Copyright © 2010 American Institute of Chemical Engineers (AIChE)

Back to Basics

Agitating
Fibrous Materials
Gregory T. Benz Slurry agitation involves complicated processes. This
Benz Technology
International, Inc. article presents guidelines for understanding the
rheology of cellulosic and other fibrous materials,
and outlines a method for scaling up their agitation.

F
ibrous structures create a complex rheology and tend Fibrous slurries
to damp an impeller’s motion, complicating their Fibrous slurries of commercial significance include all
agitation. The process of agitating some slurries, forms of paper stock, as well as cellulose slurries used to
particularly those associated with the paper industry, is make water-soluble polymers, such as carboxymethyl cel-
well understood, and many engineers are already aware of lulose (CMC) and similar materials that thicken food prod-
empirical rules for mixing common fluids. This article dis- ucts, toothpaste and drilling mud. Lignocellulosic slurries
cusses rheology and suitable scale-up methods for agitating may also serve as feedstock for cellulosic ethanol produc-
relatively new types of slurries, such as those containing tion. The solids in these slurries contain a large amount of
lignocellulosic materials. water inside their cellular structure.
In slurries that con-
tain materials such as
synthetic polymer fibers
or fiberglass, no water is
present inside, as there is
no cellular structure. This
is a major difference. Only
the free water outside
the cellular structure in
a lignocellulosic slurry
contributes to fluidizing
the slurry (1).
When the solids
content exceeds a certain
percentage of insoluble
solids, cellulosic slurries
cease to be a liquid as long
as the cell walls remain
intact. For most paper
stock slurries, the maxi-
mum solids concentration
S Switchgrass and used newspapers may be made into a fibrous slurry for the production of cellulosic ethanol. is about 12–15%; above

28 www.aiche.org/cep June 2010 CEP

that, they are damp solids. The practical limit for agita-
tion is about 6–8%. This is because the required torque is
almost proportional to the cube of the solids content from
2–8%, but increases even more rapidly above 8%.
When cellulosic material is exposed to reagents that
react with the cellulose and destroy the cell wall, the liquid
inside the cells is released and becomes available to sus-
pend any remaining solids as the reaction progresses.
Cotton fibers (which are 95+% cellulose), for example,
may be slurried to about 10% solids, and resemble mashed
potatoes at such a consistency. Reaction turns the cotton
fibers into a low-viscosity slurry of CMC or similar crystal-
line material, which requires very little motion to agitate.
Lignocellulosic materials for ethanol production, how-
ever, may start out at more than 30% solids and resemble
peat moss. These materials will liquefy when exposed to
certain enzymes to produce a final slurry with a viscosity
that could be less than 5 cP, even without the addition of
water. Using either fed-batch or continuous-flow mixing
avoids the need to agitate the original high-solids mate-
rial, because the feed to the agitator is a liquid mixture of
hydrolyzed material plus some of the unhydrolyzed mate-
rial. Generally, unhydrolyzed material can be mixed by a
dedicated solids mixer, but this equipment is more expen-
sive than similarly sized conventional agitated tanks, and
is not available in the sizes needed for commercial ethanol
production.
Rheology of fibrous slurries
In order to properly design full-scale agitation equip-
ment, the rheology of the slurry must be characterized well
enough to predict the power draw of the agitation system.
High-solids fibrous slurries can form a pile with a
finite angle of repose. This phenomenon is associated with
yield (shear) stress, and that certain shear stress must be
exceeded before motion will occur. Above that shear stress,
the material is often shear-thinning. Other common fluids
that exhibit this behavior include toothpaste and ketchup.
Fluids exhibiting a combination of yield stress (σy) and
shear-thinning behavior are known as Herschel-Bulkley
fluids, and their shear stress (σs) vs. shear rate relationship
is given by:
σs = σy + M(dv/dx)n (1)
where M is the viscosity constant, dv/dx is the velocity
gradient, and n is the power law exponent.
As the reaction progresses, the yield stress (σy), which
depends on the mechanical structural properties of the
fiber, often disappears and Eq. 1 becomes a simpler power
law relationship:
σs = M(dv/dx)n (2)
The value for M, which must be measured or experi-
mentally fitted, will also change as the reaction progresses.
Eventually, the solution becomes a low-viscosity, Newto-
nian liquid, and the n exponent can be dropped:
σs = M(dv/dx) (3)
Since viscosity (μ) is shear stress (σs) divided by veloc-
ity gradient, divide Eqs. 1, 2, and 3 by dv/dx to get corre-
sponding equations for apparent viscosity (μa):
μa = σy/(dv/dx) + M(dv/dx)n–1 (4)
μa = M(dv/dx)n-1 (5)
μa = M (6)
When the shear rate is known, the calculated viscosities

