chemical engineering research and design 8 8 ( 2 0 1 0 ) 809–818

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Chemical Engineering Research and Design

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/cherd

Mixing studies of non-Newtonian fluids in an anchor

agitated vessel

B. Triveni a , B. Vishwanadham a,∗ , T. Madhavi a , S. Venkateshwar b

a Indian Institute of Chemical Technology, Hyderabad, India
b Osmania University College of Technology, Hyderabad, India

a b s t r a c t

The success of any mixing operation involving liquid–liquid, gas–liquid and gas–liquid–solid systems depends mainly
on the geometry of the vessel and impeller, operating conditions and properties of the system. Transformation of
laboratory results to commercial scale unit is very difficult due to the complexity of flow phenomena and the scale
up is being done by adopting a conservative approach which is based on the geometric, kinematic and dynamic
similarities. This approach does not take into account the non-ideal flow behavior of the fluid and the design of
commercial unit will be more rational if this information is included in the design of the unit.
An attempt has been made to generate the data on non-ideal flow by carrying out the tracer experiments in an
anchor agitated vessel. The fluids studied include water, castor oil, castor oil methyl esters and carboxy methyl
cellulose (0.5 and 1 wt%), paper-pulp suspension (0.5 and 2 wt%) and starch suspension (2 and 4 wt%) in presence and
absence of aeration. The data is analyzed for characterizing the flow by employing mixed model and dispersion model.
Increase in the fraction of well-mixed zone ‘g’ from 0.7 to 0.95 with increase in impeller speed has been observed for
both Newtonian and non-Newtonian systems but the increase is small for viscous fluids. A correlation between the
model parameter ‘g’ and impeller speed, aeration and properties of system has been developed. Incorporating the
value of ‘g’ in different scale up rules a commercial scale stirred vessel is designed. Constant tip speed resulted in
large well-mixed zone with minimum power consumption.
© 2009 The Institution of Chemical Engineers. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Mixing; Non-Newtonian; Agitated vessel

1. Introduction and literature
A major problem in agitated vessel design is to scale up a
laboratory or pilot plant reactor to a full scale unit partic-
ularly for the systems involving more than one phase and
non-Newtonian fluids. For many problems adequate correla-
tions are not available. Similarity principles such as geometric,
kinematic and dynamic similarities are normally assumed for
scale up purpose. Mostly the power consumed by the impeller
per unit volume of liquid has been used as a measure of mixing
effectiveness. These criteria are applied on the assumption of
ideal flow pattern existing in the processing unit. The type of
flow in an agitated vessel depends on the type of impeller, the
characteristic of fluid and size and proportion of tank, baffles
and agitator. The performance parameters which normally
used to access the effectiveness of mixers are, namely: the
power input, the mixing and circulation times, and the heat
and mass transfer rates across the vessel wall. These param-
eters are closely related to the flow pattern existing in the
vessel. Voluminous literature is reported on the mixing time
and blending time of various Newtonian and non-Newtonian
fluids agitated by different impellers, but the information on
quantitative estimation of flow pattern and non-ideality exist-
ing in an agitated vessel is limited.
Low viscosity mixing applications can usually be handled
efficiently with impeller systems consisting of one or more
turbines and propellers. To obtain adequate mixing under
the laminar flow conditions encountered in high viscosity
applications, close-clearance impellers such as anchors and
helical ribbons are required. If turbine impellers are used with

