Analysis of Batch Crystallizers

Tavare, Narayan S.; Garside, J.; Chivate, M.R.

doi:10.1021/i260076a026

Cited by 47 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Antisolvent precipitation investigation has been mainly devoted to kinetic studies under batch or continuous operations [26][27][28][29] or to the experimental and theoretical study of the influence of the process conditions on the particle size and shape. [29][30][31][32][33][34][35][36] Also, other data on crystallization-related parameters are scarce.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Properties of Sugar, Polyol, and Polysaccharide Water−Ethanol Solutions

2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The solubility and viscosity of sugars (glucose, lactose, leucrose, maltose, raffinose, sucrose, and trehalose), polyols (maltitol, mannitol, sorbitol, and xylitol), and polysaccharides ( -cyclodextrin, dextrans, and inulin) in water and water-ethanol mixtures was investigated at 310 K. The increase in ethanol fraction caused a decrease in solubility in all cases. The viscosity of a 10 % (w/w) solution of any of those sugars was (1 to 1.25) mPa s except dextran solutions, which reached 5 mPa s. The viscosity of saturated solutions varied strongly from one compound to another even though the solubilities were similar. The metastable zone widths of sucrose, maltose, and lactose precipitated with ethanol were significantly larger than the one measured for mannitol. IntroductionData on the solubility and viscosity of sucrose and lactose in aqueous solution are widely available in the literature. [1][2][3][4][5] However, little information is available for many other sugars, polyols, and polysaccharides. [6][7][8][9] Even though the effect of ethanol on a few of these solutions has been investigated, 10-20 the information available is fragmented and limited to the most common sugars. Still, some work on the prediction of the solubility of sugars in water-ethanol mixtures was done using the basic and modified UNIFAC 21-24 and UNIQUAC models, 10,13,25 or the Redlich-Kister expansion model, 20 but only for some common small sugars: sucrose, glucose, and lactose.The addition of an antisolvent, such as ethanol, to an aqueous solution containing a solute poorly soluble in water would result in the precipitation of the solute by a process called antisolvent precipitation, dilution, salting-out, or drowning-out crystallization. Antisolvent precipitation investigation has been mainly devoted to kinetic studies under batch or continuous operations [26][27][28][29] or to the experimental and theoretical study of the influence of the process conditions on the particle size and shape. [29][30][31][32][33][34][35][36] Also, other data on crystallization-related parameters are scarce. Compared with other crystallization processes, limited information is available on the metastable zone width caused by the addition of antisolvent 34,37,38 during antisolvent precipitation.These physicochemical data are of interest in the fields of pharmaceutical formulation and food, where various sugars, polyols, and polysaccharides are commonly used. The properties measured in this study might then be required for the design of new processes. In this work, solubility, viscosity, and supersaturation measurements were conducted on various sugar, polyol, and polysaccharide solutions prepared with waterethanol mixtures at 310 K. Materials and MethodsMaterials. D-Saccharose (crystalline, Riedel-de Haen), lactose anhydrous (crystalline, Fluka), and D-mannitol (crystalline, Fluka) of European Pharmacopoeia grade, dextrose anhydrous (crystalline, glucose, Sigma) of USP grade, D-trehalose dihydrate (crystalline, Sigma), D-leucrose (+98 %) (crystalline, Fluka...

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Properties of Sugar, Polyol, and Polysaccharide Water−Ethanol Solutions

2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The population balance equation is a partial differential equation in both time and size, and can be solved by numerical methods (Qamar & Warnecke, 2008;Hu et al, 2004Hu et al, , 2005aTavare & Garside, 1986;Mersmann et al, 2002). These methods can solve the equation relatively easily, but they are not applicable to this system because the expression is more complicated than those obtained by direct measurement (the CSDs of the stable phase are translated).…”

Section: Kinetic Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Kinetic model for calcium sulfate α-hemihydrate produced hydrothermally from gypsum formed by flue gas desulfurization

Tang

Shen

et al. 2015

J Appl Crystallogr

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Modeling of the kinetics of the synthesis process for calcium sulfate -hemihydrate from gypsum formed by flue gas desulfurization (FGD) is important to produce high-performance products with minimal costs and production cycles under hydrothermal conditions. In this study, a model was established by horizontally translating the obtained crystal size distribution (CSD) to the CSD of the stable phase during the transformation process. A simple method was used to obtain the nucleation and growth rates. A nonlinear optimization algorithm method was employed to determine the kinetic parameters. The model can be successfully used to analyze the transformation kinetics of FGD gypsum to -hemihydrate in an isothermal batch crystallizer. The results showed that the transformation temperature and stirring speed exhibit a significant influence on the crystal growth and nucleation rates of -hemihydrate, thus altering the transformation time and CSD of the final products. The characteristics obtained by the proposed model can potentially be used in the production of -hemihydrate.

show abstract

“…If McCabe DL law holds, the crystal growth rate is sizeindependent; Eq. (3) can be changed into [10,11] qnðLÞ qt þ G d½nðLÞ dL ¼ 0.…”

Section: Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%