Nomenclature
A = viscosity correlation constant, cP/s P = power, W
a = scaling exponent, dimensionless T = cylindrical tank diameter, m
B = viscosity correlation constant, cP-s(n–1) v = velocity, m/s
C = ratio of power number to Reynolds number in V = liquid volume, m3
laminar flow x = length, m
D = impeller diameter, m Z = liquid level, m
D/T = tank diameter, m
K = Metzner and Otto shear rate constant, Greek Letters
dimensionless
M = viscosity constant, (N-sn)/m2 or kg/m-s(2–n) μ = viscosity, kg/m-s
n = power law exponent, dimensionless μa = apparent viscosity, kg/m-s
N = shaft speed, 1/s ρ = fluid density, kg/m3
NP = power number = P/ρN3D5 σs = shear stress in fluid, N/m2
NRe = impeller Reynolds number = D2Nρ/μ σy = yield stress in fluid, N/m2

CEP June 2010 www.aiche.org/cep 29

Back to Basics
can be used to determine the effect on impeller power and
applied to agitator design.
Problems in measuring rheology
Fibrous slurries are two-phase systems: a liquid car-
rier phase and a solid, fibrous phase. The carrier is typi-
cally a low-viscosity liquid such as water. The some-
times-high apparent viscosity results from the mechanical
interactions among fibers as shear stress is imposed on
the system in an attempt to make it flow. In bulk flow,
such as in a pipe or an agitated tank, the apparent viscos-
ity depends on the shear rate distribution. However, in
conventional viscometers, which use a spindle consist-
ing of a rotating disc, cone or cylinder plus a stationary
surface, the two phases tend to separate, leaving a thin
film of the carrier liquid in contact with the spindle. This
results in measured viscosity values that are unrealisti-
cally low. Some paddle viscometers measure yield stress,
but the shear rate being produced is usually not known
(even by the manufacturer).
Therefore, it is difficult to develop relationships that
would be useful in designing equipment. Often, it is neces-
sary to use the type of equipment being designed as its own
viscometer.
After a certain degree of reaction (or hydrolysis), the
fibrous structure is lost, and an apparent viscosity can be
determined for the slurry with conventional viscometers,
as long as the effect of rheology on the device’s shear rate
is accounted for. For example, the shear rate for a rotating
cylindrical spindle approximately equals its Newtonian
shear rate divided by n for a power-law fluid (2).
100
10
Power Number
1 is known, then that power number corre-
0.1
1 10 100
Reynolds Number
S Figure 1. The power number is a function of the Reynolds number, as shown here
for a typical hydrofoil impeller.
30 www.aiche.org/cep June 2010 CEP
Using an agitator as a viscometer
The power draw of an agitator impeller is characterized
by a dimensionless group known as the power number:
NP = P/ρN3D5 (7)
where NP is the power number, P is the power, ρ is the fluid
density, N is the shaft speed, and D is the impeller diameter.
The power number depends on the impeller type, its
size relative to the tank diameter (D/T), and other geo-
metric factors. Most importantly, it also depends on the
Reynolds number (NRe):
NRe = D2Nρ/μ (8)
Figure 1 illustrates the relationship between power
number and Reynolds number for a typical hydrofoil
impeller. The data do not represent a specific impeller, but
they are accurate to within ±10% for most 3-bladed hydro-
foil impellers currently on the market. Real hydrofoil data
are often known by agitator manufacturers, although this
information may be difficult to obtain.
A hydrofoil was chosen for this article for two rea-
sons: It provides good measurements over a broad range
of Reynolds numbers, and, due to its ease of application
at larger D/T ratios, it performs better than mixed-flow or
radial impellers in shear-thinning fluids.
In the laminar flow region (NRe < 40), the slope of a
log-log plot is –1, which indicates that the power number is
inversely proportional to the Reynolds number:
NP = C/NRe (9)
For this curve, C = 44.43. It is normally
best to collect data in the laminar range,
although low-transition Reynolds numbers
(up to 300 for hydrofoils) may also be used.
For an agitator impeller, if the fluid
density, shaft speed, power draw, impeller
size, and impeller type are known, the power
number can be calculated. If the relationship
between power number and Reynolds number
sponds to a particular Reynolds number, and
viscosity can be determined directly from the
definition of Reynolds number.
Power draw measurements should be
1,000 10,000
accurate to ±5% or better. Since measuring
agitator power can be difficult, electrical mea-
surements of motor draw are typically insuf-
ficient. Instead, measure the reaction torque
on the drive or vessel, and combine that with
accurate shaft-speed readings.
For example, consider an 0.18-m-dia. laboratory
impeller with the power number curve shown in Figure 1.
It operates in a fluid with a density of 1,030 kg/m3,
drawing 0.76 W at a shaft speed of 0.57 rev/s. From Eq. 7,
the power number is 21.1. Assuming laminar flow, Eq. 9
can be rearranged and solved for the Reynolds number,
yielding NRe = 2.11. This value is below 40, verifying the
assumption that the flow is laminar. The fluid’s apparent
viscosity can be easily calculated by manipulating Eq. 8,
substituting μa for μ:
11,631, B = –6,327, and n = –0.025, with a correlation
coefficient greater than 0.999.
Example 2: Agitation scale-up
This section uses the methods of Ref. 4, which are
based on geometric similarity (Figure 2). According to this
principle, all dimensions scale up proportionally. Only one
independent variable is used for scale-up — agitator speed.
A scale ratio, R, is defined as:
R = T2/T1 = D2/D1, etc. (13)

