LIQUID HOLDUP AND FLOODING
IN PACKED TOWERS
The effect of a wide range of air and water rates,
including the flooding zone, on the operation of a
3-inch-diameter glass tower successively filled
with four types of packing has been studied
visually, and pressure drop and liquid holdup were
determined simultaneously. The performance of
a packed tower in the flooding zone is described
more definitely than hitherto, and a visually de-
termined flooding point characterizing a definite
state of operation is defined. This visual flooding
point is shown to correspond closely to character-
istic behavior of pressure drop and liquid holdup.
Data for flooding velocities of the four packings,
both a t high and low rates and confirmed by the
three methods of determination, are reported.
With no gas flow and sufficiently high liquid rates,
packings flood in essentially the same manner as
if gas is flowing.
Except for combinations of low packing free
space and high liquid rates, holdup is not appre-
ciably increased by gas velocity until just before
the critical point is reached, when it rises sharply.
F OR a long time it has been recognized t h a t the liquid
and gas throughput in packed columns is subject to a n
upper limit above which the column ceases to operate
satisfactorily as a countercurrent contacting device. Al-
though proper column diameter should be determined by
economic balance, the flooding velocity determines the
minimum column diameter for satisfactory operation a t a
given gas-liquid throughput and is therefore of considerable
importance in design and operation.
This upper limit, designated either as the (‘loading” or
“flooding” point, has been vaguely described by different
observers who employed different methods of determining it.
It has been described as the gas velocity a t which, for a
fixed liquor flow, the liquor is entrained by the gas and sprayed
violently back from the top of the column; a t which the liquor
holdup apparently began t o be appreciable; at which the
liquor overflowed the top of the column; a t which there is
a slight splashing of liquor from the top of the column;
and above which there is an abrupt rise in the observed pres-
sure drop. Working independently, Mach ( 5 ) and White ( l a )
observed t h a t on log-log plots of pressure drop vs. the gas
velocity a t fixed liquor rates a t a certain gas velocity a more
or less abrupt break occurred in the curve, above which the
pressure drop rose almost vertically. Simultaneously with
the attainment of this point, spraying of liquor from the
top of the column was observed. This break point was
designated as the “upper limiting” or “flooding” point and
was employed by these authors as a measure of the flooding
velocity. Based upon it, data for various types and sizes
1 Present address, Foster Wheeler Company, New York, N. Y.
435
J. C. ELGIN AND F. B. WEISS’
Princeton University, Princeton, N. J.
With or without gas flow, it varies linearly with
liquid rate except a t low flows of the latter. Meas-
urements of the effect of gas and liquid rate on the
pressure drop and liquid holdup a t the flooding
point are presented.
PIotting flooding data as the square root of gas
velocity against that of the liquid on rectangular
coordinates gives a straight line for any one packing
with all available data and offers a useful method
of comparison and interpolation. Reasonable
agreement with the correlation method of Sher-
wood, Shipley, and Holloway is found. A differ-
ent empirical method of plotting gives just as good
results with available data on similar size packings,
and substantiation of a correlation method de-
mands further systematic data determined by a
reliable method on packings whose properties as
used have been accurately measured. The gener-
ality and fundamental similarity of the flooding
phenomenon in apparatus involving counter-
current flow of two fluids are emphasized, and a
mechanism to explain its basic cause is suggested.
of packing were reported. They also detected a second lower
break point on the pressure drop-gas velocity plot above
which its slope exceeded 2.0, which they characterized as the
‘(lower limiting” or “loading” velocity.
Relatively few data dealing with flooding are available,
and there is little knowledge of the nature and cause of
flooding, the operative mechanism a t the flooding point, or
the relation of the various methods of measurement t o one
another or to a definite condition of column operation. The
present paper presents the results of a preliminary investiga-
tion conducted in a n effort to elucidate the phenomena oc-
ourring a t flooding, to characterize the flooding point as a
definite state of operation of the column, and to ascertain
the relation of the several methods of measurement to it. T o
this end, pressure drop and liquid holdup with the air-water
system have’ been simultaneously measured, for four packing
types in a Pyrex glass column over a range of gas and liquor
flows extending through the flooding region. At the same
time the operation of the column has been carefully studied
visually.
Since the inception and completion of the present work
Uchida and Fujita (IO) and Sherwood, Shipley, and Hollo-
way (8) have reported measurements of flooding velocities in
variously packed columns. Uchida and Fujita employed
several sizes of ring and broken solid packings and measured
the flooding point by noting the gas velocity “at which a
slight splashing of water is observed a t the top of the tower.”
They related the fractional free space in the tower, determined
from measurements of the liquid holdup, to the ratio of air
velocity to water velocity a t flooding on a semilog plot and
436 INDUSTRIAL AND ENGINEERING CHEMISTRY
FIGURE
1. DIAGRAM
OF APPARATUS
found that all experimental points approximated a single
curve. Sherwood and co-workers obtained a satisfactory
correlation of their data on air-water, hydrogen-water, carbon
dioxide-water, and air with various glycerol and butyric
acid solutions and methanol in a 2-inch glass column by a
log-log plot of
They also found a satisfactory general correlation of the data
for dumped rings and miscellaneous packings in large columns
reported by Uchida and Fujita (IO), White ( I 2 ) , and Baker,
Chilton, and Vernon ( 2 ) by this method. This general cor-
relation curve in large columns varied from that given by
their own data by a factor of approximately 2, which was at-
tributed t o wall effect: “The flooding condition was ascer-
tained by visual observation of the liquid flowing over the
packing and down the walls of the column.”
The correlation employed by these latter investigators
is based on the original suggestion of Sherwood (7) and of
Walker, Lewis, McAdams, and Gilliland ( I I ) , who obtained
a reasonable correlation of a few of the available data by a
g r n U O / U L . The latter authors
plot of p ~ U ~ ~ / p ~ 2against
suggested that flooding in packed towers is caused by the
friction of the rising gas holding u p a certain amount of the
liquid in the tower, and regarded the flooding velocity as the
point where the friction per unit length equals the hydro-
static liquid head in the tower. Mach ( 5 ) found, as a general
rule, that the flooding velocity corresponds approximately t o
a pressure drop between 2 and 3 inches of water. Badger
and McCabe ( I ) concluded that the lower break in the
AP-U, curve (loading point of White) represents ‘(that
velocity a t which drops of liquid are carried u p out of the
tower by the gas” whereas the upper break or flooding point
represents (‘the gas velocity a t which the liquid cannot pene-
trate the tower but is held as a layer on top of the packing.”
They also concluded that these two points are independent
VOL. 31, NO. 4
of shape and size of packing and rate of water flow in t h a t
loading occurs at a pressure drop of 10 t o 15 pounds per
square foot per foot of packing and flooding at 40 t o 50
pounds per square foot per foot.
The present study supplies a more complete understanding
