AMISTCO

Mesh & Vane

Mist Eliminators

For optimal removal of a wide range

of liquid droplets from gas streams
 Achieving the potential of
today’s mist eliminators
I
N EVERY PROCESS involving contact between liq-
uid and flowing gas, tiny mist droplets are carried
away with the gas. (See Figure 1) This phenome-
non is called entrainment.
Beginning about 1947, special devices were
developed to remove mist from gas streams. Now
known as mist eliminators, these devices provide a
large surface area in a small volume to collect liquid
without substantially impeding gas flow. Unlike fil-
ters, which hold particles indefinitely, mist elimina-
tors coalesce (merge) fine droplets and allow the liq-
uid to drain away. Gas typically flows upward
through a horizontal mist eliminator.
More recently, advances in technology have
enabled substantial progress in mist eliminator
designs, materials, and application expertise. New
products and methods of use have been found highly
effective for many purposes, especially the following:
• Increasing throughput
• Downsizing new vessels
• Improving product purity
• Cutting operating costs
• Reducing environmental pollution
• Reducing downstream corrosion
• Increasing recovery of valuable liquids
Figure 1. Typical mist eliminator application in
distillation column
–2–
In today’s era of higher expectations of mist
eliminators, achieving such benefits requires better
knowledge on the part of users. It is no longer ade-
quate for a designer simply to indicate “mist elimi-
nator” in a drawing. The results will depend on
proper specification of mist eliminator type (or
combination of types), orientation, thickness, inter-
nal details, support and spacing in the vessel, vapor
velocity and flow pattern, and many other consider-
ations.
Despite the advances that have been made, mist
eliminator specification is still as much art as sci-
ence. For all but the most experienced users, proper
application depends on consultation with a manu-
facturer’s engineers. Such help should be consid-
ered for every new mist eliminator application as
well as every upgrade or debottlenecking of existing
applications.
T
O MAKE THE MOST of a mist eliminator invest-
ment, the designer should become familiar
with the considerations and possibilities
involved. The purpose of this publication is to pro-
vide general guidelines and an overview of the field of
mist elimination. Due to the numerous variables
involved in specifying mist eliminators, designers
and purchasers should consult with Amistco’s sepa-
ration specialists before making a final decision.
Table 1. Typical size range of mist droplets
created by various processes
(microns, micrometers)
Mechanical
Column packing or trays 5 to 800 mm
Sprays 10 to 1,000 mm
Surface evaporation 3 to 1,000 mm
Chemical
Acid mists 0.1 to 15 mm
Condensation
Blown off heat exchanger surface 3 to 500 mm
In saturated vapor 0.1 to 50 mm
 Types of mist eliminators
Figure 2. Flattened tube
of knitted 0.011-inch
wire with diagonal
crimps
T
HERE ARE THREE general types of mist elimina-
tors—mesh, vane, and fiber bed—and Amistco
makes all three. Each is suited for a different class of
applications, either alone or combined with another type.
Mesh—pads and
insertion type
The most widely applicable type of mist eliminator is
made of metal or plastic wire with typical diameter of 0.006
to 0.011 inch, loosely knitted in a form resembling a cylin-
drical net. This tube is flattened to form a two-layer strip
typically 12 inches wide, which is then crimped in a diago-
nal pattern with ridges as shown in Figure 2. When these
strips are laid together, the ridges slant in alternate direc-
tions, forming an open structure through which gas flows
Figure 4. Typical mesh-type mist eliminator pad
–3–
Figure 3. “Co-knit” mesh, including multifilament
glass fibers knitted along with the wire
freely. Such mesh can efficiently capture mist droplets as
small as 5 microns (micrometers).
For eliminating droplets down to 1 micron in diame-
ter, multi-filament yarns of various plastics or glass are
knitted into the mesh. The result is called a composite or
co-knit mesh (Figure 3).
Mesh pads
In the most familiar application of knitted mesh, the
crimped strips are stacked to form a pad with typical thick-
ness of four or six inches. (See Figure 4.) Rigidity is provid-
ed by a frame—usually metal—consisting of a grid on each
side and rods passing through the mesh. Pads larger than
about three feet across are fabricated in sections narrow
enough to pass through a manway for assembly inside a
vessel. Mesh pads can be made in almost any shape, but
most are round (as in Figure 4) or rectangular.
MistFix ™ insertion mist eliminator
In an exclusive Amistco innovation (U. S. Patent
Number 5,985,004), knitted wire mesh is wrapped into a
cylindrical core with a flange at one end. (See Figure 5.)
MistFix mist eliminators extend vertically into a vessel
from the vapor exit nozzle. As replacements or substitutes
for pads, they greatly speed turnaround time, avoid entry
of hazardous vessels, and eliminate the need for vessel cut-
ting where there is no access port. They are ideally suited
for existing vessels that do not have mist eliminators.
Typical mist
eliminator unit
are sometimes used in combination with mesh pads for
optimum performance in special situations. Amistco’s
standard vanes (front cover) are available in metal or
plastics and have various blade spacings and profiles. For
special requirements, Amistco also supplies curved vanes
such as the non-metallic variety shown in Figure 6.
Double-pocket vanes
Amistco’s high-performance double-pocket vanes
(Figure 7) can operate at higher capacity and higher effi-
ciency than conventional vanes. The design features liq-
uid pockets that prevent re-entrainment of the separated
liquid droplets. This helps increase the capacity up to
twice that of conventional vanes. The higher gas velocities
also help in obtaining 100% removal of 8-micron droplets.

Figure 7. Top edge of Amistco double-pocket vane unit

Horizontal Flow

Typical
installation

Figure 5. MistFix™ insertion mist eliminator

Fiber candles and panels
Vane packs Fiber mist eliminators can capture mist droplets so
small (below 1 micron) that they appear as smoke or near-
Also known as chevron or plate type, vane mist elim-
ly invisible haze. These units employ fine fibers—typical-
inators consist of closely spaced corrugated plates that
ly cellulose, glass, or plastic—packed into a mat with
force mist-laden gas to follow serpentine paths. These
thickness of a few inches. Fiber mist eliminators are most-
devices are generally not efficient for mist droplets small-
ly used in cylindrical form called candles (Figure 8) but are
er than about 20 microns, but they are sturdier than mesh
also available in flat panels. Amistco designs and manu-
pads and impose less pressure drop. Vane arrays can be
factures these devices under an exclusive Western Hemi-
mounted horizontally or vertically. They are preferred in
sphere license from Begg Cousland. For additional
applications involving high vapor velocities, low available
details, see the “Amistco Candle Filters” brochure.
pressure drop, viscous or foaming liquids, lodging or cak-
ing of solids, slugs of liquid, or violent upsets. Like mesh
pads, vane units are usually round or rectangular. They

Figure 6. Mist eliminator with curved non-metallic vanes Figure 8. Typical fiber mist eliminator candle

–4–
 Fundamental considerations
P
ROPER APPLICATION of mist eliminators is based
on understanding how they work. Vane and mesh
devices both employ the same mechanism—known
as inertial impaction—and thus are subject to the same
basic design rules. Fiber mist eliminators, however, cap-
ture submicron droplets (those smaller than one micron)
by an entirely different phenomenon—known as
Brownian motion—leading to very different behavior.

Inertial capture in vanes

As shown in Figure 9, vanes bend the path of mist-
laden gas into relatively tight curves. As the gas changes
direction, inertia or momentum keeps mist droplets
moving in straighter paths, and some strike adjacent
vanes. There, they are held by surface forces and coalesce Figure 10. Vane array with horizontal flow
(merge) with other droplets, eventually trickling down. If
the vane material is wettable, a surface film promotes
coalescence and drainage. In the case of upward flow, Inertial capture in mesh
coalesced liquid disengages from the bottom of the vanes
In a mesh-type mist eliminator (Figure 11), each
as droplets large enough to fall through rising gas. In the
strand acts as an obstruction around which gas must flow.
case of horizontal flow (Figure 10), the liquid trickles
Within a very short distance upstream of a filament, the
down vanes to a drain below.
gas turns aside sharply, but some mist droplets are unable
to follow. They strike the filament, adhere, and coalesce to
Figure 9. Capture of mist form droplets that are large enough to trickle down and
droplets in a vane array fall away.
with vertical flow
Figure 11. Droplet capture in a mesh-type
mist eliminator

–5–
Inertial capture efficiency
Based on the principle of inertial capture, it is easy to
understand the behavior of a vane or mesh mist elimina-
tor in terms of the efficiency with which it captures mist
droplets. Consider a droplet encountering a mesh strand
or a bend in a vane. (To help imagine the relative dimen-
sions involved in the case of a mesh pad, see Figure 12.)
The following factors determine whether the droplet
strikes the surface or turns and flows around with the gas:
1. Droplet size: The larger the droplet, the greater its
momentum and the straighter its path when surround-
ing gas flows around an obstacle. Consequently, as
seen in Figure 13, the efficiency of a given mist elimina-
tor varies steeply with droplet size (keeping the same
velocity and liquid and gas composition). For the
example mesh pad made of 0.011-inch wire, efficiency
jumps from nearly zero for 2-micron droplets to nearly
100% for 20-micron droplets. In a real situation,
droplet sizes will be distributed over a range from less
than one micron to well over 100 microns. The distri-
bution curve may be narrow or broad, peaking any-
where within that range.
2. Strand diameter or corrugation spacing: The smaller
the diameter of a mesh strand (or the closer the spacing
between the corrugations of a vane), the more abruptly
oncoming gas turns aside, and the more difficult it is for
mist droplets to follow the gas. Thus, finer strands can
capture smaller droplets (again assuming the same
Figure 12. Relative sizes of droplets and strands
1 micron (mm) = 1 millionth of a meter
–6–
Figure 13. Examples of variation of droplet capture
efficiency with droplet size and filament diameter
velocity and liquid and gas composition). This effect
can be seen by comparing the three curves in Figure 13,
representing mesh pads having different strand thick-
nesses. The 279-micron (0.011-inch) wire is 90% effi-
cient for 6-micron droplets, compared to 3-micron
droplets for the 152-micron (0.006-inch) wire and 1.5-
micron droplets for 10-micron co-knit glass fibers. (See
appendix for efficiency curves for various other types of
Amistco mesh and vanes.)
3. Gas velocity: The more rapidly a droplet approaches
a mesh strand or vane corrugation, the greater its
momentum, carrying it in a straighter path. Further-
more, at higher velocities, gas flow streamlines
approach the obstacle more closely, resulting in tighter
bends. Thus, the capture efficiency of a mist elimina-
tor increases sharply with velocity until an upper limit
is reached due to re-entrainment or flooding (dis-
cussed later).
4. Liquid density relative to gas density: What causes a
droplet to deviate from curving gas streamlines is not its
momentum alone, but the difference or ratio between
the droplet’s momentum and that of the gas around it.
In cases where the gas is nearly as dense as the liquid—
for instance, at high pressures—the gas sweeps droplets
around the obstacle more strongly, preventing capture.
5. Gas viscosity: The more viscous the gas, the more drag
it exerts on suspended droplets as the gas flows around
mesh strands and vane corrugations, leading to
reduced capture efficiency. The viscosity of a gas gener-
ally goes up with higher temperature.
6. Pad density and thickness: Finally, the efficiency of a
mesh pad also depends on how closely the strands are
packed and on the thickness of the pad. Packing densi-
ty is increased by knitting with more loops per inch and
crimping with narrower ridges. It is measured in terms
of pounds per cubic foot of pad. Thickness, in turn, is
increased by piling on more layers of crimped mesh
sheets. Thicker, denser pads bring trade-offs in terms of
higher pressure drop and susceptibility to re-entrain-
ment and flooding. Typical densities for stainless steel
mesh are 9 and 12 pounds per cubic feet, and typical
thicknesses are 4, 6, and 8 inches.

