Chemical Engineering and Processing, 31 (1992) 119- 124

119

Hold-up of Mellapak structured packings

P. Sues and L. Spiegel
SulzerBros. Ltd., Separation Columns,
Dedicated

CH-8401

to Prof. Dr.-Zng. A. Vogelpohl

Winterthur

(Switzerland)

on the occasion

of his 6&h birthday

(Received October 23, 1991; in tinal form November 27, 1991)

Abstract
The liquid hold-up of three structured packings (Mellapak 250.X, 250.Y and 500.Y) was measured with a gamma
ray absorption technique using the air/water system. The results agree well with other experimental data available
from the literature. A correlation was derived to calculate the hold-up as a function of liquid load, liquid viscosity
and specific surface area of the packing.

Introduction

Hold-up is defined as the volume of liquid present in

the form of a liquid film or rivulet on the surface of a
packing, or drops in the void space of the packing. We
limit ourselves to countercurrent,
steady-state operation
of normal two-phase flow. Knowledge of hold-up is
important
for understanding
column dynamics, batch
applications, column start-up, design of support devices
for the column (because of liquid weight in operation),
theoretical models of packing behaviour and calculation of residence time.
Structured packings have been widely used in the
process industry for more than 25 years. The Mellapak
type is made from metal sheets. The performance characteristics of Mellapak have been reported elsewhere
[1,21.
For random packings (rings, saddles, etc.), hold-up is
thought to consist of static and dynamic hold-up. Static
hold-up is made up of the liquid held within the packing, principally
by capillary forces, at zero gas and
liquid flows. Dynamic hold-up is made up of the flowing liquid. This classical distinction cannot be made if
hold-up is measured by the gamma ray absorption
technique. Then the total volume of liquid is measured,
irrespective of its state of motion. For the purpose of
formulating theoretical models, however, the notion of
the two kinds of hold-up may be helpful.
McNulty and Hsieh [3] measured the static and
dynamic hold-up of Flexipak lY, 2Y, 3Y, 4Y (Flexipak
is the US trademark of Mellapak.) The static hold-up
was determined by weighing the wet packing, the dynamic hold-up by measuring
the amount of liquid
leaving the packing after stopping liquid supply.

0255-2701/92/$5.00

With a similar method, Billet and Mackowiak [4] and

Mackowiak
[5] determined
the dynamic hold-up of
Mellapak 250.Y.
The purpose of this paper is to present the data for
liquid hold-up in three structured packings (Mellapak
250.X, 250.Y. 5OO.Y), obtained by the gamma ray
absorption technique, to compare them with other published data, and to provide a correlation for the liquid
hold-up in the region below the loading point.

Experimental

The hold-up measurements

were made in our hydraulic simulation
column SIM-1000 (Fig. 1). The
SIM-1000 has an inner diameter of 1000 mm, and
consists of transparent PVC, to make visual inspection
of the flow conditions possible. The maximum possible
packed height is 3.5 m.
At the bottom of the packing the water is separated
from the two-phase area by a liquid collector, from
where it is led into a 4 m3 tank. Three pumps of different
size pump the liquid to the top of the column with a flow
rate of up to 180 m3/h. The flow rate is kept constant by
means of control valves, in turn controlled by an electronic flow indicator/controller,
which receives the signals of flow rate measurement turbines. Entering at the
top of the column, the liquid is distributed over the
packing by a distributor
suitable for use over a wide
range of liquid loads. The gas circulation is driven by a
radial fan. The maximum possible gas flow rate is
20 000 m3/h of air at a pressure drop of 65 mbar. The gas
flow rate is measured by the pressure difference, with a
pitot tube, using an electronic micromanometer.
The

(Q 1992 - Elsevier Sequoia. All rights reserved

TABLE 1. Characteristic
and 500.Y
Type

250.x
25O.Y
5OO.Y

dimensions

of Mellapak

250.X,

aI
( mlm)

Frns/rn)

$eg)

250
250
500

0.98
0.975
0.975

30
45
45

25O.Y

F,, m/s (kg/m3)0.5

A
20
II

0.00

2.05

4.25

.
.

n m=
.

ri

15

2
9
2
B
3

.
.
lo-

t
h

1, .

20000m3/h
*j=*

::i:;::::,.%

Ag*.,

Fig. 1. Schematic

layout

of the test system.

flow can be adjusted by a vane controller at the suction

side and a hand flap at the pressure side. The overall
pressure drop is determined by a U-tube manometer,
using pitot tubes before the inlet and after the outlet of
the column.
For small pressure drops, the micromanometer can also be used as measuring equipment.
All used pitot tubes can be flushed back with compressed air to avoid corruption of the measurements by
the presence of condensed liquid.
The hold-up is measured with commercial radiometric density measurement
equipment. The gamma rays
are emitted by a 150 mCi Cs 137 source. At the opposite side of the column a detector measures the transmitted intensity of the gamma rays. It supplies a count
rate dependent on radiation intensity and sends it to an
evaluation unit which transforms the pulses from the
counter into a linear output signal. This signal is
recorded on a chart, from which the average intensity
and the temporal fluctuations are determined.
The hold-up of Mellapak 250.X, 250.Y and 500.Y
was measured. The characteristic
dimensions,
surface
area a,, void space E and crimp angle cp. are given in
Table 1. The packings are manufactured
from stainless
steel.

