ASIA-PACIFIC JOURNAL OF CHEMICAL ENGINEERING

Asia-Pac. J. Chem. Eng. 2016; 11: 229–236

Published online 9 December 2015 in Wiley Online Library
(wileyonlinelibrary.com) DOI: 10.1002/apj.1959

Research article
Study of sparger location on solid suspension in a
triple-impeller stirred vessel
Tiam You See,1 Abdul Aziz Abdul Raman,1* Raja Shazrin Shah Raja Ehsan Shah,1 Shaliza Ibrahim2 and
Mohamad Iskandr Mohamad Nor1
1
Department of Chemical Engineering, Faculty Engineering, University of Malaya, 50603 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
2
Department of Civil Engineering, Faculty Engineering, University of Malaya, 50603 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

Received 19 March 2015; Revised 3 September 2015; Accepted 12 November 2015

ABSTRACT: Several advantages such as good gas and solids dispersion have been associated with triple-impeller system for
three phase mixing processes. In this work, minimum impeller speed required for achieving just suspended condition was
studied with gassing using three Rushton turbines as agitators. The effects of sparger location and gas flow rate on the just
suspension speed, gas hold-up, gas–liquid mass transfer coefficient and power consumption were discussed. Sparger placed
above the bottom impeller showed the highest gas hold-up at just suspended condition with the same total power consumption
as the other two sparger locations. The highest gas hold-up value achieved was 12% at total power consumption of 370 W. The
data obtained fitted well into ∆Njs = kQg with k = 3.67 when the sparger is located below the bottom impeller. Significantly
lower k values can be obtained when the sparger is shifted above the bottom impeller. The sparger location above the
bottom-most impeller is proposed to be superior for industrial application of aerated solid suspensions where at least 8%
saving on power consumption can be achieved. © 2015 Curtin University of Technology and John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

KEYWORDS: sparger location; power consumption; gas hold-up; triple-impelle; solid suspension

