Plastic Pall Ring vs Teller Rosette: Which Random Packing Should You Select?

Plastic Pall Ring and Plastic Teller Rosette are both widely used plastic random packings, but their geometries create very different packed-bed characteristics. In DAIER's catalog-confirmed data, Teller Rosette provides substantially greater geometric surface area in comparable size classes, while Plastic Pall Ring generally provides greater void fraction, lower packing population and lower dry packing factor.

The practical question is therefore:

Does the tower need more geometric contacting area, or does it need a more hydraulically open and less densely populated packed bed?

That is the real difference between the two products.

---

1. Direct Answer

Choose Plastic Pall Ring more readily when:

• hydraulic openness is important;
• gas throughput is relatively high;
• lower packing factor is desirable;
• the existing tower already uses Pall Ring successfully;
• like-for-like replacement reduces project risk;
• very high geometric area is not the dominant requirement.

Evaluate Plastic Teller Rosette more strongly when:

• high geometric surface-area density is important;
• the process is relatively clean;
• strong liquid-contacting opportunity is valuable;
• a rosette-type geometry is already proven in the application;
• the tower can tolerate the finer packed-bed position.

The key trade-off is:

Teller Rosette → More Geometric Area

versus:

Pall Ring → More Open Hydraulic Position

Neither is universally better.

---

2. How Is Plastic Pall Ring Built?

Plastic Pall Ring uses an open cylindrical structure.

Its molded body includes:

• large side openings;
• internal ribs or formed surfaces;
• an open central flow region.

Compared with a simple Raschig Ring, the structure creates additional:

• exposed surface;
• gas pathways;
• liquid redistribution points.

DAIER's catalog-confirmed Plastic Pall Ring series includes 16, 25, 38, 50 and 76 mm sizes.

---

3. How Is Teller Rosette Different?

Teller Rosette is not cylindrical.

It uses a three-dimensional rosette or looped structure.

DAIER's verified product family includes approximately:

• 25 mm;
• 47 mm;
• 51 mm;
• 59 mm;
• 73 mm;
• 95 mm;
• 145 mm. 

The internal geometry changes between models.

For example:

• 25 mm uses a 5-ring structure;
• 47 and 51 mm use 9-ring structures;
• 59 and 73 mm use 12-ring structures;
• 95 mm uses 18 rings;
• 145 mm uses 20 rings. 

Therefore:

Teller Rosette is not simply a differently shaped Pall Ring.

It creates a substantially different packed bed.

---

4. The Best Direct Comparison: 25 mm vs 25 mm

DAIER has catalog-confirmed data for both products at 25 mm.

 

This comparison immediately shows the fundamental difference.

---

5. What Does the 25 mm Comparison Tell Us?

Teller Rosette provides approximately:

269 vs 213 m²/m³

of geometric surface area.

That is roughly 26% more geometric area.

But Teller Rosette also has:

• lower void fraction;
• higher dry bulk density;
• more than three times as many packing elements per cubic meter;
• much higher dry packing factor.

So the 25 mm choice is clearly:

Higher Contact-Area Density

versus:

Greater Hydraulic Openness.

---

6. Why More Surface Area Can Be Valuable

Greater geometric surface area provides more potential locations for:

• liquid spreading;
• wetting;
• gas-liquid contact.

This can make Teller Rosette attractive in relatively clean contacting duties.

However:

geometric area is not automatically effective mass-transfer area.

The usable area depends on:

• liquid distribution;
• wetting;
• liquid load;
• gas velocity;
• fluid properties.

Therefore:

269 m²/m³ does not automatically mean Teller Rosette will provide 26% more process efficiency.

That would require real performance data.

---

7. Why Pall Ring's Higher Void Fraction Matters

At 25 mm:

Pall Ring

90% void fraction

Teller Rosette

82%. 

That is a substantial difference in open bed volume.

Greater void fraction creates more physical space for:

• gas flow;
• liquid drainage.

This gives 25 mm Plastic Pall Ring a stronger preliminary position where:

• throughput;
• hydraulic margin

are important.

---

8. Packing Factor Makes the Difference Even Clearer

At 25 mm:

Pall Ring

285 m⁻¹

Teller Rosette

488 m⁻¹. 

The Teller Rosette's higher packing factor places it in a much finer geometric hydraulic position.

