Talk:Cyclonic separation

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Engineering (Rated C-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Engineering, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of engineering on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Physics / Fluid Dynamics  (Rated C-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
This article is supported by Fluid Dynamics Taskforce.
 

Comment[edit]

it would kind of be nice to have pictures/diagrams of these anti-airpollution devices

It looks like 70.171.12.17 said the above. I found a small diagram of a cyclone and have added it to the article. This is my first effort at an image insertion, so please offer guidance if I messed up. Pzavon 02:01, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

"Gas Cyclone" should redirect here since this is the common term in engineering for a device that does this type of separation.

Nov 29th 2007

the second reference link is broken: http://www.wsu.edu:8080/~gmhyde/433_web_pages/cyclones/-CycloneOverview.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.97.226.5 (talk) 12:23, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Merge from Cyclone dust collector[edit]

Well I will oppose the merge from, sort of. The information in that article is wrong in several counts. It is not gravity that causes the particles to exit, as that would constitute static settling, in this case it is the inversion of the vortex causing a high curvature in the fluid trajectory causing particles to be removed from the air stream, owing to the intertial trajectory of the particulate. Neither is a negative pressure required to operate a cyclone, the entire device can be (and usually is, except maybe in household vacuum cleaners) operated by positive pressure applied to the inlet, usually by having a fan or blower downstream of the particulat source. This, whilst a fine point, does not mislead the reader into thinking that less than atmospheric pressure is required to operate a cyclone (though this could work). Other than these points, I think everything there is covered in this article. User A1 (talk) 19:51, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Refinement in article.[edit]

This line:

Rotational effects and gravity are used to separate mixtures of solids and fluids.

Should read Centrifugal effects are used to separate mixtures of solids and fluids, as well as gravity. LoneRubberDragon (talk) 09:31, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

I say this only because there are cyclonic separation methods can be done in a sealed short cylinder, which negates using gravity. For example, Zippe centrifuges have been used since the 1960's to separate isotopes of gases, and to separate cold molecules from warm molecules, using cylinder axis and cylinder wall ducts. If your article was meant to only refer exactly to a specific method of separation, as commonly used in the agracultural / machine /vacuum industry, I apologize for it reminds me of such Zippe methods. However the article wording is general enough, it almost seems to apply to Zippe centrifuges, due to its virtual overlap. I see in your reference section you do not cross reference the Zippe, only the virtual duplicate of Zippe of the Helicon system. And I don't get the difference between Zippe and Helicon, when they are copying each other. But uranium enrichment refers to Zippe, and Zippe doesn't refer to Helicon. And Helicon doesn't refer to uranium enrichment article, any more than it refers to Helicon. And Helicon doesn't refer to Zippe. This looks like the Tower of Bable, of Babylonian times. But then again, Superresolution doesn't refer to Microscanning. LoneRubberDragon (talk) 09:31, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zippe_centrifuge

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uranium_enrichment#Centrifuge_techniques

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helikon_vortex_separation_process

This is all a confusingly similar set of articles that should be merged into one article, especially regerding the Zippe / Helicon overlap, and avoidance of each other. LoneRubberDragon (talk) 09:39, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

History[edit]

Can anybody add since when this process is known and since when it has been used industrially? --BjKa (talk) 08:31, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Broken references[edit]

Hi, the list of references for this article looks broken, but i have no idea how to fix it. I added the references template (which for some reason wasn't there) but it didn't fix the problem. Could somebody please fix it and let us know what the problem was? Cheers! Azylber (talk) 14:34, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Major textbook reference missing from this article[edit]

Reference needs to be made in this article to

Hoffmann, A.C., and Stein, L.E., 2008. Gas Cyclones and Swirl Tubes: Principles, design and operation. 2nd ed. Berlin: Springer-Verlag. 422p.

which is the principle reference text for this technology. Use of it would help to considerably sharpen the first two or three paragraphs of the article, and introduce a far more complete typology of cyclone separators and categorisers. Stringybark (talk) 11:02, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Equation clearly incorrect[edit]

In the article, the force balance equation

\frac{dr}{dt} = F_d + F_c + F_b

is incorrect. The left side has units of velocity, the right side has units of force. Furthermore, in polar coordinates, the radial acceleration has two terms. I intend to correct the equation later.

Johnny (talk) 14:36, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

To make matters worse, the forces are not acting along the same line of action, so the scalar equation is even more wrong... Preetum (talk) 23:38, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

steam water cyclone separator[edit]

I have to design a steam water separator cyclone which is useful in steam drum. which type of cyclone is useful for steam water separation there are cylindrical cyclones and conical cyclones which consist of upper conical portion and lower cylindrical portion.Which is more effective, what is purpose of guide plate in cyclones? How to decide the cyclone dimension such as cone angle, inlet size, total axial length.Please give me some suggestions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.117.113.17 (talk) 19:00, 8 September 2013 (UTC)