Shielded counter-rotating spinner assembly for microparticalization of liquid

The preferred embodiment of the shielded counter-rotating spinner assembly for microparticalization of liquid consists of two opposed, coaxial, counter-rotating, conical, sharp-edged spinners whose edges are in close proximity and whose outer surfaces are in close proximity with non-rotating shields which extend to the edges of the spinners. The purpose of the shields is to greatly reduce the spinner induced air drafts so that, when liquids are applied to the inside surfaces of the spinners through the axes of the driving motors, the droplets produced on the edges of the spinners are injected into very low velocity air. The benefits of accomplishing this are the realization of very short droplet trajectories, the concomitant reduction in size of a plenum chamber which might encompass the device, the production of dense fogs of liquid droplets, and the ability to efficiently mix a liquid with a gas or to mix binary liquid chemicals together away from the device, but within a restricted volume where the atmosphere may be controlled and the production of solid droplets from the liquid phase through cooling in a finite volume and within a controlled atmosphere.

FIELD OF THE INVENTION 
This invention pertains to the microparticalization of liquids through 
mechanical means-specifically, with the use of spinning discs. Here, 
liquid is applied to a surface of a spinner, where it wets the surface, 
and flows to the edge of the spinner, where it is ejected in the form of 
droplets. The droplets leave the spinner tangent to the spinner's edge and 
in the same direction as the spinner is rotating. The principal advantage 
of using a spinner for the production of droplets has to do with the fact 
that droplet size may be controlled by varying spinner speed. My research 
has shown that the inverse relationship between droplet size and spinner 
RPM can be described by the linear empirical equation: 
EQU ln D=-m ln RPM+b 1 
Where: 
m and b are experimentally determined constants which depend on spinner 
diameter, spinner geometry and the liquid used. I have found that the term 
"b" is flow sensitive. The larger the liquid flow rate, the greater is "b" 
and, consequently, droplet size increases somewhat. 
The principal drawback of the simpler spinner is that it generates an air 
draft whose direction, like that of an ejected droplet, is tangent to the 
edge of the spinner and in the same direction as the spinner rotates. My 
research has yielded two linear, empirical equations which describe the 
tangential air draft from a single spinner. The first equation shows the 
direct relationship between tangential air draft velocity and spinner RPM, 
or: 
EQU V.sub.AT =M.times.RPM+B 2 
Where: 
M and B are experimentally determined constants which depend on spinner 
diameter, spinner geometry and the distance from the spinner's edge. 
The second empirical equation shows the inverse relationship between the 
tangential air draft velocity and the tangential distance from the 
spinner's edge, or: 
EQU ln VAT=-M'.times.S.sub.AT +B, 3 
Where 
M' and B' are experimentally determined constants which depend on spinner 
diameter, spinner geometry and the spinner RPM. 
The spinner induced air draft is a disadvantage because droplets of liquid 
from the spinner's edge are injected directly into this co-directional air 
draft and carried a great distance, very much farther than if the droplets 
were injected into still air. 
In order to appreciate how far a spherical droplet would travel when 
injected at high speed into still air, I had to develop a representative 
aerodynamic model. The theory behind the model is based on accepted 
aerodynamic principals and experimentally derived facts and data, namely: 
A. For the most part, droplets ejected from a spinner are spherical - 
increasingly so as spinner speed increases (and droplet diameter 
decreases). 
B. The initial Reynold's number for droplets leaving the edge of a spinner 
does not exceed 300, regardless of the initial droplet velocity (i.e. 
spinner edge speed). 
C. I obtained real data for droplet size vs. spinner speed for a particular 
fluid (paint thinner) and spinner geometry. 
When the Reynold's number for a sphere is less than 300, Equation 4 may be 
used as a close approximation of the real relationship between the 
aerodynamic drag coefficient of a sphere and the Reynold's number of the 
sphere. 
##EQU1## 
Equation 4 can be regarded as a dynamic operating curve for a droplet 
injected at high velocity into air. Using Equation 4, the definition of 
Reynold's number and the general drag equation, two formulas may be 
derived which show respectively the tangential velocity of a droplet 
versus time and the tangential distance traveled versus time. These 
equations may be combined to show tangential distance as a function of 
tangential velocity, or: 
##EQU2## 
Where: K3, K4 and E are rather complicated combinations of the droplet 
density, density of air, viscosity of air and the initial velocity of the 
droplet. 
