Advertisement

Journal of Visualization

, Volume 21, Issue 1, pp 5–17 | Cite as

Particle-image-velocimetry measurements in organic liquid multiphase systems for an optimal reactor design and operation

  • Katharina Zähringer
  • Lisa-Maria Wagner
  • Dominique Thévenin
  • Patrick Siegmund
  • Kai Sundmacher
Regular Paper

Abstract

Hydrodynamic features are very important to find an optimal reactor design for the hydroformylation of long-chain alkenes. For this purpose, and for the validation of theoretical reactor concepts, velocity measurements in a model reactor system are necessary. Due to the difficult reaction conditions found in reality (toxic thermomorphic organic solvent system, high pressure, high temperature, limited fields of view in typically used model reactors) such measurements are not an easy task. In this work, comparative particle-image-velocimetry (PIV) measurements have been used to find out if (1) the substitution of the solvent with water, and (2) reducing operation pressure still lead to similar results. For this purpose, PIV measurements have been performed in a stirred tank reactor under reaction conditions (organic solvents, high pressure, high temperature), but also with water at reduced pressure levels. It is found that pressure (as expected) and also the employed solvents do not have a significant influence on the observed flow structures, although density and viscosity are rather different. Therefore, further systematic experiments are now carried out in a model reactor, completely built out of glass, with water filling, and at atmospheric pressure. A complete hydrodynamic characterization is thus possible, opening the door for optimization of the resulting hydrodynamic field and for detailed comparisons with theoretical reactor design as well as numerical predictions.

Graphical abstract

Keywords

Hydroformylation Particle-image-velocimetry Reactor design Hydrodynamics Multiphase system 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work is part of the Collaborative Research Center/Transregio 63 “Integrated Chemical Processes in Liquid Multiphase Systems” (subproject B1). Financial support by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG, German Research Foundation) is gratefully acknowledged (SFB-TR 63). Furthermore, the authors would like to thank their student Marina Goedecke for her help during the experiments.

