Abstract
In the last decades, a large number of studies have been carried out on the utilization of membranes in separation processes. However, most of these studies deal with material properties, experimental investigations and process modeling. Only quite a few authors utilized computational fluid dynamics (CFD) to analyze the flow and mass transfer in membrane modules. Using CFD it is possible to obtain spatially resolved information on the behavior of membrane modules, allowing for the investigation of geometric effects on the performance of the module. This includes e. g. the positioning of the permeate outlets, the flow alignment (co- and/or counter-current), the use of spacers and other mixing promoters and also the subject of concentration polarization close to the membrane surface. In our present study we made use of OpenFOAM®, which is a free open sourced CFD toolbox. The toolbox enables for introducing new solver code, membraneFoam, based on the standard multicomponent solver reactingFoam. In membraneFoam suitable source and sink terms have been added to account for trans-membrane flux – in this case based on the solution-diffusion model for glassy polymer gas permeation membranes. The solver has been preliminary validated using literature data obtained from a process simulation code. In a first stage of the research work the positioning of the permeate outlet and the flow alignment have been investigated for a hollow fiber gas permeation module. By adjusting the position of the permeate outlet the shell side flow can be co-current, counter-current or mixed type relative to the retentate flow inside the fibers. Since this influences the driving force for the trans-membrane flux, effects on the module performance are expected which have been analyzed using the described membraneFoam CFD approach.
References
1. Turner JA. Sustainable hydrogen production. Science 2004;305:972–4.10.1126/science.1103197Search in Google Scholar
2. Makaruk A, Miltner M, Harasek M. Membrane biogas upgrading processes for the production of natural gas substitute. Sep Purif Technol 2010;74:83–92.10.1016/j.seppur.2010.05.010Search in Google Scholar
3. Niesner J, Jecha D, Stehlík P. Biogas upgrading technologies: state of art review in European region. Chem Eng Trans 2013;35:517–22.Search in Google Scholar
4. Hinchliffe AB, Porter KE. A comparison of membrane separation and distillation. Chem Eng Res Des 2000;78:255–68.10.1205/026387600527121Search in Google Scholar
5. Scott K. Handbook of industrial membranes. United Kingdom, Oxford: Elsevier, 1995.Search in Google Scholar
6. Perry JD, Nagai K, Koros WJ. Polymer membranes for hydrogen separations. MRS Bull 2006;31:745–9.10.1557/mrs2006.187Search in Google Scholar
7. Baker RW. Membrane technology. United Kingdom, Chichester: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2004.Search in Google Scholar
8. Wijmans JG, Baker RW. The solution-diffusion model: a review. J Membr Sci 1995;107:1–21.10.1016/0376-7388(95)00102-ISearch in Google Scholar
9. Graham T. On the molecular mobility of gases. Philos Trans R Soc London 1863;153:385–405.10.1098/rstl.1863.0017Search in Google Scholar
10. Shao L, Low BT, Chung TS, Greenberg AR. Polymeric membranes for the hydrogen economy: contemporary approaches and prospects for the future. J Membr Sci 2009;327:18–31.10.1016/j.memsci.2008.11.019Search in Google Scholar
11. Haddadi B, Nagy J, Jordan C, und Harasek M. Introduction to CFD – Lecture notes for “166.049 Fluiddynamik (CFD) Thermischer Trennverfahren”. Vienna: Technische Universität Wien, 2012.Search in Google Scholar
12. OpenCFD Ltd. United Kingdom: OpenCFD Ltd; 2015 [cited 2015 May]. Available at: http://www.openfoam.org/licence.php.Search in Google Scholar
13. Lassmann, T. The purification of fermentatively produced hydrogen using gas permeation: a practical and simulative approach. Vienna: Technische Universität Wien, 2015.Search in Google Scholar
14. Aspen Technology Inc. ACM V7.3. Burlington: Aspen Technology Inc., 2011.Search in Google Scholar
©2016 by De Gruyter
