Chemical Engineering Science 57 (2002) 18771884

www.elsevier.com/locate/ces
Dispersion coecient and settling velocity of the solids in agitated
slurry reactors stirred with multiple rushton turbines
M. Nocentini, D. Pinelli, F. Magelli

DICMA-Department of Chemical, Mining and Environmental Engineering, University of Bologna, Viale Risorgimento 2,
40136 Bologna, Italy
Received 8 October 2001; accepted 22 February 2002
Abstract
The feature of solids distribution in tanks stirred with multiple Rushton turbines was investigated. Both transient and steady-state
experiments were performed in tanks of two scales with a variety of suspensions. The data were analysed with the axial sedimentation
dispersion model. The axial dispersion coecient of the solid phase was found not to dier from that of the liquid by more than 20%.
The eective particle settling velocity in the stirred medium was then determined. It is conrmed that this parameter is dierent from the
terminal settling velocity. Their ratio exhibits the same dependence on Kolmogoro microscale and particle size as obtained previously
with an indirect, approximate approach. ? 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Chemical reactors; Mixing; Multiple Rushton turbines; Multiphase ow; Particulate processes; Solids distribution
1. Introduction
The knowledge of the spatial solids distribution in solid
liquid, agitated reactors is important for proper equipment
design and reliable process operationespecially when
through-ow mode is adopted.
The solids distribution is the result of two main compet-
ing actions, namely particle lift due to its interaction with
liquid ow and turbulence and particle tendency to settle.
Several models have been proposed for calculating solids
non-homogeneity that incorporate particle settling veloc-
ity (or particle drag coecient) and one or more param-
eters for describing macro-mixing phenomena. They span
from the simple one-dimensional model with axial disper-
sion and sedimentation (e.g. Magelli, Fajner, Nocentini, &
Pasquali, 1990) to two-dimensional (Penaz, Rod, & Re-
hakova, 1978; Sysova, Fort, Vanek, & Kudrna, 1984; Ku-
drna, Sysova, & Fort, 1986; Schempp & Bohnet, 1995)
or multi-zone sedimentationdispersion models (Yamazaki,
Tojo, & Miyanami, 1986) and two- or three-dimensional
network-of-zones models (Brucato & Rizzuti, 1988; Bru-
cato, Magelli, Nocentini, & Rizzuti, 1991; McKee et al.,
1994). Computational uid dynamics tools have also started

Corresponding author. Fax: +39-051-209-3147.

