Lecture 6

Design of ESP

DESIGN OF ELECTROSTATIC PRECIPITATOR

Introduction
An electrostatic precipitator (ESP) is a particle control device that uses electrical forces to move
the particles out of the flowing gas stream and onto collector plates. The particles are given an
electrical charge by forcing them to pass through a corona, a region in which gaseous ions flow
[1].
INFORMATION REQUIRED FOR DESIGNING OF ESP
The efficiency of an ESP depends upon two factors

The size of the unit i.e. total square ft. of the collecting plate area

Amount of independent electrical energisation

In addition following details are required for designing an ESP

1.

Source of the emission : Properties of the process by which the pollutants are produced

2.

Particle size distribution

3.

Chemical analysis of dust in relation to particle size

4.

Specific eclectic resistivity of dust

5.

Dust concentration of clean gas

6.

Required dust concentration of clean gas(efficiency)

7.

Properties of gas: composition, temperature, pressure.

8.

Corrosive properties of gas

9.

Gas flow rate

Apart from these variables the design of ESP also include the determination of ancillary

factors such as rappers to shake the dust loose from the plates, automatic control system,
measures for ensuring high-quality gas flow, dust removal system, provisions for structural and
heat insulation and performance monitoring system [2].
Firstly size distribution of dust is determined; from the information of size distribution of
dust the migration velocity is calculated. After that number of charge on a particle is calculated
by using appropriate equation. On the basis of precipitation rate the collecting surface area for a
given efficiency at a particular flow rate is calculated by using Deutsch-Andersen relationship.

PARTICLE CHARGING
According to kinetics, the electron energy Qd of an originally neutral dust particle is given by
[3]:
d p KT
Q d ne
2E

d CNe 2
ln 1 P

2 KT

(2.6.1)

Where, N=number of electronic charges; dp=dust particle dia.; K=1.38*10-23(J/K);

T=Absolute Temp.; E=1.60210-19 [C]electrons; N=free ion density; C=(2kT/mi)1/2
Charging velocity is very fast at the beginning but slow down with time.

Qd ne d2P NeCt
4

(2.6.2)

Field Charging:

Q f ne 0.19 10 9 rP2 E

(2.6.3)

Where, n=Number of electronic charge; rp=Radius of particle; E=Average field intensity,

E=1.602*10-19
MIGRATION VELOCITY
The velocity of charged particle suspended in a gas under the influence of an electric
field is known as migration velocity. The particle migration velocity is the most important
parameter and is function of a large number of operation quantities such as- Electric field
strength, particle size, gas viscosity, properties of the dust [3].
Principal forces acting on particle are gravitational force, electric force, viscous force and
inertial force.

Vpm

qEC
3d

(2.6.4)

Where, Vpm=Particle migration velocity towards the collector electrode; q=ne, value of n
depends upon types on charging (diffusion or field); C=Cunningham correction factor;
E=Collector electric field; =gas viscosity; and d=particle size (m).

Table 2.6.1 Effective migration velocity (m/s) for various type of dusts.
Dust

Migration Velocity (m/s)

Zinc Oxide

0.02-0.03

Sulfuric Acid

0.08-0.16

Metal Oxides

0.02-0.03

Calcium Carbonate

0.04-0.05

Smoke Fume pit coal furnace

0.02-0.11

Fly ash from lignite furnace

0.18-0.25

Blast furnace dust

0.05

Smelter dust

0.07-0.09

Blast furnace dust

0.05

COLLECTION EFFICIENCY OF ESP

The collection efficiency of an ESP as a function of gas flow rate and precipitator size is
given by the Deutsch-Andersen Equation
Assumptions:
a. Repulsion effect is neglected.
b. Uniform gas velocity throughout the cross section
c. Particles are fully charged by field charging.
d. No hindered settling effect.
Collection efficiency mathematically expressed as follows [3]:
Vpm A c
1 exp
Q

(2.6.5)

=Fractional Collection Efficiency; Ac=Area of the collection electrode; Vpm=Particle

migration velocity; Q=Av=Volumetric flow rate of gas; v=gas velocity.
V pm A c L

1 exp
V v

Where, V=Volume of precipitator.

For cylindrical type collector:

(2.6.6)

Ac 4

V Dc

(2.6.7)

For parallel plate:

Ac 2

V S

(2.6.8)

Where, S=distance between the two parallel plates; V=Gas Volume; W=Precipitation
Rate Parameter; A=Plate Area; Q=Volumetric Flow Rate of Gas.
When the charged particle passing a charge qp is in a region where an electric field
strength of Ec is present, a force F will act on particle.

F qPEc

(2.6.9)

The migration of particle towards the collector is resisted by a drag force and the net force on
the particle is zero when it moves with a constant drift velocity (vpm)

qP Ec

2
CD d p2 gVpm

8C

(2.6.10)

For small particle stokes law is applicable.

Hence

CD

24g
g d PV pm

(2.6.11)

Substitute CD in above equation it gives vpm

V pm

q P Ec C
3d P g
qP CAc Ecm

3Q

1 exp

(2.6.12)

Where, qp=Particle charge; Ac=collector surface area; Ecm=electric field strength;

d=particle size; =gas viscosity
0.55d P

C Cunningham correction factor 1

1.257
0.4e

dP

For standard air, =0.066m

For standard air, above equation becomes

(2.6.13)

 5766q P CAc Ecm

Qd

1 exp

(2.6.14)

Collection efficiency of different types of precipitators

=(Mp1-Mp2)/Mp1.