Figure 14. Droplet capture by interception
Interception capture
There is another capture mechanism, usually called
interception, that theoretically applies to both mesh and
fiber mist eliminators. (See Figure 14.) Droplets that can-
not be captured efficiently by inertial effects due to small
size, low density, low velocity, etc., may nevertheless head
so close to the centerline of a strand that they brush
against the surface and adhere. In practice, however,
interception is indistinguishable from inertial impaction
and may be ignored in vanes and mesh.
Figure 15. Droplet capture by Brownian motion
in a fiber candle or panel
–7–
Brownian capture
Brownian motion, the main capture mechanism for
submicron droplets in fiber mist eliminators, is the fre-
quent random jerks experienced by microscopic particles
suspended in a gas or liquid. The cause is momentary
inequalities in the number and speed of surrounding
molecules hitting the particle from various directions.
This tiny motion is enough to throw small droplets out of
gas streamlines and against fibers that they would other-
wise flow around. (See Figure 15.) Since flow momentum
is not involved, capture efficiency is not improved by
larger droplets, higher velocity, higher relative liquid den-
sity, or lower gas viscosity as for vanes and mesh. Instead,
efficiency goes up with higher temperature, longer resi-
dence time in the mat (due to greater mat thickness or
lower gas velocity), and closer packing of fibers, and
down with greater droplet size and pressure.
Because fiber mist eliminators are so different from
vane and mesh units in application and specifica-
tion, further technical information about them is
provided in separate Amistco publications.
Capacity limits
The throughput capacity of a mesh or vane mist elim-
inator is limited by either of two related phenomena:
flooding (choking with liquid) and re-entrainment (dis-
lodging, suspension, and escape of coalesced droplets).
In some low-pressure applications, the pressure drop
across the device can also be an important consideration.
These limiting factors are illustrated in Figures 16 and 17.
Figure 16 is based on experimental data for a typical
horizontal mesh pad (Amistco mesh type TM-1109),
using water sprayed at various rates into rising air. It
shows how pressure drop varies with velocity and mist
load in the vicinity of the typical operating range. The
mist droplets are assumed to be within a size range suit-
able for capture by a pad of this sort—larger than 10
microns.
In Figure 16, notice that the pressure drop would be
considered small in most applications—only about 2 or 3
inches of water column even at the most extreme veloci-
ty and load combination.
Also notice that pressure drop increases markedly
with mist load. At 10 feet per second, the pressure drop
for 1 GPM/ft2 is more than three times that for a dry pad.
Figure 17, in turn, provides a subjective impression of
what happens in a typical horizontal mesh pad at three
different conditions of flow rate and mist load indicated
as Points A, B, and C in Figure 16.
Point A represents a light mist load and a velocity of
about 8 feet per second. Nearly all the incoming mist is
captured well below the middle of the pad. The rest of the
pad remains dry. In the active zone, coalesced droplets
slip rapidly down the mesh wire. At the bottom, however,
surface tension makes water accumulate on and between
wires before falling away as streams and large drops. The
 Figure 16. Pressure drop, flooding, and re-entrainment in a typical horizontal mesh pad
result is a thin flooded layer agitated by rising gas, gener-
ating a small amount of additional mist that is immedi-
ately captured again.
Point B, in turn, lies on a “moderate” load line at the
velocity where a few re-entrained droplets begin to blow
upward from the pad—about 11 ft/sec, under these con-
ditions. Re-entrainment is roughly indicated by the dark-
er background at the right side of the plot. (The darker
area on the left, in turn, signifies poor capture efficiency.)
The higher the liquid load, the lower the velocity at which
re-entrainment occurs.
At Point B, velocity is high enough to detach coa-
lesced droplets and lift some of them against the force of
gravity. Most re-entrained droplets are relatively large—
up to 1,000 microns (1 millimeter). Because of the higher
liquid flow rate in the approaching mist and greater
upward drag on captured liquid due to higher air velocity,
the flooded zone fills an appreciable layer. Incoming mist
rises higher in the pad before being captured.
Finally, at Point C, the velocity is high enough not only
to lift even the largest re-entrained droplets, but also to
Figure 17. Envisioning stages in mesh pad performance in preceding figure (vertical cross-sections through pad)
–8–
retard drainage within the pad virtually to zero. The mesh
is entirely choked with agitated liquid, generating mist
droplets downstream across a wide range of sizes.
Flooding has caused the pressure-drop curve to begin
turning up sharply. If flow were increased beyond this
point, the line would become almost vertical. For lower
liquid loads, flooding occurs at higher velocities.
Similar behavior governs capacity limits also for vane
mist eliminators and for horizontal flow through vertical
mist eliminators of both types.
As to the influence of operating variables on these phe-
nomena, flooding is promoted by high liquid load (volume
percent mist in the incoming mixture), high gas velocity
(especially for upward flow as in this example), and high liq-
uid viscosity and surface tension (inhibiting drainage).
At very light liquid loads, re-entrainment can occur
without appreciable flooding. However, with or without
flooding, re-entrainment is promoted by higher gas veloc-
ity, smaller strand diameter or vane corrugation spacing,
sharper corrugation angles, greater liquid load, lower liq-
uid density relative to gas, lower liquid surface tension,
 Sizing for gas velocity using
Souders-Brown equation
T
HE FOREGOING fundamental considerations lead
directly to procedures for sizing a mesh or vane
mist eliminator in terms of cross-sectional area, to
handle the throughput for a particular application.
The key variable is gas velocity. In a given applica-
tion, a mist eliminator has a definite operating range,
indicated by the lighter background color in Figure 16. At
velocities above this range, performance is impaired by
re-entrainment, accompanied by flooding for all but the
lightest mist loads. As velocity decreases within the oper-
ating range, droplet capture efficiency declines—more
steeply for smaller droplets than for larger ones. At some
point, the efficiency for droplets at the lower end of the Generalizing Figure 16 by applying Souders-Brown
size range has fallen to an unacceptable level. This is the
equation K = VG / …(rL - rG)/rG
bottom of the operating velocity range. For the typical
case in Figure 16, it is roughly 3 ft/sec. Dividing that into Water and air at 70° F and 1 atmosphere:
the re-entrainment limit of about 11 ft/sec yields an rL = 62.3 pounds per cubic foot
approximate turndown ratio of nearly four to one for the rG = 0.0749 pounds per cubic foot
operating range. K = VG / 28.8
It is generally recommended that the nominal oper- Design K = (10 ft/sec) / 28.8 = 0.35 ft/sec
ating velocity be established toward the top of the Maximum K = (11 ft/sec) / 28.8 = 0.38 ft/sec
range—about 10 feet per second for an air-water applica-
tion such as this. Capture efficiency is higher there than Figure 18. Graphs of Figure 16 in terms of
farther down in the range, and performance is satisfacto- Souders-Brown vapor load factor
ry at velocities from about 30% to 110% of that value.
eliminator and gas-liquid system—typically air and
A certain formula is widely used in sizing a mesh or
water—to be used in sizing mist eliminators of the same
vane mist eliminator for a given throughput. It general-
type for different gases and liquids.
izes the characteristics reflected in Figure 16 (notably
For example, Figure 18 shows the graphs of Figure 16,
excepting the low end of the operating range) from the
with the X axis converted from velocity to vapor load fac-
base case of air and water to other gases and liquids.
tor. The conversion factor is 28.8, calculated as shown in
Called the Souders-Brown equation, it has long been the
the figure. The effect is to shift the graphs of Figure 16
customary tool for predicting the maximum allowable
toward the left by that amount. The recommended
vapor velocity in a trayed vapor-liquid contactor column.
design velocity of 10 feet per second for this mesh pad in
(M. Souders and G. G. Brown, “Design of fractionating
this horizontal configuration corresponds to a load factor
Columns. I. Entrainment and Capacity,” Industrial &
of about 0.35 ft/sec. The top of the operating range, in
Engineering Chemistry, Volume 26 [1934], Pages 98-103.)
turn (11 ft/sec in Figure 16), lies at a load factor of about
The equation is similar in form to Newton’s Law for the
0.38. Amistco publishes graphs such as this as design
terminal velocity of falling spheres.
aids for a number of its products. (See appendix.)
The version of the Souders-Brown equation common-
The point is that re-entrainment, flooding, and log-
ly used for mist eliminators establishes a variable K called
log pressure-drop plots (although not capture efficien-
the vapor load factor—also known as the system load fac-
cy) all correlate well with vapor load factor for different
tor, Souders-Brown velocity, or K factor—as follows:
liquids and gases having various densities. The correla-
K = VG / …(rL - rG)/rG (Equation 1) tion generally holds at pressures from atmospheric up
K = vapor load factor (Souders-Brown velocity) to about 7 atmospheres (100 psia) for gases and liquids
whose surface tension and viscosity vary roughly alike
VG = gas velocity
with density. This includes most light hydrocarbons,
rL = liquid density in same units as rG
for instance.
rG = gas density in same units as rL As an example, consider a TM-1109 mist eliminator
The K factor can be considered an effective gas veloc- in the top of a distillation column or knockout drum as
ity for the purpose of expressing the throughput capacity shown in Figure 19. In this particular case, the square-
limit, adjusted for the effects of liquid and gas density. root divisor in Equation 1 is 11.7. The design velocity
This parameter allows data gathered for a given mist (corresponding to a K-factor of 0.35 ft/sec) is 4.10 ft/sec—

–9–

Shell diameter = 7.88 ft (std. 8.0 ft)
Flow area = 48.8 ft2
Horizontal 6-inch TM-1109 pad:
Liquid droplet density . . rL = 42.5 lbs/ft3
Gas density . . . . . . . . . . . . rG = 0.31 lbs/ft3
VG = 11.7 K Recommended design K is 0.35 ft/sec
Design velocity: VG = (11.7)(0.35 ft/sec) = 4.10 ft/sec
Suppose the given design vapor rate is 200 ft3/sec
Then the required cross-sectional area
= (200 ft3/sec)/(4.10 ft/sec) = 48.8 ft2
Flow area diameter = 2 …48.8 ft2/ p = 7.88 feet
Typically round up to next standard size: 8 feet
Figure 19. Sizing a mesh pad and vessel with Souders-
Brown equation K = VG / …(rL - rG)/rG
which is 41% of the value for air and water in Figure 16.
The pressure-drop curves and re-entrainment and flood-
ing points will likewise be shifted to about 41% of their
positions in Figure 16.
Figure 19 also shows how the Souders-Brown equa-
tion is typically used in sizing a vessel with a mist elimi-
nator of this type for flow area to achieve the design
velocity (K = 0.35) with a given design vapor flow rate.
Capture efficiency is an entirely separate matter from
sizing. As explained earlier, the inertial capture efficiency
for a given velocity, wire diameter, and droplet size is
enhanced by higher liquid density and lower gas density.
– 10 –
Table 2. Recommended design values of Souders-
Brown vapor load factor K = VG / …(rL - rG)/rG
Typical wire mesh pad (no co-knit yarn):
Vertical flow . . . . . . . . . . . . .K = 0.35 ft/sec
Horizontal flow . . . . . . . . . .K = 0.42 ft/sec
(For mist loads less than 0.1% volumetric,
equivalent to 0.5 GPM/ft2 at 10 ft/sec)
Typical vane unit
Vertical flow . . . . . . . . . . . . .K = 0.50 ft/sec
Horizontal flow . . . . . . . . . .K = 0.65 ft/sec
Double-pocket vane unit
Vertical & horizontal flow K = 1.0 ft/sec
Typical operating velocity range:
30% to 110% of design K above
Effective pressure range:
Derate K as much as 40% for vacuum or
pressures above 7 atmospheres (85 psig)
Such density changes result in a higher square-root divi-
sor in the Souders-Brown equation. In the example case
in Figure 19, however, the divisor (11.7) is lower than for
air and water (28.5). Therefore the efficiency of this pad
in this application at any given velocity will be lower than
for air and water. To achieve minimal acceptable efficien-
cy, the low end of the operating velocity range will be
higher than the typical 30% of design velocity.
Table 2 shows generally recommended design values
of K for various typical cases. Note that the values for
vane units are higher than for mesh pads. This is because
vanes are less susceptible to re-entrainment and flooding
(discussed later).
Furthermore, for both mesh and vanes (except dou-
ble-pocket vanes), design K-factors are higher for hori-
zontal flow through vertical units than for vertical flow
through horizontal units. This is because with horizontal
flow, draining of captured liquid is not retarded by gas
flowing in the opposite direction.
In all cases listed in Table 2, performance is typically
acceptable over the same range of velocities discussed for
vertical flow in a horizontal mesh pad—from about 30%
to 110% of the design value. However, as explained
before, the low end of the operating range varies in the
opposite direction from the design velocity; the lower the
design velocity, the narrower the acceptable range.
Similarly, as mentioned earlier, this correlation
breaks down at pressures outside the range of 1 to 7
atmospheres. For higher or lower pressures, the design
K-factor will be as low as 60% of the tabulated value for
each configuration in Table 2.
Finally, the design K-factors for both horizontal and
vertical mesh pads are applicable only for low to moder-
ate mist loads—up to about 0.1% liquid by volume. For a
velocity of 10 feet per second, this corresponds to about
0.5 gallons of liquid captured per minute per square foot.
For higher mist loads, the design K should be derated.
Vane units are not so sensitive to the effects of mist load
on capacity.
 Mesh versus vanes—or both
ty for long periods without maintenance or replacement.

T
HE EFFICIENCY OF VANE mist eliminators is gen-
erally acceptable only for droplets larger than 10 or Offshore platforms and long-running processes are
20 microns in the case of air and water at ambient prime examples.
conditions. (Compare efficiency curves on Pages 14 and
15.) Furthermore, a vane unit is generally more expensive
than a mesh pad in the same application. However, vanes Mesh-vane combinations
have certain advantages that dictate their selection over
Vane units can be especially valuable in certain appli-
mesh in some situations.
cations when used immediately upstream or downstream
of mesh pads. Figures 20 and 21 illustrate these concepts

Vane advantages with horizontal flow. With vertical flow, capacity will be

1. High velocity: Being less susceptible to re-entrain-

ment and flooding than mesh pads, vane units can
operate at velocities 30 to 40 percent higher in both ver-
tical and horizontal flow. (See Table 2.) Higher velocity
helps close the efficiency gap with mesh.
2. High liquid load: Vane units typically handle loads
about 5 to 10 times greater than mesh pads: up to 10
gpm/ft2 for VNM-50-6 vanes, versus 1 gpm/ft2 for TM-
1109 mesh (horizontal flow, air and water, ambient
conditions).
3. Fouling and clogging: Solid particles and debris that
would lodge in a mesh pad, eventually requiring Figure 20. Boosting throughput and efficiency of a
replacement or cleaning, pass through the much larger mesh pad by following it with a vane unit
apertures of a vane unit. In applications that are subject
to buildup of deposits, vane units can operate for much reduced as explained before for mesh pads and vane
longer intervals without cleaning and can be cleaned units alone.
much more readily than mesh pads. Mounting a vane unit downstream of a mesh pad as
4. Longer corrosion life: The thickness of vanes gives in Figure 20 combines the superior efficiency of the mesh
them a substantially greater service life than mesh with with the superior K-factor of the vanes. The typical K-fac-
the same corrosion rate. In a given corrosive service, a tor for horizontal flow is raised from 0.42 for mesh alone
vane unit made of sheet metal will last much longer (Table 2) to 0.65 for vanes. When operated at or above the
than a mesh pad made of the same alloy. resulting design velocity, the mesh pad serves as an
5. Low pressure drop: The relative openness of vanes agglomerator or coalescer of fine mist droplets. Most liq-
gives them an edge over mesh in applications where uid captured in the mesh pad is re-entrained as larger
pressure drops of a few inches of water column are cru- droplets whose sizes are well above the lower limit of the
cial. (See graphs on Pages 14 and 15.) vane unit. Higher velocity also improves the mist elimi-
nation efficiency of the mesh. In applications of co-knit
6. High liquid viscosity: There are a few applications in
mesh where the re-entrainment velocity is exceptionally
which high viscosity impedes liquid drainage so severe-
low, a downstream vane unit is indispensible.
ly that a mesh pad would flood at prohibitively low
On the other hand, mounting a vane unit upstream of
velocities and liquid loads. Vanes can handle much
a mesh pad as in Figure 21 combines the superior effi-
higher liquid viscosities.
ciency of mesh with the superior load and solids-han-
7. Rugged construction: When properly secured in
place, a typical vane unit withstands violent surges and
liquid slugs that would dislodge and even destroy the
most rugged mesh pad.
8. Foam accommodation: Because of liquid agitation in
mesh pads, those devices are not generally recom-
mended in applications subject to foaming. Vane units,
by contrast, not only drain without foaming, but can
actually break foam generated upstream.
In view of Items 3, 4, and 7 above, vane units are espe-
cially attractive in applications that require high reliabili- Figure 21. Shielding a mesh pad from a very heavy
mist load with a vane unit ahead

– 11 –
 Applying mist eliminators
Vertical
vessel,
vertical Horizontal
flow vessel, horizontal
lateral flow,
double banks

Plan view

Horizontal vessel,
vertical flow

Vertical
vessel,
horizontal
flow
Lateral view Axial
view

Axial
Horizontal vessel,
horizontal axial flow Lateral view view

Drain pipe with Horizontal vessel, oblique

liquid seal below lateral flow, double banks

Figure 22. Typical mist eliminator configurations in cylindrical knockout drums. Similar configurations can be
used in other vessels. The mist eliminators may be mesh, vane, or combinations.

dling ability of vanes. The K-factor of the combination is • Liquid holding capacity and drainage method
that of the mesh pad. • Worker access for cleaning, replacement, etc.
• Support beams for large horizontal mist eliminators

T
HE FOLLOWING are some additional considera-
tions that may come into play when applying mesh • Internal flow constraints for efficient operation
and vane mist eliminators in specific situations.
Like other information in this publication, these guide-
lines can be useful for preliminary design purposes. Internal flow guidelines
However, final decisions should not be made without con-
The last consideration in the foregoing list—internal
sulting Amistco’s separation specialists.
flow constraints—is often overlooked but may be of pri-
mary importance. There are two main principles:
Vessel configurations
The simplified diagrams in Figure 22 show several typ-
ical configurations of mist eliminators in vessels. The mist
eliminators may be mesh pads, vane units, or combina-
tions as described on Page 11. The vessels depicted are
cylindrical vapor-liquid separators, often called knockout
drums. However, some of the same concepts may also
apply to mist eliminators in process vessels, such as
vapor-liquid contactor columns, evaporators, chillers, etc.
Considerations affecting selection of a mist elimina-
tor configuration may include the following:
• Mist eliminator cross-sectional area to achieve
design velocity with required vapor throughput
• Space available inside existing vessel
• Plant space available for the vessel Figure 23. Example of mist eliminator performance
• Inlet and outlet locations to fit established piping degradation due to uneven velocity profile

