Lewis-Gilliland-Glass plot

Ethylene hydrogenation runs are summarized in Fig. 68, where the data by Lewis et al. are taken from their smoothed curves (Figs. 7 and 8 of L12). For these, approximate numerical values for

experimental data the other data are similarly processed. 

Figure 72 shows a numerical example taken from the catalytic hydrogenation of ethylene by Gilliland and Knudsen (G7). Reacticm data are shown at Uq = 30 cm/sec. The rest of the parameters are given in Fig. 72, and these make it possible to calculate for different reactor models. The experimental data are first processed by the Lewis-Gilliland-Glass plot to obtain F and a, from which e and koba are calculated for the successive ccmtact model (SCM, i> = 0). This example perhaps constitutes (Mie of the most severe tests of different reactor models. In Fig. 72 DCM(VUE) approximates the data equaUy well.

Equations (8-10) and (8-14) are essentially the same type of equations. Also, they are each equivalent to Eq. (7-9), the direct ccmtact model of VUE by Lewis et al. (L12). As a consequence, the local mass transfer term (/tob b or /tocOc) and the local fraction of directly ccmtacting catalyst (f or Fd) should be obtained from the use of the Lewis-Gilliland-Glass plot. 

At a given bed section, /Cor or A orc is obtained from Fig. 79 for each run of different catalyst activity under constant aeration. Consequently, the Icmal parameters are determined by this plot. In contrast to Eq. (7-9), which is for the overall bed performance, Eqs. (8-10) and (8-14) are for the local performance. In this sense the plot as applied to the latter equaticms is called the local Lewis-Gilliland-Glass plot (M27a). 

---