Gas Holdup and Overall Volumetric Mass Transfer Coefficient

in a Modified Reversed Flow Jet Loop Reactor

K. YAGNA PRASAD and T. K. RAMANUJAMS
Department of Chemical Engineering, Indian Instiiute of Technology, Madras-600 036, India
Experiments were conducted in a modified reversed flow jet loop reactor having the liquid outlet at the top of the
reactor to determine the gas holdup and overall volumetric mass transfer coefficient in the air-water system. The influence
of gas and liquid flow rates, and the draft tube to reactor diameter ratio were studied. It was observed that both gas
holdup and volumetric mass transfer coefficient increased with increased gas and liquid flow rates and were found to
be significantly higher in the modified reactor compared to the conventional one. The optimum draft tube to reactor
diameter ratio was found to be in the range of 0.4 to 0.5. Empirical correlations are presented to predict gas holdup
and overall volumetric mass transfer coefficient in terms of operational and geometrical variables.

Des exp6riences ont Ctt men& dans un rtacteur h boucle h jet d’tcoulement renversC modifit, dans lequel la sortie
liquide est situk au sommet du rtacteur, afin de determiner la rttention de gaz et le coefficient de transfert de matitre
volumttrique global dans le systtme air-eau. L’influence des dtbits liquides et gazeux et le rapport entre le tube d’aspi-
ration et le diamttre du reacteur ont Cgalement Ctt ttudits. On a observt que la rttention de gaz et le coefficient de
transfert de matitre volumttrique augmentaient avec I’augmentation des dtbits liquides et gazeux et que, par ailleurs,
ils ttaient considtrablement plus tlevts dans le rtacteur modifit que dans le rtacteur conventionnel. On a trouvt que
le rapport optimal entre le tube d’aspiration et le diamttre du rtacteur se situait dans la gamme de 0,4 h 0,s.Des corrt-
lations empiriques sont prtsenttes pour praire la rttention de gaz et le coefficient de transfen de matitre volumttrique
global en termes de variables gtomttriques et de fonctionnement.
Keywords: reversed flow, jet loop reactor, gas holdup, volumetric mass transfer coefficient.

