An Efficient Single-Stage Wet Electrostatic Precipitator for Fine and Nanosized Particle Control

Figures & data

FIG. 1 Schematic diagram of the parallel-plate wet ESP. Plexiglass plates (M), enter piece (C), frosted glass plate (FG), sand-blasted copper plate (G), overflowing reservoir (OR), collecting reservoir (CR), golden wire (GW), liquid inlet (LI), liquid outlet (LO), aerosol inlet (AI), aerosol outlet (AO), pulse jet valve (PJ), air hole (AH).

TABLE 1 The characteristics of the test particles

	Size range (nm)	CMD (nm)	GSD (nm)	Total number concentration (#/cm^3)
Corn oil, for efficiency test	16.8∼ 615	103.18	1.64	2.38 × 10^5
TiO2 *, for creating heavy particle condition	16.8∼ 615	232.75	2.22	2.14 × 10^4

FIG. 2 Experimental setup for particle collection efficiency and particle loading tests.

FIG. 3 Corona current as a function of applied voltage in the dry and wet ESPs.

FIG. 4 Collection efficiency of the present wet ESP for corn oil particles at the aerosol flow rate 5 and 10 L/min and the applied voltage of 4.3 kV. Each test was repeated 6 times.

FIG. 5 Collection efficiency of the present wet ESP for corn oil particles under different applied voltages. The aerosol flow rate is fixed at 5 L/min. Each test was repeated 6 times.

FIG. 6 Electrostatic precipitation and diffusive deposition efficiencies of the polydisperse corn oil particles in the present wet ESP when the aerosol flow rate and the applied voltage are 5 L/min and 4.3 kV, respectively. Each test was repeated 6 times.

FIG. 7 Collection efficiency for corn oil particles in the dry ESP at different TiO₂ nanopowder loadings. The applied voltage and aerosol flow rate are 4.3 kV and 5 L/min, respectively.

FIG. 8 Collection efficiency for corn oil particles in the wet ESP at different TiO₂ nanopowder loadings. The applied voltage and aerosol flow rate are 4.3 kV and 5 L/min, respectively.