successions of fraction passing through the

screen – undersize, and the additions of fraction being retained in the mesh – oversize, thus, it only

decreases or increases in nature that when graphically represented exhibits a curve that shows the

particle size that lie above or below a particular value of a cumulative mass fraction.
RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS

SAMPLE COMPUTATIONS

Mesh 8

2.36 mm+1.40 mm
Ave. Dpi = =1.88
2

For mass fraction:

weight of chalk
mass fraction =
mass of chalk before screening

357.63 grams
mass fraction = = 0.8953
399.45 grams

For cumulative mass fraction:

Sample larger than size noted= 0+ 0.8953 = 0.8953

Sample smaller than size noted=1- 0.8953=0.1047

For mass of chalk after screening:

Mass of chalk after screening = 357.63 g + 11.81 g + 22.16g + 1.69g +5.66g = 398.95 grams

ANSWERS TO STUDY QUESTIONS

1. What is the significance of screening?

Screening is an essential part in the analysis of particulates and its process as well as product improvement,

as it affirms regardless of whether the agglomeration procedure is creating the necessary desired size of

particulates.

Source: Question Of The Week: What Is The Importance Of A Sieve Analysis During Agglomerate

Feasibility Tests? By Jenny Seim

 2. Give example of industries in which screening is very useful.

Screening has a major role in wastewater treatment plants for it is the primary unit operation conducted.

Screening removes coarse particles such as rags, paper, plastics, and metals in order to prevent damage

and clogging of downstream equipment, piping, and appurtenances. Some modern wastewater treatment

plants use both coarse screens and fine screens.

Source: United States Environmental Protection Agency- Wastewater Technology Fact Sheet

3. Differentiate aperture, mesh number and screen interval.

Screen aperture is otherwise called the cut point (which includes having equal errors or segment

estimate) at which a screening procedure works in partitioning the material treated into two size portions.

The Mesh number on the other hand is a unit dependent on the mesh number in which, A 4 mesh screen

implies there are four minimal square openings crosswise over one inch of screen. A 100 mesh screen

has 100 openings for every inch, et cetera. This ultimately means a higher mesh numbers has smaller

particulate size. Screen interval refers to the gap between screens.

Sources: www.yourdictionary.com/mesh-number

https://www.mindat.org/glossary/effective_screen_aperture

APPENDICES

A. Graphs and Accompanying Data and Results

a. cumulative plot of screen analysis showing the mass fraction passing through the screens as a function
of the particle size
 Cumulative Mass Fraction through Screens
vs. Particle size

1 0.8953
Cumulative Mass Fraction through Screens

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2
0.0555 0.0296
0.0042
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
-0.2
Particle size, mm

b. a plot screen analysis showing the cumulative mass fraction smaller than D pi as a function of particle
size

Cumulative Mass Fraction Smaller than Dpi

vs. Particle size

0.12
0.1047
Cumulative Mass Fraction Smaller than Dpi

0.1
0.0751
0.08

0.06

0.04
0.0196
0.0154
0.02
0.0012
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
Particle size, mm

B. References