Difference between revisions of "Team:Exeter/Hydrocyclone"

Line 24: Line 24:
 
</div>
 
</div>
  
   <p>For the second design, I wanted to learn to use the software package Autodesk Fusion 360.  
+
   <p>For the 3D design of the hydrocyclones, we used the software package Autodesk Fusion 360.  
I decided to use Autodesk Fusion 360, as it is free for students and is extremely intuitive  
+
We decided to use Autodesk Fusion 360, as it is free for students and is extremely intuitive  
for beginners. After getting to grips with the software, I generated a design specifically
+
for beginners. The first design was influenced, quite simply, by  
created for 13mm piping which we have in the labs. The design was quite simply influenced by  
+
        the shapes of other hydrocyclones seen on the internet. Unfortunately, the 3D printer printed  
the shapes of other hydrocyclones seen on the internet. Unfortunately, the 3D printer printed  
+
support structures on the interior of the first hydrocyclone, which were impossible to remove.
support structures on the interior of the hydrocyclone which were impossible to remove (note
+
        From this model, we did learn  
to self, always check where the printer will print support structures). Thankfully, I did learn  
+
that the inlet was marginally too small for the piping and we were afraid of
from this model that the inlets were marginally too small for the piping and I was afraid of
+
leakages, so we went away and made the design slightly larger in order to ensure a tight fit.  
leakages, so I went away and made the design slightly larger in order to ensure a tight fit.  
+
To prevent the support structures from affecting the interior of the cyclone, we split the design
To prevent the support structures from affecting the interior of the cyclone, I split the design
+
into four separate components which we glued together using Loctite Ultra Control Gel. We
into four seperate components which I plan to glue together using Loctite Ultra Control Gel. I
+
 
chose to use Loctite Ultra Control Gel following some brief research into the most effective  
 
chose to use Loctite Ultra Control Gel following some brief research into the most effective  
adhesives for PLA plastic. Ideally, I would have used a 3D printer that can print dissolvable,
+
adhesives for PLA plastic. Ideally, we would have used a 3D printer that can print dissolvable,
PVA support structures so I could have printed the hydrocyclone as a single piece.</p>
+
PVA support structures so we could have printed the hydrocyclone as a single piece.</p>
  
  
  
<p>After gluing together the hydrocyclone - which went exactly as I had planned, thankfully -
+
<p>After gluing together the hydrocyclone,
I realised that to achieve the desired vortex I needed a more powerful pump than the peristaltic  
+
we realised that to achieve the desired vortex we needed a more powerful pump than the peristaltic  
pump we have in the labs. My initial idea was to source a pond pump from an aquatics supplier,  
+
pump we have in the labs. Our initial idea was to source a pond pump from an aquatics supplier,  
however to achieve the desired 800ml/s (approximately), I would need a pump that would cost  
+
however to achieve the desired 800ml/s (approximately), we would need a pump that would cost  
 
somewhere in the region of £120. Unfortunately this meant that the hydrocyclone was pretty much  
 
somewhere in the region of £120. Unfortunately this meant that the hydrocyclone was pretty much  
useless. The only testing I was feasibly able to accomplish was running a tap through the cyclone  
+
useless. The only testing we were feasibly able to accomplish was running a tap through the cyclone  
 
to explore whether the volume of underflow still vastly exceeded the volume of overflow.  
 
to explore whether the volume of underflow still vastly exceeded the volume of overflow.  
 
Literature suggests that the ratio of overflow to underflow should be approximately 80:20.  
 
Literature suggests that the ratio of overflow to underflow should be approximately 80:20.  
Annoyingly, the overflow:underflow ratio was closer to 20:80 with this cyclone. Because of this  
+
However, the overflow:underflow ratio was closer to 20:80 with this cyclone. Because of this  
minor set back, I went back to the drawing board to work on Hydrocyclone 2.  
+
minor set back, we went back to the drawing board to work on Hydrocyclone 2.  
 