But:

packing factor is not actual operating pressure drop.

Real tower pressure drop also depends on:

• gas flow;
• liquid flow;
• fluid density;
• viscosity;
• packed height.

So do not convert the factor difference directly into a claimed ΔP reduction.

---

9. Packing Population Is Dramatically Different

At 25 mm:

Pall Ring

53,500 pcs/m³.

Teller Rosette

170,000 pcs/m³.

That is more than three times the packing population.

This affects the character of the bed:

Teller Rosette

creates:

• more individual contacting elements;
• more element-to-element contacts;
• a finer bed network.

Pall Ring

creates:

• fewer elements;
• larger characteristic flow structure.

This difference matters when fouling becomes important.

---

10. 50 mm Pall Ring vs 51 mm Teller Rosette

These are not exact identical dimensions, but they occupy a very similar commercial size class.

Plastic Pall Ring 50 mm

• 100 m²/m³ surface area;
• 91.5% void fraction;
• 44.5 kg/m³ bulk density;
• 6,500 pcs/m³;
• 127 m⁻¹ packing factor.

Teller Rosette 51 mm

• 180 m²/m³ surface area;
• 89% void fraction;
• 57 kg/m³ bulk density;
• 25,000 pcs/m³;
• 255 m⁻¹ packing factor. 

Again, the geometry trade-off is very strong.

---

11. The 50/51 mm Surface-Area Difference Is Huge

Teller Rosette provides:

180 m²/m³

compared with:

100 m²/m³

for 50 mm Plastic Pall Ring.

That is approximately 80% more geometric surface area in this near-size comparison.

But Teller Rosette also has:

255 vs 127 m⁻¹ packing factor.

So the additional area comes with a much finer geometric bed position.

---

12. The 50/51 mm Bed Weight Is Also Different

Plastic Pall Ring:

44.5 kg/m³

Teller Rosette:

57 kg/m³.

The difference is approximately:

12.5 kg/m³. 

For a large packed volume, this affects:

• packing-support load;
• shipping weight;
• installation handling.

But the structural difference is usually less dramatic than it would be with ceramic packing.

---

13. 76 mm Pall Ring vs 73 mm Teller Rosette

This is another near-size-class comparison.

Plastic Pall Ring 76 mm

• 73.2 m²/m³ surface area;
• 92% void fraction;
• 48 kg/m³ bulk density;
• 1,930 pcs/m³;
• 94 m⁻¹ packing factor.

Teller Rosette 73 mm

• 94 m²/m³ surface area;
• 90% void fraction;
• 50 kg/m³ bulk density;
• 8,000 pcs/m³;
• 180 m⁻¹ packing factor. 

The same family-level pattern still appears.

---

14. What Does the 73/76 mm Comparison Show?

Teller Rosette again provides:

• more geometric surface area;
• many more packing elements.

Pall Ring provides:

• higher void fraction;
• lower dry packing factor;
• slightly lower bed weight.

This consistency across several size classes gives the comparison real engineering value.

---

15. Does Teller Rosette Always Have Higher Surface Area?

In the compared DAIER size classes, yes:

25 mm

269 vs 213 m²/m³.

~50 mm

180 vs 100.

~75 mm

94 vs 73.2. 

However:

this should still be described as supplier-specific catalog data rather than a universal rule for every possible manufacturer or model.

---

16. Does Pall Ring Always Have Higher Void Fraction?

For these comparison classes:

25 mm

90% vs 82%.

50/51 mm

91.5% vs 89%.

76/73 mm

92% vs 90%.

So:

Pall Ring is consistently more open by catalog void fraction in these matched or near-matched examples.

This is a meaningful reason to evaluate Pall Ring where hydraulic openness matters.

---

17. Does Pall Ring Always Have Lower Packing Factor?

Again, in these compared classes:

25 mm

285 vs 488 m⁻¹.

50/51 mm

127 vs 255 m⁻¹.

76/73 mm

94 vs 180 m⁻¹. 

That is a consistent catalog pattern.

Still:

lower packing factor should be interpreted as a stronger hydraulic screening position—not a guaranteed numerical pressure-drop advantage.

---

18. Which Packing Is Better for High Gas Throughput?

Plastic Pall Ring generally deserves stronger screening when:

• gas flow is high;
• pressure-drop margin is important;
• the process can achieve sufficient mass transfer with the available area.