of the operation of packed columns over a wide range of gas
and liquid flow conditions, and the behavior of such e q u i p
ment with respect to pressure drop, liquid holdup, and flood-
ing than was hitherto available.
Apparatus
Apparatus and flow lines are shown in Figure 1:
The tower was constructed of 3-inch-diameter (2.89-inch
i. d.) Pyrex glass tubing, 5 feet in over-all height and flanged at
the ends. To the lower end was attached a conical holdup
receiver constructed of sheet metal and designed to permit the
satisfactory discharge of water from the bottom of the column
in normal operation, the collection of holdup for measurement,
and a t the same time suitable distribution of the gas entering
the tower so as to avoid interference with the discharge of liquid
as far as possible. The gas was conducted from the top of the
tower through a tapered sheet metal pipe. Both exit devices
were connected to the ends of the tower by flanged joints in
which 0.25-inch brass plates and proper gaskets to ensure a
tight joint were inserted. Copper tubing connected to 0.19-
inch holes drilled in these brass plates led to a manometer on
which the pressure drop across the tower was measured.
Air was supplied to the bottom of the tower through a filter
and control valve provided with a needle valve by-pass for close
regulation, and from the top it passed through a trap to remove
entrainment and a calibrated orifice for metering. Water was
supplied from storage to the top of the tower by a pump, first
passing through a calibrated orifice for metering. It entered
the tower through a shower head with enlarged openings placed
approximately 3 to 4 inches above the packing level and adjusted
in operation so as to distribute the water evenly over the packing
without touching the tower walls. The water issued a t the
bottom through the holdup receiver as fast as it was received,
and passed through a U-seal and valve to an auxiliary tank from
which it was returned by pump to storage. Inlet and exit water
lines were provided with quick-opening valves to permit the
simultaneous stoppage of water to and from the tower and the
collection of the quantity draining from the packing for weighing.
The water inlet was arranged to discharge only a constant pre-
determined quantity of water after stoppage. A small quantity
retained in the exit pipe between quick-opening valve and offtake
to weigh tank was determined in advance, and the holdup was
corrected accordingly.
The column was packed successively with nominal 0.5-inch
clay Berl saddles, 0.625-inch (5/*-inch) clay Raschig rings (0.63-
inch 0. d., 0.31-inch i. d., and 0.63 inch long), 0.5-inch clay balls,
and 0.25-inch porcelain saddles to a height of 4.67 feet. The
packing support was a wire screen of mesh just sufficiently
smaller than the packing to retain it. The characteristic proper-
ties of the packings as actually employed in the tower are given
in Table I, in which the method of determining each property
is also indicated. The drained free void in each case was de-
termined by filling the tower to the top level of the packing and
measuring the water draining from the packing with proper
correction for that retained in the holdup receiver below the
bottom level of the packing and the offtake. The saddle pack-
ing was obtained from the Maurice A. Knight Company, the
0.5-inch size from a supply received in 1935, the 0.25-inch
porcelain, in 1937. The manufacturers recently stated that up
to the present time there has been considerable variation in
uniformity between different batches of saddle packing of the
same nominal size. Since the rin packing was from a supply
obtained from the United States honeware Company in 1933,
it appears likely that this also may not be representative of
more modern material. The tower was filled in each case by
dumping. Unfortunately it was learned subsequent to the
completion of the ex eriments that in the case of the 0.5-inch
saddles and 0.625-inci rings the packing had been leveled off and
otherwise adjusted to fill in large free voids appearing adjacent
to the walls a t intervals during the process of packing. Because
of the relatively small tower diameter in relation to the three
larger packing sizes the existence of “wall effect” to some degree
is also probable. These factors introduce uncertainty as t o the
extent to which the present pressure drop, holdup, and flooding
data would be reproduced in absolute magnitude by the same
nominal size and types of packing of recent manufacture in
APRIL, 1939 INDUSTRIAL AND ENGINEERING CHEMISTRY 437
regular commercial use in large-scale towers. They do not, and within these limits for the other packings. All experiments
however, affect the characteristic behavior of the present pack- were made a t room temperature, which resulted in air and water
ings, the relation of the present data among themselves, or the temperatures varying between 19" and 23" C . over the course
conclusions to be drawn. of the experiments.
Visual Observations of
Column Operation
I. DATAON PACKING
TABLE AS USEDIN THE TOWER ,#, I n normal operation well below flood-
0.5-111, 0.25-11. 0.625-In. ing, water flowed quietly down over the
0.5-In.
Clay Berl Porcelain Clay Raschig Clay
Type of Packing Saddles Berl Saddles Rings packing in a continuous film, gas being
Balls
No. packing units/cu. f t . of towera 11,650 118,700 4750 the continuous phase. When the gas
13,200
Packing surface 8,sq. ft./cu. f t . of packed volume
Fractional drained void, cu. ft./cu. f t . of packingb
llOd
0 543
285d
0.500 0.442
66s o,3ii8 rate was gradually raised with the water
Fractional dry void, cu. ft./cu. f t . of packingo 0.75 0.513 0.624 0.500 rate constant, no change was a t first
a Calculated from weight of packing in tower and weight of 100 packing units. visible but a point was eventually
b Calculated from the weight of water draining from t h e packed section after filling it.
C Dry void = 1 - [(no. of packing units per cu. ft.) (volume of one packing unit)].
reached at which the tower slowly filled
d Calculated from manufacturer's figure. with water. Filling appeared to com-
6 Calculated from the average dimensions of a packing unit.
mence in the lower section of the tower
in the majority of runs, and with gas
flow maintained at the same constant
Procedure value, the water rose to a stationary level somewhere above the
Prior to quantitative measurements of pressure drop, holdup, packing. The filling or flooding process could be followed by
and flooding, the operation of the tower with each packing was an accompanying gradual rise of pressure drop (although gas
carefully studied visually. The water rate was set a t a pre- velocity was constant) until the water level stabilized a t a
determined constant value, the gas rate was adjusted to the constant point above the packing. The height of this head
desired value, and the behavior of the tower was then observed. of water above the packing could then be raised by further
The gas rate was increased in small increments until the tower
flooded, and the observations were repeated a t each value and hcrease in the gas flow. With extreme regulation on the gas
a t a series of water rates over the permissible range of operation. line and patience, the gas flow could be set so as to stabilize
Preliminary observations showed that the tower did not imme- the water level just above the top of the packing. With no
diately stabilize after the flow rates were set, but that pressure amountof effortwas it possible to adjust the gas flow so that
drop and holdup tended to vary to a constant value. I n all
subsequent experiments the tower was allowed to run con- a water level stabilized at intermediate positions in the pack-
tinuously for 30 to 60 minutes after flow rates were set, before ing. Either the water rose t o the packed level or the excess
pressure drop and holdup measurements
were recorded. This was particularly evi-
dent under certain conditions in the flood-
~~

