Mineral Processing and Extractive Metallurgy Review

An International Journal

ISSN: 0882-7508 (Print) 1547-7401 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/gmpr20

Investigating Factors Affecting on the Efficiency of

Dynamic Mixers

Soroush Parvizi, Eskandar Keshavarz Alamdari, Seyed Hasan Hashemabadi,

Maryam Kavousi & Anahita Sattari

To cite this article: Soroush Parvizi, Eskandar Keshavarz Alamdari, Seyed Hasan
Hashemabadi, Maryam Kavousi & Anahita Sattari (2016): Investigating Factors Affecting on
the Efficiency of Dynamic Mixers, Mineral Processing and Extractive Metallurgy Review, DOI:
10.1080/08827508.2016.1218868

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08827508.2016.1218868

Published online: 27 Sep 2016.

Submit your article to this journal

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=gmpr20

Download by: [University of Exeter] Date: 28 September 2016, At: 02:20

MINERAL PROCESSING AND EXTRACTIVE METALLURGY REVIEW
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08827508.2016.1218868

Investigating Factors Affecting on the Efficiency of Dynamic Mixers

Soroush Parvizia, Eskandar Keshavarz Alamdari a,b
, Seyed Hasan Hashemabadic, Maryam Kavousia,
and Anahita Sattaria
a
Department of Mining and Metallurgical Engineering, Amirkabir University of Technology, Tehran, Iran; bResearch Center for Materials and Mining
Industries Technology, Amirkabir University of Technology, Tehran, Iran; cComputational Fluid Dynamics Research Laboratory, School of Chemical
Engineering, Iran University of Science and Technology, Tehran, Iran

ABSTRACT KEYWORDS
Mixers are widely used in chemical and hydrometallurgical processes. For instance, one of the greatest Computational fluid
challenges in the field of hydrometallurgy process is agitation made by impeller inside mixers. Solvent dynamics (CFD); dynamic
extraction is a process for separating components in solution by their distribution between two immiscible mixers; mixing; simulation;
liquids. Dynamic mixers are qualified as efficient vessels for mixing in processes accompanied by mass, solvent extraction
momentum and heat transfer and chemical reaction. One of the advantages of this type of receptacles is
their high productivity. In this study, recent conceptual and technological innovations in various dynamic
mixers are reviewed. For this purpose, geometrical, operational, and physical effective parameters in the
most important research are investigated. In addition, optimal parameters, drop size measurement, and
distribution are discussed. Current industrial applications and efficiency are discussed from a process
perspective, focusing on mixing. Considering the development of flow equipment in various flow regimes,
advances in this field will play a crucial role in scientific and industrial communities. For design and
optimization of the dynamic mixers, some models are used. The model structure is selected based on its
good compromise between accuracy and complexity. Validation of the computational fluid dynamics
models with experimental data by using progressive methods resulted in realistic simulations. In recent
researches, there has been an increasing interest in the development of alternative designs for improve-
ments of key elements, such as geometry of baffles, mixer vessels, impellers, operational parameters of
mixers and impellers, etc.

1. Introduction (motionless mixers) and dynamic mixers (mechanical mix-

ers). In dynamic mixers, the main cause of mixing is/are
Several chemical engineering processes, such as solvent
rotating impeller(s). Modern industries use static or higher
extraction or chemical reactions, involve mixing of two
intensity dynamic mixers for mixing process. Mechanical
liquids (Kraume 2004). Solvent extraction is a selective and
mixers divided in two categories: rotor-stators and extru-
powerful separation technology and has found applications in
ders. Rotor-stator mixers are very popular for inline dis-
a broader range of fields (Javanshir et al. 2012).
persion. A schematic of rotor-stator mixer is shown in
In liquid–liquid extractions, the organic phase contacts
Figure 1. Because of small volumes and high rotational
aqueous phase containing the dissolved metal or metal ion
speeds and powers, dynamic mixers provide large local
complex; two phases are immiscible in each other.
energy dissipation. Primary purpose of extruders is to
However, there is some loss of organic phase in the aqu-
melt polymer granule and to pump the melt with high
eous phase that is often less than 15 ppm. Dynamic mixers
pressure, but sometimes they are used as mixer in industry.
are used in solvent extraction. The mixer disperses the
Major mixing mechanism in rotor-stator and extruder are
organic phase in the aqueous phase in the form of small
radial and axial mixing, respectively (Paul et al. 2004).
droplets, which increase the kinetics of extraction (Free
This paper summarizes the researches on dynamic mix-
2013). Some mixers are used in leaching with corrosive or
ers including recent improvements and applications in
dangerous gases (O3, Cl2, SO2, etc.). The reactor must be
industrial processes (Thakur 2003). The most commonly
efficiently insulated and enable safe sampling. This equip-
used dynamic mixers are described and compared. Their
ment, at first operated for the investigations by the rotating
respective advantages and limitations are emphasized. In
disk for a blade stirrer (Havlik 2008).
this study, the mixing of miscible and immiscible liquid–
Physical, geometrical, and operational parameters gov-
liquid and gas–liquid by the use of dynamic mixers are
erning the performance of the various dynamic mixers are
explored. Efficiencies of dynamic mixers are compared
reported. The operation of mixers is based on conservation
based on theory, experimental and simulation results
of continuity, momentum, and energy laws. Mixers in
from the literature.
industry are divided into two main categories: static mixers

CONTACT Eskandar Keshavarz Alamdari alamdari@aut.ac.i Department of Mining and Metallurgical Engineering, Amirkabir University of Technology,
Tehran, Iran and Research Center for Materials and Mining Industries Technology, Amirkabir University of Technology, Tehran, P.O. Box 15875-4413, Iran.
© 2016 Taylor & Francis
2 S. PARVIZI ET AL.
Figure 1. Schematic representation of rotor-stator dynamic mixer (Paul 2004).
1.1 Governing equations
Fundamentals of mixing operation are based on Eqs. 1–9. Theses
equations are usually solved by commercial and open-source
computer programs, such as Ansys CFX, Ansys Fluent,
OpenFOAM, etc. The computational fluid dynamics (CFD) simu-
lation involves the continuity equation for incompressible flow
and time-averaged Navier-Stocks equations. Droplet coalescence
and break up model is implemented in some computer programs.
1.1.1 Continuity equations
The continuity equations for continuous (c) and dispersed (d)
phases are as follows:


Ñ ρc αc Uc ¼ 0 (1)


Ñ ρd αd Ud ¼ 0 (2)
Where ρ, α, and U are density, volume fraction and mean velocity
vector, respectively (Versteeg et al. 2007; White et al. 1991).
1.1.2 Momentum equations
The time-averaged governing equation for a steady, incom-
pressible, turbulent flow form as Eq. 3.


ρd ½Ñðαd Uc Ud Þ ¼ αd ÑP þ μd þ μt Ñ2 ðαd Ud Þ þ SM:d (3)
Here μ, μt, P, and SM are dynamic viscosity, turbulent viscosity,
pressure, and source term, respectively. Uc and Ud are the time-
averaged mean vectorial velocities (Versteeg et al. 2007; White
et al. 1991).
The derivation of the Navier–Stokes equations begins with an
application of Newton’s second law: balance of momentum
(often alongside mass conservation and energy balance) being
written for an arbitrary portion of the fluid. In an inertial frame
of reference, the general form of the equations of fluid motion is
as follows:
 
@u
ρ þ u:ÑuÞ ¼ Ñp þ Ñ:τ þ f (4)
@t
1.1.3 Energy equations
The energy equation is derived from the first law of thermody-
namics, which states that the rate of change of energy of a fluid
particle is equal to the rate of heat addition to the fluid particle
plus the rate of work done on the particle (Versteeg et al. 2007;
White et al. 1991). Generally, this equation is described as follows:
@ Dp
ðρhÞ þ Ñ:ðρUhÞ ¼ Ñ:ðqÞ þ  ðτ : ÑU Þ
@t Dt !
X
Ñ hk jk þ Sh (5)
k
Where h is described in Eq. 6.
X T
h¼ mk hk { hk ¼ ò Cpk dT (6)
T ref
k
1.1.4 Other equations
The k-ε turbulent model has been used to calculate the turbulent
viscosity. Where k and ε are turbulent kinetic energy and turbu-
lent dissipation rate in the related transport equations, respectively
(Ansys CFX users’ guide, 2014; Sadeghi et al. 2011). Fluid flow
field calculation has been carried out through standard k-ε turbu-
lence model. k-ε is one of most established turbulence model
which is successfully used by many researchers for simulating
similar cases. The turbulence model includes buoyancy, drag,
lift, and turbulent dispersion force (Ansys CFX users’ guide,
2014; Sadeghi et al. 2011). Buoyancy, drag, and lift effects are
considered respectively as follows:
F buo ¼ ðρ  ρ0 Þg (7)
1
Fdrag ¼ ρjUrel jUrel Ap CD (8)
2
Fdlift ¼ αd ρc CL ðUc  Ud Þ  ÑUC (9)
1.2 Turbulent flow and modeling
Mixer-settlers have a broad application in several processes, such
as metallurgical, mineral, and petroleum industries. Study of
turbulent flow and prediction of its features in a mixer-settler
are considerable challenges for turbulence models (Shabani and
Mazahery 2012). CFD modeling is used to survey the specifica-
tions of two immiscible phase dispersion (Kankaanpaa 2007).
The most popular and useful approach for engineering appli-
cations is based on solution of the existing equations of the flow
processes. The basic presumption of modeling turbulence is
understood thru continuum supposition of fluid dynamics.
Validity of the supposition might be doubtful due to some experi-
mental facts. For instance, although the polymer molecules are
well dispersed and are considerably smaller than dispersal scaled
of turbulence, small values of long chain polymers have remark-
able impact on properties of turbulence. Continuum supposition
of fluid dynamics is the foundation of modeling turbulence over
the recent decades; thus, the mentioned assumption will be
admitted here for modeling turbulence according to reactor engi-
neering. Accepting the continuum supposition indicates that the
application of the identical basic momentum conservation equa-
tions is valid for describing turbulent flows. Appropriate bound-
ary conditions are used for solving the momentum conservation
equations in order to predict the desired flow characteristics at any
value of Reynolds number. However, at higher Reynolds num-
bers, the inherent nonlinearity in these equations shows in terms

Figure 2. Modeling approaches for turbulent flows (Ranade 2002).
of turbulence, which is a three-dimensional and unsteady phe-
nomenon. It has been illustrated that by increasing of the
Reynolds number, the flow becomes more turbulent. It has been
presented that most of the engineering computations involving
turbulent flow processes should trust on models of turbulent
flows. It is usually discussed that if Navier–Stokes equations can
justify turbulent flows comprehensively, then straightforward
equations are pointless. The main endeavors in the field of turbu-
lence modeling are attributed to arrange computational models
with reasonable demands (Ranade 2002). Figure 2 classifies tur-
bulent models into three categories; direct numerical simulations,
large eddy simulations, and Reynolds-averaged Navier–Stokes
equations (RANS). Table 1 provides the advantages and disad-
vantages of RANS methods (Ranade 2002). The model structures
are selected based on good compromise between accuracy and
Table 1. Summary of two-equation and RSM turbulence models (Ranade 2002).
Model Advantages
Standard k-ε ✓ Simplest model to represent variation of turbulence length and
velocity scales
✓ Robust and economical
✓ Excellent performance for many industrial flows
✓ The most widely validated model
RNG k-ε ✓ Performs better than standard model for some:
✓ Separated flows
✓ Swirling flows
Algebraic stress models ✓ Accounts for anisotropy
(ASM) ✓ Combines generality of approach with the economy of the k-ε model
✓ Good performance for isothermal and buoyant thin shear layers
Reynolds stress models ✓ Most general model of all classical turbulence models
(RSM) ✓ Performs well for many complex flows including noncircular ducts
and curved flows
MINERAL PROCESSING AND EXTRACTIVE METALLURGY REVIEW 3
complexity. Calibration of the model with industrial plant data
will result in realistic simulations of outlets (Moreno 2009).
2. Drop size in dynamic mixers
The process of mixing and contact between two phases in the
mixer is governed by drop size distribution (DSD) produced by
the impeller. In most applications, it is necessary to produce drops
having a narrow DSD. Further, it is necessary to ensure that the
DSD is similar at various locations in the mixer vessel. This
ensures that the entire liquid volume is utilized for mass transfer
purpose and that the rate of mass transfer is almost the same
irrespective of location in the tank.
DSD in the mixer is a consequence of two opposing rate
processes: breakage of drops by turbulence and the coalescence
of drops due to collisions. The breakage of drops is related to the
turbulent energy dissipation rate in the continuous phase. The
turbulent energy dissipation rate determines the distribution of
eddy size and the corresponding eddy energies. The energy asso-
ciated with eddy size represents turbulent velocity fluctuations.
When droplets experience velocity fluctuations beyond a certain
limit, it can lead to breakage of droplets. Interaction between
eddies having certain energy and the droplets causes breakage of
droplets. The energy associated with eddies determine the break-
age efficiency. The droplet coalescence is related to the collision
rate between droplets. This is determined by local energy dissipa-
tion rate. Droplet size distribution can vary dramatically by loca-
tion in the mixer (Heng Yeoh et al. 2014). Some of the traditional
approaches, such as the application of hot-wire anemometry to
more modern ones like laser Doppler velocimetry (LDV) are used
in experimental techniques. Studying the hydrodynamics and
drop size in stirred tanks shows that detailed data for the system
scale up can be obtained by the simultaneous application of LDV
and CFD techniques. This can decrease the cost of a mixing
process and increase product quality (Ochieng et al. 2009).
Disadvantages
✓ More expensive than zero equation models
✓ Assumes isotropic eddy viscosity
✓ Performs poorly for:
✓ some unconfined flows
✓ rotating flows
✓ noncircular ducts
✓ curved boundary layers
✓ Assumes isotropic eddy viscosity
✓ Not sufficiently validated so far
✓ Restricted to flows where convection and diffusion terms
are negligible
✓ Performs as poorly as k-ε in some flows due to problems with
ε equation
✓ Not widely validated
✓ Computationally expensive (seven extra PDFs)
✓ Performs as poorly as k-ε in some flows due to problems with
ε equation
✓ Not widely validated
4 S. PARVIZI ET AL.

