chemical engineering research and design 9 1 ( 2 0 1 3 ) 19231940

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Chemical Engineering Research and Design
j our nal homepage: www. el sevi er . com/ l ocat e/ cher d
Review
Rotating reactors A review
F. Visscher, J. van der Schaaf, T.A. Nijhuis, J.C. Schouten

Laboratory of Chemical Reactor Engineering, Department of Chemical Engineering and Chemistry, Eindhoven University of Technology,
P.O. Box 513, 5600 MB Eindhoven, The Netherlands
a b s t r a c t
This review-perspective paper describes the current state-of-the-art in the eld of rotating reactors. The paper has a
focus on rotating reactor technology with applications at lab scale, pilot scale and industrial scale. Rotating reactors
are classied and discussed according to their geometry: stirred tanks, tubes, discs and miscellaneous reactors.
Their operating characteristics, industrial applications, and their main advantages and disadvantages are discussed
including power requirements, residence time distribution, reactor volume, gasliquid mass transfer rate, and the
micromixing time. Finally, the barriers for further industrial implementations are discussed.
2013 The Institution of Chemical Engineers. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Reactor; Development; Gravity; Multiphase; Intensication
Contents
1. Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1924
1.1. Reactor selection criteria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1924
1.2. Reactor classication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1925
2. Rotating reactors. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1925
2.1. Stirred tanks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1925
2.1.1. Rushton stirrer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1927
2.1.2. Gas-inducing stirrer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1927
2.1.3. Monolithic stirrer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1928
2.1.4. Foambased stirrer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1928
2.2. High shear rotating tubes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1929
2.2.1. Rotating packed bed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1929
2.2.2. Rotating zigzag bed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1929
2.2.3. Rotating uidized bed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1930
2.2.4. TaylorCouette reactor. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1931
2.2.5. Spinning tube-in-tube reactor. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1931
2.3. Low shear rotating tubes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1931
2.3.1. Rotating tube reactor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1931
2.3.2. Rotating tubular membrane reactor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1932
2.3.3. Rotating annular chromatographic reactor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1932
2.3.4. Rotating sorbent reactor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1932

Corresponding author. Tel.: +31 40 247 2850.

E-mail address: J.C.Schouten@tue.nl (J.C. Schouten).
URL: http://www.chem.tue.nl/scr (J.C. Schouten).
Received15 April 2013; Receivedinrevisedform19 July 2013; Accepted22 July2013
0263-8762/$ see front matter 2013 The Institution of Chemical Engineers. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cherd.2013.07.021
1924 chemical engineering research and design 9 1 ( 2 0 1 3 ) 19231940
2.4. Low shear rotating disc reactors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1932
2.5. High shear rotating disc reactor. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1933
2.5.1. Thin-lmspinning disc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1933
2.5.2. Rotorstator spinning disc reactor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1933
2.6. Remaining reactor types. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1934
2.6.1. Shockwave power reactor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1934
2.6.2. RAPTOR. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1934
2.6.3. Dynamically rotating axis micro reactor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1934
2.6.4. Coore agitated cell reactor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1935
2.6.5. Rotating cone reactor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1935
2.6.6. Rotating membrane reactor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1935
3. Summary and outlook. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1935
References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1936
List of symbols
A
L
surface area (m
2
m
3
)
D
I
impeller diameter (m)
d
R
inner diameter ()
E power consumption (Wm
3
)
N maximumrotation speed (RPM)
Q volumetric throughput (m
3
h
1
)
residence time
t
m
micromixing time (s)
U overall heat transfer coefcient (Wm
2
K
1
)
V reactor volume (m
3
)
1. Introduction
Mechanical agitation is applied to chemical reactors on pilot
scale and on industrial scale with the aimto increase the mix-
ing efciency (Hemrajani and Tatterson, 2004). As a result, the
reactor volume can be decreased by a factor 10100, which
is an urgent need in chemical industry; this need is com-
monly addressed as process intensication (Stankiewicz and
Moulijn, 2000). Ramshaw and co-workers were the rst pio-
neers who envisioned that understanding the length and time
scales relevant in plant design will lead to process intensica-
tion (Reay et al., 2008). The relevant length and time scales
include the integral path of plant, reactor, uid dynamics, cat-
alyst and molecular level (Charpentier and McKenna, 2004;
Lerou and Ng, 1996).
The reactor volume reduction that originates from the
applicationof mechanical agitationyields apotential cost ben-
et that acts as a driving force for the development of rotating
reactors, especially in research dealing with the ne chemical
and pharmaceutical industry (Anderson, 2012; Chaudhari and
Mills, 2011). With a lower equipment volume the holdup of liq-
uids, gases and solids in the reactor is smaller, which reduces
the impact of potential escalation of dangerous situations.
Additionally, the volume reduction allows for the application
of expensive coating materials in the reactor, like platinum
and tantalum.
Mechanical agitation is the most common method that
is applied in order to enhance mixing in industrial reactors.
For this purpose a rotating element is added to the reactor
with the purpose to increase the gasliquid, liquidliquid, and
liquidsolid mass transfer rates as well as the heat transfer
rate. As a result conversion and selectivity can be increased
and the occurrence of hot-spots is prevented. Process
intensication has been illustrated through the application of
rotating reactors, for example through the application of thin-
lmspinning disc reactors witha highheat transfer coefcient
(Aoune and Ramshaw, 1999; Zhang et al., 2010). Alternative
methods to achieve the said intensication are the integra-
tion of reaction and separation in one unit, the switch from
batch to continuous operated reactors and the application of
microreactor technology. Microreactors allow for the reduc-
tion of byproduct formation and the increase of gasliquid
and liquidliquid mass transfer rates (Hessel et al., 2009;
Hessel, 2009). The main challenge for further implementation
of this technology is the scale-up of the volumetric through-
put, which can only be achieved by increasing the pressure
drop over the microchannel or by parallel feeding of multiple
channels (Al-Rawashdeh et al., 2012; Kashid et al., 2010).
This review-perspective paper classies rotating reactors
and describes the current state-of-the-art in the eld of
rotating reactors which are applied on lab scale, pilot scale,
and industrial scale. In this review a chemical reactor is
dened as any device which is used to conduct a chemical
reaction, more specically, in which at least one molecu-
lar compound is transformed into another predetermined
chemical compound (Trambouze and Euzen, 2002b). The
discussed rotating reactors are applied for either single-phase
systems (liquid or gas) or multi-phase systems (gasliquid,
gassolid, gasliquidsolid, liquidsolid, or liquidliquid
mixtures).
The reactor selection is narrowed down further by discard-
ing reactors whichare only usedfor the experimental determi-
nationof physical properties, and by discarding reactors solely
used for the testing of catalytic properties or reaction kinetics
(Doraiswamy and Tajbl, 1974; Dudukovic et al., 2002; Kapteijn
and Moulijn, 2008; Pavko et al., 1981; Weekman, 1974). Exam-
ples of these reactors are the Berty Stationary Catalyst Basket
(Berty, 1974), the MahoneyRobinson Spinning Catalyst Basket
reactor (Mahoney, 1974), and the Carberry Spinning Catalyst
Basket reactor (Carberry, 1964). These reactors are discarded
because they are not developed with the aim of industrial
implementation. Reactors in which mechanical energy is dis-
sipated without the usage of rotation are also discarded (e.g.
the oscillatory bafed reactors, (Harvey et al., 2001), static mix-
ers, (Meijer et al., 2012), and reactors in which cavitation is
ultrasonically induced cavitation, (Rooze et al., 2013)).
1.1. Reactor selection criteria
Reactor selection is a challenging task in which multiple
aspects need to be taken into account (Krishna and Sie, 1994).
Reactors are developed dedicated to their application which
can be the synthesis of nanoparticles (Dahl et al., 2007; Ng
chemical engineering research and design 9 1 ( 2 0 1 3 ) 19231940 1925
et al., 2012; Pask et al., 2012; Tai et al., 2007), exothermic
reactions (Ogura et al., 2008), electrochemical reactions
(Rivero et al., 2010), micromixing characteristics (Assirelli
et al., 2002; Baldyga and Pohorecki, 1995; Bourne and Studer,
1992; Chu et al., 2007; Jiao et al., 2012; Rousseaux et al., 2001;
Zhao et al., 2010), and others. Reactions can also be combined
with separation steps in reactive separators (Stankiewicz,
2003). Specic aspects that cannot be neglected when reactors
are compared, are the volumetric throughput, reactor volume,
residence time distribution, effective catalyst loading, mass
transfer rates, and pressure and temperature limitations of
the reactor (Cybulski and Moulijn, 2005; Froment et al., 2011;
Trambouze and Euzen, 2002b).
Rotating reactors contain one or more rotating elements
which may have various designs: impellers, tubes, or discs.
The geometry of the rotating element and the rotational
speed determine the power required for mechanical agi-
tation. Energy dissipation in chemical reactors is given in
Wkg
1
PRODUCT
or Wm
3
LIQUID
(Baldyga and Pohorecki, 1995;
Villermaux, 1988). The mixing intensity is mainly determined
by the local energy dissipationand not by the power consump-
tion of the auxiliary equipment (Laufhtte and Mersmann,
1987; Mukherjee and Wrenn, 2009). For mechanically agitated
reactors the energy consumption by the motor that propels
the rotating element is dominant over the energy consumed
by pumps. The compressor duty signicantly contributes to
the total power consumptioninthe case of gasliquidreactors.
1.2. Reactor classication
In this review, rst the development of rotating reactors over
time is presented. Next the specic benets anddisadvantages
of various rotating reactors are given. In this review rotating
reactors are classied by four different groups according to
their characteristic geometry: tanks, tubes, discs and miscel-
laneous rotating reactors (Fig. 1).
The development of various rotating reactors in time is
schematically shown in Fig. 2. In Fig. 2 the year in which
the rst scientic or technical publication (peer-reviewed or
patent) was published is used as allocation in time. A table
with the relevant literature of each reactor is given in Table 1.
The majority of rotating reactors has been developed after
1980. Exact sales information is not available, but most of the
reactors developed since 1980 have not yet permanently pen-
etrated the commercial market of industrial processes except
for niche applications.
Fig. 2 The development of rotating reactors is
schematically shown as a function of time. The year in
which the rst scientic publication (peer-reviewed or
patent) is published is used as allocation in time.
2. Rotating reactors
2.1. Stirred tanks
Agricola (1556) illustrated in his book De Re Metallica
(On the Nature of Metals, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De re
metallica) how stirring reactors were used in the mining
industry (Stankiewicz and Moulijn, 2000). Earlier references
to vessels equipped with a stirrer date back to 77 A.D. where
Pliny the Elder describes the leaching of metals and the puri-
cationof sulfur (Pliny the Elder, 1929). The volume of industrial
used stirred tank reactors ranges from 210
3
to 310
2
m
3
.
The reactors are either batchwise, semi-batchor continuously
operated (Trambouze and Euzen, 2002a).
The most basic form of a stirred tank reactor consists of
a cylindrical tank with elliptical bottom, with one or more
stirrers mounted on a central shaft. With increasing tank
diameter, stirred tanks often exhibit poor mixing which is
especially true for multiphase reactions in which the non-
uniformity in mixing and mass transfer leads to signicant
variance in reaction rate and selectivity (Sthl Wernersson
and Trgrdh, 1999; Stitt, 2002). Some of the stirrers are
shown schematically in Fig. 3 (Hemrajani and Tatterson, 2004;
Joshi et al., 1982). Both the power consumption in stirred
tanks (Ascanio et al., 2004; Villermaux, 1988), and the various
Fig. 1 Classication of rotating reactors based on the geometry.
1
9
2
6

c
h
e
m
i
c
a
l

e
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
i
n
g

r
e
s
e
a
r
c
h

a
n
d

d
e
s
i
g
n

9

1

(

2

0

1

3

)

