Comparison of a Networks-of-Zones Fluid Mixing

Model for a Baffled Stirred Vessel with

Three-Dimensional Electrical Resistance
Tomography
T. L. Rodgers1 , F. R. Siperstein1 , R. Mann1 , T. A. York2,
and A. Kowalski3
1

School of Chemical Engineering and Analytical Science, University of Manchester,

M60 1QD, UK
2

School of Electronic and Electrical Engineering, University of Manchester, M60

1QD, UK
3

Unilever R & D Port Sunlight, Quarry Road East, Wirral, CH63 3JW, UK

Abstract.

Reliable models for the simulation of mixing vessels are important for

the understanding of real life mixing problems. To achieve these models information
about the mixing in the system must be measured to compare with the predicted
values. Electrical resistance tomography has the capability to measure spacial and
temporal changes within a vessel in three-dimensions even in optically inaccessible
environments.
This paper discusses the creation of a network-of-zones model for the prediction of
mixing within a vessel with a Cowles disk type agitator. Solving of the network-of-zones
simplied transport equations for the vessel predicts the concentration distribution
of an inert tracer added to the vessel. The change in this distribution with time
is calculated and compared with visual inspection of the vessel. The concentration
corresponding author
E-mail address: T.Rodgers@postgrad.manchester.ac.uk
Deceased at time of writing

Comparison of NoZ with ERT

distribution inside the vessel is also measured using electrical resistance tomography
and shows good agreement with the predicted values.
Keywords: Tomography, Mixing, Network-of-Zones, Cowles Disk, Modelling

Submitted to: Meas. Sci. Technol.

Comparison of NoZ with ERT

1. Introduction
Reliable models for the simulation of mixing vessels are important for the understanding
of real life mixing problems. These models should have a balance between a very
realistic set of complex equations that take a high amount of computer power and a
more simplistic set that only require a small amount. The maximum efficiency for
calculations is given by a model that is as simple as possible, represents the physical
situation well, and involves the minimum number of adjustable parameters, which are
easy to evaluate numerically.
Commonly, computational fluid dynamics is used to evaluate and quantify fluid
mechanics, especially for baffled vessels [1, 2]; the unbaffled, heavily swirling case is less
well characterised [3]. These simulated results often agree very well with experimental
results. However, until recently computational fluid dynamics only provided information
on fluid mechanics, due to the heavy computational load. Mixing curves involving
the evolution of concentration fields and liquid-phase reactions using the reagent
concentration fields have started to be investigated [4, 5, 6].
The network-of-zones (NoZ) model requires far less computer power as it is a very
simple model, but still provides a realistic description of real processes. The model is
created by dividing the vessel volume into a number of perfectly mixed zones which
are connected to each other using convective, diffusional, and swirl flows. NoZ models
have been used to simulate one-phase liquid systems [7], reactive liquid systems [8],
precipitation reactions [9], gas-liquid systems [10], and solid-liquid systems [11].
Electrical resistance tomography (ERT) is one of the few measurement methods that
is able to investigate an environment fully when both significant spatial and temporal
variation in property distributions are coupled with optical inaccessibility. Currently
there is a large amount of work being carried out with ERT within mixing and in other

Comparison of NoZ with ERT

areas of research both within the process industries and outside [12, 13, 14, 15].

2. Methods
2.1. The Network-of-Zones Model
2.1.1. Model Design An example 3D network is shown in figure 1 which is for a
16 32 100 configuration of zones, comprising 51200 elements. In this configuration
there are 100 tangential elements and 16 16 axial/radial planes above and below the
impeller. The elements are designated positions with i, j and k coordinates representing
there radial, axial, and tangential positions respectively, where i N, i [1, n];
j N, j [1, 2n]; k N, k [1, m]. n is the number of radial zones and m
is the number of tangential zones. The number of radial zones can be any number,
but it is common to have an even number for symmetry: n 2N. The number of
tangential zones can also be any number but it is also common for this to be an even
number for symmetry; also this should be chosen to make the zones as cubic as possible:
m 2N, m 2n.
The axial/radial plane is shown by figure 2; each zone in the network experiences
several different flows. The main one of these is the agitator circulation flow, q, which
flows out from the impeller in the radial direction to the vessel wall, where it evenly
splits into up and down flows, which loop around back to the agitator, as seen in figure 2.
Each zone also experiences an isotropic turbulence, which is represented by a fraction
of the agitator flow loop, , through the sides in the axial/radial plane not experiencing
the main flow loop. In the tangential direction each zone experiences a swirl motion
from the agitator, which is represented by a fraction of the agitator flow loop, L for
the clockwise swirl and R for the anti-clockwise swirl. For the circled zone in figure 2
these flows can be represented as in figure 3. In the agitator region these interchanges

