HD Packing Preset Schema
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
{
"version": 14,
"schema_note": "Version 14 adds greggn's real-world 2 in VM column validation case using 46 in of 1/4 in Raschig rings, 1200 W run power, 0.5 L/hr takeoff, and observed 95% ABV. This is retained as an unverified community field report pending temperature-correction follow-up and should not alone recalibrate Raschig ring HETP. Version 13 retunes preferred power-density bands to match the calculator's actual W/in² cross-sectional-area output scale, preventing normal hobby-scale operating conditions from being treated as extreme overload. Version 12 added structured-packing HETP variation context from Orlando et al. 2009, reinforcing that HETP can vary within a column due to liquid/vapor loading and that different correlations can produce different predictions. Version 11 renamed the former marbles preset to generic 10 mm spheres, preserving marbles as a legacy key, and added NIST/NBS ball-packing literature context. These fields are advisory unless explicitly used by the calculator code. Existing packings without correction fields use legacy model defaults.",
"model_scope_note": "This dataset is intended for hobby-scale packed-column estimation. HETP should be treated as condition-dependent rather than as a fixed property of the packing. Published HETP methods are empirical and depend strongly on liquid/vapor distribution, loading, packing geometry, surface area, liquid holdup, pressure drop, and operating conditions.",
"general_design_guidelines": {
"random_packing_max_size_to_column_diameter_ratio": 0.125,
"recommended_loading_region_note": "Packed columns are generally expected to give best mass-transfer performance when operated in the loading region, commonly described as roughly 40% to 80% of flooding. This calculator uses power density only as a hobby-scale operating proxy and does not directly calculate flooding percent.",
"distribution_note": "Poor liquid distribution, wall flow, channeling, over-compressed packing, under-wetting, and poor reflux return distribution can all make actual HETP worse than the estimate.",
"literature_basis_note": "Packed-column HETP correlations are empirical and not directly transferable across all packing types, column sizes, fluids, and operating regimes.",
"ethanol_water_rectification_note": "Published ethanol-water rectification studies show that HETP and HTU vary with vapor velocity, liquid loading, reflux regime, and packing geometry. Surface area is important, but measured efficiency remains operating-condition dependent.",
"hetp_variation_note": "Experimental structured-packing studies show that HETP can vary within different sections of the same column because liquid and vapor loading are not uniform throughout the column. Low liquid-flow regions may give less reliable or poorer HETP predictions, so this calculator should be interpreted as producing an effective average HETP estimate rather than a uniform column-wide physical constant.",
"ball_packing_note": "For spherical or ball packing, experimental NIST/NBS data indicate that separation efficiency is driven primarily by exposed surface area and ball diameter rather than material composition. Smaller spheres provide more exposed surface area and can improve separation efficiency, but increased surface area also tends to increase liquid holdup.",
"copper_material_note": "Copper spheres should be modeled geometrically as spheres for HETP purposes. Copper may still be selected for vapor-path contact because copper can help react with or bind volatile sulfur compounds, but that chemical benefit is separate from geometric HETP behavior.",
"power_density_scale_note": "Preferred power-density bands are expressed in W/in² of column cross-sectional area, matching the calculator output. These are provisional hobby-scale operating bands, not industrial flooding correlations."
