Two Phase Flow

Abstract

The experiment was carried out to study the hydrodynamics for a two phase flow of counter
current air-water system in a packed bed by determining pressure drop across the packed bed
under dry and wet conditions. SOLTEQ 3-Column Gas Absorption Unit (Model: BP750)
was used to perform the experiment which consists of 3 packed column, each of which has
80mm diameter and an effective packing height of 1.5m. Each column is filled with different
materials. The unit also consists of a rotameter, air compressor, water manometer and sump
tank. Dry flow experiment was conducted by introducing air to the column and recording
pressure drop across each column at different air flow rates whereas wet flow experiment was
attained by introducing air and water simultaneously to the column and determining pressure
drop across each column at different air and water flow rates. Loading and flooding point of
each column was determined. The data obtained was presented by plotting a graph of
pressure drop against flow rate. The graph showed a power relationship for dry flow
condition and for wet condition, the graph resembled a power relationship until loading point
was observed. Loading and flooding point were determined from the aforementioned plots.
Pressure drop values from the generalized chart were also obtained for the purpose of
comparison with experimental values.

1.0 Introduction
1.1 Packed Bed Column

A packed bed column is a hollow column which is filled with packing material. The packing
material can be rings, spheres or saddles. Different packing material creates different pressure
difference. Pressure difference is caused mainly due to the fluid friction among the packings.
The packing material that offers more resistance to the fluid can cause higher pressure drop
between the packed column. Packed bed column has critical significance in heterogeneous
catalytic reactions. The flow of fluid through the catalyst bed causes efficient physical contact
between the fluid and the catalysts thus promoting the fluid molecules to adsorb on the
surface of the catalyst, increasing the rate at which heterogeneous catalytic reaction takes
place. For example, hydrosulphurization is a common technique used to remove sulphur from
refined petroleum. Packed bed column is also important in separation processes in which
unwanted or toxic materials from the feed are removed using a catalysed bed. For instance, in
catalytic converters installed in automobiles, finely divided platinum is used to catalyse
carbon monoxide to form less harmful gas, carbon dioxide. Figure 1 shows a schematic
diagram of a typical packed bed reactor used in chemical industries

1.
 Figure 1 Schematic diagram of a typical packed bed reactor

1.2 Two Phase Flow

Two phase flow is significant in many chemical engineering processes such as the
simultaneous transport of oil and gas in horizontal pipes and vertical wells in petrochemical
industries. In a packed bed reactors, gas is usually entered from the bottom of the packed
column flowing upwards and liquid is entered from the top of the packed column flowing
downwards thus creating a counter current flow. Counter current flow creates a good contact
between the two phases. Liquid wets the packing surface and gas passes through the wetted
surface of the packing where the mass transfer takes place. Two phase flow depends on the
properties of the fluid like density, viscosity and surface tension and also on the liquid and
gas flow rate. The parameters like viscosity, surface tension and density of liquid is important
in determining the pressure drop across the packed bed. Extremely high pressure drop across
the packed bed causes loading point and flooding point in the column. Loading point is a
point at which the liquid hold up starts to increase in the column whereas in flooding point,
due to high gas flow rate flowing upward, liquid accumulates until the entire column is filled
with liquid.

1.3 Generalized Correlation for Pressure Drop in Packed Columns

Generalized correlation for pressure drop in a packed column provides an empirical formula
through which pressure drop across the packed bed in different flow rates can be determined
without carrying out experiment. Though the results may differ from the actual pressure drop
obtained from experiment as the correlations are based on predictions. The x-axis and y-axis
for the generalized chart are defined as

x-axis:

2 0.1
y-axis: 2.
( )
Where,

Gx = Liquid mass velocity (lbm/ft2.s)

Gy = Gas mass velocity (lbm/ft2.s)

y = density of gas (lbm/ft3)

x = density of liquid (lbm/ft3)

x = viscosity of liquid (cP)

Fp = Packing factor

gc = gravitational acceleration (lbm.ft/lbf.s2)

Generalized chart for pressure drop in Packed bed is provided in Appendix.

1.4 Objectives

The experiment aims to study the fluid dynamics of a packed column for counter current flow
of air and water under dry and wet conditions. Moreover, the loading and flooding points in
the columnn will be identified and the experimental values will be compared with the
correlated values as proposed by Eckert-Strigle.

2.0 Methodology

Before conducting the experiment, general start-up procedure was carried out with the output
pressure of air compressor fixed at 6.5 bars. Firstly, packed column, K-201 was selected.
Experiment was carried out under dry flow conditions by introducing air at 60 SCFH to the
column. The air flow rate was increased to 200 SCFH with the step size of 20 SCFH and
pressure drop at each air flow rate was recorded.