∗
Corresponding author at: Chemical Engineering Division, Indian Institute of Chemical Technology, Habsiguda, Hyderabad-500607, India.
Tel.: +91 40 27193626; fax: +91 40 27193626.
E-mail address: vishwanadham@iict.res.in (B. Vishwanadham).
Received 29 June 2009; Received in revised form 11 September 2009; Accepted 30 November 2009
0263-8762/$ – see front matter © 2009 The Institution of Chemical Engineers. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.cherd.2009.11.020
810 chemical engineering research and design 8 8 ( 2 0 1 0 ) 809–818
Nomenclature
B constant (71.5 for anchor)
C tracer concentration (mol/m3 )
C0 initial concentration of tracer (mol/m3 )
C1 tracer concentration in well-mixed zone
(mol/m3 )
C2 tracer concentration in dead zone (mol/m3 )
CE equilibrium concentration of tracer (CE = C0 for
batch vessel)
Di impeller diameter (m)
Dl effective axial dispersion coefficient (m2 /s)
Dt tank diameter (m)
g fraction of well-mixed zone
Hl liquid height (m)
I internal age distribution function
K fluid consistency index (kg/m (s)2−n )
n flow behavior index
N impeller speed (s−1 )
q impeller discharge rate
Q volumetric flow rate of gas
Re Reynolds number
t time (s)
T residence time (s)
ul liquid velocity (m/s)
V volume of the reactant (m3 )
Vd dead volume (m3 )
Vg superficial gas velocity (m/s)
Vm well mixed volume (m3 )
Vp plug flow volume (m3 )
z axial coordinate
Greek symbols
 liquid phase viscosity
app apparent viscosity
 exchange flow rate (m3 /s)
 liquid phase density (kg/m3 )
highly viscous liquids, flow velocities rapidly decay to low
values away from the impeller affecting the blending qual-
ity. Turbine impellers are therefore not recommended for use
in the laminar regime. For such conditions, close-clearance
impellers such as anchors and helical ribbons are commonly
used. For specifically difficult applications, special combina-
tions of anchors/helixes and anchor/turbines can be used. For
example, a helical ribbon impeller can be supported on an
anchor for providing both top-to-bottom material movement
and folding action (Paul et al., 2004).
Over the years, several approaches have been proposed
to model the blending process, namely circulation models,
eddy diffusion models, network of zones models and com-
putational fluid dynamic models. The basic draw back of
circulation model and eddy diffusion model is that only an
approximate picture of flow generated by the impellers is con-
sidered. The network of zones of model is far more realistic
as compared to circulation and dispersion models, mainly
because it attempts to take into account the flow field.
One of the pioneering works on mixing efficiency in CSTR
is by Cholette and Cloutier (1959) who studied and analyzed
mixing phenomena quantitatively by proposing mixed models
based on the combination of effective volume, piston flow and
short-circuit. They found that increased agitation decreases
both the bypassing rate and size of the dead water regions
and if agitation is greater than 300 rpm, backmix flow was
achieved.
Levenspiel (1962) proposed number of mixed models con-
sisting of plug flow, backmix flow, dispersed plug flow and dead
water regions to represent the flow of fluids through vessels.
He explained the application of these models for wide variety
of situations with bypass, recycle and cross-flow. The dead
water region exists when the fluid stays in the vessel twice
the mean residence time. These models assume no trans-
fer of fluid between the active and stagnant zones. Further
Levenspiel (1972) reported more realistic two parameter mod-
els to characterize the long time behavior of stirred vessel
which accounts for the relatively stagnant regions with long
holdup of fluid and the present model is based on this concept.
One of the earliest studies on non-Newtonian fluids was
made by Moo Young and Chan (1971) who focused on the non-
ideal flow parameters for viscous and non-Newtonian fluids
flowing through stirred tank. Based on the visual observations
of flow fields, a mechanistic model was proposed by assuming
dual back-mixing region and a dead space in series with a
plug flow reactor. He correlated the model parameters with the
impeller speed, average residence time and properties of the
system. These models are applicable for a particular geometry
(turbine) of the impeller and they have mentioned that their
model is not applicable for anchor and spiral-type agitator as
they generate different flow patterns from turbines.
Soon Khang and Levenspiel (1976) modeled the agitated
vessel by a network of ideal reactors consisting of a plug flow
reactor in series with a continuous stirred tank reactor with
total recycling (Fig. 3). They have developed a correlation to
estimate the time needed and the energy required for achiev-
ing a given degree of homogeneity, but their correlation results
in same mixing time for the same power consumption which
is practically not possible.
The flow pattern generated by anchor agitator is tangen-
tial and is suitable for mixing of viscous Newtonian and
non-Newtonian fluids (Chhabra and Richardson, 1999) and
preliminary experiments by Nagata (1975) revealed that there
exists an axial temperature profile within the vessel. Peters
and John Smith (1969) reported that at low Reynolds num-
ber, there is no flow reversal and as the Reynolds number
increases, flow reversal commences [at Re ∼20] and there will
be considerable amount of liquid behind the blade which is
moving along with the blade and essentially not mixing with
the rest of the fluid in the tank. Bertrand et al. (1996) and
Savreux et al. (2007) simulated laminar 2D mixing of non-
Newtonian fluids with an anchor impeller and conformed the
finding of Nagata that anchor is inefficient in laminar regime.
Pedrosa and Nunhez (2000) reported that there are few
works in the literature which study anchor type impellers.
The great majority of works for stirred vessels refers to turbine
impellers, especially six-blade Rushton turbines, under turbu-
lent flow. They modeled anchor agitated vessel using CFD and
showed that mixing can be improved by the increase of rota-
tional speed and by the use of impellers with a higher blade
height and with a blade support. Akiti et al. (2005) also studied
the behavior of an anchor agitated vessel of 2 and 4 l capacity
using CFD and observed that anchor impeller produces little
flow and turbulence in the area beneath the impeller irrespec-
tive of the reactor configuration.
Dieulot et al. (2005) modeled the mixing phenomena under
unsteady state stirring conditions and a new model of torus
reactor including a well-mixed zone and a transport zone is
 chemical engineering research and design 8 8 ( 2 0 1 0 ) 809–818 811

Fig. 1 – Schematic representation of experimental setup.

