Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Design and development of a PM10 multi-inlet cyclone and comparison with reference cyclones

  • Published:
Air Quality, Atmosphere & Health Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Size-segregated sampling of particulate matter (PM) using impactor suffers from D50 cutoff shift due to particle loading and re-entrainment problems. Cyclonic separation is a viable option to overcome the above problem. However, conventional reverse flow cyclone design having a single inlet and upward-facing outlet also presents a common issue of sample (particle) loss during sampling and requires several arrangements to convert it into an efficient PM sampler. Therefore, here we present a high-volume (HV) PM10 multi-inlet cyclone (MIC) design with a downward-facing outlet, which overcomes existing problems and has additional advantages, such as omnidirectional sampling where a filter collector is placed in a straight line below the cyclone outlet to minimize sample loss. Moreover, like the existing USEPA reference low-volume PM2.5 sampler inlet design, which consists of 2-impactor stages (PM10 followed by PM2.5) in a straight path, this developed HV PM10 MIC sampler can accommodate a second size fractionator (e.g., PM2.5 impactor) to sample finer-size PM on a filter. D50 cutoff of developed PM10 MIC is numerically and experimentally investigated. Since the study regarding cutoff size of another type PM10 cyclone, called respirable dust sampler (RDS) is not available in the public domain and is widely used for PM10 monitoring in India, we investigated its cutoff size empirically and experimentally, and also performed field comparisons. Collocating field evaluation of PM10 MIC and PM10 RDS cyclone was done under a wide range of particle mass loading, and results were compared with USEPA-approved high-volume PM10 impactor sampler and with a real-time particle sizer. The D50 cutoff of PM10 MIC is experimentally achieved to be 9.89 ± 0.3 µm, which is close to 9.94 µm predicted numerically and lies in the range of 9.5–10.5 µm size measured by others for PM10 impactor sampler (USEPA). The D50 cutoff of the PM10 RDS cyclone is experimentally determined to be 3.56 ± 0.1 µm, which is surprisingly lower than its claimed cutoff of 10 µm mentioned in numerous articles, where it has been used for air quality reporting and studies related to aerosol science. The field comparison correlation of PM10 MIC for PM10-2.5 levels with PM10 sampler (USEPA) (R = 0.99) and particle sizer (R = 0.94) correlated well, and the mean deviations are found to be 6.2% and 3%, respectively. While PM10 (RDS) cyclone poorly correlates (R = 0.67), and the mean deviation is 68%. Overall, the developed PM10 MIC overcomes issues associated with existing impactor and conventional cyclone sampler, and can be a better option for high-volume PM10 sampling, especially under a wide range of ambient conditions particularly where the particle mass loading is consistantly high.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

All the data and materials related to the manuscript are published with this paper, and available from the corresponding author upon request (aggarwalsg@nplindia.org).

References

  • Andersen AA (1958) New sampler for the collection, sizing, and enumeration of viable airborne particles. J Bacteriol 76:471–484

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ansys F (2017) R2 User’s Guide. ANSYS Inc

    Google Scholar 

  • BIS (2006). BIS 5182: Methods for measurement of air pollution: Part 23 respirable suspended particulate matter (PM10), cyclonic flow technique. Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS), Delhi, India. https://www.services.bis.gov.in/php/BIS_2.0/bisconnect/standard_review/Standard_review/Isdetails?ID=MTE5NDg%3D

  • Charron A, Harrison RM, Moorcroft S, Booker J (2004) Quantitative interpretation of divergence between PM10 and PM2.5 mass measurement by TEOM and gravimetric (Partisol) instruments. Atmos Environ 38(3):415–423

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Cheng YS, Chen BT (2008). Aerosol sampler calibration. air sampling instruments Committee. ACGIH. Inc, Cincinnati, pp 165–186.

