, Volume 9, Issue 5, pp 283–289 | Cite as

Modeling of direct recovery of lactic acid from whole broths by ion exchange adsorption

  • A.V. Sosa
  • J. Ochoa
  • N.I. Perotti


Lactic acid fermentation process with L. casei CRL 686 was performed. The static adsorption isotherm over a strong anionic exchange resin, AmberliteTM IRA-400 was measured, and the static binding capacity parameters were quantified. Early recovery of lactic acid from this lactate producer from unclarified culture broth was performed in a liquid solid fluidized bed, with the resin as the solid adsorbent, and the dynamic adsorption capacity was calculated. Good agreement was found between static and dynamic binding capacity values. The fluidized bed height was twice the settled bed height and the overall process was controlled by the liquid solid mass transfer. This operation was also simulated by continuously well stirred tanks arranged in series and superficial solid deactivation as in a gas solid catalytic reactor. The deactivation process takes into account liquid channeling and agglomerations of solid induced by the viscosity of the broth and also by the cells during the adsorption. These patterns were also verified by experimental observations, and are in agreement with the results found in the literature. The breakthrough data together with others from previous works were satisfactorily fitted until the 90% dimensionless concentration was reached for both culture broths. The model could be used in future studies on predictions about the liquid solid fluidized bed behavior and other different operating conditions.

fermentation ion exchange lactic acid modeling recovery 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Arters DC, Fan LS, and Kim BC (1988) Mass transfer and bed expansion of solid-slurry fluidized beds. AIChE J. 34(7): 1221–1224.Google Scholar
  2. Asenjo JA (1990) Separation process in biotechnology. Marcel Dekker, Inc., N.Y., Cap. 9, ISBN 0–8247–8270–4.Google Scholar
  3. Asif M, Kalogerakis N and Behie LA (1992) Hydrodynamic of liquid fluidized beds including the distributor region. Chem. Eng. Sci. 47(15/16): 4155–4166.Google Scholar
  4. Bascoul A, Delmas H and Courdec JP (1988) Caractéristiques Hydrodinamiques de la Fluisisation Liquide-Solide: Influence du Distributeur. Chem. Eng. J. 37: 11–24.Google Scholar
  5. Bascoul A, Courdec JP and Delmas H (1993) Mouvement des Particules Solides en Fluidisation Liquide Solide. Chem. Eng. J. 51: 135–150.Google Scholar
  6. Belter PA, Cussler EL and Hu WS (1988) Bioseparations: Downstream Processing for Biotechnology. (p. 159). John Wiley & Sons, N.Y.Google Scholar
  7. Bruno Bárcena JM (1997) ‘Producción de Biomasa y Acido L(+)-Láctico por Cepas Seleccionadas de Bacterias Lácticas’. PhD Thesis, National University of Tucumán, Argentina.Google Scholar
  8. Buijs A and Wesselingh JA (1980) Batch Fluidized Ion-Exchange Column for Streams Containing Suspended Particles. J Chromatogr 201: 319–327.Google Scholar
  9. Carberry JJ (1980) Ingeniería de las Reacciones Químicas y Catalíticas, Ed. Géminis, Bs. As., Argentina, ISBN 0–07–009890–9.Google Scholar
  10. Carlos CR and Richardson JF (1968) Solids movement in liquid fluidised beds — I. Particle Velocity Distribution 28(8A): 813–824.Google Scholar
  11. Córdoba PR, Ragout AL, Siñeriz F and Perotti NI (1996) Lactate form cultures of Lactobacillus casei recovered in a fluidized bed column using ion exchange resin, Biotechnology Techniques 10 8: 629–634.Google Scholar
  12. Córdoba P, Raya Tonetti G, Siñeríz F and Perotti NI (1999) Purification of lactic acid from fermentation using an anionic resin in a fluidized bed reactor. Lat. Am. App. Res. 29: 31–34.Google Scholar
  13. Di Felice R (1995) Hydrodynamics of liquid fluidisation. Chem. Eng. Sci. 50: 1213–1245.Google Scholar
  14. Fan L-S, Kawamura T, Chittester D.C and Kornosky RM (1985) Experimental observation of nonhomogeneity in a liquid-solid fluidized bed of small particles. Chem. Eng. Commun. 37: 141–157.Google Scholar
  15. González-Vara A, Vaccari G, Dosi E, Trilli A, Rossi M and Matteuzzi D (2000) Enhanced production of L(+) lactic acid in chemostat by Lactobacilus casei DSM 20011 using ion-exchange resins and cross flow filtration in a fully automated pilot plant controlled via NIR. Biotechnol. Bioeng. 67(2): 147–166.Google Scholar
  16. Hartman M, Trnka D and Havlin V (1992) A relationship to estimate the porosity in liquid-solid fluidized beds. Chem. Eng. Sci. 47(12): 3162–3166.Google Scholar
  17. Khan AR and Richardson JF (1989) Fluid-particle interactions and flow characteristics of fluidized beds and settling suspensions of spherical particles. Chem. Eng. Comm. 78: 111–130.Google Scholar
  18. Latif BAJ and Richardson JF (1972) Circulation patterns and velocity distributions for particles in a liquid fluidised bed. Chem. Eng. Sci. 27: 1933–1949.Google Scholar
  19. Perry RH and Chilton CH (1982) Chemical Engineer's Handbook, 5th ed. (pp 16–16).Google Scholar
  20. Planas J, Kozlowski J, Harris MJ, Tjerneld F and Hahn-Hägerdal B (1999) Novel polymer-polymer conjugates for recovery of lactic acid by aqueous two-phase extraction. Biotechnol Bioeng. 66(4): 211–218.Google Scholar
  21. Ramachandran PA and Chaudhari RV (1983) Three-Phase Catalytic Reactors. In Gordon and Breach Science Publishers, ISBN 0–677–05650–8.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • A.V. Sosa
    • 1
  • J. Ochoa
    • 1
  • N.I. Perotti
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.TucumánArgentina
  2. 2.Microbiología General e IndustrialFACET.UNTArgentina

Personalised recommendations