io

i5

i0

Height above bottom layer, cm

Fig. 2. Vertical profile

different gas loads.

of hold-up

with

horizontal

scanning

at

Measurement procedure
At the beginning of the experimental programme the
direction of the gamma ray was horizontal across the
packing along a diameter. In order to get information
about the accuracy of the method a preliminary measuring programme
was performed. The hold-up was
measured at different elevations within one packing
element for different air loads at constant water loads.
The result is shown in Fig. 2. The data were measured
with a liquid load 1 of 100 m3/m2 h at three different air
loads. It is clearly seen that at the highest air load the
local hold-up varies between 7% and 20% absolute.
Here, and for all data to follow, hold-up is given as
percentage of liquid volume per unit packed volume.
The measurements
showed that flooding starts where
two packing elements touch each other. Hold-up is
therefore a local property of the packing above the

121
hokiup profiles

loading point

Fig. 3. Vertical hold-up profile.

Gas load F,, m/s (kg/m3j0.

loading point (see Fig. 3). The loading point characterizes the condition where hold-up increases sharply due
to the interaction between gas and liquid phase.
Therefore to obtain reliable information on the average hold-up it was necessary to modify the experimental
arrangement:
instead of a horizontal an oblique traverse of the gamma ray was used. This gives a hold-up
value which is an average over a packing element as a
whole.

Temporal

behaviour of hold-up

The intensity
of the absorbed
gamma rays was
recorded on a chart, from which the temporal fluctuation of the signal could be read. In Fig. 4 the mean

Fig. 5. Hold-up of Mellapak 250.X.

amplitude is shown as function

pressed by the F-factor F,:

of the gas load ex-

F, = wcpco.5

where pG is the gas density (kg/m3) and wo the superficial gas velocity (m/s).
The liquid load is the parameter. For low F-factors
the amplitude is small, O.l%-0.2% absolute. Above the
loading point the amplitude increases quickly to 0.3%0.5% absolute. Before flooding it decreases again, where
flooding is defined as the condition where countercurrent operation is no longer possible. This behaviour
indicates that above the loading point the interactions
between gas and liquid are strong and that the hold-up
is not a static property of the packing.

Results
Liquid

load I, m/h

Gas load F,,

m/s (kq/m3).5

Fig. 4. Hold-up fluctuation versus gas load.

The hold-up data for Mellapak 250.X, 250.Y and

500.Y are given in Figs. 5-7. The diagrams show the
hold-up as a function of the F-factor, the parameter is
the liquid load, which was varied between 5 and
200 m3/m2 h. The data were obtained for a liquid temperature of 20 C.
For lower liquid loads the behaviour of the hold-up
curves is as would be expected, that is, almost horizontal up to the loading point. Above the loading point the
hold-up increases rapidly due to the strong interactions
between gas and liquid. At high liquid loads the holdup increases with increasing gas load and reaches a
plateau about 3% higher (see, in particular, Fig. 6). At
yet higher gas loads the hold-up rises sharply. This
effect appears above 125 m3/m2 h for Mellapak 250.X
and 80 m3/m2 h for Mellapak 250.Y and 500.Y and also
has an influence on the pressure drop at corresponding
loads (see Fig. 8). The effect cannot yet be explained

122

y /

Packing

--.--

01

I
1

16

_. p.

6.4

-+-

96

M250.Y

M250.X

M500.Y

FPZY

FP3Y

M250.Y

of Mellapak

10

Liquid

Gas load FV. m/s (kg/m3j0.5

Fig. 6. Hold-up

II
type

load I, m/h

Fig. 9. Hold-up versus liquid load for Mellapak 250.X, 250.Y

and 500.Y and Flexipak IY, 2Y and 3Y. Literature data from
Billet [6] and Mackowiak [5].

250.Y.

theoretically,
but certainly indicates a change in flow
regime.
This has to be investigated further to improve holdup and pressure drop models of structured packings at
very high liquid loads.

Discussion

Gas load F

Fig. 7. Hold-up

of Mellapak

m/s (kg/m3)D5

500.Y.

In Fig. 9 the hold-up data are plotted against liquid

load for zero gas flow. It can be seen that on a log-log
diagram the data may be represented by two straight
lines: the first with slope 0.37 in the range below
40 m3/m2 h and the second with slope 0.59 in the range
above 40 m3/m2 h. This behaviour
is consistent with
that of Flexipak
lY, 2Y and 3Y as measured by
McNulty and Hsieh [3].
Billet and Mackowiak [4] measured the hold-up of
Mellapak 250.Y with a volumetric method in a column
of internal diameter 220 mm and packing height 1.4 m.
Their data agree well with the present data within the
experimental
error. No effect of column diameter is
visible.
Because their measurements were obtained for liquid
loads of up to 65 m3/m2 h only, the transition in the
flow regime may be difficult to recognize from their
data.
Billet and Mackowiak correlated hold-up against liquid load by a 213 power law, but the data could be
equally well correlated with the exponent of 0.59 suggested here for the new data.
The in&em-e

Gas load F,. m/s (kg/m).5

Fig. 8. Pressure drop of Mellapak

250.X.

of packing

surface

area

In Fig. 9 it can be seen that the surface area of the

packing is important. From the data, hold-up is found
to increase with the surface area to the power of 0.83.