  • Chow JC (1995) Measurement methods to determine compliance with ambient air quality standards for suspended particles. J Air Waste Manag Assoc 45(5):320–382

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • CPCB (2012) Guidelines for the measurement of ambient air pollutants. Central Pollution Control Board, New Delhi. Accessed June 25, 2021.http://mahenvis.nic.in/Pdf/Report/report_epm_NAAQMS%20.pdf

  • Davies CN (1979) Particle-fluid interaction. J Aerosol Sci 10:477–513

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Derksen JJ (2003) Separation performance predictions of a Stairmand high-efficiency cyclone. AIChE J 49(6):1359–1371

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Elsayed K, Lacor C (2011) The effect of cyclone inlet dimensions on the flow pattern and performance. Appl Math Model 35:1952–1968

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • EN 12341 (2014). Ambient air - Standard gravimetric measurement method for the determination of the PM10 or PM2.5. European Committee for Standardization (CEN), Brussels, Belgium. https://www.evs.ee/en/evs-en-12341-2014

  • EN 14902 (2005). Ambient air -Standard method for the measurement of Pb, Cd, As and Ni in the PM10 fraction of suspended particulate matter. European Committee for Standardization (CEN), Brussels, Belgium. https://www.evs.ee/en/evs-en-14902-2005

  • EPA US (2008) National ambient air quality standards for lead (Final rule). Fed Regist 66964(73):219

    Google Scholar 

  • EPA Us (2017) List of designated reference and equivalent methods. US Environment Protection Agency, North Carolina

    Google Scholar 

  • Gimbun J, Chuah TG, Choong TS, Fakhru’l-Razi, A. (2005) Prediction of the effects of cone tip diameter on the cyclone performance. J Aerosol Sci 36(8):1056–1065

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Harrison RM, Laxen D, Moorcroft S, Laxen K (2012) Processes affecting concentrations of fine particulate matter (PM2.5) in the UK atmosphere. Atmos Environ 46:115–124

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hinds WC (1999) Aerosol technology: properties, behavior, and measurement of airborne particles. Wiley

    Google Scholar 

  • Hsu CW, Huang SH, Lin CW, Hsiao TC, Lin WY, Chen CC (2014) An experimental study on performance improvement of the Stairmand cyclone design. Aerosol Air Qual Res 14:1003–1016

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hu M, Peng J, Sun K, Yue D, Guo S, Wiedensohler A, Wu Z (2012) Estimation of size-resolved ambient particle density based on the measurement of aerosol number, mass, and chemical size distributions in the winter in Beijing. Environ Sci Technol 46:9941–9947

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Iozia DL, Leith D (1989) Effect of cyclone dimensions on gas flow pattern and collection efficiency. Aerosol Sci Technol 10:491–500

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • ISO 7708 (1995). Air quality- Particle size fraction definitions for health-related sampling. International Organization for Standardization (ISO), Geneva, Switzerland. https://www.iso.org/standard/14534.html

  • Jayasekher T (2009) Aerosols near by a coal fired thermal power plant: chemical composition and toxic evaluation. Chemosphere 75:1525–1530

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • John W, Wang HC (1991) Laboratory testing method for PM10 samplers: lowered effectiveness from particle loading. Aerosol Sci Technol 14:93–101

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kenny LC, Gussman R, Meyer M (2000) Development of a sharp-cut cyclone for ambient aerosol monitoring applications. Aerosol Sci Technol 32:338–358

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kumar A, Gupta T (2015) Development and field evaluation of a multiple slit nozzle-based high volume PM2.5 inertial impactor assembly (HVIA). Aerosol Air Qual Res 15:1188–1200

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lapple CE (1950) Gravity and centrifugal separation. Am Ind Hyg Assoc Q 11:40–48

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Le TC, Fu CX, Sung JC, Li ZY, Pui DY, Tsai CJ (2020) The performance of the PM2.5 VSCC and oil-wetted M-WINS in long-term field sampling studies. Atmos Environ 239:117804

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Le TC, Shukla KK, Sung JC, Ziyi L, Yeh H, Huang W, Tsai CJ (2019) Sampling efficiency of low-volume PM10 inlets with different impaction substrates. Aerosol Sci Technol 53(3):295–308

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lidén G, Gudmundsson A (1997) Semi-empirical modelling to generalise the dependence of cyclone collection efficiency on operating conditions and cyclone design. J Aerosol Sci 28:853–874

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Linke C, Möhler O, Veres A, Mohácsi Á, Bozóki Z, Szabó G, Schnaiter M (2006) Optical properties and mineralogical composition of different Saharan mineral dust samples: a laboratory study. Atmos Chem Phys 6:3315–3323

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Marple V A, Willeke K (1976) Inertial impactors: Theory, design and use. In: Benjamin Y.H. Liu Fine Particles: Aerosol Generation, Measurement, Sampling, and Analysis, 1st edn. Academic Press, Cambridge, pp 412-446.

