rate based mdea model
DESCRIPTION
Rate Based MDEA Model + aspen simulation modelTRANSCRIPT
Aspen Plus
Rate-Based Model of theCO2 Capture Process byMDEA using Aspen Plus
Copyright (c) 2008-2010 by Aspen Technology, Inc. All rights reserved.
Aspen Plus, the aspen leaf logo and Plantelligence and Enterprise Optimization are trademarks or registeredtrademarks of Aspen Technology, Inc., Burlington, MA.
All other brand and product names are trademarks or registered trademarks of their respective companies.
This document is intended as a guide to using AspenTech's software. This documentation contains AspenTechproprietary and confidential information and may not be disclosed, used, or copied without the prior consent ofAspenTech or as set forth in the applicable license agreement. Users are solely responsible for the proper use ofthe software and the application of the results obtained.
Although AspenTech has tested the software and reviewed the documentation, the sole warranty for the softwaremay be found in the applicable license agreement between AspenTech and the user. ASPENTECH MAKES NOWARRANTY OR REPRESENTATION, EITHER EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, WITH RESPECT TO THIS DOCUMENTATION,ITS QUALITY, PERFORMANCE, MERCHANTABILITY, OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
Aspen Technology, Inc.200 Wheeler RoadBurlington, MA 01803-5501USAPhone: (1) (781) 221-6400Toll Free: (1) (888) 996-7100URL: http://www.aspentech.com
Revision History 1
Revision History
Version Description
2006.5 First version
V7.0 Parameters of the electrolyte NRTL model have been regressed again.
The Clarke density model parameters have been regressed again.
Reaction kinetics between CO2 and MDEA has been added.
Mass transfer coefficient method has been changed to Gerster et al.(1958).
Interfacial area factor has been changed to 2.
V7.1 Update H2S solubility model parameters
V7.1 CP1 Add N2, O2, CO and H2 to the model as Henry components
V7.2 Some mistakes in this document have been fixed:
Remove 4 unused references
Update the reference for kinetics in the introduction part fromPacheco et al. (1998) to Rinker et al. (1997)
Update the references for CO2 solubility data from Jou et al. (1982,1993) to Kuranov et al. (1996) and Kamps et al. (2001)
Update Henry’s constant of CO2 in H2O by fitting VLE data of Takenouchi(1964), Tödheide (1963), Dodds (1956), Drummond (1981), Zawisza(1981), Wiebe (1940) and Houghton (1957). Update Henry’s constantof CO2 in MDEA based on the works of Wang (1992).
Update NRTL parameters between MDEA and H2O by fitting VLE data ofXu (1991), Voutsas (2004) and Kim (2008), excess enthalpy data ofPosey (1996), Maham (1997) and Maham (2000), and heat capacitydata of Chiu (1999), chen (2001) and Zhang (2002).
Determine DGAQFM, DHAQFM, CPAQ0 of MDEAH+ by fitting VLE data ofKuranov (1996), Kamps (2001), Ermatchkov (2006), Jou (1982) andJou (1993), absorption heat data of Mathonat (1995) and Carson(2000), heat capacity data of Weiland (1997) and speciationconcentration data of Bottinger (2008) together with the interactionenergy parameters between H2O and (MDEAH+, HCO3
-) and thosebetween MDEA and (MDEAH+, HCO3
-).
Update interaction parameters between H2O and (MDEAH+, HS-) andthose between MDEA and (MDEAH+, HS-) by fitting VLE data of Kuranov(1996), Kamps (2001) and Huang (1998).
Update figures for properties.
Calculate chemical equilibrium constants from Gibbs free energy,Update kinetics.
Update simulation results.
2 Contents
Contents
Introduction............................................................................................................3
1 Components .........................................................................................................4
2 Process Description..............................................................................................5
3 Physical Properties...............................................................................................6
4 Reactions ...........................................................................................................12
5 Simulation Approaches.......................................................................................15
6 Simulation Results .............................................................................................18
7 Conclusions ........................................................................................................19
References ............................................................................................................20
Introduction 3
Introduction
This file describes an Aspen Plus rate-based model of the CO2 capture processby aqueous MDEA from a gas mixture of CH4, CO2, H2S and H2O. The modelconsists of an absorber. The operation data of Dome's commercial NorthCaroline plant in Canada from Ralf (2004)[1] and Daviet et al. (1984)[2] wereused to specify feed conditions and unit operation block specifications in themodel. Thermophysical property models and reaction kinetic models used inthe simulation are based on the works of Austgen et al. (1991)[3], Rinker etal. (1997)[4] and Pinsent et al. (1956)[5]. Transport property models andmodel parameters have been validated against experimental data from openliterature.
