SEPARATION SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING

Chinese Journal of Chemical Engineering, 17(3) 381ü388 (2009)

CFD Simulation of Flow and Mass Transfer in Structured Packing

Distillation Columns*

CHEN Jiangbo (чߞϏ), LIU Chunjiang (ঞҝߞ), YUAN Xigang (၏๰‫ **)ر‬and YU Guocong
(ဥ‫ڳ‬ផ)
State Key Laboratory for Chemical Engineering (Tianjin University), Chemical Engineering Research Center and
School of Chemical Engineering and Technology, Tianjin University, Tianjin 300072, China

Abstract Detailed investigation of flow behavior in structured packing distillation columns is of great importance
in accurate prediction of process efficiency and development of more efficient and optimal equipment internals. In
this study, a three-dimensional two-phase flow model based on VOF method for simulating the hydrodynamics and
mass-transfer behavior in a typical representative unit of the structured packing is developed. In the proposed model,
the c 2 - H c model is used for the closure of turbulent mass transfer equation. By solving the proposed model, the
velocity distribution, phase fraction profile and concentration field are obtained. Using these data, the total liquid
holdup, the wetted area and the separation efficiency [height equivalent to a theoretical plate (HETP)] are estimated.
For testing the model validation, the simulated HETPs are compared with our previous experimental data obtained
in a 150 mm-diameter column containing Mellapak 350Y operating at the pressures of 0.61.8 MPa. The compari-
son shows that they are in satisfactory agreement, with an average absolute deviation (AAD) of 25.4%.
Keywords structured packing, two-phase flow model, mass transfer, height equivalent to a theoretical plate

1 INTRODUCTION
Structured packing columns are widely used in
chemical, biochemical, and petrochemical industries.
It has been found that the flow pattern on different
scales is of great importance in determining the proc-
ess performance that using structured packing as their
equipment internals [1, 2]. Detailed investigation of the
fluid dynamic behavior becomes essential for predict-
ing the process performance and for developing more
effective and optimal equipment internals.
In recent years, many numerical researches that
using computational fluid dynamic (CFD) techniques
to investigate the hydro/aerodynamic behavior in
structured packing columns have been carried out.
Among them, the work of Hodson et al. [1] may be the
first published paper which using CFD method to in-
vestigate the performance of structured packing. The
flow pattern of the vapor phase on the micro-scale
within the channels of the structured packing was
simulated. For simulating the hydrodynamics of liquid
phase flow in structured packing filled with catalyst
pellets, van Gulijk [2] presented a Toblerone model,
simplified the multiphase flow to a single phase in the
channels, and calculated the transversal dispersion in
the structured packed bed using the CFX code. On the
basis of van Gulijk’s work, the group of Krishna [35]
carried out a number of experimental and theoretical
studies on investigating the flow and mass transfer
behavior within a KATAPAK-S structure packed with
catalyst. The residence time distribution and mass trans-
fer in liquid phase [3], radial and axial dispersion [4],
and the mass transfer in gas and liquid phases [5] were
investigated by CFD method. In the research of Klöker
et al. [68], they proposed an innovative approach for
the design of reactive distillation column internals and
CFD simulations were regarded as virtual experiments
for providing the necessary hydrodynamic and mass-
transfer correlations. For predicting the dry pressure
drop of structured packing column, Petre et al. [9] and
Larachi et al. [10] proposed a combined mesoscale-
microscale predictive approach, in which the structured
packing could be decomposed into five types of rep-
resentative units (REUs). By calculating the aerody-
namics in each REU by CFD method, the pressure loss
coefficient in each particular REU could be obtained and
the total bed pressure drop could be calculated. Based
on Petre and Larachi’s work, Raynal et al. [11] inves-
tigated the influence of mesh size and turbulence
models when using CFD method to predict the dry
pressure drop of structured packing. For simulating the
flow behavior of the liquid phase, Zhang et al. [12, 13]
proposed a volume-averaged CFD model for the liq-
uid flow behavior in a structured packing column
where the gas phase was stationary. In their work, the
axial backmixing coefficient of the liquid phase was
evaluated. It should be noted that most of the litera-
tures mentioned above were using single or quasi-single
phase flow model to simulate the flow behavior.
Till date, only a few reports that using CFD
method to simulate two-phase flow within the packed
column could be found in the literatures. Based on the
volume-averaged method, Iliuta et al. [14, 15] developed
a one-dimensional two-zone two-fluid mechanistic
model to predict the irrigated two-phase pressure drop,

Received 2008-10-23, accepted 2009-03-02.

* Supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (20676091), the Program for New Century Excellent Talents
in University and the Program for Changjiang Scholars and Innovative Research Teams in Universities (IRT0641).
** To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: yuanxg@tju.edu.cn
382 Chin. J. Chem. Eng., Vol. 17, No. 3, June 2009

the total liquid holdup and the packing fractional wet- ess in the REU is simulated and the calculated separa-
ted area in countercurrent columns containing struc- tion efficiency is compared with experiments.
tured packing. Utilizing CFX code, Yin et al. [16, 17]
simulated the hydrodynamics and mass-transfer proc- 2 NUMERICAL SIMULATION PROCEDURE
esses of gas-liquid two-phase flow in randomly packed
distillation columns by solving volume averaged Navier- 2.1 Model development
Stokes equations. For simulating the macroscale mul-
tiphase flow behavior in packed column, Jiang et al. According to Petre et al. [9], the complex geometry
[18, 19] developed a new strategy for flow modeling in of structured packing can be considered as the combina-
packed beds by implementing the statistical descrip- tion of five typical representative units (REUs), among
tion of the bed structure into the Eulerian k-fluid CFD which the most typical one is the criss-crossing junction
model. Using the proposed method, the gas-liquid REU. Since the mass transfer occurs in the inner part
cocurrent down-flow system was investigated. In the (criss-crossing element) of the packing, we focus our
work of Yuan et al. [20], CFD analysis of two-phase attention only on this type of unit in the present study.
cross/countercurrent flow in the packed column with a The computational domain is shown in Fig. 1. Its
novel internal was carried out. Their results showed sizes correspond to the geometry of the structured
that the installation of the internal in the packed col- packing used in our previous experiment [28, 29]. The
umn significantly reduces the pressure drop and im- simulated domain used here is a little different from
proves operational flexibility. It should be pointed out the criss-crossing REU of Petre et al [9]. The model
that almost all the multi-phase flow studies reviewed used by Petre consisted of two channels. In our model,
above were modeling on the macroscale perspective. however, four channels are considered, two of which
For detailed investigation of the multi-phase flow are reversely positioned with the others. The effect of
behavior in structured packing, some microscale stud- different channels on the fluid dynamic behavior can
ies were carried out using VOF method. Among them, be described more practically than REU model, espe-
Szulczewska et al. [21] and Gu et al. [22, 23] investi- cially for liquid phase flow. Besides, the boundary
gated the falling film flow on the corrugated plate, conditions on the open side of the channels, which is
corresponding to the surface texture of structured very complex to determine in Petre’s model, can be
packing. Effects of the plate microstructure, liquid avoided. For wall boundaries, the surface of the pack-
viscosity, surface tension and gas flow velocity on ing was assumed to be smooth. In the simulations, we
liquid flow pattern were investigated. Also using VOF assumed that the system was isothermal and the fluids
method, Raynal et al. [11] estimated the liquid film were incompressible.
thickness in a 2D geometry, corresponding to a verti-
cal cross section of the packing. Hoffmann et al. [24]
investigated the two and three phase film flow behav-
ior for the packing. For three-phase flows, their quali-
tative comparisons showed good agreement of simula-
tions with experiments. Using semi-analytical and
CFD techniques, Valluri et al. [25, 26] investigated the
dynamic evolution of films over an industrial struc-
tured packing surface at moderate Reynolds numbers.
In their work, CFD was used as virtual experiment to
verify the semi-analytical model. In the paper of Ataki (a) This study
and Bart [27], flat packing element of Rombopak4M
was investigated. CFD simulation results were used as
a basis to derive or modify correlations to describe the
degree of wetting, the effective area and the liquid
holdup for the Rombopak4M packing. It should indi-
cate that most of the above mentioned investigations
were restricted to falling film flow on the plates.
It appears from above review that most of the
published studies were restricted to fluid dynamic
simulations, i.e., predicting the flow pattern, pressure
drop, liquid holdup and distribution behavior. There
are few reports on predicting the mass transfer effi- (b) Petre’s work
ciency in the structured packing distillation column by Figure 1 Physical model for the three-dimensional CFD
CFD method. Based on our previous work [22, 23], a model of criss-crossing representative unit of corrugated-
sheet structured packing
three-dimensional two-phase flow model for the
simulation of hydrodynamics in a typical representa-
tive unit in structured packing by the VOF approach is 2.2 Mathematical model
proposed. Combined the CFD model with mass trans-
fer equations, detailed behavior of mass transfer proc- The hydrodynamic model and its closure equations
 Chin. J. Chem. Eng., Vol. 17, No. 3, June 2009 383