INTRODUCTION power consumption, gas hold-up, gas–liquid mass

Mechanically agitated solid–liquid–gas systems are
used in chemical and process industry for mineral
processing, heterogeneous catalyst reaction, fermen-
tation, wastewater treatment and many more. Multiple
impellers are preferred over single impeller in
applications where mass transfer is crucial because of
higher gas phase residence time. Multiple-impeller
systems also have better gas phase hold-up, mass
transfer and power consumption under gassed
conditions compared to single-impeller systems.[1]
Other beneficial aspects include superior mixing
time,[2] lower operational speed at equivalent power
dissipation for bioreactors[1,3] and different flow
patterns.[4] These advantages make these systems
attractive for many industrial applications, and there
is a great potential for process optimization and
intensification.[5]
Previous experimental studies on multiple-impeller
systems have focused on impeller spacing,[6] off-bottom
clearance and impeller type for their power number,
*Correspondence to: Abdul Aziz Abdul Raman, Department of
Chemical Engineering, Faculty Engineering, University of Malaya,
50603 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. E-mail: azizraman@um.edu.my
© 2015 Curtin University of Technology and John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Curtin University is a trademark of Curtin University of Technology
transfer,[7] effect of baffling on fluid mixing[8] and
mixing time.[9] Computational fluid dynamic (CFD)
studies have been used to model gas residence time
distribution (RTD),[10] liquid phase flow,[11,12] just
suspension speed,[13,14] particle distribution,[15,16] par-
ticle suspension characteristics,[17,18] flow regimes,[19]
power consumption,[20,21] gas phase flooding charac-
teristics,[22] flow patterns[23] and mixing time.[24]
The two main operational requirements in solid
suspension operations are complete off-bottom sus-
pension and the uniform distribution of solids
throughout the vessel. Solid suspension is crucial in
stirred vessels for chemical processes to ensure
maximum surface area of the solids is exposed for
reaction. Complete suspension is a criterion introduced
by Zwietering that explains a state where no solid
matter rests on the bottom of the stirred vessel.[25] This
criterion has been extensively reviewed.[26] Minimum
impeller speed required for just suspended condition
(Njs) is one of the most important parameters that are
always used to justify the performance of solid
suspension; or Njsg in the presence of gas. Introduction
of gas significantly increases Njsg, and ∆Njs correlates
well with gas flow rate.[27,28][29] reported that the
impeller speed required to maintain suspension under
230 T. Y. SEE ET AL.
gassed conditions correlated strongly with the power
drop resulted from cavity formation. Gas flow rates also
affect liquid mixing time.[30] Njs and Njsg for various
impellers have also been studied with the presence of
internal coils.[31] Various correlations have been
proposed by several works to predict Njs and Njsg for
single impeller[25,31] and multiple impeller systems.[32,33]
Recent work has also focused on using Laser Sheet
Image Analysis for measuring particle concentration
and generating concentration distribution maps in
solid–liquid systems[34] for dilute systems.
Knowledge on the extent of solid mixing is essential
to ensure fulfilment of mass and heat transfer
requirements. Such knowledge is consequently impor-
tant in design and scale-up of stirred vessels. Optimal
design should provide good dispersion and minimise
power requirement. Previous studies[35] on triple-
impeller system have found that the impeller closest
to the tank bottom plays an important role in just
suspended condition, while middle and top impeller
only play their roles in ultimate suspension condition.
In other words, the top and middle impellers do not
dictate Njs. These studies have mainly been conducted
with the sparger located below the bottom impeller.
Studies on solid suspension using triple-impeller
system with the sparger located above the bottom
impeller are limited. Birch and Ahmed [36] studied gas
hold-up in a single-impeller system with the sparger
above the impeller and reported that sparger
dimensions and location had significant effects on gas
dispersion characteristics. Larger than impeller sparger
led to indirect loading, and there was less power loss
with aeration. They concluded that gas introduction
was favourable in the impeller output stream. Rewatkar
et al. [28] studied the critical impeller speed for solid
suspension in a single-impeller system. They reported
that solids started suspending at lower impeller speed
when the sparger was located above the impeller. They
also observed very small bubble size when Njsg was
achieved which suggested higher values of fractional
Table 1. Relationships between ΔNjs and the gas sparging rate, Qg, for Rushton turbine.
Empirical correlation Reference
Present work
[38]
∆Njs = Njsg Njs = kQg
[39]
[40]
[27]
[41]
[42]
[43]
N jsg Qg
[46]
N js ≡1 þ mNajs n where Najs ¼ N 3 m = 2.6, and n = 0.7
js D
*Rushton turbine, pitched turbine downflow and pitched turbine upflow used
© 2015 Curtin University of Technology and John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Asia-Pacific Journal of Chemical Engineering
gas hold-up. Relatively less studies have been
conducted on the effects of sparger location on solid
suspension for triple-impeller systems.
Table 1 summarises the empirical correlation between
Njsg at various conditions from the previous work. The
differences in k values are unlikely to be because of
measurement errors and inconsistency of Zwietering’s
criterion. In fact, the differences in k values reflect the
difference in experimental conditions and suggest that
the correlation is system dependent.
In short, it may be concluded that sparger location
may lead to optimised mixing operations, indicated
by lower Njsg and Pjsg (associated power consumption)
at just suspended condition using triple impeller
system. In order to isolate the effects of sparger
locations on total power consumption at just suspended
condition, three standard six-blade Rushton turbines
would be used throughout the study. The aim of this
study is to identify a suitable sparger location that
encourages high gas hold-up while minimising the
impeller speed and power required at just suspended
condition.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Experiments were conducted in a transparent flat-
bottomed cylindrical tank with internal diameter (T)
of 200 mm and four identical equally spaced baffles
having width of T/10. A sketch of the tank is shown
in Fig. 1. The tank was equipped with three Rushton
turbines with diameter of D = T/3 assembled on a single
shaft. The aspect ratio of liquid height to tank diameter
(H/T) was 2.4. For the solids, 10 wt% of ballotini with
particle size of 355–550 µm and density of 2500 kg/m3
was used. Distilled water and compressed air were used
as liquid and gas phase respectively. Gas flow rate was
varied between 0 and 2 vvm by a ring sparger with
diameter of 0.8D. Off bottom clearance was fixed at
D and impeller spacing of 2D was used for all
experiments. Three sparger locations were studied
Coefficient value Number of impellers
k = 3.67 3
k = 0.94 1
k = 0.65 1
k = 2.03 1
k = 3.75 3*
k = 0.85 1
k = 1.53, CFD 1
k = 0.94, μ = 0.001 Pa 1
k = 1.78, μ = 0.01 Pa
k = 1.65, μ = 0.1 Pa
1
Asia-Pac. J. Chem. Eng. 2016; 11: 229–236
DOI: 10.1002/apj
Asia-Pacific Journal of Chemical Engineering SPARGER LOCATION AND SOLID SUSPENSION 231

