PINSA 64, A, No. 4, July, 1998, pp. 441-567 (© Printed in india REVIEW ARTICLE GAS HOLD-UP STRUCTURE IN BUBBLE COLUMN REACTORS JB JosHi*, U PARASU VEERA, CH. V PRASAD, D V PHANIKUMAR, NS DESHPHANDE, S S THAKRE AND B N THORAT Department of Chemical Technology, University of Mumbai, Matunga, Mumbai - 400 019 (Received 09 February 1998; Accepted 24 February 1998) Fractional gas hold-up & is a key parameter which governs the performance of bubble column reactors. In view of such an importance, extensive research work has been undertaken during the past fifty years and more than 250 papers have been published. This published work has been critically analysed in this review paper and the entire subject has been presented in a coherent manner. According to hold-up structure, the bubble columns operate in homogeneous and heterogeneous regimes. The behaviour of slip velocity is markedly different in these two regimes. The mechanistic reasons for such a behaviour have been clarified in this review. Extensive discussions have been provided regarding the dependence of hold-up structure on design parameters ( such as column diameter, column height, sparger design, etc.) and the operating parameters (such as superficial gas velocity, superficial liquid velocity, liquid viscosity, surface tension, gas density, liquid density etc.). The published information on hold-up profiles, bubble size measurements, hold-up measurement and dynamic gas disengagement has been reviewed. For the ready reference for researchers and design engineers, the entire subject has been classified and extensive tables have been constructed. All the published mathematical models have been evaluated to testify the variety of experimental observations on hold-up structure, ‘Recommendations have been made for the estimation of fractional gas hold-up which are expected to be useful to practising engineers. “The review paper has clearly brought out the existing knowledge gaps and therefore specific suggestions have been made forthe future work. Key Words: Gas Hold-up Structure; Bubble Columns; Parameters—Design & Operating; Dynamic Gas Disengagement 1. Introduction Fractional gas hold-up eis a very important design parameter in bubble column reactors. It has several direct and indirect influences on the column performance. The direct and the obvious effect is on the column volume since the fraction of the volume is occupied by the gas. The indirect influences are far reaching. The possible spatial variation of &, gives rise to pressure variation which results into intense liquid phase motion. These secondary motions govern the rates of mixing, heat transfer and the mass transfer. The fractional gas hold-up is defined as the volume fraction of gas in the gas-liquid dispersion. It can be measured by a number of ways. This Author to whom correspondence should be addressed. hone: 0091-22-4145616; Fax: 0091-22-4145614; E. Mail: joj @udet, Emet. in subject has been reviewed by Joshi et al.' and will be briefly covered at the end of this review. The measurement of average gas hold-upz, is now fairly well standardized and the measurement of local gas hold-up has also reached reasonably well stage, Despite the good agreement between different measuring methods, we have not yet reached a stage where hold-up can be predicted for an unknown gas-liquid system. Therefore, the factors influencing the gas hold-up will be briefly discussed. ‘The fractional gas hold-up is principally governed by the average bubble size, its rise velocity and the number of bubbles. The average bubble size generated at the sparger (primary bubble size, dap ) depends upon the sparger design, energy dissipation rate near the sparger and the coalescing nature of the liquid. In the case of442. perforated plates and sparger rings, the energy dissipation rate is relatively small. The average bubble size decreases with a decrease in the hole size and a decrease in the surface tension. The coalescing nature does not have much influence on dp in the case of these spargers. However, for sintered and ejector/injector type spargers, the coalescing nature of the liquid phase has’ substantial influence on dap . The energy dissipation rate is also relatively high and, therefore, fine bubbles (few microns-1_mm) are generated in non-coalescing liquids. In the case of coalescing liquids, the bubbles grow in a short distance from the sparger and the bubble size is practically the same as that generated by perforated spargers. In the homogeneous regime, the bubbles rise without any dispersion or coalescence. In the heterogeneous regime, however, the average bubble size in the bulk (secondary bubble size, dys) is decided by the balance between the breaking (viscous and turbulent shear stresses) and the retaining (surface) forces and the coalescing nature of the liquid phase. The value of das decreases with a decrease in surface tension and an increase in the power consumption per unit volume (P/V). Furthermore, for a given value of P/V, the average bubble size is smaller in non-coalescing liquids as compared to those in coalescing liquids. It is known that the coalescing nature increases with an increase in the liquid viscosity and a decrease in the gas density. Pure liquids usually show a coalescing behavior. However, a mixture of two liquids gives some non-coalescing property. For example, water and aliphatic alcohols are individually of coalescing type. Addition of small quantities of aliphatic alcohol to water makes the liquid mixture somewhat non-coalescing. The strength of non-coaleseing property increases with an increase in alcohol concentration (upto a limit) and increase in the number of carbon atoms in the alcohol. The addition of an electrolyte to water also gives non-coalescing property where the strength depends