},
"empirical_cases": [
{
"case_id": "community_case_marbles_2in_ccvm_001",
"packing_key": "spheres_10mm",
"legacy_packing_key": "marbles",
"status": "unverified_user_report",
"report_type": "calibration_candidate",
"column_type": "CCVM",
"column_diameter_in": 2,
"packed_height_in": 51,
"packing_description": "1/2 in marbles used as spherical packing",
"boiler_charge_abv_percent": 30,
"run_power_w": 1200,
"predicted_output_abv_percent": 89.1,
"observed_output_abv_percent_low": 93,
"observed_output_abv_percent_high": 96,
"measurement_note": "User reports two different alcoholometer readings.",
"crosscheck_note": "Haggy cross-check using the legacy packed column calculator suggested roughly 10 plates for this setup, corresponding to an estimated HETP of about 5 in to 6 in for 1/2 in spherical packing.",
"candidate_hetp_range_in": [
5,
6
],
"packing_to_column_diameter_ratio_note": "1/2 in spheres in a 2 in column give an approximate packing-size-to-column-diameter ratio of 0.25, which exceeds the general 1/8 random-packing guideline. Despite that, the reported case suggests useful separation was achieved under this specific CCVM configuration.",
"interpretation_note": "Observed result substantially exceeds current prediction; current 10 mm sphere assumptions may be too conservative for at least some well-run narrow CCVM configurations. Treat as a calibration candidate, not a general guarantee.",
"confidence": "medium"
},
{
"case_id": "community_case_raschig_025in_2in_vm_001",
"packing_key": "raschig_rings_6mm_ceramic",
"status": "unverified_user_report_temperature_correction_pending",
"report_type": "field_validation_case",
"contributor": "greggn",
"column_type": "VM",
"column_diameter_in": 2,
"packed_height_in": 46,
"packing_description": "1/4 in Raschig rings",
"packing_nominal_size_in": 0.25,
"packing_nominal_size_mm_approx": 6.35,
"boiler_charge_volume_gal": 7,
"boiler_charge_abv_percent": 10.4,
"run_power_w": 1200,
"takeoff_rate_l_per_hr": 0.5,
"observed_output_abv_percent": 95,
"measurement_note": "Sample measurement using proof and Tralle hydrometer. Temperature-correction status has been requested from contributor and is pending.",
"calculated_power_density_w_per_in2": 382,
"calculated_power_density_note": "For a 2 in diameter column, 1200 W corresponds to approximately 382 W/in² of column cross-sectional area.",
"estimated_reflux_context_note": "At 1200 W and 0.5 L/hr takeoff, implied reflux ratio is likely high for a VM column, supporting near-azeotropic output if the column is well packed, well insulated, and operated with stable equilibrium.",
"candidate_effective_hetp_range_in": [
6,
8.5
],
"candidate_hetp_note": "A rough Fenske-style sanity check using 10.4% boiler ABV and 95% product ABV over 46 in packed height suggests an effective HETP on the order of roughly 6 in to 8.5 in depending on assumed average relative volatility. This is only a validation estimate, not a direct recalibration.",
"interpretation_note": "This field report supports the plausibility of a 46 in packed 2 in VM column using 1/4 in Raschig rings reaching approximately 95% ABV when operated slowly at high reflux. Retain as validation data pending temperature-correction follow-up. Do not use alone to retune Raschig ring packing characteristics.",
"confidence": "medium_low"
},
{
"case_id": "supplier_case_dixon_10x10mm_001",
"packing_key": "dixon_rings_10x10mm_stainless",
"status": "historical_vendor_claim_not_model_authoritative",
"report_type": "vendor_claim_reference",
"packing_description": "10x10 mm stainless Dixon rings, reported 0.15 mm wire",
"supplier_surface_area_m2_per_m3": 650,
"bulk_density_note": "Vendor-style report: approximately 1 kg occupies about 5 liters.",
"vendor_claimed_hetp_range_in": [
1.6,
2.4
],
"use_for_model": false,
"interpretation_note": "The vendor-claimed HETP range is retained only as historical reference. It is not treated as model-authoritative because Dixon ring performance depends strongly on wetting, loading, column geometry, and operating regime.",
"confidence": "low"
}
],
"research_requests": [
{
"request_id": "community_request_pall_rings_001",
"type": "packing_comparison",
"priority": "completed_initial_placeholder_data",
"requested_packings": [
"stainless_pall_rings_10mm",
"stainless_pall_rings_16mm"
],
"request_note": "Initial placeholder presets added for 10 mm and 16 mm stainless Pall rings using general packed-column design guidance. Values remain calibration candidates pending better vendor or community performance data.",
"status": "initial_presets_added_pending_calibration"
}
],
"references": [
{
"reference_id": "abdelraouf_2022_dixon_rings",
"type": "phd_thesis",
"title": "Coating and hydrodynamics of random column packing Dixon rings",
"author": "Mohamed Abdelraouf",
"institution": "Lancaster University",
"year": 2022,
"note": "Used as literature context supporting condition-dependent treatment of Dixon-ring wetting, hydrodynamics, and mass-transfer behavior."
