Design, Analysis and Scale-up of Mixing Processes.

H.S. Pordal1, C.J. Matice2

SES-Process Technology Group
5380 Courseview drive
Mason, OH-45040
Tel: (513) 336 6701

Abstract:
Mixing plays an important role in the manufacture of food, pharmaceutical, health care
and chemical products. Inadequate understanding of mixing can result in unsatisfactory
product quality, increased cost of production and loss of revenue.
The use of analysis tools of varying rigor to solve mixing problems is described. This
solution strategy can be applied to solve mixing problems related to the design of
processes, scale-up and scale-down of equipment.

Introduction:
Mixing processes are complex, multi-faceted in nature and require an understanding of
the fluid flow behvior along with an understanding of the mechanical and power
requirement aspects of the equipment. Mixing operations may involve single-phase
liquid mixing, liquid-liquid mixing, solid-liquid mixing, gas-liquid mixing, solid-solid
mixing and in some cases three-phase mixing involving solid, liquid and gas.
The primary function of a mixing vessel is to provide adequate stirring and mixing of the
fluid. The mixing characteristics influence the product quality and efficiency of the
process to a great degree. Stirred vessels come in various shapes and sizes. The main
vessel is cylindrical in shape and the vessel bottom is very often contoured. Baffles are
included in the vessel to break the vortex and prevent solid body rotation of the fluid.
Draft tubes are included to direct suction and discharge streams. Dip-tubes are employed
to inject fluids at specific locations. An important component of a stirred tank is the
impeller. The rotating impeller imparts motion and shear to the fluid thus inducing
mixing. The type of impeller employed depends on the nature of the task. Very often the
same stirred vessel is required to perform various duties. It is important to ensure
efficient and optimum operation of the stirred vessel for a given duty. There is also a
need to create process conditions that are optimum at the lab-scale, pilot-scale and
production-scale so that productivity is maximized.
There is little or no instrumentation on mixing equipment. Failure to mix is assessed by
product quality. To compensate for poor mixing, very often the mixing equipment is
1

Staff Consultant, Ph.D.

Principal SES Inc., Ph.D., P.E.

over designed. This can be counter-productive; for example, excessive mixing can
damage biological material and lead to high capital and operating costs.
The mixing requirements depend on the process. For example, the requirements for
liquid-liquid mixing are very different from those of liquid-solid mixing or liquid-gas
mixing. Scale-up or scale-down of mixing processes is not easy. Scale-up of lab
processes to pilot and production scale is difficult. Scale-up problems are made worse by
trying to use existing pilot and production mixers for new processes. Very often, scale-up
or scale-down is carried out using trial and error methods based on prior experience and
equipment vendor suggestions. Time and effort spent on process scale-up/scale-down
can be significant. Predictive tools to analyze existing equipment and techniques to scale
a process from lab to pilot and ultimately to production are required.
The following sections describe analysis methods to design and analyze mixing
equipment and to address mixing problems, including scale-up/scale-down.
This
strategy can be used for successful transition of new lab processes into production and to
affect lab development work to ensure that the processes under development are
amenable to scale-up.

Solutions to Mixing Problems:

Solution methods of varying degree of rigor can be applied to solve mixing problems.
These methods can be grouped into three tiers.
Tier-one methods are based on general guide-lines and dimensional analysis for mixing
equipment. Vendor recommendations and equipment sizing based on rules-of-thumb fall
in this category.
Tier-two solution methods employ analytical techniques to solve mixing problems.
These methods utilize empirical data along with solutions of mass and momentum on a
global scale. In this approach, fundamental equations of fluid dynamics are simplified
based on experimental results and solved to provide rapid analysis of stirred vessels.
These tools are valuable in identification of good and bad blending practices and
estimation of average mixing characteristics. For a selected stirred vessel configuration,
tier-two methods can be applied to estimate important mixing parameters such as average
tangential velocity distribution, power, average axial velocity distribution, mixing time,
overall energy dissipation rate and turbulence. These parameters can be computed at the
lab-scale, pilot-scale or production-scale for process scale-up or scale-down. The impact
of configuration changes on stirred vessel performance can be rapidly estimated.
Visimix from Visimix Ltd. is an analysis tool based on tier-two methods. Visimix
captures years of experience and wealth of information from various sources. Mixing
vessel configuration parameters such as tank shape, size, impeller type and size can be
easily defined using the user interface to Visimix. The effect of various process
parameters such as fill level, impeller rpm can be rapidly assessed. This tool can be

