Professional Documents
Culture Documents
FACULTY OF ENGINEERING
DEPARTMENT OF CHEMICAL ENGINEERING
CHNG 2009 CHEMICAL ENGINEERING
LABORATORY 2 2010
NAME OF EXPERIMENT: ABSORPTION IN
A PACKED COLUMN (MT4)
INFORMAL
DATE CONDUCTED: 27TH SEPTEMBER,
2010
DATE SUBMITTED: 11TH OCTOBER, 2010
NAME OF STUDENT: TERRANCE ALI
STUDENT ID: 809000670
LAB GROUP: B
ABSTRACT
The objective of this experiment was to calculate the rate of
absorption of Carbon Dioxide into water from analysis of liquid
solutions flowing down the absorption tower. In order to do this, an
absorption column was used and water was allowed to flow down with
column with Carbon Dioxide in air flowing up the column. Sample of
the water were collected at a point below the column and from the
Sump Tank and these were titrated with Sodium Hydroxide to
determine the amount of free CO2 in the water. It was seen that the
results from the titrations varied throughout the course of the
experiment. The rate of absorption at both points analyzed reached a
maximum and then decreased during the time for which the
experiment was conducted. Graphs were plotted which demonstrate
these relationships. The rate of absorption for the Sump Tank and
Sample Point after twenty minutes were 1.948x10 -5 mols-1 and
8.656x10-7 mols-1 respectively.
EXPERIMENTAL
APPARATUS AND MATERIALS
following:
- Absorption column
- Carbon dioxide (CO2) flow meter
- Water (H2O) flow meter
- Air flow meter
- Pump
- Compressor
- Sump tank
- Air and water valves
- Delivery tubes
Beakers
Conical flasks
Burettes
Funnel
Stopwatch
Measuring cylinders
Phenolphthalein indicator
0.0227 M Sodium hydroxide solution (NaOH)
PROCEDURE
1. The
sump
tank
was
filled
with
water
until
it
was
Sampl
e
Numb
er
Tim
e/
min
s
27.6
23.3
10
28.7
25.2
20
27.8
27.8
30
33.2
28.9
40
31.7
28.2
50
30.7
25.2
Free CO2=
Using sample 1 from the Sump Tank (S5), we get:
Free CO2=
CD=3.227x10-3mol/L
=0.100Ls-1
F1=
Therefore,
Sampl
e
Numbe
r
Tim
e/
min
s
Volume NaOH
(Vb) / ml
S4
(Sampl
e
Point)
S5
(Sump
Tank)
Free CO2 in
Sample
(x 10-3)/molL
S4
(Sampl
e
Point)
S5
(Sump
Tank)
Average Rate of
Absorption / mol/s
S4
(Sample
Point)
S5
(Sump
Tank)
CO2
Absorb
ed
(x10-5) /
mol/s
27.6
23.3
3.823
3.227
10
28.7
25.2
3.975
3.490
20
27.8
27.8
3.850
3.850
30
33.2
28.9
4.598
4.003
40
31.7
28.2
4.390
3.906
50
30.7
25.2
4.252
3.490
5.955
9.522E06
8.656E07
1.616E05
8.873E06
5.367E06
1.645E05
1.948E05
1.616E05
1.060E05
3.289E06
DISCUSSION
This
experiment
investigated
the
phenomenon
of
Absorption.
4.84
0.000
5.956
4.848
7.618
solute was being transferred from the liquid phase to the gas phase)
then the process is termed Desorption or Stripping. The liquid enters
through the top of the column and the gas enters from the base of the
column. In this way the natural forces which exist between these
different phases allow for a counter current flow.
The objective of this experiment was to determine the rate of
absorption of carbon dioxide into water from analysis of liquid
solutions flowing down the column. There are two types of columns
which can be used for Absorption namely a packed column and a
plate column. In this experiment the choice of column which was used
was a packed column with Raschig rings being used as the packing
material. Raschig rings allow for the interfacial area to be maximized
which would improve the mass transfer potential of the column.
Furthermore, Raschig rings are inexpensive and because of their
channeling ability they do not obstruct the flow of the phases which
would increase the contact between the different phases hence their
use as packing within the column is justified.