– 12 –
 Figure 24. Generally accepted spacing guidelines to maintain even velocity profile and avoid entrainment
in mist eliminators in cylindrical vessels with axial flow
1. Maintain an even velocity profile across the mist elim-
inator element—whether mesh, vane, or combination.
The object is to avoid situations such as shown in Figure
23. Here, the mist eliminator is mounted too close to the
outlet nozzle. Excessive velocity in a region near the
center of the mist eliminator results in substantial re-
entrainment there. Furthermore, deficient velocity in a
region around the perimeter causes low droplet removal
efficiency in that area. The main key to an even velocity
profile is to allow sufficient spacing between the mist
eliminator and gas inlets and outlets. Items A through E
in Figure 24 show some generally accepted guidelines in
this regard for cylindrical vessels with axial flow through
the mist eliminator. Flow distribution devices of various
sorts can reduce the necessary spacing, but at the risk of
violating the following principle.
2. Avoid strong turbulence and fluid shear in the wet
part of the vessel. The main objective is to prevent
entrainment of the collected liquid. This can be
achieved by maintaining adequate separation between
the inlet nozzle and the liquid surface as shown in Item
F of Figure 24. Another objective is to prevent shearing
of droplets into smaller particles that might pass
through the mist eliminator.
– 13 –
Application procedure
Based on all of the principles presented before, the
procedure generally followed in designing a mist elimina-
tor application involving mesh, vanes, or both is as follows:
1. Estimate the droplet size distribution (See Table 1).
2. Specify the required separation efficiency.
3. Tentatively choose a mist eliminator (mesh, vane, or
combination; mesh or vane style; materials) consider-
ing droplet size, efficiency, corrosion, and wettability.
4. Tentatively select a mist eliminator orientation and
placement in the vessel (Figure 22, etc.).
5. Calculate the necessary cross-sectional area and
mist eliminator dimensions (Figure 19, Table 2, etc.).
6. Estimate separation efficiency and pressure drop
within the required turndown range (Appendix and
similar reference literature).
7. If the estimated results are not acceptable, repeat
steps 3 through 6 with a different mist eliminator or
vessel configuration.
8. Check for conformance with internal flow guide-
lines (Figures 23 and 24, etc.) and revise as necessary.
For easy separations that are familiar to the designer,
sizing (Step 5) may be the only critical step. In even the
simplest applications, however, the possibility of improve-
 Appendix

Figure A1. Efficiency of 6-inch metal mesh pads

Figure A2. Pressure drop for 6-inch metal mesh pads

– 14 –
 Figure A3. Efficiency of 6-inch co-knit and plastic
monofilament mesh pads

Figure A4. Pressure drop for 6-inch Figure A5. Pressure drop for 6-inch plastic
co-knit mesh pads monofilament mesh pads

Figure A6. Efficiency of vane mist eliminators Figure A7. Pressure drop for a typical Amistco vane unit

– 15 –
 products, each phase of manufacturing is

A
MISTCO SEPARATION PRODUCTS, Inc.,
manufactures a wide range of phase con- closely monitored to assure that customer
tacting and separation equipment for specifications and performance requirements
both routine replacement and new construction. are satisfied or exceeded. Amistco separation
In addition to mist eliminators, our products specialists are readily available to assist cus-
include liquid-liquid coalescers and tower pack- tomers with technical design questions.
ings and internals. As Begg Cousland’s exclusive Amistco products are sold worldwide
Western Hemisphere licensee, Amistco brings to through a network of marketing representa-
customers over 25 years of fiber mist eliminator tives. For the location of your nearest represen-
manufacturing and application experience. We tative, contact Amistco or visit our Web site.
also fabricate numerous subassemblies and
turnkey separation packages for primary con-
tractors and end users worldwide.
Amistco began manufacturing knitted wire
mesh mist eliminators in Alvin, Texas, in 1991.
With greatly expanded knitting capabilities and
an ever-widening range of products, Amistco
now occupies a new 40,000-square-foot facility. 23147 Highway 6 • Alvin, Texas 77511
Our success was built upon prompt and Phone 281-331-5956 • Fax 281-585-1780
consistent customer service. From the pro- Amistco@Amistco.com • www.amistco.com
curement of materials to delivery of finished 24-hour Emergency Service: 800-839-6374

Bulletin 106 • January, 2004 • Amistco is a licensee of Begg Cousland candle technology. • MistFix is a registered trademark and Tex-Mesh is a trademark of Amistco Separation
Products, Inc. • Amistco has endeavored to assure that all information in this publication is accurate. However, nothing herein is intended as a guarantee or warranty.

– 16 –
AMISTCO
Product Bulletin – IME

MistFixTM Insertion Mist Eliminators

Solves Carryover Problems

The patented AMISTCO MistFix™ can solve carryover
problems in vessels without a mist eliminator, as well as
in vessels with a less efficient or damaged mist eliminator.

Existing or New Vessels

In existing vessels that do not have a manway, the MistFixTM
Insertion Mist Eliminator is an ideal choice. It is suitable for
any vessel having an 8” or larger gas outlet nozzle at the
top. It also eliminates the need for hazardous entry permits.
Since there is no need to enter the vessel, this drastically
reduces downtime, resulting in quicker turnarounds,
reduced maintenance cost and production gains. MistFixTM
also eliminates the need for modifications to vessels. For
new vessels MistFixTM may eliminate the need for a manway
and reduce vessel cost. It also makes future maintenance
easier and simpler.

Simple and Easy to Maintain

AMISTCO MistFixTM can easily be installed and replaced
from the outside. Existing vessels require no modifications
to accommodate the MistFixTM.

Advantages
• NO Cutting
• NO Welding U.S. Patent #5985004
• NO Manway Access
AMISTCO Separation Products manufactures a full line
• NO Hazardous Entry
of tower internals, mist eliminators and other components
• NO ASME re-certification
critical to effective mass transfer and separation.
• NO Scaffolding For more details regarding these products, visit our website
• Minimal Downtime or consult with an AMISTCO Separations representative.

Mist Eliminators | Liquid/Liquid Coalescers | Trays, Packing & Internals

23147 Hwy. 6 Alvin, Texas 77511 • Ph: (281) 331-5956 • Fax: (281) 585-1780 • www.amistco.com • amistco@amistco.com

24 Hour Emergency Service Available Emergency Phone:1-800-839-6374

11/03
AMISTCO
Product Bulletin – VNM-DP

Double Pocket Vane Mist Eliminators

Twice the Separation Capacity and AMISTCO Separation Products, Inc. manufactures a full line
Higher Efficiency Than Standard Vane of tower internals, mist eliminators and other components
critical to effective mass transfer and separation. For more
Offshore platform separators in the Gulf of Mexico, Lake
details regarding these products, visit our website or consult
Maracaibo (Venezuela) and the Java Sea (Indonesia) have
with an AMISTCO Separations representative.
utilized AMISTCO’s Double Pocket Vanes to increase their
gas production. The vane’s unique geometry channels the
collected liquid away from the gas, minimizing reentrain-
ment. The blade geometry also allows for more efficient 100
DP Vane

mist removal. New vessels can be designed much smaller Vane Type Capacity
90
DPVane
saving cost and weight. Horizontal
80

or Vertical K=1.15 70 Standard

% Efficiency
Vane
Benefits Flow 60
Standard 50
• Increase capacity up to 100% Vane
Horizontal K=0.65 40
• Reduce vessel size and weight 30
Flow
• Increased efficiency Standard 20
Vane 10
• Maintains efficiency at higher pressures Vertical K=0.50
0
Flow 0 4 8 12 16 20
• Debottleneck existing equipment Particle size, microns
Mist Eliminator at atmospheric
Gas conditions with air and water.
Outlet
Gas
Outlet

Gas 4’ Gas 8’
Inlet Inlet

Small vessel using Double Vessel with standard Mesh

Pocket Vane technology. Vane combination.

Mist Eliminators | Liquid/Liquid Coalescers | Trays, Packing & Internals

23147 Hwy. 6 Alvin, Texas 77511 • Ph: (281) 331-5956 • Fax: (281) 585-1780 • www.amistco.com • amistco@amistco.com

24 Hour Emergency Service Available Emergency Phone:1-800-839-6374

11/03
 AMISTCO
Mist Eliminator

Installation Guide
 Table of Contents
New Mist Eliminator Inspection
Removing Existing Mist Eliminator
Hold Down Options
Installation
Maintenance & Cleaning
Troubleshooting
Key Observations Before You Begin
Your AMISTCO Mist Eliminator
Mesh is oversized slightly to
ensure a snug fit between the
vessel wall and the mesh. Grids
are undersized to provide
clearance from the vessel wall.
Over sizing the mesh will also
compensate for a vessel’s out of
roundness. Any gaps between
the vessel wall and the mesh will
diminish efficiency and hamper
mist eliminator performance. A
tight fit ensures optimum mist
eliminator performance.
4
5
6-8
9-13
14
15
Mist eliminators are manufac-
tured from knitted wire, and it is
important to maintain as much
“spring” and uniformity as
possible. Avoid any cutting or
puncturing of the mesh during
installation to assure optimum
performance and service life.
Please Note:
The following information contains
general guidelines. No guarantees
and warranties are expressed or
implied. Disregard of these guide-
lines or a modification to any
product without written consent
from AMISTCO may invalidate any
warranties. If you have questions,
please call 1-800-839-6374.
3
 Step One
Check the Shipment Mist Eliminator
Always make sure you have the right Storage
mist eliminator for the job prior to
doing anything, especially removing
the old mist eliminator. Always
check your shipment to make sure
you have received the correct size
and installation hardware (if
ordered with the job) and for
potential mist eliminator damage.
Upon receipt of an AMISTCO mist
eliminator, inspect and verify the
dimensions. Also check for any
hardware and documentation that
is part of the order. If drawings
are present, make sure that the
mist eliminator corresponds to
the drawing.
4
New Mist Eliminator Inspection
Store in a clean environment. Dust,
sand and other contaminants may
foul the mist eliminator. A ware-
house is recommended for long
term storage.
Ready to Install
Lay out the sections of the mist
eliminator in a clean area close to
the vessel. For dual density pads,
check tags for correct orientation
of flow direction.
By laying out the mist eliminator
pieces you can confirm you have
the right size, all of the pieces, etc.
before you move any further for-
ward. You can also make a better
installation game plan when the
time comes.
Keep in mind the mesh pad will be
manufactured slightly larger than
the diameter of the “to be installed
into” vessel.
Step Two
When replacing a mist eliminator,
it is a good idea to study how the
existing one was installed prior to
any actual removal procedures.
Compare the existing pad to
the pad you have laid out on the
ground. Some installers even like
to orient or turn the new pad into
the exact position as the pad that
is to be removed for reference
purposes later on. This is also an
opportunity to inspect the old pad
for indications of excessive corro-
sion or fouling, which can cause
dislodged sections. Your AMISTCO
engineer can assist you with
recommendations to upgrade the
materials and implement process
improvements. AMISTCO can
provide systems that include dual-
density mesh pads, wash systems,
mesh/vane combinations and
relief doors.
If the existing pad was built in
sections, pull the center section
area first. Remove one section
at a time and remove section by
section to avoid accidentally
dropping anything. Remember
that a properly installed mist
eliminator is going to fit snug
Removing Existing Mist Eliminator
(For new process vessels proceed to page 6.)
so pulling the center section
may require a more aggressive Safety Considerations:
tug. Once the center section is
• Prior to entering any vessel, it is
removed, the other sections
important that confined space
should remove much more easily.
entry requirements have been
After removing all of the mist met, and all federal, state and
pad sections, it is important industry safety regulations have
to carefully inspect all of the been addressed.
support structures. Look for
• Mist eliminators are not designed
cracks, excessive corrosion,
to support a person. Do not step
and damaged support hardware.
directly on a mist eliminator.
Repair all defects that might
Place boards across several
impair the proper installation
sections to distribute weight.
and operation of the new mist
Verify that spans of more than 6’
eliminator. Make certain the
have heavy-duty metal grids or
existing supports are suitable for
intermediate supports.
your new mist eliminator, taking
note as to what hold down hard-
ware you will be employing.
5
 Hold Down Options
Tie Wires
Tie wires are the most common and
simplest way of attaching the mist
eliminator to its supports. The tie
wires are typically .051” in diameter
and are made of the same material
as the mesh. This can be achieved
by looping the tie wire between the
bottom support grid and the annular
ring hole and twisting the ends to
tie it in place. (Do not run the wire
through the mesh, just the support
and grid.) Tie down the four corners
of the grids in each section. Annular
ring hole spacing is typically 4” to 5”
apart with 1/4” diameter holes.
For plastic mesh materials, use
several loops of tie wire. AMISTCO
recommends optional TefzelTM tie
straps as a more secure fastener.
Tie Wires
6
J-Bolts
J-bolts can be used instead of tie
wires and are stronger. The hook
portion of the “J” connects around
the mist eliminator’s bottom grid,
extends through a clamp or holes
in the annular ring and is secured
by a nut and lock nut. Once again,
4 bolts should be used per section.
Another variant is a “welded stud.”
Please Note:
It is important that your J-bolt
connections are secure and can
withstand heat and vibration.
We recommend double nuts
or locknuts.
J-Bolts
Latch Keys
Latch Keys can be used to secure
a mist eliminator when having to
work from the top, and access to the
bottom is not possible. Simply turn
the flag toward the vessel wall and
tighten the double lock nuts.
Flag Top Grid
Wire Mesh
Bottom Grid
Optional Latch Key
Caution:
If your mist eliminator is installed
in a critical or severe service,
AMISTCO recommends a more
secure hold down method. Check
with your AMISTCO sales repre-
sentative about optional relief
doors, heavy duty grids and other
special features.
Hold Down Options
Dual Support Rings
Dual support rings have removable
ring sections on the manway side.
After the last mist eliminator
section is installed, bolt the ring
sections into place. Dual support
rings are more common for topside
installations but are also used in
bottom installations. Dual support
rings also help prevent wall bypass.
Dual Support Rings
Removable Section
of Support Ring
Offset Rings
Offset rings are held away from the
vessel wall by a standoff. Secure
the mist eliminator using tie wire
or J-bolts and clamps.
Tie Wire w/Offset Ring
Pipe Sleeve and
Spacer Bolt
These designs have through-bolt
sleeves that run through the mist
eliminator spacer bolts. Although
more secure for process upset
applications, these designs are not
recommended because they are
difficult to install (matching up the
holes particularly in replacement
applications) and often distort the
mesh and allow gas by-pass.
Instead AMISTCO recommends
either dual support rings or J-bolts.
Through Bolts
Relief Doors
Relief doors can be incorporated
into your mist eliminator design for
fouling service to prevent blowout
in upset conditions.
Gas
Relief Door
Relief door moves up and
down on the guide rods.
7
 Hold Down Options
Hold Down Bars
Hold down bars bolt into position
above the mist eliminator after it
is installed and are an effective
means to keep the mist eliminator
pieces intact.
Hold Down Bar
For mist eliminators installed
in small diameter vessels with a
flanged top, the pad must be made
in two sections to clear hold
down bar clips welded to shell.
1 2
8
Basket Cages Expansion Rings
Basket cages for one-piece mist Expansion rings can be used for
eliminators are held in place by either a support ring or a hold
the vessel top flange. You simply down ring when welding to the
slide the cage on top of the mist shell is a problem.
eliminator and fasten the head
or top flange, when installing one-
piece mist eliminators.
Expansion Ring
Hold Down Basket
Hold down method with
exit above mist eliminator
If installers must exit from manway
above the mist eliminator, install
mist eliminator tie wiring from
below working from the outer
sections toward the center. Install
the last section from the top and
secure to adjacent sections by
placing 3 hold down bars (1/4” x 1”
flat bar) across the last section
Manway Section and
installed and tie wiring or J-bolting Hold Down Bars
to adjacent sections.
Step Three Installation

One Piece Mist Eliminators

Any fastening method except J-bolts
can be used for one piece mist
eliminators. For new vessels make
sure the vessel walls are smooth
and free of weld splatter and other
debris before pushing the mist
eliminator into the vessel. Keep in
mind the mesh diameter should
slightly exceed the vessel diameter
to ensure a snug fit.

