Separation Process II Laboratory

SKKK 3761

Experiment 1: SIEVING
Date of Experiment: 13rd November 2014
Date of Submission: 20th November 2014

Section: 02
Group 6

Lecturer: Dr Nadia Adrus

Name

Matric No.

Amiruddin Mohd Tajudin

A11KK0036

Saqr Abdulrakeeb Abdullah Al-Muraisy

A11KK4006

Wan Nurul Diyana Ramli

A11KK0141

Juaidal Mamat

A11KK0073

ABSTRACT

Sieving is a separation of a mixture of particles that have different in sizes by

using sieves each with a uniform sized opening. This experiment was carried out to determine
the particle distribution by using sieving method. The experiment was conducted using 200g
of sample that separate using sieves that have different opening size and put on the electric
shaker. After certain period of time, the result is collected. The experimental results then are
compared with the theoretical and it does not deviate from theory. The particle size
distribution of samples used was identified and plotted against the cumulative percentage of
particle size. For overall, it can be conclude that sieving method is an important technique in
the analysis of particle size in the samples.

TABLE OF CONTENT

ABSTRACT

ii

1.0

INTRODUCTION

1.1

Objectives of the Experiment

1.2

Scopes of Experiment

2.0

LITERATURE REVIEW

3.0

METHODOLOGY

4.0

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

4.1
5.0

Result of the Experiment

DISCUSSION

9
10

5.1

Fractions, p3 of the samples in each class of particle size.

10

5.2

Mean, mode and median

12

5.3 Graph of cumulative percentage of particle size that less than mean particle size, Dpi
for each mesh opening of the sieve.
5.4
6.0

Calculation of particle size distribution

CONCLUSION

13
16
18

REFERENCES

19

Appendix

19

1.0

INTRODUCTION

Sieving refers to the separation of a mixture of particles of different

sizes using sieves each with a uniform sized opening. Standard sieves of
specified opening sizes are used. Sieves are stacked with the sieve with
the largest opening on the top and the material is separated into fractions
by shaking. The material between two sieves is smaller than the upper
sieve opening but larger than the smaller sieve opening.

Many natural and manufactured materials occurs in a disperse form,

which means that it consist of differently shaped and sized particles. The
particle size distribution, i.e. the number of particles of different size, is
responsible for the determination of important physical and chemical
properties such as:

Mechanical bulk behavior

Surface reaction
Taste
Miscibility
Filtration properties
Conductivity

This list could be continued at great length. The examples clearly

show how important it is to have knowledge of the particle distribution,
particularly within the context of quality assurance in the production of
bulk goods. If the particle distribution changes during the manufacturing
process then the quality of the finished product will also change. Only a
continuous monitoring of the particle size distribution can guarantee a
constant product quality.

1.1

Objectives of the Experiment

The objective of the experiment is to determine the particle

distribution using sieving method. To achieve the objective, a sieving
experiment

is

conducted

by

using

sieve

shaker

with

designated

dimensions to determine the particle distribution.

1.2

Scopes of Experiment

The scopes of the experiment is to conduct sieving experiment using sieve shaker
with designated dimension (with mesh openings that reveal particle distribution at critical
size) for the given sample of particulate solid. If the particle range of material representing
feed to a screen or product from a crusher is wide, a large sample (from 500 to 1000 grams) is
used. If the material is finely ground, a smaller sample of 25 to 100 grams is used. The
particle distribution should be determine from this experiment and repeated at least three time
to get more accurate result.

2.0

LITERATURE REVIEW

In most solid system, solid particles are made up of various sizes and in a certain size
range. Shapes of the particles also are varied and not uniform. The size distribution is often of
critical importance to te way the material performs in use. A sieve analysis can be performed
on any type of non-organic or organic granular materials including sands, crushed rock, clays,
granite, feldspars, coal and soil, a wide range of manufactured powders, grain and seeds,
down to a minimum size depending on the exact method. Being such a simple technique of
particle sizing, it is probably the most common. The non-homogeneous solid particles are
studied by sieving in a certain size range based on the size of the sieve used. Generally, there
are two kinds of basic methods of particle size analysis and it is commonly used for sieving
data procurement are (Geankoplis,2003) :

a) Cumulative Curve Analysis

This method produces a breakdown of the particles that are larger or smaller than a
certain size. It involves summation weight percent gradually to increase the particle
size. Graphs obtained are a continuous curve as shown in Figure 2.1 below:

Figure 2.1: The

cumulative curve
(Geankoplis,2003)

b) Plot Frequency through Differentiation Analysis

Fractional particle curvature is plotted against the particle size. This graph
shows the increase or reduction of particle-particle fractions in the range of a
particular size by the increasing the sieving size. Usually, this graph is shown as a
histogram form shown in Figure 2.2 below.