proposed and determined the rotational speed profile that using turbines and propellers and the information on blending
minimizes the mixing energy for a given mixing time. of non-Newtonian fluids in anchor agitated vessel is scant-
Tanguy et al. (1996) measured the power consumption of ily reported. The reported studies are correlated in terms of
an anchor agitator for the homogenization of non-Newtonian dimensionless mixing time and power consumption and suit-
fluids and showed that the constant Ks defined by Metzner able for short time scale of operation. So experiments are
and Otto (1957) do not vary strongly with the power law index. planned in an anchor and turbine agitated vessel and a mech-
Espinosa-Solares et al. (1997) studied the combined effect of anistic model consisting of a well-mixed zone and dead space
bottom clearance and wall clearance on the power consump- (relatively slow moving zone) with some exchange of fluid
tion rate and proposed a correlation between the two regions is applied.
 −0.23  b −0.27 
c 2. Experimental
Np Re = Kp = 41.1 + (1)
Dt Dt
The details of experimental unit is shown in Fig. 1. The setup
They have observed that the power consumption decreases
consists of a stirred vessel (diameter: 0.29 m, height: 0.365 m
as the bottom and wall clearance increase, which is due to the
and capacity: 0.025 m3 , SS vessel) fitted with anchor agitator
change in the flow pattern.
of 0.27 m diameter, 0.02 m blade width, 0.2 m blade height.
Number of studies (Norwood and Metzner, 1960;
The bottom and side clearance of anchor agitator are 0.03 and
Hoogendorn and den Hartog, 1967; Moo-Young et al., 1972;
0.01 m respectively. The vessel is well insulated to avoid the
Patwardhan and Joshi, 1999; Nandkishore et al., 2003; Sasakura
heat losses. A ½ hp variable gear constant speed motor is pro-
et al., 1980; Raghav Rao and Joshi, 1988) are reported focusing
vided for studying the effect of impeller speed. Speed of this
on the determination of mixing time, power utilization and
agitator is measured with a tachometer. The range of impeller
power consumption of turbine and helical ribbons and they
speed covered is 60–200 rpm. Conductivity probe is arranged at
have found that the tubular agitator to be efficient stirrer and
the bottom of the vessel. The local conductivity measurement
for high viscous fluids helical ribbon was efficient.
is affected by the presence of other phases, which are charac-
Brief literature review on mixing of fluids in agitated ves-
terized by different conductivity and random movement near
sel reveals that the anchor impeller is suitable for the mixing
of viscous Newtonian and non-Newtonian fluids and there
exists some non-ideality in the vessel. Most of the studies
reported are pertaining to the mixing of Newtonian fluids

Table 1 – Properties of the Newtonian and

Non-Newtonian fluids.
Fluid K (kg/m (s)2−n ) n  (kg/m3 )

Castor oil 0.219 1 961

CME 0.01019 1 899
0.5% CMC 17.78 0.9 1001
1% CMC 8.359 0.4 1005.5
2% starch 0.438 0.7 1003
4% starch 3.518 0.4 1021.5
0.5% pulp 2.106 0.75 999.6
2% pulp 15.41 0.35 1165.8
Fig. 2 – Experimental C/C0 vs time for 0.5%CMC at 60 rpm.
812 chemical engineering research and design 8 8 ( 2 0 1 0 ) 809–818

the probe. So the probe is arranged such that the gas bubbles The solution of Eq. (2) with appropriate boundary condi-
directly do not come in contact with the probe. Compressed tions is
air is fed at the bottom of vessel through a gas sparger for
 

studying aeration effect and the flow rate of air is measured 

∞
n2 2
by using a calibrated rotameter. The air flow rates studied C = C0 1+2 cos(n)exp − Dl t (3)
Hl 2
are 200–2000 cm3 /min. The parameters studied are effect of n=1
impeller speed, air flow rate and properties of fluid on mixing.
About 150 experiments were carried out in these studies. For large values of ‘t’ the non-ideal pulse is less important,
and only the first four terms (n = 4) in the series is significant
(Xiongwei et al., 2002). Dl is determined by fitting Eq. (3) to the
2.1. Systems studied
experimental tracer response data.

Newtonian systems studied are castor oil and its methyl esters
and non-Newtonian fluids studied are CMC (0.5 and 1 wt%),
paper-pulp (0.5 and 2 wt%), starch suspension (2 and 4 wt%).
2.2. Viscosity data
Properties of the systems are summarized in Table 1. The
data of shear stress vs shear rate for CMC, starch and pulp
suspensions has been generated using rotational viscometer
(RHEOLAB viscometer). The range of shear rate studied is from
50 to 500 s−1 . The density of slurries is calculated by the pro-
cedure given by Chhabra and Richardson (1999).
3. Experimental procedure
The experimental work is carried out in a cylindrical stirred
tank with dished end, fitted with an anchor/turbine agitator.
Provisions for tracer introduction and detection and mea-
surement of power consumption by energy meter are made.
Conductivity tracing method is adopted to characterize the
mixing pattern in the anchor/turbine agitated vessel. The ves-
sel is filled with the process liquid up to a height equal to
diameter of the vessel. Impeller is set at a particular speed
and this speed is measured by using a tachometer. 10 ml of
2N KCl is suddenly introduced as a pulse tracer from the top
of the vessel at the liquid surface and the variation of liquid
conductivity with time is measured at the bottom of the ves-
sel. Thus the average concentration of the tracer is measured
and analyzed for non-ideality by applying multi-parameter
model. These experiments are performed at different impeller
speeds in presence and absence of aeration. Sample plot of
experimental data is shown in Fig. 2.
4. Model and correlations
To interpret the flow pattern quantitatively, there are num-
ber of models such as single parameter, multi-parameter and
stochastic models. The dispersion model and multi-parameter
model are employed for analyzing the data and to correlate the
dispersion coefficient and mixed model parameters in terms
of the operating variables.
4.2. Mixed model
When the gross flow pattern of the fluid deviates greatly from
plug flow because of channeling or recirculation of the fluid,
eddies in odd corners, etc., then the dispersion model or the
tanks-in-series model cannot satisfactorily characterize the
flow in the vessel (Levenspiel, 1962). This type of flow can
be found for example in industrial stirred tank reactors. In
these situations it is probably most fruitful to view the real
vessel to consist of inter-connected flow regions with vari-
ous modes of flow between and around these regions. If more
than two parameters are present in the model, any test of
the model becomes essentially valueless, and no judgment
can be made about whether or not the model reasonably
represents the physical situation (Scott Fogler, 1992). Based
on the assumption of good micro-mixing, a multi-parameter
model consisting of a well-mixed zone with a dead space and
exchange flow between them is considered. The network of
zones model is far more realistic as compared to the circula-
tion and dispersion models, mainly because it attempts to take
into account the local flow field. These models are employed
on the bases of flow pattern observed either visually or fitting
the data to a model based on the assumption of combination
of ideal reactors. We have developed our model based on the
reported flow pattern by Peters and John Smith (1969). They
have studied the flow pattern generated by anchor agitator
and concluded that the flow reversal occurs at higher Reynolds
number and the circulation behind the blade is of considerable
interest as it represents a quantity of liquid which is mov-
ing along with the blade and essentially not mixing with the
rest of the fluid in the tank. The model consists of a back-mix
region with a stagnant space and exchange between them.
The physical representation of the model is shown in Fig. 3.
The mole balance for tank1:
dC1
vC2 − vC1 = Vm (4)
dt
The mole balance for tank2:
dC2
vC1 − vC2 = Vd (5)
dt