Table 2. The most important parameters affecting drop size distribution in the mixers of solvent extraction.
Geometrical factors Impeller geometry Stirrer or impeller type
Impeller styles
Blade width
Number of blades
Blade thickness
Blades angle
Mixer geometry Baffle type (cylindrical or planar)
Immersion depth of baffles lB
d/D ratio
d/w ratio
D/T ratio
Impeller location
Stirrer bottom clearance (h)
Reactor diameter size (T)
Reactor aspect ratio (H/T)
Stirrer height (hst)
Number of stirrer n in multiple impeller systems
Stirrer–stirrer distance s in multiple impeller systems
Operating parameters Impeller functional parameter Stirrer speed or rotation speed or impeller speed n
Torque
Power
Mixer functional parameters Agitation speed
Inlet velocity
Hold up or Dispersed phase fraction ϕd
Stabilizer concentration
Surfactant
Pumping capacity
Superficial velocity
Torque/equivalent volume
Physical characteristics Interfacial tension between the immiscible liquids γ
Density of the dispersed phase (ρd)
Density difference between two phases
Viscosity of the dispersed phase (ηd)
Viscosity difference between two phases
pH
Working temperature (T)
Temperature difference between two phases

2.1 Drop size distribution droplet size distribution for six entrance velocities utilizing CFD
simulation for oil-water flow through the standard hydrocyclone.
Optimized DSD, mass transfer, and chemical reaction are the
As shown in this figure, with increasing inlet velocity of fluids the
main purpose of using mixers in hydrometallurgical processes
DSD shift to the finer droplets (curves shift to left) (Noroozi et al.
especially solvent extraction. DSD is the most important factor
2013). According to the figure, it is obvious that inlet velocity has
affecting other parameters. Table 2 summarizes the most impor-
similar effect like impeller speed on the DSD and in some cases
tant parameters affecting DSD. Figure 3 shows the real cumulative
can be substituted.

2.2 Drop size measurement techniques

Drop size analysis covers a broad range of techniques. The
drop size distributions are measured directly inside the vessel
as a function of position. These techniques can be divided into
four main types as shown in Figure 4.

(1) Sound techniques working with ultrasound,

(2) Laser techniques,
(3) Coulter counter, and
(4) Photo based methods working with digital images and
image recognition (Coulaloglou and Tavlarides 1977).

The most important studies on measuring drop size mainly

Figure 3. Real cumulative size distribution for six different entrance velocities
(/in ¼ 0:5%, ddsd;50;in ¼ 150 μm). (Noroozi et al. 2013).
in liquid–liquid dispersion are represented in Table 3. In this
table, the most important experimental studies from 1955 to
2012 are summarized. The experimental study often results in
experimental equation that relates drop size to physical prop-
erties of fluids and geometrical and operational parameters of
mixers. For example, in most relations, Sauter diameter is

Figure 4. Overview of measurement techniques for drop size distribution in liquid/liquid systems (Coulaloglou and Tavlarides 1977).
related to the diverse We number; thus, drop size is increasing
as the surface tension between the fluids increase. For each
system materials used for experiments and method of mea-
suring drop size are described. The main results from each
experiment and the required explanation for predicting drop
size diameter in similar systems are listed in the table briefly.
Using the correlation in this table can help to design and
optimize industrial systems. Furthermore, in simulation of
similar systems, validation of the models can be done by the
experimental equations in Table 3.
2.3 Breakage and coalescence
As shown in Figure 5, summation rates of drop breakage and
coalescence determine DSD. In the mixers, often, the drop size
coalescence rate is very little and can be neglected (Guardiola
2008). The DSD of an emulsion is determined by equilibrium
between the rates of coalescence and breakage of drops. Drop
breakage is occurred by the collision between drops and turbu-
lent eddies which bombard the surface that is based on the
energy level of arriving eddy (Kraume et al. 2004). The droplet
breakage only occurs when the length scale of eddies is equal or
smaller than the droplet diameter (Noroozi et al. 2013). Eddies
that satisfy this criterion also must have the kinetic energy that
exceeds the surface energy required for breakage (Kankhaanpa
2007). Coalescence is caused thru a sequential procedure invol-
ving at least two drops. In breakage phenomenon, two drops
must collide to form a thin film of continuous phase between
them. The film must drain and eventually rupture (Maaß et al.
2012). The number of collisions between two drops grows vig-
orously with an increased dispersed fraction than the eddy drop
collisions (Kraume et al. 2004). Besides, physicochemical prop-
erties of liquid–liquid systems play an important role in control-
ling the drop size (Ban et al. 1989).
Breakage of particulate matter into smaller fragments is
encountered in many natural phenomena and technological
processes. Approach of Coulaloglou and Tavlarides is the
most widely used and quoted
 model for breakage rate. The
mechanistic model for g dp is based on the presumption that


g dp is the product of the fraction of the total number of
breaking drops and the reciprocal time required for the drop
breakage to happen (Eq. 10).
MINERAL PROCESSING AND EXTRACTIVE METALLURGY REVIEW 5
1
gðdp Þ ¼ ð Þ:ðfraction of breaking dropsÞ
breakage time
1 Nbr
¼ : (10)
tbr Ntot
The overall breakage rate by Coulaloglou and Tavlarides is
presented in Eq. 11.
ε1=3 rð1 þ ϕd Þ2
gðdp Þ ¼ C1;br 2=3
expðC2;br 5 Þ (11)
ð1 þ ϕd Þdp 2
ρε3 dp3
Equation 11 has its absolute maximum for a certain
critical particle diameter (Coulaloglou and Tavlarides
1977). Noroozi et al. (2013) investigated the effects of
breakage and coalescence on deoiling hydrocyclone per-
formance by utilizing CFD simulation. Since droplet
breakup processes are complicated in turbulent flows,
simplifications of the processes, and flow conditions are
crucial. The first assumption is the binary breakup of
particles (a particle breaks into two daughter particles
with equal or unequal sizes). The second one is that the
particle size lies in the inertial subrange. The breakage is
defined by the probability function, which is based on the
energy level of the arriving eddies.
Mixer is connected to settler and after mixing, separa-
tion occurs. The flow behavior over the settlers is investi-
gated by Kazemi and Alamdari (2012). Because the volume
fraction of dispersed phase was high, they used the
Eulerian–Eulerian multiphase model of commercial Ansys
CFX-11. The flow was assumed to be laminar and incom-
pressible because the Reynolds number of the settler is low
enough and the droplet coalescence and the break-up
model is used. The settler is constructed as a rectangular
vessel with 20, 2.75, and 10 cm length, height, and width,
respectively. Breakage and coalescence using population
balance models are summarized according to setup, materi-
als and operating parameters in Table 4.
3. Effecting parameters
As mentioned in Table 2, the effecting parameters on perfor-
mance of dynamic mixers are as follows: geometrical, operat-
ing, and physical parameters. The most important factors
 6

Table 3. The important investigation on dispersion in dynamic mixers.

Reference
Vermculen et al. (1955)
Results Equations Experimental methods and materials No.
f; shows the effect of holdup on drop size. N 2 d5=3 D4=3 ρm
¼ 0:016 A/O and O/A in batch experiments 1
f; versus ; was reported. σf; 5=3 Paddle impeller
d
fφ ¼ dφ ¼0:1 Hold up values between 0.1 and 0.4
ρm ¼ 0:6ρd þ 0:4ρc Drop size measurement technique: light
transmission
S. PARVIZI ET AL.

Rodger et al. (1956) Correlation for specific interfacial area h i  1  1 h i Seventeen different O/A dispersions in batch 2
D3 N 2 ρC 0:36
Dk υd 3 t 6 Δρ
Measured settling times included good fit 
a ¼ Dk σ T υc t0 exp 3:6 ρc ψ experiments.
Turbine impeller
Holdup was equal to 0.5 in all experiments.
drop size measurement techniques: Direct
photography and light transmission
Fernandes and Sharma No practical different between batch and continuous operation drop 
a / NDT1=2 ; Dispersions of several esters in caustic soda Batch 3
(1967) sizes a / ND; A few continuous experiments for study the
First correlation is for turbines, paddles and propellers of T<40 cm, overall specific interfacial area by using a fast
the second correlation is for turbines with T>40 cm. pseudo first order reaction.
Disk turbine impeller, paddle impellers and
propellers.
Experiments in tanks of different sizes for study
the effect of scale.
  Holdup between 0.1 and 0.5.
Sprow (1967) Eq.: d32 expressed in terms of the parameters of the the Schwarz- a
D32 ¼ a= 1 þ dmax continuous phase: 1% NaCl in water solution 4
Bezemer equation. Dispersed phase: iso-octane (2, 2, 4 trimethyl-
The ratio of two parameters is independent of impeller speed for pentane)
the studied system. Batch system
The volume average drop diameter (d30 Þ varied inversely with the Drop size measurement: Electronic particle
impeller velocity. counting (the Coulter Counter)
Numerous average diameters are directly proportional to the
maximum drop size in the emulsion.
Mlynek and Resnick (1972) Small variation in local drop sizes d32 Batch experiments with mixture of CCl4 and iso- 5
D ¼ 0:058We10:6 ð1 þ 5:4;Þ
octane as dispersed and distilled water as
continuous phase.
Rushton turbine impeller
Holdup varied between 0.025 and 0.25.
Drop size Measurement: encapsulation of drops
in a polymeric film by using a specially designed
trap.
 0:196
Weinstein and Treybal (1973) First equation is for batch system. O/A and A/O (eight cases) in batch and 6
d32 ¼ 10ð2:316þ0:672;Þ υ0:0722
c ε0:194 ρσ
Second equation is for continuous system.  c0:274 continuous experiments
In drop size correlations for continuous systems. No residence time d32 ¼ 10ð2:066þ0:732;Þ υ0:047 Holdup varied between 0.08-0.6.
c ε0:204 ρσ
c
was proposed. Drop size measurement: Light transmission
A separate correlation for holdup in terms of residence time was Using turbine impeller
proposed.   1=3 
Brown and Pitt (1974) Drop sizes were measured at impeller tip, 5=3 O/A systems with MIBK, kerosene, n-butanol as 6
d32 σρ ε2=3 εT 2=3tc ¼ c
t0 is the circulation time given by second equation.

D8=3 dispersed phase and water as continuous phase
The effect of geometrical parameters in the correlation for drop size Ntc W
D T ¼ 0:0122 were investigated (three cases).
referred to the term in the second bracket of left hand side of first Holdup was equal to 0.05.
equation Drop size measurement: Photoelectric probe.
Using disk turbine impeller
 0:6
Mc Manamey (1978) The whole power dissipation assumed to happen in the impeller σ Used experimental data of other authors. 7
d32 ¼ c ρ εi0:4
swept volume only and this value used to correlate the drop size.
(Continued )
Table 3. (Continued).
Reference Results Equations Experimental methods and materials No.
Calabrese et al. (1986a) Intermediately viscous oils showed a lot of scatter data and could   1=2 1=3 1=3 5=3 Finding the effect of dispersed phase viscosity on 8
d32 ρ μd ε d32
not be correlated d0 ¼ 1 þ 11:5 ρ c
d σ drop size.
First and third equations are for moderately viscous oils.  3=8   Silicone oils with viscosity less than 0.5 pas were
d32 μd ρC ND2 3=4
The second and fourth equations are for highly viscous oil. D ¼ 2:1 μc μC
called moderately viscous, with 1 pas
Dependence of d32 On μd for highly viscous oils was different from d32 ¼ 0:6dmax intermediately viscous and more than 4 pas as
as expected from a semi empirical model. d32 ¼ 0:5dmax highly viscous.
Log-normal drop size distributions were obtained. Using five different grades of silicone oil in water
D0 is the diameter of in viscid drop. to obtain dispersed phases of varied viscosity.
Hold up was 0.0015.
Drop size measuring technique: Batch
experiments were done with direct photography
Using Rushton turbine impeller
h
0:33 i0:59
Wang and Calabrese (1986) μd varied between 0.001 and 1 Pa.s d32 Establishing relative importance of dispersed 9
σ Varied between 0.001 and 0.045 N/m. D ¼ 0:066WeI0:66 1 þ 13:8Vi0:82 dD32
phase viscosity and interfacial tension on drop
 
Transition from low to moderate viscosity behavior to high viscosity μ ND ρ 1=2 size.
Vi ¼ d σ ρ c
behavior was found to shift toward high viscosity as σreduced. d Silicone oils were dispersed in water, methanol
The equation is valid for μd <0:5Pa:s For μd ¼ 1 observed scatter and their solution,
Experiments in Batch system
Using Rushton turbine impeller.
Holdup less than 0.002.
Drop size measurement: Direct photography
Calabrese et al. (1986b) Unlike previous studies, correlation accounts for the effect of high h
0:33 i3=5 Using previous studies to obtain the correlation 10
d32
hold up. D ¼ 0:054ð1 þ 3;ÞWeI0:6 1 þ 4:42ð1  2:5;Þ;Vi dD32 of broader utility.
Nishikawa et al. (1987a) dispersions can be coalescence or breakup controlled
6=5
μ 1=5 μd 1=8 σ 3=5 Honeybee’s wax was used as dispersed phase 11
d32 ¼ 0:105ε2=5 DT 1 þ 2:52=3 μd μ ρ
As specific power input increases transition from breakup controlled c c high temperature batch mixing experiments
to coalescence controlled takes place Rushton turbine impeller
First and third equations are for breakup controlled second and continuous phase: distilled water or millet jelly
fourth for coalescence controlled correlation for coalescence Holdup range: 0.005–0.36
controlled is not dimensionless Measurement technique: microscope
Correlation for transition value of specific power input photography
Nishikawa et al. (1987b) Incorporating the terms for the effect of scale
6=5  T 2=3 dispersed phase: Honey bee’s wax continuous 12
Breakup controlled: first equation d32 ¼ 0:105ε2=5 DT T0 phase: distilled water
!
Coalescence controlled: second equation  1=2 2=3  1=5  1=8  3=5 Batch experiments with disk turbine in tanks of
T μd μd σ
T0 = 25 cm (reference tank diameter) 1 þ 2:5 T0 μ μ
c ρ
c
different sizes
study the effect of scale

  14=4
1=4 d 3=4 T
d32 ¼ 0:0371ε Measurement technique: microscope
T0
! D
 1=2 3=4  1=5  1=8  3=8 photography
μd μd σ
1 þ 3:5 TT0 μ μ ρ
c c
 0:056
Laso et al. (1987) Approximately hold-up: 0.09 d32 μ Dispersed phase: CCl4 + n-heptane or 1-octanol 13
D ¼ 0:118WeI0:4 ;0:27 μd
c or MIBK
Continuous phase: water
flat blade turbine in a baffled tank in batch
system
Drop size measurement: photographing
Chatzi et al. (1991) Drop size distribution: bio modal d32 dispersed phase: styrene 14
D ¼ 0:045ð0:003ÞWeI0:6
continuous phase: water (0.1 g/L Polyvinyl
alcohol)
Batch and holdup= 0.01
Rushton turbine impeller
MINERAL PROCESSING AND EXTRACTIVE METALLURGY REVIEW

Drop sizes Measurement technique: particle size

analyzer
(Continued )
7
 8

Table 3. (Continued).
Reference Results Equations Experimental methods and materials No.
Zhou and Kresta (1998) compare different scale-up criteria 2 0:270 Continuous phase: water 15
d32 ¼ 118:6ðεmax ND Þ
Relation between d32 and dmax Dispersed phase: silicone oil
Nonlinearity of relation Batch and holdup: 0.0003
Four impellers: A310, HE3, PBT and RT
Drop size measurement: Doppler particle analyzer
S. PARVIZI ET AL.