μa = D2Nρ/NRe (10) where T is the cylindrical tank diameter and D is the impel-

This yields an apparent viscosity of 9.02 kg/m-s, or

9,020 cP. B2
N2

Example 1:
Partially hydrolyzed lignocellulosic slurry
Table 1 presents data for a generic slurry of a par-
tially hydrolyzed cellulosic material with an initial solids
content of 30–40% dry solids. (Without partial hydroly- B1
N1
sis, such a material would not be liquid, and would need
Z2
solids mixing equipment to induce mixing and contacting
with enzymes.) The raw data consist of torque and shaft-
speed measurements for an impeller and tank system.
D2
The column for power is the product of torque times shaft Z1
speed; it is used to calculate impeller power number, as C2

defined in Eq. 7. Equations 8, 9, and 10 are used to calcu- D1 C1

late viscosity (which is also given in cP because kg/m-s,
although an SI unit, is not in common use for everyday T1 T2

discussions of viscosity).
S Figure 2. Agitation scale-up assumes geometric similarity, where all
These data correlate well using the Herschel-Bulkley dimensions are scaled by the same factor.
model, modified using the equation of Metzner and Otto (3):
Table 1. These hypothetical data illustrate a generic
dv/dx = KN (11) hydrofoil impeller’s range of operation.
Torque, N, P, W NP NRe µ a, µa, cP
where K is the shear rate constant. Although K has been N-m 1/s kg/m-s
determined to have a value of 10 for Rushton turbines, it is
1.3 0.16 0.21 260.92 0.17 31.35 31,355
not clear whether this value applies to hydrofoils. It is also
not clear that it will remain constant for high-yield-point 1.3 0.23 0.30 126.27 0.35 21.81 21,812
fluids. Therefore, it may be unwise to convert the agitator 1.33 0.3 0.40 75.93 0.59 17.11 17,108
speed to a shear rate by substituting Eq. 11 into Eqs. 1–5 and 1.33 0.57 0.76 21.03 2.11 9.00 9,004
then assume that such a relationship may be extrapolated to 1.36 0.75 1.02 12.42 3.58 7.00 6,998
other kinds of process equipment or to pipe flow.
1.41 0.95 1.34 8.03 5.54 5.73 5,728
To avoid such potential confusion, try to correlate
apparent viscosity directly as a function of agitator speed: 1.46 1.71 2.50 2.57 17.32 3.29 3,295
*Basis: T = 0.3 m, D = 0.18 m, Z = 0.27 m, ρ = 1,030 kg/m3
μa = A/N + BN(n–1) (12) Note: Although these data are realistic for cellulosic and similar
fibrous slurries, they are not actual measured data. They are
where A and B are viscosity correlation constants. presented for illustrative purposes only and should not be used
to design equipment for any particular slurry.
For the data in Table 1 (with viscosity in cP), A =

