Module 3. Mass Transfer Coefficients

NPTEL Chemical Mass Transfer Operation 1
MODULE 3: MASS TRANSFER COEFFICIENTS
LECTURE NO. 1
3.1 Introduction to mass transfer coefficient
3.1.1 Concepts of mass transfer coefficients
Movement of the bulk fluid particles in the turbulent condition is not yet
thoroughly understood. For gases it is fairly well known as a molecular diffusion
since it is described in terms of kinetic theory [1-3]. The rate of mass transfer
from the interface to the turbulent zone in the same manner can be useful for
molecular diffusion. Thus the term CDAB/Z of Equation (2.13) which is a
characteristic of molecular diffusion is replaced by F. For binary solution,
NA
y A2
NA (N A N B )
NA F ln (3.1)
(N A N B ) NA
( N N ) y A1
A B
The term F is called mass transfer coefficient. The value of F depends on the
local nature of the fluid motion. It is a local mass transfer coefficient defined for a
particular location on the interface. Its variation depends on the effect of variation
in concentrations yA1 and yA2 on the flux. In case of equimolar counter diffusion
and transfer of one substance though stagnant another substance, special mass
transfer coefficients are generally used which are defined as:
Flux (a coefficien t) (concentra tion diffe rence) (3.2)
How mass transfer rate is calculated when there is bulk motion (turbulent) in the
medium? The answer will be addressed in this study. Convective mass transfer
Joint initiative of IITs and IISc Funded by MHRD Page 1 of 4

is of two types, namely, forced convection mass transfer and free convection
mass transfer. The concept of mass transfer coefficient is to develop a simple
and practically helpful approach to convective mass transfer problems.
Mass transfer rate (WA) is proportional to:
(i) concentration driving force (CA)
(ii) area of the contact between phases (a)
Hence, WA (3.3)
WA kcaCA (3.4)
where kc is proportionality constant, called mass transfer coefficient.
Mass transfer rate, WA can also be expressed in terms of molar flux, NA as:
WA aA = kcaCA (3.5)
NA
kc (3.6)
C A
3.1.2 Types of mass transfer coefficients

Mass transfer occurs in gas/liquid phase
Choice of driving force (concentration, partial pressure, mole fraction)
Diffusion of A through non-diffusing B/equimolar counter diffusion of A
and B.
Diffusion of A through non-diffusion B (NB=0)

NA=kG(pA1-pA2)=ky(yA1-yA2)=kc(CA1-CA2) Gas phase (3.7)
NA=kx(xA1-xA2)=kL(CA1-CA2) Liquid phase (3.8)
Subscripts (1 and 2) refer two positions in a medium.
For gas phase diffusion we know,

DAB P( p A1 p A2 )
NA (3.9)
RT pBM
( pB 2 pB1 )
where, pBM and is film thickness.
p
ln B 2
pB1
Equating Equation (3.7) and Equation (3.9),

DAB P
kG (3.10)
RT pBM
Again,
DAB P( p A1 p A2 ) DAB P P( y A1 y A2 )
NA (3.11)
RT pBM RT pBM
DAB P 2
ky (3.12)
RT pBM
Also,
DAB P( p A1 p A2 ) DAB P(C A1 C A2 )
NA (3.13)
RT pBM pBM
DAB P
kc (3.14)
pBM
For liquid phase diffusion,
D AB
NA ( x A1 x A2 ) (3.15)
x BM M av
( xB 2 xB1 )
where, xBM and is average molar concentration.
ln
xB 2 M av
xB1
DAB
kx (3.16)
xBM M av
Also,
D AB D AB
NA ( x A1 x A2 ) (C A1 C A2 ) (3.17)
x BM M av x BM


DAB
kL (3.18)
xBM

Conversions: kc=RTkG; ky=PkG; kx kL
M av

LECTURE NO. 2
Equimolar counter-diffusion of A and B (NA =-NB)

N A kG/ ( pA1 pA2 ) k y/ ( y A1 y A2 ) kc/ (C A1 CA2 ) Gas phase (3.19)
N A k x/ ( xA1 xA2 ) kL/ (CA1 CA2 ) Liquid phase (3.20)
For gas phase diffusion we know,

DAB ( p A1 p A2 )
NA (3.21)
RT
DAB
kG/ (3.22)
RT
Again,
DAB ( p A1 p A2 ) DAB P( y A1 y A2 )
NA (3.23)
RT RT
DAB P
k y/ (3.24)
RT
Also,
DAB ( p A1 p A2 ) DAB (C A1 C A2 )
NA (3.25)
RT
DAB
Equating Equation (3.19) and Equation (3.25), k c/ (3.26)


For liquid phase diffusion the flux can be written as

D AB
NA ( x A1 x A2 ) (3.27)
M av
DAB
Equating Equation (3.20) and Equation (3.27), k x/ (3.28)
M av
Also,
D AB D
NA ( x A1 x A2 ) AB (C A1 C A2 ) (3.29)
M av
DAB
k L/ (3.30)


