Gas Absorption

LABORATORY REPORT

Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirement of

BACHELOR OF ENGINEERING IN TECHNOLOGY

IN

CHEMICAL ENGINEERING

In the

FACULTY OF ENGINEERING AND BUILT ENVIRONMENT

Of the

UNIVERSITY OF JOHANNESBURG

By

Masuku H 222102330

Group 09

DUE: 14 OCTOBER 2023

i
Abstract
The aims of the study are to determine carbon dioxide composition in the streams around the
column, finding the absorption efficiency of the column and discussing the effect of varying
liquid flowrates on the absorbed carbon dioxide composition in the liquid outlet stream. A
desk top absorption apparatus was used to conduct this experiment. Air and carbon dioxide
were fed into the bottom and water was fed into the top. The collected water and the bottom
were titrated with NaOH and HCl and results were recorded in a table. It was discovered that
with an increase in the liquid flowrate the pressure drop also increased and after calculations
it was found that the composition of carbon dioxide decreased with the increase in the liquid
flowrate. The absorption efficiency was then calculated as well as the operating line and the
equilibrium line of the different flowrates. The results show that varying the flowrate will
have many different effects on the composition of the carbon dioxide as well as the pressure
drop. The experiment could be repeated two or times to reach a more accurate and more
precise result.

ii
Declaration
I Masuku H student number 222102330 of the University of Johannesburg declare that the
information in this report where otherwise indicated is my own work. Information outsourced
was acknowledged the right way.

iii
Acknowledgements
I would like to thank Mr Ramatsa for providing me with opportunity to do this experiment
and teaching me how to structure and present an acceptable lab report, I would also like to
thank the lab instructor for helping me and guiding me through the practical.

iv
Table of Contents
Abstract.................................................................................................................................................ii
Declaration............................................................................................................................................iii
Acknowledgements...............................................................................................................................iv
1.0Introduction......................................................................................................................................1
1.1Objective.......................................................................................................................................1
1.2Background...................................................................................................................................1
2.0Experimental Procedure...................................................................................................................3
3.0Results, calculations and discussions................................................................................................4
3.1Calculations and Results...............................................................................................................4
3.2Discussions...................................................................................................................................7
4.0Conclusion........................................................................................................................................8
5.0Recommendations............................................................................................................................9
6.0References......................................................................................................................................10
7.0Appendices.....................................................................................................................................11
7.1Appendix a data and formulae....................................................................................................11
7.2Appendix b raw data...................................................................................................................12

v
1.0Introduction
1.1Objective
The aims of the study are to determine carbon dioxide composition in the streams around the
column, finding the absorption efficiency of the column and discussing the effect of varying
liquid flowrates on the absorbed carbon dioxide composition in the liquid outlet stream.

1.2Background
Gas absorption column is a unit operation used to separate a gas mixture by using a suitable
solvent. It involves the removal of a solute form a stream via uptake by a non-volatile liquid
called an absorbent. The absorption column is a unit operation that is vertical cylindrical in
shape and is usually packed with trays. It operates using a counter current operation where
the clean solvent is fed at the top of the column and the untreated gas is fed at the bottom of
the column. For an absorption operation to work efficiently gas and liquid phases should be
brought into close contact with each other to facilitate mass transfer between the two.
Assumptions are made when calculations are done in this operation, as while the total liquid
and gas streams can change the flow rates of the carrier gas and the solvent are assumed to be
constant (Coulsen and Richardson,2002).

When two phases are mixed together, they will eventually reach an equilibrium and the gas is
absorbed by the liquid. The extent to which the gas is absorbed by the liquid is determined by
the partial pressure at a specific temperature and concentration. The relationship between
dilute concentration components and components in gas phase is given by Henry’s law,

P A =C A × H

Where PA = Partial pressure of a component in gas phase

CA = Concentration of the component in liquid phase

H = Henry’s constant (Yeh, Pennline and Resnik, 2001)

According to McCabe and Smith(1985), fixed temperature and pressure are estimated for a
range of x an y values in the presence of a solute free absorbent and solute fee gas. The x and
y values are used to plot an equilibrium curve which is usually non-linear. An operating line
is plotted with the equilibrium line, the operating line is linear line that is derived from the
overall tower mass balance. It is linear because of the assumption that the gas flow rate is
constant and that the liquid flow rate is also kept constant throughout the operation. The

1
operating line is above the equilibrium line for a given solute concentration in liquid phase,
the solute concentration in gas is always greater than the equilibrium value.