Pacek et al. (1999) Values of the exponent, ranging between −0.47 to −0.72, were d32 / εb Continuous phase: water 16
tabulated as a function of impeller type, dispersed phase and Dispersed phase: Chlorobenzen or sunflower oil
dispersed phase holdup. Batch and phase hold-up: 0.01–0.05.
Impellers: high shear (RT), high flow (Chemineer
HE3) and ultrahigh shear (Chemineers CS)
Drop size Measurement technique: direct
photography
Ruiz et al. (2002) Number volume distributions: log normal dmax Continuous phase: 0.25 M sodium sulfonate 17
D ¼ 0:353WeI0:6
Investigating temperature, extractant concentration, and pH solution
Increasing in temperature and decreasing pH resulted in smaller Dispersed phase: 1:1 mixture of LIX-860 N-IC & a
drops LIX84-IC in ESC AID 103
Extractant concentration (7–20% w/w) affect is not sensible Batch and holdup: 0.006–0.018
Pump-mix double shrouded impeller with eight
curved blades
Drop size measurement technique: frozen drops.
Single point photographing
Desnoyer et al. (2003) D32 correlated using the frame work of Hinze (1955) and Doulah d32 Continuous phase: mixture of TBP and Sobesso 18
D ¼ 0:28WeI0:6 ð1 þ 0:92;Þ
(1975) better correlation given in the third equation with exponent d32
¼ 0:14WeI0:6 ð1 þ 0:48;Þ 150
D
of weber number showing dependence on hold-up values d32 Dispersed phase: 20 g/L NiCl2 (a fast coalescing
First equation: NiCl2 (dispersed phase) D ¼ 0:0286WeI0:6 ð1 þ 13:24;Þ system) or 3 MHCl (a slow coalescing system)
Second equation: HCl (dispersed phase) Batch and hold up: 0.1–0.6.
PBTU impeller

Drop size measurements: laser granulameter
Quadros and Baptista (2003) The first eq. represent the D32 over a wide range of weber number  2  Determination of interfacial area by chemical 19
(We>1900) d32 ¼ 6; 1 þ Wec1I ; ðc2 ;2 þ c3 ;Þ method
D32 could be correlated using the frame work of Hinze and Doulah d32
¼ 0:0336WeI0:6 ð1 þ 13:76;Þ Aqueous phase: sulfuric acid
D
Two-blade paddle: second equation. d32 Dispersed phase: di-isobutylene diluted with
Four-blade paddle: third equation. D ¼ 0:0286WeI0:6 ð1 þ 13:24;Þ benzene
Stirred tank
Continuous system and holdup: 0.061–0.166
Two or four blades of straight paddles
Impeller speeds: covering large range of weber
number
Giapos et al. (2005) Variation of exponent (0.62–1.2) as a result of the value of holdup d32 / N a No. of blades (2, 4, 6, and 8) on drop size 20
Increasing the number of blades cause decreasing the drop size Continuous phase: Keresone
Dispersed phase: distilled water
Batch and holdups: 0.01–0.07
Disk turbine
Drop size measurement: direct photography
Sechremeli et al. (2006) Exponent range: 0.61–1.03 d32 / N a Comparison of drop sizes produced by a disk 21
Open impeller: power number = 4, D32 were larger by 6–82% than turbine and an open impeller having same
the closed impeller geometry
Closed impeller: power number = 5 Batch system and holdup: 0.01–0.1
No proportionality between dmax and d32 continuous phase: distilled water
Dispersed phase: keresone
Drop size measurement: direct photography
(Continued )
Table 3. (Continued).
Reference Results Equations Experimental methods and materials No.
d32


Huang and Tanaka (2009) The effects of the operation parameters on the extraction efficiency ¼ 0:06 1 þ 9ϕav We0:6 continuous system 22
D
were studied based on the pseudo-first-order interfacial extraction Aqueous phase: sulfuric acid
rate equation together with the hydrodynamic properties in the Dispersed phase: LIX84I, PC88A, Shellsol D70
mixer.
The extraction efficiencies of multistage extraction processes were
calculated, by using the developed simulation method, and the
results were in good agreement with the experimental results.   m 
Khakpay and Abolghasemi Correlation is in a good agreement with the experimental data. d32
WenI Batch system 23
DI ¼ að1 þ bϕÞ 1 þ cVI dD32I
(2010) d32was increased with an increase of the impeller speed continuous phase: distilled water
d32 was increased with an increase in the holdup as linear function Dispersed phase: butyl acetate
with positive slop. Drop size measurement: direct photography
d32 was depended on the Weber number as a decreasing power law 30 experiments were performed
function with an exponent of −0.593 Holdup: 0.104, 0.153, 0.397, 0.492, and 0.721
Javanshir et al. (2012) First equation: for predicting mean drop sizes d32 C3 C4 No. of blades: 4 with 45 angle 24
D ¼ C1 ð1 þ C2 ;Þ We
Second equation: by considering a function of concentration f(c) d32 C3 C4 continuous phase: gold chloride solution
D ¼ f ðc Þð1 þ C 2 ;Þ We
The comparison of d32 obtained from correlations and experimental Dispersed phase: DBC solvent (dibutyl carbitol)
values shows the overall agreement between the predicted and the Drop size measurement: direct photography
experimental values. Holdup: 0.167, 0.286, and 0.375
Higher holdups lead to larger drops
Increasing the impeller speed leads to smaller drops, thus, agitation
power increases drop breakage frequency
d32 is correlated with the impeller speed as an exponent function.
The results follow the Hinze–Kolmogorov’s theory
MINERAL PROCESSING AND EXTRACTIVE METALLURGY REVIEW
9
10 S. PARVIZI ET AL.
Figure 5. Representation of drop breakage and coalescence (Guardiola 2008).
affecting distribution size ratio are investigated in the next
subsections. Geometrical parameters are related to the design
specification of the mixer and impeller that remain constant
during the process. Functional or operational parameters are
adjustable during the process and the physical characteristics
are related to the properties of materials (such as fluid or gas)
used for mixing in the mixers.
3.1 Geometrical parameters
Bruha et al. (2007) studied the oscillation of the primary
circulation loop with an axial flow impeller and radial baffles
in a cylindrical system, with the purpose of theoretical
description of hydrodynamical stability of the loop. Their
experiments were carried out in a flat-bottomed cylindrical
stirred tank which is replete with water at room temperature
and is stirred with a six pitched blade impeller with a pitch
angle of 45 , pumping downward. The flow patterns of the
agitated liquid that is observed in a vertical plane transit thru
the vessel in front of the adjacent baffles, and it is visualized
by means of Al microparticles (0.05 mm in diameter) spread
in water and illuminated by a vertical light knife (5 mm in
width) which is presented in Figures 6 and 7.
PCL can be explained as a closed stream tube with a
vertical section of elliptical form with a core. The core is
chaotic with no obvious streamline specifications, and the
flow in the elliptical annular area is streamlined. The remain-
ing upper section is steadier considerably. Previous investiga-
tions are in agreement with the aforementioned findings
(Grackova and Koza 1972; Kresta and Wood 1993). The
flow process has performed in three stages. First, PCL grows
up to a certain size. Then, when they remain at a constant size
for a short time, it is followed by a quasi-stage. In the last step,
they collapse into very small flow formations (vortices). An
energy balance for PCL is conducted by expressing the rea-
sons for the flow field behavior. The energy balance for the
quasi-steady stage mentioned earlier, is performed under con-
ditions that the PCL reaches its top position, that is, hc ¼
hc;max as shown in Figure 8 (Bruha et al. 2007). On the other
hand, in the settler, two phases are separated completely and a
clean separation could be achieved as a result of gravity
difference. The dead zones are zones that the fluid does not
have acceptable axial velocity and fluid flow has a vortex
regime. The separation efficiency decreases due to the pre-
sence of these zones and increases the costs. Identification and
elimination of these spaces are achieved by modeling the
process. This action could raise the efficiency of the process
and will be commercial (Kazemi and Alamdari 2012).
3.1.1 Impeller geometry
Type of impeller. Many of the processes in the industry require
dispersion of one liquid into another immiscible liquid. Solvent
extraction is one of the unstable dispersion technics that provides
a large surface area for mass transfer. In the solvent extraction
process, dispersion should be fine enough in order to cause swift
mass transfer, at the same time, it must be coarse enough to
provide rapid separation of the phases. Commonly, mixer-settler
systems can utilize finer dispersions than solvent extraction col-
umns (Mersmann 1975).
Most liquid–liquid dispersions happen in a turbulent
regime and drop sizes is between 5 and 500 μm. Droplets
break as a result of shear stresses inducted by turbulence
that cause adequate deformation to prevail the stabilizing
influence of surface tension.
Accurate attention of operating conditions and fluid charac-
teristics is required to effectively design and scale up mixing
systems. Figure 9 presents a wide body of information in this
field and a broad range of modern impellers is available for
mixing challenges (Mersmann 1975). According to Figure 10,
every impeller type can be used in a certain range of viscosity. In
very high and low viscosities, some impeller types are useless.
For example, propellers and helical ribbons are used in low and
high viscosity fluids, respectively (Doran 2012). There are many
types of impellers in industry. Impellers are responsible for
mixing action and imparting shear stress to the fluid in a process.
So, the performance of mixing is affected by the mixer type.
Rewatkar and Joshi (1991) investigate three types of impellers,
namely, disk turbine (DT), pitched blade down-flow turbine
(PBTD), and pitched blade up-flow turbine (PBTU). Some
researchers have reported mixing time data for MAC using
different impeller designs. The results show that the more energy
efficient impeller type is PBTD (Biggs et al. 1963; Brennan and
Lehner 1976; Fox et al. 1956; Holmes et al. 1964; Kramers et al
1953; Norwood and Metzner 1960; Raghav and Joshi 1988).
Likewise, Zhao and Kresta (1996) focused on the turbulent
kinetic energy caused by three different impellers (Rushton
turbine, four bladed PBTD, and Lightnin A310). They observed
radial fluctuations for Rushton turbine and axial fluctuations for
PBTD and A310, in the impeller discharge area employing LDA.
Furthermore, recently the condition for measuring the time of
mixing for four different impellers, namely, RDT, HCDT,
PBTU, and PBTD is determined by the dispersed oil phase
volume fraction Φd = 10%, Qg = 0.16, 0.4 L/min, and the
Table 4. Summary of previous work using population balance modeling.
Setup System φ ρd μd σ N Author (year)
Horizontal mixer settler Au/DBC 0.167–0.54 880 2.65 12.24 335–600 Javanshir et al. (2012)
Stirred tank six-blade disk turbine Kerosene dichlorobenzene-water 0.025–0.15 972 0.0013 0.043 190–310 Coulaloglou and Tavlarides (1977)
Stirred tank six-blade paddle Various organic liquids-water 1100 0.001 0.046–0.029 300, 420, 480 Narsimhan et al. (1980)
Stirred tank disk turbine Various organic liquids-water 0.09 1000 0.0006–0.008 0.048–0.016 407–518 Laso et al. (1987a, b)
Stirred tank 6-blade RT Toluene-water 0.1-0.3 1000 0.0008 0.03 270, 300, 330 Tsouris and Tavlarides (1994)
Continuous flow screw loop reactor Paraffin oil-water 0.1 856 0.0324 0.007 1500–4800 Chen et al. (1998)
Stirred tank Rushton turbine Various organic liquids-water 0.0058 1000 0.0007-0.1339 0.035-0.042 350-700 Sathyagal et al. (1996)
Stirred tank T=H=3 m D =1 m Organic liquid-water 0.4 805, 1064 0.0006 0.024 30, 60 Alopaeus et al. (1999)
Continuous flow pump-mix mixer Water-TBP and water-xylene 0.2–0.5 1000 0.001 0.009, 0.037 90–500 C. Srilatha et al. (2010)
MINERAL PROCESSING AND EXTRACTIVE METALLURGY REVIEW
11
12 S. PARVIZI ET AL.
Figure 6. Experimental technique of flow visualization (Bruha et al. 2007).
agitation speed N = 545 rpm in liquid–liquid system. As men-
tioned previously, the results indicate that the mixing time for
PBTD is the smallest and that for HCDT is the highest in liquid–
liquid systems. In spite of higher shear and turbulence levels for
RDT and axial flow pattern of PBTD, PBTD is favorable for
macromixing. The flow pattern of RDT is higher which makes
the shorter mixing time of RDT than that of HCDT. Thus,
mixing time for PBTU is larger than that for RDT (Cheng
et al. 2012) which is in contrast with the results of single phase
case according to Figure 11 (Zhao et al. 2011).
Jaworski et al. (1996) compares the preference of commer-
cial hydrofoils Chemineer HE-3 and Prochem Maxflo T in
Figure 7. (a) PCL growing, (b) PCL at maximum height, and (c) PCL after its collapse (Bruha et al. 2007).
producing the circulating flow at equal power input. In spite
of the similarity of axial and radial flows, there was a severe
change in their magnitudes. According to recent researches,
both primary and secondary flow number of broad bladed
hydrofoil (Prochem Maxflo T) is 50% greater than that of the
narrow bladed hydrofoil (Chemineer HW-3).
Mavros et al. (1998) have compared flow efficiency of three
commercially available impellers (Rushton turbine, Mixer TT
and Lightnin A310) using LDA. The mixer TT has 70.9%
efficiency while flow efficiency of Rushton turbine and
Lightnin A310 is only 52.7% and 46.2%, respectively.
Machado et al. (2011) have compared diameters of hydro-
foil impeller (KPC) and a mixed-flow impeller (45 down-
pumping PBT). They are used for mixing solid suspension.
The PBT impeller uses up more power than the KPC and
applies more turbulence to the flow. On the other hand, more
momentum can be provided by KPC in comparison to PBT
for the same power consumption. Power consumption at just-
suspended speed aids KPC to work at higher rotational speeds
without air entrainment. Conversely, PBT consumes less
power at the point of air entrainment. According to advan-
tages and disadvantages of impellers, selecting a proper impel-
ler depends on the requirements of the mixing process. Both
experimental and simulation methods which were carried out
to determine the flow fields in different mixing tank config-
urations in a single phase system will yield reasonable results.
According to these results, reduction in the operating cost can
be achieved with the use of a draft tube in a stirred tank and
there would be a greater cost reduction in a system stirred by
the Rushton turbine compared to that stirred by a propeller
(Ochieng and Onyango 2010). Different types of impellers in
liquid–liquid systems are summarized according to investiga-
tion methods and application area (Table 5).
Impeller styles. As shown in Figure 12, impeller styles are
divided into two categories: radial flow and axial flow (Doran
2012). Radial flow impeller with multiple flat blades mounted
parallel to the axis of the mixing shaft. Impellers are closed or
open, attaching blades to a disk forms a closed impeller, and