used in the present study were similar to our previous The coupled velocity-concentration term u cj c
investigations [22, 23], so detailed description of the used in Eqs. (4) and (5) is modeled similar to Bous-
model and VOF method was omitted here. It should sinisque’s relation,
be pointed out that, in our previous work, only the 2D wC
flow falling from the surface of the plates was inves- u cj c Dt (6)
tigated. In present work, the 3D flow behavior in the wx j
REU domain that enveloped by two corrugated plates in which the constants are [31]
was numerically calculated. In the work of Raynal et
al. [11], the RNG k-İ model was proved to be more Ct 0.11 ,  Cc1 1.8 , Cc 2 2.2 , Cc3 0.72 ,
suitable to this structure than the standard k-İ model Cc 4 0.8 , V c 1.0 , V H c 1.0 .
and the realizable k-İ model. Thus in our study, the
RNG k-İ model was used to describe the turbulent The interphase mass transfer rate for binary dis-
flow characteristics in the structured packed bed. tillation is calculated according to the two-film theory,
In order to predict the mass transfer efficiency of A
S LG kL ae M A CLT  xA  xA*  (7)
structured packing by CFD method, the mass transport
equations for different components must be solved A
S LG kG ae M A CGT  yA*  yA  (8)
simultaneously with momentum equations. Here the
mass transport equation is expressed as where kL and kG are the mass transfer coefficient of
w  D q U q Cqn  ’˜ D the liquid and gas phase, respectively, MA is the mo-

wt

q U q u Cq  D q * q ’ C q
n n n
S LG (1) 
in which Cqn is the mass fraction of the nth component
in phase q, Uq is the density of phase q, * q is the
effective mass diffusivity coefficient in phase q, and
n
S LG stands for the inter-phase mass transfer rate for
species n between liquid and gas phases, which exists
only at the gas-liquid interface, and equals zero at the
bulk phases of gas and liquid.
The effective mass diffusivity coefficients for
both phases [the subscribe q is omitted in Eqs. (2)(6)]
are given by
lecular weight of component A (representing the more
volatile component, iso-butane), CLT and CGT are the
total molar concentration of iso-butane in the liquid
and gas phase. At the interface, the concentrations of
iso-butane in the liquid and gas phase xA* and yA* are
in equilibrium,
D xA*
yA* (9)
1  (D  1) xA*
where D is the relative volatility. Combining Eqs. (7)(9),
the interphase mass transfer rate can be calculated.
In Eqs. (7) and (8), the mass transfer coefficients
* U  D  Dt  (2) of gas and liquid phase, and the effective interfacial
where D is the laminar mass diffusivity coefficient, area are calculated using the correlations of Rocha et
and Dt is the turbulent mass diffusivity coefficient, al. [32] and Gualito et al. [33],
0.8
ª U  u  uLe  s º
0.333
which is solved by c 2  H c two-equation model pro- § PG · § DG ·
kG 0.054 « G Ge » ¨D U ¸ ¨ ¸
posed by Liu [30] ¬ PG ¼ © G G¹ © s ¹
0.5
§ k c2 · (10)
Ct k ¨
¨ H H ¸¸
Dt (3)
© c¹ DL uLe
kL 2 (11)
2
Ss
where c is the fluctuating concentration, c is the
10.19 WeL FrL 
0.15
concentration variance, and H c is turbulent dissipation ae s 0.359
of the concentration variance. The transport equations u
ap ReL0.2H 0.6 1  0.93cos J  ˜  sin T 0.3
for c 2 and H c are as follows
ª 1.2 º
« 15 uLs / uGs  »
(12)
wc 2
wc 2
w ª§ D · wc º 2
wC ¬1  0.2e ¼
 uj «¨ D  t ¸ »  u cj c  2H c
wt wx j wx j ¬«© Vc wx
¹ j ¼» wxj where uGe and uLe are gas and liquid effective velocity,
(4) respectively, and are correlated as ,
uGs
wH c wH w ª§ Dt · wH c º uGe (13)
 uj c «¨ D  V ¸ » H 1  hL  sin T
wt wx j wx j «¬© Hc ¹ wx j »¼
uLs
Hc wC H2 uLe (14)
Cc1 u cj c  Cc 2 c  H hL sin T
c2 wx j c2 and J is the contact angle between liquid phase and
wu H HH solid surface of packing
Cc3 uicu cj i c  Cc 4 c (5) ˉ1
wx j k k cos J 0.90 for V  0.045 N·m (15a)
384 Chin. J. Chem. Eng., Vol. 17, No. 3, June 2009