</p>
 
</p>
  
Line 62: Line 61:
  
 
<p>
 
<p>
After stumbling across a paper titled The Sizing and Selection of Hydrocyclones by Richard A. Arterburn,  
+
A paper titled The Sizing and Selection of Hydrocyclones by Richard A. Arterburn,  
I was able to design the hydrocyclone with much clearer direction. For example, I have shortened  
+
enabled us to design the hydrocyclone with much clearer direction. For example, we shortened  
 
the cyclindrical feed chamber to promote the development of the inner cyclone. To futher promote  
 
the cyclindrical feed chamber to promote the development of the inner cyclone. To futher promote  
this development, I have also extended the length of the vortex finder. In order to solve the flow  
+
this development, we also extended the length of the vortex finder. In order to solve the flow  
rate problem, I have designed hydrocyclone #3 to be much smaller; the total volume is now 20cm^{3}
+
rate problem, we designed hydrocyclone #2 to be much smaller; the total volume is now 20cm^{3}
as opposed to the volume of hydrocyclone #2, which had a total volume of 100cm^{3}
+
as opposed to the volume of hydrocyclone #1, which had a total volume of 100cm^{3}
. However, I still wanted this design to be able to seperate slightly larger particulate contaminants  
+
. However, we still wanted this design to be able to separate slightly larger particulate contaminants  
from water, such as sand, so I had to ensure that the inlet and outlets were large enough to prevent  
+
from water, such as sand, so we had to ensure that the inlet and outlets were large enough to prevent  
 
clogging.
 
clogging.
 
</p>
 
</p>
Line 75: Line 74:
 
<p>
 
<p>
 
After the initial testing of Hydrocyclone 2 revealed an overflow:underflow volume ratio of 42:100
 
After the initial testing of Hydrocyclone 2 revealed an overflow:underflow volume ratio of 42:100
(an improvement on Hydrocyclone 1, but still not sufficient), I went back to reading literature,
+
(an improvement on Hydrocyclone 1, but still not sufficient), we returned to the literature,
 
seeking instruction on how to adapt the design to increase overflow output.
 
seeking instruction on how to adapt the design to increase overflow output.
 
</p>
 
</p>
Line 87: Line 86:
 
</div>
 
</div>
  
<p>After the initial testing of Hydrocyclone #3 revealed an overflow:underflow volume ratio of 42:100 (an
+
        <p>To increase overflow output, the paper titled: Hydrocyclones for Particle
improvement on Hydrocyclone #2, but still not sufficient), I went back to reading literature, seeking
+
instruction on how to adapt the design to increase overflow output. The paper: Hydrocyclones for Particle
+
 
Size Separation (J. J. Cilliers, 2000) recommended increasing the angle of the conical chamber from the  
 
Size Separation (J. J. Cilliers, 2000) recommended increasing the angle of the conical chamber from the  
cylindrical feed chamber from 20^{\circ} to 30^{\circ}. It was also suggested that I change the diameter  
+
cylindrical feed chamber from 20^{\circ} to 30^{\circ}. It also suggested that we change the diameter  
of the vortex finder, as diameter of the vortex finder should not equal the diameter of the spigot  
+
of the vortex finder, as the diameter of the vortex finder should not equal the diameter of the spigot  
(underflow outlet). It is suggested that the size of the spigot should be within the range 0.1-0.2\ D
+
(underflow outlet). It is suggested that the size of the spigot should be within the range 0.1-0.2 * Dc
c while the size of the vortex finder should be within the range 0.13-0.43\,Dc. I also adapted the inlet
+
        while the size of the vortex finder should be within the range 0.13-0.43 * Dc. We also adapted the inlet
 
feed so that it was rectangular as opposed to circular. In the image it looks square, however that opening
 
feed so that it was rectangular as opposed to circular. In the image it looks square, however that opening
 
tapers down to a rectangle with a height to width ratio of 2:1 (still tangential to the cyclindrical feed  
 
tapers down to a rectangle with a height to width ratio of 2:1 (still tangential to the cyclindrical feed  
Line 101: Line 98:
 
 
 