Figure 8. Schematic view of the PCL under its top position (hc ¼ hc;max ) (Bruha
et al. 2007).
attaching blades on a simple hub makes an open style impeller.
Axial flow impellers have blades with an angle less than 90°. These
impellers are further classified into two categories: constant and
variable angle of attack. The first group includes pitched blade
turbines and the second one includes propellers and hydrofoils.
Cheng et al. (2013) employ two flow categories for liquid–liquid
mixing. The combination of mixing time and power consumption
analysis shows that the axial impeller is more energy efficient than
the radial impeller.
Blade width. The blade width is important in radial flow DTs.
Lu et al. (2000) investigate the role of blade width on the
generated vortex structure at impeller blade tip using a single
DT at equal power input. They observe that the impellers with
larger blade produce a fully developed vortex flow while the
smaller blade impellers produce a stronger shear stress due to
Figure 9. Modern impellers offer a great range of choice to help meet the mixing challenges (Mersmann 1975).
MINERAL PROCESSING AND EXTRACTIVE METALLURGY REVIEW 13
the mergence of the two symmetric vortices. An increase in the
blade width increases radial flow component and the locus of
extreme radial velocity shifts toward the wall. The effect of blade
width on the overall flow in the vessel is shown in Figure 13
(Rewatkar et al. 1991).
Blade thickness. Rutherford et al. (1996) and Bujalaski et al.
(1986) has observed that the importance of blade thickness for DT
where the maximum mean velocity in the impeller discharge
region is reduced approximately to 0.18 U tip when Btk/D is
increased from 0.0082 to 0.0337.
Number of blades. The effect of blades number is investi-
gated on the 45 impellers (PBTD 45 W50-4 and PBTD 45
W50-6). With the increase in blades number from four to six,
both the power number and the flow number are increased
(Kumaresan et al. 2006).
Blade angle. Similar to the impeller diameter, blade angle
affects flow characteristics of PTD impeller. As shown in
Figure 14, increasing blade angle leads to an increase in the
dimensionless axial velocity. Similar to the axial component,
the radial component increase with an increase in blade angle
(Rewatktar and Joshi 1991). Achouri et al. (2012) shows that
for gases, PBTD 60° is more efficient than PBTD 45°. The
results of simulation confirm experimental data in the
literature.
3.1.2 Mixer geometry
Baffle. Mixers often contain baffles that are generally used in
the transitional and turbulent flow regimes. Many agitated
vessels use wall baffles which consist of four flat vertical
plates, directed radially, spaced at 90◦ intervals around the
mixing tank circumference. Most of mixers have at least
three baffles, with four being the most common. Flow in
baffled mixer is divided into two patterns desirable for differ-
ent objectives, such as axial flow for blending and solids
suspension, and radial for dispersions (Torre et al. 2007).
14 S. PARVIZI ET AL.
Figure 10. Viscosity ranges for different impellers (Doran 2012).
Figure 11. Mixing time for four different types of impellers (Zhao et al, 2011).
In low viscosity liquids, baffles are used to prevent swirling,
vortexing, and poor mixing. They are structures attached to
inside tank straight side, either directly or on tabs to direct the
fluid flow vertically in the tank. The baffle numbers are
crucially important in mixing. Researchers studied the effect
of the baffle numbers of on the separation characteristics of
the system. Shabani and Mazaheri (2011) have applied mixers
with square cross section and a full width vertical baffle is
attached to prevent vortex formation.
One of the advantages of the baffles is to ensure even
distribution and reduce turbulence. According to CFD out-
puts, the amount of separation increases when baffle number
are added. This is obvious, as the number of baffles and paths
increases, separation conditions are improved (Rewatkar and
Joshi 1991). The flow regime in settlers with two rows of
picket fences is more uniform than the settlers without any
picket fences (Kazemi and Alamdari 2012).
d/D ratio. d/D ratio is defined as inlet size to the impeller
diameter. When d/D increases up to a particular point, the
efficiency is enhanced and then begins to decrease. Shabani and
Mazaheri (2011) have investigated the effect of d/D ratio on
mixing percentage for an inlet velocity of 0.1 m/s and impeller
speed of 100 rpm. Results show that as d/D increases the efficiency
increases till a particular point and then start decreasing. The
suction of liquid caused by the rotation of the impeller is an
important principle in the operation of the mixer-settler. A low-
pressure region is produced near the impeller tip as a result of high
velocity region near the tip of the impeller in the mixer. However,
the efficiency of the impeller in the suction of the liquids depends
on the location of these low-pressure zones with respect to the
inlet diameter (Strilatha et al. 2008).
d/w ratio. d/w ratio is described as the ratio of the impeller
diameter to the mixer width. As the ratio increases, higher
velocity is obtained. Thus, when the impeller diameter
increases at a constant inlet size, the velocity magnitude is
increased. Because of this reason, as the impeller diameter is
increased at constant d/w ratio, the mixing increases. The
influence of the ratio of impeller diameter and the mixer
width on mixing percentage for an inlet velocity of 0.1 m/s
and impeller speed of 100 rpm are investigated. Results show
that by the increasing the d/w ratio, the velocities increase
(Shabani et al. 2011).
D/T ratio. D/T is the ratio of impeller diameter to tank
diameter that is in the range of 0.25–0.4. The lower bound is
applied for water like viscosities and D/T is increased by increas-
ing the mixture viscosity. Areas would be remained unmixed by
smaller D/T, but a larger D/T can choke off the upflow between
the impeller and the tank wall (Shabani et al. 2011).
The dimensionless blending time characteristic (Ntm ) is
constant for baffled vessels which are geometrically identical
and agitated that is operated in turbulent-flow regime. Fluids
will incline to rotate in the vessel without appropriate baffling,
and blend times will increase. Ntm Value depends on the type
of the impeller and the diameter ratio. Mersmann (1975)
evaluates the performance of many mixers that leads to a
simple correlation with H=T ¼ 1, and represents blending
time characteristics in a single stage impeller in terms of
impeller power and D/T.
 5=3
D
Ntm ¼ 6:7 :Po1=3 (12)
T
Equation 12 is true for design calculation of impellers with
large diameter ratios (D=T>0:5), whereas Eq. 13 is accurate
for predicting blend times for axial-pumping impellers with
diameter ratios in the range of 0.1–0.5 (Mersmann 1975).
 5=3
D
Ntm ¼ 5:5 :Po1=3 (13)
T
Impeller location. Impeller location is shown with h/D. In this
regard Table 6 is presented on the basis of viscosity of the
liquid and the ratio of the liquid depth to the tank diameter
(h/D). Dickey (1984) has shown that whether one or two
impellers are needed. Furthermore, their distances from the
bottom of the mixer tank are investigated.
Clearance. Clearance plays a crucial function in the overall
flow pattern of mixing, which is related to mixing time and
power consumption. The effect of impeller clearance from the
 MINERAL PROCESSING AND EXTRACTIVE METALLURGY REVIEW 15

Table 5. different types of impellers in liquid–liquid systems.

Mixer type Investigation method Application area References
MAC Experimental Homogeneous gas–liquid dispersion Brehman et al. 1995
MSR Analytical Liquid–liquid and gas–liquid mass transfer Madhvanand et al. 2011
A315 Scaba Rushton Experimental Gas–liquid dispersion and mass transfer Sardeing et al. 2004
J-M-G T-M Experimental Gas–liquid mixing in a multiscale micromixer Hou et al. 2010
PBT& Rushton Experimental optimization of mixing in Liquid–liquid systems N. Othman et al. 2013
Rushton & PBT45 Simulation Mixing of gas–liquid–solid Murthy et al. 2007
vortex Experimental Heat transfer between two immiscible fluids (liquid–liquid systems) Lemenand et el. 2010
Rushton Simulation and experimental Mixing of liquid–gas Zhang et al. 2009
PBT Experimental Mixing of liquid–gas Shewale et al. 2006

Figure 13. Effect of blade width on overall flow in the vessel. T = 0.3, D = 0.1 m,
C = 0.1 m (Rewatkar et al. 1991).

increases. Mixing time is found to be increasing as the impel-

ler clearance increases for HCDT as shown in Figure 15. As a
result, the flow patterns of HCDT are similar to that of RDT
(Zhao et al, 2011). Effect of clearance on the flow pattern of
DT, PDT, and PTU impellers are investigated. AS shown in
Figure 16 for any mixing system, optimized clearance is
usually used to maximize the mixing zone (Rewatkar et al.
1991).

Figure 12. Impeller styles (a) Radial and (b) Axial (Doran, 2012).
tank bottom for Rushton impellers T/6, T/4, and T/3
(Figure 15) has been studied. Aeration decreases the mixing
time as the impeller clearance decrease in the range of T/3–T/
6, which is concise with that in liquid–liquid systems. Impeller
position of T/6 shows lower circulation zone. So only an
upper loop exists and an axial flow pattern occurs. The
three-phase dispersion circulates in one loop through the
impeller region with high turbulence, which reduces the mix-
ing time. As the clearance from the tank bottom increases
from T/6 to T/3, the double loop flow structure is produced
and thus the radial flow is strengthened and the mixing time
3.2 Operational Parameters
3.2.1 Impeller functional parameters
In this section, the most important functional parameters
affecting the efficiency of mixer are investigated.
Torque. One of the most important elements affecting
mixing results is the amount of torque applied to a fluid
mixture. A relatively high mixer speed and small impeller
diameter will result in lower torque and therefore a lower
mixing level. On the other hand, a larger impeller turning at
a lower speed will result in higher torque and so a higher
mixing level (Rewatkar and Joshi 1991).
Power. The equation related to the power of one impeller is
as follows.
16 S. PARVIZI ET AL.

