Interfacial mass transfer, importance

Interfacial Mass-Transfer Coefficients. Whereas equiHbrium relationships are important in determining the ultimate degree of extraction attainable, in practice the rate of extraction is of equal importance. EquiHbrium is approached asymptotically with increasing contact time in a batch extraction. In continuous extractors the approach to equiHbrium is determined primarily by the residence time, defined as the volume of the phase contact region divided by the volume flow rate of the phases. 

Chapter 9 Air-Water Mass Transfer in the Field. The theory of interfacial mass transfer is often difficult to apply in the field, but it provides a basis for some important aspects of empirical equations designed to predict interfacial transport. The application of both air-water mass transfer theory and empirical characterizations to field situations in the environment will be addressed. 

Table 5.1 shows that, with the boundary conditions present in most environmental flows (i.e., the Earth s surface, ocean top and bottom, river or lake bottom), turbulent flow would be the predominant condition. One exception that is important for interfacial mass transfer would be very close to an interface, such as air-solid, solid-liquid, or air-water interfaces, where the distance from the interface is too small for turbulence to occur. Because turbulence is an important source of mass transfer, the lack of turbulence very near the interface is also significant for mass transfer, where diffusion once again becomes the predominant transport mechanism. This will be discussed further in Chapter 8. 

Interfacial mass transfer is an important consideration in many dynamic processes involving the transport of a gaseous species across a gas-liquid interface. In particular the rate of trace gas incorporation into aqueous drops in the atmosphere has recently received much attention because of its relevance to acid precipitation (1,2). In the present paper, mass accommodation coefficient measurements are reported for O3 and SO2 on water surfaces, using an UV absorption-stop flow technique. The results are incorporated into a simple model considering the coupled interfacial mass transfer and aqueous chemistry in aqueous drops. Some implications of the measured accommodation coefficients on the oxidation of SO2 by O3 in cloud water are discussed. 

Now that we have established the importance of interfacial mass transfer in packed towers, let s talk about modelling mass transfer across a phase boundary. 

The result obtained from the film theory is that the mass transfer coefficient is directly proportional to the diffusion coefficient. However, the experimental mass transfer data available in the literature [6], for gas-liquid interfaces, indicate that the mass transfer coefficient should rather be proportional with the square root of the diffusion coefficient. Therefore, in many situations the film theory doesn t give a sufficient picture of the mass transfer processes at the interfaces. Furthermore, the mass transfer coefficient dependencies upon variables like fluid viscosity and velocity are not well understood. These dependencies are thus often lumped into the correlations for the film thickness, 1. The film theory is inaccurate for most physical systems, but it is still a simple and useful method that is widely used calculating the interfacial mass transfer fluxes. It is also very useful for analysis of mass transfer with chemical reaction, as the physical mechanisms involved are very complex and the more sophisticated theories do not provide significantly better estimates of the fluxes. Even for the description of many multicomponent systems, the simplicity of the model can be an important advantage. 

Hagesffither et al [27] derived a model for film drainage in turbulent flows and studied its predictive capabilities. It was concluded that the film drainage models are not sufficiently accurate, and that adequate data on bubbly flows are not available for model validation. For droplet flows it was found that the pure drainage process (without interfacial mass transfer fluxes) was predicted with fair accuracy, whereas no reliable coalescence criterion was found (similar conclusions were made by Klaseboer et al [41, 42]). Furthermore, it was concluded that a head on collisions are not representative for all possible impact parameters. Orme [86] and Havelka et al [32], among others, noticed that the impact parameter is of great importance for the droplet-droplet collision outcome in gas flows. However, no collision outcome maps have been published yet for bubble-bubble collisions. 

The determination of the singular points appearing in these maps yields important information about the attainable bottom product compositions in real counter-current columns. However, as shown by Chadda et al. [3], both the distillate and the bottom product compositions can be better obtained as singular points of a reactive enriching flash cascade or a stripping flash cascade, respectively. As will be shown, singular point analysis can also provide valuable information about the role of interfacial mass-transfer resistances in RD processes. 

Azeotropes are of great importance to distillation and rectification. At the azeotrope gas and liquid have the same concentration y = x) and, in turn, no driving force for interfacial mass transfer exists. Azeotropic mixtures behave in some respects like pure substances. They cannot be fractionated by simple distillation. Azeotropes can exhibit a boiling point minimum (minimum azeotropes) or a boiling point maximum (maximum azeotropes). In multicomponent mixtures saddle point azeotropes with intermediate boiling temperature can also exist. 