as V = Vm + Vd (6)
4.1. Dispersion model

The dispersion model is a single parameter model used to Vm = gV, Vd = (1 − g)V (7)
describe the non-ideality existing within the vessel. The form
of the dispersion model for batch operation is Substitution of above terms and simplification gives:

 1−g
 −t

∂C ∂2 C C1 = C0 g 1 + exp (8)
= Dl 2 (2) g g(1 − g)V/v
∂t ∂z
 chemical engineering research and design 8 8 ( 2 0 1 0 ) 809–818 813

Fig. 3 – Block diagram of mixed zone models.

and compared with non-Newtonian fluids. The magnitude of k3

  −t
 is high in laminar regime when compared with the turbu-
C2 = C0 g 1 − exp (9) lent regime for non-Newtonian fluids which shows that the
g(1 − g)V/v
aeration has profound effect on g in laminar regime.
Limitations of the correlation: this correlation is applicable
The model parameters fraction of well-mixed zone g and
for both viscous Newtonian and non-Newtonian systems for
exchange flow rate  is calculated by matching with the exper-
a wide range of Reynolds number.
imental data. The variation of exchange flow rate  is not
For non-Newtonian fluids, apparent viscosity is taken
significant and of the order of 10−6 m3 /s and the overall per-
(Calderban and Moo-Young, 1961)
formance of the unit is linked to the magnitude of the fraction
of well-mixed zone g. Therefore g has been used to quantify
(n−1)
the extent of non-ideal flow. app = K(¯ avg ) (12)
The fraction of well mixed volume is again function of
operating variables i.e. impeller speed N, velocity of air Vg ,
The average shear rate is ¯ avg = Ks N and Ks is shear rate
geometry of the system (tank diameter Dt , impeller diameter
constant
Di ) and properties of fluids like density and viscosity. Dimen-
sional analysis of the significant variables (N, , , Di , Dt , g)
 3n + 1 (n/(n−1))
indicates that for geometrically similar systems. Ks = B (13)
4n
g˛f (N, , , Dt , Di , Vg ) (10)
 2

9(Dt /Di )
and B = 9.5 + (14)
The dimensional analysis gives: 2
(Dt /Di ) − 1

Non-ideal flow parameter g  3n + 1 n

     D  app = K Bn−1 Nn−1 (15)
ND2i  Vg t 4n
=f , , (11)
 NDi Di

This equation relates g with the impeller speed, velocity

k2 k
of air, geometry and fluid properties (density and viscosity). Table 2 – Correlation: g = k1 (Re) (Vg /NDi ) 3 .
The empirical constants are obtained from the experiments System k1 k2 k3
by the non-linear regression analysis. The results are tabu-
Newtonian 0.49 0.11 –
lated in Table 2. Thus, by means of the above correlation, the
Aerated 0.82 0.078 0.046
fraction of well-mixed zone can be defined in terms of the Non-Newtonian (laminar) 0.75 0.03 –
operating variables. The values of the empirical constant k1 Aerated 0.91 0.022 0.28
and k2 are influenced by the range of Reynolds number stud-
Non-Newtonian (turbulent) 0.497 0.065 –
ied. The values of k3 show that the aeration has significant Aerated 0.71 0.053 0.014
effect on non-ideal parameters for Newtonian fluids when
814 chemical engineering research and design 8 8 ( 2 0 1 0 ) 809–818

The generalized Reynolds number for non-Newtonian flu-

ids is defined as

ND2I  N2−n D2I 

Re = = n (16)
app K((3n + 1)/4n) Bn−1

Most of the published literature on shear rate constant had

considered the dependency of Ks on flow behavior index ‘n’.
But Tanguy et al. (1996) reported that Ks is independent of
n/(n−1)
‘n’. Though the variation in the term ((3n + 1)/4n) is from
0.78 to 0.87 for a change in ‘n’ from 0.9 to 0.1, the percentage
deviation in Ks is 21.8% and 12.3% respectively. So, we have
considered the dependency of Ks on ‘n’ in the calculations.
Fig. 4 – g vs impeller speed for Newtonian systems.