Conversions: kc/ RT kG/ ; k y/ P kG/ ; k x/ k L/
M av
Example problem 3.1: Hydrochloric acid (A) diffuses through a thin film of water
(B) 4.0 mm thick at 283 K. The concentration of HCl at point 1 on one boundary
of the film is 12 wt% and on the other boundary, at point 2 is 4 wt%. The
diffusivity of HCl in water is 2.5 x 10-9 m2/s. Calculate the flux of HCl considering
water to be stagnant. Density of the solutions at points 1 and 2 are 1060.7 kg/m 3
and 1020.15 kg/m3 respectively.
Solution 3.1:
Molecular weight of HCl, MA = 36.5 and MB = 18
At point 1, mole fraction of HCl
12 / 36.5
x A1 0.0629 , Therefore, x B1 1 0.0629 0.9371
12 / 36.5 88 / 18
Average molecular weight at point 1
100
M1 19.1662 kg / kmol
12 / 36.5 88 / 18
At point 2, mole fraction of HCl

4 / 36.5
x A2 0.0201 , Therefore, x B1 1 0.0201 0.9799
4 / 36.5 96 / 18
Average molecular weight at point 2
100
M2 18.3728 kg / kmol
4 / 36.5 96 / 18
/ M 1 2 / M 2 1060.7 / 19.1662 1020.15 / 18.3728
C av 1 55.4336 kmol / m 3
M av 2 2
x x B1 0.9799 0.9371
x BM B 2 0.9596
ln( x B 2 / x B1 ) ln(0.9799 / 0.9371)
z = 4 mm = 0.004 m
Flux of HCl,
D AB C av (2.5 10 9 )(55.4336)(0.0629 0.0201)
NA ( x A1 x A2 ) 1.5452 10 6 kmol / m 2 s
x BM Z (0.9596)(0.004)
3.2 Mass transfer under laminar flow condition

Mass transfer coefficient does not play a big role in laminar flow condition as
molecular diffusion exists there. In laminar flow regime, the average liquid phase
mass transfer coefficient, kL,av is correlated with Sherwood number (Sh) and DAB
as follows:
DAB
k L ,av 3.41 (3.31)

k L ,av
Shav 3.41 (3.32)
DAB

3.3 Mass transfer under turbulent flow past solids

Mass transfer under flow past solid is a practically useful situation. Several
theories have attempted to clarify the behavior of mass transfer coefficients. All
the theories have some assumptions and some drawbacks. Hence, these are
revised frequently. In turbulent flow medium, small fluid an element of different
sizes, called eddies, move randomly. These eddies form, interact among others
and disappear in the flow path. The total molar flux of a solute A due to
molecular diffusion and eddy diffusion, JA is as follows:
dC A
J A ( D AB DE ) (3.33)
dZ
where DE is eddy diffusivity. Eddy diffusivity depends on intensity of local
turbulence.

LECTURE NO. 3
3.4 CORRELATION FOR CONVECTIVE MASS TRANSFER

COEFFICIENT
In this section various correlations that are used to estimate the convective mass
transfer coefficients for various cases are presented. The various correlations are
generally formed in terms of different dimensionless groups associated with the
mass transfer. The definitions of mostly useful dimensionless groups associated
with the mass transfer are given in Table 3.1 as follows:
Table 3.1: Dimensionless groups for mass transfer:
Name of dimensionless Definition of group Significance of group

groups
Reynolds number (Re) ul Ratio of inertia force to
viscous force
Schmidt number (Sc) Ratio of molecular
DAB diffusivity of
momentum to
molecular diffusivity of
mass transfer
Sherwood number (Sh) k g pBM RTl kc pBM l Ratio of total mass
, ,
PD AB PD AB transfer rate to mass
kc l k y pBM RTl transfer by molecular

, , etc.
DAB PD AB diffusion
Grashof number (GrD) gl 3 Ratio of product of

2
buoyancy forces and
inertia forces to

square of viscous
force
Peclet number (PeD) ul Ratio of inertia forces
Re. Sc,
DAB to mass transfer by
molecular diffusion
Stanton number (StD) Sh/(Re.Sc), Sh/PeD Ratio of total mass
transfer rate to inertia
forces
3.4.1 Correlation of mass transfer coefficients for a single

sphere
3.4.1.1 Mass transfer coefficients for a single sphere in case of
natural convection
In presence of natural convection the mass transfer from single sphere were
studied by Steinberger and Treybal (1960) and they recommended the mass
transfer coefficient as follows:
Sh Shnc 0.347(Re Sc0.5 )0.62 (3.34)
In the range of 1 < Re < 3104 and 0.6 < Sc < 3200
Shnc 2.0 0.569(GrD Sc)1 / 4 (3.35)
in the range of GrDSc < 108

and
Shnc 2.0 0.0254(GrD Sc)1 / 3 Sc0.244 (3.36)
in the range of GrD Sc > 108
3.4.1.2 Mass transfer coefficients for a single sphere in case of

forced convection
Different investigators have performed the experiment on the mass transport
from a single sphere and developed correlations based on mass transfer in the

environment of forced convection along with the consideration of mss transfer by

molecular diffusion in the general form of:
Sh Sh0 m Ren Sc1 / 3 (3.37)
where m and n are correlating constants. As per Bird et al. (1960), for low
Reynolds number, the effects of natural convection is negligible which results
Sherwood number theoretically to a value of 2.0. Then the generalized correction
becomes:
Sh 2.0 m Ren Sc1 / 3 (3.38)
At Reynolds numbers ranging from 2 to 12000 and Schmidt number ranging from
0.6 to 2.7, Froessling (1939) and Evnochides and Thodos (1959) developed the
mass transfer coefficient for a single sphere and represented as follows:
Sh 2.0 0.552 Re1 / 7 Sc1 / 3 (3.39)
3.4.2 Correlation of mass transfer coefficients for flat plates