1
9
2
3

1
9
4
0
Table 1 Rotating reactor comparison. Typical values are given of the volumetric throughput (Q [m
3
h
1
]), reactor volume (V [m
3
]), residence time (), power consumption (E
[Wm
3
]), maximumrotation speed (N [RPM]), gasliquid mass transfer rate (GLMT [s
1
]), overall heat transfer coefcient (U [Wm
2
K
1
]), and micromixing time (t
m
[s]).
Reactor Phase Q V E N GLMT U t
m
Relevant reference
Rushton stirrer GLS 10
3
to 10
1
10
3
to 10
2
1min5h 110
4
1500 0.012 10
3
10
2
to 10
1
Foust et al. (1944)
Gas-inducing stirrer GLS 10
3
to 10
1
10
3
to 10
2
1min5h 110
4
1500 0.012 10
3
Arbiter and Harris (1962)
Monolithic stirrer GL 10
3
1100min 210
3
800 0.8 10
3
Albers et al. (1998)
Solid foamstirrer GLS 10
2
10
3
1s10min 610
3
600 0.2 10
3
Tschentscher et al. (2010a)
Rot. packed bed GLS 10
2
10
3
1s10min 510
4
2500 12 10
5
10
4
Pilo (1960)
Rot. zigzag bed GL 10
4
10
1
1s10min 3 10
4
1400 12 Ji et al. (2008)
Rot. uidized bed GS 10
3
1s10min 500 10
3
Kroger et al. (1980)
TaylorCouette ow GL 10
6
10
6
1s10min 310
4
1000 0.1 10
3
to 10
1
Pudjiono and Tavare (1993)
Spinning tube-in-tube GL 10
7
10
6
to 10
3
1s3min 12,000 10
4
Hampton et al. (2008)
Rot. tube GL 10
5
10
4
115min 870 10
2
Lodha and Jachuck (2007)
Rot. tub. mem. GL 10
3
10
2
1s10min 110
3
30 Cowen et al. (1982)
Rot. ann. chrom. GLS 10
6
10
2
1s60min 20 Sarmidi and Barker (1993a)
Thin lmSDR GLS 10
3
to 10
2
10
3
1s10min 510
3
5000 6 10
4
10
2
to 10
1
Buhtz (1927) and Boodhoo and
Al-Hengari (2012)
Rotorstator SDR GLS 10
3
to 10
1
10
4
to 10
2
1s10min 5 10
6
4500 2 10
5
10
4
to 10
2
Meeuwse et al. (2010b)
Shockwave power GL 10
1
to 10
1
3600 5.2 10
4
Mancosky (2013)
RAPTOR GL 10
5
to 10
3
10
3
10s10min 310
6
1500 10
4
Barillon et al. (2007)
Dyn. rot. axis micro GL 10
7
10
6
1s 3600 Ogura et al. (2008)
Coore agitated cell GL 10
5
10
5
1s10min Jones et al. (2012)
chemical engineering research and design 9 1 ( 2 0 1 3 ) 19231940 1927
Fig. 3 Different liquid ow direction for various stirrers. Stirrer A shows the ow prole generated by a radial ow impeller
(Rushton stirrer), Stirrer B for a three blade propeller (Aiba, 1958). Stirrer C for an axial ow turbine in which liquid is
progressively sucked in (axial downwards) near the center and is forced radially outwards. An extensive list of different
stirrers is presented by Hemrajani and Tatterson (2004) and Joshi et al. (1982).
techniques to visualize the liquid ow behavior have been
elaborated already earlier in a review (Mavros, 2001).
The catalyst in a stirred tank can be either dispersed
as a slurry (with a particle diameter below 110
3
m) or
as a homogenous catalyst. The most important drawbacks
of a heterogeneously dispersed catalyst are the separation
of the catalyst from the reaction mixture, and the attrition
and agglomeration of the catalyst particles. Heat transfer to
or from stirred tank reactors can be obtained by jacketing
the stirred tank or by using internal coils. Usage of struc-
tures inside the reactor allows for higher heat transfer rates,
but increases also the risk of fouling, the non-uniformity of
mixing intensity, and the time required for reactor clean-
ing (Kumaresan and Joshi, 2006). Various methods can be
exploited in order to improve the mixing capability in stirred
tanks.
The applicationof vertical wall bafes mountedto the reac-
tor wall is well known (Lu et al., 1997). A second method to
enhance mixing capability in the stirred tank reactor is by
applying a more sophisticatedstirrer design, whichcanbe cat-
egorized according to the induced direction of ow: up/down
draft (discs, plates), radial (at blade impeller, Rushtonstirrer),
axial (propeller, pitched blade turbine), or vortex (Kumaresan
and Joshi, 2006; Stitt, 2002).
Stirrer geometries can be, but are not limited to, pro-
pellers, turbines, anchors, or Archimedes screws (Hemrajani
and Tatterson, 2004). An extensive recent review on typical
impeller characteristics which are essential for further com-
parison of various impellers is given elsewhere and addresses
the relevance of the power number, the ow number, the
momentum number, and the Zwietering constant (Machado
et al., 2012). Multiple stirrers on a single rotating shaft are
needed when the aspect ratio, the ratio of the stirrer diameter
over the tank diameter, exceeds 1.5. A last method to enhance
mixing in stirred tanks is the application and improvement
of a gas-distributing inlet, which will enhance the interfacial
area and the gasliquid mass transfer rate in the stirred tank.
Four different stirrers are described in more detail here: Rush-
tonstirrer, gas inducing stirrer, monolithic stirrer andthe solid
foamstirrer.
2.1.1. Rushton stirrer
The Rushton stirrer was developed around 1940 (Foust et al.,
1944), and is a radial owgenerating stirrer, which is equipped
with six vertical (at or curved) blades which are mounted
on a disc (Fig. 4). For the standard stirrer the blade length is
equal to D
I
/4, the blade width is equal to D
I
/5. The disc diam-
eters equals either 0.66D
I
or 0.75D
I
, in which D
I
is the impeller
diameter (Hemrajani and Tatterson, 2004). The gasliquid ow
behavior in a Rushton stirred tank was studied using Laser-
Doppler Anemometry (Wu et al., 1989) and Particle Image
Velocimetry (Hill et al., 2000). The power characteristics of
Rushton stirrer are related to physical properties of the liquid
mixture and the geometry of the tank itself (Rushton et al.,
1950a,b).
2.1.2. Gas-inducing stirrer
Often the per pass conversion of the gas phase is low when
gasliquid mass contacting is performed in a stirred tank, in
that case it is benecial to recycle the unreacted gas-phase
back into the reactor. Dead end systems are than a solution in
which expensive compression costs can be reduced: in these
systems the remaining gas phase is forced into the free reac-
tor volume fromwhere it is recycled internally into the liquid
mixture. A gas-inducing impeller enables efcient recycling
of gas from the free reactor volume into the liquid-mixture.
The critical impeller speed that is required for the start of gas
induction follows from a balance between the velocity head
generated by the impeller and the hydrostatic head above the
impeller (Patwardhan and Joshi, 1998). Guidelines have been
given about the desired geometry of gas-inducing impellers
for achieving different design objectives such as heat transfer,
mass transfer, mixing, solid suspension and froth otation.
Non-intrusive electrical capacitance tomography (ECT) has
been used to study the dispersed phase hold up, mixing times,
and reaction metrics in a continuously operated stirred tank
that was equipped with a gas-inducing stirrer (Bawadi et al.,
2011). Application of a gas-inducing stirrer in a stirred tank
gives an increase in the productivity (Bawadi et al., 2011). The
inuence of the stirrer diameter, the aspect ratio, the stirrer
submergence fromthe liquid level, and the clearance between
the stirrer and the tank bottomhas been presented elsewhere
(Saravanan et al., 1994).
The gasliquid mass transfer rate in stirred tanks that are
equipped with gas-inducing impellers was measured, and can
be described by a dimensionless correlation which contains
the Froude number (gas-induction rate), the Reynolds number
(turbulence intensity), and the Schmidt number (uid prop-
erties) (Zieverink et al., 2006). The separation of the reaction
mixture and the catalyst particles at the outlet of a stirred tank
is often troublesome; there is therefore a tendency to immo-
bilize the catalyst on the stirrer. In early attempts a lab-scale
1928 chemical engineering research and design 9 1 ( 2 0 1 3 ) 19231940
Fig. 4 The top view and the side view of a Rushton stirrer (left) and a side view of a monolithic stirred tank reactor (right).
rotating basket was mounted in the reactor, such that kinet-
ics could be measured without the presence of external mass
transfer limitation in the gas phase (Carberry, 1964).
2.1.3. Monolithic stirrer
Mounting monolithic blocks on the stirrer shaft can be an
attractive alternative for stirred tanks with dispersed cata-
lyst particles (Fig. 4). Most monoliths consist of one piece of
ceramic material; within this piece a large number of parallel
channels is present whichextends over the entire lengthof the
block. The concept of a monolithic stirrer was demonstrated
in 1998 for liquid mixtures with a low viscosity (Albers et al.,
1998). Because the catalyst is immobilized in the monolith
there is no need for liquidsolid separation at the reactor out-
let. Another advantage is the open structure of the monolithic
block which results in a large geometrical area. The inside of
the monolithic channels can be coated with a thin layer of
either a conventional catalyst (Bennett et al., 1991) or a biocat-
alyst (De Lathouder et al., 2006). The monolith is characterized
by its number of cells per square inch (Hoek, 2004b). With
increasing cell density the catalyst layer thickness decreased,
which proved to be benecial for the performance of the
monolithic stirrer reactor (Hoek et al., 2004). The volumetric
gasliquid mass transfer coefcient in a monolith increases
from 0.015s
1
at 200RPM to 0.527s
1
at 450RPM when mea-
sured for the stirrer conguration with two monoliths in one
plane (Hoek, 2004a). The cell density of the monoliths has no
effect on the gasliquid mass transfer rate. The volumetric
gasliquid mass transfer increases by a factor of three when
a stirrer conguration consisting of four monoliths in one
plane is used. The liquidsolid mass transfer rate increased
with increasing stirrer speed (Hoek, 2004b). The biggest
potential for industrial implementation would be the replace-
ment of conventional slurry reactors that are nowadays
used for multiphase processes, for example in ne chemical
synthesis.
2.1.4. Foam based stirrer
A recent innovation in stirrer design for stirred tanks is the
solid foam based stirrer. Such stirrers contain a piece of
open-celled solid foam which is made out of a reticulated
structure of struts (Fig. 5). Each strut has the function of a
static mixer which splits and recombines the uid stream
that passes the strut. The solid foamcombines a high surface
area (1608500m
2
m
3
) with a high voidage (8097%), which
yields a high surface to volume ratio. As a result non-rotating
foam packed columns exhibit a low pressure drop and high
gasliquidmass transfer rates (Stemmet et al., 2005, 2006). Due
to the highsurface area it is anexcellent material for the depo-
sition of catalysts (Ordomsky et al., 2012a,b; Wenmakers et al.,
2008, 2010).
The rotating foam stirrer reactor yields higher gasliquid
and liquidsolid mass transfer rates than stirred tanks
equipped with a Rushton stirrers or slurry bubble columns
(Tschentscher et al., 2010a,b). Various foam structures have
been applied including donuts, two-blades, and blocks (Leon
et al., 2012a). Rotating foam stirrer reactors have promising
applications for multiphase processes (Leon et al., 2012b).
Mounting multiple foam blocks on a single horizontal shaft
with bafes in between the consecutive foam blocks, yields
plug ow behavior in this reactor, and accordingly a higher
selectivity toward the desired product in selective reactions
with unwanted consecutive reactions (Leon et al., 2013).
Tomography measurements have shownthat also liquids with
a higher viscosity can be fed to such a reactor (Tschentscher
Fig. 5 Schematic 3D-view of the foamstirrer tank. The
stirrer is equipped with two equal foamblocks on which a
high catalyst loading can be coated.
Courtesy to Tschentscher et al. (2010a).
chemical engineering research and design 9 1 ( 2 0 1 3 ) 19231940 1929
Fig. 6 Schematic side view of a rotating packed bed in
which the vapor phase (dotted lines) and the liquid phase
(solid line) are contacted counter-currently over the rotating
packing (gray).
et al., 2012). An important advantage for industrial implemen-
tation of this stirrer type is the very low pressure drop which
ensures the good accessibility of the catalyst on the foam. For
industrial implementation it is essential that the catalyst does
not wash out, and thus that the appropriate catalyst coating
technique is applied.
2.2. High shear rotating tubes
2.2.1. Rotating packed bed
Rotating packed beds (RPBs) have received considerable atten-
tion as a method of process intensication for gasliquid
mass transfer. Most publications mention that the rst patent
on RPB-technology was lled by Ramshaw and Mallinson
(1981). This patent described the application of such tech-
nology for distillation, absorption, and stripping (Ramshaw,
1983). An earlier patent application described this same tech-
nique about two decades earlier (Pilo, 1960). Rotating packed
beds can be operated either co-currently, cross-currently or
counter-currently. In the most basic formof a RPB, the rotor is
an annular cylindrical packed bed which is housed in a cylin-
drical casing (Fig. 6). In rotating packed beds the rotational
speed ranges from500 to 2500RPM. The rotor can be made of
various packing types, e.g. gas spheres, solid foam, and discs.
Other rotor congurations which have been applied are disc
plate packings (Jian et al., 1998), helical packings (Chen et al.,
1995), multistaged spraying packings (Pan et al., 2006), and
split-packings (Chandra et al., 2005; Reddy et al., 2006).
The gas phase and liquid phase are counter-currently con-
tacted in a RPB. The gas phase is introduced near the casing,
and ows radially inwards through the packing and exits the
reactor through the shaft. The liquid phase is fed through a
stationary feeding tube placed in the eye of the rotor, and
touches the inner periphery of the packing as droplets, jets,
or as a spray. For measurements at low gravity level (<60g)
the liquids lls the voids of the packing, whereas at high grav-
ity levels (>100g) the voids are only partial lled (Burns and
Ramshaw, 1996; Burns et al., 2003).
The residence time distribution in a RPB was deter-
mined experimentally, and showed that intense macromix-
ing is obtained at the inner region of the packing
(d
R
=710
3
1010
3
) where the liquid impinges and
deforms. The same study showed that the liquid volume in
a packed bed under normal operation, does not exceed 5% of