Figure 1. Experimental setup.

where the sparger was placed at a distance of D/3 gas–liquid mass transfer coefficient in calculated
below the top, middle and bottom impeller, named as using Eqn (3):
L1, L2 and L3 respectively. Just suspended condition
was recorded based on Zwietering’s criterion.[25] This
dCt
criterion has been reported to consistently judge kL a:VðC CtÞ ¼ V: (3)
Njs within an accuracy of approximately 5% in dt
experiments conducted by previous researchers.[37]
Impeller speed was measured by a portable tachometer Integration of Eqn (3) gives:
(Lutron Electronic, Taiwan), and the power
consumption was calculated using Eqn (1).   
C C0
ln  ¼ kL a:t: (4)
C Ct
P ¼ 2 πNmgdL (1)

A plot of the left-hand side of Eqn (4) against time

Gas hold-up was calculated using Eqn (2). provides a straight line with a slope of kLa.

Hg Ho
εg ¼ 100% (2) RESULT AND DISCUSSION
Hg

Effect of gas sparging on solid suspension

Dynamic gassing-in method was used to measure
volumetric gas–liquid mass transfer coefficient (kLa).
The dissolved oxygen concentration in the water
was initially reduced to zero by vigorously sparging
nitrogen gas. The stable dissolved oxygen was
measured using an online hand-held dissolved
oxygen meter, Orion Star A323 (Thermo Scientific,
USA) equipped with Orion RDO Optical Dissolved
Oxygen Probe Model 087010MD (Thermo Scien-
tific, USA). The manufacturer specified an accuracy
of ±0.1 mg/L with a lower and upper limit of
detection of 0.00 to 20.0 mg/L. The overall volumetric
© 2015 Curtin University of Technology and John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Figure 2 shows the performance of solid suspension for
different sparger locations. Only bottom sparger
location, L3, shows an increase in power consumption
and just suspended speed, Njsg, when gas flow rate
was increased. Insignificant or no effects on power
consumption and Njsg were observed at sparger
location L2 (Njsg, L2) and L1 (Njsg, L1) when gas flow
rate was increased. Comparison of these sparger
positions has not been previously studied and reported.
In the present study, it was observed that there was no
gas cavity formation at the bottom impeller when L1 or
Asia-Pac. J. Chem. Eng. 2016; 11: 229–236
DOI: 10.1002/apj
232 T. Y. SEE ET AL.
Figure 2. The performance of solid suspension for different
sparger locations at just suspended condition.
L2 was used. Because the bottom impeller only works
on solid suspension and not dispersion of gas, the
increase in gas flow rate did not affect Njsg, L2 or Njsg,
L1. Cavities behind the bottom impeller blades are not
observed and the suspension is more efficient.
The findings suggested that solid suspension at just
suspended condition was strongly dependent on the
bottom impeller. Additionally, a triple-impeller system
could potentially reduce Njsg by not using L3, thus
highlighting the advantages of multiple-impeller
systems, where each impeller can have its own function
and flow.[4]
The critical power consumption at just suspended
condition (Pjsg) has similar behaviours as Njsg. Higher
power is required to increase the impeller speed for
re-suspension when gas flow rate increases.[27–29] A
correlation was developed by modifying the empirical
correlations in Table 1 and proposed for Pjsg as Eqn (5).
ΔPjs ¼ Pjsg - Pjs ¼ kp Qg
The experimental results fitted well into the
correlation with kp = 75.50.
Correlation of just suspended speed, Njsg
Figure 3 shows the effects of gas sparging from ring
sparger on Njsg at different sparger locations. Findings
of several researchers[27,38–43] are shown by plotting
the empirical equation Njsg Njs = kQg. In the present
work, little difference in Njsg was observed at very
low Qg for all three sparger locations tested. At higher
Qg (above 0.25 vvm), linearly and proportionally
higher values of Njsg were observed for L3 (Njsg, L3).
A regression with empirical correlation yielded
k = 3.67 which is comparable with previous work
reported.[27] Based on the R2 value of 0.99 obtained
from the present work (L3 in Fig. 2), it can be
suggested that the data fitted well into the correlation.
At L3, gas cavities formed behind the impellers,
© 2015 Curtin University of Technology and John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Asia-Pacific Journal of Chemical Engineering
Figure 3. ∆Njs as a function of Qg at different sparger
locations for present study and comparison with data
published. This figure is available in colour online at www.
apjChemEng.com.
significantly reduced the impeller power and increased
Njsg. Dohi et al.[44] concluded that liquid velocity was
lower in the presence of gas because of dampening of
local turbulence in the impeller region.
A regression with the empirical correlation (∆Njs = kQg)
yielded k = 0.23 and 0.16 when the sparger is located at
L2 and L1 respectively. These values were significantly
lower than reported k values in Table 1. Even though
the k values in Table 1 represent mixing process at
different conditions, it is still noteworthy that locating
the sparger above the bottom impeller can significantly
reduce the k value.
Further studies on gas dispersion and gas hold-up
were discussed in the following sections.
Gas hold-up and gas–liquid mass transfer
coefficient, kLa
(5)
A study on gas hold-up was performed for L1, L2 and
L3 with different impeller speed and gas flow rate to
investigate the effects of sparger position on gas
dispersion. Only one set of results is presented here
for ease of understanding. Figure 4 shows that the gas
hold-up increased with increase of impeller speed for
Figure 4. Relation between gas hold-up and impeller
speed at constant gas flow rate (1.5 vvm).
Asia-Pac. J. Chem. Eng. 2016; 11: 229–236
DOI: 10.1002/apj
Asia-Pacific Journal of Chemical Engineering SPARGER LOCATION AND SOLID SUSPENSION 233

