The University of Tennessee at Chattanooga

College of Engineering and Computer Science

Engineering 435
Chemical Process Systems Laboratory

Gas Absorption Column

Team Members:
Andy Guider
Marc Moss

ENGR 435-001
Dr. J. Cunningham
October 13, 1998

Introduction
This group was assigned the task of analyzing the counter-current packed tower
gas absorption column located in room 303 of the Administration Building. The behavior
of the pressure drop in relation to various gas and water flow rates was used to find the
packing factor for the 3/8" diameter glass rings that fill the column.
This report discusses the procedure followed while performing the experiments.
It begins with a description of the Gas Absorption Column, along with the theory of how
it works. It is followed by the experimental procedures and the results obtained. The
report is concluded with a discussion of the significance of the experiment and the
results, as well as the conclusion drawn. An appendix is attached to the end of the report
and includes the raw data charts and references.

Theory and Background

The packed tower is a common apparatus used for gas absorption. It consists of a
cylindrical column equipped with a gas inlet at the bottom, as well as a liquid inlet at the
top (see Figure 1.) The liquid flow enters at the top and travels through a distributor
device which ensures equal flow through the column. Once the liquid travels through the
packing material, it exits the column through an outlet at the bottom. The gas enters at the
bottom and travels counter-current to the liquid, exiting at the top of the column.
The column used for this experiment has an inside diameter of 3 inches and has a
total packed height of 5 feet. It is packed with 3/8" diameter glass Raschig rings. The gas
is a pressurized air stream, supplied at 40psig from the building. The liquid is water

pumped out of a reservoir, and is returned to the reservoir after travelling through the
column. The system is controlled and the data is recorded by the computer program
LabView, which is installed on a MacIntosh computer.
Since the column was not analyzed for the gas absorption, the only equations used
were the ones for calculating the values used on the pressure drop correlation chart.
Abscissa :

Gx
Gy

y
x y
2

Ordinate :

G y Fp x

(1)

0.1

g(x y )y

( 2)

Gx = water flow rate, in lbs/sec*in2

Gy = air flow rate, in lbs/sec*in2
x = density of water, in lbs/ft3
y = density of air, in lbs/ft3
x = viscosity of water, in centistokes
g = acceleration due to gravity, 32.2 ft/sec2
FP = packing factor
Where:

Water In

Pressure Tap

Air Out

Pressure Tap
Air In
Water Out

Figure 1: Packed Tower Schematic Diagram

Procedure

Ten runs were made at different air flow/water flow combinations. Each run was
started and then allowed to run until the system had reached steady state. After the system
had been at steady state long enough (approximately one minute) for the computer to
record a sufficient number of data points to analyze, the run was ended and the data was
saved.

Results
Table 1 contains the average values for the air flow, water flow and pressure drop
across the column for each of the ten runs. Also included are the values calculated using
equation (1), and the packing factor (Fp), which was calculated using equation (2) and the
pressure-drop correlation chart (below).

Discussion

During this experiment, we were able to make ten runs, however the first six had
to be thrown out because the abscissa values they yielded were too high for the
correlation chart. The remaining four were used to calculate the packing factor. The four
values obtained were averaged to give a packing factor of 1569. This compares somewhat
favorably to the literature value of 1000 given for 3/8" ceramic Raschig rings. The
difference could be explained by the difference in materials, as the rings were made of
glass for our experiments. Only using four runs means that the error was very high, but
this could not be avoided since there was not enough time to make more runs.

Conclusions and Recommendations

Being able to use less than half the data gathered means that the packing factor
calculated is somewhat suspect. A more complete correlation chart (with abscissa values
higher than 10) would allow the other data to be used. To counter this problem, more runs
could have been made using higher air flows and/or lower water flows.

References
Calvert, Seymour and Harold M. Englund. Handbook of Air Pollution Technology.
Wiley and Sons. New York. 1984.
McCabe, Smith and Harroit. Unit Operations of Chemical Engineering, 5th ed.

McGraw-Hill, New York, 1993.

Table of Contents
I.

Introduction

II. Theory and Background

III.

Procedure

IV. Results
V. Discussion
VI. Conclusions and Recommendations
VII. Appendix
A. References
B. Sample Calculations
C. Raw Data

Appendix