L oop reactors are extensively being used in fermentation

and wastewater treatment processes because of their
advantages such as simple construction and operation,
low investment and operational costs, definitely directed
circulation flow, very fine gas dispersion, high mixing and
mass transfer performance and relatively lower power
requirements.
In jet loop reactors (JLR), the liquid circulation and fine
gas dispersion are achieved with hydrodynamic jet flow
drive. The previous investigations (Blenke, 1979; Warnecke
et al., 1988; Tebel and Zehner, 1989) on these reactors were
carried out with a concentric draft tube and a two-fluid nozzle
at the bottom of the reactor. This type of arrangement has
a disadvantage when the reactor is used as a slurry reactor,
due to the blockage of the nozzle, and in processes involving
sparingly soluble gases such as oxygen in biological
wastewater treatment, due to the lower residence time of
gaseous phase (Kulkami et al., 1983; Wachsmann et al.,
1985).
An improved design of JLR (Wachsmann et al., 1985;
Padmavathi and Remananda Rao, 1991, 1993; Velan and
Ramanujam, 1991) with the two-fluid nozzle at the top of
the reactor not only eliminates the blockage of the nozzle
but also increases the residence time of the gas in the reactor
as the gas bubbles are forced to move against buoyancy.
However, in the above investigations the outlet of the liquid
was provided at the bottom of the reactor, in which only a
partial circulation of the liquid occurs as major part of the
liquid leaves the reactor without being circulated into the
annulus, resulting in a lower residence time of the liquid-
phase. With the liquid outlet at the top of the reactor, the
entire liquid entering the reactor should travel down the draft
tube and leave through the annulus at the top, thereby
increasing the residence time of the liquid in the reactor which
can enhance gas holdup and oxygen mass transfer coefficient
in the reactor.
*Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
190 THE CANADIAN JOURNAL OF CHEMICAL ENGINEERING, VOLUME 73, APRIL, 1995
A study of the fundamental hydrodynamic characteristics
in gas-liquid-solid systems in a reversed flow JLR has been
made by Padmavathi and Remananda Rao (1991) and of gas-
liquid systems for both Newtonian and nowNewtonian fluids
(Velan and Ramanujam, l991,1992b), but only a little work
has been reported on gas-liquid mass transfer (Wachsmann
et al., 1985; Velan and Ramanujam, 1992a). In the present
study, experiments were performed to obtain the overall gas
holdup and overall volumetric mass transfer coefficient in
the modified reversed flow jet loop reactor with the liquid
outlet at the top of the reactor. Effects of operational variables
(gas and liquid flow rates) and design variables (draft tube
to reactor diameter ratio) for the air-water system were
analyzed. The results were compared with those of the earlier
investigations (Velan and Ramanujam, 1991, 1992a) in a
similar reactor with the liquid outlet at the bottom.
Experimental
A schematic diagram of the experimental set-up is shown
in Figure 1. The apparatus was made of a 0.192 m i.d. and
1.4 m high Perspex tube. Five draft tubes of varying
diameters and 1.O m long were fixed one at a time concen-
trically inside the main reactor. The liquid was withdrawn
continuously from the outlet provided at 1.2 m height above
the bottom of the reactor and circulated back to the reactor
by means of a liquid circulation pump drawing from a storage
tank, used as a surge tank with a very small liquid volume,
via a calibrated flow meter and a two-fluid nozzle. The gas
(compressed air) was fed through an aeration tube of 2.75 mm
i.d., fixed co-axially at the center of the two-fluid nozzle.
The bottom of the reactor consisted of a cone placed at the
center of a hemisphere, as shown in Figure 1. This design
minimized the dead space and energy losses. Solenoid valves
in the inlet, outlet and bypass lines permitted simultaneous
shut-off of both gas and liquid flows for the measurement
of overall gas holdup values.
 by means of shutting the solenoid valves and eG was deter-
sv mined from the difference in the heights of the dispersion
level and the clear liquid level according to the following
relationship:

EG = (HF - HL)/HF ......................... (1)

where HF = height of the dispersion level in the reactor and

HL = height of the clear liquid level in the reactor.
Recorder The transient gassing-in (gassing-out)method was used for
the determination of overall volumetric mass transfer coeffi-
cient, KLu. A batch of liquid, of volume slightly more than
that of the reactor and pipelines, was taken in the storage
1
RM If4
tank and the liquid circulation was started at desired gas and
liquid flow rates. The gas flow rate was stopped by closing
the solenoid valve, and the liquid was deaerated to approxi-
1 mately zero oxygen concentration in a few minutes by rapid
addition of 300 g/m3 of sodium sulphite (Na2SO3*7H20)