all three sparger locations. As impeller speed increased, PT ¼ Pjsg þ Pa (6)

bubbles were broken into smaller bubbles, increasing
surface area and prolonging the duration of gas bubbles
present inside the working liquid which eventually led
to increased gas hold-up, which is in agreement with
results from literature.[45] At lower impeller speeds
(below 300 rpm), there was little difference in gas
hold-up for all three sparger locations. At higher
impeller speed, the gas hold-up for the lower sparger
locations was higher (L3 > L2 > L1). The differences
ranged from 20% to 50% and were more prominent at
higher impeller speed.
The findings showed that sparger locations had
significant effects on gas hold-up. Gas flowing out
from the ring sparger at L3 was first dispersed by the
lowest impeller, followed by the middle and top
impellers.
The gas–liquid mass transfer coefficient, kLa was
measured for L1, L2 and L3 with similar impeller speed
and gas flow rate to investigate the uniformity of gas
dispersion throughout the entire tank. Three fixed
locations were selected; near the bottom (Pt1), in the
middle (Pt2) and closer to the liquid surface (Pt3), to
measure kLa. A further insight into gas distribution
within the system specifically at just suspended
conditions is shown in Table 2. Throughout the study,
there was little difference of kLa values measured at
all the measured locations which suggests that the high
turbulence managed to keep the gas and solids
homogenous throughout the tank. Another aspect to
highlight was the little difference kLa values obtained
for L3 and L2, which further affirm the findings from
the gas hold-up studies. Locating the sparger at L2 does
not affect the homogeneity of the gas dispersion
throughout the tank.
Gas hold-up increased with increase of gas flow rate
as more gas was introduced into the tank. At lower gas
flow rate (below 0.5 vvm), there was little difference in
gas hold-up for all three sparger locations. At higher
gas flow rate, the gas hold-up for lower sparger
locations became higher (L3 > L2 > L1). The
differences ranged from 20% to 60% and were more
prominent at higher impeller speed. It is noteworthy
that there was only about 20% difference in gas holdup
between L2 and L3. Process efficiency could be reduced
by using L1 for aerated solid suspension because of
insufficient gas dispersion. However, L2 showed
promising performance for reducing gassing effect on
Njsg by considering power/energy and cost efficiency
of the system. The main observation was for small
differences in Total Power Consumption, the gas hold
up can be increased significantly by positioning the
sparger at L2. The significant increase in gas hold up
was also observed in L3; however, the PT to achieve
this also increases significantly. The PT requirement
for achieving a specific gas hold up is higher when
positioning the sparger at L3 as compared to L2. The
total power consumption was less by 8% for L2 to
achieve comparable gas holdup. Below gas hold-up
of 12%, average power consumed for the same gas
hold-up by using L2 was about 8% and 20% less
compared to L3, and L1 respectively. L2 showed
promising performance for reducing power/energy
and cost efficiency for solid suspension under gassed
conditions.
Total power consumption to gas hold-up ratio

