You are on page 1of 6

Printed

Chemical Engineering Science, Vol. in Great Britain.

47. No. Y-l

I. pp. 2221-2226,

1992.

aJoY-25oYIY2 55.00+0.00 Pergamon Press Ltd

A METHOD COEFFICIENTS

FOR EVALUATION OF MASS TRANSFER IN THE DIFFERENT REGIONS OF AIR LIFT REACTORS

J.C. Merchuk, G. Osemberg, M. Siegel and M. Shacham Department of Chemical Engineering and Program of Biotechnology, Ben Gurion University of the Negev, Beer Sheva, 84105, Israel

Abstract
The present state of the art in the experimental coeftfticientin Air Lift Reactors is reviewed. determination of mass transfer verified. For A criterion which allows to decide whether the

assumption of perfect mixing of the liquid phase is valid was experimentally Kt_a in each of the regions of the reactor (riser, downcomer Key Words: Air Lift, Mass Transfer Rate, Structured

the cases where such assumption does not hold, a new method that renders local values of and gas separator) is presented. Model The model is based on a fluid dynamic structured model of the system.

Introduction
Air lift reactors (ALR) Most of researchers present a unique problem from the stand point of determination chosen the unsteady-state gassing-in method for KLa and of the mass transfer coefficient, KLa. have determination. Probe response dynamics can influence the KLa calculations when the value KLa is equal to or greater than the inverse of the electrode 1985). Furthermore, the mass transfer coefficient that it behaves based on the assumption response time (Linek data Sinukle, usually composed for air lift reactors is is made

as a single unit, rather than a reactor In other words, an assumption

of zones with different flow regimes.

that the entire air lift reactor behaves like an ideal stirred tank reactor. Verlaan, ( 1987) has shown however that mixing in the air lift rector near plug-slow in the riser and to the overall downcomer, volume is different for the different sections, being nut! fairly well-mixed in the gas-liquid the mixing in the

separator. Fields and Slater (1988), and IMerchuk and Yunger- ( 1980) have shown that gasseparator volume reactor. of the reactor will influence As a consequence of this KLa (and its measurement) in air lift reactors will be in air Such

affected by the reactor height and the gas-liquid separator design. Ideally, the solution to the problem of measurement of mass transfer behavior lift reactors would be to determine the mass transfer rates in the individual sections. a method has been proposed by Merchuk and Siegel, (1938). to present evaluation the liquid phase(Andre et al.. 1983). For the case where

The purpose of this paper is the perfect mixing is not

results for a criterion for testing the assumption of perfect mixing in

acceptable, LL new method, based on a structured model of the air lift reactor is presented.
2221

2222

J. C. MERCHUK

et al.

A3

ExDerimentnI

Studies data reported for air lift reactors has been based on a gassing-in were conducted using both of these methods method using sodium sulfite

Most of the KLa phase flow. et al. (1986). dissolved was changed

dynamic step change method of nitrogen to air, with or without an interruption of the gas Experiments A dynamic to enable mixing oxygen

in a 200 liter
to remove the

laboratory reactor Detailed description of the experimental equipment can be seen in Siegel deoxygenation changes oxygen during continuous aeration was also studied. in gas disengagement, regime time, and flow concentration in the reactor The gas-liquid changing (Siegel separator the gas

therefore

distribution, The dissolved

et a. 1986). The at 50 cm from the

experimental reactor therefore operated like either an internal or external loop air lift mactor. was measured simultaneously risers exit. _SOcm from downcomers entrance with near complete gas disengagement carry-over Opened, flow. 17 seconds. determined into the downcomer. and 30 cm from downcomers exit. to an external loop reactor when operated separator so that there is little gas the gas-liquid separator was horizontal

The split vessel air lift behaves similarly

in the gas-liquid

In this mode of operation,

that is, the region was enlarged to allow for a zone of two-phase The choice of the method: interrupted or uninterrupted in the exxperiments. Also, similar concentration values. with a power

The mean circulation time for the range of gas flow rates studied was approximately nitrogen to air step made insignificant difference in the value of KLa versus time curves were Figure liquid Curves 1 presents typical (PNL) obtained of 0.15 using reactor

change or sodium sulfite deoxygenation,

measured by al1 three probes, and therefore similar KLa curves for uninterrupted kW/m3 (riser superficial step change, gas velocity, dimensionless

per volume

JG of 3.4 cm/set). concentration

uninterrupted step change, and sodium sulfite degassing gave completely Figure conftguration to be affected 2 shows typical

similar results.