Comparison of NoZ with ERT

Figure 1: A network for a 16 32 100 configuration with 51200 equal volume zones,
only the surface elements can be seen.
are intensified to a locally higher proportion of the agitator flow loop, by multiplying
by an additional factor A .
The transfer flows in figure 3 can be represented by the amounts given in equation 1.
The change in concentration of an element (circled zone in figure 2) is given by the sum
of the transfer flows, which can be simplified to equation 2 for an inert tracer, where CI

Comparison of NoZ with ERT

Figure 2: Zone assembly slice in the k plane showing the agitator circulation flow loop
(black) and the turbulent exchange (grey).
is the concentration of inert tracer in the cell and V is the volume of the cell.
(A)

= qCI,i1,j,k

(B)

= qCI,i,j,k

(C)

= qCI,i,j1,k

(D)

= qCI,i,j,k

(E)

= qCI,i,j,k

Comparison of NoZ with ERT

C(i,j+1,k)
(F)

C(i,j,k1)

C(i+1,j,k)

(E)
(G)

C(i,j,k)

(A) (H)

(B)
(I)

C(i1,j,k)

(D)

(J)

C(i,j,k+1)

(C)

C(i,j1,k)
Agitator circulation loop
Clockwise swirl flow

Exchange flow
Anti-clockwise swirl flow

Figure 3: Mass flows for a general zone, with flows given by equation 1.

Vi,j,k

CI,i1,j,k

(1 + 2 + L + R ) CI,i,j,k

dCI,i,j,k
=q
+ (CI,i,j1,k + CI,i,j+1,k )

dt

+L CI,j,k1

+ C
R I,i,j,k+1

(2)

A large number of NoZ simulations are carried out without the modelling of baffles
in the vessel [10, 11, 16]. However, a large number of vessels used in production have
baffles, which means that these should be modelled in the simulation. To do this the
swirl flow can be stopped at the baffle and passed around the baffle with the agitator
circulation flow rate, so the mass balance is satisfied. An extra set of zones will be left
behind the baffle to represent the dead zone seen experimentally behind baffles [17].
This will be linked to the other zones with the exchange flow rate as shown by figure 4.

Comparison of NoZ with ERT

Swirl Direction

Figure 4: Flow to represent a baffle in the vessel, arrows refer to figure 3.

2.1.2.

Determination of Parameters In a large number of NoZ simulations the

parameters used have been fitted so that the images look like the experimental images.
This can result in parameters and a model that works well for one particular situation
but cannot be applied easily to others. A better way is to try to produce a robust model
that can be applied to different situations with the parameters taken from experimental
data.
The total agitator circulation flow rate, Q, can be calculated by use of the total
flow number, NQT , the agitator rate, N, and the agitator diameter, D, as shown by
equation 3.
Q = NQT ND 3

(3)

However, this is the total flow from the agitator, but as can be seen from figure 2
this flow is assumed to be in loops. There are n/2 loops in each half of the vessel in
each 2D plane, and m pseudo 2D planes, this means that the agitator circulation flow
rate per loop, q, can be given by equation 4.

q=

NQT ND 3
nm

(4)

Comparison of NoZ with ERT

The total flow number is the flow number calculated from taking into account
the whole flow from the agitator, i.e. the velocity profile integrated from the agitator
centre to the point of flow reversal.

Kumaresan and Joshi (2006) [18] provide a

large number of total flow numbers for different pitch blade turbines and hydrofoils.
Costes and Couderc (1988) [19] use laser doppler anemometry to calculate the total
flow number for a Rushton turbine to be 3.4 0.4
As well as the agitator circulation flow loops, the exchange flow between these
loops, QEF , has been examined [20] and can be given by equation 5, where NEF is total
exchange flow number.
QEF = NEF ND 3

(5)

Again, this is the total exchange flow, but as can be seen from figure 2 this flow
is split between the zones. There are n zones exchanging between the loops in the
axial direction (same analysis is true in the radial direction) in each 2D plane, and m
pseudo 2D planes, this means that the exchange flow per element, q, can be given
by equation 6; which for simplification of the model, means that can be given by
equation 7.
q =

NEF ND 3
nm

(6)

NEF
NQT

(7)

Vasconcelos et al. (1995) [20] experimentally determined that the total exchange
flow number for a Rushton turbine was (0.236 0.009) (T /D). For a half tank diameter
agitator this means that the value of would be approximately 0.14 which agrees well
with the value predicted by Ying (1993) [16].
The swirl factors can be given by the same style of relationship as the exchange