There are several investigations in literature regarding the evaporation from a
free liquid surface or the sublimation from a flat solid surface into air stream
under both laminar and turbulent conditions. Wilty et al. (1984) developed
correlations for the average mass transfer coefficient during evaporations from a
flat solid surface of characteristic length of L under laminar and turbulent
conditions as follows:
at laminar condition and Re < 3105
Sh 0.664 Re1 / 2 Sc1 / 3 (3.40)
at turbulent condition and Re > 3105
Sh 0.036 Re4 / 5 Sc1 / 3 (3.41)
The Reynolds number and the Sherwood number are defined based on the
characteristic length l. The range of Schmidt number for the above correlations is
0.6< Sc < 2500.

LECTURE NO. 4
3.4.3 Correlation of mass transfer coefficients for single cylinder

Bedingfield and Drew (1950) studied the sublimation from a solid cylinder into air
which is flowing normal to its axis. They developed a correlation for the mass
transfer coefficient from their experimental data which can be represented as:
kG P
0.281Re 0.4 Sc 0.56 (3.42)
Gm
In this case the Reynolds number is defined based on the diameter of the
cylinder. Gm is the molar mass velocity of the gas and P is the total pressure. The
correlation is applicable in the range of 400 < Re < 25000 and 0.6 < Sc < 2.6.
3.4.4 Correlation of mass transfer coefficients in circular pipes
In a wetted wall towers as shown in Figure 3.1, the mass transfer from the thin
liquid film in the tube wall from the moving fluid has been studied extensively. In
the tower a volatile pure liquid flows down inside the surface of the tube wall
where a gas is allowed to pass through the central core. Here the evaporation of
the liquid into the moving gas stream through the gas liquid surface is referred as
mass transfer from liquid to gas Gilliland and Sherwood (1934) developed the
following correlation from the experimental data obtained by using different liquid
and air as gas in the range of 2.0103 < Re < 3.50103 and 0.6 < Sc < 2.5.
Sh 0.023 Re0.83 Sc0.44 (3.43)

where the physical properties of the gas are evaluated at the bulk conditions of
the moving gas. Sherwood number and Reynolds number are based on tower
diameter. Linton and Sherwood (1950) studied the mass transfer by extending
the Schmidt number. They developed a correlation with the extended data set
and the data set of Gilliland and Sherwood which can be represented as:
Sh 0.023 Re0.83 Sc1 / 3 (3.44)
In the range of 0.4104 < Re < 7.0104 and 0.6 < Sc < 3.0103
Figure 3.1: Wetted-wall tower
3.4.5 Correlation of mass transfer coefficients in packed and

fluidized beds
Based on advantages of increase surface area available for mass and heat
transfer for a given volume compared to an empty vessel, packed and fluidized
beds are commonly used in industrial mass transfer operations. For packed and
fluidized beds, the area of mass transfer is generally expressed in terms of
specific interfacial area which is defined as the area per unit volume of packed
bed. It can e expressed as:

6(1 )
a (3.45)
dp
Where is the porosity or void fraction and d p is the particle diameter. Various
investigations have been carried out for estimating the mass transfer coefficients
in packed beds and developed correlations for mass transfer coefficient from
their experimental results. For both gas and liquid packed and fluidized bed of
spherical particle, Gupta and Thodos (1962) developed a correlation which can
be expressed as
0.010 0.863 /
St D Sc 2 / 3 (3.46)
Re0.58 0.483
The correlation is valid only in the range of 1 < Re < 2100. Sherwood et al.
(1975) developed the following correlation for gases in the range of 10 < Re <
2500.
St D 1.17 Re0.415 Sc 2 / 3 (3.47)
where Re = (dpGy)/. Gy is the mass velocity of gas based on total cross
sectional area of the tower and dp is the diameter of a sphere with the same
surface area per unit volume as the particle. Stanton number (St D) for mass
transfer is defined as (Sh/(Re.Sc)).
3.4.6 Mass transfer coefficient in hollow-fiber membrane module

Hollow-fiber membrane modules are extensively used in various membrane
separation processes including gas separation, reverse osmosis, filtration and
dialysis. In this module a bundle of randomly packed fibers are enclosed in a
case to contact two process streams. As per Bao et al. (1999), a typical hollow-
fiber membrane module is shown in Figure 3.2. When fluids flow through the
shell and lumen as shown in Figure, mass is transferred from one stream to other
stream through the fiber wall. The mass transfer depends on the nature of the
membrane. There are numerous correlations in literature for shell side mass
transfer coefficients in this module of membrane.