9
 Installing Multi-Section Mist Eliminators in Vertical Vessels
Larger AMISTCO Mist Eliminators
are manufactured in manageable
sections to facilitate installation
through the manways of vessels.
Remember to have the new mist
eliminator “set up” outside the
vessel before you begin.
Please Note:
With last sections expect resistance.
Some installers use a thin piece of
sheet metal or cardboard sized to fit
the last section to help slip it into
place. With opposing rough mesh
services, you will need to push or
pull alternating ends of the last sec-
tion of the mesh pad to fit it in. Keep
in mind a compressed fit is neces-
sary for optimum mist eliminator
performance. (See figure, p.12.)
1 2
10
Vessels with Single Support Rings
1. Before installing any sections, mark lines on the support ring that
indicate where each section edge should sit. Align the sections in
accordance to your marks as you install each section.
2. Work from the outside in on each side by placing the end sections
on top of the support ring.
3. Compress the installed sections to fit your measurements and keep
opposing sections parallel.
4. Use a hold down to secure each section after it is properly in place.
5. Move toward the center as you add sections until only one section
remains. Use sheet metal or cardboard to facilitate installation.
6. If you are installing from below, lift the entire last section through
the void space between the opposing pad sections, position it
carefully and then pull it down into place.
7. If you are installing from above, simply push the section into place
after a careful alignment.
Large Pads:
For large pads, total compression can be several inches. It is very difficult
to “work out” all of the compression when installing the last section.
AMISTCO recommends this easy method: Loop tie wire around adjacent
grids as the sections are installed. This loop should be close to the down
rods, where the mesh is fixed to the grids. Twist the tie wire, pulling the
grids towards each other, until the grids of each section are spaced 11/2”
apart. Using this procedure will ease installation of the last sections.
3
Installing Multi-Section Mist Eliminators in Vertical Vessels

Generally with this type of support

design, support rings secure the
mist eliminator sections from
below and above. Wider vessels
may also have a center support
beam or beams. With standard
metal grids AMISTCO does not
recommend greater than a 6 ft. span
between support beams (for plastic
grids a 3 ft. maximum span). Use
greater care when installing plastic
mist eliminators to avoid breakage.
The top ring and support beams
have removable sections for remov-
ing and replacing mist eliminators.
Vessels with Dual Support Rings
1. Mark lines on the support grids that indicate where the mesh
sections should sit. Align the sections in accordance to your marks as
you work from the vessel wall inward, one side of the vessel at a time.
2. Compress the installed sections to fit your measurements and keep
the opposing sections parallel. Use C-Clamps or an equivalent on
the ring to hold the sections in place as you proceed.
3. To install the final section, make a simple installation aid using two
thin pieces of sheet metal or some smooth yet strong material that
extends the length of the section and is taller than the section.
You may even wish to cut handles in the aid. Place the installation
aids on either side of the mesh to reduce the friction of the mesh
surfaces. A compression fit is necessary, so expect resistance as
you push the final section into place. Push the section in and pull
the aids out.

4. Replace the removable section on the support ring and beam(s).

1 2 3 4

5 6 7 8

11
 Installing Multi-Section Mist Eliminators in Horizontal Vessels
Mist eliminators are generally
secured by two support rings. The
ring on the manway side will have
removable sections to allow access
to the mesh pads. Other fastening
methods may be used if there is
only one support ring. In horizontal
vessels we recommend vertical
seams to prevent settling.
Installing Final Section:
1 2 3 in the aid. Place the installation aids on either side of the mesh to
Top View
1 2
12
Horizontal Vessels with a
Vertical Mist Eliminator
1. Mark the support ring and beams indicating where each
compressed section of mesh should sit.
2. Work from the vessel wall toward the center aligning each
compressed section to your support ring and beam marks.
3. To install the final section, make a simple installation aid using two
thin pieces of sheet metal or some smooth yet strong material that
extends the length of the section. You may even wish to cut handles
reduce the friction of the mesh surfaces. A compression fit is
necessary, so expect resistance as you push the final section into
place. Push the section in and pull the aids out.
4. Replace the removable sections on the support ring and beam(s).
3 4 5
 Installing Multi-Section Mist Eliminators in Horizontal Vessels
In this configuration the mist
eliminator is mounted inside a
housing below the gas outlet nozzle.
Common hold down methods
include tie wire, J-Bolts, double
annular rings and hold down
beams. Each mist eliminator
support structure (beam or strut)
will most likely employ some sort
of removable section.
2 work when you complete
3
4
Horizontal Vessels with
Horizontal Mist Eliminators
1. Mark the supports to indicate the position of each section.
2. Start at the ends, making sure each section is properly aligned,
compressed and tied down securely. Move toward the removable
section, adding sections to both sides until the final section remains.
3. To install the final section, make a simple installation aid using two
thin pieces of sheet metal or some smooth yet strong material that
extends the length of the section. Place the installation aids on
either side of the mesh to reduce the friction of the mesh surfaces.
A compression fit is necessary, so expect resistance as you push the
final section into place. Push the section in and pull the aids out.
Final Notes:
Make certain and check your
installation procedures.
1. Check for any gaps between 3. If your mist eliminator is of
sections. A uniform com- a dual density design, make
pression fit throughout the certain all of the sections
mist eliminator is important. are installed with the
correct flow orientation.
2. Check to make sure your
tie-downs are secure and 4. Be sure to remove all tools
even with one another. and installation materials
Make sure the rings and before start-up.
beams adequately support
your mist eliminator.
13
 Maintenance and Cleaning
Routine Maintenance Removing Fouled
Solids in a mist eliminator will
eventually cause plugging, leading
to excessive pressure drop and
reduced performance. A cleaning
regimen is a good idea and as with
any piece of equipment, should be
performed before accumulations or
plugging severely affect mist elimi-
nator performance. AMISTCO can
design integral spray systems to
continuously or intermittently wet
the mist eliminator to minimize
plugging issues.
Spraying with cleaning liquids,
boiling or soaking, or passing
steam will help clean the mist
eliminator. In choosing any of
these options, be sure that they
will not damage the mesh pad.
14
Mist Eliminators
for Cleaning
To achieve thorough cleaning, it is
often helpful to remove the mist
eliminator. Keeping a spare mist
eliminator is ideal in such situations.
Important Note:
When your mist eliminator is
removed, examine the cleaned
mesh carefully for corrosion and
reduced wire diameter. When your
mist eliminator is new, it is a good
practice to measure the wire
diameter using a micrometer.
When you reach a 20% reduction
in wire mass, replacing the mist
eliminator should dramatically
increase your efficiency.
Depending upon the degree of
plugging (for instance coking or
polymerization), it is often more
economical to go ahead and replace
the mist eliminator. Contact your
AMISTCO separations specialist if
you are experiencing continuous
plugging problems, dislodged
sections and short intervals between
maintenance. Alternative design
selections such as dual density
mesh pads, spray systems, mesh/
vane combinations and relief door
options may extend your mainte-
nance intervals. In severe fouling
applications, AMISTCO recommends
you consult with your separations
specialist for more secure hold
down options.
Troubleshooting
Monitoring pressure drop across
the mist eliminator may be the best
option for determining acceptable
operation. It is a good practice to
record initial pressure drop at
start-up under clean conditions
for future observation.
• If pressure drop increases more than an inch of water column
above start-up conditions, some sort of plugging is most likely
taking place. To rectify the situation, clean the mesh pad.
• When pressure drop decreases across the mist eliminator, there are
likely holes or voids in the pad or significantly reduced mesh density.
Corrosion over time will reduce the mesh wire diameter, mesh
density and in turn reduce pressure drop. Gaps in the mesh pad will
cause channeling and a significant reduction in collection efficiency.

In addition to pressure drop,

monitor downstream process con-
ditions, particularly after an upset.
Increased liquid accumulation in
downstream low points or vessels
may indicate bypassing through
the mist eliminator. Decreased
pressure drop may indicate holes
in the mist eliminator.

AMISTCO mist eliminators are man-

ufactured under strict conformance
and quality control guidelines. They
are designed to provide optimum
performance in a variety of process
applications. If you are experiencing
chronic plugging problems or
frequent maintenance, contact your
AMISTCO separations specialist.
Alternative mesh selections may
extend your maintenance intervals.

Note:
For mist eliminator design and
performance information, ask for
AMISTCO’s Mesh and Vane Mist
Eliminator brochure.

15
 Other AMISTCO Products
When it comes to effective mass transfer separations and pollution control,
come to AMISTCO Separation Products. With the full range of separation
products, we offer individual components or turnkey systems built to your
specifications and/or performance requirements.

MESH and VANE MIST ELIMINATORS RANDOM PACKINGS STRUCTURED GRID PACKING
from knitted mesh pads to vane mist eliminators to facilitate mass transfer under a wide for severe fouling applications
and candle filters for submicron mist removal. range of applications.
We also manufacture our patented Mist FixTM
insertion cartridge mist eliminator for applications
where vessel access is prohibitive.

STRUCTURED PACKING LIQUID/LIQUID COALESCERS

AMISTCO provides a choice of sheet metal, woven we manufacture a variety of mesh and plate
wire gauze or knitted wire mesh structured packing. internals as well as turnkey systems for liquids
Candle Mist Eliminator and oil/water separations.

Insertion Mist Eliminator

INLET DISTRIBUTORS
many designs available including diffuser
plates and cyclonic type distributors.
LIQUID DISTRIBUTORS
for effective distribution of liquids over the
packing, AMISTCO offers options to meet
a variety of performance requirements.
TURNKEY POLLUTION
CONTROL PACKAGES
for asphalt, oleum, plasticizers, metal working,
compressor stations, marine bilge and a wide
range of specialty indoor air cleaning and
outdoor removal of visible plumes. We also
manufacture turnkey systems for separating
a wide variety of gas, liquid and solid regimes.

TRAYS GAS INJECTION PACKING SUPPORT

for gas liquid contacting in distillation, supports packing and provides effective
absorption, and stripping applications-valve, gas distribution with low pressure drop.
sieve, bubble cap & special designs.

Call Our 24 Hour Number 1-800-839-6374

23147 Hwy. 6 Alvin, TX 77511 • Ph: 281-331-5956 • Fax: 281-585-1780

e-mail: amistco@amistco.com • www.amistco.com
 AMISTCO

Candle FILTERS

Submicron Mist Eliminators

AMISTCO
AMISTCO is a licensee of Begg Cousland
AMISTCO Separation Products offers superior performing
candle filters and turnkey submicron mist eliminator packaged
solutions for Sulfuric Acid production, other processes involv-
ing acids and a wide range of pollution control applications.
As the Western Hemisphere licensee for Begg Cousland we
manufacture a proven unique candle filter technology to
complement our comprehensive line of mesh pad and vane
type mist eliminators.
The Begg Cousland candle filter was originally developed in
the laboratories of I.C.I.. After 30 years of proof in the field,
these unique candle filter materials and construction have
increased separating efficiency, lowered pressure drop or in
some cases both in numerous separation applications replac-
ing other candle filter technologies.
With the addition of candle filters, AMISTCO provides cus-
tomers with superior new or retrofit separations technologies
to handle everything from submicron mists to large droplets.
Our engineering expertise and fabricating capabilities go one
step further to offer customers packaged pollution control and
product recovery systems assemblies.

Glass Fibre Smallest Fibre Hanging or

TGW 15 Dia. Possible Standing Type

Collection Mechanisms Brownian Diffusion Interception Impaction

Highest Efficiency Invisible Stack Corrosion
Selection Criteria Mist Removal Emission < 20MG/NMS Protection

Design Criteria 100% Removal > 1 Micron 150-250 MM H2O Less Than 0.2 M/SEC
98% Removal < 1 Micron Pressure loss Bed Velocity

Candle Filter Applications Candle Filter Construction

• Sulfuric Acid Mists Each candle filter is composed of millions of fibers.

These fibers are carefully packed in dense form into a
• Phosphoric Acid Mists 2-inch annular space between two concentric cages.
These candles are installed vertically and grouped
• Hydrochloric Acid Mists together in multiples or as a single candle.
• Wet Chlorine Gas (Brine mist removal) Gases travel horizontally
through the filter.
• Dry Chlorine gas (H2SO4 removal) Particles are collected
on the fibers by
• Plasticizer Mist various means,
• Compressed air and refrigerant gas coalesce and drain down
(oil mist removal) through the filter bed.
Depending upon the
• Fertilizer Prill Towers application gas flow
• Ammonium Chloride mists can be directed inside/out
or outside/in the candles.

Candle Filter Separations

Candle filters remove liquid particulates by means of
impaction for particles greater than 3 microns, interception for
particles greater than 1-2 microns and Brownian diffusion for
submicron droplets. As mist laden gas passes through the
filter bed, surrounding gas molecules surround the fine mist
particles causing random side to side (Brownian) movement
while traveling through the mesh of fiber. This Brownian
movement causes the submicron droplets to eventually collide
with a fiber. Low velocities are required for the diffusion
velocities associated with Brownian movement.

Impaction Interception Brownian Diffusion

Particles 3 microns larger Particles 1 to 3 microns 1 micron and less
 — Sulfuric —
Candle Filters for
Sulfuric Acid Applications
AMISTCO Candle Filter Mist Eliminators are used in Sulfuric
Acid processes to prevent corrosion and damage to expen-
sive downstream equipment and to control pollution.
Water, shock cooling and oleum based mists result from the
various sulfuric acid processes. The exact mist eliminator
equipment recommended for a H2SO4 plant depends upon
several factors.
1. Sulfur/SO2 source
2. Single absorption or double absorption
3. Location (drying tower, IPAT, FAT)
4. Equipment requiring protection
5. Type of acid produced
6. Pressure Loss
7. Local pollution control requirements
Sulfuric
Acid Processes
Sulfur Burning Plant (dark and bright sulfur)-
Sulfur is burned and the SO2 gas is converted to SO3 through
catalytic contact. SO3 gasses are absorbed by recirculating
H2SO4 solution in an absorbing tower.
Metallurgical Plant-
Ore (pyrite) is roasted. The exit gas is purified, dried
and fed into a catalytic converter. SO3 is absorbed on a
H2SO4 solution.
— Nitrogen —
Mist Eliminators for the
Nitrogen Industry
The nitrogen industry has numerous processes where
AMISTCO Candle Filters and Knitted Mesh Mist Eliminators
provide separation solutions. They prevent corrosion,
protect downstream equipment, prevent pollution and
recover valuable product.
Nitrogen Processes
Ammonia Nitrate-Ammonia Nitrate and nitric acid are
fed to the neutralizer. The highly exothermic reaction
produces NH4NO3 and steam. The neutralizer can be under
pressure, vacuum or atmospheric. Ammonia Nitrate solution
is fed to an evaporator and concentrated solution is prilled.
Urea Fertilizer- There are once through, partial recycle
and total recycle processes. In brief, liquid NH3 is mixed
with CO2 gas under high pressure with recycled recarba-
mate. Conversion to urea is 60%. Pressure is reduced with
each pass through the first and second decomposers to drive
off all of the NH3 and CO2. The urea solution is further
concentrated in a vacuum evaporator and pumped through
spray heads in the prilling tower.
Nitric Acid- NH3 is oxidized with air on PR/RM catalyst to
form NO at high temperature. N2 and unreacted O2 are fed
to atmosphere with NO and NO2.

