ABSTRACT
Traditionally, trays have been the mass-transfer device of choice in amine absorption units. However, the need to process large volumes of flue gas to capture CO2 and the resultant high costs of multiple trains of large trayed columns have prompted process licensors and vendors to investigate alternative mass-transfer devices. These alternatives include third-generation random packings and structured packings. Nevertheless, clear-cut guidelines for selection of packings for amine units are lacking. This paper provides well-defined guidelines and a consistent framework for the choice of mass-transfer devices for amine absorbers and regenerators. This work emphasizes the role played by the flow parameter, a measure of column liquid loading and pressure, in the type of packing selected. In addition, this paper demonstrates the significant economic advantage of packings over trays in terms of capital costs (CAPEX) and operating costs (OPEX).