the total bed volume (Kenyvani and Gardner, 1989).
As a result the mean residence time of the liquid phase in
the reactor is very short which limits the separation capacity.
The micromixing efciency of rotating packed beds is dis-
cussed in detail by Yang et al. (2005). There, the micromixing
time is approximately evaluated to be about 10
4
s.
Two in-depth reviews describe the functionality of the
rotating packed bed and the relevant literature up to 2010 in
great detail (Rao et al., 2004; Zhao et al., 2010), including liquid
ow, gasliquid mass transfer, micromixing efciency, strip-
ping/absorption, and nano-particle preparation. The main
conclusion is that adequate design of the rotor is essential for
full exploitation of the centrifugal eld. The height equiva-
lent of a transfer unit is about 45 times lower in RPBs than
in conventional extraction columns (Rao et al., 2004), and
equals 110
2
210
2
m (Zhao et al., 2010). The intensi-
cation achieved so far falls short of the goal of 23 orders
of magnitude volume reduction of the conventional columns
volume (Rao et al., 2004).
Relatively poor mass transfer performance of RPB technol-
ogy was observed when used as bioreactor for the production
of polyhydroxyalkanoate froma fermentation broth (Boodhoo
et al., 2010). The apparent poor performance is attributed
to the limitation of the gas and liquid ow rates that are
a consequence of ooding characteristics. Also, the possi-
ble entrainment of air in the oxygen stripped end product
could have inuenced the reliability of these ndings. The
micromixing efciency in the RPB was determined using the
VillermauxDushman reaction system. In this study samples
were drawn along the radial position. The micromixing ef-
ciency was thus measured in different packing zones of the
RPB. The micromixing time in the RPB can be as lowas 10
4
s,
which is one to three orders of magnitude smaller than in
conventional packed beds. In the Impinging Stream Rotating
PackedBed(IS-RPB), two stainless capillary nozzles are located
in-line with the rotational shaft. The two different liquids
ow along the same axis in the opposite direction and col-
lide, which causes a narrow zone in which a high turbulence
intensity is created which leads to high micromixing (Qi et al.,
2008), and excellent mass transfer efciency (Jiao et al., 2012).
Several implementations of rotating packedbeds have been
successfully obtained, including seawater treatment, HOCl
production and nanoparticle preparation. However, industrial
acceptance of this reactor type is yet to come, mainly due to
concerns involving reliability and the energy consumption.
More sound theoretical foundations are required, especially
the liquid distribution at the entrance (in the center) of packed
bed is of main importance for the mixing intensity obtained
in the reactor. This should be combined with long termoper-
ational data and economic evaluation of such data.
2.2.2. Rotating zigzag bed
In the rotating zigzag bed (RZB) the packing fromthe rotating
packed bed is replaced by a rotor which is a coaxial combina-
tion of a rotating disc with a stationary disc (Fig. 7) (Li et al.,
2012, 2013). Concentric circular sheets are mounted on the
rotor and the stator, and act as rotating and stationary bafes,
respectively. Typically the distance between the consecutive
rings is below 1510
3
m.
The gas and liquid ow are counter-currently contacted
while owing in a horizontal zigzag motion through the reac-
tor. The RZB thus has in essence a similar geometry as
conventional tray-distillation columns, but in the RZB the ow
is oriented in a vertical plane and the gravitational eld (1g) is
replaced by a high centrifugal eld (>500g) (Wang et al., 2011).
1930 chemical engineering research and design 9 1 ( 2 0 1 3 ) 19231940
Fig. 7 Schematic side view of the rotating zigzag bed. In
this reactor the packing consists of a rotating disc (gray)
and a stator (black). Two series of concentric circular sheets
are xed on the rotating and the stationary disc. The
circular sheets on the rotor are perforated.
When compared to a rotating packed bed reactor the diameter
is increased by a factor two, whereas the length is reduced by
a factor 16. The reactor volume thus decreased by a factor 5
(Li et al., 2013).
The rotating zigzag reactor has a fewbenecial advantages
over common RPB technology: rst, one of the dynamic seals
can be replaced by a static seal, yielding a longer seal life-
time andthus less maintenance. Second, additional feedinlets
can be applied through the stator which allows for continu-
ous operation of the distillation process (Ji et al., 2008). Third,
no additional liquid feed distributers are required: the zigzag
owenhances mixing between each consecutive ring. Fourth,
the liquid hold-up of the bed is larger than in a conventional
RPB, which leads to an increased residence time. Fifth, in the-
ory multiple zigzag-rotors could be mounted on one rotational
shaft (Wang et al., 2008).
The number of theoretical plates increases with increas-
ing rotor speed (Wang et al., 2008). The RZB may contain up
to 20 theoretical plates per meter length, when operated at
1000RPMand reux rate of 60010
3
m
3
h
1
(whenmeasured
with an inner rotor diameter 2010
2
m, outer rotor diame-
ter of 6310
2
, casing diameter of 8010
2
m, casing height
5510
2
m, measured for the separation of an ethanol-water
mixture) (Wang et al., 2008). Seven industrial applications of
RZB technology have been reported, with a maximum feed
capacity of 48tons day
1
(Wang et al., 2008). The overall pres-
sure drop of the RZB is a combination of the pressure drops
over the rotor, the casing and the gas outlet (Li et al., 2013), and
increases with increasing rotor speed and the gas ow rate,
and decreases with increasing liquid ow rate (Wang et al.,
2011). Empirical correlations for the overall pressure drop over
the RZB have been presented for a dry bed and a wetted bed (Li
et al., 2013). The power required to propel the rotating zigzag
bed is discussed in detail by Agarwal et al. (2010) and Li et al.
(2012).
2.2.3. Rotating uidized bed
Fluidized beds are widely applied in chemical industry and are
used for a wide range of processes including olen polymer-
ization end detergent production. In a uidized bed reactor
the gas phase is forced through a bed of solid particles. As
a result, at appropriate conditions the gassolid mixture will
exhibit uid-like behavior, and can also be modeled as such
Fig. 8 A schematic representation of the top view of a
rotating uidized bed in a static geometry. The gas phase is
injection through the tangential inlets. Due to the rotation
of the injected gas phase, the solids present in the reactor
will start to uidize.
Courtesy to Rosales Trujillo and De Wilde (2012).
(Deen et al., 2004). In uidized beds, high catalyst loadings can
be applied.
Two types of rotating uidized beds (RFBs) have been
applied with either a static (SG) or rotating geometry (RG)
(Harish Kumar and Murthy, 2010). In the rotating uidized
bed with a rotating geometry the cylindrical enclosure rotates
around its own axis of symmetry. As a result the intensity of
the gravitational eld depends on the rotational speed and the
enclosure radius.
Compared to conventional uidized beds its main advan-
tage is the wider range of operation(HarishKumar andMurthy,
2010). The biggest disadvantage is that at extreme rotational
speeds of the enclosure, particles will accumulate near the
rimof the enclosure which leads to the channeling of the gas
phase through the dead zone near the center of the enclosure
(Kroger et al., 1980). The pressure drop and uidization criteria
have been presented by (Chen, 1987).
The second type of rotating uidized beds has a static
geometry which makes that in essence this reactor is not a
rotated reactor; however the uid behavior has a large simi-
larity withthat of other equipment describedinthis review(De
Wilde and de Broqueville, 2008a). This rotating uidized bed
with a static geometry is also known as the GasSolid Vortex
Reactor (GSVR). In this reactor the gas phase is injected tan-
gentially into the cylindrical reactor which contains the solid
particles (Fig. 8). Due to the transfer of momentum from the
gas-phase to the particles, the particles will rotate in the reac-
tor and generate a centrifugal force. High mass transfer rates
are obtained in this reactor due to the counter play between
the centrifugal force and the drag force applied by the inward-
owing gas.
The solids experience a centrifugal force which is directed
radially outwards, while the gas phase is forced to move
chemical engineering research and design 9 1 ( 2 0 1 3 ) 19231940 1931
radially inwards, which uidizes the solids radially. The con-
cept has been illustrated for lowdensity polymer particles and
high density aluminia particles, for various solids loadings
(De Wilde and de Broqueville, 2007). The heat transfer rate is
studied numerically by using computational uid dynamics
simulations of the particle bed temperature response to a step
change in the uidization gas temperature (de Broqueville
and De Wilde, 2009).
The functionality of the GSVR has been demonstrated for
the pyrolysis of lignocellulosic biomass. The gassolid heat
transfer coefcient equals 650Wm
2
K
1
, which is 35 times
higher than in non-rotating uidization reactors (Ashcraft
et al., 2012; De Wilde and de Broqueville, 2008a). The gassolid
mass transfer coefcient for the GSVR is about 10 times higher
than for conventional riser technology (Ashcraft et al., 2013).
The GSVR can be extended with a rotating chimney which
leads to increase of the centrifugal force in the vicinity of the
chimney, which on its turn allows to reduce solids losses via
the chimney and simultaneously to build up a higher solids
loading in the uidization chamber at given gas ow rate
and solids feeding rates (De Wilde and de Broqueville, 2008b).
Rotating uidized beds have a relatively large volume. Inrotat-
ing uidized beds this implies that the energy consumption is
high when compared to other reactors.
2.2.4. TaylorCouette reactor
For reactors in which only the inner or both inner and
the outer cylinders are rotating, a TaylorCouette type of
ow is observed. Such ow offers the advantage of centrifu-
gally accelerated settling, short residence times, low volume
fractions, exible phase ratios and a well-controlled inven-
tory (Vedantam and Joshi, 2006). This class of reactors is
also known as rotating annular rectors. The residence time
distribution for a such a reactor can be described as near plug
ow behavior for Taylor numbers (ratio of centrifugal to the
viscous forces) above 60 where a laminar vortex ow regime
is present (Pudjiono and Tavare, 1993).
A detailed review on experimental correlations between
the axial dispersionnumber and the Reynolds number is given
elsewhere, together with a detailed CFD and RTD study of the
uid owbehavior (Vedantamet al., 2006). Normally a smooth
shaped cylinder is used. Experiments with a ribbed rotor lead
to an increase of the micromixing efciency (Richter et al.,
2008). Both the exothermic copper-catalyzed oxidation of iso-
propanol and the pyrolysis of acetone to ketene were studied
(Cohen and Marom, 1983), and were executed under excellent
control over the yield and selectivity.
Rotating annular equipment also nds its application in
the intensication of stage wise counter-current liquidliquid
extraction (Schuur et al., 2012), and the continuous pro-
duction of monodispersed nanoparticles (Ogihara et al.,
1995). This reactor is quite similar to the rotating annu-
lar reactor, in which a gasliquid or liquidliquid mixture is
forced through the radial duct between two coaxial cylin-
ders, of which the inner cylinder is rotating (Lawrence et al.,
2000).
The radial distance between the two cylinders is small
whencompared to the radii of the cylinders and is inthe range
of 1010
3
m, which is about 40 times higher when compared
to the spinning tube-in-tube reactor. Typically the ow rate
is in the range of 1010
3
m
3
h
1
(Lawrence et al., 2000). As
a result, the pressure drop in the rotating annular reactor is
lower, which allows for a larger throughput.
Fig. 9 The spinning tube-in-tube reactor. The temperature
can be controlled by a heat exchanger which is located
around the process volume (green). Reprinted with
permission from(Gonzalez and Ciszewski, 2008). Copyright
2009, American Chemical Society. (For interpretation of the
references to color in this gure legend, the reader is
referred to the web version of the article.)
2.2.5. Spinning tube-in-tube reactor
The last example of a reactor with tubular geometry is the
spinning tube-in-tube reactor. The reactor patent for this reac-
tor was led in 2008 by Richard Holl (Holl, 2010). The reactor
consists of a rotating cylinder (rotor) inside a stationary cylin-
der (stator), which are mounted at a concentric radial spacing
between 0.2510
3
and 0.4410
3
m(Fig. 9).
As a result of the small radial distance between the cylin-
ders, the reactants inside the annular volume are exposed
to elevated shear stress levels. The typical rotational speed
of the rotor is between 3000 and 12,000RPM, with a reactor
volume that varies from 110
5
to 110
3
m
3
. The reactor
concept has been demonstrated for ne chemical production
(Gonzalez and Ciszewski, 2008; Hampton et al., 2008). Due to
the low reactor volume, and expected excellent heat trans-
fer rates, this reactor is suited for highly exothermic reactions
which require only a small amount of catalyst.
2.3. Low shear rotating tubes
2.3.1. Rotating tube reactor
Several reactors have beendevelopedwhichcombine atubular
geometry with low shear conditions. The rotating tube reac-
tor consists of a rotatable hollowcylinder, and has a rotational
speed which is typically below1000RPM. The centrifugal force
induced by the rotation results in thin liquid lms inside
the rotating rube, with a thickness between 70010
6
and
140010
6
m. The technology has been applied in the trans-
esterication of canola oil to biodiesel using a base catalyst.
Using methanol and sodiumhydroxide as catalysts, a conver-
sion of 98% was achieved in residence times of 40s (Lodha
et al., 2012).
The conversion obtained while using a residence time of