The model includes the following key features:
True species including ions
Electrolyte NRTL method for liquid and RK equation of state for vapor
Concentration-based reaction kinetics
Electrolyte transport property models
Rate-based model for absorber with valve trays
4 1 Components
1 Components
The following components represent the chemical species present in theprocess:
Table 1. Components Used in the Model
ID Type Name Formula
MDEA Conventional METHYL-DIETHANOLAMINE C5H13NO2
H2O Conventional WATER H2O
CO2 Conventional CARBON-DIOXIDE CO2
H2S Conventional HYDROGEN-SULFIDE H2S
H3O+ Conventional H3O+ H3O+
OH- Conventional OH- OH-
HCO3- Conventional HCO3- HCO3-
CO3-2 Conventional CO3-- CO3-2
HS- Conventional HS- HS-
S-2 Conventional S-- S-2
MDEAH+ Conventional MDEA+ C5H14NO2+
CH4 Conventional METHANE CH4
N2 Conventional NITROGEN N2
O2 Conventional OXYGEN O2
CO Conventional CARBON-MONOXIDE CO
H2 Conventional HYDROGEN H2
2 Process Description 5
2 Process Description
The flowsheet for Dome's North Caroline plant of Canada[2] for CO2 capture byMDEA includes an absorber and a stripper. However, only the absorber dataare reported. Table 2 represents the absorber’s typical operation data:
Table 2. Data of the Dome North Caroline Plant of Canada
Absorber
Diameter 1.28m
Valve Tray 21
Weir Height 46.5mm
Weir Length 0.9m
Percentage of Open Area 12%
Hole Diameter 12mm
Pitch of holes 36mm
Sour Gas
Flow rate 37080kmol/day
CO2 in Sour Gas 0.0352(mole fraction)
H2S in Sour Gas 0.000050(mole fraction)
Sweet Gas
CO2 in Sweet Gas 0.0185
H2S in Sweet Gas 0.6ppmv
Lean Amine
Flow rate 15190kmol/day
MDEA concentration 33%(wt)
6 3 Physical Properties
3 Physical Properties
The electrolyte NRTL method and RK equation of state are used to computeliquid and vapor properties, respectively, in the Rate-based MDEA model.CO2, H2S, N2, O2, CO, H2 and CH4 are selected as Henry-components to whichHenry’s law is applied. Henry’s constants are specified for these componentswith water and MDEA. In the reaction calculations, the activity coefficientbasis for the Henry’s components is chosen to be Aqueous. Therefore, incalculating the unsymmetric activity coefficients (GAMUS) of the solutes, theinfinite dilution activity coefficients will be calculated based on infinite-dilutioncondition in pure water, instead of in mixed solvents.
The Henry’s constant parameters of CO2 in water are regressed with thebinary VLE data[6-12], and those of CO2 in MDEA are obtained from Wang et al.(1992)[13]. The NRTL interaction parameters between CO2 and H2O are set tozero, and those between MDEA and H2O are determined from the regressionwith binary VLE data[14-16], excess enthalpy data[17-19] and heat capacitydata[20-22].
The interaction energy parameters between H2O and (MDEAH+, HCO3-), H2O
and (MDEAH+, CO3-2), and those between MDEA and (MDEAH+, HCO3
-),GMELCC, are regressed using the ternary VLE data[23-27], CO2 absorption heatdata [28, 29], ternary heat capacity data[30] and liquid phase concentration dataof MDEA-H2O-CO2 system from NMR spectrum[31].
The interaction energy parameters between H2O and (MDEAH+, HS-) andthose between MDEA and (MDEAH+, HS-), GMELCC and GMELCD, areregressed with the H2S solubility data in aqueous MDEA solution[23, 24, 32].