If the tangential velocity is set to zero in Equation 5, the resultant 
equation shows the maximum path length traveled by the droplet, or: 
##EQU3## 
Where (using the CGS system of measurement): .delta.=Density of the liquid 
of which the droplet is composed. 
.rho.=Density of the atmosphere into which the droplet is injected. 
=Viscosity of the atmosphere into which the droplet is injected. 
D=Droplet diameter. 
V.sub.i =Initial droplet velocity (a function of spinner diameter and RPM). 
A single 6 inch diameter spinner, operating in air at standard pressure, 
rotating at 16,000 RPM and fed with paint thinner at 0.75 cc/sec, will 
produce 25 micron diameter droplets. If the spinner induced air draft 
could be reduced to zero, Equation 6 predicts that the ejected droplets 
would only travel a tangential distance of 5.04 cm from the spinner edge 
(3.28 cm radially). However, the system as described does generate an air 
draft which entrains the droplets. Equation 3, with the proper constants 
for the above-described system (e.g. M=0.089 and B=7.1882), indicates a 
tangential air draft of 90 cm/sec at a tangential distance of 30 cm--the 
velocity of an entrained droplet can be no less than this. 
From what has been said, it is clear that the prior art spinner generates 
an air draft which entrains droplets and carries them very much farther 
than they would go if the spinner induced air draft could be reduced to 
zero. 
SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION 
The present invention provides a way where spinner induced air draft 
velocities are greatly reduced so that liquid droplets, ejected from a 
spinner's edge, encounter relatively still air where they decelerate 
rapidly and consequently travel short distances. The principal benefit of 
accomplishing this is that a dense fog of droplets may be produced within 
a relatively small volume (i.e. plenum chamber). 
The preferred embodiment of the invention simultaneously employs two 
structures to greatly reduce spinner induced air draft velocity. It will 
be understood that the employment of either of the two structures 
separately will, in itself, reduce spinner induced air draft velocity. 
The first structure employs two conical, sharp-edged, counter-rotating 
coaxial spinners whose edges are in very close proximity. The two spinners 
produce opposing, tangential air drafts which, because of the close 
spacing of the spinners, collide with each other very near to the edges of 
the two spinners. The collision results in an air draft which is purely 
radial in direction, but having a magnitude much less than the radial 
component of the tangential air draft produced by either spinner alone. A 
reduction in air draft velocity by as much as a factor of two is obtained 
by this structure alone. Furthermore, the reduction improves with spinner 
speed. 
The second structure employs the above-described structure with the 
addition of two non-rotating shields which cover the exposed surfaces of 
the two counter-rotating spinners. The shields are placed in close 
proximity with the spinner surfaces and extend to the edge of each 
spinner. The shields prevent air from reaching the rotating surfaces and, 
thereby, prevent air from being pumped by these surfaces. 
When both of the described structures are employed together, the air draft 
velocity from the system is reduced by at least a factor of five. For 
example, a shielded, counter-rotating spinner system with 10 cm. diameter 
spinners rotating at 20,000 RPM produces an air draft which just causes a 
lit match to flicker when placed 3 cm. from the spinner's edges. The 
shields are the most effective method for reducing air draft velocity. 
However, because some clearance must exist between a shield and a rotating 
spinner, there exists the possibility of some air recirculating within 
this void. The preferred embodiment, which employs counter-rotating 
spinners, acts to reduce these residual air drafts through the collision 
mechanism described above. 
There are several further advantages offered by the preferred embodiment of 
the invention. 
A. The inner surfaces of the two opposed counter-rotating spinners are 
self-shielded. 
B. The close proximity of the spinner edges acts as an air bearing which 
stabilizes the spinners. 
C. The close proximity of the shields with the spinners acts as air 
bearings which further act to stabilize the system. 
D. Liquid may be introduced through either or both of the driving motor 
axes. 
E. When the system is used with a single liquid, it may be conducted 
through only one motor spindle via a feed tube and sprayed equally on both 
spinners. Equation 2 (based on experimental results) indicates that a 
somewhat smaller droplet size results when a liquid flow is divided 
between two spinners rather than deposited on only one. 
F. When the system is used with two different liquids for purposes of 
mixing, each liquid may be conducted by its own feed system to a 
respective spinner through the spindle of the motor driving that spinner. 
Mixing will occur outside the system, but within a relatively small 
volume. 
G. The compact nature of the device allows it to be conveniently 
incorporated within a small plenum chamber.

DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS 
FIG. 1 compares the performance of the prior art single spinner with what 
is theoretically possible with regard to droplet path length. The graph 
relates tangential velocity V.sub.T versus tangential distance S.sub.T 
outward from the spinner edge for three cases of interest. The graph is 
based on experimental results and accepted aerodynamic principals. The 
experimental results were obtained using a single sharp-edged, conical, 6 
inch diameter spinner rotating at 16,000 RPM where 0.75 cc/sec of paint 
thinner was applied to the concave side. The average droplet size produced 
by this system is 25 microns. Trace 10 shows the velocity-distance 
relationship for the typical spinner induced air draft. Trace 12 shows the 
velocity-distance relationship for a 25 micron droplet injected into the 
co-directional air draft. Trace 12 is the result of a numerical solution 
of an aerodynamic, differential equation, based on Equation 4, namely: 
##EQU4## 
Where: V.sub.T =the tangential droplet velocity. 
V.sub.AT =the tangential air draft velocity. 
K3 and K4: complicated combinations of droplet density, density of air and 
viscosity of air (the same as in Equa. 5). 
FIG. 1 shows that a droplet gradually merges with the air draft and 
ultimately attains the same velocity as the air draft. Trace 12 represents 
the performance of the prior art spinner used to microparticularize 
liquids. If the spinner induced air draft could be eliminated entirely, a 
droplet would have the theoretical velocity-distance relationship 
indicated by Trace 14, which is characterized by a very short path length. 
Trace 14 evolves from Equa. 7, except that VAT=0. When VAT=0, an exact 
solution can be obtained, as evidenced in Equas. 5 and 6. The present 
invention produces droplets with a velocity-distance relationship 
approaching that shown by Trace 14 because spinner induced air draft 
velocity is greatly reduced. It is to be appreciated, however, that trace 
14 is only approachable at extremely low liquid flow rates since the 
ejected droplets themselves will generate an air draft due to momentum 
transfer. 
FIG. 2 shows two nearly identical conical spinners 18 and 20. The spinners 
are coaxial with opposed, sharp edges 22 and 24. The edges are in very 
close proximity. In other words, dimension "S" is minimized. This is very 
important because the performance of the invention is degraded by 
increasing dimension "S". Each spinner is driven by its own motor 26 and 
28 through motor shafts 30 and 32. The spinners may be fastened to their 
respective motor shafts by set screws 34 and 36. The motors rotate in such 
a way as to cause the spinners to counter-rotate, as indicated by arrows 
38 and 40. Because cf the opposed positioning of the motors, both motors 
rotate in the same direction when each is viewed from the shaft end. This 
is a convenient aspect of the invention with regard to the electrical 
wiring of the system when electrical motors are used, or pneumatic 
circuitry if gas turbines are employed. 
The first preferred embodiment of the counter-rotating spinner assembly for 
microparticalization of liquid is generally indicated at 16 in FIGS. 2, 3 
and 4. In FIG. 2, the assembly is shown in substantially central vertical 
section, with parts broken away and parts taken in section. In FIG. 3, the 
assembly 16 is enlarged with respect to FIG. 2 and shows only the spinning 
conical spinners, their mounting shafts, and a single feed line, with 
parts broken away. 
In FIG. 4, the assembly 16 is shown as an exterior view of the conical 
spinners from a front-upper oblique angle. 
FIGS. 2 and 3 show the single-sided method for introducing a single liquid 
into the system. Such a system would be useful for automobile carbureting 
where gasoline is the liquid or greenhouse humidifying where water is 
used. Motor shaft 30 is hollow. Feed tube 42 extends from a liquid control 
mechanism, in this case, a modified fuel injector 44. The modification of 
the injector consists of grinding off the mushroom tip so that laminar 
fluid flow is introduced into feed tube 42. Both the feed tube 42 and 
injector 44 can be mounted to an adaptor 46 which can substitute for the 
rear motor housing. O-ring 48 seals &.he feed tube. Feed tube 42 proceeds 
through the hollow motor shaft 30. The clearance 50 should not be 
excessive so as to provide an impeded path for air traveling from the 
outside of the system into the void 52, which is under slight vacuum when 
the system operates. Air flow through clearance 50 will degrade the 
efficiency of the system. Feed tube 42 proceeds through bearing 54, which 
supports it and also offers an impediment to air flow through clearance 
50. 