4
I
together with 2 g/m3 of cobaltous chloride (CoC12.6H20)
as a catalyst (Linek and Vacek, 1981;Medic et al., 1989).
Air flow to the reactor was started at the pre-set value and
-
Compressed
air
the time-change in the dissolved oxygen concentration was
monitored by a dissolved oxygen electrode (YSI 5739 with
standard membrane) connected to a YSI model 58 dissolved
oxygen meter (Yellow Springs Instrument Co., Yellow
Springs, OH). The assumptions of constant gas-phase
Figure 1 - Schematic diagram of the experimental set-up. composition with respect to axial position in the reactor
CB - Conical bottom; DO - Dissolved oxygen; DT - Draft tube; (Deckwer et al., 1974; Verlaan and Tramper, 1987) and
PG - Pressure gauge; R - Reactor, RM - Rotameter, SV - Solenoid “well-mixed’’ liquid-phase (Siege1 and Merchuk, 1987;
valve; TN - Two fluid nozzle; V - Control valve. Verlaan and Tramper, 1987) were made in the evaluation
of KLu as the liquid circulation time was always less than
TABLE1 the mass transfer time (1/KLu) for the entire range of liquid
Dimensions of the Reactor and Ranges of Variables velocity covered. The influence of the oxygen electrode
Reactor: dynamics on KLu was neglected as the time constant of the
inner diameter, D (m) 0.192 probe T€ is less than 10 seconds and the condition 7€
overall length, H (m) 1.4 < < (l/KLu) was fulfilled (Van’t Riet, 1979;Nakanoh and
dispersion height, HF (m) 1.2 Yoshida, 1983;Medic et al., 1989).
Draft tube: The KLu value for each run was obtained from the slope
inner diameter, D, (m) 0.064 (D,/D=O.33) of the straight line in the plot of In [(P - Co)/(Cr- CJ1
0.074 (DE /D=0.39)
0.084 (DE/D=O.44) versus t (Bandyopadhyay et al., 1967;Van’t Riet, 1979;
0.094 (DE 1D=O.49) Chisti and Moo-Young, 1988).The steady-state value of the
0.112 (D, /D=0.58) DO meter at the desired operating conditions of gas and liquid
length, L, (m) 1.o flow rates was taken as the saturation or equilibrium
bottom clearance, HB (cm) 7.0 concentration (P) of oxygen in the liquid for that particular
Nozzle: experimental run. Tap water was used in all the experiments.
inner diameter, D, (cm) 1.2 Six experimental runs were carried out with one batch of
equivalent flow diameter, D, (cm) 0.9 liquid. The last run was always the repetition of first one
immersion depth, HT (m) 0.2 and the error was found to be within &lo%. All the
Aeration tube:
experimental runs were carried out at room temperature of
inner diameter, DGi(mm) 2.75
outer diameter, D , (mm) 3.0 26 f 2°C and the KLu value at 20°C was calculated using
the following general formula (Eckenfelder, 1966):
Gas flow rate, Q, (m3/h) 0.3 - 1.5
Liquid flow rate, QL (m31h) 2.5 - 5.5
..............
Materials and methods

The dimensions of the reactor and the range of the varaibles
are shown in Table 1. Air and tap water (viscosity, p = 8.9
x N-s/m2and surface tension, u = 0.072N/m) were
used as the gas and liquid phases, respectively. The measure-
ment of air flow rate was made at ambient temperature and
atmospheric pressure. The overall gas holdup, eG in the
reactor was determined by the volume expansion technique.
The results were reproducible within f 10%.During steady-
state operation, the inflows of gas and liquid were stopped
Results and discussion
EFFECTOF GAS FLOW RATE
The influence of gas flow rate on KLu and eG at different
energy dissipation rates per unit reactor volume, (E/V)L,is
shown in Figure 2. The energy dissipation rate was calcu-
lated as the kinetic energy of the liquid jet based on the flow
area of the nozzle. It was observed that both eG and KLu

THE CANADIAN JOURNAL OF CHEMICAL ENGINEERING, VOLUME 73, APRIL, 1995 191
 -
System : Air Water
O E I D = 0.44
5.0

N
:
H

- 4.0-
0
O,o,
.,.,A
A Present work .,O
Velan and l A I A l
Ramanujam
5' : : 1
I1992 a 1
(9
0

1.0 1.0

0 I 1 I I I I I
0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 1 2 3 4 5

O,O, A Present work

@,.,A Velan and
Ramanujam (1991) /" -
3
t
n0.19
4 0.15
e
In
O,O,

0,
A
,A
Present work
Velan B RamMujam #-
(1991) /
-*a9.
g 0.11 -
-a
L
0.07-
0

0.021 1 1 I 0.03- 1
0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 0 1 2 3 4 . 5
Gas flow r a t e , 0, (m3/h) Energy dissipation rate, ( E I V 1 ( k W / m' )

Figure 2 - Effect of gas flow rate, Q, on: (a) overall volumetric Figure 3 - Effectof energy dissipation rate per unit reactor volume,
mass transfer coefficient, KLa and (b) overall gas holdup, c, at (EIV), on: (a) overall volumetric mass transfer coefficient, KLa and
different energy dissipation rates per unit reactor volume (EIV), (b) overall gas holdup, cG at different gas flow rates (Q,) for a
for a constant draft tube to reactor diameter ratio (D,lD). constant draft tube to reactor diameter ratio (&ID).