10

Comparison of NoZ with ERT

factor, equations 8 and 9.
L =

NSL
NQT

(8)

R =

NSR
NQT

(9)

The flow multiplier around the agitator can be determined from the difference in
the magnitude of the velocity of the agitator to the rest of the vessel. This difference
can be a couple orders of magnitude, 10-100 [21].
Values predicted from these relationships for a Rushton turbine agree well with
values determined by fitting from Ying (1993)[16] [18, 19, 20]. Use of these values
provides data that fits well with experimental data, Figure 5.
Currently there is no data in the open literature that contains these same values for
a Cowles disk. Therefore, the values have been calculated by a best fit comparison with
the overall mixing time based on experimental data. These values have been compared
to the values for a Rushton turbine to help produce sensible values, i.e. it is known that
a Cowles disk has a lower flow number than a Rushton turbine and that a Cowles disk
120
Correlation
ERT
NoZ

100

95 / s

80
60
40
20
0
0

10

20

30
N / rpm

40

50

60

Figure 5: Comparison of NoZ model mixing time prediction for a Rushton turbine with
experimental data from Stephenson et al. (2005)[22] and the mixing time correlation
from Grenville and Nienow (2004)[23].

11

Comparison of NoZ with ERT

has very little overall swirl flow it is just the actual number that is experimentally
unknown. The values used for the Cowles disk model are given in Table 1 [24].

2.2. Electrical Resistance Tomography Measurements

2.2.1. Experimental Equipment and Procedures Experiments were carried out in a
0.914 m diameter (T ), shallow dished-based, stirred tank reactor. The vessel is a
Perspex cylindrical vessel with 4 standard baffles of width w = T /10 and thickness
0.01 m. The cylindrical section is 1.5 m high and is fitted inside a square jacket through
which water can be circulated for temperature control. The square jacket provides
distortion free viewing windows for flow visualisation. The agitator rotational speeds
are monitored using a Ferro-magnetic proximity sensor coupled to a COMPACT MICRO
48 tachometer. The shaft, with a diameter of 0.05 m, is continuous and fits into a PTFE
bearing located in the centre of the dished base.
The vessel is fitted with a Cowles disk agitator (CD) with 32 angled teeth (16 up
and 16 down) of diameter DCD = T /3 and a clearance of c = T /3. The vessel was
filled to a liquid level of H = T . Figure 6 illustrates a schematic diagram of the vessel
arrangements.
A 100 ml aliquot of 50 g l1 salt solution (conductivity 11.5 S m1 ) was added to
Parameter
NQT
NEF
NSL
NSR
n
m
A
Table 1:
agitator.

Value
2.0
1.5
0.5
0.5
16
100
100

Values of the parameters used in the NoZ simulations for a Cowles disk

Comparison of NoZ with ERT

12

Figure 6: Schematic representation of the stirred tank reactor geometry for the
experiments.
the surface of the vessel, half way between 2 of the baffles.
The vessel is equipped with an array of 128 steel electrodes, 5 cm high and 3 cm
wide, set in 8 rings of 16 equally spaced electrodes. The electrodes are mounted on a
baffle cage, constructed of 16 thin wall-flush plastic ducts, each with 8 electrodes. The
bottom plane of electrodes sits 0.5 cm above the join between the cylindrical part of the
vessel and the dished base. To use the top plane of electrodes requires a fluid height of
1.1 m (H/T = 1.17). The bottom 6 planes of electrodes were used, giving good coverage
of the vessel as shown in Figure 7(a), as the seventh and eight planes were above the
liquid height.

2.2.2. Tomography Settings and Reconstruction The ITS P2000 was chosen for the
experiments presented in this paper as it is the best performing ERT instrument,
available to us, for experiments requiring high temporal resolution and is capable of
successfully monitoring homogeneity [25]. The excitation frequency is the frequency of
the alternating current injected into the electrodes, and was selected to be 9.6 kHz; using