Its combination of:

• higher void fraction;
• lower packing factor

supports this direction in the DAIER comparison data.

But actual gas capacity must still be checked for the specific tower.

---

19. Which Packing Is Better for High Contacting Area?

Teller Rosette deserves stronger screening when:

• geometric contact-area density is highly valuable;
• service is relatively clean;
• the hydraulic load can tolerate the finer packing position.

At the 50/51 mm class:

180 vs 100 m²/m³

is a very large difference.

This is a genuine reason to evaluate Teller Rosette rather than simply choosing Pall Ring by default.

---

20. Which Is Better for Scrubber Towers?

Both can be useful.

Plastic Pall Ring may move higher when:

• gas throughput is high;
• low hydraulic resistance matters;
• fouling is moderate;
• the scrubber is large.

Teller Rosette may move higher when:

• strong gas-liquid contacting is important;
• service is clean;
• the tower operates within acceptable hydraulic margins.

The word:

scrubber

alone is not enough to choose between them.

---

21. Why “Scrubber Packing” Is Too Broad a Specification

A customer may request:

plastic scrubber packing

without giving:

• gas flow;
• liquid flow;
• tower diameter;
• chemical system;
• fouling information.

That is not enough.

The same scrubber could favor:

• Pall Ring;
• Teller Rosette;
• Tri-Pack;
• another random packing

depending on the actual constraint.

The first question should therefore be:

What is limiting the tower—contacting, hydraulic capacity, fouling tolerance or material compatibility?

---

22. Which Is Better for Odor-Control Towers?

Odor-control systems often combine:

• gas scrubbing;
• aqueous circulation;
• moderate temperatures.

Teller Rosette may be attractive where high contacting-area density is useful.

Pall Ring may be attractive where:

• high gas flow;
• lower geometric resistance;
• more open bed structure

are stronger priorities.

Biological growth or solids can shift the selection toward more open packing.

---

23. Which Is Better for Fouling?

The DAIER physical data give Pall Ring an important structural advantage:

• fewer elements;
• higher void fraction;
• lower packing factor

at comparable size classes.

That can make Pall Ring worth stronger review as fouling increases.

But:

Plastic Pall Ring is not non-clogging.

Deposits can still form on:

• internal tabs;
• openings;
• element contact points.

---

24. Teller Rosette and Fouling

Teller Rosette's high element population and complex loop geometry can provide many contacting locations.

Those same features can become a disadvantage if the process contains:

• solids;
• crystals;
• sticky deposits;
• biological growth.

Therefore:

Teller Rosette should be selected cautiously in dirty service when a very fine model is being considered.

Larger Teller Rosette sizes may improve the situation, but severe fouling may still justify another packing family.

---

25. Why 25 mm Teller Rosette Is Particularly Fouling-Sensitive

At 25 mm, the bed contains approximately:

170,000 elements/m³

with a packing factor of:

488 m⁻¹.

That is a very fine packed-bed structure.

Compare Plastic Pall Ring 25 mm:

53,500 elements/m³

and:

285 m⁻¹.

Where solids or deposits exist, this difference deserves serious attention.

---

26. Large Teller Rosette Models Change the Product Position

Teller Rosette does not remain a high-packing-factor product at every size.

Its larger models include:

• 95 mm — 98 m²/m³ surface area, 92% void, 129 m⁻¹ packing factor;
• 145 mm — 65 m²/m³, 95% void, 76 m⁻¹ packing factor. 

So a large Teller Rosette bed can move toward a much more open hydraulic position.

This is why:

product family alone is not enough—the selected size also matters.

---

27. A 145 mm Teller Rosette Is Not Comparable to 25 mm Teller Rosette

Within the Teller family alone:

25 mm

• 269 m²/m³;
• 82% void;
• 488 m⁻¹.

145 mm

• 65 m²/m³;
• 95% void;
• 76 m⁻¹. 

That is a massive change.

Therefore statements such as:

“Teller Rosette has high pressure drop”

are too simplistic.

The exact model matters.

---

28. Tower Diameter Can Decide the Winner

Packing size must be reasonable relative to tower ID.

A 145 mm Teller Rosette requires a much larger tower than:

• 25;
• 47;
• 51 mm

packing.

