The objective of this work is to study a comprehensive performance of three types of structured parking in CO2 absorption application. One of them was developed in Mexican National Institute of Nuclear Research （ININ...The objective of this work is to study a comprehensive performance of three types of structured parking in CO2 absorption application. One of them was developed in Mexican National Institute of Nuclear Research （ININ abbreviation in Spanish of Instituto Nacional de lnvestigaciones Nucleates）, and the other two, Sulzer BX and Mellapak 250Y, by Sulzer Brothers Ltd. Aqueous solution of 30 weight % Monoethanolamine was employed as absorption solvent. The performance of the structured packing was evaluated in terms of the pressure drop, holds up, volumetric overall mass transfer coefficient and height of a global transfer unit of gas and liquid side as a function of the process operating parameters including gas and liquid load, by using hydrodynamic and mass transfer models. The pressure drop of ININ packing was higher than Sulzer BX and Mellapak 250Y, and volumetric overall mass transfer coefficient values are similar of Sulzer BX values and higher than Mellapak 250Y, although Sulzer BX and ININI 8 packing had less height of a global transfer unit of gas side values than Mellapak 250Y packing. The above-mentioned are consequences of the geometric characteristics and operational behavior for each packing.展开更多
文摘The objective of this work is to study a comprehensive performance of three types of structured parking in CO2 absorption application. One of them was developed in Mexican National Institute of Nuclear Research （ININ abbreviation in Spanish of Instituto Nacional de lnvestigaciones Nucleates）, and the other two, Sulzer BX and Mellapak 250Y, by Sulzer Brothers Ltd. Aqueous solution of 30 weight % Monoethanolamine was employed as absorption solvent. The performance of the structured packing was evaluated in terms of the pressure drop, holds up, volumetric overall mass transfer coefficient and height of a global transfer unit of gas and liquid side as a function of the process operating parameters including gas and liquid load, by using hydrodynamic and mass transfer models. The pressure drop of ININ packing was higher than Sulzer BX and Mellapak 250Y, and volumetric overall mass transfer coefficient values are similar of Sulzer BX values and higher than Mellapak 250Y, although Sulzer BX and ININI 8 packing had less height of a global transfer unit of gas side values than Mellapak 250Y packing. The above-mentioned are consequences of the geometric characteristics and operational behavior for each packing.
