Gas Absorption
Nurul Syaahidah Binti Aulia Sham (2018262532)
Hamizah Izzati Binti Abu Bakar (2018438736)
Muhammad Luthfi Bin Mohd Sharif (2018200204)
Nur Haziah Binti Hassan (2018659858)
Nurnadilah Binti Mat Rani (2018249448)
Abstract—Gas absorption is one of the mass transfer accumulation occurs in the packing. At the upper limit of the
operations where one or more species is removed from a gas flow rate which is called flooding velocity, flooding
gaseous stream by dissolution in a liquid. The gas happens. The operating packed column, in actual operating
absorption is equipped with tower that contains packing industries should be well below flooding since the equipment
such as Rashchig Rings packing. It is used in the cannot operate above the flooding velocity. The pressure drop
experiment as well. The main purpose of performing this within the system increases as the flow rate of the gas or the
experiment is to determine the air pressure drop across the liquid increase.
column as a function of air flow rate for different water
flow rates through the column. The pressure drop is II. OBJECTIVES
observed for every two minutes at air flow rate of 20 LPM, The purpose of performing the experiment:
40 LPM, 60 LPM, 80 LPM, 100 LPM, 120 LPM, 140 LPM,
1. To determine the pressure drop across the column as a
160 LPM and 180 LPM for water flow rate of 1 LPM, 2 function of air flow rate for different water flow rates
LPM and 3 LPM respectively. The experiment is through the column.
continued for every water flow rate until a flooding occurs.
Then, the water flow rate is changed. The pressure drop 2. To plot a graph of column pressure drop against the air
increases as the air flow rate increases. Comparing with flow rate.
the respective theoretical data, the pressure drop at 1 LPM 3. To obtain the pressure drop from the generalized
and 2 LPM of water flow rate shows a higher value correlation chart as attached in Appendix.
compare to 3 LPM of water flow rate. Packing tower
works better at a lower liquid flow rate. Low liquid flow 4. To compare the experimental value and the correlated
rate maximizes the absorption rate. The objectives of the values.
experiment are successfully obtained and thus the
experiment is successfully performed. III. THEORY
Gas absorption is a mass transfer operation where one or
more species is removed from a gaseous stream by dissolution
I. INTRODUCTION
in a liquid. The component that is extracted from the gaseous
Gas absorption is a mass transfer operation where one or stream is known as a solute and the component that extracting
more species is removed from a gaseous stream by dissolution the solute is known as a solvent. Carrier gas is the insoluble
in a liquid. The component that is extracted from the gaseous component present in the gas that is not absorbed by the
stream is known as a solute and the component that extracting solvent. The transfer is based on the preferential solubility of
the solute or dissolving the solute is known as a solvent. solutes in the solvent (Gas Absorption And Desorption,n.d.).
Packed column is usually used as gas absorption equipment. Packed towers are used for continuous counter-current
Packed column can be performed in co-current flow as well as contacting of gas and liquid in absorption (Geankoplis, 1993).
counter-current flow. Counter-current flow is preferable since The mechanism in packed tower is the gas and liquid phases
the contact time between the two species whether in vapor or flows counter–currently where they interact on the packing
liquid is longer. This equipment is usually made of a interface. The liquid flows in downward direction, over the
surface of the packing, whereas the gas flows through the space
cylindrical column containing a gas inlet and distributing
or voids of the packing in upward direction. The gas flow is
space at the bottom, a liquid inlet and a packing or filing driven by pressure while the liquid flow is driven by the
inside the tower. The packed column used in the experiment is gravity force. The gas undergoes pressure drop due to the
SOLTEQ-QVF Absorption Column BP751-B which uses liquid occupied some part of the open space and voids of the
Raschig Rings as the type of packing medium. At low gas packing and thus, reducing the area available for the gas to
velocity, the pressure drop is proportional to the flow rate. At flow. If the packing is dry with no liquid feed, then maximum
loading point, the gas starts to hinder the liquid flow and flow gas is available. The pressure drop increases as the liquid
flow rate into the tower increase. High flux will result in 1. Pump P1 is switched off.
flooding. This occurrence happen at the upper limit of the gas
2. Valves V1, V2 and V12 are closed
flow rate called flooding velocity since the liquid is blown out
with the gas at the flooding point. The gas starts to hinder the 3. The valve on the compressed air supply line is closed
liquid flow at loading point where accumulation of liquid starts and the supply pressure is exhausted by turning the
appearing in the packing. Low flux will result in channeling or regulator knob counter clockwise all the way.
weeping. There are two types of packing which is random and
structured. 4. The shut-off valve on the CO2 gas cylinder is closed.
