Performance Comparison Between the KARR Column and Pulsed Column

The KARRŪ Column and Pulsed Column have been used commercially for many years to provide high efficiency liquid-liquid extraction performance. Whereas the KARRŪ Column uses a reciprocating plate stack to create the disperse phase droplets and sufficient hold-up for the dispersed phase, the Pulsed Column uses stationary internals while imparting agitation via pulsation of the liquids within the column. This paper covers test work to compare the performance of these column types using the universally accepted toluene-acetone-water system. The standard KARRŪ Column plate stack is used in each column to provide a direct comparison between reciprocating internals and pulsating liquids. Efficiency vs capacity data is generated for each column using the Stichlmair approach. Also a comparison of the relative energy requirement is presented.