40s is equal to the conversion obtained in a membrane reactor
operated at a residence time of 6h, for a volumetric ow rate
which is 150 times higher (Lodha et al., 2012). The mechani-
cally simple design of this reactor and the low pressure drop
over the cylinder, make that the reactor can be used for bulk
processes in which mass transfer limitations is not limiting.
1932 chemical engineering research and design 9 1 ( 2 0 1 3 ) 19231940
Fig. 10 A schematic side view and front view of the rotating biological contactor. A stack of discs (black) is partially
immersed in the liquid (gray). Rotation of the stack of discs increases the liquid lmrenewal at the disc surface.
2.3.2. Rotating tubular membrane reactor
The rotating membrane bioreactor with a tubular geometry
was patented in 1982 (Cowen et al., 1982). In this reactor the
membrane is rotating around a shaft which is placed at the
liquid level in the reactor. As a result the membrane is par-
tially wetted but continuously refreshed during operation. The
rotational speed of the membrane is most often below10RPM.
A typical reactor volume equals 210
3
m
3
, and has a total
effective ltration area of 0.043m
2
(Jiang et al., 2012). Rotation
of the membrane allows for an increase of the permeate ux
because cake formation is suppressed in microltration and
concentrationpolarizationis suppressed during ultraltration
and reverse osmosis (Jaffrin, 2008).
2.3.3. Rotating annular chromatographic reactor
The rotating annual chromatographic reactor is a chemical
reactor in which chromatographic separation takes place, and
is used for liquidsolid or gassolid systems (Cho et al., 1980a).
The reactor consists of two rotatable cylinders whichare rotat-
ing around one central shaft (Fig. 11). The volume between the
Fig. 11 A schematic side view of the rotating annular
chromatographic reactor (Sarmidi and Barker, 1993a;
Stankiewicz, 2003). Component C is added at the stationary
inlet. While owing downwards, the components AC are
selectively recovered over the rimof the rotating cylinders.
two cylinders is lledwiththe solidphase. Oftenion-exchange
resins are used which have the function of both catalyst and
adsorbent. The adsorbent can also be used for the immobi-
lization of biocatalysts (Sarmidi and Barker, 1993b).
The solvent of the reacting molecules is distributed equally
at the top of the reactor. The rotational speed of the cylin-
ders, typically below 10RPM, causes horizontal migration of
the reacting molecules, whereas the uid ow causes a ver-
tical downward migration of the reacting molecules through
the solid phase. Reaction products with a high afnity to the
solid phase will have a large horizontal velocity component,
whereas reaction products with a low afnity have a small
horizontal velocity component (Sarmidi and Barker, 1993a).
At different angular positions of the reactor, the sepa-
rated products can be collected in high purity. The historical
development is described in detail in a review elsewhere
(Uretschlger and Jungbauer, 2002). Typically the reactor vol-
ume is in the range of 1010
3
m
3
, whereas the volumetric
ow rate equals 1510
3
m
3
h
1
(Cho et al., 1980b). The pres-
sure drop due to the packing inside the narrow concentric
space limits the scalability in terms of volumetric throughput
(Strhlein et al., 2007).
2.3.4. Rotating sorbent reactor
The rotating sorbent reactor was developed in 2004 and is a
combination of the rotating particle separator with a cyclonic
reactor. The basic design consists of three stages. In the rst
stage, the solid phase is injected in a gas phase owthat con-
tains an undesired component. In the second stage, the solid
phase absorbs the undesired component fromthe gas phase,
and in the third stage the solid phase is separated fromthe gas
phase. Typical rotational speed of the separator part is higher
than 12,000RPM. The volumetric ow rate equals 50m
3
h
1
and the reactor volume equals 410
3
m
3
. Industrial applica-
tions have not been reported in literature (Mondt et al., 2004).
2.4. Low shear rotating disc reactors
The rotating biological contactor (or rotating disc gasliquid
contactor) consists of a number of discs whichare mountedon
a central horizontal shaft (Fig. 10). The stack of discs witha low
inter-disc distance yields an equal geometry as a cylinder. The
discs are partially immersed in the liquid (Zhevalkink et al.,
1978). A liquid lmis brought upwards over the surface of the
discs, upon rotation of the discs. Further rotation will supply
the liquid lm to the bulk liquid. Typical rotation speeds are
below 50RPM. Due to the low rotational speed and the low
chemical engineering research and design 9 1 ( 2 0 1 3 ) 19231940 1933
power consumption of the motor the reactor is suited for a
bulk process, like wastewater treatment.
Several other low shear rotating disc reactors are applied
on either lab scale or pilot scale. The rotating disc CVD reac-
tor has solely applied to achieve a uniform layer thickness in
chemical vapor depositionprocesses (Coltrinet al., 1989). More
recent research describes a rotating disc photoelectrocatalytic
reactor (Li et al., 2012).
2.5. High shear rotating disc reactor
2.5.1. Thin-lm spinning disc
The thin-lm spinning disc reactor was commercially devel-
opedwiththe aimof intensifying gasliquidreactions (Jachuck
et al., 1997), and nds its base in a patent from 1927 (Buhtz,
1927). In this reactor, the liquid phase is fed at the center
of the rotating disc from where it ows radially outwards as
a thin lm over the disc. Extensive research has been done
with respect to the gasliquid mass transfer rate (Aoune and
Ramshaw, 1999; Sisoev et al., 2006), liquidsolid mass trans-
fer rate (Burns and Jachuck, 2005; Peev et al., 2007a), and the
heat transfer rates (Harmand et al., 2013). The thin-lmspin-
ning disc reactor has been used for polymerizations (Boodhoo
and Jachuck, 2000), active pharmaceutical ingredient produc-
tion (Oxley et al., 2000), crystallization (Pask et al., 2012; Tai
et al., 2007), and nanoparticle synthesis (Chu et al., 2007; de
Caprariis et al., 2012; Liu et al., 2012).
The characteristics of the liquid lm, i.e. the lm thick-
ness and radial velocity and residence time distribution, have
been described numerically and experimentally (Mohammadi
and Boodhoo, 2012). With increasing rotational disc speed the
liquid lm thickness decreases with increasing radius (Burns
et al., 2003; Wood and Watts, 1973).
The radial velocity increases withincreasing rotational disc
speed and increasing liquid ow rate, and decreases with
increasing viscosity (Wood and Watts, 1973). Surface waves
have been observed in the liquid lm (Aoune and Ramshaw,
1999) which are classied as concentric waves or spiral waves
(Sisoev et al., 2006), and are of major importance to the
gasliquid mass transfer rate (Peev et al., 2007b). Whereas in
most studies a smooth disc is used as the rotor, also rotat-
ing discs with surface modications have been used, which
allow for a further increase of the gasliquid mass transfer
rate (Sisoev et al., 2006).
Recently, two studies independently discussed the
micromixing efciency of the thin-lmspinning disc reactor.
Both studies concluded that this reactor type is a valuable
intensied mixer (Boodhoo and Al-Hengari, 2012; Jacobsen
and Hinrichsen, 2012), with a particular importance for
the application in very fast reactions that need large heat
dissipation (like nitrations, sulfonations, Darzens processes,
crystallizations, and exothermic condensations) (Boodhoo,
2012). The scale-up of the thin-lm spinning disc reactor is
discussed in detail elsewhere (Boodhoo, 2012). The desired
method of scale-up is a counter play of the residence time
and the liquid lm thickness. Both are determined by the
rotational disc speed and the disc radius.
2.5.2. Rotorstator spinning disc reactor
A high-shear multiphase rotating reactor that is developed
as an improvement of the thin-lm spinning disc reactor is
the rotorstator spinning disc reactor (van der Schaaf and
Schouten, 2011). This reactor consists of a rotating disc (rotor)
which is located between two stationary discs (stators). The
Fig. 12 The side view of the rotorstator spinning disc
reactor. The axial clearance between the rotor and the
stator is in the order of millimeters. Rotation of the rotor
induces a velocity gradient over the height between the
rotor and the stator. As a result a shear force acts on the
droplets, bubbles or particles between the rotor and the
stator. This results in high liquidliquid, liquidsolid, and
gasliquid mass transfer rates (Visscher et al., 2012c).
axial distance between the rotor and the stators is typically in
the range of 1.010
3
m(Fig. 12). The rotational disc speed is
most oftenaround 1000RPMbut rotational speeds of 4500RPM
have been reported (Meeuwse et al., 2012). Pulse wise resi-
dence time distribution measurements have shown that the
single phase uid ow can be described by a combination of
a plug ow volume and three ideally mixed volumes in series
(Visscher et al., 2012c). The ideally mixed volumes in series
originate fromthe boundary layer formation on the rotor and
the stators (van Eeten et al., 2012; Visscher et al., 2012c).
The gasliquid mass transfer rate was measured as a func-
tionof rotational speed (Meeuwse et al., 2010b), rotor diameter
androtorstator distance (Meeuwse et al., 2009), andfeedloca-
tion of the gas phase (Meeuwse et al., 2009). When the gas
phase is fed through an inlet in the bottom stator located at
the rim of the rotor, the gas bubble is sheared off due to the
shear stress that is present in the cavity between the rotor and
the stator. The gas bubble diameter decreases with increasing
rotational disc speed typically below 110
3
mfor rotational
speeds above 1000RPM (Meeuwse et al., 2010b), as a result
gasliquid mass transfer rates are reported of 0.43m
3
L
m
3
R
s
1
at a gas ow rate of 7.310
6
ms
1
.
Typically the gas-hold up is below5%. The volumetric mass
transfer per unit volume of gas is 40 times higher than is
reported for a bubble column. A catalytic coating was applied
to the rotor (a
L
= 274 m
2
I
m
3
R
) in order to study the reac-
tion and liquidsolid mass transfer in series. The volumetric
liquidsolid mass transfer coefcient is one order of mag-
nitude higher compare to values reported for packed beds
(Meeuwse et al., 2010a). The volumetric mass transfer coef-
cient is increased by a factor 3 when the rotor radius is
increased from 0.066m to 0.135m whereas the energy input
increases by a factor 15 (Meeuwse et al., 2011). The preferred
method to scale-up this reactor without changing the volu-
metric throughput is therefore not to increase the diameter
but to increase the number of rotors-in-series (Meeuwse et al.,
2012).
The overall liquidliquid mass transfer rate in the spin-
ning disc was measured using an extraction system with
water as the continuous phase and n-heptane as the dis-
persed phase, in combination with benzoic acid as the solute
(Visscher et al., 2011). The liquidliquid mass transfer rate
equals 0.17m
3
org
m
3
R
s
1
at 300RPM, in this particular case
both phases have plug ow behavior in the reactor. This
value increases to 51.47m
3
org
m
3
R
s
1
at 1600RPM, in this case
1934 chemical engineering research and design 9 1 ( 2 0 1 3 ) 19231940
Fig. 13 Shockwave power reactor (Mancosky, 2013).
both liquids obey ideally mixed behavior. These mass trans-
fer rates are at least 25 times higher compared to those in
packed columns and at most 15 times higher compare to those
measured in state-of-the-art microchannels (Visscher et al.,
2012d). -Ray tomography measurements have shown the vol-
ume fraction of the dispersed phase is closely related to the
ratio of the dispersed phase volumetric owrate over the total
ow rate (Visscher et al., 2012b).
A patented prototype of rotorimpellerrotor spinning disc
equipment has been reported in literature which exploits
these high liquidliquid mass transfer rate with the aim to
intensify liquidliquid contacting equipment (van der Schaaf
et al., 2012; Visscher et al., 2012a). The height equivalent of a
theoretical stage in the extractor equals 1.410
2
m(Visscher
et al., 2013), which is a factor 10 higher when compared to
other rotating equipment applied for liquidliquid contacting.
2.6. Remaining reactor types
2.6.1. Shockwave power reactor
The shockwave power reactor was patented in 1993 (Griggs,
1993), and consists of a spinning rotor that is bafed such
that dead ended cavities are present at the rim of the rotor
Figs. 13 and 14. The rotation creates locally a low pressure
zone in the cavities which collapses under the emission of
an energy wave in the surrounding liquid, called the shock-
wave. As a result gasliquid mass transfer rates up to 5.2s
1
have been obtained (Mancosky, 2013), which is about 25 times
higher than in a mechanically agitated tank. The volumetric
ow rate may vary from 0.23m
3
h
1
to 1.14m
3
h
1
, with typ-
ical rotational speeds of the Shockwave power reactor range
up to 3600RPM. A challenge in the design of this reactor is the
lifetime of the rotor and the cavities. The combination of cavi-
tation with corrosive chemicals implies that the rotor needs to
be coated with an extraordinary material to resist such harsh
conditions.
Fig. 14 Schematic view of the rotor inside the shockwave
power reactor (Mancosky, 2013). Upon rotation of the rotor
(light gray) liquid is forced radially outwards, thereby
creating cavitation at the radial inner position of the
cavities inside the rotor.
Fig. 15 Dynamically rotating axis micro reactor.
Courtesy to Ogura et al. (2008).
2.6.2. RAPTOR
RAPTOR is an abbreviation of Racteur Agit Polyvalent
Transfert Optimis Rectiligne, or Reactor with Polyvalent
Rectilinear Stirred Reactor with Optimized Transfer (Bahroun
et al., 2010).
The technology is developed by the AET group and was pre-
sented in 2007, and is shown in Fig. 17 (Barillon et al., 2007).
The exact geometry of the reactor is only scarcely disclosed
in the literature (Bahroun et al., 2010). Rotational speeds of
the inner part do not exceed 1500RPM. The small reactor vol-
ume (smaller than 2.910
3
m
3
, Milly et al., 2008) allows for
the application of temperatures up to 300