E-mail address: franco.magelli@mail.ing.unibo.it (F. Magelli).
being implemented with encouraging results (Bakker,
Fasano, & Myers, 1994; Brucato, Ciofalo, Godfrey, Grisa,
& Micale, 1996; Brucato, Ciofalo, Grisa, Magelli, & Mi-
cale, 1997; Decker & Sommerfeld, 1996; Barrue, Bertrand,
Cristol, & Xuereb, 1999; Sha, Palosaari, Oinas, & Ogawa,
1999; Micale, Montante, Grisa, Brucato, & Godfrey, 2000;
and Montante, Micale, Brucato, & Magelli, 2000).
The particle settling velocity in a stirred environment
has been recognised to be usually lower than the termi-
nal settling velocity (Magelli, et al., 1990; Brucato, Grisa,
& Montante, 1998; Pinelli, Nocentini, & Magelli, 2001).
Though this nding is in good agreement with the results of
more fundamental studies on the particleliquid interaction
(Schwartzberg & Treybal, 1968; Uhlherr & Sinclair, 1970;
Levins & Glastonbury, 1972; Kuboi, Komasawa, & Otake,
1974; Nienow & Bartlett, 1974), it was arrived to in an in-
direct wayeither by supposing that the dispersion coef-
cient of the solid and of liquid phase are equal (Magelli
et al., 1990; Pinelli, Nocentini, & Magelli, 1996) or as the
result of parametric analyses of the whole phenomena (No-
centini & Magelli, 1992; Rousar, Van den Hakker, Ditl, &
Havelkova, 1998).
A more direct experimental approach, which is based on
transient solids distribution analysis and permits to obtain
the solids axial dispersion coecient, was adopted by this
group (without publishing the results in learned journals)
0009-2509/02/$ - see front matter ? 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
PII: S 0009- 2509( 02) 00087- 8
1878 M. Nocentini et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 57 (2002) 18771884
Table 1
Particle characteristics
size (mm) Material Density (kg l
1
) U
t
(cm s
1
) In tank (s)
0.33 Glass 2.45 0.8; 4.25.3 1
23B
; 1
23A
; 1
13
0.79 Glass 2.47 3.3; 11.5 1
23B
2.95 Plastic 1.45 9.3; 18 1
23B
0.14 Glass 2.46 1.21.7 1
23A
; 1
13
0.23 Glass 2.46 3 1
23A
; 1
13
0.33 Bronze 8.61 2.3; 14.5 1
23B
0.98 Glass 2.47 5;14 1
23A
as well as by Brucato et al. (1998) and Montante, Grisa,
Micale, and Brucato (1998).
Since the data published so far are rather limited, an ad-
ditional investigation was conducted to broaden the knowl-
edge in this area. The axial sedimentationdispersion model
was adopted for data analysis. The investigation was focused
on the determination of the axial dispersion coecients of
the solid phase and the subsequent calculation of the par-
ticle settling velocity in the stirred medium. The work was
performed in two geometrically similar tanks of high as-
pect ratio agitated with multiple Rushton turbines, since this
conguration magnies the vertical concentration gradients
with respect to the radial ones. Thus, it allows an easier and
more straightforward analysis of the dispersion phenomena
and more reliable parameter estimate.
2. Experimental
2.1. Equipment and experimental conditions
The investigation was carried out in vertical, cylindrical
tanks of two scales characterised by aspect ratio H}1=4. The
following tanks were used: a small one, 1
13
(1 = 13.6 cm,
J =7.04 l), and a bigger one, 1
23A
(1 =23.2 cm, J =7.04 l),
which were identical to those used in previous investigations
(Magelli et al., 1990; Nocentini & Magelli, 1992; Pinelli et
al., 1996), see Fig. 1. The last one was substituted with one
identical in all the dimensions except for the diameter, 1
23B
(1 =23.2 cm, J =39.6 l), after breakage. The 1
13
and 1
23A
tanks were made of Pyrex, 1
23B
was made of Plexiglas. They
had four vertical 1}10 baes, at bottom and a at lid. Agi-
tation was provided with four equal, evenly spaced Rushton
turbines (D = 4.34 and 7.87 cm, respectively) mounted on
the same shaft.
The liquids used were water and aqueous solutions of
polyvinylpyrrolidone (Newtonian behaviour, viscosity up to
16 mPa s). As the solids, mono-sized spherical particles of
dierent size and material were used, all with j
S
j
L
: their
main characteristics are given in Table 1 with the prevailing
terminal velocity. The mean solids concentration was in the
range 25 g}l
1
for the glass particles, about 4 g}l
1
for the
plastic ones.
Fig. 1. Geometrical conguration of the tank and turbine location.
The experiments were carried out at room temperature
in batch conditions. The rotational speed was in the range
1525 s
1
in 1
23A
and 1
23B
and in the range 2037 s
1
in
1
13
, i.e. always higher than the just suspended condition.
2.2. Solids concentration measurement
The solid concentration in the vessel was measured by
means of the non-intrusive optical technique described by
Fajner, Magelli, Nocentini, and Pasquali (1985). A laser
diode and a silicon photo-diode, used as the light source
and the receiver respectively, were mounted on a travers-
ing system. The light beam passed through the vessel hor-
izontally along a chord about 1 cm o the shaft, approxi-
mately midway between the vertical baes. The measur-
ing system was calibrated for each particle fraction. Since
the radial solids concentration gradients are fairly limited in
stirred tanks (Yamazaki, Tojo, & Miyanami, 1986; Barresi
& Baldi, 1987; Bilek & Rieger, 1990; Mak & Ruszkowski,
1990) and, moreover, the aspect ratio of the tanks is such
as to minimise the radial inhomogeneity relative to the ver-
tical distribution, each measurement was representative of
the solid concentration on the whole horizontal plane.
M. Nocentini et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 57 (2002) 18771884 1879
Two kinds of experiments were performed for each ex-
perimental condition, namely transient and steady-state runs.
According to the rst technique, a certain amount of solid
particles was injected at the top of the vessel ( = 0) in a
very short time and the local solids concentration change
with time was detected at selected elevations (=0.14, 0.42,
0.66, 0.91 in 1
23B
, =0.14, 0.90 in 1
23A
and =0.33, 0.83
in 1
13
). Higher accuracy was reached for the 1
23B
measure-
ments as a consequence of standardisation and automation
of the experimental procedure. With the steady-state tech-
nique the solids concentration was measured at 32 verti-
cal elevations to obtain the vertical concentration proles.
Details on the objective of each technique and data treat-
ment are given below. Each measurement, in either transient
or steady-state conditions, was performed at least twice to
check for reproducibilityoften the dynamic measurements
were repeated up to ve times.
3. The model and data treatment
3.1. Solids distribution
To interpret the solids concentration distribution in the
tank, the one-dimensional sedimentationdispersion model
is adopted, which is regarded here just as a phenomenologi-
cal model. With the :-axis directed downwards (so that : =0
and H correspond to the top and the base of the vessel, re-
spectively), the mass balance for a non-reacting solid phase
in the stirred suspension for batch systems is
cC
S
ct
= D
eS
c
2
C
S
c:
2
U
S
cC
S
c:
. (1)
According to the system of coordinates adopted, U
S
is pos-
itive for j
S
j
L
. The dimensionless solution of Eq. (1)
under unsteady state for the mentioned experimental condi-
tions is (see the Appendix for the details)
C(, 0) =Pe
S
exp(Pe
S
)
exp(Pe
S
) 1
+ 2 exp(Pe
S
}2)