The dielectric constants of nonaqueous solvents are calculated by thefollowing expression:
CTBAT
11 (1)
The parameters A, B and C for MDEA in Aspen Databank are 21.9957,8992.68 and 298.15.
The liquid molar volume model and transport property models and modelparameters are adapted according to experimental data from literature. Theadaptation includes:
For liquid molar volume, the Clarke model, called VAQCLK in Aspen Plus,is used with option code of 1 to use the quadratic mixing rule for solvents.
3 Physical Properties 7
The interaction parameter VLQKIJ for the quadratic mixing rule betweenMDEA and H2O is regressed against experimental density data of theMDEA-H2O system from Bernal-Garcia et al. (2003)[33]. The Clarke modelparameter VLCLK/1 is also regressed for main electrolytes (MDEAH+,
HCO3 ) and (MDEAH+, CO
23 ) against experimental density data of the
MDEA-H2O-CO2 system form Weiland (1998)[34].
For liquid viscosity, the Jones-Dole electrolyte correction model, calledMUL2JONS in Aspen Plus, is used with the mass fraction based ASPENliquid mixture viscosity model for the solvent. There are three availablemodels for electrolyte correction and the MDEA model always uses theJones-Dole correction model. The three option codes for MUL2JONS areset to 1 (mixture viscosity weighted by mass fraction), 1 (always useJones and Dole equation when the parameters are available), and 2(ASPEN liquid mixture viscosity model), respectively. The interactionparameters between MDEA and H2O in the ASPEN liquid mixture viscositymodel, MUKIJ and MULIJ, are regressed against experimental viscositydata of the MDEA-H2O system from Teng et al. (1994)[35]. The Jones-Dolemodel parameters, IONMUB, for MDEAH+, is regressed against MDEA-H2O-CO2 viscosity data from Weiland (1998)[34]; that of CO3
2- is regressedagainst K2CO3-H2O viscosity data from Pac et al. (1984)[36] and that ofHCO3
- is regressed against KHCO3-H2O viscosity data from Palaty(1992)[37].
For liquid surface tension, the Onsager-Samaras model, called SIG2ONSGin Aspen Plus, is used with its option codes being -9 (exponent in mixingrule) and 1 (electrolyte system), respectively. The predictions of surfacetension of the MDEA-H2O-CO2 system can be in the range of theexperimental data from Weiland (1996)[38].
For thermal conductivity, the Riedel electrolyte correction model, calledKL2RDL in Aspen Plus, is used.
For binary diffusivity, the Nernst-Hartley model, called DL0NST in AspenPlus, is used with its option code set to 1 (mixture viscosity weighted bymass fraction).
In addition to the updates with the above transport properties, the aqueousphase Gibbs free energy and heat of formation at infinite dilution and 25°C(DGAQFM and DHAQFM) and heat capacity at infinite dilution (CPAQ0) forMDEAH+ are regressed with VLE[23-27], absorption heat[28. 29], heat capacity[30]
and liquid phase concentration data[31].
The estimation results of various transport and thermal properties aresummarized in Figures 1-8:
8 3 Physical Properties
900
950
1000
1050
1100
1150
1200
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7
CO2 Loading, mol/mol
Den
sit
y,kg
/m3
EXP MDEA 30w t%EXP MDEA 40w t%EXP MDEA 50w t%EXP MDEA 60w t%EST MDEA 30w t%EST MDEA 40w t%EST MDEA 50w t%EST MDEA 60w t%
Figure 1. Liquid Density of MDEA-CO2-H2O at 298.15K, experimental datafrom Weiland (1998)[34]
1.00
10.00
100.00
1000.00
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
CO2 Loading
Lo
g(V
isco
sit
y,m
PaS
)
EXP MDEA 30w t%EST MDEA 30w t%EXP MDEA 40w t%EST MDEA 40w t%EXP MDEA 50w t%EST MDEA 50w t%EXP MDEA 60w t%EST MDEA 60w t%
Figure 2. Liquid Viscosity of MDEA-CO2-H2O at 298.15K, experimental datafrom Weiland (1998)[34]
3 Physical Properties 9
0.03
0.04
0.05
0.06
0.07
0.08
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7
CO2 Loading
Su
rface
Ten
sio
n,N
/m
EXP MDEA 30w t%EST MDEA 30w t%EXP MDEA 40w t%EST MDEA 40w t%EXP MDEA 50w t%EST MDEA 50w t%EXP MDEA 60w t%EST MDEA 60w t%
Figure 3. Surface tension of MDEA-CO2-H2O at 298.15K, experimental datafrom Weiland (1996)[38]
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
0.35
0.4
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
CO2 Loading, mol/mol
Th
erm
alC
on
du
cti
vit
y,W
att
/mK
EST MDEA 30w t%
EST MDEA 40w t%
EST MDEA 40w t%
EST MDEA 60w t%
Figure 4. Liquid Thermal Conductivity of MDEA-CO2-H2O at 298.15K
10 3 Physical Properties
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7
CO2 load ing , m o l CO2/m o l M DEA
He
at
ca
pa
cit
y,
kJ
/km
ol.