Total power consumption
For comparison, Pjsg and power required to produce
compressed air (Pa) were measured. The total power
consumption (PT) was proposed by considering Pjsg
and Pa.
Figure 5 shows the ratio of total power consumption to
gas hold-up for different gas flow rate at just suspended
condition. For sparger location L3 and L2, the total
power consumption/gas hold-up value was similar;
however, from the Fig. 6, the total power consumption
to maintain just suspended condition for sparger

Table 2. Mass transfer coefficient, kLa values of 10 wt% solid loading at three points for different sparger locations
at just suspended condition.
1 1 1
Air flow kLa L3, s kLa L2, s kLa L1, s
rate, vvm Pt1 Pt2 Pt3 Njsg Pt1 Pt2 Pt3 Njsg Pt1 Pt2 Pt3 Njsg
0.3 0.194 0.214 0.232 18.5 0.196 0.242 0.213 17.5 0.173 0.156 0.157 17.6
0.5 0.272 0.268 0.244 19.5 0.244 0.240 0.212 17.5 0.197 0.177 0.198 17.8
0.8 0.252 0.261 0.257 20.5 0.285 0.286 0.298 17.8 0.211 0.216 0.207 18.2
1.0 0.289 0.337 0.319 21.2 0.229 0.309 0.288 17.6 0.155 0.159 0.215 17.8
1.3 0.310 0.244 0.251 18.0 0.225 0.183 0.212 17.5
1.5 0.244 0.322 0.306 17.5 0.205 0.205 0.217 17.5

© 2015 Curtin University of Technology and John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Asia-Pac. J. Chem. Eng. 2016; 11: 229–236
DOI: 10.1002/apj
234 T. Y. SEE ET AL. Asia-Pacific Journal of Chemical Engineering

opposed to conventional sparger placement. To achieve

comparable gas hold-up values by positioning the
sparger at L3 would observe significant higher PT. In
conclusion, L2 is promising for power efficiency (at
least 8% saving on power consumption) for industrial
applications of aerated solid suspensions. Further
studies on different impeller combinations by using
high-flow and low-power impellers such as hydrofoil-
type impellers are required in order to achieve lower
total power consumptions.

