Welcome to CDC Stacks | Particle Collection Efficiency for Nylon Mesh Screens - 37083 | CDC Public Access
Stacks Logo
Advanced Search
Select up to three search categories and corresponding keywords using the fields to the right. Refer to the Help section for more detailed instructions.
 
 
Help
Clear All Simple Search
Advanced Search
Particle Collection Efficiency for Nylon Mesh Screens
Filetype[PDF - 427.78 KB]


Details:
  • Pubmed ID:
    26692631
  • Pubmed Central ID:
    PMC4676570
  • Funding:
    CC999999/Intramural CDC HHS/United States
  • Document Type:
  • Collection(s):
  • Description:
    Mesh screens composed of nylon fibers leave minimal residual ash and produce no significant spectral interference when ashed for spectrometric examination. These characteristics make nylon mesh screens attractive as a collection substrate for nanoparticles. A theoretical single-fiber efficiency expression developed for wire-mesh screens was evaluated for estimating the collection efficiency of submicrometer particles for nylon mesh screens. Pressure drop across the screens, the effect of particle morphology (spherical and highly fractal) on collection efficiency and single-fiber efficiency were evaluated experimentally for three pore sizes (60, 100 and 180 μm) at three flow rates (2.5, 4 and 6 Lpm). The pressure drop across the screens was found to increase linearly with superficial velocity. The collection efficiency of the screens was found to vary by less than 4% regardless of particle morphology. Single-fiber efficiency calculated from experimental data was in good agreement with that estimated from theory for particles between 40 and 150 nm but deviated from theory for particles outside this size range. New coefficients for the single-fiber efficiency model were identified that minimized the sum of square error (SSE) between the values estimated with the model and those determined experimentally. Compared to the original theory, the SSE calculated using the modified theory was at least one order of magnitude lower for all screens and flow rates with the exception of the 60-μm pore screens at 2.5 Lpm, where the decrease was threefold.