cos J 5.21 u 1016.83V for V ! 0.045 N·m 1. (15b)

ˉ

2.3 Initial and boundary conditions

Initially, the computational domain is filled with

gas and the volume fraction of the liquid is set to zero.
Boundary conditions in the computation are
given below. As shown in Fig. 1, at both inlets, the
velocity, the mass fraction of iso-butane and the vol-
ume of the liquid phase are specified. At the outlets, Figure 2 Mass-weighted-averaged mass fraction of
pressure outlet conditions are given. At the walls, iso-butane at the liquid outlet versus flow time
non-slip condition is used, and the flow behavior in
regions near the walls is approximated using the
“standard wall functions” [34]. The flux of each com- mass fraction of iso-butane at the liquid outlet versus
ponent through the wall is considered to be zero. The the flow time, obtained according to the calculation
results. Generally, the time step is set lower than
values of c 2 and H c at the inlet of liquid phase are 0.0001 s, typically 0.00005 s. The first order upwind
calculated by [30] differencing is chosen as the solution of the momen-
tum equation and species transport equation. For the
cin2  0.082Cin 2
H in
H c in 0.45 cin2
kin
It is assumed that Eqs. (16) and (17) are also
validated for calculating the values of c and H c at
the inlet of gas phase. Before the simulation start, the
volume fraction of the liquid in the computational
domain is set to zero.
2.4 Simulation scheme
In the simulations, the CFD code, Fluent, is used
to solve the model equations. The calculations are car-
ried out under the unsteady state until pseudo-steady
conditions are reached, which are characterized by a
constant mass-weighted-averaged mass fraction of
iso-butane at the liquid outlet. Additionally, the mass
flow rates at outlets do not vary with time and is equal
to the inlet mass flow with less than 5% error. Fig. 2
illustrates a typical trend of the mass-weighted-averaged
(a) In the REU (b) In different sections of the REU
Figure 3 Liquid phase fraction distribution in the structured packing [Fv 1.025 m·s 1·(kg·m 3)0.5, pop 1.4 MPa]
(16) simulations, PRESTO! Pressure interpolation scheme
is adopted, and PISO is taken as recommended for
pressure-velocity coupling.
(17)
3 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
2
By CFD simulation, the flow patterns of both
phases and the concentration distribution of the com-
ponents can be obtained. Using the volume fraction of
the phases, the liquid holdup and the wetted area can
be calculated. Using the concentration distribution of
the component, the separation efficiency [height
equivalent to a theoretical plate (HETP)] can be esti-
mated. To validate the proposed method, empirical
correlations and experimental data [28, 29] are com-
pared with the simulated results.
3.1 Liquid holdup
For validating the CFD model, the liquid holdup
and wetted area are compared with the values pre-
dicted by the correlation presented by Gualito et al [33].
(c) Open sides of the channels
ˉ ˉ
 Chin. J. Chem. Eng., Vol. 17, No. 3, June 2009
(a) 0.6 MPa (b) 1.0 MPa
(d) 1.6 MPa
Figure 4 Comparison of liquid holdup predicted by the present CFD model and Gualito model [33]
ƶsimulated by CFD model;Ƶpredicted by Gualito model
Fig. 3 (a) shows the simulated liquid distribution in the
REU obtained at the Fv of 1.025 m·s 1·(kg·m 3)0.5
ˉ ˉ
under 1.4 MPa. In details, the liquid distribution on
three sections and open sides of the channels are pre-
sented in the Fig. 3 (b) and 3 (c), respectively. It can
be seen that, as the assumption made in many empiri-
cal models [32, 33], the liquid flows through the struc-
tured packing mainly in the form of continuous film,
with a few drips scattered on the surface. Besides, it is
also found that the film surface is not smooth, but cov-
ered by ripples, and the liquid film thickness varies as
it flows down, which is possibly the results of in-
creasing interaction between the gas and the liquid.
By integrating the mass of the liquid phase in the
REU, we can calculate the volume of different phases,
and further the liquid holdup. The calculated liquid
holdup results at 0.61.8 MPa are given in Fig. 4, in
which the values predicted by Gualito model are also
provided for comparison. Both models can predict the
increasing trend as the vapor flow rate increases, which
is caused by the increase of both liquid flow rate and
the interaction between the gas and the liquid. At 0.6
MPa, the values of liquid holdup predicted by present
CFD model are very close to those predicted by the
Gualito model, but at the pressures above 1.0 MPa,
the former are about 12 times higher than the latter.
3.2 Wetted area
It has been accepted that the wetted area, or the
wetted fraction of the packing surface, is very impor-
385
(c) 1.4 MPa
(e) 1.8 MPa
tant for determining the mass transfer behavior in the
structured packing columns. However, in reality, the
wetted area is different from the effective interfacial
area. Under some particular conditions, the effective
interfacial area is considered to be approximately
equal to the wetted area. Under high pressure distilla-
tion conditions, however, the film surface is covered
by many ripples as shown in Fig. 3, which makes the
effective interfacial area unequal to the wetted area.
Fig. 5 illustrates the comparison of the wetted area
calculated by present CFD model with the effective
interfacial area predicted by Gualito model. The trends
of two results are roughly the same, that is, both in-
crease with the vapor load, and all values are less than
1. However, the two predicted results are a little dif-
ferent in magnitude. At 0.6MPa, the wetted area is
smaller than the effective interfacial area. At the pres-
sure above 1.4MPa, the former becomes higher than
the latter. This indicates that the operating pressure
has greater effect on the wetted area than that on the
effective interfacial area. It is possibly caused by the
reason that, with the increase of operating pressure,
the increasing interaction between the gas and the liq-
uid phase leads to the increase of the wetted area.
3.3 Separation efficiency
The separation efficiency is compared with the
experimental data [28, 29]. The experiments were car-
ried out in a packed column with the internal diameter
of 150 mm at pressures of 0.61.8 MPa, under total
386 Chin. J. Chem. Eng., Vol. 17, No. 3, June 2009