Figure 5. The ratio of total power consumption to gas hold-

up for different gas flow rate at just suspended condition. NOMENCLATURE

C0 Lowest dissolved oxygen concentration in the

stirred tank, mg/L
C* Saturated dissolved oxygen concentration in the
stirred tank, mg/L
Ct Concentration of dissolved oxygen in the stirred
tank at time t, mg/L
D Impeller diameter, m
dL A distance from the motor to the central rod, m
g Acceleration of gravity force, 9.8 m/s2
Hg Height of liquid with gas (gas–liquid–solid)
Ho Height of liquid without gas (solid–liquid)
k Constant for just suspended speed correlation,
s 1/vvm
kLa Liquid–gas mass transfer coefficient, s 1
Figure 6. Relation between gas hold-up and gas flow rate kp Constant for correlation of power consumption
at just suspended condition. required at just suspended, W/vvm
L1 Sparger location between the top and middle
impeller
location L2 was lower than L3. As such, the sparger L2 Sparger location between the middle and bottom
location L2 was more energy efficient for achieving a impeller
specific gas hold-up at just suspended condition L3 Sparger location below the bottom impeller
compared to L3. m Mass defined by the load cell, kg
N Impeller rotational speed, s 1
Njs Just suspended speed, s 1
Njsg Just suspended speed in presence of gas, s 1
CONCLUSION Pa Power required producing compressed air, W
Pjs Power consumption required at just suspended
The minimum impeller speed required for just condition, W
suspended condition was studied with gassing using Pjsg Power consumption required at just suspended
three Rushton turbines as agitators. The effects of condition in presence of gas, W
sparger location and gas flow rate on the just PT Summation of Pa and Pjs or Pjsg, W
suspension speed as well as the respective power Qg Gas flow rate, vvm
consumption were discussed. Gassing effect on Njsg T Internal tank diameter, m
and Pjsg can be reduced in a triple impeller stirred t Time, s
vessel by using different sparger locations. Sparger V Volume of liquid in the stirred tank, l
placed above the bottom impeller (L2) could achieve ∆ Njs Different between just suspended speed with gas
the highest gas hold-up (up to 12%) with the same total and without gas, s 1
power consumption as L1 and L3 (approximately ∆ Pjs Different between power consumption with gas
370 W) at just suspended condition, Njsg. The present and without gas at just suspended condition, W
findings are supported by previous studies. At L2, the εg Gas hold-up, %
increase in Njsg because of gassing was avoided as μ Viscosity, Pa s
© 2015 Curtin University of Technology and John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Asia-Pac. J. Chem. Eng. 2016; 11: 229–236
DOI: 10.1002/apj
Asia-Pacific Journal of Chemical Engineering
Acknowledgements†
This research was supported by the Postgraduate
Research Fund (PPP) at the University of Malaya
(PG115-2012B). Raja Shazrin Shah Raja Ehsan Shah
received support in the form of PhD scholarship from
the Ministry of Higher Education, Malaysia.
REFERENCES
[1] Gogate PR, Beenackers AACM, Pandit AB. Multiple-
impeller systems with a special emphasis on bioreactors: a
critical review. Biochem. Eng. J. 2000; 6(2): 109–144.
[2] Shewale SD, Pandit AB. Studies in multiple impeller
agitated gas–liquid contactors. Chem. Eng. Sci. 2006;
61(2): 489–504.
[3] Collignon M-L, Delafosse A, Crine M, Toye D. Axial
impeller selection for anchorage dependent animal cell
culture in stirred bioreactors: Methodology based on the
impeller comparison at just-suspended speed of rotation.
Chem. Eng. Sci. 2010; 65(22): 5929–5941.
[4] Wang T, Yu G, Yong Y, Yang C, Mao Z-S. Hydrodynamic
characteristics of dual-impeller configurations in a
multiple-phase stirred tank. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2009;
49(3): 1001–1009.
[5] Maaß S, Rehm T, Kraume M. Prediction of drop sizes for
liquid–liquid systems in stirred slim reactors—Part II: Multi
stage impellers. Chem. Eng. J. 2011; 168(2): 827–838.