},
{
"reference_id": "mendes_2011_hetp_review",
"type": "book_chapter",
"title": "HETP Evaluation of Structured and Randomic Packing Distillation Column",
"author": "Marisa Fernandes Mendes",
"publisher": "IntechOpen",
"year": 2011,
"doi": "10.5772/19671",
"note": "Used for general packed-column design guidance: empirical HETP methods, importance of distribution, loading-region operation, and random-packing size relative to column diameter."
},
{
"reference_id": "klm_2011_packing_hydraulics",
"type": "engineering_guideline",
"title": "Distillation Column Packing Hydraulics Selection, Sizing and Troubleshooting",
"author": "Karl Kolmetz",
"publisher": "KLM Technology Group",
"year": 2011,
"note": "General industry guideline for packed-column design covering HETP, HTU/NTU, flooding, pressure drop, and packing selection. Emphasizes importance of surface area and liquid distribution."
},
{
"reference_id": "glasgow_schicktanz_1937_ball_packings",
"type": "nist_research_paper",
"title": "Study of Ball Packings for Laboratory Rectifying Columns",
"author": "Augustus R. Glasgow Jr. and Sylvester T. Schicktanz",
"institution": "National Bureau of Standards",
"journal": "Journal of Research of the National Bureau of Standards",
"volume": 19,
"year": 1937,
"note": "Used as literature context for spherical and ball packing. The study found that ball material had little effect compared with surface area and ball diameter; separation efficiency was substantially proportional to exposed surface area and approximately linear with reciprocal ball diameter. Lead-ball test data are used only for the material-effect conclusion and are not included as a calculator preset."
},
{
"reference_id": "orlando_2009_structured_packing_hetp",
"type": "journal_article",
"title": "HETP Evaluation of Structured Packing Distillation Column",
"author": "A. E. Orlando Jr., L. C. Medina, M. F. Mendes, and E. M. A. Nicolaiewsky",
"journal": "Brazilian Journal of Chemical Engineering",
"volume": 26,
"issue": 3,
"pages": "619-633",
"year": 2009,
"note": "Experimental and modeling study of a 40 mm laboratory distillation column using Sulzer DX gauze structured packing. Used as context showing that HETP can vary by column section and loading, that low liquid-flow regions can reduce prediction reliability, and that different HETP correlations may produce different results."
},
{
"reference_id": "hlawitschka_2015_super_ring_extraction",
"type": "journal_article",
"title": "Raschig Super-Ring Operating Characteristics in Unpulsed Liquid-Liquid Extraction Columns",
"author": "Mark W. Hlawitschka, Stephan Schmidt, Hans-Jörg Bart, and Michael Schultes",
"journal": "Chemical Engineering & Technology",
"volume": 38,
"issue": 3,
"pages": "446-454",
"year": 2015,
"doi": "10.1002/ceat.201400561",
"note": "Used as hydraulic and service-specific context for Raschig Super-Ring behavior. The paper reports higher load capacity than comparable Pall Rings in unpulsed liquid-liquid extraction, but also shows that HTU/mass-transfer behavior is system-dependent and not directly transferable to ethanol/water distillation."
},
{
"reference_id": "raschig_pall_ring_350_bulletin",
"type": "technical_bulletin",
"title": "RASCHIG Pall-Ring Product Bulletin 350",
"author": "RASCHIG GmbH",
"year": 2013,
"note": "Manufacturer technical bulletin providing operational and physical data for Pall-Ring random packing, including surface area, void fraction, pressure drop behavior, liquid holdup, absorption data, and material variations. Used as a baseline engineering data source for Pall Ring surface area and void fraction values in hobby-scale modeling."
},
{
"reference_id": "darakchiev_2008_random_packings_ethanol",
"type": "journal_article",
"title": "A Study on Modern High Effective Random Packings for Ethanol-Water Rectification",
"author": "Simeon Darakchiev and Krum Semkov",
"journal": "Chemical Engineering & Technology",
"volume": 31,
"issue": 7,
"year": 2008,
"doi": "10.1002/ceat.200800029",
"reference_url": "https://www.researchgate.net/publication/229705717_A_Study_on_Modern_High_Effective_Random_Packings_for_Ethanol-Water_Rectification",
"note": "Experimental ethanol-water rectification study measuring HTU and HETP as functions of vapor and liquid loading. The study compares Raschig Super-Ring, IMTP, Ralu Flow, and HOLPACK packings and supports treating HETP as strongly condition-dependent rather than as a fixed packing constant."
