24.11.2012 Views

Packed Bed flooding.pdf - Youngstown State University's Personal ...

Packed Bed flooding.pdf - Youngstown State University's Personal ...

Packed Bed flooding.pdf - Youngstown State University's Personal ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

14-108 EQUIPMENT FOR DISTILLATION, GAS ABSORPTION, PHASE DISPERSION, AND PHASE SEPARATION<br />

FIG. 14-99 Propeller-type surface aerator. (Ashbrook-Simon-Hartley Corp.)<br />

perforated-pipe spargers should be used. Often the holes must be<br />

placed on the pipe bottom in order to make the sparger free-draining<br />

during operation. In the quiescent regime, porous septa will often give<br />

considerably higher overall mass-transfer coefficients than perforated<br />

plates or pipes because of the formation of tiny bubbles that do not<br />

coalesce. Chain and coworkers (First International Symposium on<br />

Chemical Microbiology, World Health Organization, Monograph Ser.<br />

10, Geneva, 1952) claimed that porous disks are about twice as effective<br />

as open-pipe and ring spargers for the air oxidation of sodium sulfite.<br />

Eckenfelder [Chem. Eng. Progr., 52(7), 290 (1956)] has compared<br />

the oxygen-transfer capabilities of various devices on the basis of the<br />

operating power required to absorb a given quantity of O2. The<br />

installed cost of the various pieces of equipment probably would not<br />

vary sufficiently to warrant being including in an economic analysis.<br />

Surface mechanical aerators are not included in this comparison. Of<br />

the units compared, it appears that porous tubes give the most efficient<br />

power usage. Kalinske (Adv. Biol. Waste Treatment, 1963, p. 157) has<br />

compared submerged sparged aerators with mechanical surface aerators.<br />

He has summarized this comparison in Water Sewage Works, 33<br />

(January 1968). He indicates that surface aerators are significantly<br />

more efficient than subsurface aeration, both for oxygen absorption<br />

and for gas-stripping operations.<br />

FIG. 14-100 Aeration ejector. (Penberthy, a division of Houdaille Industries, Inc.)<br />

Zlokarnik and Mann (paper at Mixing Conf., Rindge, New Hampshire,<br />

August 1975) have found the opposite of Kalinske, i.e., subsurface<br />

diffusers, subsurface sparged turbines, and surface aerators<br />

compare approximately as 4:2:1 respectively in terms of O2 transfer<br />

efficiency; however, Zlokarnik [Adv. Biochem. Eng., 11, 157 (1979)]<br />

later indicates that the scale-up correlation used earlier might be<br />

somewhat inaccurate. When all available information is considered, it<br />

appears that with near-optimum design any of the aeration systems<br />

(diffusers, submerged turbines, or surface impellers) should give a<br />

transfer efficiency of at least 2.25 kg O2/kWh. Thus, the final selection<br />

should probably be made primarily on the basis of operational reliability,<br />

maintenance, and capital costs.<br />

Mass Transfer Mass transfer in plate and packed gas-liquid contactors<br />

has been covered earlier in this subsection. Attention here will<br />

be limited to deep-bed contactors (bubble columns and agitated vessels).<br />

Theory underlying mass transfer between phases is discussed in<br />

Sec. 5 of this handbook.<br />

To design deep-bed contactors for mass-transfer operations, one<br />

must have, in general, predictive methods for the following design<br />

parameters:<br />

• Flooding (for both columns and agitator impellers)<br />

• Agitator power requirements

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!