ing zone where flooding did not appear TABLE 11. FLOODING P O I N T DATAFOR AIR-WATER SYSTEM AT 21" * 2" c.
until the elapse of an appreciable period -UQ a t Flooding- 7 AP/N--- Increase in H
subsequent to flow adjustment; in some From From H H at Fc/Fw at Upper Com- a t Flood over
cases times more than 30 minutes were L
AP/Nus. us. UO Complete Complete break plete H a t Zero
required for completion. Visual Uo plot plot Flooding Flooding point flood Gas Flow
Procedure in making simultaneous meas- 0.5-Inch Clay Saddles
urements of pressure drop and holdup was 733 2.91 .. ... ... ... .. 30.4 ..
similar except that the data a t each flow 1,100 2.93 ... 30.2
condition were the result of an independ- 1,160 2.64 2:55 2.55 1o:io 0:697 9: 5 28.6 7: 37
ent run. After the lapse of 30 to 60 min- 2,020 2.32 .. .. 28.3 ..
2,080 2.31 .. .. 28.8 ..
utes following the adjustment of flow rates, 2,380 2.03 .. ... ... . . . .. 28.1 ..
during which gas and liquid flow were 3,230
3,340
1.76
1.75
.. ...
...
... . . . .. 27.8
27.7
..
maintained constant, pressure drop, water, 4,210 1.42 1:38 1.42 13:25 0:6o8 6:3 26.4 6:63
and air flow meter readings were recorded, 5,140 1.48 .. .. 26.7 ..
the inlet and exit water lines were closed, 5,570 1.31 .. .. 26.2 ..
and the water held in the packed section 6,380
7,350
1.37
1.20
..
.. ... ...
..
....
25.9
26.3
..
..
was allowed to drain into the holdup re-
ceiver for 15 minutes, drawn off, and
7,860
8,140
1.14
1.13
..
..
...
...
...
...
I