5. All the liquid in the column K 1 is drained by opening
IV. PROCEDURES valve V4 and V5.
Start-up Procedure: 6. All the liquid from the receiving vessels B 1 and B2 is
drained by opening valves V7 and V8.
1. All the valves are ensured to be closed except for the
ventilation valve, V13. 7. All the liquid from the pump P1 is drained by opening
valve V10.
2. All the gas connections are checked to be properly
fitted. 8. The power for the control panel is turned off.
3. The entire valve on the compressed air supply line is
opened. The supply pressure is set to be in between V. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
two to three bars by turning the regulator knob
clockwise. Table 1. Pressure Drop at Different Water Flow Rate and Air Flow Rate
(Experimental - mBar)
4. The shut-off valve on the CO2 gas cylinder is opened
and the pressure is checked. Flow Rate (L/min) Pressure Drop (mBar)
5. The power for the control panel is turned on. Water
2 4 6 8 12 14
Air 100 160 180
0 0 0 0 0 0
1.0 0 3 9 14 29 42 50 53 76 (F)
Experimental Procedures:
2.0 32 34 36 39 44 50 84 93 (F) F
1. The receiving vessel B2 is filled through the charge
port with 50 L of water by opening valve V 3 and V5.
3.0 32 36 40 47 87 (F) F F F F
Then, valve V3 is closed.
*F=Flooding
2. Valves V9 and V10 are opened slightly. The flow of the
water from vessel B1 through pump P1 is observed.
Table 2. Pressure Drop at Different Water Flow Rate and Air Flow Rate
Pump P1 is switched on. (Experimental – mmH2O/M)
3. Valve V11 is slowly opened and adjusted to give a Flow
water flow rate of around 1L/min. Rate Pressure Drop (mmH2O/m)
(L/min)
4. The water is allowed to enter the top of the column K 1, Water
flow down the column and accumulated at the bottom Air
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180
until it overflows back to vessel B1.
968.7
5. The valve V11 is opened and adjusted to give a water 1.0 0 38.2 114.7 178.5 369.6 535.4 637.3 675.6
(F)
flow rate of 1 L/min into column K1.
1185.4
6. The valve V1 is opened and adjusted to give air flow 2.0 407.9 433.4 458.9 497.1 560.8 637.3 1070.7
(F)
F
rate of 20L/min into column K1.
7. The liquid and gas flow in the column K 1 is observed. 3.0 407.9 458.9 509.9 599.1
1108.9
(F)
F F F F
The pressure drop across the column at dPT-201 is
recorded. *F=Flooding
8. Steps 3 to 5 is repeated with different values of air
flow rate, increasing by 20 L/min each time after two
minutes while maintaining the same water flow rate.