Spent Acid plants-

By-products of the organic monomer industry (caprolactam,
acrylonitrile) is burned. Exit SO2 is purified, dried, converted Nitrogen Candle
and absorbed in H2SO4.
Filter Applications
Wet Process (decomposer process)-
The hydrogen sulphite is burned. Exit gas is fed into the • Evaporator towers (prevent product loss)
converter without being dried.
• Prilling Towers (pollution prevention)
• Catalyst (minimize loss of precious metals)
Sulfuric Acid
Candle Filter Applications • Post Absorbing Tower (product recovery and
protection of downstream equipment)
• Drying towers
• Neutralizer and evaporator (prevent water
• Interpass Absorbing Towers and air pollution)
• Final Absorbing Towers (FAT)
• CrossFlow Stripper
• Product Stripper
• Acid Concentrator
• Oleum Tank Vents
• SO2 Tail Gas Scrubbers (NH3)
 — Chlorine —
Candle Filters for
Chlorine Plants
Whether your plant has diaphragm or mercury cells,
or chlorine, stream producing wet chlorine and
after the drying tower, dry chlorine, an NaOH
stream, or hydrogen stream, AMISTCO has separa-
tion technology to optimize your plant operations.
Contact your AMISTCO separations specialist for
your particular application requirements.
Chlorine Candle
Filter Applications
• Pre-drying tower with chlorine to prevent
plugging and reduce sulfuric acid consumption
• Post-drying tower before the liquid seal
compressor in dry chlorine applications to collect
sulfuric acid mists which impact product purity
or freeze on tube affecting heat exchanger
operation
• Pre NaOH Streams before jet system to
collect NaOH mists which contaminate water
• Hydrogen Streams installed after the cell
to collect NaOH and Hg mists which impact
purity, corrode the compressor and decrease
the charcoal system to remove mercury vapor
(mercury vapor cell)
AMISTCO
Separation Products, Inc.
Worldwide
23147 Hwy. 6 Alvin, TX 77511
Ph: (281) 331-5956 Fax: (281) 585-1780
e-mail: amistco@amistco.com
www.amistco.com
AMISTCO is a licensee of Begg Cousland candle technology
— Blue Haze —
Candle Filter and
Turnkey Systems for
Blue Haze Applications
For pollution and odor control, candle filters are
particularly effective in removing plasticizer,
low/medium volatile solvents, oil and other fine
mists or fumes which result from a variety of
processes in numerous industries. AMISTCO
manufactures replacement filters as well as turnkey
systems, which may involve a prefilter, cooler, fan,
pumping and instrumentation etc. Separation
systems can be built to customer specification or
performance requirement. For more details contact
one of our separations specialists.
Blue Haze Candle
Filter Applications
• Plasticizer Solvent Fume Removal
Through an absorptive recovery system,
the exhaust from ovens curing vinyl coated
flooring or wallpaper can be separated to
eliminate invisible plumes and recover valuable
process liquids.
• Lube Oil Haze From Rotating
Equipment in compressors, turbines and
other large rotating equipment mists or blue
haze generated from recirculating lube oils
creating blue haze.
• Metal Working Operations
Fumes resulting from metalworking lubricants
used in milling, drilling and other metal shaping
operations which create a blue smoke or haze.
• Plastics Processing
For injection molding, film making, and
extrusion of plastics AMISTCO Separation
Products manufactures systems to remove
submicron particles causing blue haze.
• Other Applications Include
Asphalt Production Storage and Loading,
Fabric treating and coating.
 OCTOBER 2004

HPIMPACT SPECIALREPORT TECHNOLOGY

Cure liquid carryover from

compressor suction drums

www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com
Reprinted from: ROTATING EQUIPMENT/RELIABILITY
October 2004 issue, pgs 77–84
Used with permission.
www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com

Cure liquid carryover from

compressor suction drums
Here’s how to apply mist eliminators for higher
throughput and efficiency
BERNHARD KALIS, Amistco Separation Products, Inc., Alvin, Texas

W
hen the gas approaching a compressor is wet, traces
of aqueous or organic liquid may escape the inlet
knockout drum—often intermittently—and silently
damage the compressor. Telltale signs include pitting corrosion,
salt deposits and diluted lubricants.
Instead of trying to repair symptoms, look for the root cause,
which usually involves the mist eliminator in the knockout drum
(Figs. 1, 2 and 3). Problems may include improper mist elimina-
tor specifications, overloading, uneven velocity profiles, incorrect
installation, high liquid viscosity, waxy deposits, liquid slugs,
foaming and several other possibilities.
The trouble may even be that no mist eliminator was provided
in the first place—or perhaps no knockout drum at all. But wher-
ever free liquid drops out in a suction drum, it generates some
����������������������������������������
������

������� �������

��������
�����

FIG. 2 Typical multistage compressor installation.

�������������
����
���� ���
FIG. 1 Typical compressor suction drums. ����

��������
����

FIG. 3 Typical mist eliminators: vane unit (left) and mesh pad FIG. 4 An intermittent spray system can remove deposits.
(right).

OCTOBER 2004 HYDROCARBON PROCESSING

 ROTATING EQUIPMENT/RELIABILITY

����������� ����� �������������

������������ ������������ ������������� ������������ ����������� ���������� ������������� �����������
������������ �������������� �������� ����������� �������������� ��������� ���������� ������� �������������
������������� ������������ �������� ���������� ������������� ��� ������������ �������������� �����

����������������� ������������������������� ����������������������������

����������������� ��������������������� �����������������������������

FIG. 5 Mesh pad performance degrades as liquid and gas loads increase (vertical cross-sections).

����
���

�����
������� FIG. 7 A vane unit with “double pockets” reduces re-entrainment
������ of captured liquid.

A thorough study of the relevant considerations will help

avoid common suction drum pitfalls—and some not-so-com-
mon ones—that could severely damage your compressors due to
liquid carryover.

FIG. 6 An inlet cyclone device can be used to break up foam.
mist that can damage the compressor unless it is removed by a
mist eliminator. Even in cases where the feed gas never has any
free liquid, often fine mist droplets coalesce into large drops on
the walls of the inlet pipe or inside the compressor. For all but
the driest gas, a compressor should be protected by an inlet mist
eliminator. New high-capacity, high-efficiency mist eliminator
technologies pay off the first time you avoid a shutdown.
For optimum separation performance, compressor knockout
drums must be properly designed and sized with appropriate
mist eliminator elements in correct configurations, taking into
account many factors. In multistage compressor installations,
proper knockout drum configuration is seldom the same for
all stages. To maintain good performance, design of each drum
should be reviewed whenever there are significant changes in
the process. These include appreciable increases or decreases
in throughput, shifts in composition of the gas or mist drop-
lets, upstream equipment alterations or revisions of operating
and control procedures. In addition, mist eliminator elements
should be visually inspected occasionally (especially after major
process upsets) to make sure they are intact and free of excessive
solid deposits.
HYDROCARBON PROCESSING OCTOBER 2004
Designing for droplet size distribution. There are many
different types of mist eliminator elements, and the variety has
greatly increased through the years. Not understanding the liquid
source in the upstream process can cause you to select the wrong
type of mist eliminator or to keep a given type when process
changes make it inappropriate.
Knowing the process allows you to design for the most efficient
mist collection. Most important, selection should not be made
until the droplet size distribution is defined in terms of the pro-
portion of droplets of each size. Assuming an incorrect droplet size
distribution can mean that you have designed for a less-efficient
mist eliminator, and liquid carryover may occur.
See Tables 1 and 2 for some points of reference and rough
guidelines in this respect. Be aware that capture efficiency of a
given mist eliminator element does not depend only on droplet
size. It is also influenced by gas velocity through the element and
mist load in terms of liquid flowrate per unit of cross-sectional
area. Then there are variables such as density and viscosity that
depend on temperature, pressure, and liquid and gas composition.
All else being equal, efficiency generally goes up with higher veloc-
ity (until re-entrainment occurs), larger droplets, higher liquid
density, lower gas density, smaller liquid load, finer mesh strands,
closer mesh packing (greater density), closer vane spacing and
greater mist eliminator thickness.
ROTATING EQUIPMENT/RELIABILITY

� �
�
�

�
� ����
����
�

���� � �
�

���������������� ������������������ ������������������������

������������� ����������������������������� ����������������������

� �

����
� �
� �
� ����

�������������������� ����������������� ��������������������������

����������������� ��������������������������� �������������������
�������������� ����������������������������� �����������������������

FIG. 8 Generally accepted spacing guidelines to maintain even velocity profile and avoid entrainment in compressor suction drums with axial flow.

TABLE 1. Diameter range of mist and other droplets TABLE 2. Droplet sizes (water in air) typically
of various types captured with 99.9% efficiency by mist eliminator
elements of various types
Particle type Size range, microns
Large organic molecules Up to 0.004 Element type Size range, microns
Smoke 0.0045 to 1.0 Fiber candles or panels 0.1 and larger
Condensation fog 0.1 to 30 Mesh with coknit yarn 2.0 and larger
Atmospheric clouds and fog 4 to 50 0.006-in. knitted mesh 5.0 and larger
Generated by gas atomization nozzle 1 to 500 0.011-in. knitted mesh 10 and larger
Atmospheric “mist” 50 to 100 Double-pocket vanes 10 and larger
Atmospheric “drizzle” 10 to 400 Conventional vane arrays 15 and larger
Generated by boiling liquid 20 to 1,000
Generated by two-phase flow in pipes 10 to 2,000 caked solids—consider installing a spray system as shown in Fig.
Atmospheric raindrops 400 to 4,000 4 to clean the vanes online whenever necessary. Adding a high-
efficiency mesh-type mist eliminator downstream of the vane unit
(also shown in Fig. 4) can help make up for the inherently lower
Mesh pad fouling. In some cases, liquid carryover to the droplet capture efficiency of the vanes.
compressor is caused by fouling of a mesh-type mist eliminator
due to the resulting restriction of gas flow and extra liquid holdup Liquid slugs and high liquid loading. In some applica-
in the pad. Vane-type mist eliminators are a better choice for foul- tions, liquid slugs occasionally come in with the gas feed. These
ing applications. Due to the relatively wide-open spaces between surges can temporarily overwhelm the slug-catching capability of
blades, vanes are much less likely to plug. the inlet knockout drum and flood a mesh-type mist eliminator,
If the fouling deposit can be readily dissolved by a suitable causing liquid carryover (Fig. 5).
solvent—as might be the case with viscous oils or waxes or certain When liquid slugs or generally high liquid loading are expected,
OCTOBER 2004 HYDROCARBON PROCESSING
 ROTATING EQUIPMENT/RELIABILITY

����������
�����������������������
�������
���������
����
����
���������������

��������������
��������������
���������������
��������������� ����������������
�����������������

FIG. 9 An uneven velocity profile can cause mist eliminator

performance degradation.
FIG. 10 Typical retrofit of a compressor suction drum more than
doubles its throughput capacity over that of the original
horizontal mesh pad.

��������
�������
�����
���

��� ���
FIG. 11 Double expansion rings can be used to retrofit knockout ���������� ��������
drum internals without welding. ����
��������
��������������
it is recommended to use a vane-type mist eliminator upstream of
the mesh pad as shown before in Fig. 4. Vanes can generally handle
up to 10 times more liquid load than mesh pads.

Breaking inlet foam. If liquid in the gas approaching the com-

pressor knockout drum is subject to foaming, it can readily flood
a mesh pad and, in severe cases, even a vane unit. The end result is
massive liquid carryover from the vessel and damage to the compres-
sor. A vortex-tube cyclone device (Fig. 6) can break up foam in the
incoming feed.