...
.

...
.

. .
24.5
23.6
..
..
weighed. Small predetermined correc- 8,410 1.09 ... 28.3
tions were applied to this quantity of 8,800 0.89 0:88 0.83 15:so 0.'533 4 :2 21.9 6 .'69
13,400 0.50 0.50 0.46 18.02 0.466 5.7 23.4 6.57
water to correct for that draining from 18,100 0.39 ... 19.10 0.436 24.0
the inlet line and retained in the receiver 16,610 0.38 0:33 0.37 19.65 0.420 419 24.6 6145
19,580 0.25 0.21 0.23 21,30 0.370 5.5 25.0 6.57
between quick-throw valve and drawoff. 22,700 0.09 .. ... 22.00 0.350 .. 26.4 ..
Water level in the discharge line below 28,000 0.034 .. ... 25.10 0.225 .. 25.5
.. ..
the column was maintained a t a constant 33,2005 0 .. ... 21.60 0,363 .. ..
predetermined level on a gage glass during 40,7006 0 .. ... 23.20 0.327 .. .. ..
the runs. For the next measurement a t a 0.625-Inch Clay Raschig Rings
different flow condition, the water flow was 4,070 1.66 1.59 1.64 6.56 0.762 7.4 13.4 2.37
reset a t the same value and the gas rate 4,070 1.68 . . I ... 13.5
at a higher value, and the above procedure 6,230 1.35
1.13
1:33
1.08
1.32
1.09
7.64
8.46
0:722
0.692
7:l
7.0
13.2
12.5
2:45
2.32
was repeated for a series of gas rates a t 8,160
11,460 0.75 0.72 0.64 10.10 0.633 7.6 12.3 2.72
each of a series of constant water rates 15,780 0.50 0.49 0.46 11.74 0.573 9.3 12.4 2.46
extending through the flooding zone of the 20,600 0.25 0.24 0.24 14.61 0.468 13.2 16.1 3.55
packing. O.5O-Inch Clay Balls
Holdup determinations a t each water 20.4 2.86
rate with no air flow were usually made 3,170 1.29 1.27 1.26 5.32 0.740 9.0
5,030 0.84 0.79 0.81 7.10 0.654 5.5 19.7 3.55
prior to those with air circulating. Flood- 7,880 0.56 0.55 0.55 8.06 0.607 6.8 19.8 3.52
ing observations were made with no air 11,480 0.33 0.31 0.31 9.97 0.514 10.1 22.4 3.55
flow, both by starting with an initially dry 0.25-Inch Porcelain Saddles
packing and by first flooding the column
a t a high water and low air rate, shutting 1,928 0.50 0.50 0.495 19.05 0.593 5.5 40.5 2.96
off the air, and then increasing the water 3,480 0.41 0.34 ... 21,55 0.513 3.5 39.2 2.48
6,500 0.24 0.24 0.24 24.65 0.215 7.5 47.2 2.06
rate to flooding. Determined with packing initially dry.
0
Water rates varied between approxi- b Determined by flooding the packing a t a very low gas flow, discontinuing the gas, and increasing
mately 730 and 41,000 pounds per hour per t h e liquor flow t o flood.
square foot with the 0.5-inch clay saddles
438 INDUSTRIAL AND ENGINEERING CHEMISTRY
0.1 0.15az 0.3 0.4 0.60.8 I
UG-FVSEC. ut- F’C/EC.
FIGURE2. EFFECT OF GAS VELOCITY ON PRESSURE DROPAT DIFFERENT
CONSTANT LIQUID RATESFOR THE FOURPACKINGS
apparently drained out when the gas flow was reduced the
smallest amount feasible with the equipment. The column
then resumed normal operation. The operating condition of
the tower a t this Doint was extremelv sensitive to gas flow.
Under certain conditions close to this critical point and with
some packings, filling of the tower did not immediately appear,
but after an appreciable wait it could be seen that it was occur-
ring and would complete itself in 30 to 60 minutes.
The critical gas rate a t which these conditions occur de-
pends upon the liquor rate; it diminishes as the latter is
increased. I n the higher range of liquor rates (low gas rate)
above the critical gas rate the tower operated indefinitely
in equilibrium in the flooded condition with the water head
stationary above the packing level and the gas bubbling
quietly through it with no noticeable entrainment. Water
continued to enter and leave the packing a t equal rates;
a transition from gas t o liquid as the continuous phase was
the definite observable change. At low liquor rates (high
gas rate) violent bubbling and entrainment of liquid in the exit
gas accompanied simultaneously the attainment of the criti-
cal gas flow. A water head appeared over the packing and
it was clearly evident that the tower was exhibiting essen-
tially the same behavior as a t high liquor rates although its
performance was less readily followed in detail and it was
difficult to judge whether gas or liquid was discontinuous
because of the smaller volume of the latter in the packing.
It gave the appearance of waves as large gas bubbles passed
upward, essentially similar to what is observed when air is
bubbled through a column of liquid in a long tube. At
intermediate liquor rates, bubbling in the water over the
packing was less violent and entrainment less pronounced.
VOL. 31, NO. 4
I n either case the tower operated indefinitely in
equilibrium in this flooded condition; all water
entering the top except that which was entrained
in the gas continued to pass through, but it now
functioned as a bubble device.
At very high water rates, further increase in
gas rate beyond the transition point raised the
water level over the packing until it eventually
overflowed the top with no pronounced en-
trainment. If this was done a t intermediate
water rates, appreciable entrainment set in be-
fore the water overflowed. Entrainment ap-
peared as a concomitant rather than a source
of flooding. I n either case, increase of the
gas rate well beyond the critical or transi-
tion point without regard for overflow at the
top resulted in a major part of the liquor being
blown out of the top of the tower. One might
say that a second higher flooding point existed
a t , which the tower flooded with respect to
gas, which again became the continuous phase.
Except in a few cases a t higher water rates,
little change of holdup in the packing with gas
rate could be detected below the critical point,
but a change with liquor rate was readily de-
tectable. With no gas flowing, a sufficiently
high water rat!e flooded the packing in essen-
tially the same fashion as when gas passed
countercurrently except that the transition t o
the fully flooded condition with increasing
flow appeared more gradual. A water head
appeared over the packing a t a definite water
1.5 2 flow which’ was further raised by increasing
flow until it could eventually be made to over-
flow the tower. Even with water passing
through in a fully flooded condition, however,
pockets located a t random over the packed
section appeared to remain unfilled with water.
Some of these appeared almost dry; in others a film of
water could be detected flowing over the surface of the
packing units forming them.
Visually Determined Flooding Velocity
I n view of the above observations it seems safe to conclude
t h a t transition of a packed tower from a n unflooded to a
flooded condition occurs a t a definite limiting set of flow
conditions characterized by its filling with liquid to the top
level of the packing and transition to liquid as the continuous
phase. This constitutes a definitely recognizable and re-
producible state of operation which the authors define t o be
the true flooding point of the packed tower. Determined on
the basis of the flooding point thus defined, values of the gas
velocity (770feet per second) which flooded the column a t
each of a series of water rates are reported in the second
column of Table I1 for the four packings studied. On
account of the unevenness of the uppermost packing layer, for
accuracy and reproducibility in measurement the gas velocity
raising the water level to a preset point approximately 0.5
inch above the packing in each case was taken as the flooding
velocity. The recorded values are therefore slightly in excess
of the true ones.
Determination of the flooding point of the 0.5-inch saddles
with no gas flow by the two different methods gave somewhat
different results. Commencing with an initially dry packing
and raising the water rate in small increments, the above
defined flooding point was attained a t a flow of 33,200 pounds
of water per hour per square foot. Commencing with the
column nearly a t ,flooding with a very low gas flow, stopping
APRIL, 1939
LOWER BREAKFOINT
“G
FIGURE3. SCHEMATICLOGARITHMIC
PRESSUREDROPCURVE,INDICATING
RELATIONOF BREAK POINTS TO
VISUALLYDEFINEDFLOODPOINT AS
AFFECTEDBY LOCATION
OF DATAAND
METHOD OF DRAWING
INDUSTRIAL AND ENGINEERING CHEMISTRY 439
Mach (6) and White (12),the data are represented by straight-
line segments of differing slope which results in the appear-
ance of distinct break points in the curves. However, the
authors are of the opinion that the data are in reality con-
tinuous curves, as is further discussed.
I n all cases an upper break point is clearly evident but a
lower break point or “loading” point appears only a t the
higher water rates. The frequent, unexplained absence of
the lower break point was noted by White ( l a ) . Examination
of the few similar curves on various packing published by
Mach ( 5 ) and White ( l a ) (these are so presented t h a t their
characteristics are difficult to distinguish) and some un-
published data of White ( I S ) apparently reveal a similar
behavior. It is believed t h a t the appearance of a lower
break point is due to a more pronounced curvature a t high
liquid rates and the method of representing the data by
straight lines.
With dry packings, pressure drop has been found t o vary
with the 1.8 power of the air velocity (12) as predicted by
the Fanning equation. Other investigators (4, 6, 12) found
pressure drop to vary with approximately this same power of
gas velocity with liquor circulation in regions far removed
from flooding, the log-log lines for different liquor rates being
practically parallel to that for dry packing. However,
most of these measurements cover combinations of low
liquor rates and large size packings.
The present data indicate a departure from such a relation
a t high water rates with the packings used. Unpublished
data of White (IS) show an exactly similar behavior and a
similar trend can be noted in a few of the curves presented b y
Mach. The authors incline to the opinion that pressure

the gas, and then increasing the

water rate to flooding, a flow of
40,700 pounds of water per hour per
square foot was required to flood it.
Operation of the tower a t this point
was stable in either case. I n the
latter i t was visibly evident t h a t it
operated fuller with fewer unfilled
pockets. The larger holdup, found
simultaneously as reported in
Table 11, bears out this observation.
It is not possible t o judge whether I I I I I I
this difference is associated with
wetting of the packing and better
water distribution, but this is prob- - 5
ably true. The higher value would 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6
seem to correspond more closely to
the conditions under which flood-
ing was measured with gas flow-
ing. In this case a similar procedure
effected no measurable change in
flooding values.