  • Marple VA, Rubow KL (1983) An aerosol chamber for instrument evaluation and calibration. Am Ind Hyg Assoc J 44(5):361–367

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marple VA, Rubow KL, Turner W, Spengler JD (1987) Low flow rate sharp cut impactors for indoor air sampling: design and calibration. Japca 37(11):1303–1307

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • May KR (1945) The cascade impactor: an instrument for sampling coarse aerosols. J Sci Instrum 22:187

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McMurry PH, Wang X, Park K, Ehara K (2002) The relationship between mass and mobility for atmospheric particles: a new technique for measuring particle density. Aerosol Sci Technol 36:227–238

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Moore ME, McFarland AR (1993) Performance modeling of single-inlet aerosol sampling cyclones. Environ Sci Technol 27:1842–1848

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Moore ME, Mcfarland AR (1995) Design methodology for multiple inlet cyclones. Environ Sci Technol 30(1):271–276

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • NEERI (1992) Annual report CSIR-National Environmental Engineering Research Institute. Nagpur, India

    Google Scholar 

  • Ott DK, Cyrs W, Peters TM (2008) Passive measurement of coarse particulate matter, PM10–2.5. J Aerosol Sci 39(2):156–167

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Pang X, Wang C, Yang W, Fan H, Zhong S, Zheng W, Zou H, Chen S (2022) Numerical simulation of a cyclone separator to recycle the active components of waste lithium batteries. Eng Appl Comput Fluid Mech 16:937–951

    Google Scholar 

  • Park K, Hong CH, Han JW, Kim BS, Park CS, Kwon OK (2012) The effect of cyclone shape and dust collector on gas-solid flow and performance. World Acad Sci, Eng Technol 6:217–222

    Google Scholar 

  • Patel P, Aggarwal SG, Tsai CJ, Okuda T (2021) Theoretical and field evaluation of a PM2.5 high-volume impactor inlet design. Atmos Environ 244:117811

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Patel P, Aggarwal SG (2021) Theoretical and experimental evaluation of a compact aerosol wind-tunnel and its application for performance investigation of particulate matter instruments. Aerosol Air Qual Res 21:210006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peters TM (2006) Use of the aerodynamic particle sizer to measure ambient PM10–2.5: the coarse fraction of PM10. J Air Waste Manag Assoc 56:411–416

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pillai PS, Babu SS, Moorthy KK (2002) A study of PM, PM10 and PM2.5 concentration at a tropical coastal station. Atmos Res 61(2):149–167

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Purdue LJ, Rodes CE, Rehme KA, Holland DM, Bond AE (1986) Intercomparison of high-volume PM10 samplers at a site with high particulate concentrations. J Air Pollut Control Assoc 36(8):917–920

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ranade MB, Woods MC, Chen FL, Purdue LJ, Rehme KA (1990) Wind tunnel evaluation of PM10 samplers. Aerosol Sci Technol 13(1):54–71

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rocklage JM, Marple VA, Olson BA (2013) Study of secondary deposits in multiple round nozzle impactors. Aerosol Sci Technol 47(10):1144–1151

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Rule AM, Geyh AS, Ramos-Bonilla JP, Mihalic JN, Margulies JD, Polyak LM, Kesavan J, Breysse PN (2010) Design and characterization of a sequential cyclone system for the collection of bulk particulate matter. J Environ Monit 12(10):1807–1814

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Saksena S, Uma R (2008) Longitudinal study of indoor particulate matter and its Relationship to outdoor concentrations in New Delhi, India. Indoor Built Environ 17:543–551

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shalaby H, Pachler K, Wozniak K, Wozniak G (2005) Comparative study of the continuous phase flow in a cyclone separator using different turbulence models. Int J Numer Meth Fluids 48:1175–1197