curves for Closed

for uninterrupted step change with a P/VL 0.176 kW/m3 ( JG of 3.4 cm/set). by probe location and gas distribution in the reactor. In this mode of with

Both nitrogen to air step change methods and sodium sulfite degassing method were found operation, bubbles tend to accumulate and stratify in the duwncomer, up in the upper regions approximately 42 seconds of this secztion. The dcpcb of the
hub~~le:

with very high holdfrom increases

increasing gas flow rate. Liquid velocity is relativcfy low, with a mean circulation time of for the gas tlow rates studied. measurement Hence the deviation of the values measured by there should be If the perfectly mixed model is valid for the liquid phase, then KLa

should not be affected by probe location. the different probes is a measure little difference in the KLa a hydrodynamic correct. by Andre u

of the fitness of this assumption. Also,

value measured by the three different methods if the system is at

steady and the assumptions of perfectly mixed liquid and gas phases are 1983. A single parameter g is calculated fi = l&t, KLaj as the ratio of the characteristic (1)

To test this assumption, we used a criterion similar to the one that was proposed

time for mass transfer ( KLa j to the circulation time tc:

A3

Method for evaluation of mass transfer coefficients

2223

Large p values #J=OS

indicate that the characteristic between the interval

time for mass transfer is sufficiently mixing and the interval

long to this

safely use models assuming perfect liquid mixing ( Andre & to divide of perfect assumption is incorrect). Table experimental However, value and

1983 indicated the value of where

1 compares the experiments represented in Figures 3-8, for all three probes. In gas-liquid separator gas-liquid the standard deviation is small, within error. The large p value indicates high standard deviation that perfect liquid mixing can be assumed. separator, the reverse is true (i.e., low p deviation from the perfect mixing

the case of the Opened

in the case of the Closed

) indicating

assumption.

In general, caution must be used in assuming perfect liquid mixing. As in the

later case, a more sophisticated, structured reactor model would be more appropriate.

Structuredmodel for the ALR


For the cases where the assumption of perfect mixing of the liquid is incorrect, a structured model which takes into account the fluid dynamic characteristics of the different zones in the reactor has been developed. of a previously regions: of liquid published the riser, the downcomer and gas phases, It can be considered as an unsteady-state variation and Stein, 1980). The model consists of three Riser and downcomer considers plug flow are with the dynamic behavior model (Merchuk

and the gas separator. a scheme which

represented by two coupled partial differential equations describing following Variation superimposed axial dispersion.

of hydrostatic pressure along the reactor axis s tanks for in the equations as hydrodynamic

are taken into account. The gas separator is represented by a series of well-mixed the liquid, and disengagement describing parameter. the gas. of the gas after each stage is considered the number of stages serves In this section,

Figure 3 shows a schematic representation of the model used for the simulation of the ALR. The model assumes that each of the hydrodynamic and that the oxygen regions electrodes of the reactor has a have a first order different response. Figure 4 shows tyPica representation respectively, electrodes downcomer comparing results of the simul;ition !)r:)grdui: the two top graphs area a of oxygen from conchtilltt ;Ltion in the liquid to air. The simulated and gas phases, readings from nitrogen of the behavior mass transfer coefficient,

after a step change at the bottom are presented.

located

of the riser, the top of the riser and the top of the results shown in Fig. 2.When that the electrode was the issue the spatial the lag time. This is because of KLa (which

It can be seen that the shape of the different curves that would

be obtained at different locations resemble the experimental responces in Fig. 1 have been shifted in order to eliminate when complete liquid mixing is assumed in the calculation being tested), lag time is not considered. distribution of oxygen concentration axial length of the downcomer
eu
W:S/ll-tl

these two sets of curves it should be taken into account

On the two bottom graphs of Fig.4

in the liquid phase is presented.

The abscissa is the

and riser or the number of mixed tanks for the gas

2224

J. C. MERCHUK

et al.

A3

separator. reached.

Profiles are shown 5

for several times in 10 second intervals results and experimental device

until steady state is are and

In Figure Heshcowitz coefficient located nonlinear requires

the simulation description

data for a 40 liter ALR can be seen in Merchuk

compared.Detailed (19S6). results clearly

of the experimental

In this case the shapes of the curves are very similar also. to obtain experimental The procedure of the ALR by fitting readings

These

indicate that it is possible between

data of the mass transfer of the three electrodes to be followed includes

in each of the regions regression

on the boundary

those regions.

for the best values of the gas recircuiation solution

ratio and the mass transfer of the objective function equations, which

coefficients

in the riser, downcomer

and gas separator. Calculation

the simultaneous

of a system of partial differential

represent the ALR, Conclusions

for each set of the parameter values.