process of the primary and secondary fluid, the mixing

increases with impeller speed. CFD data in this study con-
firms the results (Shabani and Mazaheri, 2011).
The effect of impeller speed versus d32 at three different
hold-ups with and without surfactant, shows that when d32
versus the impeller speed is plotted for three surfactant con-
centration (0.003, 0.006, and 0.01), the curves describe the
same trend. Thus, the figures are plotted at 0 and 0.01 wt% of
the surfactant concentration. As it mentioned, in the liquid–
liquid emulsion without any surfactant, d32 depend on the
impeller speed and has a power function of the impeller speed
with the exponent of 1.2. Javanshir et al. (2012) have reported
that increasing in the impeller speed, results in the shifting of
DSD to the smaller drops. The remarkable effect of the
impeller speed on DSD is typical for dispersions within
which drop breakage is the dominating process and the coa-
lescence found to be negligible. In these processes, an increase
in turbulent pressure fluctuations leads to decrease the stabi-
lization of the drops, thus, the dmax decreases and the entire
DSD shifts to the smaller drop size (Ruiz et al. 2002).
The effect of impeller speed in constant ratio of phases,
flow rate, and hold-up are evaluated, and the effect of phase
flow rate ratios in constant impeller speed on extraction
efficiency, mass transfer coefficient, and distribution coeffi-
cient are determined. Chemical systems used in this set con-
tain Tri-butyl phosphate (TBP) 60%, kerosene as organic
Figure 14. Effect of blade angle on mean axial velocity profile characteristics phase, and HNO3 (3.5 M), zirconium oxy-chloride (12 g/L)
(Rewatktar and Joshi 1991). as aqueous phase. The results illustrate that the behavior of a
two-phase system during separation depends not only on the
phase composition, intensity of agitation, and performance of
Table 6. Viscosity of the liquid and the ratio of the liquid depth to the tank the mass transfer process, but also on the duration of agita-
diameter (Dickey 1984). tion. As shown in Figure 17 mixing time decreases with
Impeller increasing the impeller speed until the point of intense surface
clearance
aeration. In impeller speed more than this point mixing
Viscosity [cP (Pa Maximum level Number of
s)] (h=Dt ) impellers Lower Upper
mechanism is changed (Mahmoudi and Yiannekis 1992).
<25; 000ð<25Þ 1.4 1 h=3 –
The effect of impeller speed on extraction efficiency, mass
<25; 000ð<25Þ 2.1 2 Dt =3 ð2=3Þh transfer coefficient of dispersed phase, and distribution coef-
>25; 000ð>25Þ 0.8 1 h=3 – ficient are similar. On the other hand, in high impeller speed
>25; 000ð>25Þ 1.6 2 Dt =3 ð2=3Þh
and vd/vc<1, extraction efficiency reduces while the others
increase. Efficiency changes versus impeller speed indicates
that increasing impeller speed cause an increase in extraction
NP D5 N 3 SG efficiency, Insofar as increasing impeller speed reduces the
BHP ¼ (14) drop size, the settling time of droplets increase. Totally, the
6:124  107
axial velocity component of the drops is much greater than
NP is experimentally adjusted for viscosity, proximity, the vertical component, thus preventing drop-interface coa-
blade width and blades number. Tomas et al. (2003) have lescence and causes an increase in wedge length. The wedge
studied mixing intensity of dispersion in commercial length increases approximately 10% for every 100-rpm incre-
Techmix 335-hydrofoil impeller. They have shown that the ment as the rotor speeds are changed at a fixed dispersed
impellers with lower power number (less than unity) provide phase hold-up. At high energy input levels, which is about
higher dispersion mixing intensities. On the other hand, the 1000 rpm, small drops (0.1–0.25 mm diameter) needed a long
impeller with higher power number gave better mass transfer time for coalescence (F. S. Gharehbagh and S. M. A.
function. Mousavian 2009). Contour of turbulent kinetic energy at
Impeller speed and agitation speed. When the impeller different speeds are shown in Figure 18. The results is derived
speed increases, the condition for mixing is improved because from simulated liquid–liquid system of Conroe oil and 15 vol

the velocity at the impeller tip increases. In 2011, some % water at 20 C (Roudsari et al. 2012).
researchers studied the effect of impeller speed and showed
the mixing percentage as a function of impeller speed for an 3.2.2 Mixer functional parameters
inlet velocity of 0.1 m/s. Because of exchanging momentum Inlet velocity. The momentum of two fluids is exchanged thru
between two fluids through the flow layer in the mixing the flow layer in the mixing phenomenon. While the velocity
 MINERAL PROCESSING AND EXTRACTIVE METALLURGY REVIEW 17

Figure 15. Mixing time versus impeller clearance (N ¼ 545 rpm; Qc ¼ 0:16 L=min; φd ¼ 10% (a) RDT, (b) HCDT, (c) PBTD, and (d) PBTU (Zhao et al. 2011).

Figure 16. (a) Flow patterns of DT impeller at different clearances. (b) Flow patterns of PTD impeller at different clearances. (c) Flow patterns of PTU impeller at
different clearances (Rewatkar et al. 1991).
18 S. PARVIZI ET AL.
Figure 17. Variation of mixing time with impeller speed (Mahmoudi and
Yiannekis 1992).
inlet is increased, the condition for mixing is improved and
better mixing in constant impeller speed could be resulted. On
the other hand, when inlet velocity is more than 0.5 m/s, there
is not sufficient time to separate phases. Shabani and
Mazahery (2011) indicate that greater mixing could be
obtained in constant impeller speed as a result of increasing
velocity inlet. However, there is not enough time for separa-
tion of the phases when inlet velocity is more than 0.1 m/s
with 4 baffles. In other word, increasing of mixing intensity
can deteriorate the separation process, resulting in greater
settler size and baffles numbers.
Agitation speed. One of the most important elements affecting
mixing is agitation speed. Zhao et al. (2011) have investigated this
parameter and show that with increasing agitation speed, the
continuous phase mixing time is decreased. The dispersion quality
of oil phase changes with impeller speed. When the impeller speed
decreases to sufficiently below the critical speed for complete
Figure 18. Contour of turbulent kinetic energy at different speeds (a) 300 rpm, (b) 400 rpm, and (c) 600 rpm. In Conroe oil and 15 vol% water at 20°C (Roudsari et al. 2012).
dispersion of oil phase, using CFD approach coupled with the
more accurate anisotropic Explicit Algebraic Stress Model
(EASM), mixing time behavior investigation is desirable. Cheng
et al. (2011) have proposed standards to predict the critical impel-
ler speed for complete and uniform dispersion. The critical impel-
ler speed for complete dispersion of an immiscible liquid–liquid
system in a fully baffled stirred tank with a standard Rushton
impeller is numerically studied. Abu-Farah et al. (2012) have
investigated dispersion behavior in a stirred batch vessel with
Rushton turbine impeller experimentally and with CFD
simulation.
Roudsari et al. (2012) have examined a CFD model for the
mixing of water in oil emulsion in a laboratory mixing tank
equipped with a Rushton turbine impeller. When the impeller
speed increases from 300 to 600 rpm, more eddies are pro-
duced and the size of droplets are reduced because of breakage.
According to literature (Luo and Svendsen 1996; Narsimhan
1980), when the size of eddies generated by turbulent flow are
smaller than the size of droplets, viscous forces can be omitted.
These small eddies create high frequency oscillations in droplets
and as a consequence droplet breakage occurs. On other hand,
with an increase in impeller speed, the turbulence kinetic energy
increases, which result in more droplet breakage and narrower
size distribution of droplet.
Pumping direction. Pumping direction changes are studied
for the 45 pitched blade of D/T ratio of 0.2(PBTD45W30-6
and PBTU45W30-6). For a down-flow impeller, the jet leaves
the impeller interact with the vessel base, resulting to more
energy dissipation in the regions below the impeller. For an
up-flow impeller, the jet leaves the impeller interacts with the
top liquid surface, where the energy dissipation will be smal-
ler. These results confirm the CFD predictions (Patwardhan
and Joshi 1999). The average shear rate is 8% higher for the
down-flow impeller.
3.3 Physical Parameters
Hold-up or dispersed phase fraction (φ). The dispersed
phase hold-up or dispersed phase volume fractionφd , is a
Table 7. Geometrical specifications of different impeller types (Rewatkar et al. 1991).
Impeller type No. of blades nb Diameter DðmÞ Blade width wðmÞ Hub O.D. d0 ðmÞ Horizontal blade length LðmÞ Blade angle ϕ Blade thickness kðmÞ
DT 6 0.5 0.1 0.05 0.125 0.375 0.0028
PTU 6 0.19 0.057 0.04 0.075 45 0.0028
PTU 6 0.5 0.15 0.05 0.225 45 0.0028
PTD 6 0.19 0.057 0.04 0.075 45 0.0023
PTD 6 0.19 0.057 0.05 0.07 45 0.0028
PTD 6 0.25 0.075 0.05 0.1 45 0.0023
PTD 6 0.33 0.099 0.05 0.14 45 0.0028
PTD 6 0.19 0.0475 0.05 0.07 45 0.0028
PTD 6 0.19 0.057 0.05 0.07 45 0.0028
PTD 6 0.19 0.0665 0.05 0.07 45 0.0028
PTD 6 0.19 0.076 0.05 0.07 45 0.0028
PTD 6 0.19 0.057 0.05 0.07 30 0.0028
PTD 6 0.19 0.057 0.05 0.07 60 0.0028
PTD 6 0.19 0.057 0.05 0.07 90 0.0028
PTD 6 0.19 0.0665 0.05 0.07 45 0.0043
PTD 6 0.19 0.0665 0.05 0.07 45 0.0064
PTD 6 0.5 0.15 0.05 0.225 45 0.0028
PTD 4 0.19 0.057 0.05 0.07 45 0.0028
PTD 8 0.19 0.057 0.05 0.07 45 0.0028
PTD 6 0.75 0.225 0.05 0.35 45 0.0028
MINERAL PROCESSING AND EXTRACTIVE METALLURGY REVIEW
19
20 S. PARVIZI ET AL.
significant parameter for process strengthening (Sengupta
et al. 2006). As the hold-up increases, the interfacial area
can be increased and therewith intensify the extraction
processes considerably. Findings state that an increase in
the dispersed phase fraction increases the mean drop dia-
meters (Maaß et al. 2012). Some researchers ascribe this
behavior to turbulence damping (Brown and Pitt 1972;
Cohen 1991; Doulah 1975), while others attribute it chiefly
to coalescence (Delichatsios and Probstein 1976). Moreover,
others believe that both coalescence and turbulence dam-
pening are equally responsible for the observed behavior
(Angle and Hamza 2006; Gäbler et al. 2006; Godfrey et al.
1989). Doulah (1975) relates the drop size decrease by an
increase in dispersion viscosity, expressed by the Einstein
equation (Einstein 1906; Einstein 1911), and not to turbu-
lence damping in the continuous phase. This small but
important change may be a third reason for drop size
increase with increasing hold-up.
The liquid–liquid system that is used for the experimental
works is DBC (Di Butyl Carbitol)-gold solution (Javanshir
et al. 2012). The dispersed phase is DBC solvent and two
continuous aqueous phases are scrutinized: a synthetic gold
chloride solution (HAuCl4) and a gold leach solution from
Sarcheshmeh decopperized anode slimes. The effective fac-
tors, such as hold-up on the drop size are examined. The
results show that an increase in the hold-up leads to an
increase in D32 . From other point of view, D32 increases by
increasing of the hold-up as a linear function with a slope of
1.5–2. The drop coalescence amplifies in the mixing chamber
while the hold-up increases. Thus, the number of big drops in
the mixing chamber increases (Desnoyer et al. 2003).
The outcomes are often presented as a linear function
toward the hold-up (Doulah 1975). Therefore, it seems that,
with the same impeller speed, the increase in the volume
fraction of the dispersed phase results in larger drops in the
mixer. The hold-up is calculated as following equation:
V0
φ¼ (15)
Va þ V0
Where V0 is the volume of organic phase and Va is the
volume of aqueous phase.
Larger drops are formed as a consequence of increased dis-
persed volume fractions. Higher hold-up causes in growing colli-
sion rates of drops resulting in an increasing number of breakage
and coalescence processes. Fundamentally, drop breakage hap-
pens due to collision between drops and eddies while the collision
of drops with each other is necessary for the coalescence processes.
Thus, the outcomes show that the number of collisions between
two drops grows intensely with an increased hold-up than the
eddy drop collisions (Javanshir et al. 2011).
With rising φ the influence on Sauter diameter seems to be
decreasing. Cho and Kamal (2002) have investigated the drop
size in polymer blends with high viscosity ratios. They present
that the deformation rate increases with rising hold-up, and
the shear stress also increases and causes excessive breakage.
The total deformation of the dispersed phase increases with
increasing volume fractions, because of reducing size of the
dispersed phase particles.
Coalescence, dispersion processes, and settling are all affected
by hold-up, for example, coalescence rates increase with increas-
ing φ. This is due to both increase in collision frequency and
rheological differences that enable longer contact intervals to be
obtained (Carlucci 2010).
pH. Gäbler et al. (2006) have investigated the effect of pH
on transient evolution of DSD and found that, for the coales-
cent system with pH = 3, the correlation D32 ,We0:6 holds
for very dilute systems and, with the increasing of dispersed
phase volume, the exponent increases and reaches −0.35 for
; ¼ 0:5. In other words, the experimental and simulation data
are different, because of coalescence preventing caused by
electrostatic forces, which is not considered in the population
balance equation (Razzaghi and Shahraki 2010). With increas-
ing pH, coalescence is hindered considerably. As a result, the
transient evolution of DSD after starting the stirrer changes
and the time for reaching the stationary distribution increases
(Carlucci 2010). Thus, DSD is particularly influenced by pH.
Special experiments by Kraume et al. (2004) show that in
order to evaluate the effect of coalescence and breakage, which
result in hindered coalescence caused by increased pH. The
experiments are conducted in a baffled-glass vessel with a
diameter T of 150 mm equipped with a Rushton turbine of
D/T = 0.33. Toluene was used as organic dispersed phase and
water as aqueous continuous phase. The coalescence was
decreased but not completely hindered by increasing pH to
13. At increasing pH, coalescence values are lowered due to
increasing electro-chemical double layer around the droplets
(Marinova et al. 1996).
Viscosity. Dispersed-phase. Dispersed-phase viscosity has
a deep effect on both the mean drop size and the DSD.
Calabrese et al. (1986) investigated the influence of the
dispersed-phase viscosity on the DSD by dispersing silicone
oils of different grades in water at constant interfacial
tension for dilute suspension. It is concluded that at con-
stant conditions of agitation, the steady-state DSD gets
higher considerably with increasing of dispersed phase visc-
osity νd . As the number of drops increases, the size of the
smallest drops decreases as well as the size of the largest
drops increase with the decreasing in their number and the
DSD gets wider. Calabrese et al. (1986) have reported that
in moderate viscosity (μd ¼ 0.1–0.5 Pa.s) dispersed phases
are normally distributed in number, while high-viscosity
drops (μd ¼ 5–10 Pa s) and show a log-normal distribution.
The functional form of the distribution for the intermediate
oil (μd ¼ 1, Pa. s) cannot be determined. The Sauter mean
diameter is specified by the largest drops for the high-
viscosity oils. EL-Hamouz et al. (2009) have analyzed
“We00 exponent of the theoretically derived correlation
D32 ,We0:6 , and the dispersed-phase viscosity νd . This is
because of the complex mechanism of breakage and coales-
cence which is accurate for a low-phase fraction φ (0.01)
and was determined to vary around 0.4 (Carlucci 2010).
Continuous phase. Force-balance indicates that surface
and dispersed-phase viscous forces stabilize drops in agitated
liquid–liquid systems and drops can be broken by the forces
associated with continuous-phase turbulence. According to
separation mechanism, smaller critical droplet size occurs