n=1
(n)
2
cos{n(1 )} n(Pe
S
}2) sin{n(1 )}
[(Pe
S
}2)
2
+ (n)
2
] cos{n}
exp[ {(Pe
S
}2)
2
+ (n)
2
}0], (2)
where Pe
S
= U
S
H}D
eS
and 0 = tD
eS
}H
2
. It is worth noting
that at steady state (that is when 0 ), Eq. (2) reduces
to the simple dimensionless prole (Magelli et al., 1990)
C() = Pe
S
exp(Pe
S
)
exp(Pe
S
) 1
. (3)
3.2. Data treatment
Each experimental solid concentration curve obtained
from the transient experiments at every selected elevation
was normalised and compared with the theoretical one, Eq.
(2). The parameter D
eS
was then determined with a best-t
procedure. This calculation required that the value of Pe
S
0
20
40
60
80
0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0
concentration (g L
-1
)
e
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n

(
c
m
)
Fig. 2. Example of a solids concentration prole obtained under
steadystate conditions in tank 1
23B
. Horizontal lines: () turbine
location; (- - - - -) vertical elevation for the transients experiments. Pro-
les: (symbols) experimental values; (line) best-t theoretical prole.
was available for the same experimental condition. Thus,
this last parameter was calculated by matching Eq. (3) to
the solid concentration prole obtained with the steady-state
measurements (Magelli et al., 1990).
As shown in previous work, the experimental vertical
proles are characterised by singularities in correspondence
with the turbines and midway between the turbines (Bar-
resi & Baldi, 1987; Magelli et al., 1990; Bilek & Rieger,
1990; Pinelli, Nocentini, & Magelli, 2001) provided that
the particles are not too small (Yamazaki et al., 1986). This
fact suggested to chose the elevations where to detect the
transient curves in such a way as to minimise the departure
between the experimental and the theoretical proles. One
example of an actual concentration prole is shown in Fig.
2, with the best t theoretical curve as well as the positions
of the turbines and of the selected heights for the transient
experiments.
4. Results and discussion
4.1. Generic remarks
Figs. 3ac show three pairs of transient curves obtained
at three dierent elevations for the same operating con-
dition. As is apparent, the curve shape depends markedly
on . And so does the asymptotic value C(, ). In all
cases, the agreement between the experimental and the
1880 M. Nocentini et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 57 (2002) 18771884
-0.5
0.5
1.5
2.5
3.5
4.5
-5 0 5 10 15 20 25
time (s)
n
o
r
m
a
l
i
s
e
d

c
o
n
c
.

(
-
)
experim. curve
best fit curve
-0.2
0.2
0.6
1.0
1.4
1.8
-5 0 5 10 15 20 25
time (s)
n
o
r
m
a
l
i
s
e
d

c
o
n
c
.

(
-
)
experim. curve
best fit curve
-0.5
0.5
1.5
2.5
3.5
4.5
-5 0 5 10 15 20 25
time (s)
n
o
r
m
a
l
i
s
e
d

c
o
n
c
.