Figure 3.2: Typical hollow fiber membrane
Costello et al. (1993) developed a correlation for mass transfer coefficient for
liquid flowing through the shell parallel to the fiber which can be represented as:
Sh f ( ) Re0.53 Sc0.33 (3.48)
where the packing fraction, refers to the fraction of the cross sectional area that
is occupied by the fibers. f() is the function of fiber packing fraction which is
written as:
0.47
1
f ( ) 0.53(1 1.1 ) (3.49)

The Sherwood number and Reynolds numbers are defined as 2Rk L/DAB and
(2Rv0(1-))/() respectively. R is the fiber radius and v0 is the superficial liquid
velocity. The above correlation is valid in the range of 30<100<75 and
20<Re<350. In case of flow through the lumen and constant wall concentration
which is more common in application, Cussler (1997) made a correlation which is
given by
1/ 3
d
Sh 1.62 PeD i ; Re ( di v / ) 2100 (3.50)
L

where Sh = dikL/DAB is the Sherwood number for module length L. d i is the fiber
inside diameter.
The correlations are also given in tabular form in Table 3.2.
Table 3.2: Correlations for mass transfer coefficient for different cases
Cases Correlations for mass transfer coefficient

For a single sphere Sh Shnc 0.347(Re Sc0.5 )0.62
(natural convection) where 1 < Re < 3104 and 0.6 < Sc < 3200
Shnc 2.0 0.569(GrD Sc)1 / 4
where GrDSc < 108

Shnc 2.0 0.0254(GrD Sc)1 / 3 Sc0.244
where GrD Sc > 108

For a single sphere Sh 2.0 0.552 Re1 / 7 Sc1 / 3
(forced convection) Where 2 < Re <12000 and 0.6 < Sc < 2.7
For flat plates at laminar condition and Re < 3105
Sh 0.664 Re1 / 2 Sc1 / 3
at turbulent condition and Re > 3105
Sh 0.036 Re4 / 5 Sc1 / 3
For both laminar and turbulent condition
0.6< Sc < 2500
For single cylinder kG P
0.281Re 0.4 Sc 0.56
Gm
where 400 < Re < 25000 and 0.6 < Sc < 2.6.
Circular pipes Sh 0.023 Re0.83 Sc0.44
where 2.0103 < Re < 3.50103 and 0.6 < Sc < 2.5
Sh 0.023 Re0.83 Sc1 / 3
where 0.4104 < Re < 7.0104 and 0.6 < Sc <
3.0103
Packed and fluidized 0.010 0.863 /
St D Sc 2 / 3
beds Re0.58 0.483

where 1 < Re < 2100

St D 1.17 Re0.415 Sc 2 / 3
where 10 < Re < 2500.
Hollow-fiber membrane d
1/ 3
Sh 1.62 Pe D i
module L
Where Re ( di v / ) 2100

http://nptel.ac.in/courses/103103035/13
LECTURE NO. 5
3.5 THEORIES OF MASS TRANSFER

Many theories are available to explain the behavior of mass transfer coefficient
such as the film, penetration, surface renewal and others. The theories are based
on both molecular and turbulent diffusion. The theories are explained in details in
the following sections.
3.5.1 Film theory

In case of one dimensional convective mass transfer, the concentration
distribution is linear. The coefficient of mass transfer in this special case is
proportional to the diffusion coefficient and inversely proportional to the film. This
phenomenon is commonly known as the film theory. The schematic diagram of
concentration profile with stagnant film is shown in Figure 3.3.
The expression of mass transfer coefficient is developed theoretically by
visualizing the mechanism. This is done by film theory. Film theory is based on
the following assumptions:
a) Mass transfer occurs by molecular diffusion through a fluid layer at phase
boundary (solid wall). Beyond this film, concentration is homogeneous and
is CAb.
b) Mass transfer through the film occurs at steady state.
c) Flux is low and mass transfer occurs at low concentration.
DAB dC A
Hence, N A (3.51)
dZ


Concentration profile in stagnant film
CAi

Actual concentration profile
CAi CAb
CA CAb
NA|Z NA|Z+Z
0 Z
Z
Z
Figure 3.3: Schematic diagram of concentration profile with stagnant film.
Steady-state mass balance is done over an elementary volume of thickness Z.

Rate of input of solute at Z=NA|Z
Rate of output of solute at Z+Z=NA|Z+Z
Rate of accumulation=0= (rate of input-rate of output)
Therefore, at steady state, NA|Z-NA|Z+Z=0
N A Z N A Z Z
Lim 0 (3.52)
Z 0 Z
dN A
0 (3.53)
dZ
d DAB dC A
0 (3.54)
dZ dZ
DAB d 2C A
0 (3.55)
dZ 2
d 2C A
0 (3.56)
dZ 2
Integrating Equation (3.55) for the following boundary conditions:
CA=CAi when Z=0
CA=CAb when Z=
We have now,

Z
C A C Ai (C Ai C Ab ) (3.57)

Hence, according to film theory, concentration profile in stagnant film is linear.
Molar flux through film, NA:
DAB dC A
NA
dZ Z 0
DAB (C Ai C Ab )
NA (3.58)