For the second part, the mode of experiment was changed to wet condition by introducing air
and water simultaneously to the packed column. Air entered from the bottm flowing up the
column and water entered from top flowing down the column. Initially, water flow rate was
fixed to 2.4 L/min and air flow rate was varied from 60 SCFH to 200 SCFH. Pressure drop
was recorded at each conditions. The wet condition experiment was repeated for the same
column using water flow rate of 2.8 and 3.2 L/min. The whole procedure was repeated for
column K-202 and K-203. The experiment was ended by carrying out shut down procedure.

The results obtained were presented on the plot of pressure drop against gas flow rate at each
condition (dry condition and wet condition). Loading point and flood point were

3.
determined from the plots. The experimental results were compared with the correlated data.

Job Safety Analysis

Basic Job Steps Hazards Hazard Control and Safety

Recording pressure drop Over pressure in the valve
across the column at wet due to improper circulation
conditions causing damage to the valve.
Opening and closing the Water may leak from the
valve system causing slippery
floor.
Work Method
Read the experiment manual
before starting experiment
and ensure that circulation is
complete.
Check for any leakage before
starting experiment and mop
the floor if water is leaking.

When air compressor is Physical contact with heated Wear safety gloves and avoid
shut down air may cause skin burn. touching compressor parts
other than switch.

Table 1: Job safety analysis for the experiment

3.0 Results and Discussion

3.1 Pressure Drop for Dry Column

Pressure Drop for Dry Column

100
Pressure Drop, P (mmH2O)

10

1
0 50 100 150 200 250
Air Flow Rate, Vy (SCFH)

K-201 K-202 K-203

Figure 2 Pressure drop in each column under dry column

4.
From figure 2, it is observed that the pressure drop in K-201 with Raschig ring has highest
pressure drop at each air flow rate and K-203 with Intalox saddle has lowest pressure drop at
each air flow rate. It is due to the geometry of the packing material. Intalox saddles has the
highest porosity and surface area to volume ratio when compared to Raschig rings and Berl
saddles. So air can flow easily through the packings with less obstruction resulting in less
pressure drop across the column. Similarly, Raschig rings has lower porosity and surface area
to volume ratio thus more resistance to the flow of air through the packings. It is in line with
the theory that pressure drop is caused due to the fluid friction and resistance offered by the
packings. Higher the fluid friction, higher will be the pressure drop.

Moreover, it is observed that the relationship between the pressure drop and air flow rate can
be defined by power law displaying a straight line in log-log plot. This is because when the
air flow rate is increased, number of air molecules per unit area of packings increases thus
increasing the shear stress and fluid friction among the packings.

3.2 Pressure Drop for Wet Column

From figure 3, 4 and 5, similar trend is found as for the previous experiment in that the
pressure drop increased with the increase in air flow rate. It is because increasing air flow rate
increases air molecules in to the column thus making air flow difficult resulting in high
pressure drop. Nevertheless, when the water flow is introduced to the column, the pressure
drop is even more greater than in the absence of water. This phenomenon is explained by the
occupation of water molecules in the voids between the packings so less space is available for
the air molecules to flow. So the pressure at the bottom of the column becomes higher than
the pressure at top of column. As the water flow rate is increased, pressure drop is found to
increase as well. It is quite obvious that increasing the water flow rate means more water
molecules are occupying the voids between the packings thus making the air molecules even
more difficult to flow through the packings which increases the pressure drop across the
column.

Theoretically, at low air flow rates, the plot of pressure drop and flow rate should follow the
power law. But as the air flow rate is increased, the air flow creates obstruction for the water
that is flowing downwards and the liquid hold up starts to increase in the column. At this
point, the pressure drop escalates at higher rate. This point is known as loading point of the
column. When the air flow rate is increased further, the water is filled up the whole column
and flooding point is achieved. For the sparation processes, flooding point must be avoided as
it can affect the transport of liquid through the pipe. Perhaps, when the flooding point is
observed, the experiment should be shut down and started again.

5.
 K-201
1000
dP (mm H2O)

100
2.4 L/min
2.8 L/min
10 3.2 L/min
Dry

1
0 50 100 150 200 250
Air flow rate (SCFH)

Figure 3 Pressure drop against air flow rate in K-201 under different water flow rate

K-202
1000
dP (mm H2O)

100
2.4 L/min
2.8 L/min
10 3.2 L/min
Dry

1
0 50 100 150 200 250
Air flow rate (SCFH)

Figure 4 Pressure drop against air flow rate in K-202 under different water flow rate

6.
 K-203
100
dP (mm H2O)

2.4 L/min
10
2.8 L/min
3.2 L/min
Dry

1
0 50 100 150 200 250
Air flow rate (SCFH)

Figure 5 Pressure drop against air flow rate inK-203 under different water flow rate

The following table lists the loading and flooding points for each column at different water
flow rates.