applied to rapidly assess the impact of mixing vessel configuration, fluid properties and
process parameters on mixing performance. Key mixing performance parameters are
readily available in Visimix for design evaluation decisions. In the current study, Vismix
is applied to solve a number of mixing problems.
Tier-three methods involve detailed measurements and predictions. Experimental
measurements and analytical methods based on Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD)
are classified as tier-three methods. CFD methods are based on the solution of NavierStokes equations to predict stirred vessel behavior. These methods are useful in
evaluating detailed flow patterns in complex geometries and in situations where tier-two
methods are not applicable. CFD methods are based on the solution of conservation
equations of mass, momentum and energy at thousands of locations within the flow
domain. A CFD solution provides full-field data; flow variables at each and every
location in the domain are available; a graphical representation of the flow can be
created.

Application of Solution Methods to Mixing Problems:

Verification of Analysis Methods: The appropriate choice of a solution method depends
on the complexity of the problem and the level of detail required to obtain a solution. As
a first step, the validity of the solution methods described above is established by
comparing the predictions to measured data. Figure 1 depicts experimental setup for a
mixing study. The power consumption for a propeller impeller is measured and compared
to Visimix and CFD predictions. This is depicted in Figure 2; the predictions based on
tier-two and tier-three analysis methods match experimental data very well. The
prediction of free surface vortex draw down and comparison with measurements is
depicted in Figure 3.

Figure 1: Experimental setup for mixing characteristic measurements.

1.6
1.4
Power (W)

1.2

Visimix predictions

Tier-2
analys
CFD predictions

0.8

Tier-3
analys
Experimental
measurements

0.6

Experimental

0.4
0.2
0
0

100

200

300

400

500

Impeller rpm

Figure 2: Comparison of measured power consumption with predictions.

Vortex depth (m)

0.14
0.12
0.1
Visimix predictions

0.08

Experimental measurements

0.06
0.04
0.02
0
0

200

400

600

Impeller rpm

Figure 3: Comparison of vortex draw down with predictions.

Stirred Vessel Configuration Selection: In this study, general guidelines based on tierone methods are initially applied to obtain overall scale of a mixing vessel. The mixing
characteristics for various impeller types are evaluated based on tier-two methods using
Visimix. Table-I depicts performance of stirred vessel for a pitched-blade, Rushtonturbine and A310 impellers. The tank and baffle dimensions, impeller sizes and
placement locations are the same for all impeller types. The mixing performance
information summarized in Table-I is used to select an appropriate vessel configuration.
Mixing parameter
Mixing power (W)
Average tangential
velocity (m/s)
Circulation flow rate
(m3/s)
Average circulation
velocity (m/s)
Mean period of
circulation (s)
Vortex depth (m)
Mixing time (s)

Pitched-blade
Impeller (45o)
145
.293

Rushton-turbine
Impeller
65.3
.219

A310 Impeller
99.0
.257

.053

.047

.045

.41

.433

.349

1.96

2.24

2.3

.0298
52.2

.0198
53.9

.025
61.5

Table I: Stirred vessel performance for various impeller types.

Fill Level Optimization: The fill level in an unbaffled vessel is optimized by estimating
the free surface vortex draw down in the vessel. Over-filling the mixing vessel results in
increased power consumption and increased mixing time. Under-filling can result in
free-surface vortex interaction with the impeller. This can cause foaming and product
damage. The interaction of the vortex with the impeller can also lead to vibration of the
impeller shaft resulting in mechanical failure of the equipment.
In this study, Visimix is applied to compute vortex draw-down depth for various
operating rpms. This is then used to estimate the optimum fill level of the mixing vessel.
The variation of vortex depth with rpm is depicted in Figure 4.

Vortex depth (inches)

25
20
15
10
5
0
0

100

200

300

400

Rpm

Figure 4: Vortex depth variation with rpm in a mixing vessel.

Scale-down Study: Most processes work well at the lab scale. It is relatively easy to
achieve complete mixing at the lab scale. However, the same process may not work well
at the pilot scale or production scale. Mixing equipment and type differ at each scale.
This disparity in equipment size and type introduce problems in transferring a process
from one scale to another. Scale-down of a process is carried out so that process
conditions at the production scale or pilot scale can be mimicked at the lab scale. The
duplication of a process at lab scale makes it easier to troubleshoot the process. This also
facilitates best practices at the lab scale so that process conditions at the production scale
are well understood and the process under development is amenable to scale-up.

