Gamma-Ray Computer-Aided Tomography of Industrial Packed Columns

Simon X. Xu and Greg Kennedy

Process Diagnostic Division of Tru-Tec Services, Inc.
11005 West Fairmont Parkway, La Porte, Texas 77571
Phone: (281) 471-8715, Fax: (281) 471-0078
E-mail: xus@kochind.com; kennedyg@kochind.com;
Web Site: http://www.tru-tec.com;

1. Introduction Process tomography refers to any tomographic

Packed columns are widely used in distillation,
absorption and stripping processes. It is well
known that liquid maldistribution can severely
reduce column efficiency and operability.
Maldistribution creates a localized disparity
between the liquid/vapor ratios versus the
original set of design conditions. The poor
homogeneity of liquid/vapor ratios at different
points means that some sections of packing are
being under-utilized, and the effective interfacial
area for mass and heat transfer has been reduced,
translating to a high HETP. Under extreme
conditions, low L/V ratios can result in local
composition pinches, even leading to localized
coking or sintered chemical deposits within the
packed bed.
Since the 1980s, initial liquid distribution has
received increasingly more attention,
consequently many guidelines and test facilities
for design and assessment of liquid distributors
have been developed (Killat and Rey, 1996).
However, understanding the actual distribution
within a packed bed (especially in industrial
columns) is still nothing more than mathematical
speculation based on laboratory tests (Klemas
and Bonilla, 1995; Stikkelman, 1989). Dr. John
Kunesh states; “we still are a long way from a
truly fundamental understanding of all aspects of
packing performance, particularly as it relates to
distribution” (Kunesh et al., 1995).
Tomography provides cross-sectional images of
three-dimensional (3D) objects. The most
prevalent use of tomography is still in medical
applications, for instance the Computerized
Tomography (CT) device that is used for non-
destructive examination of the human body. Over
the last decade, there has been a rapid growth in
process tomography (Scott and Williams, 1995).
method used to measure the internal state of a
chemical process. The only possibility to get the
distribution information inside a packed bed
from non-invasive techniques is the use of high-
energy gamma rays (Bowman, 1993). Gamma-
ray tomography takes advantage of the
penetrating properties of high-energy gamma
radiation to “image” internal process details of
reactors, absorbers and distillation columns.
The first published gamma tomography
experiment on industrial equipment was
performed by Bartholomew and Casagrande on a
20.4-inch diameter catalyst riser in a fluid
catalytic cracking unit (Bartholomew and
Casagrande, 1957). Some late developments
have been documented for additional reference
purposes (Scott and Williams, 1995).
In this paper, gamma-ray computer-aided
tomography (CAT-Scan) for measuring liquid
distribution is developed and tested on a 3 ft ID
experimental column. CAT-Scans have since
been applied for troubleshooting industrial
packed columns successfully.
2. Gamma Sources and Gamma Ray Detection
Proper source selection is critical to the success
or failure of this test. Many different
radioisotopes can be used as gamma-ray sources.
However, source selection should conform to the
following guidelines:
Photon energy The larger or more
dense the bed, the more energetic the source.
Source energy should be adapted to the column
diameter, packing bed density and liquid holdup
in the bed for good transmission and accuracy.
 Activity Sufficient source activity is
required to penetrate the vessel, packing and
process fluids. When source activity is small, the
radiation detected is low, and levels of
background radiation can be significant (low
signal-to-noise ratio). Longer counting times are
necessary for smaller sources, since accuracy of
the counting-rate measurement depends on the
length of counting time. If counting time is to be
minimized, the highest possible source activity
must be selected. On the other hand, sources with
high activity can reduce resolution and pose
personnel exposure problems.
Detector Scintillation counters with a solid
inorganic crystal are superior to gas-filled
detectors (i.e. Geiger-Mueller counters) in terms
of stability and sensitivity. An intermediate sized
crystal (such as NaI) will detect scattered
radiation in addition to the pulse measured from
the original mono-energetic gamma-ray source.
Scattered radiation can interfere with achieving
an accurate result if its effects are not recognized
and managed effectively by using the proper
equipment, procedure, and equipment settings.
As crystal size is increased, the scatter
component becomes less significant (Price,
1964). The crystal size selection must be tailored
to the job.
3. Scan Line Orientation and Data
Reconstruction
On the first gamma ray tomography experiment
(Bartholomew and Casagrande, 1957), a 5-
millicurie cobalt-60 source and a Geiger-Mueller
detector were used. It involved 18 discrete
measurements, which were shaped in a fan
pattern. The density distribution was calculated
graphically and analytically based on these
results. For the analytical method, the data was
reconstructed by assuming a 4th order polynomial
density function, and determining its coefficients
by the least squares method. A research group
headed by Prof. Fu Shen in Beijing (He et al.,
1991) described a similar test in a lab simulation
of a 100mm ID FCC riser. This test used a 39
mCi Cs-137 source and a NaI Scintillation
detector. A special calibration method and a set
of programs in BASIC were developed to
facilitate this test. However, no more information
about the method employed is currently
available.
Tru-Tec adopted an approach that is similar to
the one used by Bartholomew and Casagrande,
revising it for packed towers. Unlike a reactor
riser pipe, the gamma absorption and density
effects of the packing must be considered, since
both will vary with installation and operation.
Secondly, more scans are required for the towers,
since most towers are larger in diameter; and
hence, cross-sectional area. The third and most
important consideration in industrial towers is to
devise a system that is both functional and
transportable. The system must be flexible-
adapting to the individuality of a column’s design
and construction, as well as compact- so it can be
freely moved from one location to another in a
timely manner. It must provide reproducible
positioning for both the source and detector on
several scans.
For applications that involve common
commercial packings and clean processes, the
bed densities and gamma absorption coefficients
can be determined in the lab. Otherwise a “ dry
scan” on the tower is needed to account for the
packings. This dry scan should be done when the
tower is not operating, either before startup or
after shutdown.
A 4th order polynomial density function contains
15 coefficients which must be regressed from
scan data. The more data points (scan paths), the
greater the statistical accuracy of the regressed
density profile. However it is also true that the
more data points taken, the greater the duration
needed to perform the data acquisition phase of
the test, which can be a consideration if the
column is unstable.
In packed towers, liquid maldistribution can be
classified as micro (random) maldistribution and
macro (non-random) maldistribution. Micro
maldistribution is characterized by slight and
random differences in flows from the drip points
across the distributor, or from “ random
wandering” of liquid in the packing channels.
This type of maldistribution can be offset by
lateral mixing of the liquid traffic in the packed
bed, counterbalancing any ill effect on overall
efficiency (Kister, 1992). However, the impact of
the macro (or large-scale) maldistribution is
much more severe (Killat, 1996). Malfunctioning
liquid distributors and fouling/plugging in
packing beds are two common problems causing
macro-maldistribution. In an industrial setting,
CAT-Scans will detect macro (as opposed to
!
micro) maldistribution. It is not practical or
reasonable to expect a 4th order polynomial to
give a “ high resolution” image. Should micro-
maldistribution become a major concern, more
complicated models for data reconstruction will
have to be applied.
In Tru-Tec’s experience, data collected from 20-
200 of scan lines are generally sufficient to
construct a representative tomography of most
industrial packed towers. Figure 1 shows a fan-
beam scheme of 3 fan rotations, with 9 scan
paths per each rotation (3x9 pattern). The object
is to optimize the placement of the scan paths to
produce the best image. A proprietary program
has been developed by Tru-Tec to calculate
source selection, source/detector placement, data
reconstruction, and 3D-image development.
Figure 2 shows two different conventions of
presenting CAT-Scan results.
4. Experiments
A series of CAT-Scans were performed on a 3-ft
diameter Plexiglass tower section, having a 5-ft
random packing bed, at the Boston Research
Center of Koch-Glitsch, Inc. This test was
designed to evaluate the accuracy of CAT-scan
techniques in identifying liquid maldistribution.
A ladder pipe distributor was used to spread
water to the bed top, with no counter-current
vapor flow. Liquid distribution at the bottom of
the bed was measured by collecting the liquid in
an annular collector or a chord collector
underneath the packed bed. There were 18 equal-
width sections in the chord collector and 9 equal-
width sections in the annular collector (Figure
3). Liquid flow rates were measured for each
section (or annulus) using the bucket-and-
stopwatch method. By sealing some of the
distributor holes, annular and chord liquid
maldistribution patterns were simulated at liquid
flow rates ranging from 5 to 20 gpm/ft2.
The CAT-Scan elevation was 6 inches above the
bottom bed support. A 9x9 scan pattern was
utilized. Figure 4-7 shows CAT-Scan results of
the overall bed density for simulated operations
of:
• Good distribution
• Chord maldistribution (more liquid flowing
toward to one side)
• Center annular maldistribution (more liquid
flowing toward to the center area)
• Outer annular maldistribution (more liquid
flowing toward to the outer area).
It is clear that from a qualitative standpoint, the
bed densities as measured by the CAT-Scans
reflected the actual maldistribution patterns very
well.
Quantitative CAT-Scan results represents more
of a challenge. As discussed above, a dry scan is
necessary to measure packing density
distribution, in order to null-out the packing
contribution from the overall bed density. Figure
8 shows a dry CAT-Scan of the test bed. Bed
density appeared varied in a range of 8-12 lb/ft3
across the tower area, although the average bed
density was close to the packing bulk-density
10.6 lb/ft3. Random packings can have local bed
density variances due to installation and loading
procedure, but our weighting test for differently
packed beds did not show significant density
differences. Further investigation found that the
variance was due to different orientations of the
packing pieces on the scan paths. The findings
indicated that packing bulk density is not the
only factor that must be considered when
investigating maldistribution within a packed
bed. A dry-scan is necessary for a truly accurate
assessment of liquid distribution, since packing
orientation and external influences, such as
stiffing rings and conduit can also affect the scan
results.
Liquid volume fraction of the total flow for any
specific area can be obtained by integrating the
liquid density distribution, which is the
difference between the operating-bed density
distribution and the dry-bed density distribution.
Figures 9 and 10 compare the liquid
distributions collected by the bucket-and-
stopwatch method versus the CAT-Scan data.
Liquid distributions as measured by both
methods are in very good agreement with each
other for the “ good distribution” and the “ chordal
maldistribution” cases. Observations during the
test indicated that part of the annular collector
was flooded and liquid overflowed from one
annulus to another. This thwarted us from
comparing the liquid distributions from the CAT-
Scan and the collector quantitatively for those
tests. However, there is little reason for us to
doubt the possibility of measuring the annular
"
maldistribution quantitatively with the CAT-Scan
approach, based on good qualitative images
(Figures 6 and 7) for the annular maldistribution
tests and excellent quantitative agreement for the
test of good distribution and chordal
maldistribution (Figures 9 and 10).
5. Troubleshooting Industrial Towers by
CAT-Scans
CAT-Scans have been used in packing bed and
mist eliminator applications on column diameters
ranging from 2 to 26ft. The details of these tests
will in time be presented elsewhere.
6. Closing Remarks
Gamma Ray Tomography (CAT-Scan) is a
practical technology for quantitatively measuring
the liquid macro-maldistribution in packed
columns. Liquid distribution can not be estimated
by subtracting packing bulk density from the
CAT-Scan density measurement with reasonable
accuracy. A dry-scan is necessary for a
quantitative assessment of liquid distribution.
Acknowledgement
The authors thank Jerry Kolek of Tru-Tec
Services and Andrew Marcinkowski of Koch-
Glitsch for their help with the experiments,
Charles Hsieh and Kenneth McNulty of Koch-
Glitsch for their useful discussions and
suggestions, John Bowman for his thoughtful
comments to the paper. In addition, the authors
would like to acknowledge the Boston Research
Center of Koch-Glitsch, Inc. for permission to
use the test column.
Literature Cited
Bartholomew, R.N. and R.W. Casagrande,
Measuring Solids Concentration in Fluidized
Systems by Gamma-Ray Absorption, Industrial
and Engineering Chemistry, 49(3): 428 (March
1957)
Bowman, J. D., Troubleshoot Packed Towers
with Radioisotopes, Chemical Engineering
Progress, (9), p.34 (Sept. 1993)
He, K.A, K.L Zhu, R.J. Feng, X. M. Xu, Z.J.
Huang and F. Shen, Application of Gamma Ray
Attenuation Scanning Technique to the Gas-
Liquid Mass Transfer Equipment and Riser of
FCC Unit, INTERPEC CHINA’91- Proceedings
of the International Conference on Petroleum
Refining and Petrochemical Processing, Vol. 3,
p.1092, International Academic Publishers,
Beijing (Sept. 1991)
Killat, G. R. And T. D. Rey, Properly Assess
Maldistribution in Packed Towers, Chemical
Engineering Progress, p.69, (May 1996)
Kister, H., Distillation Design, McGraw-Hill,
New York (1992)
Klemas, L. And J. A. Bonilla, Accurately Assess
Packed-Column Efficiency, Chemical
Engineering Progress, p.27, (July 1995)
Kunesh, J.G., H.Z. Kister, M.J. Lockett and J.R.
Fair, Distillation: Still Towering over Other
Options, Chemical Engineering Progress, (10):
43 (October 1995)
Price, W. J., Nuclear Radiation Detection,
McGraw-Hill, NY (1964)
Scott, D. M. and R. A. Williams (Editors),
Frontiers in Industrial Process Tomography,
Engineering Foundation, N. Y. (1995)
Stikkelman, R. M., Gas and Liquid
Maldistributions in Packed Columns,
Academisch Boeken Centrum, Delft (1989)