Comparison of NoZ with ERT

13

lower frequencies slows the sampling rate which means that it is too slow for monitoring
the mixing, and using higher frequencies increase the noise in the data which means
good quality data cannot be collected. The sampling time interval is the time taken for
the ITS P2000 to take one plane of measurements, and was selected to be 40 ms; using
a longer sampling time means that it is too slow for monitoring the mixing, and using
a shorter sampling time means that the voltages are not collected over a long enough
time which means good quality data cannot be collected. The delay cycles is the time
between each cycle of measurements, i.e the sampling time interval times the number
of delay cycles, which was selected to be 3; using a larger number of delay cycles means
that the sampling is too slow for monitoring the mixing, using a smaller number means
good quality data cannot be collected as the equipment is trying to work to quickly and
can become saturated.
The number of samples per frame is selected to be 1; taking more samples per
frame allows averaging, but means that the sampling is too slow for monitoring the
mixing. The frames per download is set equal to the number of measurement frames,
which means that the data is not downloaded from the ITS P2000 box to the computer
until the end of the experiment; this allows the equipment to run slightly faster allowing
a faster sampling rate. The injection current was set to be 50 mA; if more current is
used the collected voltages can saturate the collectors meaning that good quality data
cannot be collected, and using a lower voltage means that the noise in the measurements
is proportionally larger also meaning that good quality data cannot be collected. The
sampling strategy used was the normal adjacent, which means that the input current is
applied over pairs of adjacent electrodes and the voltage measured on pairs of adjacent
electrodes on the same plane; this is currently the only strategy available with the ITS
P2000.

14

Comparison of NoZ with ERT

Table 2 summarises the optimal data acquisition settings employed during the
experiments and shows the sampling rate for the collection of one frame of data (i.e. all
six planes). Using these optimal data acquisition settings resulted in a signal-to-noise
ratio (SNR) of approximately 59 dB at a reactor charge conductivity of 0.01 S m1 .
The SNR is the ratio of the mean of one voltage reading over a number of frames, n, to
the standard deviation of the reading, averaged over the number of readings in a frame,
equation 10. In this case the SNR was taken over 30 frames to produce a good average.

SNR = 20 log

mean
= 10 log
standard deviation
i

"

Pn

2
i=1 Vi
n Pn
2
( i=1 Vi )

(10)

An accurate geometric model of the vessel, including the exact electrode positions,
was developed using constructive solid geometry (Figure 7(a)). The baffles and the
agitator were also modelled as they strongly affect the measured voltage signals [26]
and so are requisite for the finite element model accuracy. Figure 8 shows the reference
set of voltage measurements for plane 3 (near the agitator) and a calculated set with
the baffles and the agitator modelled and without. The average error for the model
with the modelled baffles and agitator is 10.6 %, and it can be seen from Figure 8 that
Setting
Excitation frequency
Sampling time interval
Delay cycles
Samples per frame
Frames per download
Injection current
Sampling strategy
Sampling rate

Value
9.6 kHz
40 ms
3
1
Equal to the number of measurement frames
50 mA
Normal adjacent
3.06 fps

Table 2: ITS P2000 data acquisition settings.

15

Comparison of NoZ with ERT

the shape of the voltages fit well. The average error for the model without the interior
modelled is 29.0 % and it can be seen from Figure 8 that the shape is not that close
to the measured voltages. The geometric model was meshed (using an advancing front
surface mesh and Delaunay techniques) to give 8198 tetrahedral elements, k, using the
Netgen mesh generator [27], as shown by Figure 7(b). The collected voltage data was
reconstructed using the generalised singular value decomposition (gsvd) algorithm [28]
based on the finite element model. This approach decomposes the image into individual
spatial frequency components and affords the ability to control the number of generalised
singular values incorporated into the solution. The inclusion of a low number of singular
values in the solution yields an image with lower spatial resolution but which is robust to
measurement noise. Conversely, the inclusion of a high number of singular values yields

(a)

(b)

Figure 7: Representation of the stirred tank for the tomography reconstruction, (a)
electrode configuration, (the top planes of electrodes are not shown as they are above
the water level). (b) finite element model (only surface elements visible).

16

Comparison of NoZ with ERT

Measured Voltage
Calculated with fittings
Calculated without fittings

0
-0.1

Voltage / V

-0.2
-0.3
-0.4
-0.5
-0.6
-0.7
-0.8
0

20

10

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Measurement
Figure 8: Measured voltages for plane 3 (near the agitator) compared to the calculated
voltages with and without the modelling of the interior fittings (i.e. baffles and agitator).
an image with potentially higher spatial resolution which is less robust to measurement
noise.
In EIT, the aim of the problem is to calculate a new admittivity (conductivity for
collection of the real part of the voltage only) distribution from a change in the boundary
value voltage. The change in the admittivity from a reference state can be given by the
least square solution to a first order assumption between the change in measured voltages
to the change in admittivity, equation 11 [26], where J is the Jacobian matrix given as
the differential of the boundary voltage with respect to the admittivity distribution at a
reference state and L is the regularisation matrix (a matrix approximation to a partial
differential operator) [29].