C and an operat-
ing pressure of 250bar. The maximumowrate is 0.15m
3
h
1
,
witha residence time between15s and10min. The heat trans-
fer area per reactor volume equals 150m
2
m
3
whichis at least
30 times higher thanfor anindustrial scale stirredtank reactor
which is batch wise operated (5m
2
m
3
).
2.6.3. Dynamically rotating axis micro reactor
A unique combination of micro reactor technology and
mechanical agitation is used in the dynamically rotating
Fig. 16 The reactorblock of the Coore reactor. Ten
consecutive mixing chambers are interconnected. Once
ideally mixed ow behavior is achieved in each mixing
chamber, plug ow behavior is mimicked over the reactor
block.
Courtesy to Jones et al. (2012).
chemical engineering research and design 9 1 ( 2 0 1 3 ) 19231940 1935
Fig. 17 The experimental set-up of the RAPTOR. The
reactor exhibits high heat and mass transfer rates and can
handle ow rates with a maximumof 0.15m
3
h
1
.
Courtesy to Barillon et al. (2007).
axis micro reactor. This reactor consists of two cylinders of
which one is rotating. The inner cylinder has internal diame-
ter of 810
3
m and the spacing between the two cylinders
is 10010
6
m (Fig. 15, Ogura et al., 2008). The volumet-
ric ow rate is typically in the range of 8010
9
m
3
s
1
.
The rotation speed of the outer cylinder is limited to
3600RPM. Due to the high shear stress in the small radial
gap between the 10010
3
mlong cylinders, high mass trans-
fer rates are achieved for liquidliquid applications, as has
been demonstrated by generating emulsions of water and o-
chlorobenzene, and the nitration of naphthalene (Ogura et al.,
2013). Literature on this reactor type is too scarce to make a
valid estimation of its feasibility.
2.6.4. Coore agitated cell reactor
The coore agitated cell reactor (ACR) is commercially avail-
able since 2006 and consists of two separate parts: a reactor
block and a lateral moving plate (Jones et al., 2012). Each reac-
tor block consists of a channel that connects ten consecutive
interlinked reactor chambers. In each chamber a non-xed
mixing element is present (Fig. 16). Upon moving the plate,
the non-xed mixing element enhances the dispersion in
the reactor chambers. The moving plate causes the liquid
in each reactor chamber to behave as ideally mixed ow; as
a result plug ow behavior is mimicked in a single reactor
block.
The design of the non-xed mixing element opens up
the application for gasliquid contacting as well as slurry
handling. Catalysts can be loaded into the non-xed mixing
element. The reactor blockvolume may vary from2010
6
m
3
to 10010
6
m
3
, volumetric liquid ow rate equals up to
1010
3
m
3
s
1
. Adjustments can be made to allow for
counter-current liquidliquid extraction over 6 stages in a sin-
gle extractor block. Technically this reactor does not belong to
this review since it is shaken, not stirred. When the reactor is
mounted on the moving plate the unit has a small footprint;
accordingly the reactor is well applicable in laboratories and
in fume hoods.
The feasibility of various industrial applications have been
reported by the manufacturer, including but limited to the
Hoffman reaction, Suzuki reaction, polymerizations and Grig-
nard reactions. The greatest benet to conventional batch
reactors is the easy scalability of the reactor. A challenge for
further industrial implementation of this reactor will be the
prevention of fouling, for processes in which solids build-up
might occur.
2.6.5. Rotating cone reactor
The rotating cone reactor was developed at the University of
Twente. In this reactor a solid phase is fed to the bottominlet
of a rotating cone, fromwhere they travel spiral-wise upwards.
The inner diameter of the cone has amaximumof 0.650m. The
rotational speed of the cone is 900RPM. The reactor volume
may range from 2 to 200dm
3
. The combined feed rate of the
gas and solid phase equals 13kgh
1
. The rst industrial test
case for whichthis reactor is usedwas the pyrolysis of biomass
(Wagenaar et al., 1994). More recently the ow behavior was
presented (Leung et al., 2012), as well as the feasibility of the
rotating cone reactor for the epoxidation of soybean oil (Chen
et al., 2011).
2.6.6. Rotating membrane reactor
Rotating membranes nd their application in ultraltration
(Sarkar et al., 2009, 2012). A theoretical comparison of rotat-
ing and stationary membrane disc lters was published in
2000 (Serra and Wiesner, 2000). An in-depth review on this
matter was published by Jaffrin(2008). To obtainsufcient sur-
face area multidisc membrane units are mounted on a single
shaft.
Examples of equipment are the DMF (Pall Corp., USA), Dyno
(Bokela, Germany), Optilter (ABB Flootek, Finland) and the
SpinTek (Huntington, USA) (Jaffrin, 2008). The membrane area
per module may reach 150m
2
(Blse et al., 2006). Membrane
diameters are typically below1m. The power requiredfor rota-
tion is below 30kW(Jaffrin, 2008). The availability of ceramic
membranes will facilitate the future development of rotat-
ing membrane reactors, its application for the production of
galacto-oligosaccarides should an productivity increase by a
factor two (Sen et al., 2012).
3. Summary and outlook
This review-perspective paper describes the current state-of-
the-art in the eld of rotating reactors. An overview is given
of the development of rotating reactors over time. The paper
has a focus on rotating reactor technology with applications
in lab scale, pilot scale and industrial chemical reaction engi-
neering. Rotating reactors are classied according to their
geometry. The reactors are classied as stirred tanks, tubes,
discs and miscellaneous reactors. Their main advantages and
disadvantages are presented, including the typical operational
conditions (residence time, rotational speed, energyconsump-
tion). An overview is given in Table 1. The energy dissipation
mentioned in Table 1 represent the maximum energy con-
sumed by the motor(s) that propel the rotating element(s).
This is not equal to the energy that is dissipated locally in
the liquids. Where possible an accurate approximation of this
difference is given. However, for many reactors the energy
that is locally dissipated in the reactants is not well dened.
As an indication the power to volume ratio could be studied.
Fromsuch a ratio the Shockwave power reactor has high local
energy dissipation, whereas a large scale stirred tank has a
lowpower to volume ratio. Table 1 thus has the function of an
orientation on the maximum power that is consumed by the
reactors described.
In academia there is a tendency to develop multifunctional
modules suited for reactive extractions, one-pot synthesis,
and juke-box like functionalities where multiple separations
steps are combined in one compact mini-plant. The further
development of such equipment requires that large scale
1936 chemical engineering research and design 9 1 ( 2 0 1 3 ) 19231940
equipment manufacturers, end-product consumers, proto-
type experts, and reactor scientists collaborate together from
the start in research projects dealing with reactor develop-
ment.
A promising route to bridge the gap between lab-scale
reactor development and industrial implementation of new,
intensied reactors is the process of knowledge valorization.
One method to achieve such an industrial implementation is
the startup of spinoff companies (De Cleyn and Braet, 2009).
Examples of such spinoff companies are Transatomic Power
(molten-salt reactors), FLOWID (micro reactor technology),
SOWARLA (wastewater treatment), and SPINID (rotorstator
and rotorrotor spinning technology). The presence of
resource incubators at researchinstitutes and universities will
facilitate and speed up the development of such companies.
Introducing new reactor concepts in chemical engineering
is a lengthy process. Industry is reluctant to introduce novel
chemical reactor types in existing processes when replace-
ment is not essential, with the aimto minimize possible risks
to plant performance. The introduction thus depends mainly
on the development of new processes and new production
plants.
A strong argument for the introduction of novel reactor
types will come from the experience that is built up dur-
ing public-private research projects in which both academic
and industrial partners are collaborating. During suchprojects
detailed information of chemical resistance, heat- and mass
transfer performance, mechanical durability of rotating parts,
and energy consumption can be collected.
References
Agarwal, L., Pavani, V., et al., 2010. Process intensication in
HiGee absorption and distillation: design procedure and
applications. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 49 (20), 1004610058.
Aiba, S., 1958. Flowpatterns of liquids in agitated vessels. AlChE J.
4 (4), 485489.
Al-Rawashdeh, M., Yu, F., et al., 2012. Numbered-up gasliquid
micro/milli channels reactor with modular ow distributor.
Chem. Eng. J. 207208, 645655.
Albers, R.K.E., Houterman, M.J.J., et al., 1998. Novel monolithic
stirred reactor. AlChE J. 44 (11), 24592464.
Anderson, N.G., 2012. Using continuous processes to increase
production. Org. Process Res. Dev. 16 (5), 852869.
Aoune, A., Ramshaw, C., 1999. Process intensication: heat and
mass transfer characteristics of liquid lms on rotating discs.
Int. J. Heat Mass Trans. 42 (14), 25432556.
Arbiter, N., Harris, C.C., 1962. Chapter 14: Flotation machines. In:
Fuerstenau, D.W. (Ed.), Froth Flotation. AIME, New York, pp.
347364.
Ascanio, G., Castro, B., et al., 2004. Measurement of power
consumption in stirred vessels a review. Chem. Eng. Res.
Des. 82 (9), 12821290.
Ashcraft, R.W., Heynderickx, G.J., et al., 2012. Modeling fast
biomass pyrolysis in a gassolid vortex reactor. Chem. Eng. J.
207208, 195208.
Ashcraft, R.W., Kovacevic, J., et al., 2013. Assessment of a
gassolid vortex reactor for SO
2
/NO
x
adsorption fromFlue
Gas. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 52 (2), 861875.
Assirelli, M., Bujalski, W., et al., 2002. Study of micromixing in a
stirred tank using a rushton turbine: comparison of feed
positions and other mixing devices. Chem. Eng. Res. Des. 80
(8), 855863.
Bahroun, S., Li, S., et al., 2010. Control and optimization of a
three-phase catalytic slurry intensied continuous chemical
reactor. J. Process Control 20 (5), 664675.
Baldyga, J., Pohorecki, R., 1995. Turbulent micromixing in
chemical reactors a review. Chem. Eng. J. Biochem. Eng. J. 58
(2), 183195.
Barillon, O., De Panthou, F., Marie, S., Trani, A., Falk, L., Jenck, J.,
2007. 1st European Process Intensifcation Conference ,
19-9-2007, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Bawadi, Abdullah, et al., 2011. Chapter Synthetic Liquids
Production and Rening. American Chemical Society.
Bennett, C.J., Kolaczkowski, S.T., et al., 1991. Determination of
heterogeneous reaction kinetics and reaction rates under
mass transfer controlled conditions for a monolith reactor.
Trans. Ins. Chem. Eng. B69 (4), 209220.
Berty, J.M., 1974. Reactor for vapor-phase catalytic studies. Chem.
Eng. Prog. 70 (5), 78.
Blse, D., Feuerpeil, H.P., Olapinski, H., 2006. EP1299177 B1,
Rotating lter. Date of patent: 8/11/2006.
Boodhoo, K.V.K., 2012. In: Boodhoo, K.V.K., Harvey, A. (Eds.),
Process Intensication Technologies for Green Chemistry:
Engineering Solutions for Sustainable Chemical Processing.
Wiley, ChiChester, UK (Chapter 3).
Boodhoo, K.V.K., Al-Hengari, S.R., 2012. Micromixing
characteristics in a small-scale spinning disk reactor. Chem.
Eng. Tech. 35 (7), 12291237.
Boodhoo, K.V.K., Jachuck, R.J., 2000. Process intensication:
spinning disk reactor for styrene polymerisation. App. Therm.
Eng. 20 (12), 11271146.
Boodhoo, K.V.K., Cartwright, C.D., et al., 2010. Development of a
HIGEE bioreactor (HBR) for production of
polyhydroxyalkanoate: hydrodynamics, gasliquid mass
transfer and fermentation studies. CEP:PI 49 (7), 748758.
Bourne, J.R., Studer, M., 1992. Fast reactions in rotorstator mixers
of different size. CEP:PI 31 (5), 285296.
Buhtz, E., US1629200. Method of and apparatus for carrying out
chemical reactions or physical processes. Date of patent:
17/5/1927.
Burns, J.R., Jachuck, R.J.J., 2005. Determination of liquidsolid
mass transfer coefcients for a spinning disc reactor using a
limiting current technique. Int. J. Heat Mass Trans. 48 (12),
25402547.
Burns, J.R., Ramshaw, C., 1996. Process intensication: visual
study of liquid maldistribution in rotating packed beds. Chem.
Eng. Sci. 51 (8), 13471352.
Burns, J.R., Ramshaw, C., et al., 2003. Measurement of liquid lm
thickness and the determination of spin-up radius on a
rotating disc using an electrical resistance technique. Chem.
Eng. Sci. 58 (11), 22452253.
Carberry, J.J., 1964. Desiging laboratory catalytic reactors. Ind.
Eng. Chem. 56 (11), 3946.
Chandra, A., Goswami, P.S., et al., 2005. Characteristics of ow in
a rotating packed bed (HIGEE) with split packing. Ind. Eng.
Chem. Res. 44 (11), 40514060.
Charpentier, J.C., McKenna, T.F., 2004. Managing complex
systems: some trends for the future of chemical and process
engineering. Chem. Eng. Sci. 59 (89), 16171640.
Chaudhari, R.V., Mills, P.L., 2011. Multiphase catalysis and
reaction engineering for emerging pharmaceutical processes.
Chem. Eng. Sci. 59 (2223), 53375344.
Chen, J., Jiang, J., et al., 2011. Catalytic cracking of soybean oil for
production of renewable fuel using rotating cone reactor.
Taiyangneng Xuebao/Acta Energiae Solaris Sinica 32 (3),
354357.
Chen, Y.M., 1987. Fundamentals of a centrifugal uidized bed.
AlChE J. 33 (5), 722728.
Chen, Z., Xiong, S., et al., 1995. Helical rotating absorber. J. Chem.
Ind. Eng. 46, 388392.
Cho, B.K., Carr, J., et al., 1980a. A continuous chromatographic
reactor. Chem. Eng. Sci. 35 (12), 7481.
Cho, B.K., Carr, R.W., et al., 1980b. A new continuous ow reactor
for simultaneous reaction and separation. Sep. Sci. Technol.
15 (3), 679696.
Chu, G.W., Song, Y.H., et al., 2007. Micromixing efciency
of a novel rotorstator reactor. Chem. Eng. J. 128 (23),
191196.
chemical engineering research and design 9 1 ( 2 0 1 3 ) 19231940 1937
Cohen, S., Marom, D.M., 1983. Experimental and theoretical study
of a rotating annular ow reactor. Chem. Eng. J. 27 (2), 8797.
Coltrin, M.E., Kee, R.J., et al., 1989. A mathematical model of the
uid mechanics and gas-phase chemistry in a rotating disk
chemical vapor deposition reactor. J. Electrochem. Soc. 136 (3),
819829.
Cowen, G., Morton-Berry, P., Steel, M.L., US4311570. Chemical
process on the surface of a rotating body. Date of patent:
19/1/1982.
Cybulski, A., Moulijn, J., 2005. Structured catalysts and reactors,
2nd ed. Taylor & Francis, Boca Raton, FL.
Dahl, J.A., Maddux, B.L.S., et al., 2007. Toward greener
nanosynthesis. Chem. Rev. 107 (6), 22282269.
de Broqueville, A., De Wilde, J., 2009. Numerical
investigation of gassolid heat transfer in rotating
uidized beds in a static geometry. Chem. Eng. Sci. 64 (6),
12321248.
de Caprariis, B., Di Rita, M., et al., 2012. Reactionprecipitation
by a spinning disc reactor: inuence of hydrodynamics on
nanoparticles production. Chem. Eng. Sci. 76, 7380.
De Cleyn, S.H., Braet, J., 2009. Research valorisation through
spin-off ventures: integration of existing concepts and
typologies, World Review of Entrepreneurship. Manage. Sust.
Develop. 5 (4), 325352.
De Lathouder, K.M., Bakker, J.J.W., et al., 2006. Structured reactors
for enzyme immobilization: a monolithic stirrer reactor for
application in organic media. Chem. Eng. Res. Des. 84 (5),
390398.
De Wilde, J., de Broqueville, A., 2007. Rotating uidized beds in a
static geometry: experimental proof of concept. AlChE J. 53 (4),
793810.
De Wilde, J., de Broqueville, A., 2008a. Experimental investigation
of a rotating uidized bed in a static geometry. Powder
Technol. 183 (3), 426435.
De Wilde, J., de Broqueville, A., 2008b. Experimental study of
uidization of 1G-Geldart D-type particles in a rotating
uidized bed with a rotating chimney. AlChE J. 54 (8),
20292044.
Deen, N.G., van Sint Annaland, M., et al., 2004. Multi-scale
modeling of dispersed gasliquid two-phase ow. Chem. Eng.
Sci. 59 (89), 18531861.
Doraiswamy, L.K., Tajbl, D.G., 1974. Laboratory catalytic reactors.
Cat. Rev. 10 (1), 177219.
Dudukovic , M.P., Larachi, F., et al., 2002. Multiphase catalytic
reactors: a perspective on current knowledge and future
trends. Cat. Rev. 44 (1), 123246.
Foust, H.C., Mack, D.E., et al., 1944. Gasliquid contacting by
mixers. Ind. Eng. Chem. 36 (6), 517522.
Froment, G.F., DeWilde, J., Bischoff, K., 2011. Chemical Reactor
Anaylysis and Design, 3rd ed. Wiley, Hoboken, NJ, USA.
Gonzalez, M.A., Ciszewski, J.T., 2008. High conversion, solvent
free, continuous synthesis of imidazoliumionic liquids in
spinning tube-in-tube reactors. Org. Process Res. Dev. 13 (1),
6466.
Griggs, J.L., US5188090. Apparatus for heating uids. Date of
patent: 23/2/1993.
Hampton, P.D., Whealon, M.D., et al., 2008. Continuous organic
synthesis in a spinning tube-in-tube Reactor:
TEMPO-catalyzed oxidation of alcohols by hypochlorite. Org.
Process Res. Dev. 12 (5), 946949.
Harish Kumar, S., Murthy, D.V.R., 2010. Minimumsupercial uid
velocity in a gassolid swirled uidized bed. CEP:PI 49 (10),
10951100.
Harmand, S., Pelle, J., et al., 2013. Review of uid ow and
convective heat transfer within rotating disk cavities with
impinging jet. Int. J. Therm. Sci. 67, 130.
Harvey, A.P., Mackley, M.R., et al., 2001. Operation and
optimization of an oscillatory ow continuous reactor. Ind.
Eng. Chem. Res. 40 (23), 53715377.
Hemrajani, R.R., Tatterson, G.B., 2004. In: Paul, E.L.,
Atiemo-Obeng, V.A., Kresta, S.M. (Eds.), Handbook of
Industrial Mixing Science and Practice. John Wiley & Sons,
Hoboken, NJ (Chapter 6).
Hessel, V., 2009. Novel process windows gate to maximizing
process intensication via ow chemistry. Chem. Eng. Tech.
32 (11), 16551681.
Hessel, V., Renken, A., Schouten, J.C., Yoshida, J., 2009. Micro
Process Engineering: A Comprehensive Handbook. Wiley,
Weinheim, Germany.
Hill, D.F., Sharp, K.V., et al., 2000. Stereoscopic particle image
velocimetry measurements of the ow around a Rushton
turbine. Exp. Fluids 29 (5), 478485.
Hoek, I., 2004a. Towards the Catalytic Application of a Monolithic
Stirrer Reactor. TU, Delft, The Netherlands (Chapter 2)
(PhD-Thesis).
Hoek, I., 2004b. Towards the Catalytic Application of a Monolithic
Stirrer Reactor. TU, Delft, The Netherlands (Chapter 3)
(PhD-Thesis).
Hoek, I., Nijhuis, T.A., et al., 2004. Performance of the monolithic
stirrer reactor: applicability in multi-phase processes. Chem.
Eng. Sci. 59 (2223), 49754981.
Holl, R., US7780927. Spinning tube in tube reactors and their
methods of operation. Date of patent: 24/8/2010.
Jachuck, R.J., Lee, J., et al., 1997. Process intensication for energy
saving. Appl. Therm. Eng. 17 (810), 861867.