(
-
)
experim. curve
best fit curve
(b)
(a)
(c)
Fig. 3. Comparison of experimental and theoretical dimensionless curves
for transient experiments at selected elevations in tank 1
23B
. d

=0.79 mm;
water; (a) = 0.14; (b) = 0.42; and (c) = 0.91.
theoretical curves was fairly good. In passing, this fact justi-
es the use of the simple uid dynamic model adopted in this
study.
Two further aspects are worth mentioning. The overshoot
exhibited at = 0.14 was always (slightly) higher for the
theoretical curve than for the experimental one: this seems
to depend on the way the solids are actually introduced into
the reactor (point injection) and on the non-innite value
of the radial dispersion mechanism and coecient. As re-
gards the choice of the measurement positions, apart from
the above-mentioned requirement that the real-steady-state
concentration does not deviate from the theoretical prole
signicantly, values close to 0.60.7 are to be avoided. In-
deed, at these elevations the curves feature a smoothed peak
that cannot be easily recognised in the experimental curve
due to data noise, thus making parameter evaluation rather
inaccurate. For this reason, the curves at these elevations
were not considered.
4.2. Axial dispersion coecient
The values of the axial dispersion coecient for the solid
phase, D
eS
, were determined as outlined before. They were
usually slightly lower at =0.14 than at =0.41 and 0.91,
0.00
0.10
0.20
1'000
Re
D
e
S
/
N
D
2
10'000 100'000 1'000'000
Fig. 4. Dimensionless axial dispersion coecients for glass particles at the
two scales: (, ) d

=0.33 mm; ( , ) d

=0.23 mm; (void symbols)

1
23A
; (solid symbols) 1
13
.
which fact is probably to be attributed to the experimental
technique. However, since this deviation was always within
the experimental error (15%), they can be considered as
independent of the measurement position (the only excep-
tions were the experiments with bronze particles, charac-
terised by j}j
L
7.6, in which case the dierences could
be as high as 30%). Therefore, the average of the measured
values was retained and used for subsequent treatment. As
already reported (Magelli, Fajner, Nocentini, & Pasquali,
1986; Montante, Grisa, Micale, & Brucato, 1998), the D
eS
values were proportional to the rotational speed. The values
at the two scales were dierent and could be reconciled by
dividing them by ND
2
, as shown in Fig. 4 for meaningful
conditions. Thus, the behaviour of the axial dispersion co-
ecients for the solids is quite consistent with that for the
liquid (Magelli et al., 1990).
The axial dispersion coecients for the solids were then
compared with the dispersion coecients of the liquid.
These last values were taken from the literature (Magelli et
al., 1990) and the possible solids inuence on D
eL
values
was disregarded due to the dilute suspensions used. For
comparison, the ratio D
eL
}D
eS
is plotted as a function of
z}d

in Fig. 5this last parameter being the ratio between

Kolmogoro microscale and particle size, which has been
used in a rst attempt to describe the particleturbulence
interaction (Magelli et al., 1990). The microscale z was
calculated as an average value from literature power con-
sumption data by neglecting local dierences in specic
power dissipation, c, (Barthole et al., 1982; Laufh utte &
Mersmann, 1985; Fort, Machon, & Kadlec, 1993; Zhou &
Kresta, 1996).
As is apparent from Fig. 5, the average D
eS
and D
eL
val-
ues do not dier by more than 20% from each other for any
of the conditions tested or the two-scale tanks (actually, the
scattering drops to 10% for the experiments conducted in
the 1
23B
with the optimised experimental procedure). This
fact is in agreement with previous results obtained in equip-
ment stirred with non-standard, high D}1 turbines (Mon-
tante et al., 1998) and it is also consistent with most recent
M. Nocentini et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 57 (2002) 18771884 1881
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
0.001 0.010 0.100 1.000
/dp
D
e
L
/
D
e
S
dp=0.33mm, T23
dp=0.79mm, T23
dp=2.95mm plastic, T23
dp=0.13mm, T23
dp=0.23mm, T23
dp=0.98mm, T23
dp=0.23mm, T13
dp=0.13mm, T13
dp=0.30mm, T13
DeL/DeS=1
+20%
-20%
Fig. 5. Comparison of the axial dispersion coecients (average data) for the liquid and the solid phase: (, ) d

= 0.33 mm (all materials); ( , )

d

=0.23 mm; (, 4) d

=0.13 mm; () d

=2.95 mm; (+) d

=0.98 mm; () d

=0.79 mm; (void symbols) 1

23A
and 1
23B
; (solid symbols): 1
13
.
(Dashed lines) 1 20%.
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
0.00 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08
/dp
D
e
L
/
D
e
S
Fig. 6. Comparison of the axial dispersion coecients for the liquid and
the solid phase: scattering of the data before averaging: () = 0.91;
(), = 0.41; () = 0.14; d

