Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Ammonia (NH3) Mitigation Using Electrolyzed Water Spray Scrubber
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.


Introducing the official SlideShare app

Stunning, full-screen experience for iPhone and Android

Text the download link to your phone

Standard text messaging rates apply

Ammonia (NH3) Mitigation Using Electrolyzed Water Spray Scrubber


Published on

Proceedings available at: …

Proceedings available at:

The objective of this research was to evaluate electrolyzed water as a solution for a lab-scale spray scrubber for removing NH3 from air. A one-stage spray scrubber was fabricated to treat 50 cfm (1.42 m3/min) of introduced mixed NH3-air with an approximate NH3 concentration of 20 ppm. The mixed air was blown, countercurrent, to the 5-ft vertical scrubber body using a fan. Eight scrubber design variables were studied including contact times, nozzle types and scrubber solutions. Three contact times were 0.3, 0.6 and 0.9 s. The two narrow and standard nozzles sprinkled in a full-cone spray pattern but at different angles of 26ᴼ and 52ᴼ, respectively. The scrubber solutions variables tested were reverse osmosis (RO) water and two types of electrolyzed water (50 ppm of total chlorine) with pH = 9.0 and pH = 6.5. The 18 combinations of treatments were tested in three replications and statistically analyzed to investigate the objective. The result showed that all of the experiments were able to mitigate the NH3, but at different efficiencies. The maximum efficiency of 53% was acquired with the narrow nozzle, 0.9s contact time and electrolyzed water with pH = 6.5. Therefore, it was concluded that increasing the contact time, decreasing the pH of electrolyzed water and using the narrow angle, higher flow rate nozzle increased the scrubber efficiency.

Published in: Education, Technology, Business

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total Views
On Slideshare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

No notes for slide


  • 1. Ammonia (NH3) Mitigation Using an Electrolyzed Water Spray ScrubberGerald Riskowski, Professor,Texas A&M University, Bio. Ag. Eng. Dept.Saqib Mukhtar, Professor,Texas A&M University, Bio. Ag. Eng. Dept.Ahmad Kalbasi, Researcher,Texas A&M University, Bio. Ag. Eng. Dept.Amir M. Samani Majd, PhD Candidate,Texas A&M University, Bio. Ag. Eng. Dept.Waste to Worth Conference, Hyatt Hotel, Denver, CO. April 1-5, 2013
  • 2. Introduction NH3 emission from AFOs Adverse effects on animal and worker health Source of Odor and Environmental Pollution Contribute to fine particulate matter formation Eutrophication of water bodies Contamination of groundwater Constituent of nitrous oxide, a potent greenhouse gas NH3 emission into the atmosphere results in a loss of nitrogen, an essential plant nutrient.
  • 3. Introduction U.S.EPA regulation- Environmental Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA)-NH3 and H2S emissions exceeding 45.4 kg (100 lb) in any 24 hour time period are considered a “reportable Quantity.”
  • 4. IntroductionAbatement Technologies Chemical amendments Hollow fiber mitigation technologies Bio-filters Exhaust air scrubber Packed bed scrubbers Impingement plates scrubbers Fiber beds Higher pressure drops and operating costs compared Cyclonic spray scrubber, to spray scrubbers Venturi scrubbers Rotating beds
  • 5. Objective To develop and evaluate a lab- scale spray scrubber that uses an electrolyzed water scrubber solution.
  • 6. Materials and MethodsThe main set-upA one-stage spray scrubber5-ft vertical scrubber body
  • 7. Materials and Methods The main set-upA fan blew 50 cfm of mixed NH3& air into the scrubber stream Approximate NH3 concentration in simulated exhaust air was 20 ppm
  • 8. Materials and MethodsTwo Types of Nozzles Used for ScrubbingExhaust Air  Narrow-Angle Full Cone Nozzle  Standard Type Full Cone Nozzle
  • 9. Materials and Methods The main set-up  Two types of nozzles: A Narrow-Angle Full Cone Nozzle A Standard Type Full Cone Nozzle Nozzle Narrow-angle Standard TypeSpray pattern Full cone Full coneSpray angle 26o 45oHeight of spray 30 cm (12”) 15 cm (6”)Droplet size 700-900 µm 200-300 µmPressure 190-200 kPa 190-200 kPa (27.6-29 psi) (27.6-29 psi)Scrubbing solution 5.2 L/min 0.95 L/minflow rate (~1.38 gal/min) (~0.252 gal/min)
  • 10. Exhaust Air 2 Contact NH3 Preheating chamberAnalyzer System Exhaust nozzle Air P Manometer Spray F P cone F 1 Air Air duct Air Pump Fan NozzleNH3 Cylinder Drainage Valve Scrubbing Flowmeter F Solution Pressure Gage P
  • 11. Contact chamber Spray nozzle Manometer Air duct NH3 NH3 flowmeterdiffuser NH3 Air nozzle cylinder Centrifugal fan
  • 12. Production of Electrolyzed water Membrane less Electrolyzed water Electrolyzing regular NaCl solution In an EW solution, the most effective form of chlorine compounds include hypochlorous acid (HOCl) and hypochlorite ion (OCL-) HOCl OCl- + H+
  • 13. Materials and MethodsExperiments Eight Variables: 54 experiments: 18 scenarios in three replications - Contact times: 0.3, 0.6 and 0.9 second - Nozzle types: Narrow and Standard - Scrubber solutions: Reverse osmosis (RO) water, two types of electrolyzed water (50 ppm of total chlorine) with pH = 9.0 and pH = 6.5.
  • 14. Materials and MethodsMeasurements TEImodel 17C chemiluminescence NH3 analyzer Ion Selective Electrode NH3 probe & pH probe
  • 15. Results and Discussion: Treatment Variables EfficiencyTreatment # (%)* contact time Nozzle type Scrubbing solution (s) 1 0.3 37.9 (1.6) 2 EW, pH 6.5 0.6 51.9 (3.8) 3 0.9 56.0 (2.7) 4 0.3 34.7 (5.5) 5 Narrow-angle RO 0.6 43.9 (3.6) 6 0.9 49.5 (5.6) 7 0.3 39.0 (0.8) 8 EW, pH 9.0 0.6 47.1(2.0) 9 0.9 51.3(3.6)
  • 16. Results and Discussion: Treatment Variables EfficiencyTreatment # (%)* Scrubbing Nozzle type contact time (s) solution 10 0.3 37.9 (0.7) 11 EW, pH 6.5 0.6 46.7 (3.3) 12 0.9 43.9 (4.4) 13 0.3 32.1 (2.5) Standard 14 RO 0.6 36.7 (4.8) Type 15 0.9 39.3 (2.8) 16 0.3 34.2 (7.7) 17 EW, pH 9.0 0.6 39.9 (3.9) 18 0.9 40.6 (0.7)
  • 17. Results and Discussion:
  • 18. Conclusions The ammonia removal efficiency of the scrubber ranged from 34% to 56%. Increasing the contact time, decreasing the pH of electrolyzed water and narrow spray pattern mostly increased the efficiency of the scrubber. The maximum efficiency of 56% was for: narrow nozzle, 0.9s contact time, Electrolyzed water with pH = 6.5
  • 19. Future PlanA Wet scrubber will be designed fromthe knowledge gained in laboratorystudies will be scaled-up for Field studies
  • 20. Acknowledgements & QuestionsFunding for this study was made possible by the State of Texas AirQuality Initiative.