Pressure Drop Hysteresis of Hydrodynamic States in Packed Tower for Foaming Systems


Article Metrics: (Click on the Metric tab below to see the detail)

Article Info
Submitted: 14-03-2011
Published: 22-11-2011
Section: Original Research Articles
Fulltext PDF Tell your colleagues Email the author

An experimental investigation was carried out to determine the effects of gas and liquid flow velocities and surface tension on the two-phase phase pressure drop a in a downflow trickle bed reactor. Water and non- Newtonian foaming solutions were employed as liquid phase. More than 240 experimental points for the trickle flow (GCF) and foaming pulsing flow (PF/FPF) regime were obtained for present study. Hydrodynamic characteristics involving two-phase pressure drop significantly influenced by gas and liquid flow rates. For 15 and 30 ppm air-aqueous surfactant solutions, two-phase pressure drop increases with higher liquid and gas flow velocities in trickle flow and foaming/pulsing flow regimes. With decrease in surface tension i.e. for 45 and 60 ppm air-aqueous surfactant systems, two-phase pressure drop increases very sharply during change in regime transition at significantly low liquid and gas velocities. Copyright © 2011 BCREC UNDIP. All rights reserved.

(Received: 14th March 2011, Revised: 29th June 2011; Accepted: 4th July 2011)

[How to Cite: V. Sodhi, and R. Gupta. (2011). Pressure Drop Hysteresis of Hydrodynamic States in Packed Tower for Foaming Systems. Bulletin of Chemical Reaction Engineering & Catalysis, 6(2): 115-122. doi:10.9767/bcrec.6.2.828.115-122]

[How to Link / DOI: || or local: ]

| View in 


Trickle Bed Reactor; Foaming; Hydrodynamics; Pressure Drop

  1. Vijay Sodhi 
    Department of Chemical and Biotechnology Engineering, Beant College of Engineering and Technology, Gurdaspur, Punjab 143521, India

    Assistant Professor,

    Department of Chemical and Bio-Technology Engineering

    Beant College of Engineering and Technology, Gurdasspur, Punjab, INDIA 143521.

  2. Renu Gupta 
    Department of Chemical Engineering, Dr. B. R. Ambedkar National Institute of Technology, Jalandhar 144011, India

    Assistant Professr,

    Department of Chemical Engineering

    NIT Jalandhar 144001.

  1. Burghardt, A.; Bartelmus, G.; Szlemp, A. 1995. Hydrodynamics of pulsing flow in three-phase fixed-bed reactor operating at an elevated pressure, Industrial and Engineering Chemistry Research, 43: 4511–4521.
  2. Bansal, Ajay, 2003. Hydrodynamics of trickle bed reactor, PhD Thesis. Engineering and Technology Faculty, Punjab University, Patiala, Punjab, India.
  3. Bansal, A.; Wanchoo, R. K.; and Sharma, S. K. 2008. Flow regime transition in a trickle bed reactor, Chemical Engineering Communication, 58:111-118.
  4. Prud’homme. R.K.; Khan, S.A. Foams, Theory, Measurements, and Applications, CRC Press, 1996.
  5. Midoux, N.; Favier, M.; Charpentier, J.C. 1976. Flow pattern, Pressure Loss and Liquid Holdup Data in Gas–Liquid Downflow Packed Beds with Foaming and Nonfoaming Hydrocarbons, Journal of Chemical Engineering of Japan, 9: 350–356
  6. Saroha, A.K.; Nigam, K.D.P. 1996. Trickle bed reactors, Reviews in Chemical Engineering, 12: 207–347.
  7. Grandjean, B. P. A.; Iliuta, I.; Larachi, F. 2002. New mechanistic model for pressure drop and liquid holdup in trickle flow reactors, Chemical Engineering Science, 57: 3359 – 3371.
  8. Muthanna, A.; Dudukovic, M. 1995. Pressure drop and liquid holdup in high pressure trickle bed reactors. Chemical Engineering Science, 49: 5681–5698.
  9. Iliuta, I.; Thyrion, F.C.; Muntean, O. 1996. Residence time distribution of the liquid in two-phase cocurrent downflow in packed beds: air/Newtonian and non-Newtonian liquid systems, Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering, 74: 783-796.