Referring to FIG. 3, feed tube 42 is provided with side orifices 56 and 58 
which are so designed as to spray half the liquid jet on surface 64 of 
spinner 18. Surface 64 is a curved annular recessed portion of conical 
surface 66 designed to capture the sprayed liquid 60 and 62 so that liquid 
is evenly distributed to surface 66. Feed tube 42 is also provided with an 
end orifice 68 which is so designed as to spray the remaining liquid as 
jet 70 onto the motor shaft 32 and surface 72. Surface 72 is an annular 
curved recessed portion of conical surface 74 designed to capture the 
sprayed liquid 70 so that liquid 70 is evenly distributed to surface 74. 
The distance between the downstream face of bearing 54 and side orifices 
56 and 58 is defined by Dimension "L". Dimension "L" should be such that 
all the liquid 60 and 62 is sprayed onto surface 64. The amount of feed 
tube protrusion (Dimension "P") should be minimized to minimize feed tube 
vibration. Feed tube vibration can result in unequal liquid feed problems 
as well as fatigue cracking in the region of side jet orifices 56 and 58. 
The material from which spinners 18 and 20 are made must be wettable by 
the liquid in jets 60, 62 and 70. Otherwise, the liquid spray will not 
stick to surfaces 64 and 72 nor subsequently spread evenly over surfaces 
66 and 74. Liquid spreads out radially on surfaces 66 and 74 through a 
component 76 of centrifugal force until it reaches edges 22 and 24, 
respectively. Angle "A" helps even out the flow since a component 78 of 
centrifugal force drives the liquid against the surfaces 66 and 74 causing 
it to spread. If Angle "A" is too small, liquid will stream directly to 
the spinner edges resulting in large droplets. A good range for A is 
5.degree.-15.degree. with paint thinner. My preference is 15.degree.. The 
surface finish of surfaces 66 and 74 should be matte so as to promote 
wetting. However, surfaces 66 and 74 should have mirror-like finishes near 
edges 22 and 24 so that preferential droplet emitters are not created at 
these edges. Edges 22 and 24 should be sharp in order to reduce the area 
of droplet "footprint" at the spinner's edge. The outer surfaces 80 and 82 
of the two spinners 18 and 20 are defined by Angle "B". I have used 
15.degree.-30.degree. for angle B. My preference is 30.degree.. Angle "B" 
is only important in giving structural integrity to the spinners so that, 
at high speed, the spinners will not disintegrate or distort. The surface 
finishes of surfaces 80 and 82 should be mirror-like to reduce the ability 
of these surfaces to pump air. 
FIG. 4 shows the aerodynamics of the counter-rotating spinner system. The 
spinners 18 and 20 are rotating, as indicated by arrows 38 and 40. 
Regarding spinner 18 as isolated, it will generate an air flow indicated 
by the dotted line 84. This is due to the adhesion of air to the outer 
surface of spinner 18. Due to the rotation of the spinner, the air is 
pumped in a radial direction along its surface. Due to the low viscosity 
of air, only a thin layer next to the surface attains this generalized 
flow pattern. Ultimately, an air draft is formed of which an element has 
the velocity vector 86. Vector 86 is tangent to the spinner's edge and in 
the same direction as the rotation of the spinner 18. The tangential 
velocity vector 86 has a radial component 88. 
In the case of the counter-rotating spinners, each spinner produces its own 
tangential air draft 90 and 92, respectively. Because the spinners are 
counter-rotating, the tangential velocity vectors 90 and 92 are opposed. 
When Dimension "S" is minimized, vectors 90 and 92 shear efficiently. 
Dimension "S" must be minimized because the two layers of pumped air are 
thin. When Dimension "S" is minimized, the point of shearing is brought 
close to the spinners' edges before the air drafts have a chance to 
disperse angularly. When Dimension "S" is minimized, vectors 90 and 92 
shear and form a vortex 94, which ultimately decays into a purely radial 
air flow 96. Vector 96 is smaller (by about a factor of two) than vector 
88, the radial component of velocity vector 86 produced by a single 
spinner. 
FIG. 5a compares the radial air draft velocity produced by the 
counter-rotating system with the radial component velocity of the air 
draft produced by a single prior art spinner; this, at a distance of 1.42 
cm from a spinner edge. FIG. 5b does the same for a radial distance of 
2.84 cm. Trace 98 indicates the performance of the counter-rotating 
system, whereas trace 100 indicates the performance of the single state of 
the air spinner. FIGS. 5a and 5b derive from real data obtained using 6 
inch diameter spinners rotating at 16,000 RPM. Three observations can be 
made from FIGS. 5a and 5b: 
A. The counter-rotating system produces a smaller radial air draft than a 
single spinner at any, spinner RPM or distance. 
B. The radial air draft produced by the counter-rotating system increases 
at a lower rate with increasing spinner speed than the radial air draft 
component produced by the single spinner. 