}
],
"packings": [
{
"key": "spheres_10mm",
"legacy_keys": [
"marbles"
],
"label": "Spheres, 10 mm",
"category": "ball_packing",
"material": "generic_solid",
"typical_materials": [
"glass",
"stainless_steel",
"copper"
],
"nominal_size_mm": 10,
"nominal_size_m": 0.01,
"surface_area_m2_per_m3": 380,
"void_fraction": 0.36,
"critical_surface_tension_n_per_m": 0.061,
"source_confidence": "medium",
"source_type": "sphere_geometry_plus_nist_ball_packing_context_plus_community_case",
"source_note": "Geometric starting value based on random packing of spheres. NIST/NBS ball-packing work supports the general principle that spherical-packing efficiency depends primarily on exposed surface area and sphere diameter rather than material composition. Community calibration suggests the current default model may be conservative in at least some well-run narrow CCVM configurations.",
"literature_context_reference_ids": [
"mendes_2011_hetp_review",
"glasgow_schicktanz_1937_ball_packings"
],
"candidate_hetp_range_in": [
5,
6
],
"max_packing_to_column_diameter_ratio": 0.125,
"distribution_sensitivity": "high",
"preferred_power_density_w_per_in2_low": 100,
"preferred_power_density_w_per_in2_high": 500,
"operating_note": "Spheres are large, low-surface-area ball packing. For HETP behavior, sphere diameter and exposed surface area matter more than material composition. Performance is highly dependent on column diameter, liquid distribution, reflux return, hydraulic loading, and liquid holdup. In small columns, sphere diameter can easily exceed the general 1/8 random-packing size guideline.",
"material_note": "Glass, stainless steel, or copper spheres may be modeled similarly for geometric HETP purposes if diameter and packing density are similar. Copper spheres may provide useful copper vapor-path contact for sulfur-compound cleanup, but that chemical benefit is separate from geometric HETP behavior.",
"community_calibration_note": "Community comparison suggests current default prediction for 10 mm spheres may be too conservative. In at least one 2 in CCVM case with 51 in of 1/2 in marbles at 1200 W on a 30% charge, observed output was about 93% to 96% ABV, while current prediction was 89.1%. Cross-checking against Haggy's packed column calculator suggests an effective HETP closer to roughly 5 in to 6 in.",
"calibration_priority": "high",
"use_case_profile": {
"neutral_spirit": "low",
"flavor_retention": "high",
"detuned_column": "high",
"general_purpose": "medium"
},
"performance_profile": {
"relative_efficiency": "low_to_medium",
"relative_pressure_drop": "low",
"relative_flood_tolerance": "medium",
"distribution_risk": "high",
"wall_effect_risk": "high_in_narrow_columns",
"material_sensitivity_for_hetp": "low",
"hydraulic_sensitivity": "medium"
},
"ui_note": "Useful low- to medium-efficiency spherical packing when flavor retention is desired.",
"calculator_note": "Current default model for 10 mm spheres should be treated as conservative pending further calibration. Large sphere size relative to column diameter can make predictions lower-confidence. Material choice is less important for HETP than diameter and exposed surface area, though copper may provide separate vapor-path chemistry benefits.",
"status": "active"
},
{
"key": "dixon_rings_10x10mm_stainless",
"label": "Dixon Rings, 10×10 mm (Stainless)",
"category": "structured_random_packing",
"material": "stainless_steel",
"nominal_size_mm": 10,
"nominal_size_m": 0.01,
"surface_area_m2_per_m3": 650,
"void_fraction": 0.9,
"critical_surface_tension_n_per_m": 0.075,
"source_confidence": "medium_low",
"source_type": "vendor_geometry_plus_literature_context",
"source_note": "Geometry and surface-area values are retained as vendor-style descriptor values for 10×10 mm stainless Dixon rings. HETP is not treated as a fixed vendor value; performance should be modeled as condition-dependent and field-calibrated.",
"literature_context_reference_ids": [
"abdelraouf_2022_dixon_rings",
"mendes_2011_hetp_review",
"darakchiev_2008_random_packings_ethanol",
"orlando_2009_structured_packing_hetp"
],
"realistic_hetp_range_in": [
3,
8
],
"calibration_multiplier": 1.15,
"wetting_sensitivity": 0.45,