[6] Harvey AD, Wood SP, Leng DE. Experimental and
computational study of multiple impeller flows. Chem. Eng.
Sci. 1997; 52(9): 1479–1491.
[7] You ST, Abdul Raman AA, Raja Ehsan Shah RSS,
Mohamad Nor MI. Multiple-impeller stirred vessel studies.
Rev. Chem. Eng. 2014; 30(3): 323–336.
[8] Lu W-M, Wu H-Z, Ju M-Y. Effects of baffle design on
the liquid mixing in an aerated stirred tank with standard
Rushton turbine impellers. Chem. Eng. Sci. 1997; 52(21–22):
3843–3851.
[9] Magelli F, Montante G, Pinelli D, Paglianti A. Mixing time in
high aspect ratio vessels stirred with multiple impellers.
Chem. Eng. Sci. 2013; 101: 712–720.
[10] Pinelli D. A phenomenological model for the gas phase flow
in high-aspect-ratio stirred vessels: the role of small bubbles
in non-coalescent and moderately viscous liquids. Chem.
Eng. Sci. 2005; 60(8–9): 2239–2252.
[11] Alliet-Gaubert M, Sardeing R, Xuereb C, Hobbes P, Letellier
B, Swaels P. CFD analysis of industrial multi-staged stirred
vessels. Chem. Eng. Process. Process Intensif. 2006; 45(5):
415–427.
[12] Khopkar AR, Kasat GR, Pandit AB, Ranade VV. CFD
simulation of mixing in tall gas–liquid stirred vessel: Role
of local flow patterns. Chem. Eng. Sci. 2006; 61(9):
2921–2929.
[13] Wadnerkar D, Utikar RP, Tade MO, Pareek VK. CFD
simulation of solid–liquid stirred tanks. Adv. Powder
Technol. 2012; 23(4): 445–453.
[14] Tamburini A, Cipollina A, Micale G, Brucato A, Ciofalo M.
CFD simulations of dense solid–liquid suspensions in
baffled stirred tanks: Prediction of the minimum impeller
speed for complete suspension. Chem. Eng. J. 2012;
193–194: 234–255.
[15] Tamburini A, Cipollina A, Micale G, Brucato A, Ciofalo M.
CFD simulations of dense solid–liquid suspensions in baffled
stirred tanks: Prediction of solid particle distribution. Chem.
Eng. J. 2013; 223: 875–890.
[16] Murthy BN, Ghadge RS, Joshi JB. CFD simulations of gas–
liquid–solid stirred reactor: Prediction of critical impeller
†
Correction added on 6 January 2016, after first online publication: the
Acknowledgements section has been added.
© 2015 Curtin University of Technology and John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
SPARGER LOCATION AND SOLID SUSPENSION 235
speed for solid suspension. Chem. Eng. Sci. 2007; 62(24):
7184–7195.
[17] Ochieng A, Onyango MS. Drag models, solids
concentration and velocity distribution in a stirred tank.
Powder Technol. 2008; 181(1): 1–8.
[18] Tamburini A, Cipollina A, Micale G, Brucato A, Ciofalo M.
CFD simulations of dense solid–liquid suspensions in baffled
stirred tanks: Prediction of suspension curves. Chem. Eng. J.
2011; 178: 324–341.
[19] Ahmed SU, Ranganathan P, Pandey A, Sivaraman S.
Computational fluid dynamics modeling of gas dispersion in
multi impeller bioreactor. J. Biosci. Bioeng. 2010; 109(6):
588–597.
[20] Kumaresan T, Joshi JB. Effect of impeller design on the flow
pattern and mixing in stirred tanks. Chem. Eng. J. 2006;
115(3): 173–193.
[21] Taghavi M, Zadghaffari R, Moghaddas J, Moghaddas Y.
Experimental and CFD investigation of power consumption
in a dual Rushton turbine stirred tank. Chem. Eng. Res.
Des. 2011; 89(3): 280–290.
[22] Bombač A, Žun I. Individual impeller flooding in aerated
vessel stirred by multiple-Rushton impellers. Chem. Eng. J.
2006; 116(2): 85–95.
[23] Montante G, Magelli F. Liquid homogenization
characteristics in vessels stirred with multiple Rushton
turbines mounted at different spacings. Chem. Eng. Res.
Des. 2004; 82(9): 1179–1187.
[24] Fujasová M, Linek V, Moucha T. Mass transfer correlations
for multiple-impeller gas–liquid contactors. Analysis of the
effect of axial dispersion in gas and liquid phases on ‘local’
values measured by the dynamic pressure method in
individual stages of the vessel. Chem. Eng. Sci. 2007;
62(6): 1650–1669.
[25] Zwietering TN. Suspending of solid particles in liquid by
agitators. Chem. Eng. Sci. 1958; 8(3–4): 244–253.
[26] Kasat GR, Pandit AB. Review on mixing characteristics