A criterion for predicting the validity of the assumption calculation of Kt_a values for an ALR has been experimentally assumption approach justify the use of this criterion. For cases where the perfect mixing KLa values obtained using the proposed

of perfect

liquid mixing

for

tested. The results obtained an alternative of ALR model, much

is not valid, Preliminary

based on a fluid dynamic structural model is pi-oposed.

results indicate that the

represent the operation

more accurately than the single value obtained based on the perfect mixing assumption. Notation concentration (mg/l) FG
KLa

riser superficial gas velocity mass transfer coefficient time circulation time gas recirculation ratio perfect mixing pal=meter <I?+( I)) Andre Fields, Linek, Young, G., Kobinson V., C.W. and Moo-Young, 1983, Cbem. 1%. M. Chem. Eng. Sci., 38, 1845 Vol. 4, (Moo-

:,

a
B 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

References P.R. and Slater, N.K.H., and Sinukle, M., Robinson C.W. Eng. Sci., 33,647. Biotechnology, Pergamon Bioeng., Eng. 64, 57 22, 1189. 41,105. Biotechnol., 32,1585. Press, Oxford.

J., 1985, Comprehensive and Howell, M.,1986, J-A., Eds.)

Merchuk Merchuk Merchuk Merchuk Siegel, Verlaau,

J. C., and Heshkiwitz J.C., Stein Y. and J-C., and Siegel, J.C., and Yunger, Merchuk M.H.,

Can. J. Chem.

p R-I., 1980, Biotechnol. 1988, J. Chem, Tech. R., 1990, Chem.

Eng. Sci.,

45, 2973-2975,.

M.H.,

J-C.. Schugerl,

K.., 1986, AIChE,

P., lL989, Chem.

Eng. Sci.,44,1139

A3

Method for evaluation of mass transfer coefficients

222s

TABLE 1: ComDarison of Methods and Probe Location KLa( 1/hr) tc (set) P Separator 3.98 16.2 55.8 Opened 0.82 41.1 106.1 Closed
1 .O 0.9 & 0.8 -t x -0 0.8 0.7 CLOSED

Std. Dev. 2.09 14.12

u; 0.6 0 0.5 z q 0 PROBE 1 BE _ * PRO-_ 2 A PROBE 3 I I 75 100125150 TIME (SEC) I I 1752 2 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.0 0 PROBE 1 l PROBE 2 A PROBE 3 25 50 100 125 75 TIME (SEC) 150 175

0 0.3

::

-+--t---t---+--l

25

50

Figure 2-Clcwcd gas .scpantor, 200-liter ALR . Probe I -Top or the riser: Probe 2Top 4. the drnvncomer; Prrrbe 3-Bottom.

Gas Out

* One or more perfectly


mixed tanks

Liquid & entrained

gas

Fipure 3- Schemntic rcprcsentatic>n of the nuid-dynamically structured mtdcl. The equations represent the transient behwinr. EZquatir~ns for the same phase in diffcrcnt regions are connected by the boundary conditions.

* I
Y

DOWNCOMER

RISER
Co-current upf low *Axial Dispersion In bothphases *(kLa) riser

Co-current downf low Axial Dispersion in both phases downcomer

(kLa)

Gas In

2226

J. C. MBRCHIJK ef al.

A3

8 l--

-------l

0.25

Simulntion rcsulta. Top figures xc tcmponl prorilcs prcdiclcd at the bottom d the downcomcr (I). the lop in the liquid phase; Top right-Idem in o1 the riser (2) and the gas separator. Top Icl t-O.xygen ccmcenlmlion the gas phase.Bottnm figures zwe aputial proriles predicted al six points ol lime after a slcp off c>sygen concentration at the gas inlet. Proiilcs corrcspond, I rom bottom lo top, lo 10.20.30.40.50 and 60 s t-Oxygen conccntntions in the liquid phase: Bottom right-Idcm in the gas scpztntor. rcspcctivcly. Bottom lrl

40

I,

hl,IZ.

Sitiiul;lfiotl 1

J 1 ..~~,__~_.-~---.~-~-~----in

1t see)

.l .

I (set)

I0

Ml

Fieurc 5-Comparison of simulated (Ml) and cxpcrimcntal (righl) profiles of oxygen in the 40-liter ALR. Jr,= 0.017 m/s; Simulation wzis done with: KLat=0.U75 I/s ; KLad=O.MO l/s ; KLa&~.0401/s ; a = 0.15

You might also like