Jacobsen, N.C., Hinrichsen, O., 2012. Micromixing efciency of a
spinning disk reactor. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 51 (36),
1164311652.
Jaffrin, M.Y., 2008. Dynamic shear-enhanced membrane ltration:
a review of rotating disks, rotating membranes and vibrating
systems. J. Membr. Sci. 324 (12), 725.
Ji, J.B., Xu, Z.C., Yu, Y.L., 7,344,126. Equipment of multi-rotor
zigzag high-gravity rotating beds. Date of patent: 18/3/2008.
Jian, Q., Deng, X., et al., 1998. Experimental study of gas ow
resistance and gasliquid mass-transfer performance in
supergravity rotating packed bed with wavy disk packing.
Huaxue Fanying Gongcheng Yu Gongyi 14 (1), 4248.
Jiang, T., Zhang, H., et al., 2012. Fouling characteristics of a novel
rotating tubular membrane bioreactor. CEP:PI 62, 3946.
Jiao, W., Liu, Y., et al., 2012. Micromixing efciency of viscous
media in novel impinging stream-rotating packed bed reactor.
Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 51 (20), 71137118.
Jones, E., McClean, K., et al., 2012. Biocatalytic oxidase: batch to
continuous. Chem. Eng. Res. Des. 90 (6), 726731.
Joshi, J.B., Pandit, A.B., et al., 1982. Mechanically agitated
gasliquid reactors. Chem. Eng. Sci. 37 (6), 813844.
Kapteijn, F., Moulijn, J.A., 2008. Laboratory catalytic reactors:
Aspects of catalyst testing. In: Chapter Handbook of
Heterogeneous Catalysis. Wiley, River Street Hoboken, ISBN
9783527610044.
Kashid, M.N., Gupta, A., et al., 2010. Numbering-up and mass
transfer studies of liquidliquid two-phase microstructured
reactors. Chem. Eng. J. 158 (2), 233240.
Kenyvani, M., Gardner, N.C., 1989. Operating characteristics of
rotating beds. Chem. Eng. Prog. 85, 4452.
Krishna, R., Sie, S.T., 1994. Strategies for multiphase reactor
selection. Chem. Eng. Sci. 49(24 Part A), 40294065.
Kroger, D.G., et al., 1980. In: Grace, J.R., Matsen, J.M. (Eds.),
Fluidization. Springer, US (Chapter).
Kumaresan, T., Joshi, J.B., 2006. Effect of impeller design on the
ow pattern and mixing in stirred tanks. Chem. Eng. J. 115 (3),
173193.
Laufhtte, H.D., Mersmann, A., 1987. Local energy dissipation in
agitated turbulent uids and its signicance for the design of
stirring equipment. Chem. Eng. Tech. 10 (1), 5663.
Lawrence, J.R., Swerhone, G.D.W., et al., 2000. A simple rotating
annular reactor for replicated biolmstudies. J. Microbiol.
Methods 42 (3), 215224.
Leon, M.A., Geers, P., et al., 2012a. Effect of foamstirrer design on
the catalytic performance of rotating foamstirrer reactors.
Chem. Eng. J. 207208, 209217.
Leon, M.A., Maas, R.J., et al., 2013. Hydrodynamics and gasliquid
mass transfer in a horizontal rotating foamstirrer reactor.
Chem. Eng. J. 217, 1021.
Leon, M.A., Nijhuis, T.A., et al., 2012b. Mass transfer modeling of a
consecutive reaction in rotating foamstirrer reactors:
1938 chemical engineering research and design 9 1 ( 2 0 1 3 ) 19231940
selective hydrogenation of a functionalized alkyne. Chem.
Eng. Sci. 73, 412420.
Lerou, J.J., Ng, K.M., 1996. Chemical reaction engineering: a
multiscale approach to a multiobjective task. Chem. Eng. Sci.
51 (10), 15951614.
Leung, W.W.F., Li, K., Yang, C., et al., 2012. A high-efcient
rotating disk photoelectrocatalytic (PEC) reactor with macro
light harvesting pyramid-surface electrode. AlChE J. 58 (8),
24482455.
Li, Y., Ji, J., et al., 2013. Pressure drop model on rotating zigzag bed
as a new HIGEE. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res..
Li, Y., YuLi, Y., et al., 2012. Rotating zigzag bed as trayed HIGEE and
its power consumption. Asia-Pac. J. Chem. Eng. 8 (4), 494506.
Liu, H.S., Wang, Y.H., et al., 2012. Characterization of AgI
nanoparticles synthesized in a spinning disk reactor. Chem.
Eng. J. 183, 466472.
Lodha, H., Jachuck, R.J.J. AIChE Annual Meeting, Advances in
Process Intensication II, 4-11-2007. Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
Lodha, H., Jachuck, R., et al., 2012. Intensied biodiesel
production using a rotating tube reactor. Energy Fuels 26 (11),
70377040.
Lu, W.M., Wu, H.Z., et al., 1997. Effects of bafe design on the
liquid mixing in an aerated stirred tank with standard
Rushton turbine impellers. Chem. Eng. Sci. 52 (2122),
38433851.
Machado, M.B., Nunhez, J.R., et al., 2012. Impeller characterization
and selection: balancing efcient hydrodynamics with
process mixing requirements. AlChE J. 58 (8), 25732588.
Mahoney, J.A., 1974. The use of a gradientless reactor in
petroleumreaction engineering studies. J. Catal. 32 (2),
247253.
Mancosky, D.G., 2013. The ShockWave Power Technology.
Commercial Brochure, Rome, GA.
Mavros, P., 2001. Flow visualization in stirred vessels: a review
of experimental techniques. Chem. Eng. Res. Des. 79 (2),
113127.
Meeuwse, M., Lempers, S., et al., 2010a. Liquidsolid mass
transfer and reaction in a rotorstator spinning disc reactor.
Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 49 (21), 1075110757.
Meeuwse, M., Hamming, E., et al., 2011. Effect of rotorstator
distance and rotor radius on the rate of gasliquid mass
transfer in a rotorstator spinning disc reactor. CEP:PI 50 (10),
10951107.
Meeuwse, M., van der Schaaf, J., et al., 2010b. Gasliquid mass
transfer in a rotorstator spinning disc reactor. Chem. Eng.
Sci. 65 (1), 466471.
Meeuwse, M., van der Schaaf, J., et al., 2009. Mass transfer in a
rotorstator spinning disk reactor with cofeeding of gas and
liquid. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 49 (4), 16051610.
Meeuwse, M., van der Schaaf, J., et al., 2012. Multistage
rotorstator spinning disc reactor. AlChE J. 58 (1), 247255.
Meijer, H.E.H., Singh, M.K., et al., 2012. On the performance of
static mixers: a quantitative comparison. Prog. Polym. Sci. 37
(10), 13331349.
Milly, P.J., Toledo, R.T., et al., 2008. Hydrodynamic cavitation:
characterization of a novel design with energy considerations
for the inactivation of saccharomyces cerevisiae in apple
juice. J. Food Sci. 73 (6), M298M303.
Mohammadi, S., Boodhoo, K., 2012. Online conductivity
measurement of residence time distribution of thin lmow
in the spinning disc reactor. Chem. Eng. J. 207208, 885894.
Mondt, E., Kemenade, H. P. van, Brouwers, J.J.H., Bramer, E.A.,
2004. 3rd International Symposiumon Two Phase Flow
Modelling and Experimentation , Pisa, Italy.
Mukherjee, B., Wrenn, B.A., 2009. Inuence of dynamic mixing
energy on dispersant performance: role of mixing systems.
Environ. Eng. Sci. 26 (12), 17251737.
Ng, C.M., Chen, P.C., et al., 2012. Green high-gravitational
synthesis of silver nanoparticles using a rotating packed bed
reactor (RPBR). Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 51 (15), 53755381.
Ogihara, T., Matsuda, G., et al., 1995. Continuous synthesis of
monodispersed silica particles using CouetteTaylor vortex
ow. J. Ceram. Soc. Jpn. 103 (1194), 151154.
Ogura, T., Ohta, T., Takahashi, Y., Mae, K., 2013. World Conference
of Chemical Engineering 8 , 23-8-2009, Montreal, Quebec,
Canada.
Ogura, T., Ohta, T., Takahashi, Y., Mae, K., 2008. AIChE Spring
Meeting & IMRET-10, 2008 , New Orleans, Louisiana, USA.
Ordomsky, V.V., Schouten, J.C., et al., 2012a. Foamsupported
sulfonated polystyrene as a new acidic material for catalytic
reactions. Chem. Eng. J. 207208, 218225.
Ordomsky, V.V., Schouten, J.C., et al., 2012b. Zirconiumphosphate
coating on aluminumfoams by electrophoretic deposition for
acidic catalysis. ChemCatChem4 (1), 129133.
Oxley, P., Brechtelsbauer, C., et al., 2000. Evaluation of spinning
disk reactor technology for the manufacture of
pharmaceuticals. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 39 (7),
21752182.
Pan, Z.Q., Zhang, Y.J., et al., 2006. Experimental investigation into
mass transfer between liquid and gas in multi-staged
spraying rotating packed bed. J. South China Univ. Technol. 34
(3), 6771.
Pask, S.D., Nuyken, O., et al., 2012. The spinning disk reactor: an
example of a process intensication technology for polymers
and particles. Polym. Chem. 3 (10), 26982707.
Patwardhan, A.W., Joshi, J.B., 1998. Design of gas-inducing
reactors. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 38 (1), 4980.
Pavko, A., Misic, D.M., et al., 1981. Kinetics in three-phase
reactors. Chem. Eng. J. 21 (2), 149154.
Peev, G., Nikolova, A., et al., 2007a. Solid dissolution in a thin
liquid lmon a horizontal rotating disk. Heat Mass Transfer
43 (4), 397403.
Peev, G., Peshev, D., et al., 2007b. Gas absorption in a thin liquid
lm ow on a horizontal rotating disk. Heat Mass Transfer 43
(8), 843848.
Pilo, C.W., US2941872. Apparatus for intimate contacting of two
uids. Date of patent: 21/6/1960.
Pliny the Elder, 1929. Naturalis Historia: The Elder Plinys
chapters on chemical subjects, Translated by Bailey, K.C.
Arnold, London, UK.
Pudjiono, P.I., Tavare, N.S., 1993. Residence time distribution
analysis froma continuous couette ow device around critical
Taylor number. Can. J. Chem. Eng. 71 (2), 312318.
Qi, G.S., Liu, Y.Z., et al., 2008. Experimental research on extraction
of acetic acid fromdilute solution by chemical complexation
impinging stream-rotating packed bed. Xiandai
Huagong/Modern Chemical Industry 28 (11), 6567.
Ramshaw, C., 1983. HIGEE distillation an example of process
intensication. Chem. Eng. 389, 1314.
Ramshaw, C., Mallinson, R.H. US4283255. Mass transfer process.
Date of patent: 11/8/1981.
Rao, D.P., Bhowal, A., et al., 2004. Process intensication in
rotating packed beds (HIGEE): an appraisal. Ind. Eng. Chem.