5. Some observations on the effect of

process variables on mixing phenomena
The design of an agitated vessel primarily depends on two
aspects, one is impeller power requirement and the other is
quality of mixing. The power requirement for mixing has been
studied extensively in terms of the power correlation for differ-
ent impellers and quality of mixing for viscous Newtonian and
non-Newtonian fluids was scantly reported. The present work
is focused on the tracer studies to characterize the non-ideal
flow of non-Newtonian fluids in an anchor agitated vessel.
Since it was reported that the flow pattern in anchor agitated
system is non-ideal and to account the non-ideality, the dis-
persion model has been employed.
The quality of mixing of a fluid in an agitated vessel pri-
marily depends on agitation (mechanical, aeration), geometry
and properties of the fluid (viscosity). Effect of some of these
parameters is studied.
5.1. Dispersion model
This model, in general, is applied when the flow pattern
slightly deviates from the ideal flow condition. Experimental
determination of dispersion number for water was made prior
to carry out the experiments with other fluids. As expected,
the Dl /NDi 2 found to be very high for water and for other fluids
Dl was found to vary from 0.0066 to 0.0095 m2 /s for Newto-
nian and 0.00025 to 0.0117 m2 /s at 60 and 200 rpm respectively.
These values indicate large deviation from ideal flow condi-
tions.
As the dispersion model is assumed to be applicable for
small deviations from ideal flow, and to account this non-
ideality, a multi-parameter model has been employed.
5.2.1. Newtonian fluids
The effect of impeller speed on fraction of well-mixed zone (g)
for different Newtonian fluids is shown in Fig. 4 by plotting g
vs impeller speed. The g value of water is very high compared
to other systems studied and it is observed that the fraction
of well-mixed zone (g) increases with the impeller speed and
reaches a constant value at higher impeller speeds for all the
systems studied. The laminar regime prevails upto a Re of 1000
for Newtonian systems in an anchor agitated vessel (Shamlou
and Edwards, 1989) and the present experimental conditions
falls in laminar for castor oil and turbulent for water and CME.
As the increase in g value of CME is from 0.85 to 0.92 and castor
oil is from 0.7 to 0.8, we can conclude that the variation in
g with the impeller speed is pronounced in laminar regime
than in turbulent regime. At a particular impeller speed, the
fraction of dead space occupied is less for CME than that of
castor oil, which is due to the difference in viscosity of both
the solutions.
The aeration effect on the dead space is shown in Fig. 5.
For aerated systems the value of g is found to increase with
agitation and aeration. The effect of viscosity on the fraction
of well-mixed zone is shown in Fig. 6 particularly in presence
of aeration at lower impeller speed of 60 rpm. As expected, the
value of g found to increase with increase in air velocity, but
the increase is relatively small for castor oil compared to CME
and water. At higher impeller speeds the viscosity effect is not
very significant.
Data obtained for well-mixed zone for anchor as well as
turbine impellers is shown in Fig. 7. The objective of this data
is mainly to see the effect of agitator geometry on quality of
mixing. It may be observed from Fig. 7 that the anchor agi-
tator appears to be suitable for viscous systems, though the
difference in well-mixed zone is marginal.

5.2. Mixed model

This model is described as combination of ideal reactors and

this is based on the visualization of flow pattern. Among the
different models available combination of ideal back mix reac-
tor with dead space and exchange between them has been
employed. On the basis of mass balance of tracer data the frac-
tion of well mixed volume (g) and the exchange flow rate ()
are evaluated. A generalized correlation between the model
parameters and dimensionless numbers has been developed
(Eq. (11)). This model is useful in estimating the effect of vari-
ables on the extent of non-ideality for both Newtonian and
non-Newtonian systems. Fig. 5 – Effect of aeration on g for castor oil.
 chemical engineering research and design 8 8 ( 2 0 1 0 ) 809–818 815

Fig. 6 – Effect of aeration on g for Newtonian systems at

60 rpm. Fig. 9 – g with impeller speed for starch.

Fig. 10 – g with impeller speed for CMC.

Fig. 7 – Comparison between anchor and turbine agitators.