due to decrease in continuous phase viscosity (Calabrese
et al. 1986).
Viscosity ratio. At the interface, secondary droplets may occur
because they coalesce very slowly and then disturb the coalescence
process. Formation of secondary droplet is related to the viscosity
ratio of the dispersed and continuous phase (Kankaanpa 2007).
The viscosity ratio is defined as the ratio of the dispersed phase
viscosity to the continuous phase viscosity (Eq. 16).
μd
p¼ (16)
μc
Different values of p can result in variant drop shapes. For
example, when p is equal to unity, the drop narrows at the
center, assumes a dumbbell shape and ultimately breaks in to
two mother drops with a few daughters in between, while p <
1, tip streaming occurs and daughter droplets are released
from the tips. Log-normal distribution is the result of this
type of break up. Drop stretches occur because the capillary
number is higher than the critical value, and the stretched
drop orients itself in the direction of the flow and breaks up
due to the instability of capillary wave (Das et al. 2013).
Magnetic field and particle weight percentage. The effect of
magnetic field and weight percentage of particles on viscosity
of magneto rheological fluid has been studied by Omidbeygi
et al. (2011). In the absence of an applied magnetic field, the
magneto rheological fluid behaves as a Newtonian fluid, but
when magnetic field is applied, the magneto rheological fluid
behaves like Bingham plastics with a magnetic field-depen-
dent yield stress. Results are compared with those of CFD
simulation of two eccentric cylinders and it shows that visc-
osity is enhanced by increasing the magnetic field, eccentricity
ratio, and weight percentage of suspensions. Besides, the
power function represents a linear behavior with solid content
and reduction in velocity profile caused by viscosity enhan-
cing by increasing magnetic field or weight percentages of
suspensions.
Surfactant. In liquid–liquid dispersion, droplet size is
reduced due to the emulsification by addition of a surfactant.
This phenomenon is occurred as a result of the reduction of
interfacial tension created by the surfactant. The main reason of
this reduction is the inclination of the surfactant molecules to get
adsorbed at the liquid–liquid interface. The drop starts deform-
ing, while a pressure fluctuation because of an eddy is experi-
enced by the drop across its diameter. The formation of the
depression on the drop interface results in the deformation
and enhancement of the depression and breakage (Koshy 1986).
The effect of surfactant on drop size. Khakpay et al. (2009)
have used Aniline as surfactant throughout their experiments
in a liquid–liquid system of toluene-water. Figure 19 shows
the influence of Aniline (cationic surfactant) concentration on
D32 . This study is carried out at three different hold-ups with
four different impeller speeds. It was determined that the
curves consisted of two obvious distinct area: for Aniline
concentration range between 0 and 0.003 wt.% (Region 1),
there is a significant decrease in D32 and Aniline concentra-
tions more than 0.005 wt.% (Region 2) are considered as a
plateau region. In Region 1, D32 decreases intensely with the
increase of the surfactant concentration up to 0.003 wt%
MINERAL PROCESSING AND EXTRACTIVE METALLURGY REVIEW 21
Aniline because of the following reasons. In the presence of
Aniline, there is a considerable reduction in interfacial ten-
sion, especially at low Aniline concentrations. Moreover, the
drop–drop coalescence was diminished significantly in com-
parison with that of the system without surfactant. In Region
2, D32 depends on the impeller speed and hold-ups instead of
the surfactant concentration (Denkov et al. 2004). Janssen
et al. (1997) by studying the effect of surfactant concentration
on breakup modes concluded that necking is predominant at
low surfactant concentrations, while at higher surfactant con-
centration, tip streaming occurs (De Bruijn 1993).
Interfacial tension. Torab-Mostaedi et al. (2012) have
reported that DSD is found to be narrower and more evenly
distributed about the mean size for the system of lower inter-
facial tension. Furthermore, smaller drops are generated from
the medium interfacial tension system than are produced
from the higher interfacial tension system.
Since the Weber number is related to inverse interfacial
tension magnitude, with increasing one of them the other
decreases. The dependency of Sauter diameter to the We
number is shown in Figure 20 and the trends confirm the
previous explanations (Kraume et al. 2004).
Density. Forces of different magnitude can act on fluids
with different densities. As shown in Figure 21, according to
CFD simulations, power consumption by the impeller is
rarely affected by the amount of mixing percentage as a
function of impeller speed and density.
In the mixing process, momentum of the fluids is
exchanged thru the flow layer. By decreasing density differ-
ence between two liquids, mixing situation is improved and in
constant impeller speed, better mixing is achieved. When
difference between two densities is less than 0.1, there is no
sufficient time for phase separation (Shabani and Mazaheri
2011). As the density difference between the phases increases,
the coalescence rate or the phase separation rate is improved
(Ritcey and Ashbrook 1984, Hartland and Jeelani 1994).
Temperature. One of the important parameter in mixer
efficiency is temperature (Shabani and Mazaheri 2011).
Increasing temperature leads to decrease in the continuous
phase viscosity that result in enhancing the rate of drainage of
the continuous phase between 2 drops, which improve coa-
lescence process. Figure 22 represents CFD data, which shows
that the amount of mixing increases in higher temperature.
There is not enough time for separation process at tempera-
tures higher than 40 C which result in increased mixing
intensity. It can produce a dispersion, which is more difficult
to separate and requires larger settler size and higher entrain-
ment levels. The influence of temperature on the coalescence
rate is very vigorous, because physical properties of the dis-
persed and continuous phases depend on temperature.
Generally, higher temperatures cause more coalescence rates
(Charles and Mason 1960).
Time. Knowledge about the hydrodynamic characteris-
tics of mixer-settler is essential for predicting their perfor-
mance under transient conditions. Residence time
detritions are studied for heavy phases in two types of
mixer-settler. Results present that the flow pattern is inter-
mediate between perfect mixing and perfect plug flow. The
flow pattern and various parameters are evaluated for the
22 S. PARVIZI ET AL.

Figure 19. The effects of the Aniline concentration on D32 (Khakpay et al. 2004).

Figure 21. amount of mixing percentage as a function of impeller speed and

density (Shabani and Mazaheri 2011).

Figure 20. Sauter diameter for different phase fractions over We number at:
(a) pH = 3 and (b) pH = 13 (Kraume et al. 2004).

Figure 22. Amount of mixing percentage as a function of impeller speed and

temperature (Shabani and Mazaheri 2011).

two units that are related to each other (Hanson and Sharif
1970). Time effects are of prime importance in dispersion
and even more in mixers where the geometry generates
chaotic flow perturbations (Li et al. 1996). The time
required for rupture of a given drop at equilibrium defor-
mation can be estimated with Eq. 17.
ηc
trupture ¼ (17)
ðσ=Ddrop Þ
At very high viscosity ratios, trupture can reach very high
values (Bentley and Leal 1986; Grace 1982). Then time has a
major influence on the final dispersion and its effects must be
considered at the early stages of process design (Fradette et al.
2007).
4. Concluding remarks and recommendation
Drop size analysis covers a broad range of experimental and
Operational
simulation techniques. The DSDs, which result from the
summation effects of, drop breakage and coalescence, plays
a major role in liquid–liquid systems. The mean drop dia-
meters are strongly affected by system properties. The related
parameters are divided into three categories: physical, geome-
trical, and operational. The most important results in each
category are described.
Geometrical
● Geometrical parameters consist of impeller geometry
and mixer geometry. Impeller geometry includes: impel-
ler styles, blade width, blade thickness, blades angle; and
mixer geometry includes reactor diameter (T), reactor
aspect ratio (H/T), impeller location, stirrer height, stir-
rer bottom clearance, number of stirrer and their dis-
tances in multiple impeller systems, baffle type
(cylindrical or planar), immersion depth of baffles,
number of blades, d/d ratio, d/w and D/T ratio.
● Impellers are the main instrument in mixing process,
thus the type of mixer is influenced by different kinds of
Impeller. Radial flow or axial flow occurs according to
the impeller style. Besides, impellers are further classi-
fied as constant or variable angle of attack. By analyzing
Physical
the combination of mixing time and power consump-
tion studies proved that the axial impellers is more
energy efficient than the radial impellers in many
systems.
● Blades’ features are a subset of impellers geometry that is
studied as blade width, thickness, and angle. Results
represents that impellers with larger blade produce a
fully developed vortex flow and smaller blade impellers
produce a stronger shear stress due to the mergence of
the two symmetric vortices.
● On the other hand, regarding the studies on mixer
parameters, the effects of baffles number on separation
characteristics of the system are investigated. According
to the results, as the number of baffles and paths
increases, separation condition improves.
MINERAL PROCESSING AND EXTRACTIVE METALLURGY REVIEW 23
● d/D is defined as the ratio of inlet size to the impeller
diameter. When d/D increases up to the particular point,
the efficiency is enhanced and then it begins to decrease.
● d/w is described as the ratio of impeller diameter to
mixer width. Studies show that increasing the impeller
diameter at constant d/w ratio, increases mixing
efficiency.
● D/T is the ratio of impeller diameter to tank diameter
that is in the range of 0.25–0.4.
● Impeller location is represented with h/D ratio.
Literature shows that normally one or two impellers
are needed in mixing. One of the effective parameters
is off-bottom clearance that plays a crucial function in
the overall flow pattern of mixing, which is related to
mixing time and power consumption.
● In the next step, operational parameters are studied.
Torque is one of the most important elements affecting
mixing results. According to the studies, a lower mixing
level is caused by high mixer speed and small impeller
diameter that is following by lower torque. Similarly, a
higher mixing level is caused by a larger impeller rotat-
ing at a lower speed as a result of higher torque.
● Another operational parameter is mixing power.
Investigations show that the impellers with lower
power number (less than unity) provide higher disper-
sion mixing intensities. When the impeller speed
increases, the mixing condition is improved because
the velocity at the impeller tip increases and extraction
efficiency increases.
● Mixer functional parameters include inlet velocity, agi-
tation speed, and pumping direction. The better mixing
in constant impeller speed could be resulted by increas-
ing inlet velocity. It should be pointed out that agitation
speed is one of the important elements that affect mix-
ing process.
● Physical properties of the materials used in the system
are very important. Coalescence and breakage depend
on viscosity ratio, density difference(s), surfactant con-
centration, pH, temperature, interfacial tension, and dis-
persed phase volume fraction (hold-up). Investigation of
variations in these parameters came to the following
results:
○ An increase in the dispersed phase can increase the
interfacial area and therewith intensify extraction effi-
ciency significantly.
○ Moreover, with increasing hold-ups, the drop coales-
cence intensifies in the mixing chamber and the
number of big drops in the mixing receptacle
increases.
24 S. PARVIZI ET AL.

○ By changing pH and ionic strength, it is possible to D32 Sauter mean diameter (L)
dmax Maximum stable drop diameter (L)
increase or decrease the coalescence behavior of the f ðdÞ Number probability density distribution (L1 )
system significantly. N Impeller speed (T−1)
○ Using different densities make it possible to predict NP Impeller power number
separation. Actually, the mixing condition would be P Pressure
better if the density difference between two liquids is SG Fluid specific gravity
T Tank diameter (L)
decreased, but when difference between two densities Va Volume of aqueous phase
is less than 0.1, there is not enough time for phase V0 Volume of organic phase
separation. W Width of the impeller blade (L)
○ The influence of viscosity on drop size is investigated We Generalized Weber group
in two phases: dispersed-phase and continuous-phase WeI Impeller Weber number
viscosity. At constant agitation condition, DSD
enlarges considerably as dispersed phase viscosity
Greek letters
increases as well as the decrease in continuous phase
viscosity would result in a smaller critical droplet size.
○ Temperature is another important parameter in DSD. μt Turbulent viscosity
It is concluded that the amount of mixing increase Μ Dynamic viscosity
with increasing temperature. This is obviously due to ρc Density of continuous phase (ML−3)
the exchanging of the momentum of the two fluids ρd Density of dispersed phase (ML−3)
through the flow layer in the mixing process, where ρm Effective density of the dispersion (ML−3)
the increase in the temperature will result in decreas- σ Interfacial tension (MT−2)
ing of viscosity, thus mixing condition is improved. ; Local dispersed phase hold-up (−)
○ Mixing time has a major influence on the final dis- ε Specific turbulent energy dissipation rate (L2 T−3)
persion and its effects must be considered in mixing
process.
ORCID
Mixing process provides the surface for mass transfer and ESkandar Keshavarz Alamdari http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0972-4817
chemical reaction, but very fine drop sizes cause difficulty in
downstream process; for instance, in solvent extraction very
fine drop sizes cause severe problem in separation process in References
settler. Besides, narrow DSD is achieved by changing the
Abu-Farah, L., Al-Qaessi, F., and Schonbucher, A., 2012, “Cyclohexane/
affecting parameters in mixing that is favorable in most water dispersion behavior in a stirred batch vessel experimentally and
industries. Hence, the most important experimental and with CFD simulation.” Procedia Computer Science, 1, pp. 655–664.
simulation investigations are focused on optimization of Achouri, R., Mokni, I., Mhiri, H., and Bournot, P., 2012, “A 3D CFD
drop size (according to fluids properties and related technol- simulation of a self-inducing pitched blade turbine down flow.”
ogies) and obtaining of narrow DSD. In most industries, it is Energy Conversion and Management, 64, pp. 633–641.
Alopaeus, V., Koskinen, J., and Keskinen, K. L., 1999, “Simulation of the
very important that DSD do not vary dramatically with loca- population balances for liquid-liquid system in a nonideal stirred tank:
tion in the mixer. Studying hydrodynamics and DSD in mix- Part 1 description and qualitative validation of the model.” Chemical
ers shows by the simultaneous application of LDV and CFD Engineering Science, 54, pp. 5887–5899.
techniques, which decreases mixing cost and increases the Angle, C. W. and Hamza, H. A., 2006a, “Predicting the sizes of toluene-
efficiency of mixing process. Dynamic mixers are very com- diluted heavy oil emulsions in turbulent flow - Part 2: Hinze-
Kolmogorov based model adapted for increased oil fractions and
mon in broad range of industries. Investigating-related energy dissipation in a stirred tank.” Chemical Engineering Science,
researches about them in a way that compares between dif- 61 (22), pp. 7325–7335.
ferent methods is essential. Furthermore, the review helps in Angle, C. W. and Hamza, H. A., 2006b, “Drop sizes during turbulent
choosing suitable mixer and optimize the effecting parameters mixing of toluene-heavy oil fractions in water.” AIChE Journal, 52 (7),
for each case. For further works, it is recommended to do pp. 26392650.
ANSYS-CFX 14.5. Users Guide. 2014.
CFD (hydrodynamics and population balance) for specific Ban, T., Kawaizumi, F., Nii, S., and Takahashi, K., 1989, “Effects of
mixing process and valid models with experimental setup in surface activities of extractants on drop coalescence and breakage in
lab scale. Choosing parameters in simulated models lead to a mixer-settler.” Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research, 12, pp.
optimal design and parameters for each specific process. 395–399.
There have been intensive ongoing developments in research Bentley, B. J. and Leal, L. G., 1986, “An experimental investigation of
drops deformation and break-up in steady two-dimensional linear
to optimize cost and performance. flows.” Journal of Fluid Mechanic, 167, pp. 241–283.
Biggs, R. D., 1963, “Mixing rates in stirred tanks.” A.I.Ch.E., 9, pp. 636–
640.
Nomenclature Breman, B. B., Beenackers, A. A. C. M., and Bouma, M. J., 1995, “Flow
regimes, gas hold-up and axial gas mixing in the gas-liquid multi-
a Specific interfacial area (L−1) stage agitated contactor.” Chemical Engineering Science, 50 (18), pp.
Btk Impeller blade thickness (L) 2963–2982.
D Impeller diameter (L) Brennan, D. J. and Lehrer, I. H., 1976, “Impeller mixing in vessels
d Droplet diameter (L) experimental studies on the influence of some parameters and

