Comparative Mass Transfer Performance Studies of CO<sub>2</sub> Absorption into Aqueous Solutions of DEAB and MEA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The mass transfer performance of the absorption of CO 2 in an aqueous solution of a new amino alcohol, 4-diethylamino-2-butanol (DEAB), which has been developed as an effective postcombustion CO 2 capture solvent, was investigated and compared with the performance of CO 2 absorption in a conventional amine, MEA. The absorption experiments were conducted in an absorption column containing structured packing, whereas the absorption performance was evaluated in terms of the overall mass transfer coefficient, K G a v . In particular, the effects of parameters such as inert gas flow rate, liquid flow rate, and solution concentration were compared for both DEAB and MEA. The results show that K G a v increases as both the liquid flow rate and concentration of solution increase whereas inert gas flow rate has little or no effect on K G a v . An empirical correlation for the mass transfer coefficient for the CO 2 -DEAB system has been developed as a function of the process parameters. In terms of comparison, the results show that the mass transfer performance of MEA was greater than that of DEAB. However, with the extremely high solubility and ease of regeneration of DEAB based on our previous study, it may be extremely beneficial to formulate an absorption solvent involving both MEA and DEAB in order to take advantage of the synergy effects of high solubility, ease of regeneration as well as the high mass transfer performance of the mixture.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".