K
30w t% MDEA, EXP 30w t% MDEA, EST
40w t% MDEA, EXP 40w t% MDEA, EST
50w t% MDEA, EXP 50w t% MDEA, EST
60w t% MDEA, EXP 60w t% MDEA, EST
Figure 5. Liquid Heat Capacity of MDEA-CO2-H2O at 298.15K, experimentaldata from Weiland (1997)[30]
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
0 0.5 1 1.5
CO2 load ing , m o l CO2/ m ol MDEA
Ab
so
rpti
on
he
at,
kJ
/mo
l
313K, EXP 313K, EST
353K, EXP 353K, EST
393K, EXP 393K, EST
Figure 6. Integral CO2 absorption heat in aqueous MDEA solution (MDEAmass fraction = 0.30), experimental data from Mathonat (1995)[28]
3 Physical Properties 11
0.0001
0.001
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1000
10000
0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10
CO2 loading, mol CO2/mol MDEA
CO
2p
res
su
re,k
Pa
EXP 313K EXP 313KEXP 353K EXP 373KEXP 393K EXP 393KEST 313K EST 353KEST 373K EST 393K
Figure 7. VLE of MDEA-CO2-H2O (MDEA mass fraction is around 0.50). Emptysymbols represent experimental data from Jou et al. (1982)[26] and fullsymbols represent experimental data from Ermatchkov et al. (2006)[25]
0.001
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1000
10000
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10
H2S loading
H2
SP
res
su
re,k
Pa
EXP 40C
EST 40C
EXP 70C
EST 70C
EXP 100C
EST 100C
EXP 120C
EST 120C
Figure 8. VLE of MDEA-H2S-H2O (MDEA mass fraction = 0.50), experimentaldata from Huang et al. (1998)[32]
12 4 Reactions
4 Reactions
MDEA is a tertiary ethanolamine, as shown below in Figure 9. It can associatewith H+ to form MDEAH+ but cannot react with CO2 to produce carbamate asprimary or secondary ethanolamines can.
Figure 9. MDEA Molecular Structure
The electrolyte solution chemistry has been modeled with a CHEMISTRYmodel with CHEMISTRY ID = MDEA. This CHEMISTRY ID is used as the globalelectrolyte calculation option in the simulation by specifying it on the Globalsheet of the Properties | Specifications form. Chemical equilibrium isassumed with all the ionic reactions in the CHEMISTRY MDEA. In addition, aREACTION model called MDEA-REA has been created. In MDEA-REA, allreactions are assumed to be in chemical equilibrium except that of CO2 withOH- and CO2 with MDEA.