<p>Initial testing of the Hydrocyclone was to discover whether the perfect overflow to underflow ratio of
 
<p>Initial testing of the Hydrocyclone was to discover whether the perfect overflow to underflow ratio of
80:20 could be achieved at a particular flow rate. After some initial optimisation of flow rates, I discovered  
+
80:20 could be achieved at a particular flow rate. After some initial optimisation of flow rates, we discovered  
that the perfect ratio could be achieved with a flow rate of 143ml/s. The experiment I conducted was to connect
+
that the perfect ratio could be achieved with a flow rate of 143ml/s. The experiment we conducted was to connect
the cyclone to the pump, and run the experiment until the overflow outlet had been filled to 1L. My results then
+
the cyclone to a pump (a simple DC pump from an aquatics store, capable of 1200L/h), and run the experiment until the  
showed that at 143ml/s, for every litre of overflow, I had 250ml of underflow (give or take 5ml). The experiment
+
        overflow outlet had been filled to 1L. Our results then
 +
showed that at 143ml/s, for every litre of overflow, we had 250ml (+/- 5ml) of underflow. The experiment
 
was conducted three times and an average was taken. The next round of experimentation will follow the protocol  
 
was conducted three times and an average was taken. The next round of experimentation will follow the protocol  
as detailed above. I will be testing the hydrocyclone's ability to actually filter larger particulates from the  
+
as detailed below. We will be testing the hydrocyclone's ability to actually filter larger particulates from the  
 
water.  
 
water.  
 
</p>
 
</p>
Line 124: Line 122:
 
<li>Hydrocyclone 3.</li>
 
<li>Hydrocyclone 3.</li>
 
<li>DC pump, capable of flow rates of up to 1200L/H.</li>
 
<li>DC pump, capable of flow rates of up to 1200L/H.</li>
<li>(Some sort of stirring device to keep the aragonite sand in suspension)</li>
+
<li>Magnetic Stirrer</li>
 
<li>Necessary tubing.</li>
 
<li>Necessary tubing.</li>
<li>Aragonite sand solution with a sand to water ratio of 20:80.</li>
+
<li>Aragonite sand solution with a sand to water ratio of 10:90.</li>
<li>Seives with a mesh small enough to filter aragonite sand from the underflow (approx 100 microns).</li>
+
<li>1 x 5-litre beakers.</li>
<li>3 x 5-litre beakers/buckets.</li>
+
                <li>2 x 2-litre beakers.</li>
 
<li>heavy duty scales + a set of more sensitive scales for measuring the volume of sand.</li>
 
<li>heavy duty scales + a set of more sensitive scales for measuring the volume of sand.</li>
 
<li>Stopwatch</li>
 
<li>Stopwatch</li>
Line 135: Line 133:
 
<h3><b>Set up of the experiment:</b></h3>
 
<h3><b>Set up of the experiment:</b></h3>
  
<ol>
+
<ol>    <li>While turned off, and unplugged, stick the DC pump to the wall of the 5L beaker, with the inlet nozzle
<li>Weigh out 1kg of aragonite sand and pour into the sample solution beaker. Then fill the beaker to the
+
                facing the base, 1 inch inch from the bottom.</li>
 +
<li>Weigh out 500g of aragonite sand and pour into the sample solution beaker. Then fill the beaker to the
 
5L marker with water. </li>
 
5L marker with water. </li>
<li>While turned off, and unplugged, place the DC pump in the sample solution, being careful not to get
 
the electrical components wet. Ensure that the pump is flat on the bottom of the beaker.</li>
 
 
<li>Set up a clamp stand over the 'Underflow beaker' and secure the hydrocyclone vertically.</li>
 
<li>Set up a clamp stand over the 'Underflow beaker' and secure the hydrocyclone vertically.</li>
 
<li>Connect the necessary tubing; pump to inlet feed, vortex finder to overflow beaker, spigot to underflow
 