EFFECTOF LIQUID FLOW RATE

increased with an increase in gas flow rate for a given
( E l v ) ~This
. was due to the increased gas entrainment and
gas-liquid interfacial area at higher gas flow rates. Similar
trends have been reported in the literature for various
configurations of reactors, includingjet loop reactors (Akita
and Yoshida, 1973; Be110 et al., 1985; Warnecke et al., 1988;
Velan and Ramanujam, 1991, 1992a; Koide et al., 1992;
Padmavathi and Remananda Rao, 1993).
The dashed lines in the Figure 2 represent the results of
the earlier investigations (Velan and Ramanujam, 1991,
1992a)on a similar downflow jet loop reactor, but one which
had the liquid outlet at the bottom of the reactor. It was
observed that eG values in the present study are higher,
more significantly at the lower range of gas and liquid flow
rates, and the KLu values are nearly doubled. This effect can
be explained by the increased residence time of the liquid
in the modified reactor, which can hold more gas bubbles
of the same size, thus increasing e~ as well as KLU. From
Figure 2, it also can be observed that the effect of the reactor
modification on KLu was more pronounced than that on eG.
At higher gas flow rates, even though the gas holdup values
are nearly equal, much higher KLu values were observed,
which may be due to finer dispersion of the gas-phase,
thereby increasing the gas-liquid interfacial area available
for mass transfer.
The effect of liquid flow rate on KLa and CG is shown in
Figure 3 in terms of (ElV), for different gas flow rates. eG
was found to increase with an increase in the liquid flow rate,
as shown in Figure 3b, due to the increased circulation of
gas bubbles into the draft tube with the increased liquid flow
rate. A similar trend was reported in the literature for a
downflow jet loop reactor (Velan and Ramanujam, 1991).
The effect of liquid flow rate on KLu indicated a different
phenomena, as shown in Figure 3a. Within the range of
variables studied it was observed that KLu increased with
increased (EIV), in the range of low (EIV),, reached a
maximum value at about 1.8 kW/m3, then decreased to a
minimum value, and then increased at the higher range of
(ED'),. The reason for this effect can be explained as
follows.
Flow visualization studies were conducted prior to this
investigation. The flow regimes in the reactor were altered
by varying the gas and liquid flow rates. It was observed
that there was a transmission from the uniform bubbly flow
regime to an uneven churn-turbulent flow regime at (El V),
values of about 2 kW/m3. This type of change in flow
regimes was only observed with the variation of liquid flow
rate, and no such significant change was observed with the
variation of gas flow rate at a constant liquid flow rate. The
decrease in KLu values at this point could be due to the

192 THE CANADIAN JOURNAL OF CHEMICAL ENGINEERING, VOLUME 73, APRIL. 1995
 Oalor
System : Air-Water

2.1 2.43
3.33

0 . 0
0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6
DE / D Ratio

Figure 4 - Effect of draft tube to reactor diameter ratio (DElD) 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6
on overall gas holdup (eG) at different energy dissipation rates per DE I D Ratio
unit reactor volume for a constant gas flow rate (QG).