(a) 0.6 MPa  (b) 1.0 MPa (c) 1.4 MPa

(d) 1.6 MPa (e) 1.8 MPa

Figure 5 Comparison of the wetted area calculated by present CFD model with the effective mass-transfer area predicted by
Gualito model
ƶcalculated by CFD model;Ƶpredicted by Gualito model

(a) In the REU (b) In different sections of the REU

Figure 6 Contour of liquid concentration in the structured packing [Fv 1.025 m·sˉ1·(kg·mˉ3)0.5, pop 1.4 MPa]

reflux operation. The packing was Mellapak 350Y,
and the system was n-butane/iso-butane mixture. In
the simulation, it was assumed that the gas- and
liquid-phase are uniformly distributed in the packed
bed. Fig. 6 (a) shows the simulated concentration dis-
tribution obtained at the Fv of 1.025 m·s 1·(kg·m 3)0.5
ˉ ˉ
under 1.4 MPa. It is clearly seen that the mass transfer
rate in different sections is not the same. At the posi-
tion where the gas-liquid interface waves intensely,
the concentration gradient of iso-butane in the liquid
phase is higher, which means that the mass transfer
rates are relatively higher.
According to the simulated concentration distri-
bution, the mass-weight-averaged concentration of
iso-butane at the liquid outlet can be calculated, and
then by the Fenske equation, the separation efficiency
(HETP) is estimated. Fig. 7 gives the simulation re-
sults and experimental data under different conditions.
By comparison, it is found that the present CFD
model predicts the similar trend as the experimental
data, with an average absolute deviation (AAD) of
25.4%. Generally, the model under-predicts the HETP
for most the F-factors studied because only
criss-crossing REU is included in the computational
domain, while other REUs, such as the 2-layer transi-
tion REU, the channel-wall transition REU and the
 Chin. J. Chem. Eng., Vol. 17, No. 3, June 2009 387