Now comparing Equation (3.58) with Equation (3.8),
D AB
kL (3.59)

Film theory is useful in the analysis of mass transfer with chemical reaction. For
turbulent flow, the mass transfer coefficient has much smaller dependency
compared to laminar flow. In the turbulent flow, the mass transfer coefficient is
n
proportional to DAB where n may be zero to 0.9, depending upon the operating
conditions. Although the film theory offers some explanation of the mechanism of
mass transfer in fluid media, it does not explain the estimation thickness of the
film. Due to this disadvantage, application of the model is restricted to mass
transfer in a diffusion cell.

http://nptel.ac.in/courses/103103035/14
LECTURE NO. 6
3.5.2 Penetration theory

Most of the industrial processes of mass transfer is unsteady state process. In
such cases, the contact time between phases is too short to achieve a stationary
state. This non stationary phenomenon is not generally taken into account by the
film model. In the absorption of gases from bubbles or absorption by wetted-wall
columns, the mass transfer surface is formed instantaneously and transient
diffusion of the material takes place. Figure 3.4 demonstrates the schematic of
penetration model.
Basic assumptions of the penetration theory are as follows:
1) Unsteady state mass transfer occurs to a liquid element so long it is in
contact with the bubbles or other phase
2) Equilibrium exists at gas-liquid interface
3) Each of liquid elements stays in contact with the gas for same period of
time
Liquid elements
are sliding down
Rising gas
bubble
Figure 3.4: Schematic of penetration model.

Under these circumstances, the convective terms in the diffusion can be

neglected and the unsteady state mass transfer of gas (penetration) to the liquid
element can be written as:
c 2c
DAB (3.60)
t Z 2
The boundary conditions are: t = 0, Z > 0 : c = c Ab and t > 0, Z = 0 : c = cAi.
The term cAb is the concentration of solute at infinite distance from the surface
and cAi is the concentration of solute at the surface. The solution of the partial
differential equation for the above boundary conditions is given by the following
equation:
c Ai c Z
erf (3.61)
c Ai c Ab 2 D t
AB
Where erf(x) is the error function defined by

x
2

erf ( x) exp( Z 2
)dZ (3.62)
0
If the process of mass transfer is a unidirectional diffusion and the surface

concentration is very low (cAb~0), the mass flux of component A, NA [kg m2 s1],
can be estimated by the following equation:
DAB c c
NA (3.63)
1 c Ab Z Z 0 Z Z 0
Substituting Equation (3.61) into Equation (3.63), the rate of mass transfer at
time t is given by the following equation:
D AB
N A (t ) (c Ai c Ab ) (3.64)
t
Then the mass transfer coefficient is given by
DAB
k L (t ) (3.65)
t
The average mass transfer coefficient during a time interval tc is then obtained by
integrating Equation (3.61) as

t
1 c DAB
k L ,av k (t )dt 2 (3.66)
tc 0 tc
So from the above equation, the mass transfer coefficient is proportional to the
square root of the diffusivity. This was first proposed by R. Higbie in 1935 and the
theory is called Higbies penetration theory.
3.5.3 Surface Renewal Theory

For the mass transfer in liquid phase, Danckwert (1951) modified the Higbies
penetration theory. He stated that a portion of the mass transfer surface is
replaced with a new surface by the motion of eddies near the surface and
proposed the following assumptions:
1) The liquid elements at the interface are being randomly swapped by fresh
elements from bulk
2) At any moment, each of the liquid elements at the surface has the same
probability of being substituted by fresh element
3) Unsteady state mass transfer takes place to an element during its stay at
the interface.
Hence, average molar flux, NA,av

N A,av (C Ai C Ab ) s DAB (3.67)
Comparing Equation (3.67) with Equation (3.8) we get

k L,av s DAB (3.68)
where s is fraction of the surface renewed in unit time, i.e., the rate of surface
renewal [s-1].
3.5.4 Boundary Layer Theory
Boundary layer theory takes into account the hydrodynamics/flow field that
characterizes a system and gives a realistic picture of the way mass transfer at a
phase boundary. A schematic of concentration boundary layer is shown in Figure
3.5.

U
u U
CAb
y
CA=CAi-0.99(CAi-CAb)
(x) m(x)
Flat plate
Figure 3.5: Schematic of concentration boundary layer.
When (x)u=Uand when m(x) u=0.99U distance over which solute

concentration drops by 99% of (CAi-CAb).
x.k L , x
Shx 0.332(Re) 0.5 ( Sc) 0.33 (3.69)
D AB
where, x is the distance of a point from the leading edge of the plate; kL,x is the
local mass transfer coefficient.
l.k L, x
Shav 0.664(Re) 0.5 ( Sc) 0.33 (3.70)
D AB
where, l is the length of the plate.
Example problem 3.2: Zakauskas (Adv. Heat Transfer, 8, 93, 1972) proposed
the following correlation for the heat-transfer coefficient in a staggered tube bank
arrangement:
Nu 0.453 Re 0.568 Pr 0.36 , where 10 Re ( u g d / ) 10 6 and 0.7 Pr 500
Estimate the mass-transfer coefficient by using the mass and heat transfer
analogy if to be expected for evaporation of n-propyl alcohol into carbon dioxide
for the same geometrical arrangement of tube diameter (d) of 38 mm when the
carbon dioxide flows at a maximum velocity (ug) of 10 m/s at 300 K and 1 atm.
Properties of dilute mixtures of propyl alcohol in carbon dioxide at 300 K and 1
atm are: Molecular weight (M) = 44 gm/mole, density () = 1.8 kg/m 3, Viscosity
() = 1.4910-5 kg/m.s, diffusivity (DAB) = 7.610-6 m2/s and universal gas