Pressure Drop
Pressure drop data on the four
packings are presented graphically
in Figure 2 as the customary log-log
plot of pressure drop per foot of
packing vs. apparent gas velocity
a t constant liquid rates. The ma-
jority of the data were taken in the
vicinity of flooding since this was
the point of present interest. I n a
few cases measurements were ex-
tended well below this. Following Dotted ourves show holdup at the visually defined flooding point.
440 INDUSTRIAL AND ENGINEERING CHEMISTRY
drop bears a different relation to gas velocity a t high liquor
rates under conditions of large holdup and probably low
packing free space.
The pressure drop curves of Figure 2 show the same be-
havior for all four packings and agree in type with similar
measurements of other investigators on various packings.
The data for the 0.5-inch saddle and the ring packing appear,
however, to be appreciably higher than those available for
similar packings of the same nominal size. Similar dis-
crepancies appear between data of other investigators. I n
the present case this might be explained by “wall effect” or
probably by differences in the packing. It does not seem
impossible that differences in the method of measuring the
flow of gas to the tower may account for some divergence.
For example, with the orifice before the tower, the conditions
under which the gas is measured obviously vary with pressure
drop in the tower and depth of packing. Other experiment-
ers, as for the present data, have measured the gas volume
after leaving the tower. I n either case the linear velocity
of the gas varies in the packing (although its weight rate of
flow is constant) and bears a complicated relation to the
volume measured a t the orifice and the calibration of the
latter. Whether the linear gas velocities calculated by dif-
ferent investigators are on a comparable basis is unknown.
Flooding Velocity from Pressure Drop
The highest point on each curve of Figure 2 is the pressure
drop obtained a t the visually observed flooding point de-
fined above. The upper break point on the pressure drop
curves a t each water rate has been located as accurately as
possible in accordance with the procedure of Mach (6) and
White (22). Gas velocities from the curves of Figure 2
corresponding to this point, defined by White as the flooding
velocity of the tower, are recorded in column 3 of Table 11.
The agreement between the values thus obtained and those
measured visually demonstrates clearly that the break point
of the pressure drop curve properly located coincides closely
VOL. 31, NO. 4
with the critical flooding point of the tower previously
described, and confirms the view that this is the true flooded
point of a packed tower.
I n general, depending upon the location of the experimental
points, there is obviously some latitude in locating a break
point. The latter and its proximity to the true flood point
are determined primarily by the size of the increments by
which the gas velocity has been varied for the pressure drop
determinations in the flooding Bone. The break points, as
shown in Figure 2 or Table 11, always fall slightly below the
true flooding point of the tower. They may be regarded as
setting a lower limit to the flooding velocity which does not
vary appreciably from it if pressure drop measurements have
been properly located.
The authors conclude from a careful analysis of available
data that the log-log plot of pressure drop vs. gas velocity is
in reality a continuous curve such as is represented schemati-
cally by the solid curve ABHC,Figure 3. Flooding is visual-
ized as a continuous process rather than an abrupt transition,
commencing gradually somewhere near B and continuing a t
an accelerating pace until completed a t C where liquid fills the
tower to the level of the packing. According to this view, a
zone of flooding exists rather than a distinct flooding point.
The velocity a t the upper limit marking the completion of
the process and characterizable as described above, may,
however, be so regarded. Curve AKHC, composed of
straight lines, is drawn to show two break points, K and H ,
and indicates the common method of representing such data.
The narrow range of the flooding zone under commonly
studied conditions, together with the usual method of plotting
on logarithmic coordinates, makes this possible. Points on
the sharply rising portion of the pressure drop curves above
the break point, Figure 2 (portion HC of Figure 3), appear a t
random. This is also the case in the data of other investiga-
tors and is to be ascribed to the sensitivity of pressure drop
to gas velocity in the flooding zone, combined with the
spacing of pressure drop measurements a t widely separated
gas velocities in this region.
SHOPASSEMBLY VIEW
OF THE WORLD’S FIRST
F U L L YA U T O M A T I -
CALLY CONTROLLED
SOLVENT RECOVERY
ADSORPTIONSYSTEM;
THE CONTROL MECHA-
N I S M SHOWN H A S
BEEN SIMPLIFIED AND
REDUCEDIN SIZETO
FIT INTO A SMALL
CASE FOR PANEL
MOUNTINQ
Courtesv, E. L. Luaces
Associates
APRIL, 1939 INDUSTRIAL AND ENGINEERING CHEMISTRY 441

Pressure drop readings were unfortunately not continued
after the visually defined flooding point was attained. Hypo-
thetical curve CR of Figure 3, representing increase of pres-
sure drop with gas velocity as the liquid head builds up
above the packing, is intended t o indicate what may happen
in locating erroneous break points ( P or 8) if measurements
are made a t too wide an interval on either side of the true
flood point.
Mach (6) concluded t h a t the flooding velocity (break
point of the AP-U, plot) was attained a t a relatively con-
stant pressure drop between 2 and 3 inches of water (10 to
15 pounds per square foot) per foot of packing. The present
data do not substantiate this as a general rule for all flow
conditions, although it may serve as a rough empirical guide.
mutually dependent. Some parallelism between the be-
havior of the holdup and pressure drop curves can be dis-
cerned. Simmons and Osborn (9) and Furnas and Bellinger
(4) reported that holdup in packings is unaffected by gas
flow, but they gave no measurements and evidently em-
ployed low flow rates. With 0.5-inch paper rings, Mayo,
Hunter, and Nash (6) obtained a curve similar to those in
Figure 4 for one low water rate.
HOLDUP AT FLOODING is represented for each packing by
the dotted curves of Figure 4. The tower operates less full
a t the visually defined flooding point as the water rate to the
packing is diminished. This behavior would be expected,
since the packing must accommodate the passage of a cor-
respondingly greater volume of gas. Calculated values of
the fractional drained void a t flooding unfilled by water are
recorded in Table 11.
When plotted against water rate, the holdup curves in each
case coincide closely with that a t zero gas flow until the up-
turn a t the beginning of the flooding zone is reached. Several
interesting facts are revealed by the holdup data, the physical
significance of which are not yet understood. With all
packings, if holdup a t the flooding point is plotted against
the water rate, the line obtained parallels almost exactly
that with no gas flow reported below; that is, water rate

,u FTJSEC.

FIGURE5. EFFECTOF GAS VELOCITYON

HOLDUP
IN THE 0.5-INCH SADDLES ON LOGARITH-
MIC COORDINATES
Upper break points correepond t o visually defined flooding
point.

The break points in Figure 2 in general fall appreciably

below this range. The corresponding pressure drops (Table
11, column 7) are not constant but first diminish and then
increase, passing through a minimum as the water rate is in-
creased. A similar trend is evident in the data of other in-
vestigators. The authors doubt that pressure drop a t the
break point has any physical significance or designates any
definite abrupt change in the state of operation of the tower.
I n the majority of cases there is obviously considerable lati-
tude in the exact location of the break point which (due to
the sensitivity in this zone) may produce wide variation in
the correspondingly fixed pressure drop even though the gas
velocity is little affected.
The pressure drop a t the visually observed flooding point
(Table 11,column 8) was carefully studied, especially with the
0.5-inch saddle packing. The data demonstrate definitely
that the pressure drop first diminishes and then increases,
eventually becoming relatively constant as the ratio of gas
velocity l,o liquid velocity increases. Furthermore, i t varies
with the size and type of packing. One concludes t h a t pres-
sure drop is not a reliable guide to the flooding velocity of
a particular packing.

