Gas permeation flux

In summary, one can see that separation selectivity for gas and vapor molecules depends on the category of pores (mesopores, supermicropores, and ultramicropores) and on the related transport mechanisms. Either size effect or preferential adsorption effect (irrespective of molecular dimension) is involved in selective separation of multicomponent mixtures. The membrane separation selectivity for two gases is usually expressed either as the ratio between the two pure gas permeation fluxes (ideal selectivity) or between each gas permeation flux measured from the mixture of the two gases (real selectivity). More detailed information on gas and vapor transport in porous ceramic membranes can be found in Ref. [24]. 

For gas separations, solution-diffusion theory leads to the conclusion that gas permeation flux (J) is proportional to the difference in gas partial pressure across the membrane (Ap) J=(P//)Ap. The proportionality constant is equal to the intrinsic permeability (P) for the membrane material divided by the effective membrane thickness (/). In turn, the permeability is equal to the product of a solubility (S) and diffusivity (D) P=D S. The ability to separate two... 

Robeson s well-known tradeoff curve shows the strong inverse relationship between gas permeation flux (permeability) and selectivity [66], Robeson s plot also shows a line Unking the most permeable polymers at a particular selectivity. This Une is called the upper bound. Comparison of gas permeability (permeability of O2 and permeability of CO2) and the separation performances for different gas pairs (O2/N2 and CO2/CH4) of PAs have been shown in terms of Robeson plots. Permselectivity values of O2/N2 gas pair versus O2 permeabiUty values and permselectivity values of CO2/CH4 gas pair versus... 

Indeed, it is worth noting that by itself, a permeation rate proportional to p°50 could be consistent with any value whatever for the ratio of monatomic to diatomic species in the solid, if the diatomic species is very immobile. For in such case, the permeation flux would be carried entirely by the monatomic species, whose concentration always goes as p0 50. However, a sizable diatomic fraction would significantly modify the transient behavior of the permeation after a change in gas pressure. Although neither Van Wieringen and Warmholtz nor Frank and Thomas published details of the fit of their observed transients to the predictions of diffusion theory, it is unlikely that any large discrepancies would have escaped their attention. 

To attain this goal, a pervaporation technique has been proposed, using a PVA composite membrane, made by casting of a mixture of PVA aqueous solution and a GA one on a polyethersulfone (PES) porous support, solvent evaporation and thermic curing [72], Excellent dehydration performance has been obtained (separation factor 320 and permeation flux 1.5 kg m 2 h 1, for 90 wt% TFEA in the feed and 80 °C). 

For single-component gas permeation through a microporous membrane, the flux (J) can be described by Eq. (10.1), where p is the density of the membrane, ris the thermodynamic correction factor which describes the equilibrium relationship between the concentration in the membrane and partial pressure of the permeating gas (adsorption isotherm), q is the concentration of the permeating species in zeolite and x is the position in the permeating direction in the membrane. Dc is the diffusivity corrected for the interaction between the transporting species and the membrane and is described by Eq. (10.2), where Ed is the diffusion activation energy, R is the ideal gas constant and T is the absolute temperature. 

In the discussion of concentration polarization to this point, the assumption is made that the volume flux through the membrane is large, so the concentration on the permeate side of the membrane is determined by the ratio of the component fluxes. This assumption is almost always true for liquid separation processes, such as ultrafiltration or reverse osmosis, but must be modified in a few gas separation and pervaporation processes. In these processes, a lateral flow of gas is sometimes used to change the composition of the gas on the permeate side of the membrane. Figure 4.14 illustrates a laboratory gas permeation experiment using this effect. As the pressurized feed gas mixture is passed over the membrane surface, certain components permeate the membrane. On the permeate side of the membrane, a lateral flow of helium or other inert gas sweeps the permeate from the membrane surface. In the absence of the sweep gas, the composition of the gas mixture on the permeate side of the membrane is determined by the flow of components from the feed. If a large flow of sweep gas is used, the partial... 

The permeability of gases through membranes is most commonly measured in Barrer, defined as 10-10 cm3(STP)/cm2 s cmHg and named after R.M. Barrer, a pioneer in gas permeability measurements. The term ji/ pio — pit), best called the pressure-normalized flux or permeance, is often measured in terms of gas permeation units (gpu), where 1 gpu is defined as 10 6 cm3(STP)/cm2 s cmHg. Occasional academic purists insist on writing permeability in terms of mol m/m2 s Pa (1 Barrer = 0.33 x 10-15 mol m/m2 s Pa), but fortunately this has not caught on. 

A commercial Cu based catalyst supplied by Haldor-Topsoe was applied to the water-gas shift reaction. At 210 °C, a permeating flux of 4.5 Ndm3 nT2 s 1 was determined for pure hydrogen at a very low pressure drop of 0.2 bar. Then the membrane reactor was coupled with a conventional water-gas shift reactor. At 260-300 °C reaction temperature and a GHSV of 2 085 h 1, the maximum conversion achievable due to the thermodynamic equilibrium could be exceeded by this new technology by 5-10%. 

In the crossflow module illustrated in Figure 8.5(a), the pooled permeate stream has a water concentration of 1.88%. The counterflow module illustrated in Figure 8.5(b) performs substantially better, providing a pooled permeate stream with a concentration of 3.49%. Not only does the counterflow module perform the separation twice as well, it also requires only about half the membrane area. This improvement is achieved because the gas permeating the membrane at the residue end of the module contains much less water than the gas permeating the membrane at the feed end of the module. Permeate counterflow dilutes the permeate gas at the feed end of the module with low-concentration permeate gas from the residue end of the module. This increases the water concentration driving force across the membrane and so increases the water flux. 

Example 9-5. When measuring the gas permeation through a film one obtains a time-axis intercept of the steady-state permeation asymptote of 0 = 254 min using the time-lag method. The thickness of the film being studied is 75 pm. The pressure difference (Ap) between the two sides of the film remains constant at 0.2 bar and the flux through the film is 2 cwW h. Calculate the value of the solubility coefficient 5. 

Measurement of palladium membrane permeability. The permeation rate of hydrogen gas through the palladium membrane, Q , was assumed to obey the half-power pressure law(20). The permeation flux of hydrogen through the membrane is proportional to the difference between the souare roots of the hydrogen partial pressure on the high and low pressure sides of membrane. 

Normally when one of the two performance indicators of a porous ceramic membrane for gas separation (i.e., separation factor and permeability) is high, the other is low. It is, therefore, necessary to m e a compromise that offers the most economic benefit Often it is desirable to slightly sacrifice the separation factor for a substantial increase in the permeation flux. This has been found to be feasible with a 5% doping of silica in an alumina membrane [GaBui et al., 1992]. 

The mechanisms by which various components in a liquid or gaseous feed stream to the membrane system are transported through the membrane structure determine the sq>aiation properties of the membrane. These transport mechanisms are quite different in liquid and in gas or vapor phases. So are their effects on permeate flux (or permeability) and retention (or rejection) coefficient or separation factor in the case of gas separation. 

---