Mass-Transfer Characteristics for Gas−Liquid Reaction of H<sub>2</sub>S and Sulfuric Acid in a Packed Column
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The mass-transfer characteristics of a gas−liquid reaction system in a packed column filled with ceramic Raschig rings were studied using the reaction between hydrogen sulfide (H 2 S) and sulfuric acid solutions. An analysis based on two-film theory shows that the mass-transfer resistance consists of two consecutive steps: gas-side mass transfer and surface reaction. The resistance from the liquid side was negligible because the concentration of sulfuric acid was above stoichiometric and can be regarded as a constant. Onda et al.'s correlations (Onda, K.; Takeuchi, H.; Okumoto, Y. J. Chem. Eng. Jpn. 1968, 1, 56) are able to estimate the effective interfacial area as well as the mass-transfer coefficients for our reactor system. Because the reaction between H 2 S and concentrated sulfuric acid is a pseudo-first-order reaction with respect to H 2 S under the experimental conditions used, the approximate equality between the measured overall mass-transfer coefficient and the reaction rate constant suggests the regime of reaction rate control. In other words, the comparison between the rate constants and mass-transfer coefficient is able to show the rate-controlling regimes in terms of operating conditions such as acid concentration, temperature, and acid and gas flow rates. Tests were also carried out with gaseous compounds often found in industrial H 2 S streams. No reaction was observed for methane, carbon dioxide, carbonyl sulfide, and carbon disulfide. However, the conversion of ethylene was about 20%, and those of mercaptan and thiophene were nearly 100%. This study provides useful data that can facilitate scale-up calculations of this potential sulfur removal and recovery technology.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".