Holdup
The water retention in each packing measured simul-
taneously with pressure drop is shown in Figure 4 as a func-
tion of gas velocity a t different constant water rates. Except
a t high rates with the ball and ring packings which have
relatively low free voids, gas velocity has very little effect on
holdup until the flooding process begins. The upward turn
of the holdup curves evidently marks its beginning. Once the
gas flow begins to effect an increase in holdup, the process
continues a t a rapidly accelerating pace since the two are
FIGURE
6, EFFECT
OF WATERRATEON HOLDUP IN VARIOUS
WITH No GAS FLOWING
PACKINGS
varies the holdup a t the flood point to the same extent as it
does with no gas flow. The amount by which the holdup a t
flooding exceeds that without gas flow was calculated in the
last column of Table 11. The relative independence of water
and gas flow exhibited by this quantity in the case of each
packing indicates t h a t the column floods when the normal
442 INDUSTRIAL AND ENGINEERING CHEMISTRY VOL. 31, NO. 4
L I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I pounds per square foot per hour their.data ap-
pear to be practically linear. Simmons and
Osborn (9) and Mayo, Hunter, and Nash (6)
also concluded t h a t holdup varied as the 1.0
power of water rate except in the very low flow
range.
Holdup in packed towers may be related to
liquor rate by
H = L/V (1)
where V defines the vertical rate of passage
through the tower; that is, 1/V is the time re-
quired to traverse one foot of packed height.
Since liquid is a discontinuous phase, V is less
than directly proportional to L and holdup must
increase with the latter. As pointed out by
Furnas and Bellinger, V can be related to VO,the
average velocity of the liquid layer over the pack-
00001 ing surface, by
0 00008
0.00006 V = Vaesina
0 00004
0.00 002 ! I Illllll I 1 IIIIIII ~ @ l l l l l l I I IIIYIIR I If the entire holdup measured by drainage is
assumed to represent a liquid layer on the pack-
0.0 000 I ing surface, the average layer thickness is given
0.01 .oz .o3.w.o6~soI 0.2 a40.6081
4 6110 20 4060~)100 zoo z l
.
--
UY
7. COMPARISON
FIGURE OF PRESENTFLOODING VELOCITYDATAWITH
CORRELATIONMETHODOF SHERWOOD,SHIPLEY,AND HOLLOWAY, SHOW- W P )
ING AGREEMENTWITH LINE FOR DUMPEDRINGS t = H/pS = (2)
S(Vosin a)

holdup of the packing a t a given water rate is exceeded by a The slope of the holdup curves of Figure 6 is 1/V. Hence,
fixed constant value. above rates of approximately 4000 pounds per hour per
FLOODING VELOCITY FROM HOLDUP.Comparison of the square foot, for a given packing the water layer must evi-
pressure drop curves of Figure 2 with
those for holdup in Figure 4 shows
that the abrupt rise of holdup coin- 2.6
cides closely with that of pressure drop.
It cannot be doubted t h a t these factors
are closely related to each other and
to the flooding process. The close
correspondence is still more evident
if the holdup data are plotted against
gas velocity on logarithmic coordinates.
This has been done for all packing,
and the plot for the 0.5-inch saddles
is shown in Figure 5. Two break
points are readily distinguished; the
highest corresponds closely to the gas
velocity a t the upper break points of
F i g u r e 2. V a l u e s of t h e flooding
velocity determined from holdup in
this way are recorded in column 4,
Table 11. It is evident that holdup
s u p p l i e s a m e a s u r e of f l o o d i n g
velocity.
HOLDUP AT ZERO GAS FLOW.Data
for the present packings together with
those reported for water with various
packings by other investigators are
presented in Figure 6. I n all cases
the holdup varies with the 1.0 power
of the water rate when the latter ex-
c e e d s a p p r o x i m a t e l y 3000 to 4000
pounds per hour per square foot. At
water rates between 430 and 6800
Furnas and Bellinger (4) found holdup
with ring and saddle packings to de-
pend on the 0.54 to 0.74 power of jI V&
the water rate; but above 3000 to 4000 1 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 2 4 ;5
 APRIL, 1939 INDUSTRIAL AND ENGINEERING CHEMISTRY 443

