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 ...
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