EXPERIMENT 14: CAMPHOR BALLS

CHEMICAL ENGINEERING LABORATORY

Determination of mass transfer coefficients for the sublimation of camphor

and naphthalene

Parth Vora1, Chetan Pandere2, Ashima Chopra3, Shraavya Rao4,Ajay Verma5, Aditya Upasani6
1:14CHE1010 3:14CHE1042 5:17CHE201
2:14CHE1022 4:14CHE1058 6:17CHE202

ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT

Mass transfer coefficient, camphor, In this paper, experiments were performed to study the variation of
naphthalene
mass transfer coefficient as a function of flow rate of air for
sublimation for a laminar regime Camphor-air system and
Naphthalene-air system were considered. Variation of mass transfer
factor with Re and mass transfer coefficient with gas flow rate was
determined for both systems.

depend similarly upon the film thickness and upon

1. Introduction the degree of turbulence at the solid gas interface.
In this experiment, we have selected camphor or
In this report, we have attempted to find the mass naphthalene as the phase change material and will
transfer coefficient for a sublimation process. We attempt to determine the influence of gas velocity
have also attempted to determine its variation with on the mass transfer coefficient at a constant gas
gas flow rate. Gas-liquid mass transfer coefficients temperature, for a fixed initial particle mass.
come into play in industrial gas-solid catalytic
processes.
Nomenclature
The rate of mass transfer between a solid phase
and a gaseous phase depends largely on astagnant Kg Mass Transfer Coefficient
Ps Vapor Pressure of Camphor
gas film at the interface. The film thickness is Re Reynolds Number
dependent on the degree of turbulence at the solid Sc Schmidt Number
Ms Molecular Weight
gas interface, ie. the gas velocity at the interface. Jd Mass transfer Factor
The film thickness typically decreases with increase G Gas Flow Rate
in turbulence. The mass transfer coefficients
2 Experiment 14: Camphor Balls

2. Theory packed bed. A schematic diagram of the test

apparatus is shown in Figure 1. A column, 6.8 cm
Mass Transfer Coefficient is the ratio of the flux to in diameter and 2.2 cm in height is packed with
a concentration (or composition) difference. Thus, camphor balls. Dimensions of the camphor balls
are measured using a screw gauge having least
..(1) count 0.01 mm, at the start of recording
observations.
These coefficients generally represent rates of
3.2. Procedure
transfer that are much greater than those that
occur by diffusion alone, as a result of convection The dimensions and number of the camphor balls
or turbulence at the interface where mass transfer are noted using the vernier callipers. They are
occurs. weighed and packed in the column. Metered air is
passed for a known time until a measurable
To find kg by correlations, Mass transfer coefficient
difference in weight is observed. The loss in
kg depends principally upon the transport
weight of the balls is found and the flow rate of air.
properties of the fluid (Sc) and the hydrodynamics
The experiment is repeated for different flow rates
of the particular system involved(Re)
for air, different bed height and particle diameter.
.(2)

.(3)

Mass transfer factor jd is given by

....(4)

The experimental jd is compared with the

correlations available:
....(5)

...(6)
Fig. 1 Set Up

Both correlations are applicable for laminar flow

only. Equation 5 is taken from the lab manual,
while equation 6 is taken from Perrys Chemical
Engineering Handbook. 4. Results and Discussion:

4.1. Camphor-Air System:

3. Materials and Methods:

3.1. Materials and Setup For camphor air system, variation of mass
transfer coefficient with gas flow rate was plotted
Camphor balls from were used. A series of in figure 2. (in terms of logarithm). Table1 shows
experiments were used to determine the mass the values of gas flow rates and mass transfer
transfer coefficient in a camphor/naphthalene coefficients. The expected trend was observed:
 EXPERIMENT 14: CAMPHOR BALLS

mass transfer coefficient increases with increase in 4.33 3.09 0.49 5.37
gas flow rate. The equation obtained was 4.78 2.03 0.41 4.83
(7) 4.04 4.01 0.62 4.87
It must be noted that this equation is only valid 4.33 2.88 0.50 3.99
for the system in the range of gas flow rates 250
ml/min to 600 ml/min. 1.00
Table 1: Gas Flow Rates and Mass Transfer
Coefficients 0.00
G(ml/min) kg (m/s) % Error in % Error in Kg 3.00 4.00 5.00
G -1.00 Exptl
273.87 0.13 5.00 0.01 Eqn 5
375.03 0.15 3.08 0.01 -2.00 Eqn 6
591.33 0.22 2.00 0.01
282.33 0.13 4.00 0.01 -3.00
405.93 0.16 2.86 0.01
-4.00

-8.80 -8.40 -8.00 -7.60 -7.20

-1.50 Fig 3:lnJD vs lnRe
The experimental correlation obtained is shown
y = 0.7133x + 3.7662
-1.70
in figure 4. The lines indicate a 95% confidence
R = 0.9885 interval.