"underload_penalty_strength": 0.9,
"overload_penalty_strength": 0.35,
"max_packing_to_column_diameter_ratio": 0.125,
"distribution_sensitivity": "high",
"preferred_power_density_w_per_in2_low": 250,
"preferred_power_density_w_per_in2_high": 850,
"operating_note": "Fine wire-mesh random packing can provide high efficiency only when well wetted and properly loaded. Under-loaded operation, poor reflux distribution, low liquid loading, or wall flow may substantially worsen effective HETP.",
"community_calibration_note": "Dixon-ring performance should be treated as provisional until verified in hobby-scale columns. Current model uses a condition-dependent correction rather than the historical supplier-claimed HETP range.",
"calibration_priority": "high",
"use_case_profile": {
"neutral_spirit": "high",
"flavor_retention": "low",
"detuned_column": "low",
"general_purpose": "medium"
},
"performance_profile": {
"relative_efficiency": "high",
"relative_pressure_drop": "medium",
"relative_flood_tolerance": "medium",
"distribution_risk": "high",
"wetting_sensitivity": "high",
"loading_sensitivity": "high"
},
"ui_note": "Fine stainless wire-mesh random packing. Potentially high efficiency, but actual performance depends strongly on wetting and loading.",
"calculator_note": "Uses a provisional wetting/loading correction. Treat results as calibration candidates until field-tested in hobby-scale columns. Ethanol-water rectification and structured-packing literature support treating HETP as operating-condition dependent rather than fixed.",
"status": "active"
},
{
"key": "raschig_rings_6mm_ceramic",
"label": "Raschig Rings, 6 mm (Ceramic)",
"category": "rings",
"material": "ceramic",
"nominal_size_mm": 6,
"nominal_size_m": 0.006,
"surface_area_m2_per_m3": 750,
"void_fraction": 0.7,
"critical_surface_tension_n_per_m": 0.061,
"source_confidence": "medium",
"source_type": "published_packing_data_midpoint_plus_design_guideline",
"source_note": "Midpoint estimate based on published small ceramic Raschig ring data; suitable for rough modeling. Literature guidance for random packing suggests checking packing size relative to column diameter and maintaining good liquid distribution.",
"literature_context_reference_ids": [
"mendes_2011_hetp_review"
],
"max_packing_to_column_diameter_ratio": 0.125,
"distribution_sensitivity": "medium",
"preferred_power_density_w_per_in2_low": 150,
"preferred_power_density_w_per_in2_high": 650,
"operating_note": "Small Raschig rings offer higher surface area than larger rings but may increase pressure drop and sensitivity to loading. Distribution remains important, especially in short hobby columns.",
"use_case_profile": {
"neutral_spirit": "medium",
"flavor_retention": "medium",
"detuned_column": "medium",
"general_purpose": "high"
},
"performance_profile": {
"relative_efficiency": "medium",
"relative_pressure_drop": "medium",
"relative_flood_tolerance": "medium",
"distribution_risk": "medium"
},
"ui_note": "Balanced general-purpose packing with better rectification than spheres.",
"calculator_note": "Useful for moderate rectification while still preserving more character than very high-efficiency packings. Check packing size relative to column diameter for narrow columns.",
"status": "active"
},
{
"key": "raschig_rings_10mm_ceramic",
"label": "Raschig Rings, 10 mm (Ceramic)",
"category": "rings",
"material": "ceramic",
"nominal_size_mm": 10,
"nominal_size_m": 0.01,
"surface_area_m2_per_m3": 450,
"void_fraction": 0.7,
"critical_surface_tension_n_per_m": 0.061,
"source_confidence": "medium_low",
"source_type": "interpolated_from_small_and_medium_ceramic_raschig_data_plus_design_guideline",
"source_note": "Intermediate ceramic Raschig ring preset estimated between the existing 6 mm and 13 mm ceramic Raschig presets. Suitable as a rough hobby-scale modeling value pending better published or vendor-specific data.",
"literature_context_reference_ids": [
"mendes_2011_hetp_review"
],
"max_packing_to_column_diameter_ratio": 0.125,
"distribution_sensitivity": "medium",
"preferred_power_density_w_per_in2_low": 125,
"preferred_power_density_w_per_in2_high": 600,
