|Wang, Lingjuan - TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY|
|Wanjura, John - TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY|
|Faulkner, Brock - TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY|
|Parnell, JR., Calvin - TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY|
|Shaw, Bryan - TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY|
|Lacey, Ronald - TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY|
|Capareda, Sergio - TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY|
Submitted to: ASAE Annual International Meeting
Publication Type: Proceedings
Publication Acceptance Date: August 5, 2004
Publication Date: August 5, 2004
Citation: Wang, L., Wanjura, J.D., Faulkner, B., Parnell, Jr., C.B., Shaw, B.W., Lacey, R.E., Capareda, S.C., Buser, M.D. 2004. Study of "baffle type pre-separator plus cyclone" abatement systems for cotton gins. American Society of Agricultural Engineers. Paper No. 044017. Interpretive Summary: Cotton gins in some areas of the cotton belt are being required to implement additional control measures in order to meet the ever changing state air pollution regulatory agency guidelines. Recently, an air control district proposed a guideline requiring cotton gins to implement control technologies including a baffle-type pre-separator followed by a bank of either 1D-2D or 1D-3D cyclones. Currently the information on the collection efficiency of a baffle-type pre-separator followed by 1D-2D cyclones is nonexistent in the literature. The purpose of this research is to compare the collection efficiencies of these two control systems on a laboratory scale. The results of this study indicate that both systems had collection efficiencies greater than 97%. Comparatively, the baffle-type pre-separator followed by a 1D-3D cyclone did not perform any better than a pre-separator followed by a 1D-2D cyclone. Future tests are planned to confirm these results on a full size system.
Technical Abstract: "Pre-separator plus1D2D cyclone" and "pre-separator plus 1D3D cyclone" systems were tested with ground gin trash which contains 10.35% lint fiber and 5.49% fine dust (less than 100 um). Test results indicate that the pre-separator collected gin trash at over 97% collection efficiency. There were no significant differences in emission concentrations and overall collection efficiencies from these two systems even though the 1D3D cyclone collection efficiencies were slightly higher than 1D2D cyclone when tested with high lint content trash and with pre-separator in the system. A "Pre-separator plus 1D2D cyclone" system could perform as efficiently as a "pre-separator plus 1D3D cyclone" system when tested with high lint content gin trash.