formulation of a general mixing time equation.” Chemical Engineering
Research Design, 54, 1976, pp. 139–152.
Brown, D. E. and Pitt, K., 1972, “Drop size distribution of stirred non-
coalescing liquid-liquid system.” Chemical Engineering Science, 27 (3),
pp. 577–583.
Brown D. E. and Pitt, K., 1974, “Effect of impeller geometry on drop
breakup in a stirred liquid–liquid contactor.” Chemical Engineering
Science, 29, pp. 345–348.
Bujalski, W., Nienow, A. W., Chatwin, S., and Cooke, M., 1986, “The
dependency on scale of power numbers of Rushton disc turbines.”
Proceedings of the International Conference on Mechanical Agitation,
Toulouse, pp. 1.37–1.46.
Bruha, O., Bruha, T., Fort I., and Johada, M., 2007, “Dynamics of the
flow pattern in a baffled mixing vessel with an axial impeller.” Acta
Polytechnica, 47(6), pp. 17–28.
Calabrese, R. V., Chang, T. P. K., and Dang, P. T., 1986a, “Drop breakup
in turbulent stirred-tank contactors- part I: Effect of dispersed-phase
viscosity.” AiChE Journal, 32(4), pp. 657–662.
Calabrese, R. V., Wang, C. Y., and Bryner, N. P., 1986b, “Drop breakup
in turbulent stirred tank contactors, Part-III: correlation for mean size
and drop size distributions.” AIChE Journal, 32, pp. 677–681.
Carlucci, G., 2010, “Drop size distributions in stirred liquid-liquid sys-
tems Influence of the dispersed phase.” Master final project,
Department of Process Engineering, Technical university of Berlin.
Charles, G. E. and Mason, S. G., 1960, “The coalescence of liquid drops
with flat liquid-liquid interfaces.” Journal of Colloid Science, 15, pp.
105–122.
Chatzi, E. G., Boutris, C. J., and Kiparissides, C., 1991, “Online monitor-
ing of drop size distributions in agitated vessels, Effect of temperature
and impeller speed.” Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research, 30,
pp. 536–543.
Chen, Z., Pruss, J., and Warnecke, H., 1988, “A population balance
model for disperse systems: drop size distribution in emulsion.”
Chemical Engineering Science, 53(5), pp. 1059–1066.
Cheng, D., Feng, X., Yang, C., Cheng, J. C., and Mao Z., 2012,
“Experimental study on gas-liquid-liquid macro-mixing in a stirred
tank.” Chemical Engineering Science, 75, pp. 256–266.
Cheng, D, Feng, X., Cheng, J. C., and Yang, C., 2013, “Numerical
simulation of macro mixing in liquid-liquid stirred tank.” Chemical
Engineering Science, 101, pp. 272–282.
Cho, Y. G. and Kamal, M. R., 2002, “Effect of the dispersed phase
fraction on particle size in blends with high viscosity ratio.” Polymer
Engineering Science, 42, pp. 2005–2015.
Cohen, R. D., 1991, “Effect of turbulence damping on the steady-state
drop size distribution in stirred liquid- liquid dispersions.” Industrial
& Engineering Chemistry Research, 30(1), pp. 277–279.
Coulaloglou, C. A. and Tavlarides, L. L., 1977, “Description of interaction
processes in agitated liquid-liquid dispersions.” Chemical Engineering
and Science, 32 (11), pp.1289–1297.
Das, M. D., Hrymak, A.N., and Baird, M. H. I., 2013, “Laminar liquid–
liquid dispersion in the SMX static mixer.” Chemical Engineering
Science, 101, pp. 329–344.
Desnoyer, C., Masbernat, O., and Gourdon, C., 2003, “Experimental
study of drop size distribution at high phase ratio in liquid–liquid
dispersions.” Chemical Engineering Science, 58, pp. 1353–1363.
Delichatsios, M.A. and Probstein, R.F., 1976, “Effect of coalescence on
average drop size in liquid-liquid dispersions.” Industrial and
Engineering Chemistry Fundamentals, 15 (2), pp. 134–138.
Desnoyer, C., Masbernat, O, and Gourdon, C., 2003, “Experimental
study of drop size distributions at high phase ratio in liquid–liquid
dispersions.” Chemical Engineering and Science, 58, pp. 1353—1363.
Dickey, D. S., 1984, Liquid agitation, In Handbook of Chemical
Engineering Calculations, (N. P. Chopey and T. G. Hicks, Eds.),
New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Doran, P.M., 2012, Bioprocess Engineering Principles, Cambridge, MA:
Academic Press.
Doulah, M.S., 1975, “An effect of hold-up on drop sizes in liquid-liquid
dispersions, industrial and engineering chemistry fundamentals,
Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Fundamentals, 14, pp. 137–138.
MINERAL PROCESSING AND EXTRACTIVE METALLURGY REVIEW 25
Einstein, A., 1906, “Eine neue Bestimmung der Moleküldimensionen.”
Annals of Physics, 324 (2), pp. 289–306.
Einstein, A., 1911, “Berichtigung zu meiner Arbeit: Eine neue Bestimmung
der Moleküldimensionen.” Annals of Physics, 339(3), pp. 591592.
El-Hamouz, A. M., Cooke, M., Kawalski, A., and Sharrat, P., 2009,
“Dispersion of silicone oil in water surfactant solution: Effect of impeller
speed, oil viscosity and addition point on drop size distribution.” Chemical
Engineering and Processing, 48 (2), pp. 633–642.
Fernandes, J. B. and Sharma, M. M., 1967, “Effective Interfacial area
in agitated liquid–liquid contactors.” Chemical Engineering Science,
22, pp. 1267–1282.
Fort, I., Grackova, Z., and Koza, V., 1972, “Flow pattern in a system with
axial mixer and radial baffles.” Collection of Czchoslovak Chemical
Communication, 37, pp. 2371–2385.
Fox, E. and Gex, V., 1956, “Single phase blending of liquids.” American
Institute of Chemical Engineers (AICHE) Journal, 2, pp. 539–544.
Fradette, L., Tanguy, P., Li, H. Z., and Choplin, L., “Liquid-liquid viscous
dispersions with a SMX static mixer.” Chemical Engineering Research and
Design, 85(A3), pp. 395–405.
Free, M. L., 2013, Hydrometallurgical: Fundamentals and Applications,
WILEY.
Gäbler, A., Wegener, M., Paschedag, A.R., and Kraume, M., 2006, “The
effect of pH on experimental and simulation results of transient drop
size distributions in stirred liquid-liquid dispersions.” Chemical
Engineering Science, 61(9), pp. 3018–3024.
Gharebaghi, M., Shemirani, F., and Baghdadi, M., 2009, “Dispersive
liquid-liquid microextraction based on ionic liquid and spectrophoto-
metric of mercury in water samples.” International Journal of
Environmental Analytical Chemistry, 89, pp. 21–33.
Gharehbagh, F. S. and Mousavian, S. M. A., 2009, “Hydrodynamic
characterization of mixer-settlers.” Journal of the Taiwan Institute of
Chemical Engineers, 40, pp. 302–312.
Gharehbagh, F. S., Mousavian, S. M. A., and Kamal, S., 2009,
“Hydrodynamic characterization of mixer-settlers in extraction of
zirconium with TBP, Iran.” Journal of Chemistry & Chemical
Engineering, 28 (1) pp. 85–93.
Giapos, A., Pachatouridis, C., and Stamatoudis, M., 2005, “Effect of
the number of impeller blades on the drop sizes in agitated disper-
sions.” Chemical Engineering Research and Design, 83 (A12), pp.
1425–1430.
Godfrey, J. C., Obi, F. I. N., and Reeve, R. N., 1989, “Measuring drop size
in continuous liquid-liquid mixers.” Chemical Engineering Progress, 85
(12), pp. 61–69.
Grace, H. P., 1982, “Dispersion phenomena in high viscosity immiscible fluid
systems and application of static mixers as dispersion devices in such
systems.” Chemical Engineering Communication, 14, pp. 225–277.
Guardiola, R. E., 2008, Influence of the Dispersed Phase Fraction on Drop Sizes
in Liquid-Liquid Systems, Technische Universität Berlin, Diplomarbeit.
Hanson, C., Sharif, M., 1970, “Hydrodynamic studies on two multistage
mixer-settlers.” Can. Journal of Chemical Engineering, 48, pp. 132–134.
Hartland, S. and Jeelani, S.A.K., 1994, Gravity settlers, In The Book of
Liquid-Liquid Extraction Equipment, (J.C. Godfrey, M. J. Slater, eds),
England: John Wiley & Sons, pp. 411–530.
Havlik, T., 2008, Hydrometallurgy: Principles and Applications, Elsevier.
Hinze, J.O., 1955, “Fundamentals of the hydrodynamic mechanism of
splitting in dispersion processes.” AIChE Journal, 1, pp. 289–295.
Holmes, D.B., Voncken, R.M., and Dekker, J.A., 1964, “Fluid flow in
turbine-stirred, baffled tanks-I: Circulation time.” Chemical
Engineering Science, 19, pp. 201–208.
Hou, X., Qian, G., and Zhou, X., 2011, “Gas–Liquid Mixing in a Multi-
Scale Micro Mixer with Arborescence structure.” Chemical
Engineering Journal, 167, pp. 475–482.
Huang, Y. and Tanaka, M., 2009, “Analysis of continuous solvent extrac-
tion of nickel from spent electroless nickel plating baths by a mixer-
settler.” Journal of Hazardous Materials, 164, pp. 1228–1235
Jaworski, Z., Nienow, A.W., and Dyster, K.N., 1996, “An LDA study of
the turbulent flow field in a baffled vessel agitated by an axial, down-
pumping hydrofoil impeller.” The Canadian Journal of Chemical
Engineering, 74, pp. 3–15.
26 S. PARVIZI ET AL.
Javanshir, S., Abdollahy, M., and Abolghasemi, H., 2012, “Drop size distribu-
tion in a mixer–settler reactor for the gold chloride/DBC system.”
Chemical Engineering Research and Design, 90, pp. 1680–1686.
Joshi, J. B. and Sharma, M. M., 1982, “Mechanically agitated gas-liquid
reactors.” Chemical Engineering Science, 37, pp. 813–844.
Kankhaanpa, T., 2007, “CFD procedure for studying dispersion flows and
design optimization of the solvent extraction settler.” Doctoral Thesis,
Department of Materials science and engineering, Helsinki university of
Technology.
Kazemi, O. and Alamdari, E. K., 2012, “CFD simulation and optimization of
the settler of an industrial copper solvent extraction plant.” The second
International and The seventh Joint Conference of Iranian Metallurgical
engineering and Iranian Foundrymen Scientific Societies, University of
Semnan, Iran.
Khakpay, A., Abolghasemi, H., and Salimi-Khorshidi, A., 2009, “The
effects of a surfactant on mean drop size in a mixer-settler extractor.”
Chemical Engineering and Processing, 48, pp. 1105–1111.
Khakpay, A. and Abolghasemi, H., 2010, “The effects of impeller speed and
holdup on mean drop size in a mixer settler with spiral-type impeller.”
The Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering, 88, pp. 329–334.
Koshy, A., 1986, “Effect of Surfactants on drop breakage in turbulent
liquid dispersions.” Chemical engineering Science, 43(3), pp. 649–654.
Kramers, H., Baars, G. M., and Knoll, W. H., 1953, “A comparative study
of the rate of mixing in stirred tanks.” Chemical Engineering Science, 2,
pp. 35–42.
Kraume, M., Gabler, A., and Schulze, K., 2004, “Influence of physical
properties on drop size distributions of stirred liquid/liquid disper-
sions.” Chemical Engineering & Technology, 27, pp. 330–334.
Kresta, S.M. and Wood, P.E., 1993, “The mean flow field produced by a
45°C pitched blade turbine: Changes in the circulation pattern due to
off bottom clearance.” The Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering,
71, pp. 42–52.
Kumaresan, T. and Joshi, J. B., 2006, “Effect of impeller design on the
flow pattern and mixing in stirred tanks.” Chemical Engineering
Journal, 115(3), pp. 173–193.
Laso, M., Steiner, L., and Hartland, S., 1987a, “Dynamic simulation of
liquid-liquid agitated dispersion-i: Derivation of a simplified model.”
Chemical Engineering Science, 42(10), pp. 2429–2436.
Laso, M., Steiner, L., Hartland, S., 1987b, “Dynamic simulation of liquid-
liquid agitated dispersions-2: Experimental determination of breakage
and coalescence rates in a stirred tank.” Chemical Engineering Science,
42(10), pp. 2437–2445.
Lemenand, T., Durandal, C., Della Valle, D., and Peerhossaini, H., 2013,
“Turbulent direct-contact heat transfer between two immiscible
fluids.” International Journal of Thermal Sciences, 49(10), pp. 1459–
1476.
Li, H. Z., Fasol, C., and Choplin, L., 1996, “Hydrodynamics and heat
transfer of theologically complex fluids in a Sulzer SMX static mixer.”
Chemical Engineering Science, 5, pp. 1947–1955.
Lu, W. M., Wu, H. Z., Chuang, N. Y., and Lin, Y. L., 2000, “Effect of the
blade size on the vortex structure and gas dispersion in gas-liquid
stirred vessels with a single rushton turbine impeller.” Proceeding of
National Science Concoul, 24, pp. 166–175.
Luo, H. and Sevendsen, H. F., 1996, “Theoretical model for drop and
bubble breakup in turbulent dispersions.” AlChe Journal, 42(5), pp.
1225–1233.
Maaß, S., Paul, N., Kraume, M., 2012, “Influence of the dispersed phase
fraction on experimental and predicted drop size distributions in
breakage dominated in stirred systems.” Chemical Engineering
Science, 76, pp. 140–153.
Machado, M. B., Nunhez, J. R., Nobes, D., and Kresta, S. M., 2011,
“Impeller characterization and selection: Balancing efficient hydrody-
namics with process mixing requirements, AIChE Journal, 58(8), pp.
2573–2588.
Mahmoudi, S.M., Yiannekis, M., 1992, Fluid Mechanics of mixing:
Modelling, Operations and Experimental Techniques, Norwell, MA:
Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Marinova, K. G., Alargova, R. G., Denkov, N. D., Velev, O. D., Petsev, D.
N., Ivanov, I. B., and Borwankar, R. P., 1996, “Charging of oil–water
interfaces due to spontaneous adsorption of hydroxyl ions.”
Langmuir, 12, pp. 2045–2051.
Mavros, P., Xuereb, C., and Bertrand, J., 1998, “Determination of 3D
flow fields in agitated vessels by laser Doppler velocimetry: use and
interpretation of RMS velocities.” Chemical Engineering Research and
Design, 76, pp. 223–233.
McManamey, W. J., 1978, “Sauter mean and maximum drop diameters
of liquid–liquid dispersions in turbulent agitated vessels at low dis-
persed phase holdup.” Chemical Engineering Science, 34, pp. 432–434.
Mlynek, Y., and Resnick, W., 1972, “Drop size in an agitated liquid–
liquid system.” AIChE Journal, 18, pp. 122–127.
Mersmann, A., 1975, “Fluid dynamics of fluid two phase systems.” In
Preprints 5th International Congress of Chemical Engineering,
CHISA 75, Prague, Section I 2.1.
Moreno, C.M., Perez-Correa, J. R., and Otero, A., 2009, “Dynamic
modelling of copper solvent extraction mixer–settler units.” Minerals
Engineering, 20, pp. 1350–1358.
Murthy, B. N., Ghadge, R. S., and Joshi, J. B., 2007, “CFD simulations of
gas–liquid–solid stirred reactor: Prediction of critical impeller speed
for solid suspension.” Chemical Engineering Science, 62 (24), pp.
7184–7195.
Narsimhan, G., Ramkrishna, D., and Gupta, J. P., 1980, “Analysis of drop
size distributions in lean liquid-liquid dispersions.” ALCHE Journal,
26(6), pp. 991–1000.
Nishikawa, M., Mori, F., and Fujieda, S., 1987a, “Average drop size in a
liquid–liquid phase mixing vessel.” Journal of Chemical Engineering of
Japan, 20 (1), pp. 82–88.
Nishikawa, M., Mori, F., Fujieda, S., and Kayama, T., 1987b, “Scale up of
liquid–liquid phase mixing vessel.” Journal of Chemical Engineering of
Japan, 20 (5), pp. 454–459.
Noroozi, S., Hashemabadi, S. H., and Chamkha, A. J., 2013, “Numerical
analysis of drops coalescence and breakage effects on de-oiling hydro-
cyclone performance.” Separation Science and Technology, 48(7), pp.
991–1002.
Norwood, K. W. and Metzner, A. B., 1960, “Flow patterns and mixing
rates in agitated vessels.” A.I.Ch.E., 6, pp. 432–437.
Ochieng, A., Onyango, M., Kiriamiti, K., 2009, “Experimental measure-
ment and computational fluid dynamics simulation of mixing in a
stirred tank: a review.” South African Journal of Science, 105 (11–12),
pp. 421–426.
Ochieng, A. and Onyango, M. S., 2010, “CFD simulation of the hydro-
dynamics and mixing time in a stirred tank.” Chemical Industry &
Chemical Engineering Quarterly, 16 (4), pp. 379−386.
Omidbeygi, F. and Hashemabadi, S. H., 2012, “Experimental study and
CFD simulation of rotational eccentric cylinder in a magnetorheolo-
gical fluid.” Journal of Magnetism and Magnetic Materials, 324 (13),
pp. 2062–2069.
Pacek, A.W., Chasart, S., Nienow, A.W., and Bakker, A., 1999, “The influence
of impeller type on mean drop size and drop size distribution in an agitated
vessel.” Chemical Engineering Science, 54, pp. 4211–4222.
Paul, E. L., Atiemo-Obeng, V. A., Kresta, S. M., 2004, Handbook of
Industrial Mixing (Science and Practice), John Wiley & Sons INC.
Patwardhan, A. W. and Joshi, J. B., 1999, “Relation between flow pattern
and blending in stirred tank.” Industrial and Engineering Chemistry
Research, 38 (8), pp. 3131–3143.
Quadros, P. A. and Baptista, C. M. S. G., 2003, Effective interfacial area
in agitated liquid–liquid continuous reactors.” Chemical Engineering
Science, 58 (17), pp. 3935–3945.
Raghav, R. K. S. M. S. and Joshi, J. B., 1988, “Liquid phase mixing in
mechanically agitated vessels.” Chemical Engineering Communications,
74, pp. 1–26.
Ranade, V.V., 2002, Computational Flow Modeling for Chemical
Reactor, Bath, UK: Academic press.
Razzaghi, K. and Shahraki, F., 2010, “On the effect of phase fraction on
drop size distribution of liquid–liquid dispersions in agitated vessels.”
Chemical Engineering Research & Design, 88, pp. 803–808.
Rewatkar, V. B. and Joshi, J. B., 1991, “Effect of impeller design on liquid
phase mixing in mechanically agitated reactors.” Chemical Engineering
Communication, 102, pp. 1–33.