change of the flow regime. During the transition region, and
at the initial stages of the churn-turbulent flow regime, the
eddies developed in the reactor reduced the recirculation of
gas bubbles and increased their coalescence, thereby reducing
the gas-liquid interfacial area for mass transfer. In addition,
the driving force for mass transfer, i.e. the concentration
difference, was lower in the churn-turbulent (back mixing)
flow region than in the bubbly (plug) flow region, which
effected a reduction in the rate of mass transfer.
At the higher range of ( E / V L ,KLu increased due to the
increased liquid circulation. However, it was observed
that the variation of KLu with gas flow rate was more
pronounced than its variation with the liquid flow rate. The
optimum value of 2 kW/m3 was also reported in the
literature (Wachsmann et al., 1985). Higher values of EG
and KLu with the modification can also be observed from
Figure 3. KLu values were found to be higher even though
the gas holdup values were low. From Figure 3, it was also
observed that the influence of the modification was more
pronounced at the lower range of gas flow rates and energy
dissipation rates.
EFFECTOF DEID RATIO
The effect of draft tube to reactor diameter ratio, DEID,
on EG and KLU is shown in Figures 4 and 5, respectively.
It was observed that both eC and KLu values increased with
the increase in DE/D ratio to an optimum value and then
decreased with a further increase in the DE/D ratio within
the range of gas and liquid flow rates studied. The optimum
value of DEID for EG was found to be in the range of 0.4
to 0.5and for KLu it was found to be about 0.4. Initially,
with the increased DE/ D ratio the cross sectional area of the
draft tube increased and that of the annulus decreased. As
the area of the draft tube increased, the gas dispersion into
the draft tube increased, and as the cross sectional area of
the annulus decreased the liquid velocity in the annulus
Figure 5 - Effect of draft tube to reactor diameter ratio (DE/D)
on overall volumetric mass transfer coefficient (K,u) at different
energy dissipation rates per unit reactor volume (EIV), for a
constant gas flow rate (QG).
increased, thereby increasing the liquid circulation velocity.
Thus, more gas bubbles were drawn into the draft tube from
the annulus, increasing cG and KLu. With a further increase
in the DE /D ratio, the cross sectional area of the draft tube
became too large and the driving force in the draft tube for
liquid circulation decreased, so much so that the gas bubbles
rising in the annulus tried to escape from the top due to their
high rise velocity without being drawn into the draft tube.
Hence, both the ec and KLu values decreased when DE/D
exceeded its optimum value. A similar type of trend was
reported in the literature for downflow jet loop reactors
(Wachsmann et al., 1985;Velan and Ramanujam, 1991,
1992a) and the optimum values agree well with their reports.
CORRELATIONS OF G' AND KLu
The following empirical correlations were obtained for eG
and KLu, based on the experimental data of the modified
reactor in terms of operational and geometrical variables.
For the bubbly flow regime:
EG = 8.703 X l$0.42 ..... (3)
Usgo.45(D~/D)o'2'
where l$ and U are in m/s, and the constant has the
units of (s/m)0.87"'
for 6.55 I l$ ( m / s ) c 10.5
for KLu in l/s, l$ and U, in m/s, and the constant has