An important question to be answered is Which phase should be dispersed The answer depends on a variety of conditions that are sometimes contradicting (BlaB 1992). In aqueous two-phase systems water constitutes the continuous phase in most cases since the inventory of organic hquids should be small. Often recommended is the dispersion of the larger volrrmetric flow because more droplets are formed and, in turn, the interfacial area becomes higher. Furthermore, the interfacial mass transfer should take place out from the continuous phase into the dispersed phase (see Sect. 6.4.2). The dispersed phase must not wet the colurrm internals to avoid premature coalescence of the droplets. 

The determination of the driving force for the interfacial mass transfer is very difficult in extraction columns since no pure plug flow exists within the column This is one of the most important differences between gas-liquid and liquid-Uquid contactors. Because of the small density differences in liquid-liquid systems there exists a relatively high rate of axial backmixing of dispersed as well as of continuous phase. Backmixing reduces the concentration differences along the column height. 

The bubble size distribution is among the important factors controlling the interfacial mass transfer rate in gas liquid stirred tank reactors. This distribution is determined by a balance of coalescence and breakage rates. For this reason the trailing vortices play an important role in the gas dispersion processes in gas-liquid stirred tanks. This role stems from the vortex s ability to capture gas bubbles in the vicinity of the impeller, accumulate them inside the vortex and disperse them as small bubbles in the vortex tail. This ability is related to the high vorticity associated with the rotation of the vortex. Sudiyo [86] investigated bubble coalescence in a 2.6 L stirred tank. 

At the end of this chapter on gas-liquid reaction accompanied by a rise in temperature vMch may be great enough to affect the rate of gas absorption substantially, it may be observed that fundamental background formulations have been developped these few last years ai this must be completed now by experim tal studies. As in the case of the important work in isothermal conditions (more directed on kinetic scheme) that has also been developped recently and that we have not presented here, the suggested ccmi-planentary work necessitates of course the simultaneous knowledge or determination of the physico-chemical parameters such as the solubility, mass and thermal diffusivity... and of the interfacial mass transfer parameters. Let us see now diat has been done recently on that topics. 

Like first-order reactions, second-order reactions can enhance interfacial mass transfer. Unlike the situation with first-order reactions, this enhancement eannot be easily calculated. Because second-order reactions are common and important, we resort to a variety of limiting cases to predict mass transfer coefficients in these situations. 

The important point to note here is that the gas-phase mass-transfer coefficient fcc depends principally upon the transport properties of the fluid (Nsc) 3nd the hydrodynamics of the particular system involved (Nrc). It also is important to recognize that specific mass-transfer correlations can be derived only in conjunction with the investigator s particular assumptions concerning the numerical values of the effective interfacial area a of the packing. 

Volatilization — Volatilization is a physico-chemical phenomenon of particular interest to environmental managers as well as safety managers. It is the tendency of a material to transfer from a liquid phase (either pure or dissolved as in aqueous systems) to a gaseous phase (commonly air). The volatilization, or evaporation as it is more commonly called, is controlled by a number of factors, the most important of which are the vapor pressure of the material, temperature (vapor pressure increases with temperature), and air/material interfacial surface area, and the action of active mass transfer agents such as wind. 

In their analysis, however, they neglected the surface tension and the diffusivity. As has already been pointed out, the volumetric mass-transfer coefficient is a function of the interfacial area, which will be strongly affected by the surface tension. The mass-transfer coefficient per unit area will be a function of the diffusivity. The omission of these two important factors, surface tension and diffusivity, even though they were held constant in Pavlu-shenko s work, can result in changes in the values of the exponents in Eq. (48). For example, the omission of the surface tension would eliminate the Weber number, and the omission of the diffusivity eliminates the Schmidt number. Since these numbers include variables that already appear in Eq. (48), the groups in this equation that also contain these same variables could end up with different values for the exponents. 

Most studies on heat- and mass-transfer to or from bubbles in continuous media have primarily been limited to the transfer mechanism for a single moving bubble. Transfer to or from swarms of bubbles moving in an arbitrary fluid field is complex and has only been analyzed theoretically for certain simple cases. To achieve a useful analysis, the assumption is commonly made that the bubbles are of uniform size. This permits calculation of the total interfacial area of the dispersion, the contact time of the bubble, and the transfer coefficient based on the average size. However, it is well known that the bubble-size distribution is not uniform, and the assumption of uniformity may lead to error. Of particular importance is the effect of the coalescence and breakup of bubbles and the effect of these phenomena on the bubble-size distribution. In addition, the interaction between adjacent bubbles in the dispersion should be taken into account in the estimation of the transfer rates... 

---