Dealing with high liquid viscosity. There are applications

in which high viscosity impedes liquid drainage so severely that
a mesh pad would flood at prohibitively low velocities and liquid
loading. In these applications, a vane unit is the better choice. For
high efficiencies, consider double-pocket vanes (Fig. 7), which
handle high-viscosity liquids with an efficiency of 99.9% for 8-
micron and larger droplets.
Mist eliminator spacing in the vessel. An often over-
looked but very important aspect of suction drum design that
can lead to liquid carryover is proper spacing in the vessel. Fig.
8 illustrates guidelines for sufficient distance between the mist
eliminator and the gas inlet and outlet.
HYDROCARBON PROCESSING OCTOBER 2004
FIG. 12 Typical results of poor flow distribution from the inlet to a
compressor knockout drum.
If spacing is too close, most of the gas will pass through only part
of the mist eliminator. This causes localized high velocities with liquid
re-entrainment and low velocities with poor efficiency (Fig. 9).
In an existing conventional drum where the mist eliminator
is too close to the gas outlet, there may not be enough room
to increase the spacing. The solution then might be a properly
designed flow distribution device located downstream of the mist
eliminator to create a more uniform velocity profile.
ROTATING EQUIPMENT/RELIABILITY
���������������������������
��������
FIG. 13 An inlet diffuser can alleviate poor inlet flow distribution.
Overcoming pressure-drop constraints. Processes that
operate under vacuum or very low pressure immediately upstream of
the compressor can be very tricky for suction drum design, because
pressure drop across the mist eliminator must be kept low. However,
generally speaking, the lower the pressure-drop characteristics of a
mist eliminator type, the lower its efficiency in removing mist. Liquid
carryover from the suction drum may be a result of selecting a low-
efficiency mist eliminator for the sake of low pressure drop.
When high efficiency is not required, a vane unit or low-density
mesh pad may be recommended to achieve low pressure drop. To gain
higher efficiency without much cost in terms of pressure drop, a possi-
ble solution is a dual-density mesh pad. In such a pad, the downstream
layer has higher density than the upstream layer. The result is higher
separation efficiency with only slight increase in pressure drop.
Throughput exceeding design capacity. In designing
compressor knockout drums, like other gas-liquid separator vessels,
conventional mist eliminators are generally selected and sized with
a margin of about 10% above the design throughput. Flowrates
beyond the upper operating limit may allow liquid carryover due
to high velocities that cause re-entrainment from the mist elimina-
tor element.
More specifically, mist eliminators are typically sized for cross-
sectional area to achieve a design velocity according to the Soud-
ers-Brown vapor load factor, K :
VG
K=
ρL − ρG
ρG
where VG = Gas velocity (volume flow divided by cross-sec-
tion)
L = Liquid density
G = Gas density
Conventional horizontal mesh pads are traditionally sized for a
OCTOBER 2004 HYDROCARBON PROCESSING
������������ �������
����� �����
�����������
FIG. 14 Mesh pads can be protected from dislocation and damage
due to sudden pressure changes.
K factor of 0.35 ft/sec, which corresponds to a velocity of 10 ft/sec
in the reference case of water and air at room conditions.
When a knockout drum’s throughput has grown to exceed its
capacity, generally two options are:
1. Replace the vessel with a larger one to allow a mist elimina-
tor with greater cross-sectional area, thus reducing the velocity.
2. Replace the mist eliminator in the existing vessel with one
using the latest technology to maintain efficiency with higher
throughput.
Option 2 is generally much more cost-effective and often
does not require prohibitive down time. In a traditional vertical
cylindrical vessel, the typical horizontal orientation is no longer
the only solution. Compressor knockout drums can be retrofit-
ted for capacity increases using any of the following alternative
techniques:
• Vertical mist eliminator elements with horizontal flow (K =
0.42 for mesh pads, K = 0.65 for vane units)
• Properly engineered baffling for even velocity profiles with
close spacing
• Horizontal mesh pads with drainage layers or multiple zones
that can increase capacity by 10% to 12% (K = 0.40)
• Double-pocket vanes that can double capacity of a conven-
tional vane unit (K = 0.8 to 1.1)
• Mesh-vane combinations that can increase efficiency and
capacity by 10% to 25% (K = 0.5 to 0.65)
• Mesh agglomerator followed by double-pocket vanes for
highest efficiency (99.9% of 2-micron droplets) and greatest
capacity increase
• Two- or four-bank configurations that allow mist eliminator
elements of greater cross-sectional areas.
Fig. 10 illustrates several of these possibilities: horizontal flow
through vertical mist eliminator elements, use of mesh pads to
agglomerate fine mist into large droplets that are removed by vane
units and a double-bank configuration.
Retrofit without recertifying for ASME code. Retrofit-
ting an existing vessel for any of the foregoing suggested remedies has
one drawback: it often requires welding new support rings, beams,
ROTATING EQUIPMENT/RELIABILITY
clips and other structures to the vessel wall. Most vessels are ASME
code certified. Thus, after welding to the vessel wall, the welded area
must be heat-treated and the vessel must be recertified.
To avoid this cumbersome procedure, consider using expan-
sion rings that are made in sections for passing through a man-
way. Inside the vessel, the rings are bolted together and wedged
against the vessel wall without welding. A double-ring design
(Fig. 11) helps ensure that the fixture does not move during
operation. Once the rings are installed— either in vertical or
horizontal vessels — beams can be bolted to the rings, and com-
plete housings can be built up inside the vessel.
Using inlet diffusers to relieve carryover. Inlet design
is one of the most commonly neglected aspects of a compressor
knockout drum design. It is often the cause of poor performance.
In the example shown in Fig. 12, a poorly selected half-pipe inlet
deflector projecting into the vessel produces the following results
when the collected liquid is at a high level:
• Gas jets to the back wall of the vessel. Without enough
space to diffuse the jet, gas utilizes only part of the mist elim-
inator. Due to an uneven velocity profile, liquid carryover
occurs (Fig. 9).
• The gas jet agitates the accumulated liquid below, creating
a higher mist load.
• Turbulence spoils normal gravity settling of larger liquid
droplets below the mist eliminator. The resulting additional liquid
load increases likelihood of flooding the mist eliminator.
A properly selected inlet diffuser added to an existing knock-
out drum (Fig. 13) provides more effective liquid separation
coming in with the gas and distributes the gas evenly through-
out the vessel diameter.
Damage by sudden pressure changes. Carefully review
the transient pressures that occur at the knockout drum and mist
eliminator during all phases of operations. The suction drum could
see a sudden surge of flow in either direction due to compressor
recycle or opening an antisurge valve. Thus, a mesh-type mist
eliminator can be subjected to forces not seen in normal operation.
This can dislodge the pad sections, leading to compressor damage
from liquid carryover or even from pad fragments.
Pads and vanes can also be damaged by freezing liquids in
cold climates. In natural gas production and pipelining, hydrate
formation is known to destroy both types of mist eliminators.
To cope with any of these scenarios, as shown in Fig. 14,
any or all of the following remedies can be applied to mist
eliminator elements:
• Reinforce with heavy-duty material
• Fasten with bolts instead of traditional tie wires, or pro-
vide an upper support ring in addition to the lower one
• Provide a pressure relief door in the case of mesh.
Case histories.
Ethylene plant debottleneck. A large ethylene producer
needed to debottleneck its six-stage compressor train to increase
throughout. This project needed to be accomplished with mini-
mal cost and down time.
Using conventional mist eliminators—horizontal mesh pads
or vane units—the knockout drum before each compressor stage
would have to be enlarged. For instance, the 8-ft drum at the first-
stage inlet would be replaced by a 14-ft vessel.
OCTOBER 2004 HYDROCARBON PROCESSING
Article copyright © 2004 by Gulf Publishing Company. All rights reserved. Printed in U.S. A.
A thorough review was made of the process conditions and
internal geometry of the existing knockout drums. Each drum
was then customized with vertical double-pocket vanes and
mesh agglomerators arranged as in Fig. 10 using one, two or
four banks as required. To ensure proper gas distribution, inlet
diffusers were added (Fig. 13), and flow distribution plates were
mounted on the downstream side of each vane unit. The result
was 35% increased capacity while achieving an efficiency of
99.9% of 1-micron and larger mist droplets.
Fertilizer plant capacity boost and amine loss cut. A four-
train fertilizer plant needed more ammonia processing capacity
in one of the trains to increase production capacity. The bottle-
neck was the overhead knockout drum in two of four carbon
dioxide absorber towers in that train. Those vessels also served
as suction drums for the compressors that followed. In addition,
it was desired to reduce excessive loss of valuable amine in the
form of mist escaping the knockout drums.
The absorber process conditions and available room in the
knockout drums were carefully studied. Although space in one
of the drums was very tight, the problem was solved by retrofit-
ting both of them with a double-bank system (Fig. 10). In each
bank, a mesh agglomerator was followed by a double-pocket
vane unit. The result was a 30% capacity increase. In addition,
the amine loss rate fell to 0.05 gallon per million standard cubic
ft, which corresponds to savings on the order of $75,000 per
year. Another benefit was eliminating a cause of pitting corro-
sion in the compressors.
Gas production and condensate recovery increase. A large
oil and gas company wanted to revamp several dozen of their
30-year-old two-phase field separators (sizes two to five ft OD).
The purpose was to increase capacity and improve condensate
recovery. As in the preceding case, the separators were also suc-
tion drums for compressors.
The separators were brought from the field to a local fabrica-
tion shop. There, the old internals were removed, the inlet and
outlet nozzles were enlarged, and the vessels were retrofitted
with double-pocket vane units. The separators were ASME-code
recertified, painted and reinstalled in the field with new instru-
mentation. This rejuvenation saved the company thousands of
dollars per unit as compared to purchasing new separators. Gas
capacity increased by up to 50%, and condensate recovery went
up by many thousands of barrels per year.
These cases are typical of many applications where up-
to-date separation technology made a big difference. Similar
results can be achieved for a wide variety of compressor knock-
out drums in refineries, gas plants, oil and gas exploration and
production, and petrochemical plants. HP
Bernhard Kalis earned a BS degree in chemical engineering
at The Hague University of Technology in The Netherlands. Since
1998, he has been technical director at Amistco Separation Prod-
ucts, Inc., Alvin, Texas, where he is involved in developing new
separation technology, promoting applications of Amistco’s technology and trouble-
shooting difficult separation applications for clients domestically and internationally.
He also negotiates exclusive technology agreements with other companies and is
responsible for expanding Amistco’s worldwide network of representatives. Mr. Kalis
lectures throughout the processing industries on liquid-liquid coalescing and gas-
liquid separation and has published numerous articles on separation technology. In
the past 22 years, he has held engineering management positions at Exxon in South
America, Kuwait Oil in Kuwait, Shell Chemical in The Netherlands and Setpoint, Inc.,
Litwin Engineering and Koch-Otto York in the US.
 Other AMISTCO Products
When it comes to effective mass transfer, separations PROFILE WIRE INDUSTRIAL SCREENS
for a wide range chemical processes including
and pollution control, come to AMISTCO Separation catalyst support beds, misc. filtration and much more.

Products. With a full range of separation products,

we offer individual components or turnkey systems built

to your specifications and/or performance requirements.

MESH and VANE MIST ELIMINATORS RANDOM PACKINGS STRUCTURED GRID PACKING
from knitted mesh pads to vane mist eliminators to facilitate mass transfer under a wide for severe fouling applications
and candle filters for submicron mist removal. range of applications.
We also manufacture our patented Mist FixTM
insertion mist eliminator for applications where
vessel access is prohibitive.

STRUCTURED PACKING LIQUID/LIQUID COALESCERS

AMISTCO provides a choice of three types of we manufacture a variety of mesh and plate
structured packing. internals as well as turnkey systems for liquids
Candle Mist Eliminator and oil/water separations.

Insertion Mist Eliminator

LIQUID REDISTRIBUTORS
for effective collection and redistribution of
liquids. AMISTCO offers variable options to
meet a variety of performance requirements.
INLET DISTRIBUTORS
many designs available including diffuser
plates and cyclonic type distributors.
TURNKEY POLLUTION
CONTROL PACKAGES
for asphalt, oleum, plasticizers, metal working,
compressor stations, marine bilge and a wide
range of specialty indoor air cleaning and
outdoor removal of visible plumes. We also
manufacture turnkey systems for separating
a wide variety of gas, liquid and solid regimes.

TRAYS GAS INJECTION PACKING SUPPORT

for gas/liquid contacting in distillation, supports packing and provides effective
absorption, and stripping applications-valve, gas distribution with low pressure drop.
sieve, bubble cap & special designs

23147 Hwy. 6 Alvin, TX 77511 • Ph: 281-331-5956 • Fax: 281-585-1780

e-mail: amistco@amistco.com
HYDROCARBON • www.amistco.com
PROCESSING OCTOBER 2004
Complete MISTFIX™ article as seen in OG&PE
 Copyright 2004 by Amistco Separation
Products, Inc., Alvin, Texas. Amistco strictly
prohibits publication, distribution, or dissemina-
tion of this paper or any part of it, or conversion
of this digital version into any other format,
without prior written permission of Amistco.

We need a mist eliminator

in that knockout drum!
Can we add one without
overhauling the vessel?
Bernhard Kalis, Technical Director

I
T’S A SURPRISINGLY COMMON problem in refineries,
petrochemical plants, gas plants, and similar facilities. A
vertical knockout drum, such as the one shown in Figure 1,
removes free liquid from a certain gas stream. In many such
vessels, a mist eliminator is provided to remove fine droplets of
liquid suspended in the gas. The conventional arrangement is
a mesh pad located immediately below the gas exit as in Figure
2. However, at the time the plant was built, that precaution was
not considered necessary in this particular knockout drum.
Now mist is carrying over and causing trouble downstream.
The conventional solution is simply to add a mist elimina-
tor as shown in the diagram. That would be feasible if the drum

Figure 2. Knockout drum with conventional mesh-type

mist eliminator, manway, and body flange

had a manway for worker entrance or a full body flange at the

top, both shown in Figure 2. However, this particular vessel was
not provided with either of those features. Thus, adding a con-
ventional mist eliminator would require cutting the vessel
open, at considerable cost in terms of dollars and down time.