A. Chemistry ID: MDEA
1 Equilibrium OHMDEAOHMDEAH 32
2 Equilibrium 3322 HCOOHO2HCO
3 Equilibrium 2
3323 COOHOHHCO
4 Equilibrium OHOHO2H 32
5 Equilibrium OHHSSHOH 322
6 Equilibrium OHSHSOH 3
22
4 Reactions 13
B. Reaction ID: MDEA-REA
1 Equilibrium OHMDEAOHMDEAH 32
2 Equilibrium OHOHO2H 32
3 Equilibrium 2
3323 COOHOHHCO
4 Kinetic 32 HCOOHCO
5 Kinetic OHCOHCO 23
6 Equilibrium OHHSSHOH 322
7 Equilibrium OHSHSOH 3
22
8 Kinetic2 2 3MDEA H O CO MDEAH HCO
9 Kinetic3 2 2MDEAH HCO MDEA H O CO
The equilibrium constants for reactions 1-4 in MDEA are calculated from thestandard Gibbs free energy change. DGAQFM. DHAQFM and CPAQ0 ofMDEAH+, which are used to calculate the standard AMPH+ Gibbs free energy,are determined in this work. The DGAQFM (or DGFORM), DHAQFM (orDHFORM) and CPAQ0 (or CPIG) parameters of the other components can beobtained from the databank of Aspen Plus. The equilibrium constants forreactions 5-6 in MDEA are obtained from Austgen et al. (1988) [39].
The power law expressions (T0 not specified) are used for the rate-controlledreactions (reactions 4-5 and 8-9 in MDEA-REA):
N
i
a
i
n iCTTR
ETTkr
10
0
11exp (2)
Where:
r = Rate of reaction;
k = Pre-exponential factor;
T = Absolute temperature;
T0 = Reference temperature;
n = Temperature exponent;
E = Activation energy;
R = Universal gas constant;
N = Number of components in the reaction;
Ci = Concentration of component i;
ai = The stoichiometric coefficient of component i in the reaction equation.
If T0 is not specified, the reduced power law expression is used:
N
i
a
in iC)
RT
E(kTr
1
exp (3)
14 4 Reactions
In this work, the reduced expression is used. In equation (3), the
concentration basis is Molarity, the factor n is zero, k and E are given in
Table 3.
The kinetic parameters for reaction 4 in Table 3 are taken from the work ofPinsent et al. (1956)[5]. The kinetic parameters for reaction 5 are calculatedby using the kinetic parameters of reaction 4 and the equilibrium constants ofthe reversible reactions 4 and 5. The kinetic parameters for reaction 8 aretaken from the work of Rinker et al. (1997)[4] and the kinetic parameters forreaction 9 are calculated by using the kinetic parameters of reaction 8 andthe equilibrium constants of the reversible reactions 8 and 9.
Table 3. Parameters k and E in Equation (1)
Reaction No. k E , cal/mol
4 4.32e+13 13249
5 2.38e+17 29451
8 2.22e+07 9029
9 1.39e+12 19141
5 Simulation Approaches 15
5 Simulation Approaches
Case 3 of the North Caroline plant[2] is used in the simulation.
Simulation Flowsheet – The absorber of the North Caroline plant has beenmodeled with the following simulation flowsheet in Aspen Plus, shown inFigure 10.
LEANIN
GASIN
GASOUT
RICHOUT
ABSORBER
Figure 10. Rate-Based MDEA Flowsheet in Aspen Plus
16 5 Simulation Approaches
Unit Operations - Major unit operations in this model have been representedby Aspen Plus blocks as outlined in Table 4.
Table 4. Aspen Plus Unit Operation Blocks Used in theRate-Based MDEA Model
Unit Operation Aspen Plus Block Comments / Specifications
Absorber RadFrac 1. Calculation type: Rate-Based
2. 21 Stages
3. Top Pressure: 55 bar
4. Reaction: Reaction ID is MDEA-REA for all stages; whencalculation type is equilibrium, Holdup is used, and in thisfile, Holdup=0.028 m3, which is close to the scaled valuecalculated by Holdup correlation
5. Tray Type: Glitsch Ballast
6. Tray Diameter: 1.28m
7. Weir height: 46.5mm
8. Number of valves per active area: 151.7 1/m2
9. Mass transfer coefficient method: Gerster et al. (1958)
10. Interfacial area method: Scheffe and Weiland (1987)
11. Interfacial area factor: 1
12. Heat transfer coefficient method: Chilton and Colburn
13. Holdup correlation: Bennett et al. (1983)
14. Holdup scale factor: 1
15. Film resistance: Discrxn for liquid film; Film for vaporfilm
16. Additional discretization points for liquid film: 5
17. Flow model: Mixed
5 Simulation Approaches 17
Streams - Feeds to the absorber are gas stream GASIN containing H2S, CH4,CO2 and H2O and liquid solvent stream LEANIN containing aqueous MDEAsolution loaded with some CO2 and H2S. Feed conditions are summarized inTable 5.