5.2.2. Non-Newtonian fluids

Most of the industrial mixing operations of non-Newtonian
fluids are carried out under laminar conditions as the effect
of process parameters will have significant effect on fluid
behavior and hence tracer experiments were carried out in
this regime. The non-Newtonian fluids which are employed in
these studies are different concentrations of carboxy methyl
cellulose, paper-pulp and starch suspensions. The effect of
following variables on well-mixed zone has been observed:
impeller speed, aeration, properties of the fluid. It is well
Fig. 11 – Effect of aeration on g for 0.5% CMC.
known that the viscosity varies with shear rate for non-
Newtonian fluids, there is a need to use generalized Reynolds
general found to increase with impeller speed and the increase
number based on the apparent viscosity of the system for
is not significant. The increase in g value for 0.5% pulp is from
defining the regime of mixing. The data obtained for all these
0.881 to 0.941 and 0.851 to 0.881 for 2% pulp for an increase in
studies is in the range of Reynolds number from 40 to 18,000
rpm from 60 to 140. This clearly indicates that mixing pattern
for a variation in impeller speed from 60 to 200 rpm.
does not change with agitation speed after certain agitation
In Figs. 8–10 the effect of rpm on g for systems pulp, starch
speed. At lowest rpm of 60, the g value around 0.8 to 0.9. There-
and CMC are shown respectively. The well mixed fraction in
fore the flow pattern may also depend on geometry of the
vessel, impeller and properties of the fluid. In case of dilute
solution of CMC, the increase in g is steep with rpm compared
to starch and pulp. This may be due to high flow behavior index
n ∼0.9.
Effect of aeration on g for different systems at different
rpm is shown in Figs. 11–13. General trend of increase in well-
mixed zone is found with aeration. As observed earlier, the
effect of impeller speed is not significant on g but the aera-
tion has influenced considerably in enhancing the well-mixed
zone. From Figs. 12 and 13, it is observed that the aeration has
profound effect on the non-ideal parameter at lower impeller
speeds. As the impeller speed increases, the flow regime trans-
mits to turbulent regime and the effect of air velocity becomes
Fig. 8 – g with impeller speed for pulp. insignificant. Similar trend is observed for pulp suspension
816 chemical engineering research and design 8 8 ( 2 0 1 0 ) 809–818
Fig. 12 – Effect of aeration on g for 2% starch.
Fig. 13 – Effect of aeration on g for 4% starch.
(Fig. 14). So we can conclude that the aeration has similar
effect in both Newtonian and non-Newtonian systems.
5.3. Scale up
Transition of mixing processes from lab scale to full scale com-
mercial operation is fascinating and challenging, significant
differences can exist both in various processes and the mixing
parameters as the scale of operation is increased. Qualitative
and quantitative concepts of how these differences can be
evaluated in specific areas are essential to good scale up. In
general scale up is based on the Dimensional analysis and fix-
ing either of speed, power per unit volume, torque, blending
time. Power per unit volume is a classical approach which is
used extensively for scaling up of an agitated vessel as the
power estimation is simple and fairly accurate and it ensures
constant specific interfacial area. But it gives only crude
approximation to the quality of mixing and constant power
per unit volume is incapable of correlating the widely differ-
ent local conditions within the vessel. Froment and Bischoff
(1979) mentioned the work by Van Dierendonck who designed
a stirred vessel for the hydrogenation of a-nitrocaprolactam
Fig. 14 – Effect of aeration on g for 2% pulp.
based on constant effective speed and power per unit volume.
The effective stirring speed criterion led to an industrial reac-
tor with a volume of 6 m3 and the constant specific power
input criterion led to a volume of 20 m3 which is very high.
More sophisticated approaches take account of the fact that
different applications in mixing require different ratios to be
maintained constant and constant power per unit volume is
always not suitable for the design of a commercial unit.
Scale up of mixing of Non-Newtonian fluids is compli-
cated because apparent viscosity varies with the shear rate.
Changes in the apparent viscosity can shift the generalized
Reynolds number from laminar to transition or turbulent
regime causing change in power consumption and other
design parameters (Bisio and Kabel, 1985; Robert Wilkens et
al., 2003). In view of this complex situation and to arrive at
reasonable scale up basis, the following number of scale up
criteria are applied. In all these cases geometrical similarity
is assumed. (i) Constant Reynolds number, (ii) power per unit
volume, (iii) tip speed, (iv) impeller discharge rate per unit vol-
ume and (v) Froude numbers are used as scale up criteria. The
results obtained from scale up studies are shown in Table 3
and the following observations are drawn.
5.3.1. Constant Reynolds number (Re)
Constant Reynolds number ensures the dynamic similarity in
both lab scale and commercial scale unit and this result in
constant g value.
N   D (2/(2−n))
1 2
= (17)
N2 D1
This criterion resulted in the smallest production mixer
i.e. very low impeller speed for both Newtonian and non-
Newtonian systems. As the impeller speed reduced drastically,
the apparent viscosity of the non-Newtonian fluid increases.
For this reason, scale up based on equal Re is not usually rec-
ommended.
5.3.2. Constant power per unit volume (P/V)
Scale up based on equal power per unit volume is eas-
ily understandable and practical and it correlates well with
mass transfer characteristics in the mixer. P/V = constant, i.e.
P/D3 = constant
P
Po = (18)
N3 D5
N   D 2/3
1 2
= (19)
N2 D1
The power consumption required for the agitation in
laminar regime is evaluated by the correlation proposed by
Espinosa-Solares et al. (1997) which accounts the effect of both
wall and bottom clearance on the power consumption. When
the flow regime is transformed to turbulent, the power num-
ber is assumed to be constant. Better mixing is observed but
resulted in higher power consumption for both Newtonian and
non-Newtonian systems.
5.3.3. Constant tip speed (DN)
The impeller tip speed is a common scale up criterion for
industrial mixers, often associated with the shear sensi-
tive mixing phenomena and this tip speed determines the
maximum shear rate. Maintaining a constant tip speed is iden-
tical to constant torque per unit volume and constant liquid
 chemical engineering research and design 8 8 ( 2 0 1 0 ) 809–818 817

Table 3 – Scale-up results.