Figure 1. Typical vertical knockout drum

–2–
 A potential solution: the MistFix™
mist eliminator
However, there is another solution that works in many
cases such as this. It is a patented type of mist eliminator man-
ufactured by Amistco Separation Products, called MistFix™
(U. S. patent number 5,985,004). As seen in Figure 3, a MistFix
unit is a hollow cylinder of the same sort of knitted mesh that
conventional mesh pads are made of. It is designed to be
inserted in a vertical flanged gas exit nozzle, being secured by a
base ring that fits between the flanges. Rigidity is provided by a
cylindrical frame around which the mesh is wrapped (not
shown in the diagram), and the bottom end is closed by a plate.
MistFix units are widely applicable for exit nozzles with inside
diameter no less than about 6 inches, provided that the length
necessary to achieve an efficient gas velocity range is no greater
than about 54 inches. By use of special high-efficiency, high-
density mesh styles, the radial thickness of the mesh can be as
low as two inches—sometimes even less.
Figure 3. MistFix™ insertion mist eliminator
A MistFix mist eliminator functions in the same manner as
a mesh pad mounted vertically, such as in the knockout drum
shown in Figure 4. Gas flows horizontally through the mesh,
and captured liquid drains downward. In a MistFix unit as in
Figure 3, mist-free gas emerges from the mesh into the central
cavity and flows upward into the gas exit pipe.
The MistFix unit is sized to fit closely inside the exit nozzle.
Its length depends on the case at hand. The longer the mesh
cylinder, the greater the cross-sectional area of the mesh for gas
flow, and the lower the gas velocity for a given volumetric
throughput. The length of the mesh cylinder is selected so that
the velocity through the mesh is within an optimum range for
the application.
MistFix units can be advantageous for retrofitting even
large vessels that have manways. This method avoids the usual
down time and expense for installing a conventional mist elim-
inator. There is no need to purge and ventilate the vessel, build
a scaffold inside, weld supports for the mist eliminator, and
recertify the vessel to ASME code.
–3–
Figure 4. Gas flows through the mesh of a MistFix unit
horizontally, as it does through a vertical flat mesh
pad in some knockout drums such as this one.
Vessels with special linings for corrosion resistance but no
mist eliminators are especially appropriate candidates for
retrofit with MistFix units. If increased throughput causes mist
and the need for a mist eliminator, it is difficult to attach a sup-
port ring without penetrating the lining. Even slight damage to
the lining can lead to corrosion and possible failure of the ves-
sel. A MistFix unit may be the only viable alternative.
Even for new construction, MistFix mist eliminators are
preferred over conventional alternatives in some cases. One
instance is applications requiring frequent replacement
because of fouling or corrosion. Another is those in which
entering the vessel for inspection and replacement would be
burdensome because down time cannot be tolerated, or the
process material is exceptionally hazardous, etc.
Despite the advances that have been made in the technol-
ogy, there is still as much art as science in the design and spec-
ification of mesh and vane mist eliminators. For all but the
most experienced users, proper application depends on con-
sultation with the manufacturer’s engineers. This is especially
so in the case of MistFix mist eliminators.
This paper provides some background for those discus-
sions with Amistco engineers. Included are some general
guidelines for applying MistFix mist eliminators, particularly in
retrofits. The information is not intended to enable users to
design and specify these devices without assistance.
Applying general mist eliminator
design to a MistFix unit
Although MistFix mist eliminators are cylindrical, they are
designed and specified for an application by the same methods
as conventional flat mesh and vane units. The overall general
procedure is as follows:
1. Estimate the size distribution of mist droplets.
2. Specify the required separation efficiency in terms of the
percent of mist to be removed.
3. Considering droplet size, mist load, liquid characteristics,
and the characteristics of various mesh types in terms of
droplet capture efficiency, corrosion resistance, mist load
capacity, and wettability by the mist liquid, tentatively
 choose a mesh style and material and the radial thickness gas velocity begins to cause unacceptably poor droplet capture
of the cylindrical mesh pad to achieve the required sepa- efficiency.
ration at optimum gas velocity. The Souders-Brown equation allows experimental data
4. Choose a design value for the vapor load factor K that is taken with air and water on a certain mist eliminator to be gen-
appropriate for the foregoing assumptions, and calculate eralized to the same type of device with gases and liquids hav-
the optimum design velocity through the mesh using the ing generally similar characteristics but different densities.
Souders-Brown equation (explained next). Once a design value of the vapor load factor K is established for
5. Based on the optimum velocity, the expected volumetric a mist eliminator type, the design velocity can be calculated for
throughput, and the assumed diameter of the MistFix various combinations of gases and liquids.
unit, calculate the necessary cross-sectional area for gas The appropriate design value of K for a MistFix unit
flow through the mesh and thus the length of the unit depends on a number of factors that are beyond the scope of
(also explained below). this paper. As a first approximation in most cases, however, one
can use the figure that is commonly recommended for vertical
6. Estimate separation efficiency and pressure drop within flat mesh pads: 0.42 feet per second. This K factor corresponds
the required turndown range. to a velocity of 12 feet per second in the reference case of water
7. If the estimated results are not acceptable, repeat steps 3 and air at room conditions.
through 6 with a different mesh style, material, or thick- It is assumed that the mist load is less than 0.1% volumet-
ness, or with a different diameter of the MistFix unit if ric, which is equivalent to 0.5 gpm per square foot at 10 feet per
that option is available. second. Greater mist loads require special considerations.
8. Check for conformance with internal gas flow guidelines It is also assumed that the pressure in the vessel is between
and for height available for the MistFix unit inside the atmospheric and about 85 psig. The K value should be de-rated
vessel, and revise as necessary. by 0.1 (24%) for each 100 psi increase above atmospheric pres-
For explanations of those methods as applied to a broad sure.
range of devices, see Amistco’s literature such as “Amistco Mesh
& Vane Mist Eliminators,” Bulletin 106. Sizing a MistFix unit
Regarding Step 3 above, a very wide variety of mesh types
Applying the design velocity to size a MistFix unit (Step 5
are available for conventional pads and MistFix units. Standard
above) is a bit more tricky than with a conventional flat mesh
wire diameters are 0.011 inch and 0.006 inch. Standard alloys
pad. In a flat pad, the velocity is the same throughout the pad—
are 304 and 316 SS, but others such as Inconel and Hastelloy are
at least ideally, to a first approximation. That velocity is simply
often supplied for certain corrosive services. Plastic monofila-
the volumetric flow rate divided by the cross-sectional area of
ments include polypropylene and Teflon. Yarns co-knit with
the pad, which is the same throughout the thickness of the pad.
metal or plastic mesh for capturing very fine mist droplets are
However, in the cylindrical mesh pad of a MistFix unit, the
commonly provided in Dacron, glass fiber, polypropylene, and
cross-sectional area through which the gas enters the mesh at
Teflon. It may be that the optimum mesh selection is a combi-
the outer surface is larger than the area of the inner surface.
nation of different types. For instance, an outer layer of fine,
dense mesh or co-knit yarn may serve to coalesce very small
mist droplets, forming larger entrained droplets that are in turn
captured by an inner layer of coarser bare mesh.
Efficiency and pressure-drop estimations (Step 6 above)
are beyond the scope of this paper, typically requiring consulta-
tion by Amistco engineers. The full spectrum of efficiencies can
be provided by a MistFix unit, from a general-purpose efficien-
cy of 99% of 10-micron and larger droplets to a high efficiency
of 99.9% of 2-micron and larger droplets. Typically the pressure
drop across a MistFix device is 2 to 4 inches of water column.
Step 4 above is conducted for a MistFix unit in the same
way as for a conventional flat mist eliminator. These devices are
sized for cross-sectional area to achieve a design velocity
according to the Souders-Brown vapor load factor K:

The design velocity is the value of the superficial or average

gas velocity through the mesh (volumetric flow rate divided by
cross-sectional area) that is optimal for the particular liquid and
gas involved. It is intended to lie about 10% below the upper
end of the operating velocity range. That upper end is the point
at which increasing gas velocity begins to cause excessive re-
entrainment of captured liquid from the mesh. The lower end
of the operating range, in turn, is the point at which decreasing Figure 5. A special consideration in selecting a MistFix unit:
higher velocity at the inner surface than at the outer

–4–
 Figure 6. Simplified sizing example
(See Figure 5.) Thus, the velocity increases as the gas flows radi-
ally inward.
Depending on the judgment of the designer, the design
velocity may be established at the inner or outer surface or any-
where in between. The most conservative and cautious
approach is to set the inner-surface velocity at the design value,
to make sure re-entrainment is avoided. Velocities farther out
toward the outer surface will be progressively lower.
Figure 6 depicts the application of Steps 4 and 5 above to a
typical simplified design case. A knockout drum with design
throughput of 3,600 actual cubic feet per minute has an 18-inch
gas exit nozzle. A MistFix unit is to be inserted in the nozzle,
and the proper length is to be determined. The pressure is less
than 85 psig. The flowing materials are hydrocarbon vapor and
liquid with densities of 0.31 and 45.2 pounds per cubic foot.
Using a design K factor of 0.42 as discussed before, the
design velocity turns out to be 4.91 feet per second. The cross-
sectional area required to achieve that velocity is 12.2 square
feet. For this MistFix unit, the length to achieve that design
velocity at the outer surface is 31.1 inches. By comparison, if a
conventional round horizontal mesh pad were used, that
design cross-section would correspond to a diameter of 47.3
inches.
Flow guidelines in turn, encompass two considerations:
maintaining an even velocity profile throughout the length of
the unit, and avoiding strong turbulence and fluid shear around
and below the MistFix unit. Consultation by Amistco engineers
is especially important in this area.
To prevent uneven flow through the mesh, the bottom end
of the device should be well clear of the inlet stream—more
than about half a vessel radius above the top of the inlet nozzle.
In many cases, undesirable turbulence can be diminished by a
properly selected inlet diffuser. If a manway is not available for
installing such a device, it may be possible to use a diffuser
designed for insertion through the inlet nozzle as shown in
Figure 7. To control flow inequality along the length of the
MistFix unit, variation in thickness or density of the mesh may
be incorporated.

Height and flow considerations

in the vessel
Special considerations for MistFix units are also involved in
Step 8 above, regarding available vessel height and internal flow
guidelines. The length of a MistFix device is of course con-
strained by the vertical space inside the vessel as well as the typ-
ical 54-inch maximum. The length limit is to allow good
drainage of captured liquid, without excessive flooding in the
lower end of the MistFix unit. Four and a half feet is a general-
ly appropriate maximum for typical wire mesh, low-viscosity
liquid, and a typical light mist load of about 0.1% volumetric.
Figure 7. Use of an inlet diffuser to help maintain even flow
The length limit must be shortened for high viscosity, heavy
through a MistFix unit when it extends near the
mist loads, and high-density mesh.
inlet nozzle of the knockout drum

–5–
 In-line chamber for small these devices have been operating very successfully for several
years. The plant keeps spare MistFix units in inventory and can
gas exit nozzles easily change a fouled MistFix in a few hours.
If the existing gas exit nozzle on the knockout drum is too Refinery capacity increase and
small for inserting a MistFix unit, an in-line chamber can some-
times be provided for the device directly above the knockout
downtime reduction
drum as shown in Figure 8. This expedient comes into play A medium-size Midwestern refinery needed to increase the
when the exit nozzle diameter is smaller than the minimum 6 capacity of three knockout drums by 10%. At the same time,
inches, or when the MistFix unit must be bigger than the nozzle management was looking for ways to reduce the periodic down
to provide enough flow area within the available vessel height. time of the vessels for replacing the horizontal mesh pads. The
drums had an outside diameter of 60 inches and a height of 108
inches. For each vessel, the gas flow rate was 8,000 ACFM. The
gas was fuel gas with a density of 0.15 lb/ft3. The mist consist-
ed of oil with a density of 50 lb/ft3, the liquid load being less
than 0.1%. The exit nozzles were 16 inches in diameter.
One of the knockout drums was chosen for retrofit with a
MistFix unit on a trial basis. Amistco’s design was for a diame-
ter of 16 inches, a length of 48 inches, Monel for the mesh, and
316 SS for the frame. The device has been operating successful-
ly for 16 months. Because of this positive experience, the refin-
ery is considering MistFix units for the other two separators as
well as additional applications in the plant.

Specialty chemicals plant with lined vessels

A specialty chemicals plant had increased its capacity over
the years and was operating without mist eliminator pads in
any of its vessels. Now frequent liquid carryover in several
places required corrective action. Unfortunately, most of the
vessels involved were lined for corrosion resistance. Adding a
mesh pad would require welding a support ring to the vessel
wall, entailing considerable expense to restore the lining.
Amistco designed a MistFix unit 36 inches long for one
Figure 8. Mounting a Mist-Fix unit in a chamber
vapor-liquid separator with 42-inch outside diameter and 108-
above the knockout drum
inch height. The diameter of the gas outlet nozzle was 10 inch-
es. The gas flow rate was 3,000 ACFM, and the gas density was
In the special circumstances where this configuration is 0.007 lb/ft3. To resist corrosion, the mesh was made of Ni-200
feasible, it provides all the benefits that a MistFix mist elimina- and Teflon. Using a MistFix unit in the gas outlet avoided dam-
tor brings when inserted in a knockout drum. Conventional flat aging the vessel lining. As a result of success in that retrofit, the
mesh pads and vane units can also be mounted in this fashion. plant has ordered additional MistFix units for other lined vessels.
However, in such cases, the chamber must be considerably larg-
er than for an equivalent MistFix unit. Each application of this
type is unique and requires consultation of Amistco engineers. THE AUTHOR
BERNHARD KALIS earned a BS degree in
Case Histories chemical engineering at The Hague
University of Technology in the
Chemical fiber plant reduces cleaning cycle Netherlands. Since 1998, he has been tech-
A Midwestern fiber production plant had to shut down two nical director at Amistco Separation
identical vertical gas-liquid separators four times a year to Products, Inc., in Alvin, Texas. There, he is
replace the horizontal mesh pads due to fouling with fibers. involved in developing new separation
Each shutdown lasted two days because of the time required for
technology, promoting applications of
ventilating the vessel and building a scaffold inside to reach the
mesh pad. The plant was operating near maximum capacity, so Amistco’s technology, and trouble-shooting difficult separation applica-
any down time directly affected the company’s bottom line. tions for clients domestically and internationally. He also negotiates
The separators were 36 inches in diameter and 84 inches exclusive technology agreements with other companies and is responsible
high. The incoming stream consisted of an off gas with a densi- for expanding Amistco’s worldwide network of representatives. Mr. Kalis
ty of 0.25 lb/ft3 and a throughput of 3,600 actual cubic feet per lectures throughout the processing industries on liquid-liquid coalescing
minute. The feed contained less than 0.1% water with droplets
and gas-liquid separation and has published numerous articles on sepa-
greater than 10 microns in size, and also traces of fibers. The
ration technology. In the past 22 years, he has held engineering manage-
gas outlet nozzle had an inside diameter of 12 inches.
Based on the process conditions, Amistco designed a 12- ment positions at Exxon in South America; Kuwait Oil in Kuwait; Shell
inch MistFix unit with a length of 30 inches for each separator, Chemical in the Netherlands; and Setpoint, Inc., Litwin Engineering, and
using 316 SS mesh. As of this writing in the summer of 2004, Koch-Otto York in the USA.

Bulletin 108 • August, 2004 • MistFix is a trademark of Amistco Separation Products, Inc. • Amistco has endeavored to assure that all information in this publication is accurate. However, nothing herein is intended as a guarantee or warranty.

–6–
 Compressor Suction Drums:
I think I’ve got liquid carryover.
What can I do about it?
Bernhard Kalis, Technical Director
Figure 1. Typical compressor suction drums
I
T HAPPENS in petrochemical plants, refineries, and any-
where else that the gas approaching a compressor is wet.
Traces of aqueous or organic liquid escape the inlet knock-
out drum—often intermittently—and silently damage the com-
pressor. Telltale signs include pitting corrosion, salt deposits,
and diluted lubricants.
Instead of trying to repair symptoms, look for the root
cause, which usually involves the mist eliminator in the knock-
out drum (Figures 1 and 2). Problems may include improper
mist eliminator specifications, overloading, uneven velocity
profiles, incorrect installation, high liquid viscosity, waxy
deposits, liquid slugs, foaming, and several other possibilities.
The trouble may even be that no mist eliminator was pro-
vided in the first place—or perhaps no knockout drum at all.
But wherever free liquid drops out in a suction drum, it gener-
ates some mist that can damage the compressor unless it is
removed by a mist eliminator. Even in cases where the feed gas
never has any free liquid, there are often fine mist droplets that
coalesce into large drops on the walls of the inlet pipe or inside
the compressor. For all but the driest gas, a compressor should
be protected by an inlet mist eliminator. New high-capacity,
high-efficiency mist eliminator technologies pay off the first
time you avoid a shutdown.
For optimum separation performance, compressor knock-
out drums must be properly designed and sized with appropri-
–1–
Figure 2. Typical multistage compressor installation
ate mist eliminator elements in correct configurations, taking
into account many factors. In multistage compressor installa-
tions, the proper knockout drum design is seldom the same for
all stages. To maintain good performance, the design of each
drum should be reviewed whenever there are significant
changes in the process, such as increases or decreases in
throughput, shifts in composition of the gas or mist droplets,
alterations of upstream equipment, or revisions of operating
and control procedures. In addition, mist eliminator elements
should be visually inspected occasionally (especially after
major process upsets) to make sure they are intact and free of
excessive solid deposits.
A thorough understanding of the relevant considerations
will help you avoid common suction-drum pitfalls—and some
not-so-common ones—that could severely damage your com-
pressors due to liquid carryover. For detailed explanations of
mist eliminator selection, sizing, and vessel design for a wide
range of applications, see Amistco’s literature such as “Amistco
Mesh & Vane Mist Eliminators,” Bulletin 106. This paper pro-
vides information that applies specifically to compressor inlet
knockout drums.
 Designing for droplet size distribution with higher velocity, finer mesh strands, closer packing of mesh
(greater density), closer spacing of vanes, and greater thickness
There are many different types of mist eliminator elements, of the mist eliminator element.
and the variety has greatly increased through the years. Not
understanding the liquid source in the upstream process can Mesh pad fouling
cause you to select the wrong type of mist eliminator, or to keep
a given type when process changes make it inappropriate. In some cases, liquid carryover to the compressor is caused
Understanding the process allows you to design for the by fouling of a mesh-type mist eliminator, on account of the
most efficient mist collection. Most important, selection should resulting restriction of gas flow and extra holdup of liquid in the
not be made until the droplet size distribution is defined, in pad. Vane-type mist eliminators are a better choice for fouling
terms of the proportion of droplets of each size. Assuming an applications. Due to the relatively wide open spaces between
incorrect droplet size distribution can mean that you have blades, vanes are much less likely to plug. If the fouling deposit
designed for a less efficient mist eliminator, and liquid carryover can be readily dissolved by a suitable solvent, as might be the
may occur. case with viscous oils or waxes or certain caked solids, consider
installing a spray system as shown in Figure 3 to clean the vanes
on-line whenever necessary. Adding a high-efficiency mesh
Table 1. Diameter range of mist and other droplets mist eliminator downstream of the vane unit (also shown in
Particle Type Size range (microns) Figure 3) can help make up for the inherently lower droplet cap-
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------- ture efficiency of the vanes.
Large organic molecules Up to 0.004 µm
Smoke 0.0045 to 1.0 µm
Condensation fog 0.1 to 30 µm
Atmospheric clouds and fog 4 to 50 µm
Generated by gas atomization nozzle 1 to 500 µm
Atmospheric “mist” 50 to 100 µm
Atmospheric “drizzle” 10 to 400 µm
Generated by boiling liquid 20 to 1,000 µm Typical mist eliminators for reference:
Generated by 2-phase flow in pipes 10 to 2,000 µm vane unit (above)
Atmospheric raindrops 400 to 4,000 µm larger mesh pad (below)

Table 2. Droplet sizes (water in air) typically captured with

99.9% efficiency by mist eliminator elements of various types
Element type Size range (microns)
--------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------
Fiber candles or panels 0.1 and larger
Mesh with co-knit yarn 2.0 µm and larger
0.006-inch knitted mesh 5.0 µm and larger
0.011-inch knitted mesh 10 µm and larger
Amistco double-pocket vane 10 µm and larger
Conventional vane arrays 15 µm and larger

Figure 3. Intermittent spray system to remove deposits

See Tables 1 and 2 for some points of reference and rough
guidelines in this respect. Be aware that the capture efficiency of
a given mist eliminator element does not depend only on Liquid slugs and high liquid loading
droplet size. It is also influenced by gas velocity through the ele-
ment and mist load in terms of liquid flow rate per unit of cross- In some applications, liquid slugs occasionally come in with
sectional area. Then there are variables such as density and vis- the gas feed. These surges can temporarily overwhelm the slug-
cosity that depend on temperature, pressure, and liquid and gas catching capability of the inlet knockout drum and flood a mesh-
composition. All else being equal, efficiency generally goes up type mist eliminator, causing liquid carryover. (See Figure 4.)