123

Again this result is supported by the data for Flexipak

of McNulty and Hsieh who also found hold-up to
increase with surface area to the power of 0.83. This is
in contrast to the results of Billet and Mackowiak for
Montz packings Bl-100
to Bl-300,
for which they
found the hold-up to vary with surface area to the
power of 0.33.
This may be explained by the fact that Billet and
Mackowiaks
experiments were carried out at lower
liquid loads, at which the packing may not have been
completely wetted. Under these circumstances the comparison should be based on the wetted area rather than
the geometric surface area.

B
.
.

-.-._._.
1 ____..___ M500

The influence of viscosity

The influence of viscosity was investigated qualitatively with the liquids triethylene glycol (TEG)
and
aqueous solutions of monodiethanolamine
(MDEA)
having dynamic liquid viscosities between 6 and 30 cP.
From the measurements the influence of the viscosity
on the hold-up can be described by the correction
factor
(PLIr(LL,0)O=
where ~1~is the dynamic liquid viscosity (cP) and pL,o
the dynamic viscosity of water at 20 C (cP).
Correlation for hold-up
The hold-up below the loading point can be calculated by the following empirical equation within 10%
accuracy:

p&350
M700

I
100
Liquid

The infltlence of packing crimp angle

The crimp angle seems to have a negligible influence
on the hold-up. For Mellapak 250.X it is 30 to the
vertical, for Mellapak 250.Y it is 45. Despite the
steeper gradient of the falling liquid in the X-type
packing compared to the Y-type, we do not find an
important difference in hold-up. No further experimental data relating specifically to this factor appear to be
available in the literature.

M500.Y
M,70

Fig. 10. Hold-up

curves

load I, m/h

for Mellapak.

Hold-up of distributor, collectors

The published data do not include the hold-up in the
column internals as distributors, collectors, etc. Holdup in these elements must be calculated separately.

Conclusion
The total hold-up of Mellapak 250.X, 250.Y and
500.Y has been measured by a gamma ray absorption
technique in a column of 1000 mm internal diameter
with the air/water system. The data agree well with
the few data in the literature. An empirical correlation is given to calculate the hold-up for all Mellapak
types.
Our experimental technique measures the total holdup. It is not possible to distinguish between static and
dynamic hold-up, as is usually done in the literature. It
may be that this difference is only important for the
conventional volumetric method. Considering the very
local nature of hold-up in the packing it seems at least
doubtful to base modelling of the liquid behaviour in
the packing on data from integral, that is, non-local,
measurements only.

h, = ca,0~83Z(pL/pL, o)~25
where p,_ is the dynamic liquid viscosity, pr,o the dynamic viscosity of water at 20 C, 1 the liquid load
(m3/m2 h), and a, the surface area (m2/m3),
c = 0.0169

for

1~ 40 m3/m2 h

c = 0.0075

for

1> 40 m3/m2 h

x = 0.37

for

I < 40 m3/m2 h

x = 0.59

for

I > 40 m3/m2 h

Figure
10 shows the empirical expression
given
above, for the various Mellapak types, with a subset of
the experimental data to indicate their accuracy.

Nomenclature
specific area of packing, m2/m3
gas load F-factor, m/s (kg/m3)0-5
liquid hold-up, % of packing volume
hold-up fluctuation, % of packing volume
liquid load, m/m* h or m/h
superficial gas velocity, m/s
void space of packing, m/m
liquid dynamic viscosity, CP
dynamic viscosity of water at 20 C, CP

124

PC

cp

gas density, kg/m3

crimp angle to vertical axis

References
1 L. Spiegel and W. Meier, Correlations
of the performance
characteristics
of the various Mellapak types, Inst. Chem. Eng.
Symp. Ser. No. 104, (1987) A203-A215.
2 Separation
Columns for Distillation and Absorption, Publ. No.
22.13.06, Sulzer, Winterthur,
1991.

3 K. J. McNulty
and C. Hsieh, Hydraulic
performance
and
efficiency of Koch Flexipac structured
packings, AIChE Annu.
Meeting, 1982.
4 R. Billet and J. Mackowiak,
Application
of modern packings in
thermal separation
processes, Chem. Eng. Technol., 11 (1988)
213-227.
5 J. Mackowiak,
Fluiddynnmik van Kolonnen mit modernen FiiIIkiirpern und Packungen ftir GaslFliissigkeitssysteme,
Salle +
Sauerlander,
Frankfurt/Main,
1991.
6 R. Billet, Modeling of fluid dynamics in packed columns, Inst.
Chem. Eng. Symp. Ser. No. 104, (1987) A171-A182.