C. The radial air draft produced by the counter-rotating system increases 
at a slower rate with increasing distance from the spinner edges than the 
radial air draft component produced by the single spinner. 
Observation B is enhanced by the fact that Equation 2 does not adequately 
describe the radial air draft produced by the counter-rotating system. The 
data for this system shows considerable curvature and is best represented 
by Equation 8: 
EQU V.sub.AR =M".times.ln RPM-b" 8 
Where: 
M" and B" are experimentally determined constants which depend on spinner 
geometry and the distance from the spinner's edges. 
The behavior of Equation 8 (trace 98) with the increasing spinner speed 
shows the enhanced behavior of the counter-rotating system over the single 
spinner, which is best represented by Equation 2 (trace 100). 
Besides reducing the radial air flow velocity by a factor of two, the 
counter-rotating system produces a purely radial air flow. Referring back 
to FIG. 4, vector 86, besides representing the tangential trajectory of 
air flow from a single spinner, if the spinner 18 was isolated, can also 
represent the tangential trajectory of a droplet emitted from a single 
spinner. In other words, in the case of a single spinner, the induced air 
draft vector and droplet trajectory are codirectional. In the case of the 
counter-rotating system, the droplets initially have tangential 
trajectories like vectors 90 and 92. However, the air flow is purely 
radial as vector 96. A consequence of this is that the tangentially 
traveling droplets run into the radial air flow. This vector collision 
slows the droplets dramatically and curves their trajectories in a radial 
direction. Still, the droplets are ultimately entrained by the radial air 
draft produced by the counter-rotating system. 
The second preferred embodiment of the counter-rotating spinner assembly 
for microparticalization of liquid is generally indicated at 102 in FIGS. 
6 and 7. The apparatus 102 employs the closely spaced counter-rotating 
spinners of the first embodiment together with shields to control air flow 
on the outer surfaces of the spinners. In addition, FIGS. 6 and 7 also 
show how two liquids may be introduced separately into the system for 
mixing beyond the spinner edges. 
FIG. 6 shows two opposed conical spinners 104 and 106, driven by motors 108 
and 110 in a counter-rotating manner, as indicated by arrows 112 and 114. 
These counter-rotating spinners are identical to the first preferred 
embodiment 16 for reducing spinner-induced air draft velocity described 
earlier. All that was said previously about the prior spinners 18 and 20 
also applies to the spinners 104 and 106. 
In addition, FIGS. 6 and 7 show the use of non-rotating shields 116 and 
118. The shields have surfaces 120 and 122 which are in very close 
proximity with the surfaces 124 and 126 of the rotating spinners 104 and 
106. The shields prevent air from reaching spinner surfaces 124 and 126. 
Consequently, no air flow can be induced by these surfaces. Shields 116 
and 118 present the second preferred embodiment for greatly reducing 
spinner-induced air drafts. Shields 116 and 118 may also serve for 
mounting the respective spinner driving motors 108 and 110 via bolts 128. 
Also, shields 116 and 118 may serve as adaptor flanges to hold the two 
motor-spinner subassemblies to a plenum chamber 130 via bolts 132 and 
O-rings 134. Access to the spinner set screws 135 may be made through 
access holes 136. Access holes 136 are plugged by set screws 138. 
Whatever the design configuration, a prime prerequisite is to make a 
leak-tight assembly so that air cannot reach spinner surfaces 124 and 126. 
Referring to FIG. 7, access hole 136 must be plugged, otherwise an air 
flow will be created along the path indicated by the dotted arrow 140, 
which will partially destroy the action of shield 116. When leak-tight, 
the shields are extremely effective in eliminating spinner-induced air 
drafts. However, because of the finite clearances 142 and 144 and the fact 
that a slight vacuum exists within these clearances, a very small 
recirculation of air will occur near each spinner edge, as indicated by 
arrows 146 and 148. However, the action of the counter-rotating spinners 
(described above) tends to nullify this. Clearances 142 and 144 also act 
as air bearings, as does clearance 150 between the spinner edges 152 and 
154. The air bearings greatly reduce spinner vibration and, consequently, 
improve the stability of the spinner edges. This results in more uniform 
droplet diameters. It is to be emphasized that the performance of the 
system is optimized by minimizing clearances 142, 144 and 150. A practical 
value for these clearances may be taken as 0.015 inch. 