= 0.33 (glass only), 0.79 and 2.95 mm

particles in water; 1
23B
vessel.
conclusions regarding turbulent diusivities of the liquid and
the solid phases in a stirred tank (Montante & Lee, 1999;
Sessiecq, Mier, Gruy, & Cournil, 1999).
In Fig. 6, the values are also reported of the not aver-
aged parameters from the measurements eected at various
heights in the 1
23B
vessel with water. An identical trend
was obtained with liquids of higher viscosity. It is inter-
esting to note that the scatter of these raw data increases
with d

increasethe inuence of the rotational speed be-

ing marginal. Whether this derives from a change in the
particleturbulence interaction (Tsuji, Morikawa, & Sh-
iomi, 1984) cannot be stated on the basis of the present
analysis.
4.3. Settling velocity
Once Pe
S
and D
eS
were known for a given operating con-
dition, the particle settling velocity in the stirred tank could
be simply calculated from Pe
S
denition: U
S
= Pe
S
D
eS
}H.
Then U
S
was compared with the terminal settling velocity,
U
t
, this last being calculated with Turton and Levenspiels
correlation (1986).
Fig. 7 shows that U
S
is usually lower than U
t
, thus con-
rming previous ndings obtained in the same equipment
under the simplifying assumption D
eS
=D
eL
(Magelli et al.,
1990) as well as with a direct approach in CouetteTaylor
ow (Brucato et al., 1998) and mechanically stirred sys-
tems (Montante et al., 1998). Also, the values of the ra-
tio U
S
}U
t
are in good agreement with the correlation given
by Pinelli et al. (1996), which is reported as a solid line
in the gure. The classication of the data points is simi-
lar to that of the data on which the mentioned correlation
is based on: whether this specic fact depends on inade-
quacy of the adopted ow model, oversimplication of the
envisaged particleturbulence interaction or both factors is
unclear at this stage.
1882 M. Nocentini et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 57 (2002) 18771884
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
0.001 0.01 0.1 1
/d
p
U
s
/
U
t
Fig. 7. Ratio of the settling velocity in the stirred system, U
S
, and the
terminal settling velocity, U
t
. Comparison of the present data with a
correlation based on D
eS
= D
eL
(Pinelli et al., 1996). Symbols: see Fig.
5; lines: 30%.
Finally, it is interesting to note that the U
S
values parallel
those of the slip velocity in stirred suspensions (Montante
& Lee, 1999; Sedivy, Ditl, & Rieger, 1999).
5. Conclusions
The dispersion coecients of the solid phase were mea-
sured and analysed at two scalesreference being made to
the sedimentationdispersion model. From their values, the
particle settling velocities in the stirred system were also
evaluated.
The dispersion coecients for the solid phase were found
not to dier by more than 20% from those of the liquid.
And the ratio between the settling velocity in the stirred
system and that in a quiescent liquid, U
S
}U
t
, is conrmed
to be usually less than unity, the dependence on z}d

being
equal to that found in the past on the basis of simplifying
assumptions.
With the pair of the mentioned parameters, the solid
distribution in tanks of high aspect ratio and stirred with
multiple Rushton turbines can be estimated via the simple
sedimentationdispersion model. Although the extrapola-
tion of the correlation U
S
}U
t
vs. z}d

to more general cases

and, in particular, its use in more sophisticated models are
questionable conceptually, the consistency of this nding
with the results of various analyses is certainly supportive
to this end (see Brucato, Magelli, Nocentini, & Rizzuti,
1991, Brucato et al., 1996, 1997, 1998; Micale et al., 2000;
Montante et al., 1998; Nocentini & Magelli, 1992; Rousar
et al., 1998 for dierent models and dierent equipment
congurations).
This study also suggests the need for a better, more fun-
damental understanding of the particleturbulence interac-
tion to explain the overall, complex phenomenon of solids
dispersion.
Acknowledgements
This work was nancially supported by the Italian Min-
istry of University and Research and the University of
Bologna (PRIN 1998) and by CNR (Grant 84.01156.95).
The collaboration of Dr. D. Fajner and Messrs. F. Orlan-
dini, L. Giamperi, F. Magri and S. Milan in carrying out
the experimental programme is gratefully acknowledged.
Part of the results given in this paper were anticipated at the
World Conference III of Chemical Engineering (Tokyo,
September 1986) and at the Third International Sympo-
sium on Mixing in Industrial Processes (ISMIP-3, Osaka,
September 1999).
Appendix.
The aim of this appendix is to derive the response of the
sedimentationdispersion model to a Dirac impulse of solids
at : =0 in batch conditions. A classical analytical approach
is adopted. The following initial and boundary conditions
apply to Eq. (1) for the considered situation:
C
S
(:, 0) = 0 0 6: 6H, (A.1)
D
eS
dC
S
d:

:=H
+ U
S
C
S
|
:=H
= 0, (A.2)
D
eS
dC
S
d:

:=0
+ U
S
C
S|:=0
= C
S, av
Ho(t). (A.3)
The L-transforms of Eq. (1) with the condition (A.1) and
the transforms of Eqs. (A.2) and (A.3) are
D
eS
d
2
G
d:
2
U
S
dG
d:
SG = 0, (A.4)
D
eS
dG
d:

:=H
U
S
G|
:=H
= 0, (A.5)
D
eS
dG
d:

:=0
U
S
G|
:=0
= C
S, av
H. (A.6)
The solution of Eq. (A.4) has the form
G = K
1
exp(z
1
:) + K
2
exp(z
2
:), (A.7)
where the characteristic roots are
z
1, 2
=
U
S

(U
2
S
+ 4D
eS
S)
2D
eS
=Pe}2

(Pe
2
}4 + H
2
S}D
eS
)
and the constants K
1
and K
2
can be specied by means of
the boundary conditions as
K
1
=C
S, av
H exp(z
2
H)}(U
S
D
eS
z
1
)
[exp(z
1
H) exp(z
2
H)],
K
2
=C
S, av
Hexp(z
1
H)}(U
S
D
eS
z
2
)
[exp(z
1
H) exp(z
2
H)].
M. Nocentini et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 57 (2002) 18771884 1883
By substitution of these expressions into Eq. (A.7), the trans-
formed concentration is obtained as follows:
G(:, S) =
C
S, av
H
exp(z
1
H) exp(z
2
H)

exp(z
1
H) exp(z
2
:)
U
S
D
eS
z
2

exp(z
2
H) exp(z
1
:)
U
S
D
eS
z
1

,
(A.8)
whence
G(:, S)
C
S, av
=
H exp(U
S
:}2D
eS
)[: cos{:(H :)} U
S
}2D
eS
sin{:(H :)}]
Ssin{:H}
(A.9)
with :
n
=

[ (U
S
}2D
eS
)
2
S
n
}D
eS
].
The poles of the denominator of (A.9) are
S
n
=U
2
S
}4D
eS
n
2

2
D
eS
}H
2
. (A.10)
Anti-transformation of Eq. (A.9) with the method of the
residues gives Eq. (2).
Notation
C
S
local volumetric solids concentration, ML
3
C =C
S
}C
S, av
, dimensionless local solids concen-
tration, dimensionless number
C
S, av
average volumetric solids concentration, ML
3
D turbine diameter, L
D
eL
dispersion coecient for the liquid, L
2
T
1
D
eS
dispersion coecient for the solids, L
2
T
1
d