constant (R) = 8.314 J/mole.K. Sherwood number is defined based on diameter

of the tube as k G RTd / DAB
Solution 3.2: Re = 1.8*10*0.038/1.4910-5 = 45906.04

Sc = (1.4910-5)/(1.8* 7.610-6) = 1.08
Analogy to heat transfer
Sh 0.453 Re 0.568 Sc 0.36 = 207.68
So, k G RTd / DAB = 207.68
Therefore kG = (207.68*DAB)/(RTd) = 1.66510-05 mole/m2.s.Pa

LECTURE NO. 7
3.6 INTERPHASE MASS TRANSFER THEORY

The process of mass transfer from the bulk of one phase to the interphse surface
and then from the interphase to the bulk of another phase is called interphase
mass transfer. As an example absorption of sulfur dioxide from air occurs by
water. In this case sulfur dioxide diffuses through air and then passes through the
interface between the air and water and finally, diffuses through the adjacent
immiscible water phase. Here mass transfer occurs in each phase because of
concentration gradient till an equilibrium state (i.e., chemical potential of the
component becomes same for both the phases) exists at the interface between
the phases. When a system is in equilibrium, there is no net mass transfer
between the phases. In cases involving ideal gas and liquid phases, the fairly
simple useful relation (Equation (3.71)) known as Raoults law can be applied for
relating the equilibrium concentrations in the two-phases.
y A P xA PAv (3.71)
where PAv is the vapour pressure of pure solute A at the equilibrium condition and
P is the equilibrium pressure. If the liquid phase does not behave ideally, the
following modified form of Raoults law can be applied:
y A P xA A PA (3.72)
where A is the activity coefficient of solute A in solution. For dilute solution

Henrys law can be used to express the equilibrium relations which is expressed
by
pA y A P HxA (3.73)

where pA is the equilibrium partial pressure of solute A in the vapour phase and H
is the Henrys law constant.
3.6.1 Two-film Resistance Theory

Consider the mass transfer of a solute A from the bulk of a gas phase to the bulk
of a liquid phase. This can be shown graphically in terms of distance through the
phases as shown in Figure 3.6. The concentration of A in the main body of the
gas is yAG mole fraction and it falls to yAi at the interface. In the liquid, the
concentration falls from xAi at the interface to xAL in the bulk liquid. According to
Lews and Whitman (1924), there is no resistance to solute transfer across the
interface separating the phases. Only diffusional resistances are residing in the
fluids. The equilibrium concentrations yAi and xAi are obtained from the systems
equilibrium distribution curve. This concept has been called the two-resistance
theory. In the figure the concentration rise at the interface from yAi to xAi is not a
barrier to diffusion in the direction gas to liquid. They are equilibrium
concentrations. For steady state mass transfer, the rate at which A reaches the
interface from the gas must be equal to the rate at which it diffuses to the bulk
liquid, so that no accumulation or depletion of A at the interface occurs.
Therefore the mass transfer flux of A in terms of mass transfer film coefficient for
each phase can be written as:
N A k y ( y AG y Ai ) k x ( xAi xAL ) (3.74)
After rearranging it can be written as:

y AG y Ai k
x (3.75)
x AL x Ai ky

Figure 3.6: Concept of two-resistance

LECTURE NO. 8
3.6.2 Overall mass transfer coefficients

Experimentally the mass transfer film coefficients ky and kx are difficult to
measure except for cases where the concentration difference across one phase
is small and can be neglected. Under these circumstances, the overall mass
transfer coefficients Ky and Kx are measured on the basis of the gas phase or the
liquid phase. The entire two-phase mass transfer effect can then be measured in
terms of gas phase molar fraction driving force as:
N A K y ( y AG y*A ) (3.76)
where, Ky is based on the overall driving force for the gas phase, in mole/m2.s
and y *A is the value of concentration in the gas phase that would be in the
equilibrium with xAL. Similarly, the entire two-phase mass transfer effect can then
be measured in terms of liquid phase molar fraction driving force as:
N A K x ( x*A xAL ) (3.77)
where Kx is based on the overall driving force for the liquid phase, in mole/m 2.s
and x*A is the value of concentration in the liquid phase that would be in the
equilibrium with yAG. A relation between the overall coefficients and the individual
mass transfer film coefficients can be obtained when the equilibrium relation is
linear as y Ai mxAi . The linear equilibrium condition can be obtained at the low
concentrations, where Henrys law is applicable. Here the proportionality

constant m is defined as m= H/P. Utilizing the relationship, y Ai mxAi , gas and
liquid phase concentrations can be related by

y*A mxAL (3.78)

and
y AG mx*A (3.79)
Rearranging Equation (3.76), one can get

1 y y *A
AG (3.80)
Ky NA
From geometry, y AG y*A can be written as
y AG y*A ( y AG y Ai ) ( y Ai y*A ) (3.81)
Substituting Equation (3.81) in Equation (3.80)