The apparatus shown in FIGS. 6 and 7 can employ two like feed tubes 156 and 
158. In this instance, each feed tube has only side jet orifices 160 and 
162, respectively. Such a system can be used for mixing two different 
liquids. One liquid may be introduced through feed tube 156 where it is 
sprayed onto spinner surface 164 where, in turn, it will spread over 
spinner surface 166 to spinner edge 152 where it is emitted as droplets. 
Likewise, the other liquid may be introduced through feed tube 158, 
sprayed on curved annular surface 168 where it proceeds to spread over 
surface 170 and ultimately reaches spinner edge 154 where it too is 
emitted as droplets. Mixing of the two liquids in droplet form occurs in a 
relatively small volume adjacent to, but just beyond the spinner edges. 
Mixing is efficient because of the greatly enhanced density of the fog of 
particles brought about by the nearly total elimination of spinner induced 
air drafts. Each fluid system may be provided with flow controls so that 
the proportion of the mixture can be easily adjusted. The mixing can be 
done in a controlled inert atmosphere introduced directly into the plenum 
chamber. The atmosphere into which the binary liquid chemicals are 
released can in itself be a reactant. 
FIG. 8 compares the performance of the prior art single spinner with that 
of the dual counter-rotating spinners and the dual counter-rotating 
shielded spinners. The data is from actual experiments involving 3.950 
inches diameter, conical, sharp-edged spinners, all of the same geometry, 
rotating at 20,000 RPM. Trace 172 shows the radial air draft component 
velocity versus distance relationship for the prior art spinner. Trace 
174-176 shows the radial air draft velocity versus distance relationship 
for the dual counter-rotating spinners. Segment 176 pitches downward to 
the left because of the vortex mentioned earlier. The reduction in air 
draft velocity through the employment of counter-rotating spinners alone 
is readily evident over the range shown. At greater distances, the 
reduction improves. Attempts at measuring the radial air draft velocity 
produced by the dual counter-rotating shielded spinners were hampered by 
the fact that the instrumentation could only measure air draft velocities 
greater than 89 cm/sec. The cross-hatched area 184 shows where 
measurements were not obtainable. Data point 178 shows the only reliable 
value obtained with this system. No air draft velocity could be detected 
at 2.5 cm. Consequently, trace 180 indicates the worst case behavior of 
the dual counter-rotating shielded spinners. The opposite cross-hatched 
area 182 indicates where the characteristic curve for this system may lie. 
Considering the only data point available, a five-fold improvement has 
been made over the single spinner. 
The third preferred embodiment of the shielded spinner assembly for 
microparticalization of liquid is illustrated in section in FIG. 9 and is 
generally indicated at 186. The apparatus 186 is useful in material 
processing where the manufacture of spherical microparticles of a 
particular material is desired. The principal advantage of the invention 
in this regard would be to reduce trajectory lengths brought about by the 
near elimination of air drafts so that the manufacturing process could be 
conducted in a smaller volume. In this case, it is convenient to have one 
spinner 188 driven by motor 190. Spinner 188 is almost the same 
configuration as spinners 20 and 106. Two non-rotating shields 192 and 194 
act to greatly reduce the generation of spinner induced air drafts. 
Shields 192 and 194 may also serve as mounting flanges for both mounting 
the spinner motor 190 and mounting the shields to the plenum chamber walls 
196. The material to be processed is introduced in liquid form through 
feed tube 198 and deposited on spinner surface 200 where it wets and 
spreads under a component of centrifugal force across the conical spinner 
surface to edge 202 where it is emitted as droplets. 
If heat is required, heater coils 204, 206 and 208 may be employed to heat 
the feed tube 198, the shields 192 and 194, and spinner 188 by conduction 
or radiation. If heat is involved, it may be convenient to use metal "V" 
seals 210. Shields 192 and 194 may be made of ceramic. The spinner 188 may 
be made of a wettable refractory metal or ceramic. An inert, refrigerated 
gas may be used as an atmosphere within the plenum chamber to promote 
cooling. 
By this structure and by the previous structures, microparticalization of 
liquids can be achieved. One or two such liquids can be microparticalized 
and discharged into a controlled gaseous environment for reaction. The 
apparatus of FIG. 9 also shows that the temperature of the 
microparticalized liquid can be controlled by heating. Similarly, it can 
be cooled, in accordance with the requirements of a particular reaction. 
This invention has been described in its presently contemplated best mode, 
and it is clear that it is susceptible to numerous modifications, modes 
and embodiments within the ability of those skilled in the art and without 
the exercise of the inventive faculty. Accordingly, the scope of this 
invention is defined by the scope of the following claims.