Similarly, 76 mm Pall Ring needs sufficient cross-sectional population.

A very large packing element in a small tower can create:

• wall effects;
• poor bed randomness.

So the real comparison is:

Pall Ring model vs Teller Rosette model for this specific tower diameter.

---

29. Which Is Better for a Small Tower?

Smaller packing sizes generally provide more elements across the cross-section.

But a very fine packing can also create greater hydraulic resistance.

For a small tower:

• smaller Pall Ring;
• smaller Teller Rosette

may both be candidates.

The choice still depends on:

• required contacting area;
• allowable pressure drop;
• fouling.

Do not select simply from tower diameter.

---

30. Existing Pall Ring Tower: Should You Change to Teller Rosette?

Only when the project has a specific reason.

If the Pall Ring tower already:

• meets required removal;
• has acceptable pressure drop;
• operates reliably;

then switching to Teller Rosette creates unnecessary engineering uncertainty.

The new packing would change:

• surface area;
• packing factor;
• element population;
• bed weight.

Routine replacement does not need to become a geometry retrofit.

---

31. Existing Teller Rosette Tower: Should You Change to Pall Ring?

A change may deserve review when:

• pressure drop is excessive;
• capacity needs to increase;
• fouling has become a reliability problem.

Plastic Pall Ring may provide:

• higher void fraction;
• lower packing factor

in comparable sizes.

But the change also reduces geometric surface-area density.

Therefore:

the required mass-transfer duty must be rechecked before conversion.

---

32. Do Not Automatically Keep the Same Bed Height

At the ~50 mm class:

Pall Ring

100 m²/m³.

Teller Rosette

180 m²/m³. 

That geometric difference is too large to assume:

same packed height = same process performance.

Any geometry conversion should review:

• required contacting;
• bed height;
• hydraulics.

---

33. Material Compatibility Is a Separate Decision

Both products can be supplied in plastic materials, but:

“plastic” is not a complete material specification.

Confirm the actual polymer grade and process compatibility.

Compatibility depends on:

• chemical species;
• concentration;
• operating temperature;
• solvents;
• oxidizers.

pH alone is not enough.

---

34. PP Does Not Automatically Mean the Two Packings Perform the Same

Even if both are made from PP:

material is the same, geometry is not.

PP answers:

chemical/material suitability.

Pall Ring vs Teller Rosette answers:

packed-bed geometry.

Those are different engineering decisions.

---

35. Support Grid Compatibility

Changing geometry or size may affect:

• smallest retention dimension;
• how elements sit on the support.

The support grid should be checked for:

• opening size;
• structural strength;
• open area.

Changing from large Teller Rosette to small Pall Ring—or vice versa—may require a support review.

---

36. Hold-Down Review

High gas velocities can move plastic random packing because plastic packing is relatively light.

A hold-down device may be required to:

• restrain movement.

It should not:

• compress the bed.

Packing family, size, gas velocity and bed depth should all be considered when reviewing the restraint arrangement.

---

Plastic Pall Ring vs Teller Rosette Decision Table

---

37. Quick Selection Guide

Choose Plastic Pall Ring more readily when:

• hydraulic capacity is a strong priority;
• gas flow is high;
• moderate fouling exists;
• the tower already uses Pall Ring successfully;
• lower packing factor is desirable.

Evaluate Teller Rosette more strongly when:

• high geometric surface area matters;
• service is clean;
• strong gas-liquid contacting is important;
• hydraulic margin is sufficient.

Move toward larger Teller Rosette sizes when:

• a rosette geometry is desired;
• but the 25–50 mm hydraulic position is too fine.

Consider another packing family when:

• severe solids;
• crystallization;
• extreme hydraulic constraints

dominate the project.

---

38. What Information Should Be Included in an RFQ?

Provide:

• tower internal diameter;
• packed height;
• process application;
• gas composition;
• liquid composition;
• gas flow;
• liquid flow;
• operating temperature;
• operating pressure;
• required removal or transfer duty;
• allowable pressure drop;
• fouling or solids conditions;
• preferred polymer if known.

For replacement projects also provide:

• existing packing family;
• existing size;
• support-grid details;
• hold-down arrangement;
• reason for replacement.

