72 Figure 7 is a similar plot for metal IMTP random packing;
Figure 8 for metal Pall rings; and Figure 9 for metal gauze BX structured packing。 A discussion of some further issues
Metal gauze structured packing in the ‘‘X’’ configuration
。c D 。
related to curve fitting is presented in Appendix C。
In this section, we compare predictions made with the mass-transfer correlations developed above to experiment for
a number of different chemical systems, packing types。 All calculations were carried out with Aspen Rate Based Distil- lation v7。2。2 In general, we used the COUNTERCURRENT flow
distillation simulations。 For acid gas removal with amines or
(75) with caustic, we used the VPLUG flow option (this option
Figure 11。 Comparison of correlation predictions with experimental data for metal Pall rings。
(a) Data of Shariat and Kunesh57 for total reflux distillation of cyclohexane/n-heptane at 5 psia。 (b) Data of Shariat and Kunesh57 for total reflux distillation of cyclohexane/n-heptane at 5 psia。 (c) Data from Schultes9 for total reflux distillation of i-butane/n-butane at 165 psia。 (d) Data of Shariat and Kunesh57 for total reflux distillation of cyclohexane/n-heptane at 5 psia。 Correlations used in these calcula- tions: Bravo and Fair,4 Onda et al。,3 and Billet and Schultes。5
treats the liquid phase as well mixed and the vapor as in plug flow) and the ELECNRTL package for physical properties。 The reader is informed wherever we have deviated from
sizes。 In each case, the mass-transfer coefficient correlation developed in this article for structured packings performs as well or better than the other mass-transfer correlations examined。
these conventions。 The bases of the 65
property options are described elsewhere。
and ELECN 66
Tables 1 and 2 contain an additional column with hHETPi
predictions from the new mass-transfer coefficient/interfa-
Figure 10 is a comparison of total reflux binary hHETPi data for metal IMTP with simulated results for a selection of different binary mixtures and packing sizes。 In each case, the mass-transfer coefficient correlation developed in this ar- ticle for metal IMTP outperforms the other mass-transfer correlations examined。
Figure 11 is a comparison of total reflux binary hHETPi data for metal Pall rings with simulated results for a selec- tion of different binary mixtures and packing sizes。 In each case, the mass-transfer coefficient correlation developed in this article for metal Pall rings outperforms the other mass- transfer correlations examined。
Figure 12 is a comparison of total reflux binary hHETPi data for sheet metal structured packings with simulated results obtained for a selection of different binary mixtures and packing
cial-area correlations developed in this article。 Clearly, the new mass-transfer/interfacial-area correlations are an improvement over the other public-domain correlations examined here across a varied range of chemical systems and packing sizes/geometries。
Lawal et al。40 have compared pilot plant data with the results of simulation studies on the absorption of CO2 by monoethanolamine (MEA) in a column packed with IMTP 40 metal random packing。 The pilot plant data were taken by the Separations Research Program at the University of Texas, Austin。68 Lawal et al。 reported detailed results for two cases, referred to as ‘‘Case 32’’ and ‘‘Case 47。’’ Case 32 is more interesting to study because the results are strongly dependent upon the mass-transfer correlation selection。 In our simulations, we have used the Aspen v7。0 MEA 填料塔的新传质相关性英文文献和中文翻译(16):http://www.youerw.com/fanyi/lunwen_81699.html