"operating_note": "Intermediate-size ceramic Raschig rings provide a compromise between the higher surface area and pressure drop of smaller rings and the lower pressure drop but lower efficiency of larger rings. As with other random packings, column diameter and liquid distribution strongly affect realized efficiency.",
"calibration_priority": "medium",
"use_case_profile": {
"neutral_spirit": "medium",
"flavor_retention": "medium",
"detuned_column": "medium",
"general_purpose": "high"
},
"performance_profile": {
"relative_efficiency": "medium",
"relative_pressure_drop": "medium",
"relative_flood_tolerance": "medium_high",
"distribution_risk": "medium"
},
"ui_note": "Intermediate general-purpose ceramic ring packing.",
"calculator_note": "Useful as a middle-ground Raschig ring preset between 6 mm and 13 mm sizes. Treat as an interpolated estimate until better calibration data is available.",
"status": "active"
},
{
"key": "raschig_rings_13mm_ceramic",
"label": "Raschig Rings, 13 mm (Ceramic)",
"category": "rings",
"material": "ceramic",
"nominal_size_mm": 13,
"nominal_size_m": 0.013,
"surface_area_m2_per_m3": 320,
"void_fraction": 0.7,
"critical_surface_tension_n_per_m": 0.061,
"source_confidence": "medium",
"source_type": "proxy_from_15mm_published_data_plus_design_guideline",
"source_note": "Approximate proxy based on commonly published 15 mm ceramic Raschig ring values. Larger random packing should be checked carefully against column diameter because oversize packing can reduce distribution quality and prediction confidence.",
"literature_context_reference_ids": [
"mendes_2011_hetp_review"
],
"max_packing_to_column_diameter_ratio": 0.125,
"distribution_sensitivity": "medium_high",
"preferred_power_density_w_per_in2_low": 100,
"preferred_power_density_w_per_in2_high": 550,
"operating_note": "Larger Raschig rings are more open and lower pressure drop, but lower surface area and larger packing size make them less suitable for narrow columns when high rectification is desired.",
"use_case_profile": {
"neutral_spirit": "low",
"flavor_retention": "medium",
"detuned_column": "medium",
"general_purpose": "medium"
},
"performance_profile": {
"relative_efficiency": "low",
"relative_pressure_drop": "low",
"relative_flood_tolerance": "high",
"distribution_risk": "medium_high"
},
"ui_note": "Lower surface area, lower efficiency, and relatively open packing.",
"calculator_note": "May suit lower-efficiency applications or larger-diameter low-pressure-drop operation. In narrow hobby columns, 13 mm random packing may exceed the general 1/8 column-diameter guideline.",
"status": "active"
},
{
"key": "stainless_scrubbers",
"label": "Stainless Scrubbers / Stainless Wool",
"category": "scrubber_packing",
"material": "stainless_steel",
"nominal_size_mm": 1,
"nominal_size_m": 0.001,
"surface_area_m2_per_m3": 650,
"void_fraction": 0.94,
"critical_surface_tension_n_per_m": 0.075,
"source_confidence": "low",
"source_type": "wire_mesh_proxy_estimate_plus_design_guideline",
"source_note": "Conservative hobby-scale proxy based on wire-mesh packing ranges; should be calibrated against observed distiller behavior. Actual surface area, void fraction, and wetting behavior depend strongly on packing density and compression.",
"literature_context_reference_ids": [
"mendes_2011_hetp_review",
"darakchiev_2008_random_packings_ethanol"
],
"max_packing_to_column_diameter_ratio": 0.125,
"distribution_sensitivity": "medium",
"preferred_power_density_w_per_in2_low": 250,
"preferred_power_density_w_per_in2_high": 900,
"operating_note": "Scrubber packing performance depends heavily on how tightly the packing is installed. Over-compression can reduce voidage and capacity; loose or uneven installation can reduce wetting and effective area.",
"calibration_priority": "high",
"use_case_profile": {
"neutral_spirit": "high",
"flavor_retention": "low",
"detuned_column": "low",
"general_purpose": "high"
},
"performance_profile": {
"relative_efficiency": "high",
"relative_pressure_drop": "medium",
"relative_flood_tolerance": "medium",
"distribution_risk": "medium",
"packing_density_sensitivity": "high"
},
"ui_note": "Higher-efficiency packing commonly used when stronger rectification is desired.",
