Numerical calibration of the Andersen cascade impactor using a single jet model

The Comparison of Fluid Dynamics Parameters in an Andersen Cascade Impactor Equipped With and Without a Preseparator

“…The velocity increased steadily from stage 0 to stage 7 and the difference in velocity between stage 0 and stage 7 is greater than 70%. The narrower the space through which the air travels the higher is the velocity [8]. When the nozzle velocity increases, it is able to accelerate the particle velocity, and this shows good agreement with the acceleration of the particles' velocity [21].…”

“…Gulak et al simply used a 2D single-nozzle model to determine if gravity affected the deposition of the particles in a computer simulation. In the case of a single-nozzle impactor operated at 28.3 L/min, there was a good agreement between the simulations with an experimental setup in models and gravity [8]. Sethuraman and Hickey employed a simple 2D preseparator model.…”

“…The nozzle's dimensions are 2,000-fold smaller than those of the stage's body resulting in a quality of meshing [8]. The finite volumes for each part of the ACI and its Orthogonal Quality are presented in Table II.…”

“…A computational fluid dynamic (CFD) model has been used as an aid for calculating and determining the particle size and the air flow from the ACIs to evaluate the performance of the impactor and other aerosol characteristics [5,[8][9][10]. Gulak et al simply used a 2D single-nozzle model to determine if gravity affected the deposition of the particles in a computer simulation.…”

“…Vinchurkar et al (2009) described the effects of the aerosol charge that increased the measured particle size distributions (deposition fraction on each stage) up to 30% and produced a reduced cutoff (d50) at each stage of up to 400%. The research work of multiple-jet models (whole stage cascade impactor) also produced clear flow patterns that were more useful when compared with a single jet design [5,8].…”