Figure 4. Envisioning mesh pad performance degradation as liquid and gas loads increase (vertical cross-sections)

–2–

Figure 5. Cyclone device to break inlet foam
When liquid slugs or generally high liquid loading are
expected, it is recommended to use a vane-type mist eliminator
upstream of the mesh pad as shown before in Figure 3. Vanes can
generally handle up to 10 times more liquid load than mesh pads.
Figure 6. Generally accepted spacing guidelines to maintain even velocity profile
and avoid entrainment in compressor suction drums with axial flow
–3–
Breaking inlet foam
If liquid in the gas approaching the compressor knockout
drum is subject to foaming, it can readily flood a mesh pad and
in severe cases even a vane unit. The end result is massive liq-
uid carryover from the vessel and damage to the compressor. A
vortex-tube cyclone device (Figure 5) can break up foam in the
incoming feed.
Dealing with high liquid viscosity
There are applications in which high viscosity impedes liq-
uid drainage so severely that a mesh pad would flood at prohib-
itively low velocities and liquid loading. In these applications, a
vane unit is the better choice. For high efficiencies, consider
Amistco’s double-pocket vanes, which handle high-viscosity
liquids with an efficiency of 99.9% for 8-micron and larger
droplets.
Mist eliminator spacing in the vessel
An often overlooked but very important aspect of suction
drum design that can lead to liquid carryover is proper spacing
in the vessel. Figure 6 illustrates guidelines for sufficient dis-
tance between the mist eliminator and the gas inlet and outlet.
If spacing is too close, the gas will pass though only part of
the mist eliminator. This causes localized high velocities with
liquid re-entrainment and low velocities with poor efficiency as
shown in Figure 7.
In an existing conventional drum where the mist elimina-
tor is too close to the gas outlet, there may not be enough room
to lower the mist eliminator. The solution then might be a
properly designed flow distribution device located above the
mist eliminator to create a more uniform velocity profile.
Figure 7. Example of mist eliminator performance
degradation due to uneven velocity profile
Overcoming pressure-drop constraints
Processes that operate under vacuum or very low pressure
immediately upstream of the compressor can be very tricky for
suction drum design, because the pressure drop across the mist
eliminator must be kept low. However, generally speaking, the
lower the pressure-drop characteristics of a mist eliminator
type, the lower its efficiency in removing mist. Liquid carryover
from the suction drum may be a result of selecting a low-effi-
ciency mist eliminator for the sake of low pressure drop.
When high efficiency is not required, a vane unit or low-
density mesh pad (Amistco TM-1105) may be recommended to
achieve low pressure drop. To gain higher efficiency without
much cost in terms of pressure drop, a possible solution is a
dual-density mesh pad. In such a pad, the downstream layer
has higher density than the upstream layer. The result is higher
separation efficiency with only slight increase in pressure drop.
When a knockout drum’s throughput has grown to exceed
its capacity, there are generally two options:
1. Replace the vessel with a larger one to allow a mist elimi-
nator with greater cross-sectional area, thus reducing the
velocity.
2. Replace the mist eliminator in the existing vessel with
one using the latest technology to maintain efficiency
with higher throughput.
Option 2 is generally much more cost-effective and often
does not require prohibitive down time. In a traditional vertical
cylindrical vessel, the traditional horizontal orientation is no
longer the only solution. Compressor knockout drums can be
retrofitted for capacity increases using any of the following
techniques:
1. Vertical mist eliminator elements with horizontal flow (K
= 0.42 for mesh pads, K = 0.65 for vane units)
2. Properly engineered baffling for even velocity profiles
with close spacing
3. Horizontal mesh pads with drainage layers or multiple
zones that can increase capacity by 10 to 12% (K = 0.40)
4. Amistco Double-Pocket Vanes that can double the capac-
ity of a conventional vane unit (K = 0.8 to 1.1)
5. Mesh-vane combinations that can increase efficiency
and capacity by 10% to 25% (K = 0.5 to 0.65)
6. Mesh agglomerator followed by Double-Pocket Vanes for
highest efficiency (99.9% of 2-micron droplets) and great-
est capacity increase
7. Two-bank or four-bank configurations that allow mist
eliminator elements of greater cross-sectional areas
Figure 8 illustrates several of these possibilities: horizontal
flow through vertical mist eliminator elements, use of mesh
pads to agglomerate fine mist into large droplets that are
removed by vane units, and a double-bank configuration.
Amistco’s design specialists can help apply such advanced
means of optimizing the efficiency and capacity of existing
knockout drums to create optimal solutions for particular
applications.
For highest efficiency:
Amistco Double-Pocket
Vane unit

Throughput exceeding design capacity

In designing compressor knockout drums, like other gas-
liquid separator vessels, conventional mist eliminators are gen-
erally selected and sized with a margin of about 10% above the
design throughput. Flow rates beyond the upper operating
limit may allow liquid carryover due to high velocities that
cause re-entrainment from the mist eliminator element.
More specifically, mist eliminators are typically sized for
cross-sectional area to achieve a design velocity according to
the Souders-Brown vapor load factor K:
K = VG / g(UL – UG)/UG
VG = Gas velocity (volume flow divided by cross-section)
UL = Liquid density
UG = Gas density
Conventional horizontal mesh pads are traditionally sized
Figure 8. Typical retrofit of a compressor suction drum that
for a K factor of 0.35 feet per second, which corresponds to a
more than doubles its capacity over that of the original
velocity of 10 feet per second in the reference case of water and
horizontal mesh pad
air at room conditions.

–4–
Retrofit without recertifying for ASME code
Retrofitting an existing vessel for any of the foregoing sug-
gested remedies has one drawback: it often requires welding
new support rings, beams, clips and other structures to the ves-
sel wall. Most vessels are ASME code certified. Thus, after weld-
ing to the vessel wall, the welded area must be heat-treated, and
the vessel must be recertified. It is generally desirable to avoid
this cumbersome procedure. Amistco offers expansion rings
that are made in sections that can be passed through a manway.
(See Figure 9.)
The rings are then bolted together and wedged against the
vessel wall without welding. The unique double expansion
design ensures that the installed ring does not move during
operation. Once the rings are installed—either in vertical or
horizontal vessels—beams can be bolted to the rings and com-
plete housings can be built up inside the vessel.

Figure 10. Typical results of poor flow distribution from the

inlet to a compressor knockout drum

surge valve. Thus, a mesh-type mist eliminator can be

subjected to forces not seen in normal operation. This can dis-
Figure 9. Amistco expansion rings for retrofitting
lodge the pad sections, leading to compressor damage from liq-
knockout drum internals without welding
uid carryover or even from fragments of the pad.

Using inlet diffusers to relieve carryover

Inlet design is one of the most commonly neglected
aspects of a compressor knockout drum design, thus often the
cause of poor performance. In the example shown in Figure 10;
a half-pipe inlet deflector projecting into the vessel reduces the
gas flow area of that position, with the following results:
1. Gas jets to the back wall of the vessel.
2. Without enough space to diffuse the jet, gas utilizes only
part of the mist eliminator. Due to uneven velocity pro-
file, liquid carryover occurs as in Figure 7.
3. The gas jet agitates the accumulated liquid below, gener-
ating droplets.
4. Turbulence spoils normal gravity settling of larger liquid
droplets below the mist eliminator. Additional liquid
load increases the likelihood of flooding the mist elimina-
tor.
A properly selected inlet diffuser added to an existing
knockout drum (Figure 11) provides more effective separation
of liquid coming in with the gas and distributes the gas evenly
throughout the vessel diameter before the gas moves upwards.

Damage by sudden pressure changes

Carefully review the transient pressures that occur at the
knockout drum and mist eliminator during all phases of opera-
Figure 11. Use of an inlet diffuser to alleviate
tions. The suction drum could see a sudden surge of flow in
poor distribution of inlet flow
either direction due to compressor recycle or opening an anti-

–5–
 Pads and vanes can also be damaged by freezing liquids in Fertilizer plant capacity boost & amine loss cut
cold climates. In natural gas production and pipelining,
A 4-train fertilizer plant needed more ammonia gas pro-
hydrate formation is known to destroy mesh pads and vanes.
cessing capacity in one of the trains to increase production
To cope with any of these scenarios, as shown in Figure 12,
capacity. The bottleneck was the overhead knockout drum in
any or all of the following remedies can be applied to mist elim-
two of four carbon dioxide absorber towers in that train. Those
inator elements:
vessels also served as suction drums for the compressors that
1. Reinforce with heavy-duty material. followed. In addition, it was desired to reduce excessive loss of
2. Fasten with bolts instead of traditional tie wires, or pro- valuable amine in the form of mist escaping the knockout
vide an upper support ring in addition to the lower one. drums.
4. Provide a pressure relief door in the case of mesh. Amistco reviewed the absorber process conditions and the
available space in the knockout drums. Although the space in
one of the drums was very tight, we were able to solve this prob-
lem by retrofitting both drums with a double-bank system as in
Figure 8. In each bank, a mesh agglomerator is followed by an
Amistco Double-Pocket Vane unit. The result was a 30% capac-
ity increase. In addition, the rate of amine loss fell to 0.05 gal-
lon per million standard cubic feet, which corresponds to sav-
ings on the order of $75,000 per year. Another benefit was elim-
ination of a cause of pitting corrosion in the compressors.

Gas production & condensate recovery increase

A large oil and gas company wanted to revamp several
dozen of their 30-year-old two-phase field separators (sizes 2 to
5 feet OD). The purpose was to increase capacity and improve
recovery of condensate. As in the preceding case, the separa-
Dual support Through bolts tors were also suction drums for compressors.
rings Joining with a local fabrication shop, Amistco brought the
separators from the field, removed the old internals, enlarged
the inlet and outlet nozzles, and retrofitted the vessels with
Amistco Double-Pocket Vane units. The separators were ASME-
code recertified, painted, and reinstalled in the field with new
instrumentation. This rejuvenation saved the company thou-
Relief door sands of dollars per unit as compared to purchasing new sepa-
rators. Gas capacity increased by up to 50%, and condensate
recovery went up by many thousands of barrels per year.

Figure 12. Protecting mesh pads from pressure damage

T
HESE CASES are typical of many applications where
Amistco’s separation technology made a big difference.
Similar results can be achieved for a wide variety of com-
Compressor knockout drum cases pressor knockout drums in refineries, gas plants, oil and gas
exploration and production, and petrochemical plants.
For information and consultation, call the author,
Ethylene plant debottleneck Technical Director Bernhard Kalis, or any other Amistco separa-
A large ethylene producer needed to debottleneck its six- tion specialist, at the address below.
stage compressor train to increase throughout. This project
needed to be accomplished with minimal cost and down time.
Using conventional mist eliminators—mesh pads or hori-
zontal-flow vanes—the knockout drum before each compressor
stage would have to be enlarged. For instance, the drum at the
inlet to the first stage, eight feet in diameter, would be replaced
by a 14-foot vessel.
Amistco thoroughly reviewed the process conditions and
internal geometry of each knockout drum. We then customized
each existing drum with double-pocket vanes and mesh
agglomerators arranged as in Figure 8, using one, two, or four
banks as required. To ensure proper gas distribution, we added 23147 Highway 6 • Alvin, Texas 77511
inlet diffusers as in Figure 11 and flow distribution plates on the Phone 281-331-5956 • Fax 281-585-1780
downstream side of the vane units. The result was 35%
increased capacity while achieving an efficiency of 99.9% of 1- Amistco@Amistco.com • www.amistco.com
micron and larger mist droplets. 24-hour Emergency Service: 800-839-6374

Bulletin 107 • May, 2004 • Copyright 2004 by Amistco Separation Products, Inc. • Amistco has endeavored to assure that all information in this publication is accurate. However, nothing herein is intended as a guarantee or warranty.

–6–
AMISTCO
Product Bulletin – TEG

Are Solvent Dollars Slipping Through Your Mist Eliminator?

Then AMISTCO’s Technology

is your solution
If you have any of the processes below and use a solvent
like DEA, MEA, MDEA or a specialty solvent, chances are
that you might be losing 50-200K$/yr. worth of solvents
with your gas product from the gas treater. AMISTCO’s
technology has designed a high efficiency mist eliminator
specifically for this process. It allows you to recover 95% or
more of your solvent losses. The results are measured as
reduced solvent make up.

Refining : Desulfurization, Gas Treating,

Hydrogenation, Dehydration

Exploration: Dehydration, Glycol Treating

Fertilizer PLT: CO2 Removal

Gas Processes: Dehydration, Sweetening

15000

12000
Tell Us About Your Process
9000
AMISTCO high efficiency TEG Saver Plus mist eliminators
are designed specifically to meet the particulars of your
6000
process requirements. Experienced separations engineers
are available at any time to assist you in the sizing and 3000
selection of your high efficiency TEG Saver Plus mist
0
elimiator. Remember, when you need it right, and you
need it right now, call AMISTCO.

Mist Eliminators | Liquid/Liquid Coalescers | Trays, Packing & Internals

23147 Hwy. 6 Alvin, Texas 77511 • Ph: (281) 331-5956 • Fax: (281) 585-1780 • www.amistco.com • amistco@amistco.com

24 Hour Emergency Service Available Emergency Phone:1-800-839-6374

06/05