1 y y*A ( y AG y Ai ) ( y Ai y*A ) ( y AG y Ai ) m( x Ai x AL )
AG (3.82)
Ky NA NA NA NA NA
The substitution of Equation (3.76) into the Equation (3.82) relates overall gas
phase mass transfer coefficient (Ky) to the individual film coefficients by
1 1 m
(3.83)
K y k y kx
Similarly the relation of overall liquid phase mass transfer coefficient (Kx) to the
individual film coefficients can be derived as follows:
1 x*A x AL y AG y Ai x Ai x AL
(3.84)
Kx NA mN A NA
Or
1 1 1
(3.85)
K x mk y k x
The following relationships between the mass transfer resistances can be made
from the Equations (3.83) and (3.85):
Resistance in gas phase 1/ k y
(3.86)
Total resistance in both phases 1 / K y
Resistance in liquid phase 1/ kx

(3.87)
Total resistance in both phases 1 / K x

If solute A is very soluble in the liquid, m is very small. Then the term m/kx in
Equation (3.83) becomes minor and consequently the major resistance is
represented by 1/ky. In this case, it is said that the rate of mass transfer is gas
phase controlled. In the extreme it becomes:
1 1
(3.88)
K y ky
The total resistance equals the gas film resistance. The absorption of a very
soluble gas, such as ammonia in water is an example of this kind. Conversely
when solute A is relatively insoluble in the liquid, m is very large. Consequently
the first term of Equation (3.85) becomes minor and the major resistance to the
mass transfer resides within the liquid. The system becomes liquid film
controlling. Finally this becomes:
1 1
(3.89)
K x kx
The total resistance equals the liquid film resistance. The absorption of a gas of
low solubility, such as carbon dioxide or oxygen in water is of this type of system.
Example problem 3.3: In an experimental study of the absorption of ammonia

by water in a wetted-wall column, the value of overall mass transfer coefficient,
KG was found to be 2.75 10-6 kmol/m2-s-kPa. At one point in the column, the
composition of the gas and liquid phases were 8.0 and 0.115 mole% NH 3,
respectively. The temperature was 300K and the total pressure was 1 atm.
Eighty five % of the total resistance to mass transfer was found to be in the gas
phase. At 300 K, Ammonia water solutions follows Henrys law upto 5 mole%
ammonia in the liquid, with m = 1.64 when the total pressure is 1 atm. Calculate
the individual film coefficients and the interfacial concentrations. Interfacial
concentrations lie on the equilibrium line.

Solution 3.3:
The first step in the solution is to convert the given overall coefficient from KG to
Ky .
K y K G P = 2.75 10-6 101.3 = 2.786 10-4 kmol/m2-s
For a gas-phase resistance that accounts for 85% of the total resistance,
Ky
ky 3.28 10 4 kmol/m 2 - s
0.85
1 1 m
From Equation, , by substituting the values of Ky , ky and m
K y ky kx
kx = 3.05 10-3 kmol/m2-s
To estimate the ammonia flux and the interfacial concentrations at this particular
point in the column use the equation, y A mx A, L to calculate
y A mx A, L 1.64 1.15 10 3 1.886 10 3
The flux is from equation

N A K y ( y AG y *A ) 2.768 10 4 (0.080 1.866 10 3 ) 2.18 10 5 kmol / m 2 s
Calculate the gas-phase interfacial concentration from equation,

N A k y ( y AG y A,i ) as
NA 2.18 10 5
y A,i y AG 0.080 0.01362
ky 3.28 10 4
Since the interfacial concentrations lie on the equilibrium line,

y A, i 0.01362
x A, i 8.305 10 3
m 1.64

Nomenclature
a Cross-sectional area [m2] s Fraction of surface renewed/unit

time [-]
C Molar concentration [mol/m3] Sav Average cross-sectional area for
diffusion [m2]
d Diameter [m] T Temperature [K]
dp Diameter of a particle [m] t Time [s]
DAB Diffusivity of A in B [m2/s] u Velocity [m/s]
DE Eddy diffusivity [m2/s] U average velocity [m/s]
DK Knudsen diffusion coefficient U Free stream velocity [m/s]
[m2/s]
DS Surface diffusion coefficient V Volume [m3]
[m2/s]
ED Activation energy [J/mol] w Mass fraction [-]
Gm Molar mass velocity [mol/m2.s] W Mass transfer rate [mol/s]
Gy Mass velocity of gas [kg/m2.s] x Mole fraction for liquid [-]
H VA Latent heat of vaporization of y Mole fraction for gas [-]
component A [J/mol]
J Flux based on arbitrary X, Coordinates
reference [mol/m2.s] Y, Z
K Proportionality constant x*,y* Equilibrium mole fraction of
defined in Equation (1.79) [-] solute in liquid and gas phase,
respectively [-]
K Overall mass transfer Association factor [-]
coefficient [m/s]
k/, k Individual mass transfer Porosity [-]
coefficient [m/s]

l Length [m] Molar volume [mol/m3]

m Mass [kg] Packing fraction [-]
M Molecular weight Characteristic length parameter
of binary mixture of A and B [m]
N Flux [mol/m2.s] Tortuosity [-]
p Partial pressure [N/m2] collision integral [-]
P Total pressure [N/m2] Density [kg/m3]
PAV Vapor pressure of A [N/m2] Film thickness [m]
r Radius [m] Viscosity [kg/m.s]

