Issue
Korean Journal of Chemical Engineering,
Vol.29, No.1, 1-8, 2012
Dissolution of a South African calcium based material using urea: An optimized process
The rate at which limestone dissolves is very important in wet flue gas desulfurization process (FGD). High dissolution rates provide better alkalinity, which is important for sulfur dioxide (SO2) absorption. This study investigates the use of urea to improve the dissolution rate of limestone. The dissolution characteristics have been studied by using a pH-Stat method. The dissolution rate constant was measured according to the shrinking core model with surface control, i.e. (1-(1-X)1/3)=krt. The effect of experimental variables such as temperature, amount of urea, solid to liquid ratio and stirring speed on the dissolution rate of limestone were investigated. Using a central composite design(CCD) of experiments variables, a mathematical model was developed to correlate the experimental variables to the dissolution rate constant. The experimental value was found to agree satisfactorily with predicted dissolution rate constant. The model shows that high temperature and low solid to liquid ratio improves the dissolution rate. The dissolution rate increased slightly with increase in the stirring speed. In the presence of urea the dissolution rate constant increased by 122%. The dissolution reaction follows a shrinking-core model with the chemical reaction control as the rate-controlling step.
[References]
  1. Spalding-Fecher R, Matibe DK, Energy Policy, 31(8), 721, 2003
  2. Kaminski J, Appl. Energy, 75(3-4), 165, 2003
  3. Lee HK, Deshwal BR, Yoo KS, Korean J. Chem. Eng., 22(2), 208, 2005
  4. Kang M, Park JH, Choi JS, Park ED, Yie JE, Korean J. Chem. Eng., 24(1), 191, 2007
  5. Choi JH, Kim JH, Bak YC, Amal R, Scott J, Korean J. Chem. Eng., 22(6), 844, 2005
  6. Uchida S, Moriguchi H, Maejima H, Koide K, Kageyama S, Canadian J. Chem. Eng., 56, 690, 1978
  7. Eisenlohr L, Meteva K, Gabrovsek F, Dreybrodt W, Geochimet Coschimica Acta., 63, 989, 1999
  8. Plan L, Geomopho., 68, 201, 2005
  9. Siagi ZO, Mbarawa MM, J. Hazard. Mater., 163, 678, 2007
  10. Shih SM, Lin JP, Shiau GY, J. Hazard. Mater., 79(1-2), 159, 2000
  11. Hosten C, Gulsun M, Min. Eng., 17, 97, 2004
  12. Hefter GT, Tomkins RPT, The experimental determination of solubilities, John Wiley, 2003
  13. Gerbec ASM, Kocjancic R, Frkal P, Acta Chim. Slov., 46, 323, 1999
  14. Takashina T, Honjo S, Ukawa N, Iwashita K, Soc. Chem. Eng. Japan., 35, 197, 2002
  15. Rutto H, Siagi Z, Mbarawa M, J. Hazard. Mater., 168(2-3), 1532, 2009
  16. Sekiguchi K, Obi N, Man. Chem. Pharm. Bull., 9, 866, 1961
  17. Hausmanns S, Laufenberg G, Kunz B, Desalination., 104, 95, 1996
  18. Montgomery DC, Design and analysis of experiments, John Wiley and Sons Ltd., New York, 2001
  19. Drehmel DC, Symp., 46, 123, 2001
  20. Ahlbeck J, Engman T, Vihma M, Chem. Eng. Sci., 48, 3479, 1993
  21. Ahlbeck J, Engman T, Falten S, Vihma M, Chem. Eng. Sci., 50(7), 1081, 1995
  22. Danckwerts PV, Gas-liquid reactions, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1970
  23. Levenspiel O, Chemical reaction engineering, John Wiley and Sons, New York, 1972
  24. Gao X, Guo RT, Ding HL, Luo ZY, Cen KF, J. Hazard. Mater., 168(2-3), 1059, 2009
  25. Aydogan A, Erdemoglu M, Ucar G, Hydrometa., 88, 52, 2007
  26. Calderbank PK, Moo-Young MB, Chem. Eng. Sci., 16, 39, 1961
  27. Harriott P, AIChE J., 8, 93, 1962