Rewatkar, V. B., Rao, K. S. M. S. R, Joshi, J.B., 1991, “Critical impeller
speed for solid suspension in mechanically agitated three-phase reac-
tors: 1. Experimental part.” Industrial & Engineering Chemistry
Research, 30, pp. 1770–1784.
Ritcey, G. M. and Ashbrook, A. W., 1984, Solvent Extraction, Principles and
Applications to Process Metallurgy, Part 1, Amsterdam: Elsevier Science
Publishers B. V., pp. 1–39.
Rodger, W. A., Trice, V. G., and Rushton, J. H., 1956, “Effect of fluid motion
on interfacial area of dispersions.” Chemical Engineering Progress, 52 (12),
pp. 515–520.
Roudsari, S. F., Turcotte, G., Dhib, R., and Ein-Mozaffari, F., 2012, “CFD
modeling of the mixing of water in oil emulsions.” Computers &
Chemical Engineering, 45, pp. 124–136.
Ruiz, M. C., Lermanda, P., and Padilla, R., 2002, “Drop size distribution
in a batch mixer under breakage conditions.” Hydrometallurgy, 63, pp.
65–74.
Rutherford, K., Mahmoudi, M. S., Lee, K. C., and Yianneskis, M., 1996,
“The influence of Rushton impeller blade and disk thickness on the
mixing characteristics of stirred vessel.” Chemical Engineering
Research and Design, 74, pp. 369–378.
Sadeghi, R., Mohebbi, A., and Baniasadi, M., 2011, “CFD modeling of the
launder of settler of an industrial copper solvent extraction plant.”
International Journal of Mineral Processing, 98, pp. 55–65.
Sardeing, R., Aubin, J., and Xuereb, C., 2004, “Gas–liquid mass transfer:
A comparison of down- and up–pumping axial flow impellers with
radial impellers.” Trans IChemE, 82 (A12), pp. 1589–1596.
Sathyagal, A. N., Ramkrishna, D., and Narsimhan, G., 1966, “Droplet
breakage in stirred dispersions: Breakage functions from experimental
drop size distributions.” Chemical Engineering, 51(9), pp. 1377–1391.
Sengupta, B., Sengupta, R., and Sabrahmanyam, N., 2006, “Process
intensification of copper extraction using emulsion liquid membranes:
Experimental search for optimal conditions.” Hydrometallurgy, 84(1–
2), pp. 43–53.
Sechremeli, D., Stampouli, A., and Stamatoudis, M., 2006, “Comparison
of mean drop sizes and drop size distributions in agitated liquid–
liquid dispersions produced by disk and open type impellers.”
Chemical Engineering Journal, 117, pp. 117–122.
Shabani, M. O. and Mazahery, A., 2011, “Evaluation of the effect of
mixer settler baffles on liquid-liquid extraction via CFD simulation.”
University Politehnica of Bucharest Scientific Bulletin-series, 73, pp. 55–
64.
Shabani, M. O., Alizade, M., Mazahery, A., 2011, “Fluid flow character-
ization of liquid-liquid mixing in mixer-settler.” Engineering with
Computers, 27, pp. 373–379.
Shabani, M. O. and Mazahery, A., 2012, “Computational fluid dynamics
(CFD) simulation of liquid-liquid mixing in mixer-settler.” Archive of
Metallurgy and Materials, 57, pp. 173–178.
Shewale, S. D. and Pandit, A. B., 2006, “Studies in multiple impeller
agitated gas–liquid contactors.” Chemical Engineering Science, 61, pp.
489–50.
MINERAL PROCESSING AND EXTRACTIVE METALLURGY REVIEW 27
Srilatha, C., Morab, V. V., Mundada, T. P., and Patwardhan, A. W., 2010,
“Relation between hydrodynamics and drop size distributions in
pump-mix mixer.” Chemical Engineering Science, 65, pp. 3409–3426.
Tcholakova, S., Denkov, N. D., and Danner, T., 2004, “Role of surfactant
type and concentration for the mean drop size during emulsification
in turbulent flow.” Langmuir, 20, pp. 7444–7458.
Thakur, R. K., Vial, C. H., Nigam, K. D. P, and Nauman, E. B., 2003,
Static mixer s in the process industries–a review.” Chemical
Engineering Research and Design, 81(7), pp. 787–826.
Tomas, M., Linek, V., and Eva, P., 2003, “Gas hold up, mixing time and
gas-liquid volumetric mass transfer coefficient of various multiple
impeller configuration: Rushton turbine, pitched blade and techmix
impeller and their combinations.” Chemical Engineering Science, 58,
pp. 1839–1846.
Torré, J.-P., Fletcher, D. F., Lasuye, T., and Xuereb, C., 2007, “An experi-
mental and computational study of the vortex shape in a partially baffled
agitated vessel.” Chemical Engineering Science, 62, pp. 1915–1926.
Tsouris, C. and Tavlarides, L. L., 1994, “Breakage and coalescence models
for drops in turbulent dispersions.” ALCHE Journal, 40(3), pp. 395–406.
Vermeulen, T., Williams, G. M., and Langlois, G. E., 1955, “Interfacial
area in liquid–liquid and gas–liquid agitation.” Chemical Engineering
Progress, 51(2), pp. 85–F.
Versteeg, H. K. and Malasekara, W., 2007, “An Introduction to
Computational Fluid Dynamics, the Finite Element Volume Method,
New York: Longman Group Ltd.
Wang, C. Y. and Calabrese, R. V., 1986, “Drop breakup in turbulent
stirred tank contactors: Part II: relative influence of viscosity and
interfacial tension.” AIChE Journal, 32 (4), pp. 667–676.
Weinstein, B. and Treybal, R. E., 1973, “Liquid–liquid contacting in
unbaffled agitated vessels.” AIChE Journal, 19, pp. 304–312.
White, F.M., 1991, Viscous Fluid Flow, Second Edition, New York:
McgGraw-Hill.
Yeoh, G.H., Cheung, C.P., Tu, J., 2014, Multiphase Flow Analysis Using
Population Balance Modeling: Bubbles, Drops and Particles, United
Kingdom: Elsevier Ltd.
Zhao, G. and Kresta, S.M., 1996, “Impact of tank geometry on the
maximum turbulence energy dissipation rate for impellers.” AIChE
Journal, 42(9), pp. 2476–2490.
Zhao, Y.C., Li, X. Y., Chen, J. C., Yang, C., and Mao, Z. S., 2011,
“Experimental study on liquid-liquid macro-mixing in a stirred
tank.” Industrial and Engineering Chemistry Research, 50(10), pp.
5952–5958.
Zhang, Q., Yong, Y., Mao, Z. S., Yanga, C., and Zhaoc, C., 2009,
“Experimental determination and numerical simulation of mixing
time in a gas–liquid stirred tank.” Chemical Engineering Science, 64
(12), pp. 2926–2933.
Zhou, G. and Kresta, S. M., 1998, “Correlation of mean drop size and
minimum drop size with the turbulence energy dissipation and the
flow in an agitated tank.” Chemical Engineering Science, 53(11), pp.
2063–2079.