upon the type and concentration of electrolyte. The presence of small surface active impurities may also impart non-coalescing property. It may be emphasized that the measurement and prediction of the strength of the non-coalescing nature has been the most complex problem which hinders reliable prediction of the bubble size and the fractional gas hold-up. JBJOSHT et al. ‘The secondary bubble size (dps ), in general, may be different from the primary bubble size. In the near sparger region, the primary bubble size continuously changes with respect to distance from the sparger and finally attains the secondary bubble size. The height of the sparger region depends upon the difference between dgp and dgs. If a special care is taken so that dyp equals dys, the height of sparger region is small. When dsp < das, =, decreases with an increase in the column height. In contrast, when dup > das (for instance, in the case of single point sparger), z=, increases with an increase in the column height. For any difference between dep and das, the height of sparger region increases with an increase in the non-coalescing nature of the liquid phase. As a result, the height of sparger region is in the range of 1 < H/D <5. In the sparger region, the liquid flow pattern also gets developed. If the overall column height is ‘much greater than the height of sparger region, the hold-up does not change with respect to the column height. However, care must be taken to account for the effect of the hydrostatic head on the superficial gas velocity. The value of Vo needs to be expressed at the average pressure between the bottom and the top. The value of =; increases with an increase in the superficial gas velocity. However, the =, —Vo relationship depends upon the regime of operation (Fig. 1). The regime of operation is decided by the design parameters (sparger design, column diameter, column inclination) and operating parameters (superficial gas and liquid velocities, FRACTIONAL GAS HOLD-UP, & woMosencous J® TRANSrTon [HETEROGENEOUS SUPERFICIAL GAS VELOCITY, Vg (mm/s) Fig. 1 Schematic of various regimes in bubble column reactor.GAS HOLD-UP STRUCTURE IN BUBBLE COLUMN REACTORS Ju, 6, Po and the coalescing nature of the liquid phase). The =, Vo relationship may be expressed in the form of a power law model: Eq < Ve [0 The value of x is greater than or equal to one in the homogeneous regime whereas it is less than one (0.4 to 0.8) in the heterogeneous regime. In the transition regime, the value of x continuously decreases from the high homogeneous value to the low heterogeneous value (with some exceptions of even negative values as shown in Fig. 1). Therefore, while developing correlation, it is very important that, separate correlations are developed for the homogeneous and heterogeneous regimes. It should also be remembered that, there is a range of Vo over which the transition occurs The fractional gas hold-up is known to be independent of column diameter in both homogeneous and heterogeneous _regimes. However, for a given gas-liquid system, the value of & is independent of column diameter if the regime of operation is the same. Homogeneous regime prevails in small diameter columns and the heterogeneous regime prevails in large diameter columns. Therefore, & may depend upon the column diameter due to transition. This problem is particularly noticeable at low values of Vo (< about 80 mm/s). At high value of Vo and for air-water like systems, the fractional gas hold-up becomes independent of the column diameter when it exceeds about 150mm. Some additional aspects of &,—Vo-D relationship will be described in Sections 3.1 and 4.1 for homogeneous and heterogeneous regimes, respectively. 2, Identification of Prevailing Flow Regime First obvious method for the determination of regime is visual observation of the gas liquid dispersion. The heterogeneous (or churn turbulent) regime is characterised by intense liquid circulation whereas very gentle motion prevails in the homogeneous regime. This difference can be recognised by visual observations if the column wall is transparent. The flow regime can also be identified from the plot of fractional gas hold-up versus superficial gas velocity. In the homogeneous regime, & -Vo plot 443 has slope greater than or closer to one (21, refer Fig. |, line AB) and the line passes through origin. The plot has slope much less than one (line DE) in the heterogeneous regime. However, it is somewhat difficult to locate the point of transition on the, & Ve curve particularly when the plot does not have a maximum and the change in slope is gradual. This problem can be overcome by using the graphical method of Wallis". In this method, drift flux velocity is plotted against Vg. The drift flux velocity is given by the following equation Jou=VoeitVie6 QA) where + signs indicate countercurrent and current flows of the gas-liquid, respectively. A typical plot of drift flux versus &% is shown in Fig. 2. The change of the slope clearly indicates the change of flow regime. DRIFT FLUX, ig (m/s) FRACTIONAL GAS HOLD-UP, &g Fig. 2 Drift ux plot Since the heterogeneous regime is characterised by radial hold-up profiles and intense liquid circulation, the actual measuremients of either hold- up profiles or/and liquid flow pattern across column will obviously and conclusively indicate the prevailing flow regime. The experimental techniques for the measurement of local gas hold- up will be described in Section 8. The measurement techniques for multiphase flow pattems are at the preliminary stage of development. The recent developments will be described in Section 8. 3. Modelling and Correlations for Average Gas Hold-up in the Homogeneous Regime Homogeneous regime is characterized by almost uniformly sized bubbles. All the bubbles formed at