-1.90
0.70

0.60
-2.10

Fig. 2: lnkg vs lnG 0.50

y = -0.2872x + 1.7643
In addition, variation of mass transfer factor 0.40
R = 0.9142
with Reynolds number was plotted and compared
0.30
with the correlations given by equations 5 and 6. 3.90 4.40
While the general trend of idecrease in mass
transfer factor with increase in Reynolds number is
Fig 4: lnJD vs lnRe
followed, it was observed that both the
correlations significantly underpredicted the mass
The equation obtained was:
transfer factor values. Figure 3 shows the
comparison of predicted and experimental values.
.(9)
Table 2: Mass Transfer Factor and Re
ln(Re) % Error in ln(jd) % Error in
Re Jd
4.01 5.01 0.63 6.66
4 Experiment 14: Camphor Balls

4.2. Naphthalene-Air System:

0.00
4.00 5.00 6.00
Time constraints prevented us from taking more
than 3 readings. A plot of mass transfer coefficient -0.50
versus gas flow rate was plotted, as shown in figure Series1
5. The expected trend was followed : mass transfer
-1.00
coefficient increased with increase in flow rate
Table 3: Mass Transfer Coefficients and Gas
Flow Rates -1.50
lnG % Error lnkg %
in G Error Fig 4: lnjd vs lnRe
in kg We have not attempted to fit these values to a line,
-8.75 6.67 -3.66 4.01
as we have only three data points. However, with
-7.97 3.33 -3.50 3.34
further data points, we will be able to fit lines and
-7.67 2.50 -3.32 3.13
get correlations for naphthalene, similar to
camphor.
-3.00
-9.00 -8.50 -8.00 -7.50 -7.00 5. Conclusion

-3.40 Experiments were conducted to find the variation

of mass transfer coefficient and mass transfer
factor with air flow rate for the sublimation of
-3.80
camphor and naphthalene within the laminar
regime. It was observed that mass transfer
-4.20 coefficient increased with increase in gas flow rates
in both cases. Mass transfer factor decreased with
Reynolds Number in both cases. Correlations were
Fig 4: lnkg vs lnG
obtained for these variations in case of camphor-
Similarly, mass transfer factor was plotted air system. Further on, more data points are
against Reynolds Number. The same trend was required before similar correlations can be
observed, that of decreasing mass transfer factor obtained for naphthalene.
with increase in Reynolds No.
6. References:
Table 4: Mass transfer Factors and re
ln(Re) % Error in Re ln(jd) % Error in Jd 1. Perrys Chemical Engineering Handbook
4.62 6.67 -0.43 6.96 2. Shivkumar Bale, et al, Spatially resolved
5.40 3.34 -1.05 3.93 mass transfer coefficient for moderate
5.64 2.51 -1.17 3.25 reynolds number flows in packed beds:
Wall Effects, International Journal of Heat
and Mass Transfer 110 (2017)406-415, 16
March . 2017
EXPERIMENT 14: CAMPHOR BALLS

.
6 Experiment 14: Camphor Balls

7. Annexure 1: Observations

8. Annexure 2:
 EXPERIMENT 14: CAMPHOR BALLS

Sample Calculations
Observations:
Rotameter Reading: 16000
Gas Flow Rate : 16000*0.927-1600=274 ml/min
Dball =0.00690 m
H= 0.00556 m
Bed Ht=2.3 cm
Bed Diameter =6.54 cm
Weight Change W=1.01 gm.
N =100
A=(dballh+0.5dball2)N =2.05 x10-2 m2
Volume Vball=r2hN=2.18 x 10-5 m3
Voidage = Vball/Bed Volume=0.72
Velocity Vel=G/(r2)=0.08 m/s
Re =DballVel/=55.4

Time=20 min
Kg =0.13 m/s
Sc= /D
Jd = kg Sc2/3/vel=1.87

Error Analysis:
If R=f(X1, X2, X3)
Then

So for example, given

A=(dballh+0.5dball2)N =2.05 x10-2 m2
dball =0.69 cm
h=0.556 cm
dball =0.002 cm
h =0.002 cm

=0.46 %

9. Annexure 3:
Calculation Tables
1. Camphor
Flow Wt Dia Ht N A Volume Bd Voidage G(ml/min) G(cu V(m/s)
Rate Change cm cm sq cu m Ht m/s)
gm m
16000.00 1.01 0.01 0.01 105.00 0.02 2.18E- 0.02 0.72 273.87 0.00 0.08
05
8 Experiment 14: Camphor Balls

26000.00 1.20 0.01 0.01 105.00 0.02 2.18E- 0.02 0.72 375.03 0.00 0.11
05
40000.00 1.75 0.01 0.01 105.00 0.02 2.18E- 0.02 0.72 591.33 0.00 0.18
05
20000.00 1.15 0.01 0.01 100.00 0.02 2.44E- 0.04 0.80 282.33 0.00 0.08
05
28000.00 0.92 0.01 0.01 100.00 0.02 2.72E- 0.04 0.78 405.93 0.00 0.12
05

Re Kg (m/s) Sc jd lnjd ln(Re)

55.39 0.13 2.67 2.97 1.09 4.01
75.86 0.15 2.67 2.58 0.95 4.33
119.61 0.22 2.67 2.39 0.87 4.78
57.11 0.14 2.67 3.12 1.14 4.04
82.11 0.13 2.67 2.15 0.77 4.41

2. Naphthalene
Flow Wt A sq Volume Voidage G(cu ln G V(m/s) Re
Rate Change m cu m m/s)
gm kg jd lnjd
12000.00 0.25 0.04 0.00 0.39 0.00 - 0.05 101.44 -
8.75 0.03 0.65 0.43
24000.00 0.30 0.04 0.00 0.33 0.00 - 0.10 221.08 -
7.97 0.03 0.35 1.05
32000.00 0.32 0.04 0.00 0.43 0.00 - 0.14 280.67 -
7.67 0.04 0.31 1.17