APPARATUS

Water tank glass absorption Stopwatch Ruler Packing = 10 mm glass Raschig Ring

RESULTS
Liquid Flow, L M3/Hour Gas Flow in Monotube, Vm3 10 20.3 19.7 20 19.7 20.2 19.4 Low, High Low High Low High Low High Low High 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0

mmH20 mmH20 mmH20 mmH20 mmH20 mmH20 mmH20 mmH20 mmH20 mmH20

15

20.3

19.7

19.7

20

20.1

19.6

20

20.2

19.6

19.4

20.5

19.9

19.8

25 30 35 40 45

19.5 19.0 17.5 15.8 13.7

20.0 20.9 22.3 24.0 26.5

18.9 18.5 17.6 17.2 16.8

20.6 21.2 22.0 22.5 22.9

18.9 19.0 18.5

20.8 20.6 20.8

FLOODING

Liquid Flow ,L : 20 M3/Hour

Gas Flow, V (m3/hr) 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 Monotube Low (mm H2O) 20.3 20.3 20.2 19.5 19.0 17.5 15.8 13.7 Monotube High (mm H2O) 19.7 19.7 19.6 20.0 20.9 22.3 24.0 26.5 (P) ln (V) (mm H2O) 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.5 1.9 4.8 8.2 12.8 2.30 2.71 3.00 3.22 3.40 3.56 3.69 3.81 ln (P/m packing) -2.81 -2.81 -2.81 -2.99 -1.66 -0.73 -0.19 0.25

ln (V) vs ln (P/m packing)

4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 ln (V) vs ln (P/m packing)

Liquid Flow ,L : 30 M3/Hour

Gas Flow, V (m3/hr) 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 20 19.7 19.4 18.9 18.5 17.6 17.2 16.8 Monotube Low (mm H2O) Monotube High (mm H2O) 19.7 20 20.5 20.6 21.2 22.0 22.5 22.9 (P) ln (V) (mm H2O) -0.3 0.3 1.1 1.7 2.7 4.4 5.3 6.1 2.30 2.71 3.00 3.22 3.40 3.56 3.69 3.81 ln (P/m packing) -3.50 -3.50 -2.21 -1.77 -1.31 -0.82 -0.63 -0.49

ln (V) vs ln (P/m packing)

4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 ln (V) vs ln (P/m packing)

Liquid Flow ,L : 40 M3/Hour

Gas Flow, V (m3/hr) 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 FLOODING Monotube Low (mm H2O) 20.2 20.1 19.9 18.9 19.0 18.5 Monotube High (mm H2O) 19.4 19.6 19.8 20.8 20.6 20.8 (P) ln (V) (mm H2O) -0.8 -0.5 -0.1 1.9 1.6 2.3 2.30 2.71 3.00 3.22 3.40 3.56 ln (P/m packing) -2.53 -2.99 -4.61 -1.66 -1.83 -1.47

ln (V) vs ln (P/m packing)

4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 ln (V) vs ln (P/m packing)

Calculation
Liquid flow, L (m3/hr) : 20 i) Pressure drop at gas flow 10 m3/hr P mm H2O = Manometer, High - Manometer Low = (19.7-20.2) mm H2O = -0.6 mm H2O

The same step was repeated to calculate the pressure drop at gas flow 15 mm H2O until 45 mm H2O in every Liquid flow, L (m3/hr) who been experimented yet.

II)

ln (V) at gas flow 10 m3/hr ln (V) = ln 10 = 2.30

Repeat the same step to calculate the ln (V) at gas flow 15 mm H2O until 45 mm H2O.

ln (P/m packing) = ln (0.0006 m H2O/0.010 m packing) =-2.81

Repeat the same step to calculate the ln (P/m packing) at gas flow 15 mm H2O until 45 mm H2O.

Note: All these steps were repeated to calculate the pressure drop, ln (V) and ln (P/m packing) the different liquid flow which are 30 m3/hr, 40 m3/hr and 50 m3/hr.

DISCUSSION
This experiment uses packed tower that has 10mm glass Raschig Rings. When the liquid flow is at 20 m3/hr and gas flow 10 m3/hr, pressure drop is 0.6mm H2O after 2 minutes, ln (V) = ln 10 which is 2.30 and the ln (P/m packing) = ln (0.0006 m H2O/0.010 m packing) which is -2.81. The gas flow increases to15 m3/hr and after 2 minutes operating. Also, in 40 m3/hour at liquid flow, flooding point occurred in 40 m3/hour. It is because flooding point is in a packed or tray column where it has vapor flowing up and liquid flowing down; there is an upper limit to how fast the liquid can drain downwards. The point at which liquid cannot flow down as fast as it is coming into the column. The actual flooding point is partly dependent on how fast the liquid can flow down with no vapor flowing upwards and the rate at which vapor is trying to flow upwards. Then on 50 m3/hour liquid flow, the experiment cannot be conducted because it keeps flooding and no data was available to be jotted down. At the end of the experiment, the apparatus was busted since valve 4 was too loosening to adjust so we had to end the experiment.

CONCLUSION
The flooding point and the pressure drop can be determined by using gasliquid absorption column. At 20 m/hour liquid flow rate, no flooding point occurs. Then, at 30 m/hour there is still no flooding point. Also at 40 m/hour there flooding point at 40 Vm3/hour. However, before the flooding point, the pressure drop will moderately increases and decreases due to the error during experiment. at the end, the liquid flow rate is increased to 50 m/hr the flooding occur as soon as the experiment stars so there was no point on proceeding so we decided to end the experiment.

RECOMMENDATION
We recommend that future users of the absorption column ensure that the gas analyzer is properly calibrated to improve precision of the data. The continuous flow process for collecting data is also recommended to obtain better results by lessening fluctuations in the gas flow analyzer readings. We must also suggest that the apparatus is checked before the experiment to make sure it is fully functional and does not break down just like it did while we were doing the experiment.

Appendix