Lab scale Commercial scale (2000 l)

Newtonian systems
D 1.0 4.56 4.56 4.56 4.56 4.56
N (rpm) 1.0 0.048 0.363 0.219 1 0.462
DN (m/s) 1.0 0.22 1.66 1.0a 4.56 2.10
Re 1.0 1.0a 7.56 4.55 20.8 9.73
P/V 1.0 0.0018 1.0a 0.039 16.85 0.18
q/V 1.0 0.048 0.363 0.219 1.0a 0.4618
Fr 1.0 0.01 0.6 0.218 4.56 1.0a
P (hp) 1.0 0.223 97.17 4.61 20.25 21.28

g = 0.49 Re0.11
g 0.77 0.77 0.97 0.925 – –

Non-Newtonian systems
D 1.0 4.56 4.56 4.56 4.56 4.56
N (rpm) 1.0 0.97 0.36 0.219 1.0 0.468
DN (m/s) 1.0 0.547 1.66 1.0a 4.56 2.13
Re 1.0 1.0a 3.9 1.69 20.8 5.94
P/V 1.0 0.016 1.0a 0.104 16.8 0.29
q/V 1.0 0.0967 0.3634 0.219 1a 0.468
Fr 1.0 0.0043 0.60 0.218 4.56 1.0a
P (hp) 1.0 1.93 117 12.2 1982 34.09
app 1.0 2.19 1.93 2.68 1 1.63

Laminar regime g = 0.75 Re0.03 /turbulent g = 0.497 Re0.065

g 0.85 0.85 0.915 0.89 0.85 0.785

a
Scale up criteria.

motion. Here the kinematic similarity is maintained i.e. the 5.3.5. Constant Froude number (Fr)
velocities in the large scale unit will everywhere be approxi- The Froude number is the ratio of inertial to gravitational force
mately equal to those in corresponding locations in small scale and signifies the surface behavior of the liquid.
unit (Broadkey and Hershey, 1988).
 
N2 D
Fr = = constant (24)
gravity
ND = constant (20)

N  D  N   D 0.5
1 2
1 2 = (25)
= (21) N2 D1
N2 D1

Rotational speed tends to decrease with most scale up criteria.