R Universal gas constant
[J/mol.K]
References
1. Treybal, R. E., Mass-Transfer Operations, 3rd Eddition, McGraw-Hill,
1981
2. Geankoplis, C.J., Transport Processes and Separation Process
Principles. 4th Edition, Prentice-Hall of India, New Delhi, 2005.
3. Dutta, B.K., Principles of Mass transfer and Separation Processes.
Prentice-Hall of India, New Delhi, 2007.

Module 3. Mass Transfer Coefficients

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Module 3. Mass Transfer Coefficients

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

NPTEL Chemical Mass Transfer Operation 1

MODULE 3: MASS TRANSFER COEFFICIENTS

3.1 Introduction to mass transfer coefficient

3.1.1 Concepts of mass transfer coefficients

Flux (a coefficien t) (concentra tion diffe rence) (3.2)

Joint initiative of IITs and IISc Funded by MHRD Page 1 of 4

3.1.2 Types of mass transfer coefficients

Diffusion of A through non-diffusion B (NB=0)

For gas phase diffusion we know,

Equating Equation (3.7) and Equation (3.9),

Joint initiative of IITs and IISc Funded by MHRD Page 3 of 4

Equating Equation (3.8) and Equation (3.17),

Joint initiative of IITs and IISc Funded by MHRD Page 4 of 4

MODULE 3: MASS TRANSFER COEFFICIENTS

Equimolar counter-diffusion of A and B (NA =-NB)

N A k x/ ( xA1 xA2 ) kL/ (CA1 CA2 ) Liquid phase (3.20)

For gas phase diffusion we know,

Joint initiative of IITs and IISc Funded by MHRD Page 1 of 4

For liquid phase diffusion the flux can be written as

Equating Equation (3.8) and Equation (3.17),

At point 2, mole fraction of HCl

3.2 Mass transfer under laminar flow condition

Joint initiative of IITs and IISc Funded by MHRD Page 3 of 4

3.3 Mass transfer under turbulent flow past solids

Joint initiative of IITs and IISc Funded by MHRD Page 4 of 4

MODULE 3: MASS TRANSFER COEFFICIENTS

3.4 CORRELATION FOR CONVECTIVE MASS TRANSFER

Name of dimensionless Definition of group Significance of group

kc l k y pBM RTl transfer by molecular

Grashof number (GrD) gl 3 Ratio of product of

Joint initiative of IITs and IISc Funded by MHRD Page 1 of 3

3.4.1 Correlation of mass transfer coefficients for a single

in the range of GrDSc < 108

in the range of GrD Sc > 108

3.4.1.2 Mass transfer coefficients for a single sphere in case of

Joint initiative of IITs and IISc Funded by MHRD Page 2 of 3

environment of forced convection along with the consideration of mss transfer by

3.4.2 Correlation of mass transfer coefficients for flat plates

Joint initiative of IITs and IISc Funded by MHRD Page 3 of 3

MODULE 3: MASS TRANSFER COEFFICIENTS

3.4.3 Correlation of mass transfer coefficients for single cylinder

3.4.4 Correlation of mass transfer coefficients in circular pipes

Sh 0.023 Re0.83 Sc0.44 (3.43)

Joint initiative of IITs and IISc Funded by MHRD Page 1 of 6

Figure 3.1: Wetted-wall tower

3.4.5 Correlation of mass transfer coefficients in packed and

Joint initiative of IITs and IISc Funded by MHRD Page 2 of 6

3.4.6 Mass transfer coefficient in hollow-fiber membrane module

Joint initiative of IITs and IISc Funded by MHRD Page 3 of 6

Figure 3.2: Typical hollow fiber membrane

Joint initiative of IITs and IISc Funded by MHRD Page 4 of 6

Cases Correlations for mass transfer coefficient

where GrDSc < 108

where GrD Sc > 108

Joint initiative of IITs and IISc Funded by MHRD Page 5 of 6

where 1 < Re < 2100

Joint initiative of IITs and IISc Funded by MHRD Page 6 of 6

3.5 THEORIES OF MASS TRANSFER

3.5.1 Film theory

Joint initiative of IITs and IISc Funded by MHRD Page 1 of 3

Figure 3.3: Schematic diagram of concentration profile with stagnant film.

Steady-state mass balance is done over an elementary volume of thickness Z.

Joint initiative of IITs and IISc Funded by MHRD Page 2 of 3

Joint initiative of IITs and IISc Funded by MHRD Page 3 of 3

Solution 3.2: Re = 1.8100.038/1.4910-5 = 45906.04

y AG yA ( y AG y Ai ) ( y Ai yA ) (3.81)