Issue
Korean Journal of Chemical Engineering,
Vol.35, No.3, 734-743, 2018
Evaluating isotherm models for the prediction of flue gas adsorption equilibrium and dynamics
We evaluated isotherm models for the precise prediction of adsorption equilibrium and breakthrough dynamics. Adsorption experiments were performed using pure N2, CO2 and their binary mixture with an activated carbon (AC) material as an adsorbent. Both BET and breakthrough measurements were conducted at various conditions of temperature and pressure. The corresponding uptake amount of pure component adsorption was experimentally determined, and parameters of the four different isotherm models, Langmuir, Langmuir-Freundlich, Sips, and Toth, were calculated from the experimental data. The predictive capability of each isotherm model was also evaluated with the binary experimental results of binary N2/CO2 mixtures, by means of sum of square errors (SSE). As a result, the Toth model was the most precise isotherm model in describing CO2 adsorption equilibrium on the AC. Based on the breakthrough experimental result from the binary mixture adsorption, non-isothermal modeling for the adsorption bed was performed. The breakthrough results with all of the isotherm models were examined by rigorous dynamic simulations, and the Toth model was also the most accurate model for describing the dynamics.
[References]
  1. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990-2013. U.S. EPA, 2015.
  2. Figueroa JD, Fout T, Plasynski S, McIlyried H, Srivastava RD, Int. J. Greenhouse Gas Control, 2, 9, 2008
  3. Folger P, Carbon Capture: A Technology Assessment, CRS Report for Congress (2010).
  4. Yu CH, Huang CH, Tan CS, Aerosol Air Quality Res., 12, 745, 2012
  5. Choi JH, Kim YE, Nam SC, Yun SH, Yoon YI, Lee JH, Korean J. Chem. Eng., 33(11), 3222, 2016
  6. Zhang JS, Yedlapalli P, Lee JW, Chem. Eng. Sci., 64(22), 4732, 2009
  7. Zhang JS, Lee JW, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., 48(13), 5934, 2009
  8. Lee S, Liang L, Riestenberg D, West OR, Tsouris C, Adams E, Environ. Sci. Technol., 37, 3701, 2003
  9. D’Alessandro DM, Smit B, Long JR, Angew. Chem.-Int. Edit., 49, 6058, 2010
  10. Khalili S, Khoshandam B, Jahanshahi M, Korean J. Chem. Eng., 33(10), 2943, 2016
  11. Chue KT, Kim JN, Yoo YJ, Cho SH, Yang RT, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., 34(2), 591, 1995
  12. Himeno S, Komatsu T, Fujita S, J. Chem. Eng. Data, 50(2), 369, 2005
  13. Wu YJ, Yang Y, Kong XM, Li P, Yu JG, Ribeiro AM, Rodrigues AE, J. Chem. Eng. Data, 60(9), 2684, 2015
  14. Cavenati S, Grande CA, Rodrigues AE, J. Chem. Eng. Data, 49(4), 1095, 2004
  15. Rufford TE, Watson GCY, Saleman TL, Hofman PS, Jensen NK, May EF, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., 52(39), 14270, 2013
  16. Rashidi NA, Yusup S, Hameed BH, Energy, 61, 440, 2013
  17. Dantas TLP, Luna FMT, Silva IJ, Torres AEB, de Azevedo DCS, Rodrigues AE, Moreira RFPM, Brazilian J. Chem. Eng., 28, 533, 2011
  18. Gleuckauf E, Trans. Faraday Soc., 51, 1540, 1955
  19. Malek A, Farooq S, AIChE J., 42, 761, 1997
  20. Park J, Lee JW, Korean J. Chem. Eng., 33(2), 438, 2016
  21. Casas N, Schell J, Pini R, Mazzotti M, Adsorption, 18, 143, 2012
  22. Park JH, Kang RH, Lee JW, Korean J. Chem. Eng., 34(6), 1763, 2017
  23. Kang SH, Jeong BM, Choi HW, Ahn ES, Jang SC, Kim SH, Lee BK, Choi DK, Korean Chem. Eng. Res., 43(6), 728, 2005
  24. Bird RB, Stewart WE, Lightfoot EN, Transport Phenomena 2nd Ed. Wiley (2007).
  25. Becnel JM, Holland CE, McIntyre J, Matthews MA, Ritter JA, Proceedings of the 2002 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition, 2002, Session (1613).
  26. Ho YS, Porter JF, Mckay G, Water Air Soil Pollut., 141, 1, 2002
  27. Lee JW, Ko YC, Jung YK, Lee KS, Yoon YS, Comput. Chem. Eng., 21, S1105, 1997