(a) 0.6 MPa  (b) 1.0 MPa (c) 1.4 MPa

(d) 1.6 MPa (e) 1.8 MPa

Figure 7 Comparison of HETP predicted by different models at different pressures
Ƶexperimental data;ƶsimulated by CFD model;ƻpredicted by Gualito model

entrance region REU (as given in the literature of
Petre et al. [9]), are not taken into account in the
simulations. It is reasonably accepted that the separa-
tion efficiencies in these REUs are relatively lower
than that in the REU considered in this CFD model.
In Fig. 7, the predicted HETPs from Gualito
model are also provided for comparison. Contrary to
the trend of experimental results, the HETPs predicted
by Gualito model slightly increase with the increase of
Fv. Besides, the predicted HETPs from empirical cor-
relations deviate more greatly from the experimental
data than those predicted by present CFD model under
each operating pressure. As a result, the CFD model
presented in this paper can offer a better prediction of
mass-transfer efficiency than Gualito model under the
conditions investigated.
4 CONCLUSIONS
A three-dimensional two-phase model is devel-
oped for the simulation of the hydrodynamics and
mass-transfer in a typical representative unit within
the structured packing. In the model, the effects of the
surface tension and inter-phase friction force on the
flow are considered, and the c  H c model is used to
2
the criss-crossing REU are obtained, and the total liq-
uid holdup, the wetted area and the separation effi-
ciency are further calculated. The comparison with the
experimental data over a wide range of operating con-
ditions shows that this CFD model can predict the
separation efficiency well, with an AAD of 25.4%.
Compared with the predicted results from Gualito
model, the results predicted by the present model are
closer to experimental results. All these indicate that
the CFD model can play a useful role in studying the
performance of the structured packing columns.
NOMENCLATURE
effective interfacial area, m2·m 3
ˉ
ae
specific surface area of packing, m2·m 3
ˉ
ap
C concentration
CLT, CGT total molar concentration of iso-butane in the liq-
uid and gas phase
Ct, Cc1, Cc2, Cc3, Cc4 turbulence model constants for the concentration field
CP, C1, C2 turbulence model constants for the velocity field
c fluctuating concentration (mass fraction)
c2 concentration variance
laminar mass diffusivity coefficient, m2·s 1
ˉ
D
turbulent mass diffusivity coefficient, m2·s 1
ˉ
Dt
F momentum source term, N·m
ˉ3

gas flow parameter, m·s 1·(kg·m 3)0.5

ˉ ˉ
Fv
calculate the turbulent diffusion coefficient. With the
fLG friction factor
use of the commercial CFD package-Fluent 6.1, the g acceleration of gravity, m·s 2
ˉ

velocity and concentration fields in both phases within HETP height of equivalent to a theoretical plate, m
388 Chin. J. Chem. Eng., Vol. 17, No. 3, June 2009

hL liquid holdup 9 Petre, C.F., Larachi, F., Iliuta, I., Grandjean, B.P.A., “Pressure drop
k turbulent kinetic energy, m2·s 2
ˉ
through structured packings: breakdown into the contributing
kG gas-phase mass-transfer coefficient, m·s 1
ˉ mechanisms by CFD modeling”, Chem. Eng. Sci., 58, 163177 (2003).
10 Larachi, F., Petre, C.F., Iliuta, I., Grandjean, B., “Tailoring the pres-
liquid-phase mass-transfer coefficient, m·s 1
ˉ
kL
ˉ1 sure drop of structured packings through CFD simulations”, Chem.
M molecular weight, kg·kmol Eng. Process., 42, 535541 (2003).
pop operation pressure, MPa 11 Raynal, L., Boyer, C., Ballaguet, J.P., “Liquid holdup and pressure
mass transfer rate between the liquid phase and gas phase, kg·s 1·m 3
ˉ ˉ
SLG drop determination in structured packing with CFD simulations”,
s the side dimension of a corrugation cross section, m The Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering, 82, 871879 (2004).
t time, s 12 Zhang, P., “Experimental studies and CFD simulations of fluid flow
u velocity, m·s 1
ˉ
and mass transfer in a structured packed column at elevated pres-
uGe gas effective velocity, m·s 1
ˉ sure”, Ph.D. Thesis, Tianjin University, Tianjin (2002). (in Chinese)
13 Zhang, P., Liu, C.J., Yuan, X.G., Yu, K.T., “CFD simulations of liq-
gas superficial velocity, m·s 1
ˉ
uGs
uid phase flow in structured packed column”, J. Chem. Ind. Eng.
liquid effective velocity, m·s 1
ˉ
uLe (China), 55 (8), 13691373 (2004). (in Chinese)
liquid superficial velocity, m·s 1
ˉ
uLs 14 Iliuta, I., Larachi, F., “Mechanistic model for structured-packing
x mole fraction in the liquid phase containing columns: irrigated pressure drop, liquid holdup and packing
x* interfacial mole fraction in the liquid phase fractional wetted area”, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., 40, 51405146 (2001).
y mole fraction in the gas phase 15 Iliuta, I., Petre, C.F., Larachi, F., “Hydrodynamic continuum model
y* interfacial mole fraction in the gas phase for two-phase flow structured-packing-containing columns”, Chem.
D relative volatility Eng. Sci., 59, 879888 (2004).
16 Yin, F.H., Sun, C.G., Afacan, A., Nandakumar, K., Chuang, K.T.,
Dq volume fraction of liquid in phase q
“CFD modeling of mass-transfer processes in randomly packed dis-
effective mass diffusivity coefficient, kg·m 1·s 1
ˉ ˉ
Ƚ
tillation columns”, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., 39,13691380 (2000).
Ȗ contact angle, (°) 17 Yin, F., Afacan, A., Nandakumar, K., Chuang, K.T., “Liquid holdup
į mean film thickness, m distribution in packed columns: gamma ray tomography and CFD
energy dissipation rate of turbulence, m2·s 3
ˉ
İ simulation”, Chem. Eng. Process., 41, 473483 (2002).
Hc turbulent dissipation of the concentration variance, m2·s 3 18 Jiang, Y., Khadilkar, M.R., Al-Dahhan, M.H., Dudukovic, M.P.,
ˉ

ș corrugation angle, (°) “CFD of multiphase flow in packed- bed reactors: 1. k-Fluid model-
ț gas-liquid interface curvature, m 1
ˉ ing issues”, AIChE J., 48 (4), 701715 (2002).
19 Jiang, Y., Khadilkar, M.R., Al-Dahhan, M.H., Dudukovic, M.P.,
P molecular viscosity, Pa·s
“CFD of multiphase flow in packed-bed reactors: 2. Results and ap-
Peff effective turbulent viscosity, Pa·s
plications”, AIChE J., 48 (4), 716730 (2002).
U density, kg·m 3
ˉ
20 Yuan, Y.H., Han, M.H., Cheng, Y., Wang, D., Jin, Y., “Experimental
surface tension, N·m 1
ˉ
ı and CFD analysis of two-phase cross/countercurrent flow in the
ı c, V H c turbulence model constants for diffusion of c 2 and Hc packed column with a novel internal”, Chem. Eng. Sci., 60 (22),
WLG friction force on the gas-liquid interface, N·m 2 62106216 (2005).
ˉ