solid particle diameter, L

H tank height, L
N rotational speed, T
1
P power consumption, ML
2
T
3
Pe
S
=U
S
H}D
eS
, P eclet number for the solids, dimen-
sionless number
t time, T
U
S
settling velocity of solid particles in stirred liq-
uid, LT
1
U
t
settling velocity of solid particles in a quiescent
liquid (terminal velocity), LT
1
J tank volume, L
3
: vertical coordinate (directed downwards), L
c =P}jJ, average power consumption per unit
mass, L
2
T
3
=:}H, dimensionless vertical coordinate (di-
rected downwards), dimensionless number
0 =tD
eL
}H
2
, dimensionless time, dimensionless
number
z =(v
3
}c)
0.25
, Kolmogoro microscale, L
j dynamic viscosity, MT
1
L
1
v kinematic liquid viscosity, LT
1
j
L
liquid density, ML
3
j
S
solid density, ML
3
References
Bakker, A., Fasano, J. B., & Myers, K. J. (1994). Eects of ow pattern on
solid distribution in a stirred tank. Institution of Chemical Engineers
Symposium Series, 136, 18.
Barresi, A., & Baldi, G. (1987). Solid dispersion in an agitated vessel.
Chemical Engineering Science, 42, 29492956.
Barrue, H., Bertrand, J., Cristol, B., & Xuereb, C. (1999). Eulerian
simulation of dense solidliquid suspension in multi-stage stirred
vessel. Proceedings of the third international symposium of mixing
in industrial processes Osaka, 1922 September (pp. 3744). Tokyo:
Society of Chemical Engineers Japan.
Barthole, J. P, Maisonneuve, J., Gence, J. N., David, R., Mathieu, J., &
Villermaux, J. (1982). Measurement of mass transfer rates, velocity
and concentration uctuations in an industrial stirred tank. Chemical
Engineering Fundamentals, 1, 1726.
Bilek, P., & Rieger, F. (1990). Distribution of solid particles in a mixed
vessel. Collection Czech Chemical Communications, 55, 21692181.
Brucato, A., Ciofalo, M., Godfrey, J., Grisa, F., & Micale, G. (1996).
Experimental determination and CFD simulation of solids distribution
in stirred vessels. Proceedings of the 5th international conference
multiphase ow in industrial plants (pp. 323334), Amal, September
2627. Milan: ANIMP.
Brucato, A., Ciofalo, M., Grisa, F., Magelli, F., & Micale, G. (1997).
On the simulation of solid particle distribution in multiple impeller
agitated tanks via computational uid dynamics. AIDIC conference
series, Vol. 2 (pp. 287294). Milan: AIDIC.
Brucato, A., Grisa, F., & Montante, G. (1998). Particle drag coecients
in turbulent uids. Chemical Engineering Science, 53, 32953314.
Brucato, A., Magelli, F., Nocentini, M., & Rizzuti, L. (1991). An
application of the network-of-zones model to solids suspension in
multiple impeller mixers. Chemical Engineering Research and Design,
69, 4352.
Brucato, A., & Rizzuti, L. (1988). The application of the network-of-zones
model to solid-liquid suspensions. Proceedings of the sixth European
conference mixing (pp. 273280). Pavia, May 2426. Craneld:
BHRA.
Decker, S., & Sommerfeld, M. (1996). Calculation of particles suspension
in agitated vessels with the EulerLagrange approach. Institution of
Chemical Engineers Symposium Series, 140, 7182.
Fajner, D., Magelli, F., Nocentini, M., & Pasquali, G. (1985). Solids
concentration proles in a mechanically stirred and staged column
slurry reactor. Chemical Engineering Research and Design, 63, 235
240.
Fort, I., Machon, V., & Kadlec, P. (1993). Distribution of energy
dissipation rate in an agitated gasliquid system. Chemical Engineering
and Technology, 16, 389394.
Kuboi, R., Komasawa, I., & Otake, T. (1974). Fluid and particle motion
in turbulent dispersion. II. Inuence of turbulence of liquid on the
motion of suspended particles. Chemical Engineering Science, 29,
651657.
Kudrna, V., Sysova, M., & Fort, I. (1986). A probability form of the
diusion equation and its use to describe the distribution of the
solid phase particle concentrations in a mechanically agitated charge.
Collection Czech Chemical Communications, 51, 19101924.
Laufh utte, H. D., & Mersmann, A. (1985). Laser-Doppler velocimetry as
a suitable measuring technique for the determination of ow behaviour
in stirred uids. German Chemical Engineering, 8, 371379.
Levins, D. M., & Glastonbury, J. R. (1972). Particle-liquid hydrodynamics
and mass transfer in a stirred vessel. Part I: Particle-liquid
motion Transactions of the Institution of Chemical Engineers, 50,
T32T41.
1884 M. Nocentini et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 57 (2002) 18771884
Magelli, F., Fajner, D., Nocentini, M., & Pasquali, G. (1986). Solids
concentration proles in vessels stirred with multiple impellers.
Proceedings of the world conference III of chemical engineering,
Vol. 3 (pp. 362365), Tokyo, September 2125, paper 8k-204. Tokyo:
Society of Chemical Engineers Japan.
Magelli, F., Fajner, D., Nocentini, M., & Pasquali, G. (1990). Solid