Column Water Flow Loading Point Flooding Point

Rate, Vx (SCFH) (SCFH)
(L/min)
K201 2.4 140 200
2.8 120 180
3.2 120 160

K202 2.4 160 Not observed

2.8 160 Not observed
3.2 160 200

K203 2.4 140 Not observed

2.8 120 Not observed
3.2 140 Not observed

Table 2: Loading and flooding points of wet column experiments.

7.
From table 2, it is obvious that the best packing material is Berl saddles as the flooding point
is not observed except for awater flow rate of 3.2 L/min. It can be used as high performance
packing. Raschig rings should not be used in the packing column as loading and flooding
points are detected so it is vulnerable to high pressure differences.

3.3 Comparison of Experimental Results with Generalized Correlations

When the experimental results are compared with the the generalized correlations, it can be
clearly observed that the correlated values are more consistent and displays a more power-
like relationship when compared to wet experimental data. Though the experimental results
does not deviate much from the correlations.

It is important to note that the generalized correlations for pressure drop in a packed column
are empirical in nature instead of theoretical. The correlation is established by conducting
experiments under different physical conditions. Therefore, the correlation is valid only
within a certain range of physical parameters in which the experiments were conducted.
Caution must be taken when using generalized correlation for pressure drop in packed
column to estimate the pressure drop across the column, especially when the packed column
is operated at critical pressure and temperature of the fluid. In this situation, it would be
highly recommendable to conduct a pilot-scale experiment to analyze the actual pressure drop
to fix the design parameters involved in column design such as pumping requirement, column
effective packing height, column diameter and packing materials.

4.0 Conclusions

In conclusion, the pressure drop across the column increased with the increase in air flow
rate. Similarly, under wet conditions, the pressure drop observed were even more higher than
the dry conditions. The log-log plot of pressure drop against air flow rate showed a power
relationship for dry flow condition and for wet condition, the graph resembled a power
relationship until loading point was observed. Loading point of the column was determined
by observing the first signs of water hold up in the column while flooding point was
determined when the water was filled in the whole column. Pressure drop values from the
generalized chart were also obtained for comparison with experimental values. The
experimental values did not deviate much from the correlated values.

8.
5.0 References

1. Eigenberger, G. (1992). Fixed-Bed Reactors. Ullmanns Encyclopedia of Industrial

Chemistry,
B4, 199-238.
2. Froment, G. F., Bischoff, K. B., & De Wilde, J. (2011). Chemical Reactor Analysis
and Design
(3rd ed.).Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
3. Hewitt, G. F. (2011). Gas-Liquid Flow. Retrieved October 20, 2014, from
http://www.thermopedia.com/content/2/
4. Jnos, T., & Elza, K. (2008). Environmental technology. Retrieved October 22,
2014, from
http://www.tankonyvtar.hu/en/tartalom/tamop425/0032_kornyezettechnologia_en/ch0
8s05.html
5. Nice, K., & Bryant, C. W. (2000). How Catalytic Converters Work. Retrieved
October 20,
2014, from http://auto.howstuffworks.com/catalytic-converter2.htm
6. Perry, R. H., & Green, D. W. (2008). Perrys chemical engineers handbook (8th ed.).
New York: McGraw-Hill.
7. http://kb.eng-
software.com/display/ESKB/Relationship+Between+Pressure+Drop+and+Flow+Rate
+in+a+Pipeline

9.
APPENDIX

Table A1: Pressure drop values determined from dry column experiment.
Air Flow Pressure Drop (mmH2O)
(SCFH) K201 K202 K203
60 4 3 2
100 8 5 3
140 13 9 5
180 20 14 18
200 24 17 10

Table A2: Pressure drop values determined from wet column experiment for column K201.
FLOW RATE
Air (SCFH) 60 100 140 180 200

Water (L/min)
2.4 12 26 53 200 289
2.8 15 26 168 293 -
3.2 15 43 168 - -

Table A3: Pressure drop values determined from wet column experiment for column K202.
FLOW RATE
Air (SCFH) 60 100 140 180 200

Water (L/min)
2.4 6 17 35 90 135
2.8 11 34 53 152 278
3.2 13 34 81 198 278

Table A4: Pressure drop values determined from wet column experiment for column K203.
FLOW RATE
Air (SCFH) 60 100 140 180 200

Water (L/min)
2.4 3 5 9 23 31
2.8 5 8 17 39 45
3.2 5 10 17 39 52

10.
Table B1: Packing factor for the packing materials used in the experiment. (Jnos & Elza,
2008)

Figure B1: Generalized Chart for Pressure Drop in Packed Column as proposed by Eckert,
modified by Strigle. (Jnos & Elza, 2008)

11.