Ask the supplier to confirm:

• exact product geometry;
• nominal size;
• actual dimensions;
• surface area;
• void fraction;
• bulk density;
• packing population;
• dry packing factor.

---

Common Selection Mistakes

Assuming Teller Rosette Is Always More Efficient

It has greater geometric area in comparable sizes, but effective performance requires actual process conditions.

Assuming Pall Ring Is Always Lower Pressure Drop

Its catalog position is more hydraulically open in the comparisons shown, but actual ΔP still depends on gas and liquid loads.

Comparing Only Surface Area

25 mm Teller Rosette has more area but much lower voidage and higher packing factor.

Comparing Only Void Fraction

The process still needs enough effective contacting.

Treating 50 mm Pall and 51 mm Teller as Exact Same-Size Products

They are only near-size-class comparisons.

Assuming All Teller Rosette Models Are Hydraulically Fine

95 and 145 mm models have much lower packing factors than the smaller models.

Changing Geometry Without Reviewing Bed Height

Surface-area density may change substantially.

Ignoring Fouling

Fine Teller Rosette beds can contain very high packing populations.

---

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the main difference between Plastic Pall Ring and Teller Rosette?

Plastic Pall Ring uses an open cylindrical geometry, while Teller Rosette uses a multi-loop rosette geometry. In DAIER's comparable-size data, Teller Rosette provides more geometric surface area while Pall Ring provides higher void fraction and lower packing factor.

What is the 25 mm comparison?

Plastic Pall Ring 25 mm:

• 213 m²/m³;
• 90% void;
• 68 kg/m³;
• 53,500 pcs/m³;
• 285 m⁻¹.

Teller Rosette 25 mm:

• 269 m²/m³;
• 82% void;
• 85 kg/m³;
• 170,000 pcs/m³;
• 488 m⁻¹. 

Which has more surface area?

Teller Rosette has more surface area in the DAIER comparable-size examples used here.

Which has higher void fraction?

Plastic Pall Ring has higher verified void fraction in the 25 mm, ~50 mm and ~75 mm comparisons.

Which has lower packing factor?

Plastic Pall Ring has lower dry packing factor in those same comparison classes.

Is Teller Rosette always higher pressure drop?

No. Actual tower pressure drop depends on operating conditions, and larger Teller Rosette models have much lower packing factors than the small versions.

Which is better for high gas flow?

Plastic Pall Ring generally deserves stronger preliminary screening where hydraulic capacity is important, but final selection requires actual gas and liquid loads.

Which is better for high contacting area?

Teller Rosette deserves stronger screening where high geometric-area density is valuable and the service is clean.

Which is better for fouling?

Pall Ring may deserve stronger consideration in comparable sizes because of its more open catalog position, but severe fouling may require another packing entirely.

Can I replace Teller Rosette with Pall Ring at the same bed height?

Do not assume so. Geometric surface area and hydraulic behavior can change substantially.

---

Selection Takeaway

Plastic Pall Ring and Teller Rosette solve different sides of the random-packing trade-off.

At 25 mm:

Pall Ring → 213 m²/m³ / 90% void / 53,500 pcs/m³ / 285 m⁻¹

while:

Teller Rosette → 269 m²/m³ / 82% void / 170,000 pcs/m³ / 488 m⁻¹.

At approximately 50 mm:

Pall Ring 50 mm → 100 m²/m³ / 91.5% void / 6,500 pcs/m³ / 127 m⁻¹

while:

Teller Rosette 51 mm → 180 m²/m³ / 89% void / 25,000 pcs/m³ / 255 m⁻¹.

At the larger ~75 mm class:

Pall Ring 76 mm → 73.2 m²/m³ / 92% void / 94 m⁻¹

while:

Teller Rosette 73 mm → 94 m²/m³ / 90% void / 180 m⁻¹. 

This creates a clear preliminary decision:

More Geometric Contacting Area → Teller Rosette

while:

Greater Hydraulic Openness / Lower Packing Factor → Plastic Pall Ring

But the final choice must still consider:

• actual tower diameter;
• gas and liquid loads;
• fouling;
• required process duty;
• selected polymer;
• bed height;
• tower internals.

The key principle is:

Do not ask which plastic packing is universally better. Ask whether the tower is limited by contacting area or by hydraulic openness—and then compare the exact supplier model at the appropriate size.