Good mixing is observed with reasonable amount of power
consumption for Newtonian fluids. But in case of non-
Newtonian fluids, fraction of well-mixed zone is slightly lower
with reasonable amount of power consumption.
5.3.4. Constant impeller discharge flow rate per unit
volume (q/V)
The impeller pumping number is used to predict the impeller
pumping rate, q, directly and the bulk fluid velocity indirectly.
q = k ND3 as q/D3 = constant
N1 = N2
In case of non-Newtonian fluids, though the fraction of
dead zone is small power consumption is very high and the
flow regime is changed from laminar to turbulent. For Newto-
nian system the proposed correlation is applicable in laminar
regime and as the flow regime is shifted from laminar to tur-
bulent the quantity of well-mixed zone is not found.
Impeller speed has a powerful non-linear effect on Fr, causing
Fr to decrease with increasing volume, even though diameter
is increasing. Thus scale up based on equal Fr is rarely used
as a scale up criterion because it results in a relatively large
and expensive industrial mixer for both Newtonian and non-
Newtonian systems.
The scale up rule must be selected based on the most
critical transport property which affects the performance of
the process. It is observed from scale up calculations that
the application of constant power per unit volume criterion
resulted in large well-mixed zone but with high power con-
sumption and constant tip speed criterion has resulted in
(22)
efficient mixing with reasonable power consumption for New-
tonian systems. It has been observed that the flow regime is
(23) almost laminar in both lab scale and commercial scale unit for
Newtonian system. Where as, for non-Newtonian fluids, the
apparent viscosity varies with the scale and the flow regime
is changed from laminar to transitional or turbulent regime.
In case of non-Newtonian systems, constant Reynolds num-
ber results in the smallest production mixer and constant
impeller discharge flow per unit volume gives very large power
consumption. Equal power per unit volume criterion leads to
good mixing but with relatively higher power consumption
818 chemical engineering research and design 8 8 ( 2 0 1 0 ) 809–818
when compared with the constant tip speed criterion for non-
Newtonian systems. Finally we can conclude that constant tip
speed criteria is more suitable for scale up studies on mix-
ing of Newtonian and non-Newtonian fluids to ensure the
same quality of mixing in commercial unit as that of lab scale
unit.
6. Conclusions
• Mixed model consisting of a well-mixed zone and dead
space with exchange of fluid (cross-flow) between the effec-
tive and dead volumes is found to be suitable for quantifying
the degree of non-ideality.
• It is observed that the fraction of well-mixed zone increases
with the impeller speed and found to remain constant
at higher impeller speed of 200 rpm. In the case of non-
Newtonian fluids the increase in g value for 0.5% pulp is
from 0.881 to 0.941 and 0.851 to 0.881 for 2% pulp for an
increase in rpm from 60 to 140. At low impeller speed the
aeration is found to have significant impact on fraction of
well-mixed zone. It is also observed that the well-mixed
zone decreases with increase in viscosity.
• A correlation of model parameters in terms of the operating
variables is developed and a commercial unit is designed by
accounting the presence of non-ideal mixing. In most of the
scale up criteria employed, the flow regime changes from
laminar to turbulent for non-Newtonian fluids due to vari-
ation in the apparent viscosity. Equal tip speed resulted in
good mixing with reasonable power consumption for both
Newtonian and non-Newtonian fluids.
References
Akiti, O., Yeboah, A., Bai, G. and Armenante, P.M., 2005,
Hydrodynamic effects on mixing and competitive reactions in
laboratory reactors. Chem Eng Sci, 60: 2341–2354.
Bertrand, F., Tanguy, P.A. and Brito De La Fuente, E., 1996, A new
perspective for the mixing of yield stress fluids with anchor
impellers. J Chem Eng Jpn, 29(1): 51–58.
Bisio, A. and Kabel, R.L., (1985). Mixing processes by Oldshue, J.Y.
In Scaleup of Chemical Processes. (Wiley, New York, USA), pp.
301–333
Broadkey, R.S. and Hershey, H.C., (1988). Agitation in Transport
Phenomena—A Unified Approach. (McGraw-Hill Company), pp.
359–399
Calderban, P.H. and Moo-Young, M.B., 1961, The power
characteristics of agitators for the mixing of Newtonian and
non-Newtonian fluids. Trans Inst Chem Eng, 39: 337–347.
Chhabra, R.P. and Richardson, J.F., (1999). Liquid mixing. In
Non-Newtonian Flow in Process Industries.
(Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford), pp. 324–391
Cholette, A. and Cloutier, L., 1959, Mixing efficiency
determinations for continuous flow systems. Can J Chem Eng,
37: 105–112.
Dieulot, J.Y., Petit, N., Rouchon, P. and Delaplace, G., 2005, An
arrangement of ideal zones with shifting boundaries as a way
to model mixing processes in unsteady stirring conditions in
agitated vessel. Chem Eng Sci, 60: 5544–5554.
Espinosa-Solares, T., Brito De La Fuente, E., Thibault, F. and
Tanguy, P.A., 1997, Power consumption with anchor
mixers-effect of bottom clearance. Chem Eng Commun, 157:
65–71.
Froment, G.F. and Bischoff, K.B., (1979). Chemical Reactor Analysis
and Design. (John Wiley & Science), pp. 731–732
Hoogendorn, C.J. and den Hartog, A.P., 1967, Model studies on
Mixers in the viscous flow region. Chem Eng Sci, 22:
1689–1699.
Levenspiel, O., (1972). Non-ideal flow. In Chemical Reaction
Engineering. (John Wiley & Sons, New York, USA), pp. 253–325
Levenspiel, O., 1962, Mixed models to represent flow of fluids
through vessels. Can J Chem Eng, 135–138.
Metzner, A.B. and Otto, R.E., 1957, Agitation of non-Newtonian
fluids. AIChE J, 3: 3–10.
Moo Young, M. and Chan, K.W., 1971, Non ideal flow parameters
for viscous fluids flowing through stirred tanks. Can J Chem
Eng, 49: 187–194.
Moo-Young, M., Tichar, K. and Dullien, F.A., 1972, The blending
efficiencies of some impellers in batch mixing. AIChE J, 18(1):
178–182.
Nagata, S., (1975). Heat transfer in agitated vessel. In Mixing:
Principles and Applications. (Wiley, New York, USA), pp. 100–102
Nandkishore, K.N., Patwardhan, A.W. and Joshi, J.B., 2003,
Liquid-phase mixing in stirred vessels: turbulent flow regime.
Ind Eng Chem Res, 42: 2661–2698.
Norwood, K.W. and Metzner, A.B., 1960, Flow patterns and mixing
rates in agitated vessels. AIChE J, 6: 432.
Patwardhan, A.W. and Joshi, J.B., 1999, Relation between flow
pattern and blending in stirred tanks. Ind Eng Chem Res, 38:
3131–3143.
Paul, E.L., Atiemo-Obeng, V.A. and Kresta, S.M., (2004).
Mechanically stirred vessels. In Handbook of Industrial Mixing:
Science and Practice. (Wiley, New York, USA), pp. 385–387
Pedrosa, S.M.C.P. and Nunhez, J.R., 2000, The behavior of stirred
vessels with anchor type impellers. Comp Chem Eng, 24:
1745–1751.
Peters, D.C. and John Smith, M., 1969, Mixing in anchor agitated
vessels. Can J Chem Eng, 47: 268–271.
Raghav Rao, K.S.M.S. and Joshi, J.B., 1988, Liquid phase mixing in
mechanically agitated vessels. Chem Eng Commun, 74: 1–25.
Robert Wilkens, J., Henry, C. and Gates, L.E., 2003, How to scale-up
mixing process in non-Newtonian fluids. Chem Eng Prog,
44–52.
Sasakura, T., Kato, Y., Yamamuro, S. and Ohi, N., 1980, Mixing
process in a stirred vessel. Int Chem Eng, 20: 251–258.
Savreux, F., Jay, P. and Albert, M., 2007, Viscoplastic fluid mixing
in a rotating tank. Chem Eng Sci, 62: 2290–2301.
Scott Fogler, H., (1992). Analysis of non-ideal reactors. In Elements
of Chemical Reaction Engineering (second edition). (Prentice Hall
of India), pp. 759–803
Shamlou, P.A. and Edwards, M.F., 1989, Power consumption of
anchor impellers in Newtonian and non-Newtonian liquids.
Chem Eng Res Des, 67: 537–543.
Soon Khang, J. and Levenspiel, O., 1976, New scale-up and design
method for stirrer agitated batch mixing vessel. Chem Eng
Sci, 31: 569–577.
Tanguy, P.A., Thibault, F. and Brito De La Fuente, E., 1996, A new
investigation of the Metzner-Otto concept for anchor mixing
impellers. Can J Chem Eng, 74: 222–228.
Xiongwei, N., De Gelicourt, Y.S., John, N. and Howes, T., 2002, On
the effect of tracer density on axial dispersion in a batch
oscillatory baffled column. Chem Eng J, 85: 17–25.