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sharma M, Dikshit O (2016). Comprehensive Study on Air Pollution and Green House Gases (GHGs) in Delhi. A report submitted to Government of NCT Delhi and DPCC Delhi, pp 1–334. https://cerca.iitd.ac.in/uploads/Reports/1576211826iitk.pdf. Accessed 15 Feb2023

  • Kuo KY, Tsai CJ (2001) On the theory of particle cutoff diameter and collection efficiency of cyclones. Aerosol Air Qual Res 1:47–56

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shukla SK, Shukla P, Ghosh P (2013) The effect of modeling of velocity fluctuations on prediction of collection efficiency of cyclone separators. Appl Math Model 37:5774–5789

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stairmand CJ (1951) The design and performance of cyclone separators. Trans Instn Chem Engrs 29:356–383

    Google Scholar 

  • Tsai CJ, Cheng YH (1996) Comparison of two ambient beta gauge PM10 samplers. J Air Waste Manag Assoc 46:142–147

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • USEPA, 2016. Monitoring PM2.5 in Ambient Air Using Designated Reference or Class I Equivalent Methods. Quality Assurance Guidance Document section 2.12. US Environmental Protection Agency (Document No. EPA-454/B-16-001), pp 1-174 https://www3.epa.gov/ttnamti1/files/ambient/pm25/qa/m212.pdf. Accessed 15 Feb 2023

  • Vanderpool RW, Peters TM, Natarajan S, Gemmill DB, Wiener RW (2001) Evaluation of the loading characteristics of the EPA WINS PM2.5 separator. Aerosol Sci Technol 34:444–456

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Vanderpool RW, Krug JD, Kaushik S, Gilberry J, Dart A, Witherspoon CL (2018) Size-selective sampling performance of six low-volume “total” suspended particulate (TSP) inlets. Aerosol Sci Technol 52(1):98–113

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Xiang R, Park SH, Lee KW (2001) Effects of cone dimension on cyclone performance. J Aerosol Sci 32:549–561

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Yadav S, Tandon A, Tripathi JK, Yadav S, Attri AK (2016) Statistical assessment of respirable and coarser size ambient aerosol sources and their timeline trend profile determination: a four year study from Delhi. Atmos Pollut Res 7:190–200

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhao B (2005) Development of a new method for evaluating cyclone efficiency. Chem Eng Process 44:447–451

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This development is a part of DST, New Delhi, funded project (IDP/ IND/17/2013) and inhouse project (OLP 183832). PP thanks the funding agency (DST) for providing JRF/SRF fellowship under above project. Director, CSIR-NPL is acknowledged for providing all facilities and support for this development. All members/students of Gas Metrology group and past and present Divisional Heads of the ESBMD at CSIR-NPL are also acknowledged for their all support.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Gas Metrology, Environmental Sciences & Biomedical Metrology Division, CSIR-National Physical Laboratory, Dr. K.S. Krishnan Marg, New Delhi, 110012, India

    Prashant Patel, Shankar G. Aggarwal, Khem Singh & Daya Soni

  2. Academy of Scientific and Innovative Research (AcSIR), Ghaziabad, 201002, India

    Prashant Patel, Shankar G. Aggarwal & Daya Soni

  3. Institute of Environmental Engineering, National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, No. 1001, University Road, 300093, Hsinchu, Taiwan

    Thi-Cuc Le & Chuen-Jinn Tsai

Authors
  1. Prashant Patel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Shankar G. Aggarwal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Thi-Cuc Le
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Khem Singh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Daya Soni
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Chuen-Jinn Tsai
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

PP performed designing and theoretical calculations, and experimental work and wrote the draft of the manuscript. SGA conceptualized the study and provided overall guidance and continuous examinations of the work, and reviewed the manuscript. TCL helped in the designing of the cyclone, and theoretical calculations. KS and DS helped in the development of the cyclone and laboratory setup. CJT conceptualized the study and provided guidance throughout the work.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Shankar G. Aggarwal.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Patel, P., Aggarwal, S.G., Le, TC. et al. Design and development of a PM10 multi-inlet cyclone and comparison with reference cyclones. Air Qual Atmos Health 16, 1955–1968 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11869-023-01384-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11869-023-01384-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation