4.7 Article

Theoretical and experimental studies of membrane wetting in the membrane gas-liquid contacting process for CO2 absorption

Journal

JOURNAL OF MEMBRANE SCIENCE
Volume 308, Issue 1-2, Pages 162-170

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.memsci.2007.09.050

Keywords

membrane wetting; carbon dioxide absorption; membrane contactors; mass transfer resistance; simulation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A systematic simulation has been carried out in membrane contactors to study CO2 capture by water and diethanolamine (DEA) aqueous solutions from a CO2/N-2 mixture under the wetted and the non-wetted operation modes. Two types of microporous hollow fiber membrane modules made of polypropylene (PP) and polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF) hollow fibers were used to conduct CO2 absorption experiments. The corresponding experimental data were used to verify simulated results. Experimental study showed that the membrane wetting could not be completely avoided especially in the case of chemical absorption. Both experimental and theoretical study disclosed that the membrane wetting would result in a significant drop of CO2 flux. The simulation results further revealed that for the physical absorption of CO2 by water, the proportion of membrane phase resistance in the overall mass transfer resistance increased from less than 5 to about 90% when the operation mode was shifted from non-wetted to wetted. As for the chemical absorption, analysis on the mass transfer resistance revealed that the ratio of the membrane resistance increased sharply from 10 to 70% when only 10% membrane length was wetted. With the introduction of an extra resistance caused by the membrane wetting, the mass transfer in the wetted membrane phase finally became the rate-control ling step. It was not as effective to enhance the CO, flux by increasing the inlet gas velocity or the liquid velocity as in the non-wetted mode of operation. (c) 2007 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available