in solid-liquid and solid-liquid-gas reactor vessels. Can.
J. Chem. Eng. 2008; 83(4): 618–643.
[27] Dutta NN, Pangarkar VG. Critical impeller speed for solid
suspension in multi-impeller three phase agitated contactors.
Can. J. Chem. Eng. 1995; 73(3): 273–283.
[28] Rewatkar VB, Raghava Rao KSMS, Joshi JB. Critical
impeller speed for solid suspension in mechanically agitated
three-phase reactors. 1. Experimental part. Ind. Eng. Chem.
Res. 1991; 30(8): 1770–1784.
[29] Frijlink JJ, Bakker A, Smith JM. Suspension of solid particles
with gassed impellers. Chem. Eng. Sci. 1990; 45(7):
1703–1718.
[30] Kawase Y, Shimizu K, Araki T, Shimodaira T.
Hydrodynamics in three-phase stirred tank reactors with
non-newtonian fluids. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 1997; 36(1):
270–276.
[31] Nikhade BP, Moulijn JA, Pangarkar VG. Critical impeller
speed (N SG) for solid suspension in sparged stirred vessels
fitted with helical coils. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2005; 44(12):
4400–4405.
[32] Magelli F, Fajner D, Nocentini M, Pasquali G. Solid
distribution in vessels stirred with multiple impellers. Chem.
Eng. Sci. 1990; 45(3): 615–625.
[33] Magelli F, Fajner D, Nocentini M, Pasquali G, Marisko V,
Ditl P. Solids concentration distribution in slurry reactors
stirred with multiple axial impellers. Chem. Eng. Process.
Process Intensif. 1991; 29(1): 27–32.
[34] Tamburini A, Cipollina A, Micale G, Brucato A. Particle
distribution in dilute solid liquid unbaffled tanks via a novel
laser sheet and image analysis based technique. Chem. Eng.
Sci. 2013; 87: 341–358.
[35] Dohi N, Matsuda Y, Shimizu K, Minekawa K, Kawase Y. An
experimental investigation into vapor dispersion and solid
suspension in boiling stirred tank reactors. Chem. Eng.
Process. Process Intensif. 2002; 41(3): 267–279.
[36] Birch D, Ahmed N. The influence of sparger design and
location on gas dispersion in stirred vessels. Chem. Eng.
Res. Des. 1997; 75(5): 487–496.
[37] Bao Y, Zhang X, Gao Z, Chen L, Chen J, Smith JM, Kirkby
NF. Gas dispersion and solid suspension in a hot sparged
Asia-Pac. J. Chem. Eng. 2016; 11: 229–236
DOI: 10.1002/apj
236 T. Y. SEE ET AL.
multi-impeller stirred tank. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2008; 47(6):
2049–2055.
[38] Chapman CM, Nienow AW, Cooke M, Middleton JC.
Particle-gas-laiquid mixing in stirred vessels Part III: Three
phase mixing. Chem. Eng. Res. Des. 1983; 61a: 167–181.
[39] Bujalski W, Konno M, Nienow AW. Scale-up of 45 pitch
blade agitators for gas dispersion and solid suspension. in
6th European Conference on Mixing, 1988, 24–26.
[40] Wong CW, Wang JP, Huang ST. Investigations of fluid
dynamics in mechanically stirred aerated slurry reactors.
Can. J. Chem. Eng. 1987; 65(3): 412–419.
[41] Nienow AW, Bujalski W. Recent studies on agitated three-
phase (gas–solid–liquid) systems in the turbulent regime.
Chem. Eng. Res. Des. 2002; 80(8): 832–838.
[42] Panneerselvam R, Savithri S, Surender GD. Computational
fluid dynamics simulation of solid suspension in a gas-
© 2015 Curtin University of Technology and John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Asia-Pacific Journal of Chemical Engineering
liquid-solid mechanically agitated contactor. Ind. Eng. Chem.
Res. 2009; 48(3): 1608–1620.
[43] Ibrahim S, Nienow AW. The effect of viscosity on particle
suspension in an aerated stirred vessel with different
impellers and bases. Chem. Eng. Commun. 2009; 197(4):
434–454.
[44] Dohi N, Matsuda Y, Itano N, Minekawa K, Takahashi T,
Kawase Y. Critical impeller speed for suspending solids in
aerated agitation tanks. Can. J. Chem. Eng. 2001; 79(1):
107–111.
[45] Garcia-Ochoa F, Gomez E. Suspension of solid particles in
multi-impeller three-phase stirred tank reactors. Biotechnol.
Adv. 2009; 27(2): 153–176.
[46] Zhu Y, Wu J. Bioreactor scale-up and oxygen transfer rate in
microbial processes: An overview. Can. J. Chem. Eng. 2008;
80(4): 1–6.
Asia-Pac. J. Chem. Eng. 2016; 11: 229–236
DOI: 10.1002/apj