dently attain a constant average velocity

over the surface. T h a t the layer thickness on
the surface is independent of its average
velocity seems unlikely. To account for the
observed increase of holdup with flow rate,
one can assume either that the surface is in-
completely wetted, even a t these high flow
rates, or t h a t the water layer on the pack-
ing surface represents only a minor portion
of the measured holdup. The authors incline
to the latter view.
Further, V appears to be practically con-
stant for a variety of packings since, except
for the two smallest sizes, the holdup curves
of Figure 6 for different packings are approxi-
mately parallel. If, as assumed by Furnas
and BeUinger in their treatment of absorption
coefficients in packed towers, 01 is constant
. for various packings, the average water layer
over the several packings must likewise be
constant. The authors believe the most likely
explanation of the available facts to lie in the
a s s u m p t i o n t h a t w a t e r held between the
packing units in operation, and not partici-
pating in the layer flow over the surface,
constitutes the major portion of the observed
holdup, and that not the velocity of the layer SQUARE
F ~ , & 9., ~ ~ ROOTPLOTOF FLOODING VELOCITYDATAFOR VARIOUB
o n t h e ciurface b u t t h a t t h r o u g h s m a l l PACKINGS WITH DIFFERENT GAS-LIQUID SYSTEMS
channels a t the points of contact of packing
units determines the holdup. At low water
rates where V is lower and varies, holdup consists essen- Uchida and Fujita for 15-mm. (0.6-inch) porcelain rings
tially of the surface film. Before definite conclusions are (Figure 8). As the fractional void was about 7 per cent less
drawn regarding the operation of packings such factors must and the packing surface per cubic foot was 52 per cent
be studied systematically for a wide range of types and greater in the latter case, it is not surprising t h a t the two sets
conditions. of data do not agree when plotted according to Figure 7.
The appearance of the fractional void to the 3.0 power
Treatment of Flooding Velocity Data in the ordinate emphasizes differences in its relative magni-
tude.
The agreement of present results with the method of While there is unquestionably much justification for this
correlating flooding velocity data proposed by Sherwood, method of plotting, in view of uncertainties in existing data,
Shipley, and Holloway (8) may be seen in Figure 7. The it cannot be regarded as fully substantiated.
solid line is t h a t proposed by these authors for dumped As the theoretical relation a t the flood point for spray-
rings in a large-diameter column. The upper range of type liquid-liquid towers, Elgin and Browning (3) obtained
points represents the data calculated on the basis of the the expression :
measured drained wet voids; the dotted line, the correspond-
ing points based on the dry voids as employed by these
authors (8). It is interesting that approximate agreement
with the proposed line is obtained on the basis of drained where LD,LN = flood-point flow rates of discontinuous and con-
tinuous phase, respectively, cu. ft./(hr.) (sq.
wet void, and that the line calculated on dry void coincides f t . of tower cross section)
rather closely with that given by the data of Sherwood, Shipley, uo = constant velocity of passage of fixed size drops
and Holloway. The latter data were also obtained by visual of the discontinuous phase with no counter-
observation on approximately the same sizes of packing current flow of the continuous
and diameter of tower. No particular significance can a t
present be attached to these facts although the authors favor I n fundamental operation spray type and packed towers are
the use of’ drained void as representing more closely the void not dissimilar. Although theoretical justification cannot a t
condition in the packing during actual operation. The line present be presented, the empirical suggestion arises that a
proposed by Sherwood and co-workers for large towers is similar relation, in some general form as
based primarily on the data of Uchida and Fujita (10)for
air-water, together with a few reported by White ( l a ) . The
method of measuring flooding velocity employed by the
former is open to question. White does not report the proper-
ties of his packings as used, and it is necessary to assume might apply to a packed tower. I n that case, in view of
those available for commercial packings. The flooding the apparent constancy of V over a wide range of flow, a
velocity curves he reports are based on the data of Mach
and Berl in addition t o his own. Sherwood, Shipley, and
linear relation between 4% and .\/z a t the flood point
for any given packing and system might be expected. The
Holloway suggest “wall effect” as the explanation for the majority of available data have been so plotted in Figures 8
failure of their data t o coincide with t h a t of Uchida and and 9. It can be seen that this is actually the case. I n
Fujita. Their flooding velocities a t the flooding point for a few cases a tendency toward departure from the rela-
0.5-inch carbon rings coincide rather closely with those of tion a t very low liquid flow rates can be discerned which
444 INDUSTRIAL AND ENGINEERING CHEMISTRY
parallels a similar behavior of holdup. Although this is
to be regarded as an empirical result, it offers a useful
method for comparison and interpolation of flooding velocity
data.
Comparatively wide divergences between the data of
different investigators on similar sizes and types of packing
are evident, as well as inconsistencies in those divergences in
several cases. The data of White and of Mach on larger
sizes of rings (as well as those of Mach on saddles) are con-
siderably higher than .those of other investigators, although
FIGURE10. ALTERNATECORRELATION OF FLOODING
VELOCITY
DATAON MISCELLANEOUSPACKINGS
OF SIMILAR
SIZEFOR THE AIR-WATER
SYSTEM
the results on the 0.5-inch size as reported by White are
noticeably lower. These divergences are probably accounted
for by differences in the packing materials used, but differ-
ences in the method used t o measure flooding velocity may
likewise be involved.
I n Figure 10 data for present packings, together with those
of Sherwood, Shipley, and Holloway (8) and of Baker,
Chilton, and Vernon (2) on similar sizes and varieties of,
packing have been plotted according to a method suggested
by the preceding results. This involves plotting as coordi-
nates the dimensionless groups
[-I against c): (z)]”‘“
[
and is t o be regarded as essentially empirical. Fractional
drained voids were used since they are considered t o have
been most accurately determined in the present experiments.
Since drained voids were not reported for their packings by
other investigators, for comparison the reported dry void was
VOL. 31, NO. 4
corrected in each case by the ratio of drained to dry void
found for the same type and size of packing in the present
work. This expediency does not affect the relative agree-
ment. The data of Uchida and Fujita for 15-mm. rings fall
appreciably above Figure 10 a t high liquor rates but show
good agreement a t low rates; their data for all sizes fall
closely on the line if calculated on dry void. Owing to
the range of data, logarithmic coordinates are used as a
matter of convenience ; similar correlation is obtained on
rectangular coordinates but the curvature of the line is
enhanced.
The authors do not intend to advocate the above as a
superior method of correlation. It is presented because of
its interest as a possible basis of procedure with future work
and its emphasis on the necessity for systematic study over
a wide flow range of a variety of packings, with accompanying
accurate determinations of their physical properties as
used, before a method of correlating flooding data is sub-
stantiated.
Generality and Mechanism of Flooding
A quantitative theoretical mechanism to explain the ob-
served experimental performance of packed towers in the
flooding zone is not yet possible, nor can the basic cause of
flooding and the interrelation between the several factors
involved be definitely stated. White ( l a ) visualized flooding
as the result of the effect of gas friction in increasing liquid
holdup in the packing which, assumed inappreciable a t low
velocities, eventually began and increased a t a rapidly ac-
celerating pace, and culminated in the flooding of the tower.
Except in details this hypothetical mechanism is substanti-
ated by the experimental facts now available. I n so far as it
does not imply that flooding is a n abrupt transition at a
certain definite gas velocity and pressure drop, or prevents
liquid flow through the tower, Sherwood’s suggestion (7) that
flooding is caused by the effect of gas friction on holdup and
t h a t the flooding point is that a t which friction per unit
length equals the hydrostatic liquid head in the tower is
essentially the same view.
It is believed desirable t o emphasize here the generality of
flooding and to visualize it as a requisite consequence in any
apparatus in which one fluid passes discontinuously through
a n immiscible second one. The flooding of the packed
tower is a special case of this general viewpoint. Bubble-
cap, spray, bubble, or film type gas-liquid or liquid-liquid
