for propellant radical savings BAMAs Innovation Day Museum of - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

BAMA’s Innovation Day Museum of Science & Industry, Manchester Tuesday 18th April 2017

Microfluidics technology as a game-changer for propellant radical savings

Table of Contents

1. Company Introduction 2. Microfluidics solutions approach to Aerosols 3. Bench test results 4. Conclusions 5. Next steps: Industrialization

• 1. Company Introduction

4

Company

2001 Free microjet generation technologies R&D

Privately funded +18 permanent jobs +90% international clients IP (+100 patents) Quality Certified

Fluids Mechanics Research Three business lines:

• Industrial Innovation
• Analytical Chemistry Nebulizers
• Microencapsulation

Analytical Chemistry Micro-Encapsulation Industrial Innovation

5

Aerosol Actuators

 Omnidirectional Inket printing  Robotized applications  High Viscosity Spraying  Fuel Injections and Micromixers  Evaporative Cooling  OneNeb series  New developments  On demand services  Processes development  Small specialty particles production  Probiotics  Living organisms  Essential Oils

Innovative Industrial Devices Sample Introduction Nebulizers Microencapsulation Technologies

Design + Prototyping + Manufacturing

Company

• 2. Microfluidics approach

7

Approach

A.M Gañán-Calvo

• App. Phys. Lett.

2005, 86, 214101

Laminar r Microjets Dripping Micro sprays Microencapsulation Turb rbulent ulent Micro sprays Microencapsulation

extreme effects

Hybrid id options ions in the middl dle - Micro sprays, Microencapsulation

Ingeniatrics’ expertise is the aerodynamic control of the aerosol generation

+ GLR

• GLR

liquid uid Gas

Envir ironm

• nmenta

ntal l and regula lator tory (Air as a propellant) **GLR** Packaging ging cost (less materials, optimal amounts of formula and gas) Safety ty (droplet size, high pressure vessels, inflammable gases) + all the specific challenges of every specific formulation and packaging (materials compatibility, stability…)

• Not clogging

gging

• Effective and safe drople

plet t size

• Spray pattern

Approach

• Can this be useful

ful to the Aerosol industry?

• What are the Aerosol’s Indu

dustry stry challe lenge nges?

Approach

• Can this be useful

ful to the Aerosol industry?

• What are the Aerosol’s Indu

dustry stry challe lenge nges?

“The less propellant the better”

i.e. the lower GLR as possible

𝐻𝑀𝑆 = 𝑛𝑕 𝑛𝑚

• 3. Bench test results

Bench tests

Bench test results

Test1. . Water Water-Et Ethano hanol l + Air

• 80/20 volume
• 957,8 Kg/m3
• 1,02 cP
• 30 mN/m suface tension

Test2. . HairSpra pray + + Isobuta utane

• 803,1 Kg/m3 Kg/m3
• 3,6 cP
• 22,19 mN/m suface tension

Ql (ml/min) Qg (l/min) Δp (mbar) X50 (µm) GLR 10 2.12 800 18.15 0.265 15 2.09 800 21.21 0.175 20 2.04 800 24.13 0.128 Ql (ml/min) Qg (l/min) Δp (mbar) X50 (µm) GLR 10 2.05 800 18.89 0.449 15 2.02 800 20.98 0.287 20 1.99 800 23.34 0.206

GLR 0,128 28 GLR 0,206 06*

* Calculated

Bench test results

Bench tests

Particle le size μm Test1. . Water Water-Et Ethano hanol l + Air

Flow Rate vs Partic icle le Size

∆P = 0,8 bar

Bench test results

Test1. . Water Water-Et Ethano hanol l + Air

• 80/20 volume
• 957,8 Kg/m3
• 1,02 cP
• 30 mN/m suface tension

1 5 10 50 100 500 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4

Particle le size μm Test2. . HairSpra pray + + Isobuta utane

 10 ml/min Blue  15 ml/min Red  20 ml/min Green

Bench test results

Flow Rate vs Partic icle le Size

∆P = 0,8 bar

Bench test results

Gas pressu sure vs Particle icle Size

Q = 20 ml/min Test1. . Water Water-Et Ethano hanol l + Air

1 5 10 50 100 500 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4



Blue 700 mbar X50=23,67 µm



Red 800 mbar X50=21,99 µm



Green 900 mbar X50=20,69 µm



Grey 1000 mbar X50=19,56 µm

Bench test results

Test2. . HairSpra pray + + Isobuta utane

Gas pressu sure vs Particle icle Size

Q = 20 ml/min

• 4. Conclusions

 We can get an excellent quality aerosol with a low gas consumption (GLR 0,128) just using the right nozzle technology (pneumatic)  Formula flowrate and particle distribution are related (20ml/min good starting point)  Gas pressure at the nozzle can be pretty low (0,9 bar)

Conclusions How

• w wou
• uld th

this s resul ult t on

• n a real

l aeros

• sol
• l can?
• Smaller can
• Less propellant
• Use of Non-

liquefiable propellants

Product Propellant Proportion GLR Hair spray Liquefied Formula:50% 1,11 Deodorant Liquefied Formula:20% 3,6 Moisturizer Compressed gas Formula:99,83% 0,002 𝐻𝑀𝑆 = 𝑛𝑕 𝑛𝑚

Conclusions

How much formula can be delivered with a 120ml can and a 12g CO2 cartridge as a propellant? For a 100ml can, how much Isobutane do I need in order to deliver 48ml of formula? How big should a can be to spray the same amount of formula (48ml) but with compressed air? HairSpray + CO2 HairSpray + Isobutane HairSpray + Air Packaging Volume (ml) 100 100 436 used (ml) 108 83 436 Amount of propellant in can (g) 12 10 5 volume propellant in can, 25ºC,1atm, (ml) 18 17

• lume of propellant, under pressure (ml)

35 388 % formula actually sprayed 90% 90% 90% targetted Formula flowrate (g/s) 0,3 0,3 0,3 Propellant requiered flowrate (g/s) 0,056 0,083 0,041 total spray flowrate (g/s) 0,356 0,383 0,341 Spraying time (s) 216 116 116 GLR (theoretical) 0,185 0,276 0,136 volume of formula delivered (ml) 81 43 43 volume of formula in the can (ml) 90 48 48 manometric pressure in the can (bar) 12,0 3,4 12,0 Comparative propellant savings 83% 75% 88%

20

Spraying time comparison CO2 (120ml) Isobutane (100ml) Air (500ml)

216 116 116

• 5. Next steps. Industrialization

Industrialization

Industrialization

P.I. Parque Plata. C/ Camino Mozárabe, 41 41900 Camas, Seville (Spain) T.(+34)954081214 E.info@ingeniatrics.com

www.ingeniatrics.com

Thanks