9. Steps 3 to 6 is repeated with different values of water
flow rate, each time increasing by 1 L/min by adjusting
valve V11
Shut-down Procedures:
Table 3. Pressure Drop at Different Water Flow Rate and Air Flow Rate Table 6. Log Pressure and Log Air Flow Rate Value (Theoretical-mmH2O/M)
(Theoretical – H2O/FT)
Flow Rate (L/min) Pressure Drop (MMH2O/M)
Flow Rate (L/min) Pressure Drop (H2O/FT)
Water
Water 1.30 1.60 1.78 1.90 2.00 2.08 2.15 2.20 2.26
Air
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180
Air
1.0 - 0.87 1.18 1.40 1.50 1.80 2.00 F F
1.0 0 0.09 0.18 0.30 0.38 0.75 1.20 F F
2.0 0.8 1.20 1.50 1.62 1.82 F F F F
2.0 0.08 0.19 0.38 0.50 0.80 F F F F
3.0 1.20 1.70 1.78 2.10 F F F F F
3.0 0.19 0.60 0.73 1.50 F F F F F
*F=Flooding
*F=Flooding
TABLE 7. DATA FROM CALCULATION TO DETERMINE THEORETICAL PRESSURE
DROP
Table 4. Pressure Drop at Different Water Flow Rate and Air Flow Rate
(Theoretical – mmH2O/M) Air Gas Mass y-axis Liquid Mass Velocity x-axis
Flow Velocity (Gx)
Rate (Gy)
(Vy) Kg/m2s Kg/m2s
Flow Rate
Pressure Drop (MMH2O/M)
(L/min) LPM 1 2 3 1 2 3
LPM LPM LPM LPM LPM LPM
Water
16 18 20 0.08 0.0012 3.32 6.64 9.96 1.46 2.91 4.37
20 40 60 80 100 120 140
Air 0 0 40 0.16 0.0046 3.32 6.64 9.96 0.73 1.46 2.18
60 0.24 0.0104 3.32 6.64 9.96 0.49 0.97 1.46
1.0 0.00 7.50 15.00 24.99 31.24 62.48 99.97 F F 80 0.31 0.0186 3.32 6.64 9.96 0.36 0.73 1.09
100 0.39 0.0290 3.32 6.64 9.96 0.29 0.58 0.87
120 0.47 0.0418 3.32 6.64 9.96 0.24 0.49 0.73
2.0 6.25 15.83 31.24 41.66 66.65 F F F F
140 0.55 0.0569 3.32 6.64 9.96 0.21 0.42 0.62
160 0.63 0.0743 3.32 6.64 9.96 0.18 0.36 0.55
3.0 15.83 49.99 60.82 124.97 F F F F F
180 0.71 0.0940 3.32 6.64 9.96 0.16 0.32 0.49
*F=Flooding
TABLE 8. PERCENTAGE ERROR OF EXPERIMENT
Table 5. Log Pressure and Log Air Flow Rate Value (Experimental-
mmH2O/M)
Water Flow Rate Theoretical Experimental Percentage Error
(LPM) Flooding Air Flow Flooding Air Flow (%)
Flow Rate Rate Rate
Pressure Drop (MMH2O/M)
(L/min) (LPM) (LPM)
Water 1 160 180 12.50
1.3 1.6 1.7 1.9 2.0 2.0 2.1
2.20 2.26 2 120 160 33.33
Air 0 0 8 0 0 8 5
3 100 100 0.00
2.99
1.0 - 1.58 2.06 2.25 2.57 2.73 2.80 2.83
(F)
3.07
2.0 2.61 2.64 2.66 2.70 2.75 2.80 3.03 F
(F)
3.04
3.0 2.61 2.66 2.71 2.78 F F F F
(F)
*F=Flooding
Sample Calculation for Cross Sectional Area of Packed
Column
Sample Calculation for Gas Mass Velocity, Gy
Fig. 1. Graph of Log Pressure Drop vs Log Air Flow Rate
For calculations,
Density of Air, ρy = 1.175 kg/m3
Density of Water, ρx = 996 kg/m3 Sample Calculation for Liquid Mass Velocity, Gx
-1
Packing Factor, Fp = 900 m
Column Diameter, D = 0.08 m
Area of Packed Column, Ac = 0.0050 m2
Water Viscosity, x = 0.0008 kg/m3
*All Properties are taken at T=30˚C
Sample Calculation for y-axis
Sample Calculation to Converts Experimental Pressure Drop
Units, mbar to mmH2O/m
*1 mbar = 10.1971 mmH2O
*Height Column = 0.8 m Sample Calculation for x-axis
Sample Calculation for Kinematic Viscosity of water, Vx
L/min of increment. Based on Figure 2, the pattern is
Sample Calculation to Convert Theoretical Pressure Drop obvious in which the log pressure drop increases as the log
Units, in H2O/ft to mmH2O/m air flow rate increase. The graph also illustrates that when
the air flow rate increases, the pressure drop also increase I
which theoretically, it is true.
Also, from the graph, we could see that the faster the water
flow rate, the lower the log air flow rate. This can be
explained as the water flowing downwards prevents the air
flowing upwards. This results in a very high pressure drop.
Hence, at high water flow rate, flooding occurs quite faster
than at the lower water flow rate. This is due to the
Sample Calculation for Percentage Error resistance that the water flow exhibits to the air flow is
higher. This also happens to the theoretical data. The
experimental data that we received shows the same pattern
as the theoretical data.