"calculator_note": "Generally more suitable when aiming for higher purity rather than flavor retention. Actual behavior depends heavily on packing density, compression, wetting, and reflux distribution.",
"status": "active"
},
{
"key": "copper_mesh",
"label": "Copper Mesh",
"category": "scrubber_packing",
"material": "copper",
"nominal_size_mm": 1,
"nominal_size_m": 0.001,
"surface_area_m2_per_m3": 700,
"void_fraction": 0.95,
"critical_surface_tension_n_per_m": 0.075,
"source_confidence": "low",
"source_type": "wire_mesh_proxy_estimate_plus_design_guideline",
"source_note": "Hobby-scale proxy based on published wire-mesh packing ranges and practical equivalence to stainless scrubbers in hobby columns; should be calibrated against observed column behavior. Actual performance depends strongly on mesh density, compression, and wetting.",
"literature_context_reference_ids": [
"mendes_2011_hetp_review",
"darakchiev_2008_random_packings_ethanol"
],
"max_packing_to_column_diameter_ratio": 0.125,
"distribution_sensitivity": "medium",
"preferred_power_density_w_per_in2_low": 250,
"preferred_power_density_w_per_in2_high": 900,
"operating_note": "Copper mesh may behave similarly to stainless scrubber packing as a mass-transfer surface, but packing density, wetting, and compression can dominate actual HETP. Copper may also be chosen for chemical interaction with sulfur compounds rather than efficiency alone.",
"calibration_priority": "high",
"use_case_profile": {
"neutral_spirit": "high",
"flavor_retention": "low",
"detuned_column": "low",
"general_purpose": "high"
},
"performance_profile": {
"relative_efficiency": "high",
"relative_pressure_drop": "medium",
"relative_flood_tolerance": "medium",
"distribution_risk": "medium",
"packing_density_sensitivity": "high"
},
"ui_note": "High-efficiency mesh packing commonly used for stronger rectification.",
"calculator_note": "Often behaves similarly to stainless scrubbers in hobby columns, though actual performance depends heavily on packing density, compression, wetting, and column setup.",
"status": "active"
},
{
"key": "stainless_pall_rings_10mm",
"label": "Pall Rings, 10 mm (Stainless)",
"category": "rings",
"material": "stainless_steel",
"packing_generation": "second_generation_random_packing",
"nominal_size_mm": 10,
"nominal_size_m": 0.01,
"surface_area_m2_per_m3": 515,
"void_fraction": 0.94,
"critical_surface_tension_n_per_m": 0.075,
"source_confidence": "medium",
"source_type": "manufacturer_bulletin_plus_general_design_guideline",
"source_note": "10 mm stainless Pall Ring physical data are aligned with Raschig Pall-Ring Product Bulletin 350, which lists metal Pall Rings around 10 mm at approximately 515 m²/m³ surface area and about 94% free volume. Ethanol-water rectification literature supports treating measured packing efficiency as loading-dependent rather than fixed.",
"literature_context_reference_ids": [
"mendes_2011_hetp_review",
"raschig_pall_ring_350_bulletin",
"darakchiev_2008_random_packings_ethanol"
],
"max_packing_to_column_diameter_ratio": 0.125,
"distribution_sensitivity": "medium",
"preferred_power_density_w_per_in2_low": 150,
"preferred_power_density_w_per_in2_high": 700,
"operating_note": "Small Pall rings are more open than simple Raschig rings and should generally tolerate vapor flow better while retaining reasonable surface area. Performance still depends on liquid distribution, loading, and column diameter.",
"calibration_priority": "high",
"use_case_profile": {
"neutral_spirit": "medium",
"flavor_retention": "medium",
"detuned_column": "medium",
"general_purpose": "high"
},
"performance_profile": {
"relative_efficiency": "medium",
"relative_pressure_drop": "medium_low",
"relative_flood_tolerance": "medium_high",
"distribution_risk": "medium",
"random_packing_generation": "second"
},
"ui_note": "Open stainless ring packing with moderate efficiency and better flow capacity than simple Raschig rings.",
"calculator_note": "Physical surface area and free-volume values are supported by manufacturer data, but predicted HETP should still be treated as rough until calibrated against known hobby-scale runs.",
"status": "active"
},
{
"key": "stainless_pall_rings_16mm",