<li>Connect the necessary tubing; pump to inlet feed, vortex finder to overflow beaker, spigot to underflow
 
beaker. Use tie wraps to secure.</li>
 
beaker. Use tie wraps to secure.</li>
<li>Give the sample solution a good stir and be prepared to quickly begin the experiment while the sand
+
<li>Place the sample solution beaker (5L) onto a magnetic stirrer and initiate the stirrer to keep the sand in  
is still in suspension.</li>
+
                suspension.</li>
 
<li>Before conducting the experiment, ensure that the stopwatch is to hand.</li>
 
<li>Before conducting the experiment, ensure that the stopwatch is to hand.</li>
 
</ol>
 
</ol>
Line 154: Line 151:
 
<li>(BEFORE THE WATER LEVEL FALLS BELOW THE PUMP INLET) Turn off the pump and stop the stopwatch. Record  
 
<li>(BEFORE THE WATER LEVEL FALLS BELOW THE PUMP INLET) Turn off the pump and stop the stopwatch. Record  
 
the time.</li>
 
the time.</li>
<li>Use the seive to filter out the aragonite sand from the underflow while keeping the water in a measuring  
+
                <li> leave the underflow and overflow solutions to settle overnight. </li>
container. Note the volume of water.</li>
+
<li>Carefully pour the excess fluid from both beakers into a measuring cylinder, being careful not to disturb
 +
                the settled sediment. Note the volume of water.</li>
 
<li>Dry the remaining sediment in an oven.</li>
 
<li>Dry the remaining sediment in an oven.</li>
<li>Using the scales, measure the weight of the underflow sediment. Note the ratio of underflow sand:water. </li>
+
<li>Using the scales, measure the weight of the underflow sediment. Note the ratio of underflow sand:water.  
 +
                </li>
 
<li>Repeat this step for the overflow.</li>
 
<li>Repeat this step for the overflow.</li>
 
</ol>
 
</ol>

Revision as of 10:01, 24 October 2017

.

Hydrocyclone

The Filter: Stage 1 - Hydrocyclone

Hydrocyclone 1

Hydrocyclone 1

For the 3D design of the hydrocyclones, we used the software package Autodesk Fusion 360. We decided to use Autodesk Fusion 360, as it is free for students and is extremely intuitive for beginners. The first design was influenced, quite simply, by the shapes of other hydrocyclones seen on the internet. Unfortunately, the 3D printer printed support structures on the interior of the first hydrocyclone, which were impossible to remove. From this model, we did learn that the inlet was marginally too small for the piping and we were afraid of leakages, so we went away and made the design slightly larger in order to ensure a tight fit. To prevent the support structures from affecting the interior of the cyclone, we split the design into four separate components which we glued together using Loctite Ultra Control Gel. We chose to use Loctite Ultra Control Gel following some brief research into the most effective adhesives for PLA plastic. Ideally, we would have used a 3D printer that can print dissolvable, PVA support structures so we could have printed the hydrocyclone as a single piece.

After gluing together the hydrocyclone, we realised that to achieve the desired vortex we needed a more powerful pump than the peristaltic pump we have in the labs. Our initial idea was to source a pond pump from an aquatics supplier, however to achieve the desired 800ml/s (approximately), we would need a pump that would cost somewhere in the region of £120. Unfortunately this meant that the hydrocyclone was pretty much useless. The only testing we were feasibly able to accomplish was running a tap through the cyclone to explore whether the volume of underflow still vastly exceeded the volume of overflow. Literature suggests that the ratio of overflow to underflow should be approximately 80:20. However, the overflow:underflow ratio was closer to 20:80 with this cyclone. Because of this minor set back, we went back to the drawing board to work on Hydrocyclone 2.

Hydrocyclone 2

Design adaptations

Hydrocyclone 2

A paper titled The Sizing and Selection of Hydrocyclones by Richard A. Arterburn, enabled us to design the hydrocyclone with much clearer direction. For example, we shortened the cyclindrical feed chamber to promote the development of the inner cyclone. To futher promote this development, we also extended the length of the vortex finder. In order to solve the flow rate problem, we designed hydrocyclone #2 to be much smaller; the total volume is now 20cm^{3} as opposed to the volume of hydrocyclone #1, which had a total volume of 100cm^{3} . However, we still wanted this design to be able to separate slightly larger particulate contaminants from water, such as sand, so we had to ensure that the inlet and outlets were large enough to prevent clogging.