Even though, for both theoretical data and experimental data
shows the relationship between pressure drop and the air
flow rate is proportional to each other, the experimental data
in which the pressure drop is very much smaller compares
to the theoretical pressure drop. This is probably due to
human error in which during the handling of equipment.
Sample Calculation for Theoretical Pressure Drop
Based on the theoretical data, the flooding during the water
flow rate of 1 L/min should have happened at 160 L/min.
However, in the experiment, the flooding occurs at 180
L/min. For the water flow rate of 2 L/min, the flooding
occurs during the air flow rate of 160 L/min compares to
theoretical data which shows flooding at 120 L/min. And for
the flow rate of water of 3 L/min, the occurrence of flooding
should be in 100 L/min in which it is the same
experimentally. This exhibits errors for the experiment in
which the percentage of error is 12.50%, 33.33% and 0%
for the water flow rate of 1 L/min, 2 L/min and 3 L/min
respectively. The reason of these kinds of errors is perhaps
more to human error while handling the equipment.
The errors of the experimental data also could have been
from the parallax error in which the level of the eye during
the controlling and adjusting of water flow rate and air flow
Fig. 2. The Theoretical Pressure Drop is located at the Intersection Point rate. The eye could not have been in meniscus while
between the value of y-axis and x-axis for The Respective Flow Rate performing the adjustment of flow rates. This contributes to
errors in experiment and thus giving affects to the reading
The main purpose of performing this experiment is to and flooding occurrence.
determine the air pressure drop across the column as a
function of air flow rate for different water flow rates Based on the experiment performed, we could see that the
through the column in which it is illustrated in the plotted packing used in the tower during the experiment is working
graph (Figure2). The air flow rate is being controlled and at its best at lower liquid flow rate since flooding occur at a
varies from 20 L/min to a maximum of 180 L/min with an very high gas flow rate. This gives long contacting time
increment of 20 L/min for every two minutes. At the end of between the gas and liquid and hence, maximizing the
the allocated time, the value of pressure drop is for the absorption rate. But, this type of packing exhibits quick
particular gas flow rate is jotted down as data. This step flooding at high liquid flow rate even though the gas flow
continues for the next increment of 20 L/min of air flow rate rate is low and thus shorten the time the gas and the water in
for the particular water flow rate until flooding occurs. contact with each other and minimize the absorption rate.
When flooding occurs, the process is stop and it is proceed
with another water flow rate that is up to 3 L/min with 1
CONCLUSION
Based on the experiment, it can be concluded that the
pressure drop increases as the air flow rate increase. At 1
LPM and 2 LPM of water flow rate, the pressure drop is
quite high compare to the theoretical value. While at 3 LPM
of water flow rate, the pressure drop is the same with the
theoretical value. The percentage error determined at those
water flow rates are 12.50%, 33.33% and 0% respectively.
This illustrates that the packing inside the packing tower
work efficiently at low liquid flow rate compare to when the
liquid runs at high flow rates. The lower the liquid flow rate,
the longer the contact time of water and air thus maximizing
the absorption rate. Since the objectives are successfully
achieved, the experiment is a well done.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Several recommendations can be made to make better the
experiment. Firstly, the students should reduce the human
error that is been made during the experiment. Errors such
as parallax errors should be avoided to obtain a more
accurate data. Next, the equipment itself should be
maintained properly. Old equipment such as old packing of
the packing tower and outdated equipment will contribute to
a larger percentage of errors. Next, students should be
wearing their personal protective equipment (PPE) to
minimize the risk of being in danger or getting injured.
Lastly, students should read and understand the laboratory
procedures and experiment procedures before performing
the experiment. This is to ensure that the experiment runs
smoothly.
REFERENCES
[1] Syahiirah, N. (n.d.). CHE504 - Lab Report on Gas
Absorption (L8) (2018). Retrieved March 16, 2020,
from [Link]
_Lab_Report_on_Gas_Absorption_L8_2018_?
show_app_store_popup=true
[2] (n.d.). Retrieved March 16, 2020, from
[Link]
[Link]
[3] Principles of Gas Absorption. (n.d.). Retrieved March
16, 2020, from
[Link]
[4] Gas-Liquid Absorption. (n.d.). Retrieved March 16,
2020, from
[Link]
liquid-absorption
APPENDIX