Table 5. Feed specification
Stream ID GASIN LEANIN
Substream: MIXED
Temperature: K 305.37 317.04
Pressure: bar 55.158 55
Mole-flow: mol/sec
H2O 0.399 238.26
MDEA 0 17.75
CO2 15.83 0.1038
H2S 0.0256 0.00158
CH4 440.03 0
Prop-Sets - A Prop-Set, XAPP, has been created to report apparent molefraction of CO2 and MDEA in liquid streams to facilitate calculations of CO2
loading of the streams.
18 6 Simulation Results
6 Simulation Results
The simulation was performed using Aspen Plus V7.2. Key simulation resultsare presented in Table 6 and Figure 11. Figure 11 displays both the resultsusing Mixed flow model (the solid line) for the tray and the results using theCounterCurrent flow model for the tray (the dashed line). As shown by thisfigure, the Mixed flow model is much better for this model, which is using atray column.
Table 6. Key Simulation Results
MeasurementRate-Based MDEA model(Mixed flow model)
CO2 mole fraction in GASOUT 1.34% 1.56%
0
50
100
150
200
250
0 5 10 15 20
Stage number
Te
mp
ert
ure
,F
Measurement
AspenPlus: Mixed Flow Model
AspenPlus: CounterCurrent Flow Model
Figure 11. Absorber Liquid Temperature Profile
7 Conclusions 19
7 Conclusions
The Rate-Based MDEA model provides a rate-based rigorous simulation of theprocess. Key features of this rigorous simulation include electrolytethermodynamics and solution chemistry, reaction kinetics for the liquid phasereactions, rigorous transport property modeling, rate-based multi-stagesimulation with Aspen Rate-Based Distillation which incorporates heat andmass transfer correlations accounting for columns specifics and hydraulics.
The model is meant to be used as a guide for modeling the CO2 captureprocess with MDEA. You may use it as a starting point for more sophisticatedmodels for process development, debottlenecking, plant and equipmentdesign, among others.
20 References
References
[1] G. Ralf, “Mathematische Modellierung des MDEA Absorptionsprozesses.”PhD Diss., the Rheinisch Westfäli technical university at Aachen, 2004
[2] G. R. Daviet., R. Sundermann, S. T. Donelly, J. A. Bullin, “Dome’s NorthCaroline Plant Conversion to MDEA.” Proceedings of Gas ProcessorsAssociation Convention, New Orleans, LA, 69 (1984)
[3] D.M. Austgen, G.T. Rochelle, C.-C. Chen, “Model of Vapor-Liquid Equilibriafor Aqueous Acid Gas-Alkanolamine Systems. 2. Representation of H2S andCO2 Solubility in Aqueous MDEA and CO2 Solubility in Aqueous Mixtures ofMDEA with MEA and DEA”, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., 30, 543-555 (1991)
[4] E.B. Rinker, S.S. Ashour, O.C. Sandall, “Experimental Absorption RateMeasurements and Reaction Kinetics for H2S and CO2 n Aqueous DEA, MDEAand Blends of DEA and MDEA”, GPA Research Report, No. 159, 1997
[5] B.R. Pinsent, L. Pearson, F.J.W. Roughton, “The Kinetics of Combination ofCarbon Dioxide with Hydroxide Ions”, Trans. Faraday Soc., 52, 1512-1520(1956)
[6] S. Takenouchi and G.C. Kennedy, “The Binary System H2O–CO2 at HighTemperatures and Pressures”. Am. J. Sci., 262, 1055–1074 (1964)
[7] K. Tödheide and E.U. Franck, Zeitschrift fur Physikalische Chemie NeueFolge, BD. 37, S.387-401 (1963)