"label": "Pall Rings, 16 mm (Stainless)",
"category": "rings",
"material": "stainless_steel",
"packing_generation": "second_generation_random_packing",
"nominal_size_mm": 16,
"nominal_size_m": 0.016,
"surface_area_m2_per_m3": 360,
"void_fraction": 0.95,
"critical_surface_tension_n_per_m": 0.075,
"source_confidence": "medium",
"source_type": "manufacturer_bulletin_plus_general_design_guideline",
"source_note": "16 mm stainless Pall Ring preset is based on manufacturer data trend for metal Pall Rings, with the closest Raschig bulletin value listing 15 mm metal Pall Rings at approximately 360 m²/m³ surface area and about 95% free volume. Ethanol-water rectification literature supports treating measured packing efficiency as loading-dependent rather than fixed.",
"literature_context_reference_ids": [
"mendes_2011_hetp_review",
"raschig_pall_ring_350_bulletin",
"darakchiev_2008_random_packings_ethanol"
],
"max_packing_to_column_diameter_ratio": 0.125,
"distribution_sensitivity": "medium_high",
"preferred_power_density_w_per_in2_low": 100,
"preferred_power_density_w_per_in2_high": 650,
"operating_note": "Larger Pall rings are more open and lower pressure drop, but lower surface area and larger element size make them less suitable for narrow hobby columns when high rectification is desired.",
"calibration_priority": "high",
"use_case_profile": {
"neutral_spirit": "low_to_medium",
"flavor_retention": "medium",
"detuned_column": "medium",
"general_purpose": "medium"
},
"performance_profile": {
"relative_efficiency": "low_to_medium",
"relative_pressure_drop": "low",
"relative_flood_tolerance": "high",
"distribution_risk": "medium_high",
"random_packing_generation": "second"
},
"ui_note": "Open, low-pressure-drop stainless ring packing. Better suited to larger columns or lower-efficiency operation.",
"calculator_note": "Physical surface area and free-volume values are supported by manufacturer data trend, but predicted HETP should still be treated as rough until calibrated against known hobby-scale runs. In narrow columns, 16 mm packing may exceed the general 1/8 column-diameter guideline, reducing confidence in the estimate.",
"status": "active"
},
{
"key": "structured_gauze_packing_generic",
"label": "Structured Gauze Packing (Generic Stainless)",
"category": "structured_packing",
"material": "stainless_steel",
"nominal_size_mm": 1,
"nominal_size_m": 0.001,
"surface_area_m2_per_m3": 750,
"void_fraction": 0.95,
"critical_surface_tension_n_per_m": 0.075,
"source_confidence": "low",
"source_type": "structured_packing_literature_context_placeholder",
"source_note": "Generic placeholder inspired by structured stainless gauze packing literature. Ethanol-water rectification literature includes comparison against HOLPACK structured packing, but this generic preset is not a direct HOLPACK model and is not calibrated for hobby ethanol-water columns.",
"literature_context_reference_ids": [
"mendes_2011_hetp_review",
"darakchiev_2008_random_packings_ethanol",
"orlando_2009_structured_packing_hetp"
],
"max_packing_to_column_diameter_ratio": 0.125,
"distribution_sensitivity": "high",
"preferred_power_density_w_per_in2_low": 250,
"preferred_power_density_w_per_in2_high": 900,
"operating_note": "Structured gauze packing can be highly efficient when properly installed and wetted, but performance depends strongly on geometry, distributor quality, liquid loading, and operating regime. Published structured-packing work also shows that HETP can vary by column section and loading.",
"calibration_priority": "medium",
"use_case_profile": {
"neutral_spirit": "high",
"flavor_retention": "low",
"detuned_column": "low",
"general_purpose": "medium"
},
"performance_profile": {
"relative_efficiency": "high",
"relative_pressure_drop": "low_to_medium",
"relative_flood_tolerance": "medium",
"distribution_risk": "high",
"loading_sensitivity": "high"
},
"ui_note": "Generic structured gauze comparison preset. Not yet calibrated for common hobby hardware.",
"calculator_note": "Use cautiously. This is a reference-style preset, not a verified HomeDistiller community packing. HETP may vary substantially with column loading and liquid distribution.",
"status": "active"
}
]
}