1983
DOI: 10.1252/jcej.16.407
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Gas holdup and volumetric liquid-phase mass transfer coefficient in bubble column with draught tube and with gas dispersion into annulus.

Abstract: The gas holdup s and the volumetric liquid-phase mass transfer coefficient kLa were studied experimentally in a bubble column with a draught tube and with gas dispersion into the annulus. It has been shown that s and kLa increase with increasing gas velocity and frothing ability of liquid, while the dimensions of the column have a minor effect on s and kLa. Based on these observations, empirical equations for s and kLa are proposed which are applicable to columns with diameters of 0.1-0.3 m.It was shown also t… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

2
23
0

Year Published

1985
1985
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
5
2

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 85 publications
(25 citation statements)
references
References 1 publication
2
23
0
Order By: Relevance
“…(15) and (16) developed here agreed exceptionally well with Eq. (17) of Koide et al [31] and this validates our data. Of course the earlier developed Eq.…”
Section: Gas-liquid Mass Transfersupporting
confidence: 93%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…(15) and (16) developed here agreed exceptionally well with Eq. (17) of Koide et al [31] and this validates our data. Of course the earlier developed Eq.…”
Section: Gas-liquid Mass Transfersupporting
confidence: 93%
“…(15) and (16) [31]. The reasons for this disparity are apparently linked with important differences between the reactor used by us and that used by Bang et al [21].…”
Section: Gas-liquid Mass Transfermentioning
confidence: 81%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…The details of this method are similar to those in the previous paper. 5) Photographs of bubbles in the column were taken in three regions (the region j, 7= 1-3) whose levels from the gas distributor were respectively 0-0.33 m, Figure 3 shows the effect of c 'B, the concentration of surface-active substance, on e/e0, the ratio of s in aqueous solution to that in water. s/s0 seems to increase at lower concentration in an aqueous solution of alcohol with longer carbon chain length.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%