Superscripts
n spices index
Subscripts
A more volatile component
G gas phase
i, j coordinate
in inlet
L liquid phase
q phase index
REFERENCES
1 Hodson, J.S., Fletcher, J.R., Porter K.E., “Fluid mechanical studies
of structured distillation packings”, Ins. Chem. Eng. Symp. Ser., Dist.
Absorp., (142), 9991007 (1997).
2 van Gulijk, C., “Using computational fluid dynamics to calculate
transversal dispersion in a structured packed bed”, Comput. Chem.
Eng., 22, S767S770 (1998).
3 van Baten, J.M., Krishna, R., “Liquid-phase mass transfer within
KATAPAK-S® structures studied using computational fluid dynam-
ics simulations”, Catalysis Today, 69, 371377 (2001).
4 van Baten, J.M., Ellenberger, J., Krishna, R., “Radial and axial dis-
persion of the liquid phase within a KATAPAK-S® structure: ex-
periments vs. CFD simulations”, Chem. Eng. Sci., 56, 813821 (2001).
5 van Baten, J.M., Krishna, R., “Gas and liquid phase mass transfer
within KATAPAK-S® structures studied using CFD simulations”,
Chem. Eng. Sci., 57, 15311536 (2002).
6 Klöker, M., Kenig, E.Y., Gorak, A., “On the development of new
column internals for reactive separations via integration of CFD and
process simulation”, Catalysis Today, 79 (1-4), 479485 (2003).
7 Klöker, M., Kenig, E.Y., Piechoia, R., Burghoff, S., Egorov, Y.,
“CFD-based study on hydrodynamics and mass transfer in fixed
catalyst beds”, Chem. Eng. Technol., 28 (1), 3136 (2005).
8 Egorov, Y., Menter, F., Kloker, M., Kenig, E.Y., “On the combination
of CFD and rate-based modelling in the simulation of reactive sepa-
ration processes”, Chem. Eng. Process., 44 (6), 631644 (2005).
21 Szulczewska, B., Zbicinski, I., Gorak, I., “Liquid flow on structured
packing: CFD simulation and experimental study”, Chem. Eng.
Technol., 26 (5), 580584 (2003).
22 Gu, F., Liu, C.J., Yuan, X.G., Yu K.T., “CFD simulation of liquid film
flow on inclined plates”, Chem. Eng. Technol., 27 (10), 10991104 (2004).
23 Gu, F., “CFD Simulations of the local-flow and mass-transfer in the
structured packing”, Ph.D. Thesis, Tianjin University, Tianjin (2004).
(in Chinese)
24 Hoffmann, A., Ausner, J., Repke, J.U., Wozny, G., “Fluid dynamics
in multiphase distillation processes in packed towers”, Comput.
Chem. Eng., 29 (6), 14331437 (2005).
25 Valluri, P., “Multiphase fluid dynamics in structured packings”, Ph.D.
Thesis, Imperial College London, University of London (2004).
26 Valluri, P., Matar, O.K., Hewitt, G.F., Mendes, M.A., “Thin film flow
over structured packings at moderate Reynolds numbers”, Chem.
Eng. Sci., 60, 19651975 (2005).
27 Ataki, A., Bart, H.J., “Experimental and CFD simulation study for
the wetting of a structured packing element with liquids”, Chem.
Eng. Technol., 29 (3), 336347 (2006).
28 Chen, J.B., Tang, Z.L., Wang, G.Q., Liu, C.J., Yuan, X.G., Yu, G.C.,
“Performance of Mellapak 350Y corrugated sheet structured packing at
elevated pressure”, J. Chem. Ind. Eng. (China), 55 (2), 335336 (2004).
(in Chinese)
29 Chen, J.B., “Numerical and experimental study of transport phe-
nomena in a structured packed column at high pressure”, Ph.D. The-
sis, Tianjin University, Tianjin (2006). (in Chinese)
30 Liu, B.T., “Study of a new mass transfer model of CFD and its ap-
plication on distillation tray”, Ph.D. Thesis, Tianjin University, Tian-
jin (2003). (in Chinese)
31 Zhang, Z.S., Turbulence, National Defense Industry Press, Beijing
(2002). (in Chinese)
32 Rocha, J.A., Bravo, J.L., Fair, J.R., “Distillation columns containing
structured packings: A comprehensive model for their performance.
2. Mass transfer model”, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., 35, 16601667 (1996).
33 Gualito, J.J., Cerino, F.J., Cardenas, J.C., Rocha, J.A., “Design
method for distillation columns filled with metallic ceramic, or plastic
structured packings”, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., 36, 17471757 (1997).
34 Fluent Inc., User’s Guide of Fluent 6.0, Lebanon (2001).