News:

SMF - Just Installed!

Main Menu
Menu

Show posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Show posts Menu

Topics - sploo

#1
In my never ending quest to think about building a Thien Separator (but never actually getting round to making one)...

I noticed that Cosmas Bauer has a separator design that has a completely circular baffle (no 120 degree section that's connected to the side of the separator body), and instead the baffle is supported by the outlet tube (which comes all the way down from the top and touches the baffle). He's cut away a section of the side of the outlet tube, as obviously the end is sealed against the baffle.

I can see that would be useful in stopping larger material getting caught on the leading edge of the larger (120 degree) segment of the baffle (as there is no larger segment - just a gap all the way round). However, I assume that drawing air from a cutaway at the side of the outlet tube would cause a lot of unwanted turbulence.

The original Thien design (pictured at http://www.jpthien.com/cy.htm) uses three rods coming down from the separator's top plate (to support the baffle). I assume they will catch longer (e.g. planer) shavings, and also affect airflow.

So... what I'm wondering about is to create a baffle with a slot/gap all the way round (i.e. a perfect circle), but supported by a single rod or pipe from the center of the underside of the baffle, which would be attached to the bottom of the collection bucket; basically a bucket with a tall table (with a round table top) sitting inside.

I assume the air speed in the center column underneath the baffle should be low/zero (i.e. the supporting pipe shouldn't affect airflow), and with a 1 1/2" (38mm) diameter metal pipe the baffle should be fairly rigid. A tapped hole in the top of the pipe would allow the baffle to be easily unscrewed for tipping waste out of the bucket, and the air outlet above could be a nice open bell mouth.

Does that sound like a good idea, or have a missed something?

PS I understand that a thin material for the baffle is a good idea. With the baffle supported from the middle of the underside, it should sag less than when it's supported from the side by a 120 degree segment, so it would be interesting to find some really thin sheet materials (1/16" aluminium, or carbon fiber). With it attached by just a single screw from the top it'd be easy to test out different slot gaps and baffle thicknesses.
#2
I've got a Fox F50-843 dust extractor: impeller based, 3hp, claimed around 3900 cubic meters per hour (2295 CFM).

I've been using just the impeller/motor unit and expelling air and dust into a trash can inside a small enclosure outside my workshop. It works pretty well, but occasionally "puffs" some dust out of a vent that's near the top of enclosure.

I'm wondering about adding a Thien separator to try to reduce the amount of dust expelled in the exit air. The restrictions/limitations I'm working around are:

  • A rectangular inlet to the separator (as the exhaust on the extractor is rectangular, with a cross sectional area similar to a 6" diameter pipe)
  • The inlet would probably have to come in from the top, rather than the side
  • A tight space into which to fit a can/drum/bin - probably only 40cm (16") diameter
I'm assuming that having a rectangular inlet (with a suitable elbow) wouldn't be a major problem, and that I should go with an appropriately wide circular pipe for the exhaust. Would having such a small diameter separator for a relatively large inlet cripple the air flow?

I may be able to work out a design with the rectangular inlet coming in from the side if that'd make a significant difference to the efficiency. I've seen some good top hat designs, and that looks ideal for a rectangular side inlet - though it would be a push rather than pull system (i.e. the extractor would push air and dust into the separator). Would such a design (top hat + push + 6" rectangular inlet + 16" diameter separator) be realistic?