[8] W.S. Dodds, L.F. Stutzman and B.J. Sollami, "Carbon Dioxide Solubility inWater", industrial and engineering chemistry, 1 (1), 92-95 (1956)
[9] S.E. Drummond, “Boiling and Mixing of Hydrothermal Fluids: ChemicalEffects on Mineral Precipitation”, Ph.D. Thesis, Pennsylvania State University,(1981)
[10] A. Zawisza and B. Malesiska, “Solubility of Carbon Dioxide in LiquidWater and of Water in Gaseous Carbon Dioxide in the Range 0.2-5 Mpa and atTemperature up to 473K", J. Chem. Eng. Data, 26, 388-391 (1981)
[11] R. Wiebe and V.L. Gaddy, “The solubility of Carbon Dioxide in Water atVarious Temperatures from 12 to 40 ◦C and at Pressures to 500 atm”, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 62, 815–817 (1940)
[12] G. Houghton, A.M. Mclean, and P.D. Ritchie, "Compressibility, Fugacity,and Water-solubility of Carbon Dioxide in the Region 0-36 atm and 0-100 C",Chemical engineering science, 6, 132-137 (1957)
References 21
[13] Y. W. Wang, S. Xu, F. D. Otto, A. E. Mather, “Solubility of N2O inAlkanolamines and in mixed solvents”, Chem. Eng. J. 48, 31-40 (1992)
[14] S. Xu, S. Qing, Z. Zhen, C. Zhang, J. Carroll, “Vapor PressureMeasurements of Aqueous N-Methyldiethanolamine Solutions”, Fluid PhaseEquilib., 67, 197-201 (1991)
[15] E. Voutsas, A. Vrachnos, K. Magoulas, “Measurement andThermodynamic Modeling of the Phase Equilibrium of Aqueous N-Methyldiethanolamine Solutions”, Fluid Phase Equilib., 224, 193-197 (2004)
[16] I. Kim, H. F. Svendsen, E. Borresen, “Ebulliometric Determination ofVapor-Liquid Equilibria for Pure Water, Monoethanolamine, N-Methyldiethanolamine, 3-(Methylamino)-propylamine, and Their Binary andTernary Solutions”, J. Chem. Eng. Data, 53, 2521-2531 (2008)
[17] M. L. Posey, “Thermodynamic Model for Acid Gas Loaded AqueousAlkanolamine Solutions”, PhD thesis, the University of Texas at Austin, (1996)
[18] Y. Maham, A. E. Mather, L. G. Hepler, “Excess Molar Enthalpies of (Water+ Alkanolamine) Systems and Some Thermodynamic Calculations”, J. Chem.Eng. Data, 42, 988-992 (1997)
[19] Y. Maham, A. E. Mather, C. Mathonat, “Excess properties of(alkyldiethanolamine + H2O) mixtures at temperatures from (298.15 to338.15) K”, J. Chem. Thermodyn., 32, 229-236 (2000)
[20] L. F. Chiu, M. H. Li, “Heat Capacity of Alkanolamine Aqueous Solutions”,J. Chem. Eng. Data, 44, 1396-1401 (1999)
[21] Y. J. Chen, T. W. Shih, M. H. Li, “Heat Capacity of Aqueous Mixtures ofMonoethanolamine with N-Methyldiethanolamine”, J. Chem. Eng. Data, 46,51-55 (2001)
[22] K. Zhang, B. Hawrylak, R. Palepu, P. R. Tremaine, “Thermodynamics ofAqueous Amines: Excess Molar Heat Capacities, Volumes, and Expansibilitiesof (Water + Methyldiethanolamine (MDEA)) and (Water + 2-Amino-2-methyl-1-propanol (AMP))”, J. Chem. Thermodyn., 34, 679-710 (2002)
[23] G. Kuranov, B. Rumpf, N. A. Smirnova, G. Maurer, “Solubility of SingleGases Carbon Dioxide and Hydrogen Sulfide in Aqueous Solutions of N-Methyldiethanolamine in the Temperature Range 313-413 K at Pressures upto 5 Mpa”, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., 35, 1959-1966 (1996)