Dissipation (w/kg)

In this study, a production scale process is scaled down to the lab scale so that best
mixing practices at the lab scale can be established. As a first step, key mixing
parameters are identified. Tier-two methods using Visimix are applied to evaluate the
performance of existing equipment. The analysis indicates a disparity in mixing
performance as depicted in Figure 5a.
Various lab scale process conditions and
equipment configurations are examined using Visimix such that the performance at the
two scales match as depicted in Figure 5b. This study resulted in best practices at the lab
scale so that the process at the production scale is well understood. The same techniques
can also be applied to scale up a process.

0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0

Full-scale
Lab-scale (mag)
Lab-scale(blade)
Pilot-scale

100

200

300

400

500

rpm

Dissipation (w/kg)

Figure 5a: Performance of existing equipment.

0.1
0.09
0.08
0.07
0.06
0.05
0.04
0.03
0.02
0.01
0

Full-scale
Lab-scale (mag)
Rev1
Lab-scale(mag)Rev2
Lab-scale(mag)
Rev3
0

200

400

600

rpm

Figure 5b: Performance of revised equipment configuration.

Solids Dissolution Predictions: In this study, dissolution of solids is examined. Tier-two

methods using Visimix are applied to predict solids dissolution behavior in mixing vessel
configurations at the lab scale, pilot scale and production scale. Figure 6 depicts
dissolution time for various impeller sizes and rpm. An appropriate impeller size and
speed is selected based on this analysis. The impact of various process parameters on
dissolution behavior at the various equipment scales is examined. Optimization of vessel
configuration and process conditions is carried out.

Dissolution time (minutes)

300
250
A310 (d/T=0.3)

200

A310(d/T=0.4)
150

Existing impeller

100

Lab-scale

50
0
0

200

400

600

Impeller (rpm)

Figure 6: Solids dissolution in mixing vessel.

Impeller Placement in Vessel: Tier-two methods can be applied to predict overall mixing
behavior such as, the impact of number of impellers on mixing behavior. However, these
methods do not provide detailed information pertaining to impeller-impeller interaction
and its impact on flow behavior in the vessel. These issues are addressed using Tier-three
methods. In the present study, tier-three simulation methods are applied to examine the
impact of impeller placement on flow behavior and hence mixing characteristics.
The flow field in the vessel is simulated using CFD techniques. The mixing vessel
configuration uses two Rushton-turbine impellers. These impellers are designed to pump
radially outward. Figure 7a depicts the flow field (velocity vectors) if the impellers are
spaced further apart. The lower impeller pumps downward and the flow field is not
optimum. Figure 7b depicts the flow field when the impellers are spaced too close to
each other. In this case, the impellers pump towards each other. The flow field when
the impellers are placed at an optimum spacing is depicted in Figure 7c; under these
conditions both impellers pump radially outward.

Downward pumping of
impeller

Figure 7a: Velocity field when impellers are placed further apart.

Converging flow (both

impellers pumping towards
each other )

Figure 7b: Velocity field when impellers are placed too close to each other.

Figure 7c: Velocity field at optimum impeller spacing.

Conclusions:
A multi-tiered approach can be successfully applied for design, analysis and scale-up of
mixing processes. This solution strategy provides the flexibility of adopting the most
appropriate tool based on requirements. Sizing calculations for a new design can be
carried-out using tier-one analysis. Important mixing parameters are estimated using tiertwo analysis. A number of concepts can be rapidly examined using tier-two methods.
These methods can be applied to solve a number of mixing problems. Detailed
information not readily available can be obtained using tier-three methods. These
methods vary in rigor and provide information at various scales. This information can be
assimilated for selected processes to generate specific guidelines for design, scale-up and
trouble shooting of stirred vessels.

References:
1) Perry, R.H., Green, D., Chemical engineers handbook, 1984.
2) Harnby, N., Edwards, M.F., Nienow, A.W., Mixing in the process industries,
Butterworth Heinemann, 1992.
3) Tatterson, G.B., Fluid mixing and gas dispersion in agitated tanks, Mc Graw-Hill
Inc., 1991.
4) Tatterson, G.B., Scaleup and design of industrial mixing processes, Mc Graw-Hill
Inc., 1994.
5) Visimix 2000 Turbulent. , User guide, 2002.
6) FLUENT, User guide, 2002.