towers exhibit flooding in essentially the same manner.
Preliminary visual laboratory studies of the flooding of such
equipment indicate no fundamental or radical difference in
the operative mechanism producing flooding. A difference in
the visual behavior of such equipment arises from differences
in the phase initially discontinuous. The behavior of a n
evaporator or vaporizer operated a t an excessive heat rate
for its diameter or a tube containing a column of water into
which air is bubbled a t a n increasing rate is believed t o be an
evidence of the same basic phenomenon.
The general character of flooding is visualized as follows:
As pointed out in Equation 2, the holdup of any discontinuous
phase passing through another, whether the latter is in
motion or not, necessarily increases with its rate of flow since
its linear velocity in the continuous is less than proportional
to the rate a t which it enters. That its holdup must eventu-
ally approach the free volume or cross section of the appara-
tus and result in a tendency for it to become continuous and
displace the phase initially continuous is obvious. The
continuous phase, if in countercurrent motion, retards the
passage of the discontinuous through frictional drag to a
greater or less extent. An increase in the holdup of the
latter follows. This in turn results in a corresponding in-
APRIL, 1939 INDUSTRIAL AND ENGINEERING CHEMISTRY
crease of holdup. Since the countercurrent velocities are
mutually interdependent, the effect is multiplied at a rapidly
accelerating pace with further increase in volume of either
phase fed to the apparatus and must eventually culminate in
flooding. When t h e flooding point is reached, either of two
things may happen. Depending upon the rate of passage of
the continuous phase if made discontinuous in the other
and its corresponding holdup a t the relative volume flow
rates at which flooding has occurred , either the discontinuous
phase is reversed, and the only evident change is a transition,
say, from a spray to a bubble device; or if the flow conditions
are such that the corresponding holdup of each would be
sufficient to fill the available volume, a competition results
and either is discharged more or less violently from one or
both ends of the apparatus. Both conditions occur in a
packed tower or a spray type liquid-liquid tower. Only the
latter situation is observed i n a film type or a bubble type
gas-liquid tower. T h e first may be regarded as flooding with
respect to liquid, the second, to gas.
T h e experimental facts for packed towers as well as those
known to the authors for other apparatus are in accord with
this hypothetical mechanism.
Summary
That packed towers cease to operate satisfactorily when rate
of gas and liquid feeds exceed a certain limit, usually designated
as the flooding velocity, is well known. Published descriptions
regarding flooding characterize it variously and indefinitely, and
the relatively few data for flooding velocities do not show good
agreement. Different criteria have been used for its measure-
ment and these have not been related to a definite state of opera-
tion or to one another. Data on the effect of gas and liquor
velocity on holdup in packings extending to the flooding zone
are completely lacking.
A 3-inch diameter glass tower filled successively with four
kinds of packing has been employed to study visually the effect
of air and water flow on the operation of such equipment up to
the flooding point and simultaheously pressure drop and water
holdup in the packing were measured.
The true flooding point of a packed tower is characterized as
that at which the liquid fills the tower to the top level of the
packing. This is a definitely measurable and reproducible state
of operation. The behavior of the tower operated both below
and above this point has been described. Violent entrainment
of liquid occurs at this point when the water rate is low, but the
only change at high rates is the transition from water to air as
the discontinuous phase. I n no case is water flow through the
packing stopped. A packing floods in essentially the same
manner at sufficiently high liquor flow and no gas flow. Data
for flooding velocities of the packings determined a t this visually
defined point are reported.
I n general, gas velocity has little effect on liquid holdup until
just before a critical gas velocity is reached, a t which it rapidly
rises. With and without gas flow, holdup varies linearly with
water rate except at very low rates until the critical water rate
is reached, when i t rises rapidly. On a logarithmic plot of
holdup us. gas velocity, an upper break point occurs which
coincides closely with the visually defined flooding velocity.
The observed effect of gas and liquor velocity on pressure
drop in the flooding zone agrees with that of previous investi-
gators. When represented by straight lines on logarithmic
coordinates, the data for pressure drop vs. gas velocity show an
upper break point a reeing closely with the visually determined
flooding velocity. I% is concluded that the break point always
falls slightly below the true flood point but supplies a reasonably
accurate measure of it.
Data for pressure drop and water holdu at the flood point
are given for various air and water flows. Sressure drops both
at this point and the break point on the logarithmic plot vary
with gas and liquor flow and pass through a minimum. The
significance of the pressure drop at the break point and its
reliability as an estimate of flooding are questioned.
All packings show similar behavior.
The data show reasonable agreement with the correlation
method proposed by Sherwood, Shipley, and Holloway, but it
is emphasized that insufficient unquestionable data are available
to substantiate this method or to locate the theoretical line
definitely. Plotting the square root of gas velocity vs. the square
root of liquor velocity a t flooding on rectangular coordinates
445
gives a straight line for any packing with all available flooding
velocity data. An empirical plot is shown which differs from
that of the above authors but which correlates well the present
data together with most of those available on similar size pack-
ings, but this is suggested primarily as a basis for future study
and because i t emphasizes the necessity for additional data
on packings whose properties as used have been accurately
measured.
The generality and fundamental similarity of the flooding
phenomenon in any apparatus which brings two fluids together
in countercurrent flow are pointed out, and a mechanism which
explains its basic cause is suggested.
Acknowledgment
The authors wish t o thank t h e Maurice A. Knight Com-
pany, Akron, Ohio, who donated the supply of Berl saddle
packings utilized in the present experiments.
Nomenclature
Fc = wet void during operation with liquor circulating,
cu. ft./cu. f t . of packed tower volume
F D = fractional dry void in the packing, cu. ft./cu. ft. of
packed tower volume
F , = fractional drained void in the packing, cu. ft./cu. ft.
of packed tower volume
g = acceleration of gravity, ft./(sec.) (sec.)
G = superficial mass velocity of gas = 3600 U Q ~ Q ,
lb./(hr.) (sq. ft.)
H = liquid holdup in packed section, lb./cu. ft. of packed
tower volume
IC’, IC = proportionality coefficients
L = superficial mass velocity of liquid = U L ~ Llb./(hr.)
,
(sq. ft.)
m = mean hydraulic radius (free vol. divided by total con-
tact area)
N = height of packed tower, ft.
A P / N = pressure drop, lb./(sq. ft.)(ft.)
S = surface area of packing, _. sa.
- ft./cu. ft. of Dacked
tower volume -
t = average thickness of liquid layer on packing, f t .
UG = superficial gas velocity based on entire tower cross
section, f t./sec.
UL = superficial liquor velocity based on entire cross
section, f t./hr.
Y = vertical rate of liquid passage through tower, ft./hr.
VO = average velocity of liquid layer over packing surface,
ft./hr.
ff = average inclination of path of flow to the horizontal
PG == density of gas, lb./cu. ft.
PL = density of liquid, lb./cu. ft.
P = viscosity of liquid, centipoises
Literature Cited
Badger, W. L., and McCabe, W. L., “Elements of Chemical
Engineering,” 2nd ed., New York, McGraw-Hill Book Co.,
1936.
Baker, T., Chilton, T. H., and Vernon, H. C., Trans. A m . Znst.
Chem. Engrs., 31, 296 (1935).
Elgin, J. C., and Browning, F. M., Zbid., 31, 639 (1935).
Furnas, C. C., and Bellinger, F., Zbid., 34, 251 (1938).
Mach, E., Forsch. Gebietezngenieurw., 6,375-9 (1935) ; Dechema,
6, 38 (1934).
Mayo, F., Hunter, T. G., and Nash, A. W., J . SOC.Chem. Znd.,
54, 375T (1935).
Sherwood, T. K., “Absorption and Extraction,” 1st ed., New
York, McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1937.
Sherwood, T. K., Shipley, G. H., Jr., and Holloway, F. A. L.,
IND. ENG.CHEM.,30, 765 (1938).
Simmons, C. W., and Osborn, H. B., Jr., Zbid., 26, 529
(1934).
Uchida, S.,and Fujita, S.,J. SOC.Chem. Ind. Japan, 39, 886
(1936); 40, 238 (1937).
Walker, W. H., Lewis, W. K., McAdams, W. H., and Gilliland,
E. R., “Principles of Chemical Engineering,” 3rd ed., New
York, McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1937.
White, A. M., Trans. A m . Inst. Chem. Engrs., 31, 390
(1935).
White, A. M., Neel, R. M., and Welsh, A. J., chem. eng. thesis,
Univ. North Carolina, 1936.