Mass Transfer Considerations for Scale-Up and Scale-Down of Animal Cell Bioprocesses

  • R. Puskeiler
  • M. Edler
  • K. Didzus
  • R. Müller
  • J. Gabelsberger
Conference paper
Part of the ESACT Proceedings book series (ESACT, volume 5)

Abstract

The development, characterization and validation of animal cell bioprocesses can greatly benefit from straight forward scale-up/-down procedures that generally rely on scale down models. The match of scale down model data to the data gathered at larger scales relies on several factors one of which is the mass transfer coefficient. This study reports the kLa for O2 and CO2 measured in a bioreactor equipped with a ring sparger. The results indicate that higher power input leads to a decrease of CO2 elimination capacity. When high power input is attributed to a smaller bubble diameter, this finding confirms a conclusion in literature that relates CO2 elimination to bubble size (Mostafa and Gu (2003), Biotechnol Prog 19(1):45–51; Frahm et al. (2002), J Biotechnol 99(2):133–148). Aeration rate, however, does not influence the mass transfer ratio at a given power input.

Keywords

Mass Transfer Coefficient Bubble Size Aeration Rate Small Bubble Bubble Diameter 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. M. Boon, J.J. Heijnen (1998), Hydromet 48:187–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. B. Frahm, H.C. Blank, P. Cornand, W. Oelssner, U. Guth, P. Lane, A. Munack, K. Johannsen, R. Pörtner (2002), J Biotechnol 99(2):133–148.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. R. Fuchs, D.D.Y. Ryu (1971), Ind Eng Chem Process Des Dev 10(2):190–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. D.R. Gray, S. Chen, W. Howarth, D. Inlow, B.L. Maiorella (1996), Cytotechnol 22(1–3):65–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. V. Linek, V. Vacek, P. Benes (1987), Chem Eng J Biochem Eng 34(1):11–34.Google Scholar
  6. S.S. Mostafa, X. Gu (2003), Biotechnol Prog 19(1):45–51.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. R. Puskeiler, D. Weuster-Botz (2005), J Biotechnol 120(4):430–438.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. M. Sobotka, A. Prokop, I.J. Dunn, A. Einsele (1982), Ann Rep Ferm Proc 5:127–210.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • R. Puskeiler
    • 1
  • M. Edler
    • 2
  • K. Didzus
    • 1
  • R. Müller
    • 1
  • J. Gabelsberger
    • 1
  1. 1.Pharma Biotech Production and DevelopmentRoche Diagnostics GmbHPenzbergGermany
  2. 2.Institute of Chemistry, University of LoebenLoebenAustria

Personalised recommendations