distribution in vessels stirred with multiple impellers. Chemical
Engineering Science, 45, 615625.
Mak, A. T. C., & Ruszkowski, S. W. (1990). Scaling-up of solids
distribution in stirred vessels. Institution of Chemical Engineers
Symposium Series, 121, 379395.
McKee, S. L., Williams, R. A., Mann, R., Dickin, F. J., Brinkel, J.,
Ying, P., Boxman, A., & McGrath, C. (1994). Measurement of
concentration proles and mixing kinetics in stirred tanks using a
resistance tomographic technique. Institution of Chemical Engineers
Symposium Series, 136, 916.
Micale, G., Montante, G., Grisa, F., Brucato, A., & Godfrey, J. (2000).
Inner-outer CFD simulation of particle distribution in stirred vessels.
Chemical Engineering Research and Design, 78, 435444.
Montante, G., Grisa, F., Micale, G., & Brucato, A. (1998). Particle
settling velocities in turbulent stirred tanks. Proceedings of the sixth
international conference multiphase ow in industrial plants (pp. 311
322), Milan, September 2425. Milan: BHRA.
Montante, G., & Lee, K. C. (1999). Liquid and solid particle mean
ow and turbulence levels in a stirred vessel with low impeller
clearance. Institution of Chemical Engineers Symposium Series, 146,
305316.
Montante, G., Micale, G., Brucato, A. & Magelli, F. (2000).
CFD simulation of particle distribution in a multiple-impeller
high-aspect-ratio stirred vessel. In: H. E. A. van den Akker, & J. J.
Derksen (Eds.), Proceedings of the 10th European conference mixing
(pp. 125132), Delft, 25 July. Elsevier: Amsterdam.
Nienow, A. W., & Bartlett, R. (1974). The measurement and prediction
of particle-uid slip velocities in agitated vessels. Proceedings of the
rst European conference on mixing and centrifugal separation (pp.
B1.1B1.15), Cambridge, September 911. Craneld: BHRA.
Nocentini, M., & Magelli, F. (1992). Solid distribution in slurry reactors
stirred with multiple impellers: Continuous ow systems. In: R.
King (Ed.), Fluid mechanics of mixing: Modelling, operations and
experimental techniques (pp. 7380). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic
Publishers.
Penaz, F., Rod, V., & Rehakova, M. (1978). Concentration distribution
of suspension in a mixed vessel. Collection Czech Chemical
Communications, 43, 848861.
Pinelli, D., Nocentini, M., & Magelli, F. (1996). Modelling of the solid
distribution in slurry reactors stirred with multiple impellers: Inuence
of suspension characteristics. 12th congress CHISA, Prague, August
2530, paper No. D1.2.
Pinelli, D., Nocentini, M., & Magelli, F. (2001). Solids distribution in
stirred slurry reactors: Inuence of some mixer congurations and
limits to the applicability of a simple model for predictions. Chemical
Engineer Communications, 188, 91107.
Rousar, I., Van den Hakker, H. E. A., Ditl, P., & Havelkova, D. (1998).
Turbulence modeling of solid dispersion in agitated tank. 13th CHISA
congress, Prague, August 2328, paper No. G3.3.
Schempp, A., & Bohnet, M. (1995). Untersuchungen zur
Verteilung der dispersen Phase in Fest}Fl ussig-R uhrreaktoren.
Chemie-Ingenieur-Technik, 67, 608612.
Schwartzberg, H. G., & Treybal, R. E. (1968). Fluid and particle
motion in turbulent stirred tanks. Industrial Engineering Chemistry
Fundamentals, 7, 612.
Sedivy, V., Ditl, P., & Rieger, F. (1999). Dimensionless ow
characteristics in mixed suspension obtained by LDA}PDA. Institution
of Chemical Engineers Symposium Series, 146, 373381.
Sessiecq, P., Mier, P., Gruy, F., & Cournil, M. (1999). Solid particles
concentration proles in an agitated vessel. Chemical Engineering
Research and Design, 77, 741746.
Sha, Z., Palosaari, S., Oinas, P., & Ogawa, K. (1999). CFD Simulation
of Solid Suspension in a Stirred Tank. Proceedings of the 3rd
international symposium of mixing in industrial processes (pp. 29
36), Osaka, 1922 September. Tokyo: Society Chemical Engineers
Japan.
Sysova, M., Fort, I., Vanek, T., & Kudrna, V. (1984). Flow of solid
liquid suspension in agitated system. Eighth congress CHISA. Prague,
September 37, paper V3.49.
Tsuji, Y., Morikawa, Y., & Shiomi, H. (1984). LDV measurements of an
air solid two-phase ow in a vertical pipe. Journal of Fluid Mechanics,
139, 417434.
Turton, R., & Levenspiel, O. (1986). A short note on the drag correlation
for spheres. Powder Technology, 47, 8386.
Uhlherr, P. H. T., & Sinclair, C. G. (1970). The eect of free-stream
turbulence on the drag coecient of spheres. Proceedings CHEMECA
70, Vol. 1 (pp. 113). Melbourne: Buttherworths.
Yamazaki, H., Tojo, K., & Miyanami, K. (1986). Concentration proles of
solids suspended in a stirred tank. Powder Technology, 48, 205216.
Zhou, G., & Kresta, S. (1996). Impact of tank geometry on the maximum
turbulence energy dissipation rate for impellers. A.I.Ch.E. Journal,
42, 24762490.