CEP June 2010 www.aiche.org/cep 31

Back to Basics
ler diameter. The shaft speed ratio can be represented as:
N2/N1 = 1/Ra (14)
Scaling up based on equal fluid velocity (and equal tip
speed) requires using a = 1 as the scaling exponent. This
will prevent the formation of zero-motion zones in the
scaled-up system, as long as the laboratory starting point
has complete motion. Ignoring any increase in pumping
number upon scale-up due to changes in Reynolds number
provides a degree of safety factor.
Equation 14 is rewritten as:
N2 = N1/R (15)
The vessel described in Table 1 will serve as the original,
small-scale vessel for this example. The chosen impeller(s)
must allow full motion throughout the vessel (determined by
visual observation) at some measured shaft speed. Impellers
that are too small allow dead spots (where the fluid velocity
is zero) to form, whereas impellers that are too large rotate
the entire mass of fluid without mixing it.
Baffles are needed in low-viscosity applications to
prevent swirl. In fluids with a high yield stress or shear-
thinning behavior, baffles often hinder flow and create dead
spots. Therefore, for this example, baffles are not used.
Careful observation of this vessel reveals the need for
dual impellers to achieve full motion throughout the mass.
The material in the bottom part of the tank is more difficult
to agitate than material at the top and requires a higher
shaft speed to achieve full motion than is needed at the top.
This is because in the bottom of the tank, the yield stress is
applied over a larger area per volume of liquid than along
the sides of the upper section of the tank.
By combining the original 0.18-m-dia. impeller near
the bottom of the shaft with a smaller (0.15-m-dia.)
impeller near the top of the shaft, it is possible to achieve
visually similar motion throughout the depth of the vessel.
A shaft speed of 5.6 rev/s (336 rpm) is needed to create full
tank motion with this system.
Scaling to a production vessel with a 3.5 m diameter,
the principle of geometric similarity gives an R value of
11.667. Multiplying Z = 0.27 by 11.667 gives a full-scale
liquid level of 3.15 m and a working volume of 29.34 m3
(7,750 gal). The lower impeller has a diameter of 2.1 m and
the upper impeller’s diameter is 1.76 m. The shaft speed is
5.6/11.667 = 0.48 rev/s (28.8 rpm).
To determine agitator power, calculate the apparent
viscosity and then the power and Reynolds numbers. At
0.48 rev/s, Eq. 13 gives μa = 10,800 cP (10.8 kg/m-s).
From Eq. 8, the Reynolds numbers are 202 for the lower
impeller and 142 for the upper impeller. Figure 1 gives
32 www.aiche.org/cep June 2010 CEP
power numbers of about 0.57 for the lower impeller and
0.7 for the upper impeller. The power of the lower impeller
is calculated by rearranging Eq. 7, resulting in P = 2,652
W. Similarly, for the upper impeller, P = 1,347 W.
The total agitator power is the sum of these: 3,999 W,
or 4 kW. Motors come in standard sizes, and agitator drives
typically have nominal American Gear Manufacturer’s
Association (AGMA) speed ratings. Allowing for a motor
load of 90% or less, the nearest standard gear drive/motor
package would be 7.5 hp at 30 rpm. Minor adjustments
to impeller size can be made for operating at the slightly
higher AGMA shaft speed.
Thoughts for the future
The most significant new fibrous slurries are those used
for cellulosic ethanol production. Feedstocks include wood
pulp, sawdust, switchgrass, corn stover, newspaper, munici-
pal waste, etc., and may in the future include residue from
algae used for food and fuel oil production. Feedstocks may
be pretreated mechanically, thermally, or by acids or alkalis
to make them more easily hydrolyzed by enzymes. Enzyme
dosing and type may vary from process to process.
With all these variables, it will probably be necessary
to test each feedstock in each process at each major
stage of hydrolysis to obtain sufficient data for agitator
design. Current operating plants may simply be using
oversized equipment. Although a unified theory of
cellulosic rheology would be very useful, at present, it
seems very unlikely. CEP
Literature Cited
1. Benz, G. T., “Agitation Challenges in Cellulosic Ethanol
Production,” Ethanol Producer, pp. 130–133 (March 2008).
2. Mitschka, P., “Simple Conversion of Brookfield R.V.T. Readings
into Viscosity Functions,” Rheologica Acta, 22 (2), pp. 207–209
(1982).
3. Metzner, A. B., and R. E. Otto, “Agitation of Non-Newtonian
Fluids,” AIChE Journal, 3, pp. 3–10 (1957).
4. Rautzen, R. R., et al., “How to Use Scale-up Methods for
Turbine Agitators,” Chem. Eng., pp. 109–118 (Sept. 27, 1976).
GREGORY T. BENZ is the president of Benz Technology International, Inc.
(2305 Clarksville Rd., Clarksville, OH 45113; Phone: (937) 289-4504;
Fax: (937) 289-3914; E-mail: benztech@mindspring.com), which
focuses on mixing and bioreactor design consultation, including equip-
ment specification and bid evaluation. He is also an instructor for the
Univ. of Madison Continuing Education Program and a registered P.E.
in Ohio with more than 33 years of experience in the design of agita-
tion systems. He has authored an online mixing course taught by the
Decatur Professional Development Corp. He received a BS in chemical
engineering from the Univ. of Cincinnati, and has taken a course on
fermentation biotechnology from The Center for Professional Advance-
ment. He is a member of AIChE, the International Society for Pharma-
ceutical Engineering (ISPE), the Society for Industrial Microbiology
(SIM), the Society for Biological Engineering (SBE), and the American
Chamber of Commerce in Shanghai.