2020
DOI: 10.1016/j.elstat.2020.103426
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Effect of charged water drop atomization on particle removal performance in plate type wet electrostatic precipitator

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2025
2025

Publication Types

Select...
5
2

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 20 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 29 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Concerning the installation of the electrode that delivers the electric charge to the particles in the fumes, the results suggested adequate conditions for its operation with phase velocities of 0.6 m/s [19,20] and temperature below 90 °C [21,22]. Regarding energy recovery efficiency, the temperature of the combustion gases was reduced from 183 °C to 67 °C, equivalent to 0.96 [kW] transferred to the water.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Concerning the installation of the electrode that delivers the electric charge to the particles in the fumes, the results suggested adequate conditions for its operation with phase velocities of 0.6 m/s [19,20] and temperature below 90 °C [21,22]. Regarding energy recovery efficiency, the temperature of the combustion gases was reduced from 183 °C to 67 °C, equivalent to 0.96 [kW] transferred to the water.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Subsequently, the particles are deposited at the collecting plates and get collected (Yamamoto & Velkoff 1981;Zhao & Adamiak 2008). Although they are widely used, the ESP devices encounter problems such as particle re-entrainment and insufficient capacity to remove small particles (Teng et al 2020). In particular, in recent years, the emission of PM 2.5 (particles with diameters less than 2.5 μm) endangers the environment and public health (especially in developing countries), leading to more stringent PM 2.5 -emission limits in the past decade worldwide (Mep 2011).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…An electrostatic precipitator (ESP) remains one of the most popular devices for the waste-gas treatment. The ESP is widely used in coal-fired power plants, accounting for nearly 80 % of factories in China in the past few decades (Teng, Fan & Li 2020). The ESP in general has the advantages of low energy consumption, large flue gas treatment capacity and high-efficiency (Jaworek et al 2019).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, DESPs have disadvantages of generating harmful ozone due to corona discharge and reduced collection efficiency for fine particles like PM 2.5 [8]. Additionally, DESPs showed a rapid decrease in dust collection efficiency after 15 and 20 min of continuous operation, with 15.7% to 39% and 5% to 21% efficiency reduction, respectively [9].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%