[24] A. P. –S. Kamps, A. Balaban, M. Jodecke, G. Kuranov, N. A. Smirnova, G.Maurer, “Solubility of Single Gases Carbon Dioxide and Hydrogen Sulfide inAqueous Solutions of N-Mythyldiethanolamine at Temperatures from 313 to393 K and Pressures up to 7.6 MPa: New Experimental Data and ModelExtension”, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., 40, 696-706 (2001)
[25] V. Ermatchkov, A. P. –S. Kamps, G. Maurer, “Solubility of CarbonDioxide in Aqueous of N-Methyldiethanolamine in the Low Gas LoadingRegion”, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., 45, 6081-6091 (2006)
[26] F. Y. Jou, A. E. Mather, F. D. Otto, “Solubility of H2O and CO2 in AqueousMethyldiethanolamine Solution”, Ind. Eng. Chem. Process Design Develop.,21, 539-544 (1982)
22 References
[27] F. Y. Jou, J. J. Carroll, A. E. Mather, F. D. Otto, “The Solubility of CarbonDioxide and Hydrogen Sulfide in a 35 weight % Aqueous SolutionMethyldiethanolamine”, Can. J. Chem. Eng., 71, 264-268 (1993)
[28] C. Mathonat, “Calorimetrie de mélange, a ecoulement, a temperatures etpressions elevees. Application a l’etude de l’elimination du dioxide de carbonea l’aide de solutions aqueuses d’alcanolamines”, Universite Blaise Pascal, Paris,(1995)
[29] J. K. Carson, K. N. Marsh, A. E. Mather, “Enthalpy of Solution of CarbonDioxide in (Water + Monoethanolamine, or Diethanolamine, or N-Methyldiethanolamine) and (Water + Monoethanolamine + N-Methyldiethanolamine) at T = 298.15 K”, J. Chem. Thermodyn., 32, 1285-1296 (2000)
[30] R. H. Weiland, J. C. Dingman, D. B. Cronin, “Heat capacity of AqueousMonoethanolamine, Diethanolamine, N-Methyldiethanolamine, and N-Methyldiethanolamine-Based Blends with Carbon Dioxide”, J. Chem. Eng.Data, 42, 1004-1006 (1997)
[31] W. Bottinger, M. Maiwald, H. Hasse, H., “Online NMR SpectroscopicStudy of Species Distribution in MDEA-H2O-CO2 and MDEA-PIP-H2O-CO2”, Ind.Eng. Chem. Res., 47, 7917-7926 (2008)
[32] S.H. Huang, H. –J, NG, “Solubility of HsS and CO2 in Alkanolamines”,GPA Research Report No. 155, September 1998
[33] J.M. Bernal-Garcia, M. Romas-Estrada, G.A. Iglesias-Silva, “Densitiesand Excess Molar Volumes of Aqueous Solutions of N-Methyldiethanolamine(MDEA) at Temperatures from (283.15 to 363.15)K”, J.Chem. Eng. Data, 48, 1442-1445 (2003)
[34] R.H. Weiland, J.C. Dingman, D.B. Cronin, G.J. Browning, “Density andViscosity of Some Partially Carbonated Aqueous Alkanolamine Solutions andTheir Blends”, J. Chem. Eng. Data, 43, 378-382 (1998)
[35] T.T. Teng, Y. Maham, L.G. Hepler, A.E. Mather, “Viscosity of AqueousSolution of N-Methyldiethanolamine and of Diethanolamine”, J. Chem. Eng.Data., 39, 290-293 (1994)
[36] J.S. Pac, I.N. Maksimova, L.V. Glushenko, ”Viscosity of Alkali SaltSolutions and Comparative Calculation Method”, J. Appl. Chem. USSR, 57,846 (1984)
[37] Z. Palaty, “Viscosity of diluted aqueous K2CO3/KHCO3 solutions”, Collect.Czech. Chem. Commun., 57, 1879 (1992)
[38] R.H. Weiland, “Physical Properties of MEA, DEA, MDEA and MDEA-BasedBlends Loaded with CO2”, GPA Research Report No. 152, August 1996
[39] D.M. Austgen, G.T. Rochelle, X. Peng, and C.-C. Chen, "A Model ofVapor-Liquid Equilibria in the Aqueous Acid Gas-Alkanolamine System Usingthe Electrolyte-NRTL Equation," Paper presented at the New Orleans AIChEMeeting, March (1988)