Figure 2.2: The differential curve (Geankoplis, 2003)

In the sieving method, the principle involved is based on particles of fine particles
through the screen wire fabric / wie electro with a uniform pore size. Coarse particles will
remain on the sieve. These particles can be passed in the dry or wet depending on the nature
of the material or the sample. Mixture of particles with different sizes and densities were
initially separated into fractions in sieving (sieving or screening), respectively. Each fraction
can be weighed to obtain the weight. This information can then be used to give additional
weight fraction in each size class. Two methods described above differ only in the context of
data analyze.

Specifically for this experiment, the cumulative curve approach was used to calculate
the average particle size, specific surface area or particle populations (Mc Cabe.,et al, 2005).
Cumulative method is more accurate when compared with the method of differential analysis.
This is due to the cumulative method does not require the assumption of a certain fraction of
the particles in the same size, with an average class size.

In the process of sieving, sieve series are shaken in a period of time sufficient to last
fraction left as the largest percentage. Next, the sample size distribution can be determined by
determining the weight of particles trapped on each sieve. Thus, the cumulative percentage
can be calculated and cumulative percentage graphs can be plotted against particle size.
Based on the cumulative graph, the size of particles on the cumulative percentage 84%, 50%
and 16% can be determined. Next, the size of the standard deviation, the mean or average
size distribution of the sample can be obtained from the following relationship (Mc Cabe.,et
al, 2005):

The size of the standard deviation, = Dp (84%) / Dp (50%)

Mean or average, ln Dp = ln Dp (50%) + 0.5ln2
The size distribution = [ Dp (84%) + Dp (50%) ] / 2
Where,
Dp = Screen opening (mm)

3.0

METHODOLOGY

The particle size distribution analysis after collecting, preparing and

size the sample is done. The test sieves with mesh openings that reveal
particle distribution is selected at critical sizes. The analysis is done by
doing the following:

Start-up
1. Stack the sieves on top of each other with the coarsest (largest
opening) on the top of the stack.
2. Put the bottom pan under the finest (smallest) opening sieve. This
pan collects fine material that passes through the last one.
3. Use a laboratory scale (accurate to .1 gram) to weigh an empty
container (such as an extra empty bottom pan) and establish the
tare weight.
4. Weigh the sample material.
5. Empty the sample into the top of the stack. Make sure you do not
overload the surface as this causes blinding or blocking of the
openings.
6. Put the stack into the sieve shaker.
7. Place a cover on the top of the stack. (If do not have the cover, you
need to determine the sieving loss)
8. Make sure the stack is securely in place.
9. Set the proper length of time to agitate the material.
10.
Turn on the shaker and run the test.
After run the experiment
11.

After the shaker stops, empty the material from the coarsest

sieve into the empty container that you weighed in step (3). Use a
soft bristle brush to gently brush the underside of the sieve to
remove all of the particles.

12.

Tap the side of the frame with the handle of the brush to clean

the remaining material from the sieve.

13.
Weigh the contents in the part to the nearest 1/10 gram and
record the data.
14.
Return the material to its original sample container.
15.
Repeat steps 11 through 14, using the container referenced in
step (3) for each sieve, including the fine material in the bottom
pan.
16.
Total the weights to make sure the sum of the retained
material and the material in the bottom pan is as close as possible
to the original weight. Check your specification for allowable
variation.
17.
Divide the weight obtained from each sieve by the weight of
the original sample. Record the percentage for each sieve.
18.
Calculate and record the cumulative percentages as required.
19.
Repeat all the steps above for 3 times.

Diagram 3.0: Sieve shaker

10

4.0

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

4.1

Result of the Experiment

Table 4.1: Cumulative Analysis for 3 set of analysis

Run

Mesh Openings
(mm)

Mean Particle
Size, Dpi (mm)

Sieving
Loss (g)

Mass Fraction,
p3 (%)

Cumulative fractions for

particle size < Dpi (%)

0.500
0.300
0.250
0.125
0.075
Pan
0.500
0.300
0.250
0.125
0.075
Pan
0.500
0.300
0.250
0.125
0.075
Pan

0.4
0.275
0.1875
0.1
0.075
0.4
0.275
0.1875
0.1
0.075
0.4
0.275
0.1875
0.1
0.075

20.66
8.40
7.32
31.16
39.80
41.35
24.28
8.79
0.48
19.28
49.03
43.45
32.33
13.80
5.21
30.41
30.86
36.72

13.8
5.6
4.9
20.8
26.5
28.4
18.2
5.9
0.3
12.9
32.7
30.0
21.6
9.2
3.8
20.3
20.6
24.5

86.2
80.6
75.7
54.9
28.4
0.0
81.8
75.9
75.6
62.7
30.0
0.0
78.4
69.2
65.4
45.1
24.5
0.0

11

5.0

DISCUSSION

5.1

Fractions, p3 of the samples in each class of particle size.