Res. 43 (4), 11501162.
Reay, D., Ramshaw, C., Harvey, A., 2008. Process Intensication,
Engineering for Efciency, Sustainability and Flexibility.
Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford.
Reddy, K.J., Gupta, A., et al., 2006. Process intensication in a
HIGEE with split packing. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 45 (12),
42704277.
Richter, O., Hoffmann, H., et al., 2008. Effect of the rotor shape on
the mixing characteristics of a continuous ow Taylor-vortex
reactor. Chem. Eng. Sci. 63 (13), 35043513.
Rivero, E.P., Granados, P., et al., 2010. Mass transfer modeling and
simulation at a rotating cylinder electrode (RCE) reactor under
turbulent ow for copper recovery. Chem. Eng. Sci. 65 (10),
30423049.
Rooze, J., Rebrov, E.V., et al., 2013. Dissolved gas and ultrasonic
cavitation a review. Ultrason. Sonochem. 20 (1), 111.
Rosales Trujillo, W., De Wilde, J., 2012. Fluid catalytic cracking in a
rotating uidized bed in a static geometry: a CFD analysis
accounting for the distribution of the catalyst coke content.
Powder Technol. 221, 3646.
Rousseaux, J.M., Muhr, H., et al., 2001. Mixing and micromixing
times in the forced vortex region of unbafed mixing devices.
Can. J. Chem. Eng. 79 (5), 697707.
chemical engineering research and design 9 1 ( 2 0 1 3 ) 19231940 1939
Rushton, J.H., Costich, E.W., et al., 1950a. Power characteristics of
mixing impellers, Part 1. Chem. Eng. Progr., Part III 46 (8),
395404.
Rushton, J.H., Costich, E.W., et al., 1950b. Power characteristics of
mixing impellers. Part 2. Chem. Eng. Progr., Part III 46 (9),
467476.
Saravanan, K., Mundale, V.D., et al., 1994. Gas inducing type
mechanically agitated contactors. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 33 (9),
22262241.
Sarkar, A., Moulik, S., et al., 2012. Performance characterization
and CFD analysis of a novel shear enhanced membrane
module in ultraltration of Bovine SerumAlbumin (BSA).
Desalination 292, 5363.
Sarkar, P., Ghosh, S., et al., 2009. Effect of different operating
parameters on the recovery of proteins fromcasein whey
using a rotating disc membrane ultraltration cell.
Desalination 249 (1), 511.
Sarmidi, M.R., Barker, P.E., 1993a. Saccharication of modied
starch to maltose in a continuous rotating annular
chromatograph (CRAC). J. Chem. Tech. Bio. 57 (3), 229235.
Sarmidi, M.R., Barker, P.E., 1993b. Simultaneous biochemical
reaction and separation in a rotating annular chromatograph.
Chem. Eng. Sci. 48 (14), 26152623.
Schuur, B., Kraai, G.N., et al., 2012. Hydrodynamic features of
centrifugal contactor separators: experimental studies on
liquid hold-up, residence time distribution, phase behavior
and drop size distributions. CEP:PI 55, 819.
Sen, D., Sarkar, A., et al., 2012. Batch hydrolysis and rotating disk
membrane bioreactor for the production of
galacto-oligosaccharides: a comparative study. Ind. Eng.
Chem. Res. 51 (32), 1067110681.
Serra, C.A., Wiesner, M.R., 2000. A comparison of rotating and
stationary membrane disk lters using computational uid
dynamics. J. Membr. Sci. 165 (1), 1929.
Sisoev, G.M., Matar, O.K., et al., 2006. The ow of thin liquid lms
over spinning discs. Can. J. Chem. Eng. 84 (6), 625642.
Sthl Wernersson, E., Trgrdh, C., 1999. Scale-up of Rushton
turbine-agitated tanks. Chem. Eng. Sci. 54 (19),
42454256.
Stankiewicz, A.I., Moulijn, J.A., 2000. Process intensication:
transforming chemical engineering. Chem. Eng. Prog. 96 (1),
2233.
Stankiewicz, A., 2003. Reactive separations for process
intensication: an industrial perspective. CEP:PI 42 (3),
137144.
Stemmet, C.P., Jongmans, J.N., et al., 2005. Hydrodynamics of
gasliquid counter-current ow in solid foampackings. Chem.
Eng. Sci. 60 (22), 64226429.
Stemmet, C.P., van der Schaaf, J., et al., 2006. Solid foampackings
for multiphase reactors: modelling of liquid holdup and mass
transfer. Chem. Eng. Res. Des. 84 (12), 11341141.
Stitt, E.H., 2002. Alternative multiphase reactors for ne
chemicals: a world beyond stirred tanks? Chem. Eng. J. 90
(12), 4760.
Strhlein, et al., 2007. Chapter 6: Simulated Moving-Bed
Reactors. In: Sundmacher, K., Kienle, A., Seidel-Morgenstern,
A. (Eds.), Integrated Chemical Processes. Wiley, River Street
Hoboken.
Tai, C.Y., Tai, C.T., et al., 2007. Synthesis of magnesiumhydroxide
and oxide nanoparticles using a spinning disk reactor. Ind.
Eng. Chem. Res. 46 (17), 55365541.
Trambouze, P., Euzen, J.P., 2002a. Chemical Reactors, FromDesign
to Operation. Institute Franc ais du ptrole Publications, Paris,
France (Chapter 4).
Trambouze, P., Euzen, J.-P., 2002b. Chemical Reactors, Technip.
Insititut Franc ais du ptrole publications, Paris, France.
Tschentscher, R., Nijhuis, T.A., et al., 2010a. Gasliquid mass
transfer in rotating solid foamreactors. Chem. Eng. Sci. 65 (1),
472479.
Tschentscher, R., Spijkers, R.J.P., et al., 2010b. Liquidsolid mass
transfer in agitated slurry reactors and rotating solid foam
reactors. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 49 (21), 1075810766.
Tschentscher, R., Schubert, M., et al., 2012. Gas holdup of rotating
foamreactors measured by tomography effect of solid foam
pore size and liquid viscosity. AlChE J.,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/aic.13787.
Uretschlger, A., Jungbauer, A., 2002. Preparative continuous
annular chromatography (P-CAC), a review. Bioproc. Biosys.
Eng. 25 (2), 129140.
van der Schaaf, J., Schouten, J.C., 2011. High-gravity and
high-shear gasliquid contactors for the chemical process
industry. Curr. Opin. Chem. Eng. 1 (1), 8488.
van der Schaaf, J., Visscher, F., Bindraban, D., Schouten, J.C.
WO/2012/150226 A1. Device for multi phase and single phase
contacting. Date of patent: 30/4/2012.
van Eeten, K.M.P., van der Schaaf, J., et al., 2012. Boundary layer
development in the ow eld between a rotating and a
stationary disk. Phys. Fluids 24 (3), 033601033618.
Vedantam, S., Joshi, J.B., 2006. Annular centrifugal contactors a
review. Chem. Eng. Res. Des. 84 (7), 522542.
Vedantam, S., Joshi, J.B., et al., 2006. Three-dimensional CFD
simulation of stratied two-uid TaylorCouette ow. Can. J.
Chem. Eng. 84 (3), 279288.
Villermaux, J., 1988. The role of energy dissipation in contacting
and mixing devices. Chem. Eng. Tech. 11 (1), 276287.
Visscher, F., Nijhuis, R.T.R., et al., 2012a. Liquidliquid ow in an
impellerstator spinning disc reactor. CEP:PI,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cep.2013.01.015.
Visscher, F., Saffarionpour, S., et al., 2013. Counter-current
liquid-liquid contacting in an spinning disc reactor
(Unpublished Work).
Visscher, F., Bieberle, A., et al., 2012b. Water and n-heptane
volume fractions in a rotorstator spinning disc reactor. Ind.
Eng. Chem. Res. 51 (51), 1667016676.
Visscher, F., de Hullu, J., et al., 2012c. Residence time distribution
in a single phase rotorstator spinning disc reactor. AlChE J. 59
(7), 26862693.
Visscher, F., Gaakeer, W.A., et al., 2011. Liquidliquid extraction
systems of benzoic acid in water and heptane,
methylbenzene, or trichloroethylene as cosolvent. J. Chem.
Eng. Data 56 (9), 36303636.
Visscher, F., van der Schaaf, J., et al., 2012d. Liquidliquid mass
transfer in a rotorstator spinning disc reactor. Chem. Eng. J.
185186, 267273.
Wagenaar, B.M., Prins, W., et al., 1994. Pyrolysis of biomass in the
rotating cone reactor: modelling and experimental
justication. Chem. Eng. Sci. 49(24 Part 2), 51095126.
Wang, G.Q., Xu, Z.C., et al., 2011. Progress on Higee distillation
introduction to a new device and its industrial applications.
Chem. Eng. Res. Des. 89 (8), 14341442.
Wang, G.Q., Xu, Z.C., et al., 2008. Performance of a rotating zigzag
bed a new HIGEE. CEP:PI 47 (12), 21312139.
Weekman, V.W., 1974. Laboratory reactors and their limitations.
AlChE J. 20 (5), 833840.
Wenmakers, P.W.A.M., van der Schaaf, J., et al., 2008. Hairy
Foam: carbon nanobers grown on solid carbon foam. A fully
accessible, high surface area, graphitic catalyst support. J.
Mater. Chem. 18 (21), 24262436.
Wenmakers, P.W.A.M., van der Schaaf, J., et al., 2010. Comparative
modeling study on the performance of solid foamas a
structured catalyst support in multiphase reactors. Ind. Eng.
Chem. Res. 49 (11), 53535366.
Wood, R.M., Watts, B.E., 1973. The ow, heat and mass transfer
characteristics of liquid lms on rotating discs. ChemEng.
Res. Des. 51 (a), 315322.
Wu, H., Patterson, G.K., et al., 1989. Distribution of turbulence
energy dissipation rates in a Rushton turbine stirred mixer.
Exp. Fluids 8 (34), 153160.
Yang, H.J., Chu, G.W., et al., 2005. Micromixing efciency in a
rotating packed bed: experiments and simulation. Ind. Eng.
Chem. Res. 44 (20), 77307737.
Zhang, D., Zhang, P.Y., et al., 2010. Application of HIGEE process
intensication technology in synthesis of petroleumsulfonate
surfactant. CEP:PI 49 (5), 508513.
1940 chemical engineering research and design 9 1 ( 2 0 1 3 ) 19231940
Zhao, H., Shao, L., et al., 2010. High-gravity process intensication
technology and application. Chem. Eng. J. 156 (3), 588593.
Zhevalkink, J.A., Kelderman, P., et al., 1978. Liquid lmthickness
in a rotating disc gasliquid contactor. Water Res. 12 (8),
577581.
Zieverink, M.M.P., Kreutzer, M.T., et al., 2006. Gasliquid mass
transfer in benchscale stirred tanks uid properties and
critical impeller speed for gas induction. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res.
45 (13), 45744581.