References

  1. Baldi S, Yianneskis M (2003) On the direct measurement of turbulence energy dissipation in stirred vessels with PIV. Ind Eng Chem Res 42:7006–7016CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Behr A, Roll R (2005) Hydroaminomethylation in thermomorphic solvent systems. J Mol Catal A Chem 239:180–184CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Deen NG, Hjertager BH (2002) Particle image velocimetry measurements in an aerated stirred tank. Chem Eng Commun 189:1208–1221. doi: 10.1080/00986440213881 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Deen NG, Solberg T, Hjertager BH (2002) Flow generated by an aerated Rushton impeller: two-phase PIV experiments and numerical simulations. Can J Chem Eng 80:638–652Google Scholar
  5. Dreimann JM, Warmeling H, Weimann JN, Künnemann K, Behr A, Vorholt AJ (2016) Increasing selectivity of the hydroformylation in a miniplant: catalyst, solvent, and olefin recycle in two loops. AIChE J. doi: 10.1002/aic.15345 Google Scholar
  6. Hall JF, Barigou M, Simmons MJH, Stitt EH (2005) A PIV study of hydrodynamics in gas-liquid high throughput experimentation (HTE) reactors with eccentric impeller configurations. Chem Eng Sci 60:6403–6413. doi: 10.1016/j.ces.2005.03.044 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Hentschel B, Kiedorf G, Gerlach M, Hamel C, Seidel-Morgenstern A, Freund H, Sundmacher K (2015) Model-based identification and experimental validation of the optimal reaction route for the hydroformylation of 1-dodecene. Ind Eng Chem Res 54:1755–1765CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Kaiser NM, Flassig RJ, Sundmacher K (2016) Probabilistic reactor design in the framework of elementary process functions. Comput Chem Eng 94:45–59. doi: 10.1016/j.compchemeng.2016.06.008 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Kämper A, Warrelmann SJ, Reiswich K, Kuhlmann R, Franke R, Behr A (2016) First iridium-catalyzed hydroformylation in a continuously operated miniplant. Chem Eng Sci 144:364–371. doi: 10.1016/j.ces.2016.01.054 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Kilander J, Rasmuson A (2005) Energy dissipation and macro instabilities in a stirred square tank investigated using an le PIV approach and LDA measurements. Chem Eng Sci 60:6844–6856. doi: 10.1016/j.ces.2005.02.076 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Kim KC, Jeong EH, Kim SK, Adrian RJ (2001) A study on the turbulent mixing characteristics in a Rushton turbine reactor by PIV and PLIF. DLR-Mitteilung (3):163–173Google Scholar
  12. McBride K, Gaide T, Vorholt A, Behr A, Sundmacher K (2016) Thermomorphic solvent selection for homogeneous catalyst recovery based on COSMO-RS. Chem Eng Process 99:97–106. doi: 10.1016/j.cep.2015.07.004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Montante G, Magelli F, Paglianti A (2013) Fluid-dynamics characteristics of a vortex-ingesting stirred tank for biohydrogen production. Chem Eng Res Des 91:2198–2208. doi: 10.1016/j.cherd.2013.04.008 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Pan C, Min J, Liu X, Gao Z (2008) Investigation of fluid flow in a dual rushton impeller stirred tank using particle image velocimetry. Chin J Chem Eng 16:693–699. doi: 10.1016/S1004-9541(08)60142-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Sharp KV, Adrian RJ (2001) PIV Study of small-scale flow structure around a Rushton turbine. AIChE J 47:766–778. doi: 10.1002/aic.690470403 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Sharp KV, Kim KC, Adrian RJ (1999) A comparison of dissipation estimation methods in a stirred tank using particle image velocimetry (PIV). In: Proceedings of the 1999 3rd ASME/JSME joint fluids engineering conference, FEDSM’99, San Francisco, California, USA, 18–23 July 1999 (CD-ROM):1Google Scholar
  17. Sheng J, Meng H, Fox RO (1998) Validation of CFD simulations of a stirred tank using particle image velocimetry data. Can J Chem Eng 76:611–625CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Sheng J, Meng H, Fow RO (2000) A large eddy PIV method for turbulence dissipation rate estimation. Chem Eng Sci 55:4423–4434CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Sudiyo R, Virdung T, Andersson B (2003) Important factors in bubble coalescence modeling in stirred tank reactors. Can J Chem Eng 81:557–565CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Wieneke B (2015) PIV uncertainty quantification from correlation statistics. Meas Sci Technol 26:074002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Yoon HS, Sharp KV, Hill DF, Adrian RJ, Balachandar S, Ha MY, Kar K (2001) Integrated experimental and computational approach to simulation of flow in a stirred tank. Chem Eng Sci 56:6635–6649. doi: 10.1016/S0009-2509(01)00315-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Yoon HS, Hill DF, Balachandar S, Adrian RJ, Ha MY (2005) Reynolds number scaling of flow in a Rushton turbine stirred tank. Part I—Mean flow, circular jet and tip vortex scaling. Chem Eng Sci 60:3169–3183. doi: 10.1016/j.ces.2004.12.039 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Zagajewski M, Behr A, Sasse P, Wittmann J (2014) Continuously operated miniplant for the rhodium catalyzed hydroformylation of 1-dodecene in a thermomorphic multicomponent solvent system (TMS). Chem Eng Sci 115:88–94. doi: 10.1016/j.ces.2013.09.033 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Zagajewski M, Dreimann J, Thönes M, Behr A (2016) Rhodium catalyzed hydroformylation of 1-dodecene using an advanced solvent system: towards highly efficient catalyst recycling. Chem Eng Process 99:115–123. doi: 10.1016/j.cep.2015.06.014 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Zlokarnik M (2001) Stirring: theory and practice. Wiley-VCH, WeinheimCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Visualization Society of Japan 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Lehrstuhl für Strömungsmechanik und StrömungstechnikOtto-von-Guericke-Universität MagdeburgMagdeburgGermany
  2. 2.LSVTOtto-von-Guericke-Universität MagdeburgMagdeburgGermany
  3. 3.Max Planck Institute for Dynamics of Complex Technical SystemsMagdeburgGermany

Personalised recommendations