Histogram for Analysis Run 1

30
25
20
15
10
5
0

28.4

26.5

20.8
13.8
4.9

5.6

mass fraction (%)

mesh opening (mm)

Figure 5.1a: Mass fraction, p3 in each mesh opening for Run 1

Histogram for Analysis Run 2

35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0

mesh fraction (%)

mesh opening (mm)

Figure 5.1b: Mass fraction, p3 in each mesh opening for Run 2

12

Histogram for Analysis Run 3

30
25
20
15
10
5
0

mass fraction (%)

mesh opening (mm)

Figure 5.1c: Mass fraction, p3 in each mesh opening for Run 3

13

5.2

Mean, mode and median

Mode The most frequent size category which can be obtained from the histogram.
Median 50% above and below of the category involved.
The median for all analysis runs can be obtained from Figure 4.4, 4.5 and 4.6.

Mean The average size category

M=

P16 +P50 + P84

3

Mean for Run 1:

=

0.036+0.124+ 0.360
3

= 0.173

The values of mean, mode and median for all analysis run can be obtained from Table 4.2.
Table 5.2: Mode, mean and median for all analysis runs
Cumulative
Percentage

Mode

Mean

Median

0
0.075
0

0.173
0.047
0.067

0.124
0.13
0.16

Analysis
Run 1
Run 2
Run 3

The histogram graph indicates in percentage the amounts of particles existing in

respective particle size intervals after the range of target particle sizes was divided into
separate intervals.

14

15

5.3

Graph of cumulative percentage of particle size that less

than mean particle size, Dpi for each mesh opening of the sieve.

Cumulative Analysis Run 1

100
90
80
70
60

cumulative (%)

50
40
30
20
10
0
0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

mesh opening (mm)

Figure 5.3a: Cumulative Analysis Run 1

16

Cumulative Analysis Run 2

90
80
70
60
50

cumulative (%) 40
30
20
10
0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.5

0.6

mesh opening (mm)

Figure 5.3b: Cumulative Analysis Run 2

Cumulative Analysis Run 3

90
80
70
60
50

cumulative (%) 40
30
20
10
0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

mesh opening (mm)

Figure 5.3c: Cumulative Analysis Run 3

17

From the graph obtained above, the particle size at the cumulative percentage of 16%, 50%
and 84% are shown in Table 4.3.

Table 5.3: The particle size (mm) at different cumulative percentage

Cumulative
Percentage

16 %

50%

84%

0.034
0.034
0.04

0.124
0.13
0.16

0.36
-

Analysis
Run 1
Run 2
Run 3

18

5.4

Calculation of particle size distribution

The formula involved:

P84 P16
2

For Analysis Run 1

Particle size distribution

0.360.034
2

= 0.163 mm
The particle size distribution of all run can be seen in Table 4.4 below.

Table 5.4a: Particle size distribution for different analysis run

Analysis
Run 1
Run 2
Run 3

Particle Size Distribution

(mm)
0.163
-0.017
-0.02

From the Table 4.3, it can be seen that the particle size of distribution for Run 2 and 3
were in negative value. These values were not relevant. Thus, there must be some error
occurred while conducting the experiment. The errors were:

i.
ii.

Weighing system had zero error which cannot weigh the particles accurately.
Windy condition which caused the fine particles to be blown during the weighing

iii.

process.
The duration for shaking of the particles was too short for the certain particles to be
sieved.

19

Besides, there was also some loss of particles during conducting the experiment. It
was because the mass of particles after sieving was less than the original mass. The
calculation of the percentage loss of particles for Run 1 can be seen below:

Original mass = 150 g

Mass after sieving = 20.66 + 8.40 + 7.32 + 31.16 + 39.80 + 41.35
= 148.69 g

Percentage error =

(150148.69)
150

100%

= 0.87 %

The summary of percentage loss for all Run 1, 2 and 3 is shown in Table 4.4. This
happened due to some reasons which were:

i.

The windy condition at the area of experiment which caused the fine particles to be

ii.

easily blown.
The cover was not placed tightly on the top of the stack during the running of the
shaker.

Table 5.4b: Percentage loss of particles for different analysis

Analysis
Run 1
Run 2
Run 3

Percentage Loss of Particles

(%)
0.87
3.13
0.45

20

6.0

CONCLUSION

Although there some error in determining the particle size distribution, the experiment
is achieved the objective. Throughout first run, the particle size distribution of the sample is
0.163mm and have 0.87% loss of particles. However, through Run 2 and Run 3, the particle
size distribution recorded unacceptable value as the value particle size (mm) at 84%
cumulative percentage cannot be determined. This may due to the errors while carried out the
experiment. Thus, some recommendation such as carried out the experiment in the closed
room so that tiny particles not escape while transfer the samples into the pan.

21

REFERENCES

Geankoplis, Christi J. (2003). Transport Processes and Separation Process Principles. (4 th

edition). Prentice Hall International, New Jersey.

Mc Cabe, W.L., Smith, J.C. & Harriot, P. (2005). Unit Operation of Chemical Engineering.
7th Edition. Mc Graw-Hill.

22

Appendix

23