It is seen from the titration results obtained that the water from the
Sump Tank required less Sodium Hydroxide than that from the Sample
Point. This indicated that the water at the Sample Point which was
located at the base of the tower contained more Carbon Dioxide than
the water within the Sump Tank. This trend is expected since the
Sump Tank initially contained a bulk of solute free water and thus
when the water from the base of the column is allowed to re-enter the
Sump
Tank
the
process
of
diffusion
would
occur
since
the
concentration of the solute within the Sump Tank would be less than
that of the incoming water providing a concentration gradient. The
solute would now be diluted causing the amount of CO 2 in the sample
taken from the Sump Tank to be less than that of the sample taken
from the Sample Point. Moreover, it was seen that the Titration results
varied greatly with respect to time. This could be explained through
the many sources of errors which are provided at the end of this
Discussion.
The first graph illustrates the relationship between the free CO 2 in the
water sample and the time intervals. it was seen that both graphs
share a similar trend in that they both increases initially, then leveled
off and slightly decreased. There was one inconsistency in that both
titrations of the water from the Sump Tank and the water from the
Sample Point yielded the same titre value which meant that the
concentration of CO2 did not change during that period. This may not
have been the case but due to the Sump Tank not being allowed to
reach a state of equilibrium with respect to the distribution of CO 2
within the water, the water tested could have yielded such a result.
This result is expected since the amount of free CO 2 in the water is
expected to increase with time as water is allowed to absorb it from
the gas. One must keep in mind that the water in this experiment is
being recycled and as such CO 2 would already be in the water when it
flows through the column again thus causing the amount of free CO 2
in the water to increase. the graph levels off and this is expected
since there would, at some point, exist a state of equilibrium between
the CO2 absorbed and the CO2 in the gas. At this point it can be said
that the water becomes saturated and as such it cannot absorb any
more CO2.
The second graph illustrates that as time increases the average rate
of absorption of CO2 generally decreases after an initial increase. This
pattern is extremely evident in the case of the Sump Tank. In the case
of the water titrated from the Sample Point, there existed one
inconsistency in that the value corresponding to a time of 20 minutes
after starting to take readings where the average rate was very low.
this could have been attributed to an error in the titration conducted
on that specific sample. There is an initial increase in the rate of
absorption since there would be very little CO 2 in the incoming water
and as such the system would be far away from equilibrium meaning
that the water would have a greater desire to absorb CO 2 from the
gas. As the amount of CO2 in the water increases this desire of the
water to absorb CO2 is gradually hindered meaning that the average
rate of absorption would decrease as represented in the graph.
The last graph which was plotted shows the relationship between the
CO2 absorbed across the column and time. It is seen that with the
exception of the value for a time of 20 minutes the amount of CO 2
absorbed increased. This discrepancy at a time of 20 minutes has
been explained previously. The gradient of this curve would give at
idea of the rate of absorption of CO 2 throughout the column which is
the same data acquired from Graph 2. It is seen that the gradient is
initially steep and then it becomes calmer which follows the pattern
explained in the analysis of Graph 2.
It is worth mentioning that Absorption has many uses in Industry.
Some of these are:
It can be used for the removal of carbon dioxide from, and the
desulphurization
of
biogas
from
anaerobic
digesters
and
landfills.
In certain reactions, absorption can be used in order to
eliminate impurities from the feed since these can hinder the
reaction catalyst.
Safety Analysis
When pouring the water from the bucket into the Sump Tank
great care should be adopted so as to not spill any water on the
floor which can lead to someone falling in the laboratory, if such
a scenario does indeed take place then mops should be readily
cylinder.
A sink should have been used for the dumping of chemicals
instead of a bucket since a bucket could be accidently knocked
over very easily.
Sources of Errors
The water which was used to fill the Sump Tank was tap water
and as such the water could have contained chemicals which
attained.
The flow rates of the three feed streams namely air, water and
Carbon Dioxide varied during the experiment and there was no
method of making them remain constant. If the flow rates are
varied then the amount of each phase which is in contact with
each other will also be varied leading to differences in
absorption.
It is recommended that:
collected
for
titrating
would
represent
the
actual
REFERENCES
Coulson, J.M. and J.F. Richardson (1991). Chemical Engineering,
Volume II(4th Edition). Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford.
Treybal, R.E. (1980). Mass Transfer Operations (3rd Edition). McGrawHill, New York.
www.gasairconditioning.org/absorption_advantages_applications.htm
Farabi, H. Lecture Notes.
APPENDIX
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Abstract
1
Experimental
Results and Calculations
4
Discussion
8
Conclusions
& Recommendations
12
References
13
Appendix
14