Figure 1 absorption column with operating and equilibrium line (Nakanoh and Yoshida, 1980)

From figure 1 the overall mass balance over the column can be figured to be

G N+1 Y n+ 1+ L0 X 0 =LN X n+G Y 1

Therefore, the operating line and cane derived to be,

L L
Y n +1= X n +(Y 1− X 0 )
G G

During the operation of the absorption of carbon dioxide in an absorption column the increase
in the air flowrate will results to an increase in the pressure of the system. This is because as
the frictional forces experienced by the fluid are increased in the system (Christov et al., 2018).
The increase of the flowrate will also result to less carbon dioxide being absorbed because of
the decrease in the gas phase resistance (Khan, Halder and Saha, 2016).

2
2.0Experimental Procedure
To the start the experiment deionized water which was the solvent was poured in to into tank
d1. The carbon dioxide cylinder to absorbed was connected via a valve 9 and valve 8 was
used to connect compressed air supply. Valve 2,3,4,5,6,7 and 10 were closed. The operating
loops was selected and valves 1,8 and 9 were opened after which the flowrate of the pump
was selected at 30 percent output which was 80l/min. The flow rate pf air and carbon dioxide
were set by opening the air feed line valve and selecting the operating loop. The flowrate of
air was set at 20l/min by scrolling and the flowrate of carbon dioxide was set to 9l/min and
the switch of the pump was turned to position 1. For the first run the differential pressure was
recorded after 10 minutes and all the water was drained from the bottom of the apparatus.
About 100ml of the water was transferred to a conical flask where it was titrated with
standard solution of NaOH and hydrochloric acid using phenolphthalein indicator until an
end point was reached. For the next 3 runs the flow rate was gradually increased to 40 l/min,
60 l/min and 90 l/min. for each run the differential pressure was taken after 10 minutes and
the titration was done.

3
3.0Results, calculations and discussions
3.1Calculations and Results
The aims of the study are to determine carbon dioxide composition in the streams around the
column, finding the absorption efficiency of the column and discussing the effect of varying
liquid flowrates on the absorbed carbon dioxide composition in the liquid outlet stream.
Equations used in these calculations are found in appendix A and experimental data used in
calculations is found in table 1 in appendix b.

Sample calculation for run 1

Volumetric flowrate =

3
20 L m 3
air= × =0.02m /min
min 1000 L
3
water =0.08 m /min
3
c o2=0.009 m /min

Mass flowrates (density values in appendix a)

Mair=density × vlomutric flowrate=1.23 × 0.02=0.0246 Kg /min

Mwater=1000 ×0.08=80 Kg/min

Mcarbon dioxide=1.98× 0.009=0.01782 Kg/min

Number of moles for each component

Mr ( air )=0.23 Mr ( oxygen ) +0.77 Mr ( Nitrogen )=0.23 ( 2 ×15.999 ) +0.77 ( 2 ×14.007 )=28.93032 kg /kmol

m 0.0246 0.0008503 kmol

n= = =
Mr 28.93032 min

80
n ( water )= =4.4407 kmol /min
18

0.01782 0.0004050092 kmol

n(Co2)= =
43.999 min

Carbon dioxide mole fraction at the inlet

0.0004050092
y 1= =0.3679
0.0004050092+0.0008503

4
Concentration of outlet carbon dioxide

n ( NaOH ) =C ×V =0.1× 0.0022 L=0.00022 mol

NaOH: H2CO3

1 : 1

∴n(H2CO3)= 0.00022mol

n H 2 CO 3 0.00022
C h 2CO 3= = =0.0022 M
V H2O 0.1

80 L
n ( H 2 CO3 ) = × 0.0022 M =0.176 mol
min

n( H 2 CO 3) 0.176
x 1= = =0.0003963142
n ( H 2 CO 3 ) +n(water ) 0.176 +4440.07

G=n ( air ) ×n ( CO 2 )=0.0008503+0.0004050184=0.0012553

L = 4.440743825 kmol/min

Operating line equation for run1

L
y 2= ( x −x ) + y 1
G 2 1

4.440743825
y 2=
0.001255
( x 2−0.0003963142 ) +0.322642

Equilibrium equation using Henry’s law.

y=1640 x 1

0.00003963
absorption efficiency= −1=98 %
0.00003963+0.3679

Operating line for run 2

4.440743825
y 2=
0.0021057
( x 2−0.000027026 ) + 0.19234

Operating line for run 3

4.440743825
y 2=
0.002956
( x 2−0.000012612 ) +0.1370

5
Operating line for run 4

4.440743825
y 2=
0.0042314
( x 2−0.0000090088 ) + 0.09572

Water flow CO2 CO2 Pressure

Run Time Air -flow CO2 flow rate composition composition Drop

Top of Bottom of
(min) (L/min) (L/min) (L/min) column column (mmHg)

