This work investigates the impact of fluid (CO
2(g), water) flow rates, channel geometry, and the presence of a surfactant (ethanol) on the resulting gas–liquid flow regime (bubble, slug, annular), pressure drop, and interphase mass transfer coefficient (
)
[...] Read more.
This work investigates the impact of fluid (CO
2(g), water) flow rates, channel geometry, and the presence of a surfactant (ethanol) on the resulting gas–liquid flow regime (bubble, slug, annular), pressure drop, and interphase mass transfer coefficient (
) in the FlowPlate
TM LL (liquid-liquid) microreactor, which was originally designed for immiscible liquid systems. The flow regime map generated by the complex mixer geometry is compared to that obtained in straight channels of a similar characteristic length, while the pressure drop is fitted to the separated flows model of Lockhart–Martinelli, and the
in the bubble flow regime is fitted to a power dissipation model based on isotropic turbulent bubble breakup. The LL-Rhombus configuration yielded higher
values for an equivalent pressure drop when compared to the LL-Triangle geometry. The Lockhart–Martinelli model provided good pressure drop predictions for the entire range of experimental data (AARE < 8.1%), but the fitting parameters are dependent on the mixing unit geometry and fluid phase properties. The correlation of
with the energy dissipation rate provided a good fit for the experimental data in the bubble flow regime (AARE < 13.9%). The presented experimental data and correlations further characterize LL microreactors, which are part of a toolbox for fine chemical synthesis involving immiscible fluids for applications involving reactive gas–liquid flows.
Full article