THE CANADIAN JOURNAL OF CHEMICAL ENGINEERING, VOLUME 73, APRIL, 1995 193

For the chum-turbulent flow regime:
KLu = 1.08 X qo.w
Usg0.67(DE/D)-o.56. . . (5)
for 10.5 I (m/s) I 14.4
for KLu in Us, VJ and Us,in m/s, and the constant has the
units of s0.47/m’.47.
The effective range of the variables for the above equations
are:
6.55 I q (m/s) I 14.4
14.03 I U,, (m/s) I 116.9
0.33 IDE/D I0.58
The exponents on these variables in Equations (3),(4)and
(5)give the overall effect of these variables on the parameter
such as cG and KLu within the given range. The correlation
coefficients for Equations (3),(4)and (5)are 0.98,0.94and
0.95,respectively. The standard error or estimate (S,)for
cG using Equation (3) is 0.0042 and those for KLu using
Equations (4)and (5) are 0.0017 and 0.0033,respectively.
Conclusions
The following conclusions can be made based on the results
of the present investigation.
i) The overall gas holdup and the overall volumetric mass
transfer coefficient increase with increased gas and liquid
flow rates. The effect of the gas flow rate is more
pronounced than that of the liquid flow rate.
ii) Overall gas holdup and volumetric mass transfer coeffi-
cient are found to be higher in the modified reversed flow
jet loop reactor than in the conventional downflow jet
loop reactor.
iii) Higher volumetric mass transfer coefficient values are
obtained in the range of lower energy dissipation rates
in the modified reversed flow jet loop reactor.
iv) The optimum draft tube to reactor diameter ratio is found
to be in the range of 0.4 to 0.5 for maximum gas holdup
and about 0.4 for maximum overall volumetric mass
transfer coefficient.
v) Based on the experimental data, empirical correlations
were proposed to predict the overall gas holdup and
overall volumetric mass transfer coefficient.
Nomenclature
A = cross sectional area of the column (m2)
flow area [r(Dz2 - Dco2)/4] (m2)
3 =
= saturation (equilibrium) concentration of oxygen in
liquid (mg/L)
= instantaneous concentration of oxygen in liquid
(mgW
co = initial concentration of oxygen in liquid (mglL)
D = inner diameter of the column (m)
= inner diameter of the draft tube (m)
= inner diameter of the aeration tube (m)
= outer diameter of the aeration tube (m)
= diffusivity of oxygen in water (m2/s)
= diameter of the nozzle (m)
194 THE CANADIAN JOURNAL OF CHEMICAL ENGINEERING, VOLUME 73, APRIL, 1995
= energy dissipation rate per unit volume,
[ (PL A y q 3 ) / 2 v ~ (kW/m3)
]
= gravitational constant (m/s2)
= height of the reactor (m)
= bottom clearance (height of the lower edge of the
draft tube from the bottom of the reactor) (m)
= height of the dispersion level in the reactor (m)
= height of the clear liquid level in the reactor (m)
= nozzle immersion depth (height of the upper edge of
the draft tube from the tip of the nozzle) (m)
= overall volumetric mass transfer coefficient (l/s)
= length of the draft tube (m)
= volumetric flow rate of the gas at ambient temperature
and atmospheric pressure (m3/h)
= volumetric flow rate of the liquid (m3/h)
= time (s)
= temperature (“C)
= linear liquid velocity based on Ay (m/s)
= superficial gas velocity based on Dci (m/s)
= dispersion volume in the reactor (m3)
Greek letters
E = fractional holdup (-)
jt = viscosity of the liquid (N.s/m2)
P = mass density of the media (kg/m3)
U = surface tension of the liquid (Nlm)
= first order electrode time constant (s)
rE
Subscripts
G = gas-phase
L = liquid-phase
References
Akita. K. and F. Yoshida, “Gas Holdup and Mass Transfer
Coefficient in Bubble Columns”, Ind. Eng. Chem. Process Des.
Dev. 12, 76-80 (1973).
Bandyopadhyay, B., A. E. Humphrey and H. Taguchi, “Dynamic
Measurement of the Volumetric Oxygen Transfer Coefficient in