1 10 20 9 80 0.00003963 0.3679 34

2 20 40 9 80 0.00002702 0.19235 37

3 30 60 9 80 0.00001261 0.1370 41

4 40 90 9 80 0.00000901 0.09572 45

50

45

40

35
pressure drop mmh2o

30

25

20

15

10

0
0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09 0.1
mass flowrate kg/min

6
3.2Discussions

The results show that when varying the air flow rate of the system the pressure drop
increases exponentially, this because the as the flowrate increases the frictional forces
experienced in the pipes increase this can explained by Bernoulli’s equation when comparing
the flowrate against the pressure drop the relationship is that an increase in flowrate results to
a decrease in pressure which means the pressure drops increases (Christov et al., 2018).

The column has a very high absorption efficiency, this means that carbon dioxide is easily
absorbed into the solvent. Varying the liquid flow rate resulted to less carbon dioxide being
absorbed by the solvent as mention by Khan and Saha (2016) that is because at higher
flowrates the is a decrease in the gas phase resistance which results to the rate of mass
transfer being reduced. From the calculation after deriving and applying the equation of the
operating line using the mass balance and information literature (Nakanoh and Yoshida, 1980)
,it can be concluded that with an increase in the liquid flowrate the gas flowrate increases
which means that the operating line gets more steeper witch each run as G becomes bigger.

7
4.0Conclusion
The aims of the study are to determine carbon dioxide composition in the streams around the
column, finding the absorption efficiency of the column and discussing the effect of varying
liquid flowrates on the absorbed carbon dioxide composition in the liquid outlet stream. The
results showed with a varying liquid flow rate the pressure drop of the system increases
exponentially and that the composition of carbon dioxide decreases both at the bottom and
the top of the column. The absorption efficiency was found to be high at about 98% using
data from the first run made.

8
5.0Recommendations
Repeat the experiment more than 2 or mire times to reach a precise and more accurate
conclusion.

Inspection of an leaks that may cause the results to be false or inaccurate.

9
6.0References
Christov, I.C. et al. (2018) ‘Flow rate–pressure drop relation for deformable shallow microfluidic
channels’, Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 841, pp. 267–286. Available at:
https://doi.org/10.1017/JFM.2018.30.

Khan, A.A., Halder, G.N. and Saha, A.K. (2016) ‘Experimental investigation of sorption
characteristics of capturing carbon dioxide into piperazine activated aqueous 2-amino-2-
methyl-1-propanol solution in a packed column’, International Journal of Greenhouse Gas
Control, 44, pp. 217–226. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/J.IJGGC.2015.11.020.
McCabe, W. L. and J. C. Smith, Unit Operations of Chemical Engineering,4th Edition,
McGraw Hill Book Company, New York, NY, 1985
Nakanoh, M. and Yoshida, F. (1980) ‘Gas Absorption by Newtonian and Non-Newtonian
Liquids in a Bubble Column’, Industrial and Engineering Chemistry Process Design and
Development, 19(1), pp. 190–195. Available at:
https://doi.org/10.1021/I260073A033/ASSET/I260073A033.FP.PNG_V03.
J.M Coulson & J.F Richardson, Particle Technology & Separation Processes (2002) , Vol 2,
5th Ed, Elsevier Butterworth Heinemann
Yeh, J.T., Pennline, H.W. and Resnik, K.P. (2001) ‘Study of CO2 Absorption and Desorption
in a Packed Column’, Energy and Fuels, 15(2), pp. 274–278. Available at:
https://doi.org/10.1021/EF0002389.

10
7.0Appendices
7.1Appendix a data and formulae

Density d

d(air) = 1.225 kg/m^3

d(carbon dioxide) = 1.98 kg/m^3

d(water) = 1000kg/m^3

molecular weight values

air = 28.93032kg/kmol

water = 18kg/kmol

carbon dioxide = 43.999kg/kmol

m
n=
Mr

Where n = number of moles per min

m = mass flowrate

Mr = molecular weight

n=C ×V

Where n = number of moles per min

C = Molarity

V = volume in L

G=n ( air ) +n (carbon dioxide )

11
7.2Appendix b raw data

Table 2: NaOH volume from titration

Initial Final

0 2.2

0 1.5

0 0.7

0.1 0.6

12