After the initial testing of Hydrocyclone 2 revealed an overflow:underflow volume ratio of 42:100 (an improvement on Hydrocyclone 1, but still not sufficient), we returned to the literature, seeking instruction on how to adapt the design to increase overflow output.

Hydrocyclone 3

Design adaptations

Hydrocyclone 3

To increase overflow output, the paper titled: Hydrocyclones for Particle Size Separation (J. J. Cilliers, 2000) recommended increasing the angle of the conical chamber from the cylindrical feed chamber from 20^{\circ} to 30^{\circ}. It also suggested that we change the diameter of the vortex finder, as the diameter of the vortex finder should not equal the diameter of the spigot (underflow outlet). It is suggested that the size of the spigot should be within the range 0.1-0.2 * Dc while the size of the vortex finder should be within the range 0.13-0.43 * Dc. We also adapted the inlet feed so that it was rectangular as opposed to circular. In the image it looks square, however that opening tapers down to a rectangle with a height to width ratio of 2:1 (still tangential to the cyclindrical feed chamber).

Initial testing of the Hydrocyclone was to discover whether the perfect overflow to underflow ratio of 80:20 could be achieved at a particular flow rate. After some initial optimisation of flow rates, we discovered that the perfect ratio could be achieved with a flow rate of 143ml/s. The experiment we conducted was to connect the cyclone to a pump (a simple DC pump from an aquatics store, capable of 1200L/h), and run the experiment until the overflow outlet had been filled to 1L. Our results then showed that at 143ml/s, for every litre of overflow, we had 250ml (+/- 5ml) of underflow. The experiment was conducted three times and an average was taken. The next round of experimentation will follow the protocol as detailed below. We will be testing the hydrocyclone's ability to actually filter larger particulates from the water.

Lab Protocol

Hydrocyclone set up

Below is the lab protocol I have written for the next round of experimentation:

You will need:

  • Hydrocyclone 3.
  • DC pump, capable of flow rates of up to 1200L/H.
  • Magnetic Stirrer
  • Necessary tubing.
  • Aragonite sand solution with a sand to water ratio of 10:90.
  • 1 x 5-litre beakers.
  • 2 x 2-litre beakers.
  • heavy duty scales + a set of more sensitive scales for measuring the volume of sand.
  • Stopwatch

Set up of the experiment:

  1. While turned off, and unplugged, stick the DC pump to the wall of the 5L beaker, with the inlet nozzle facing the base, 1 inch inch from the bottom.
  2. Weigh out 500g of aragonite sand and pour into the sample solution beaker. Then fill the beaker to the 5L marker with water.
  3. Set up a clamp stand over the 'Underflow beaker' and secure the hydrocyclone vertically.
  4. Connect the necessary tubing; pump to inlet feed, vortex finder to overflow beaker, spigot to underflow beaker. Use tie wraps to secure.
  5. Place the sample solution beaker (5L) onto a magnetic stirrer and initiate the stirrer to keep the sand in suspension.
  6. Before conducting the experiment, ensure that the stopwatch is to hand.

Protocol (read carefully before continuing):

  1. Instantaneously turn on the DC pump and initialise the stopwatch.
  2. (BEFORE THE WATER LEVEL FALLS BELOW THE PUMP INLET) Turn off the pump and stop the stopwatch. Record the time.
  3. leave the underflow and overflow solutions to settle overnight.
  4. Carefully pour the excess fluid from both beakers into a measuring cylinder, being careful not to disturb the settled sediment. Note the volume of water.
  5. Dry the remaining sediment in an oven.
  6. Using the scales, measure the weight of the underflow sediment. Note the ratio of underflow sand:water.
  7. Repeat this step for the overflow.