Fermentation Systems”, Biotechnol. Bioeng. 9, 533-544 (1%7).
Bello, R. A., C. W. Robinson and M. Moo-Young, “Gas Holdup
and Overall Volumetric Oxygen Transfer Coefficient in Airlift
Contactors”, Bioetechnol. Bioeng. 27, 369-381 (1985).
Blenke, H., “Loop Reactors”, in “Advances in Biochemical
Engineering”, Vol. 13, T. K. Ghose, A. Fiechter and N.
Blakebrough, Eds., Springer-Verlag. Berlin (1979), pp. 121 -
214.
Chisti, M. Y. and Moo-Young, “Hydrodynamics and Oxygen
Transfer in Pneumatic Bioreactor Devices”, Biotechnol. Bioeng.
31, 487-494 (1988).
Deckwer, W.-D., R. Burckhart and G. Zoll, “Mixing and Mass
Transfer in Tall Bubble Columns”, Chem. Eng. Sci. 29,
2177-2188 (1974).
Eckenfelder, W. W., Jr., “Aeration and Mass Transfer”, in
“Industrial Water Pollution Control”, McGraw-Hill Book
Company, New York (1966) pp. 62-86.
Koide, K., K. Shibata, H. Ito, S.Y. Kim and K. Ohtaguchi, “Gas
Holdup and Volumetric Liquid-phase Mass Transfer Coefficient
in a Gel-Particle Suspended Bubble Column with Draught Tube”,
J. Chem. Eng. Japan 25, 11-16 (1992).
Kulkami, K., Y, Shah and A. Schumpe, “Hydrodynamics and Mass
Transfer in a Down Flow Bubble Column”, Chem. Eng.
Commun. 24, 307-337 (1983).
Linek, V. and V. Vacek, “Chemical Engineering Use of Catalyzed
Sulfite Oxidation Kinetics for the Determination of Mass Transfer
Characteristicsof Gas-Liquid Contactors”, Chem. Eng. Sci. 36,
1747 - 1768 (1981).
Medic, L., A. Cehovin, T. Koloini and A. Pavko, “Volumetric
Gas-Liquid Mass Transfer Coefficients in a Rectangular Bubble
 Column with a Rubber Aeration Pad”, Chem. Eng. J. 41,
B51-B54 (1989).
Nakanoh, M. and F. Yoshida, “Transient Characteristics of Oxygen
Probes and Determination of K,a”, Biotechnol. Bioeng. 25,
1653-1654 (1983).
Padmavathi, G. and K. Remananda Rao, “Hydrodynamics of
Reversed Flow Jet Loop Reactor as a Gas-Liquid-Solid
Contactor”, Chem. Eng. Sci. 46,3293-3296 (1991).
Padmavathi, G.and K. Remananda Rao, “Influence of Geometry
on Gas Holdups in a Reversed Flow Jet Loop Reactor”, Can.
J. Chem. Eng. 71, 94-100 (1993).
Siegel, M. H. and J. C. Merchuk, “Mass Transfer in Air-lift
Reactors: Effects of Gas Recirculation”, in “Bioreactors and
Biotransformations”, G. W. Moody and P. B. Baker, a s . ,
Elsevier, London (1987).pp. 350-362.
Tebel, K. H. and P. Zehner, “Fluid Dynamic Description of Jet
Loop Reactors in Multi-phaseOperations”, Chem. Eng. Technol.
12, 274-280 (1989).
Van’t Riet, K., “Reviewing of Measuring Methods and Results
in Nonviscous Gas-Liquid Mass Transfer in Stirred Vessels”,
Ind. Eng. Chem. Process Des. Dev. 18, 357-364 (1979).
Verlaan, P. and J. Tramper, “Hydrodynamics, Axial Dispersion,
Gas-Liquid Oxygen Transfer in an Air-lift Loop Bioreactor with
Three-phase Flow”, in “Bioreactors and Biotransformations”,
G.W. Moody and P. B. Baker, Eds., Elsevier, London (1987)
pp. 363-373.
THE CANADIAN JOURNAL OF CHEMICAL ENGINEERING, VOLUME 73, APRIL, 1995
Velan, M and T. K. Ramanujam, “Hydrodynamics in Down Flow
Jet Loop Reactor”, Can. J. Chem. Eng. 69,1257-1261 (1991).
Velan, M. and T. K. Ramanujam, “Gas Liquid Mass Transfer in
a Down Flow Jet Loop Reactor”, Chem. Eng. Sci. 47,
2871-2876 (1992a).
Velan, M. and T. K. Ramanujam, “Hydrodynamics and Mixing
in Down Flow Jet Loop Bioreactor with a Non-Newtonian
Fluid”, Bioprocess Eng. 7, 193-197 (1992b)
Wachsmann, U.. N. Riibiger and A. Vogelpohl, “Effect of
Geometry on Hydrodynamics and Mass Transfer in the Compact
Reactor”, Ger. Chem. Eng. 8, 411-418 (1985).
Warnecke, H. J., M. Geisendorfer and D. C. Hempel, “Mass
Transfer Behaviour of Gas-Liquid Jet Loop Reactors”, Chem.
Eng. Technol. 11, 306-311 (1988).
Manuscript received June 7, 1994;revised manuscript received
January 6,1995;accepted for publication January 9, 1995.
195