A review of existing literature for the purpose of comparing correlations which allow Lhe explicit predictim @ gas holdup in twoor three-phase bubble columns shows wide disagreement concerning the eTfegt. of various variables. Further, various correlations, apparently of equal validity, show equally wide disagreement in the Fiadicted absolute values of gas holdup among three test systems; water-air, hydrocarbon solvent-air, and trichloroethyrene air. Some possible reasons for these disagreements are discussed.Extensive gas holdup data obtained in a 0.30 m diameter column for the three test systems were correlated statisticany for the transition and the turbulent region. The resulting correlation gives agreement with experiment to within *20%, with most data showing * 10% agreement. The proposed correlation was also tested against thirteen data sets (from eight researchers) which corresponded to its region of validity and gave good agreement. Three additional relevant data sets were not satisfactorily predicted.On a prockdk Ir une ktude bibliographique dans le but de comparer des corrklations permettant de prkdire explicitement la ktention des gaz dans des colonnes a bulles deux ou trois phases et on a montrk que ces codlations ne s'accordent pas sur I'effet des diffkrentes variables. De plus, diverses codlations, apparernment de mkme validitk, montrent kgalement un dksaccord dans les valeurs absolues prkdites pour la ktention des gaz dans le cas de trois systbmes-tests: eau -air, solvant a base d'hydrocarburesair et trichlokthylbneair. On analyse quelques raisons pouvant expliquer I . Air-Water Air-Glycol aq. soh. Air -Methanol 02-Water 2. Air-Alcohols Air-Halogenated Hydrocarbons 3. Air-Water Air-Glycerol, aq. soln. Air-Kerosene 4. (Air, H2, C02, CH4, C3Hw, N2) -Water Air -Organic Liquids Air-Electrolyte soln. U,, m/s 0.003 -0.4 UL, m/s 0 -0.044 D, rn 0.152 -0.6 H , m 1.26 -3.5 Single nozzle sparger d,,, rn 0.005 C = 0.2 for pure liquids and non-electrolyte mixtures Akita and Yoshida (1973) U,. m/s 0 -0.2 D, rn 0.1 H , rn > 1.2 Perforated plate d,,, rn 0.0005, 0.001 U,, rn/s 0.0014 -0.14 D, m 0.05, 0.07, 0.10 Perforated plate d,,, m 0.00087 -0.00309 Bach and Pilhofer (1978) Ex -= 0.115[ I -E, E , = 0.72! U -0.485 U z + 0.0975 U 3 u = U G [ p L / u ( p L -PO)^]''^ Kurnar et al. (1976) M = 21-49 u, pL 0 5 7 8 U,, m/s 0.012 -0.38 D, rn 0.1