(2.6.15)

Where, Mp1 and Mp2 being the mass of dust per unit volume of the gas stream at the
entrance and exit of the precipitator.
The volumetric flow rate Vg in a precipitator by the equation
d2
Vg c v
4

(2.6.16)

For a plate precipitators

Vg n a h v

(2.6.17)

Where; h=Height of the plate which is equal to the height of the channels
The equation is related to gas velocity v and number n of the element for pipe
precipitators. If particles are of a solid, the collected particles are removed from electrode by
shaking it in a process known as rapping. If particles are of a liquid, after collecting on the
electrode the liquid then flows down the electrode by action of gravity and collects at the bottom.
The particle charging process is done by means of corona surrounding a highly charged
electrode, such as wire [4].
DUST RESISTIVITY

Dust resistivity is the most important dust property.

With high dust resistant a large voltage in the dust layer is observed accumulated by a
decreasing current.

Specific Dust Resistivity: is the resistivity of a layer of dust will a layer thickness of 1 cm
over a collection area of 1m2

The Specific dust resistivity is designed the symbol rs and measured in cm

rs

Ac Rm

(2.6.18)

Where, Ac=collection area; Rm=mean electric resistivity; =dust layer thickness.

Table 2.6.1. Ranges for ESP design parameters

Parameter
Precipitation rate VP
Channel width, D

Range of values
1.0-10 m/min
15-40 cm

Plate area
Specific collection area
Gas flow rate
Gas velocity u

0.25-2.1m2/(m3/min)
1.2-2.5 m/s

Duct length
Height
Aspect ratio R=

0.5-1.5(Not less than 1 for

Corona power ratio

1.75-17.5W/(m3/min)

Corona current ratio

50-750 A/m2

Plate area per electrical set

460-7400 m2

>99%)

Number of electrical section Ns

a.

In the direction of gas flow

b.

Total number of sections

Spacing between sections

2-8
1-10 bus sections/(1000 m3/min)
0.5-2m

Len, Lex

2-3m

Plate height; length

8-15m; 1-3m

Problem 2.6.1: A plate type ESP use in a cement plant for removing dust particles consist of 10
equal channels. The spacing between plates is 15 cm and the plates are 3 m high and 3 m long.
Unit handles 20,000 m3/h of gas.
a) What is the efficiency of collection plates?
b) What is the collection rate of particles having density 9.2 gm/m3?
c) What should be the length of the plate for achieving efficiency of 99% keeping other
parameter same?
Solution:

Vpm Ac

Qg

1 exp

Ac 2 n h l

q Qg

Given: Particle migration velocity (Vpm)=0.1 m/sec; Number of plates (n)=10; Height of plate
(h)=3 m; Length of plate (l)=3 m; Gas flow rate (Qg)=20000 m3/h=2.7778 m3/sec; Density of
particle ()=9.2 g/m3.
Total area of collection plates (Ac)=2103 m3 m=180 m2.

0.1180
0.9608
5.555

1 exp
96.08%

The collection rate q 0.9608 5.555 9.2 49.1070 g / sec

Let us assume the length of plate is l m.
Therefore, the total collection area of plate (Ac ) becomes 40 l m2.
The length of plate can be obtained from following equation:

0.1 40 l
0.99 1 exp

5.555
l 95.9314m
a) The efficiency of collection plate is 96.08%.
b) The collection rate of particles having density is 49.1070g/sec.
c) Length of the plate for achieving efficiency of 99% keeping other parameter same is 95.93 m.
Problem 2.6.2: An ESP handles 107 ft3/min of gas. It uses 3.6 Amp current and has 28000 ft2
collection plate areas. At the present operating temperature, the dust resistivity is 31011 -cm.
It has been suggested that the gas cooled to reduce the dust resistivity to 71010 -cm assuming
that average dust thickness is 0.45 inch and that voltage difference between the charging walls
and outer surface of the dust layer is 30 kV must be maintained in both cases. Estimate the
reduction in power requirement that cooling the gas to get neglect the effect of gas temperature
on charging and drift velocity.
Solution:
V

I
A

P V I

Given: Gas flow rate (Qg)=107 ft3/min; Current (I)=3.6 A; Total area of collection plates
(Ac)=28000 ft2=26.01106 cm2; Dust resistivity (1)=31011 -cm; Dust resistivity (2)=71010
-cm; Dust thickness (=0.45 inch=1.143 cm. Assuming that V1 is the voltage when dust
resistivity is 1 (kV) and voltage is V2 when dust resistivity is 2 (kV) and P is the power input
(kW)
For a dust resistivity of 31011 -cm,
V1

1 I
A

3 1011 1.143 3.6

47.4602 kV
26.01 106

Total applied voltage is 30 kV+47.4602 kV=77.4602 kV

Therefore, the power input when dust resistivity is 1

P1 V1I 77.46023.6 278.856 kW

For a dust resistivity of 51010 -cm,
V2

2 I
A

7 1010 1.143 1.6

11.074 kV
26.01106

Total applied voltage is 30 kV+11.07 kV=41.074 kV

The power input P2 V 2 I 41.074 3.6 147.886 kW
Therefore by cooling of gas, power input gets reduced to P=P1- P2.
P=278.856-147.886=130.97 kW.
REFERENCES
[1]

http://www.wind.arch.tkougei.ac.jp/APECWW/Report/2009/INDIAb.pdf

[2]

Liu, D. H. F., Liptak, B. G., Bous, P. A. Environmental Engineering Handbook, 2nd

edition, CRC Press, LLC, Florida, 1997.

[3]

Theodore, L. Electrostatic Precipitators in Air Pollution Control Equipment

Calculations, Wiley, 2008.

[4]

Peavy, H. S., Rowe, D. R., Tchobanoglous, G. Environmental Engineering, McGrawHill, 1985.