= arg min kJ V k2 + 2 kLk2

(11)

17

Comparison of NoZ with ERT

For the matrices in equation 11 there exists matrices UJ Rmk , UL Rkk with
UJT UJ = I0 , ULT UL = I0 , and a nonsingular X Rkk which give equation 12.

0
UJ 0 J

X =

M 0
L
0 UL

(12)

With = diag (1 , . . . , k ) Rkk and M = diag (1 , . . . , k ) Rkk such that

0 1 . . . k 1, 1 . . . k 0, and i2 + 2i = 1 for
i = 1, . . . , k. The solution to equation 11 can then be given by equation 13 [26]
with F = diag (f1 , . . . , fk ) Rkk with diagonal elements given by equation 14

= XF 1 UJT V

fi =

(i /i )2
,
(i /i )2 + 2

i = 1, . . . , k

(13)

(14)

The regularisation parameter in the algorithm, was determined frame by frame to

be the value obtained by an analysis of the Discrete Picard Condition [30]. The Discrete
Picard Condition compares the generalised singular values (representing the change in


the data, i /i ) with the Picard coefficients (representing the noise in the data,uTJ,i V ),
and gives the value where they are equal. Values of the generalised singular values
greater than the Picard coefficients contain recoverable data and should be utilised,
which occurs if the regularisation parameter is set to this equality, equation 15.
j+1
where j = max[i], i
=
j+1

i
i

1

 T

uJ,i V  1, i [1, , k]

(15)

Figure 9(a) shows an example comparison of the generalised singular values with
the Picard coefficients; the point where they cross gives the value of the regularisation
parameter. Figure 9(b) shows the variation of the regularisation parameter with the

18

Comparison of NoZ with ERT

frame number; during the mixing the regularisation parameter increases as the sharp
changes in conductivity create more noise in the data. The automatic identification of
optimum algorithm parameters, based on measured data, is a novel development and
contrasts strongly with common practice where parameters are selected based on best
fit with known or anticipated solutions.
The data from the tracer addition can be compared to the NoZ model by placing a
high concentration of material in one zone of the NoZ model. The model is appropriate
if the mixing time, tracer images, and local tracer concentrations predicted are similar
to those measured experimentally.
For comparison, the ERT data collected needs to be converted into a salt
concentration. This was achieved by adding known concentrations of salt solution to the
ERT vessel and measuring the reconstructed conductivity, giving a simple correlation.
The fit of this correlation is shown in Figure 10, and shows that as the concentration
gets over about 0.2 g l1 , a small change in concentration produces a large change in the
measured conductivity, and that at concentrations less than 0.001 g l1 , the ITS P2000
struggles to differentiate the concentration change.

Magnitude

10

15

10

10

Generalised singular values

Picard Coefficients

0.0005

Regulrisation parameter

10

10
10
10

-5

-10

10

0.0004

0.0003

0.0002

0.0001

-15

100

200

300

400

Index

(a)

500

600

700

50

100

150

200 250 300

Frame number

350

400

450

500

(b)

Figure 9: Discrete Picard Analysis. (a) Comparison of the generalised singular values
with the Picard coefficients. (b) Change of the regularisation parameter with the frame
number.

19

Comparison of NoZ with ERT

Concentration / g l

-1

0.1

C=0.820+0.124ln(-0.0087)

0.01

0.001

0.01

0.012

0.014
0.016
-1
Conductivity / S m

0.018

0.02

Figure 10: Comparison of ERT average measured conductivity with the concentration
of salt solution in the vessel.
3. Results and Analysis
Figure 11 shows the variation of the mixing time predicted by the NoZ model for the
Cowles disk compared to the times measured by ERT and the prediction of the mixing
time from the correlation by Grenville and Nienow (2004)[23]. It can be seen that the
NoZ and the ERT predict very similar values of the mixing time which are very similar
to the currently used correlation.
Figure 12 presents the global average conductivity trace for the ERT experiment
at 100 rpm and the resulting mass balance generated when 5 g of salt were added to
the vessel after 20 s (the 100 ml tracer). From about 35 seconds the global average
conductivity trace is still varying, but the mass balance is producing a relatively constant
value. This is due to the fact that there are no extreme values of the conductivity being
measured so the correlation from Figure 10 is in the most reliable region (conductivities
from 0.0102 to 0.012 S m1 ). The mass balance also takes into account the volume of

20

Comparison of NoZ with ERT

20
Correlation
ERT
NoZ prediction

95 / s

15

10

0
0

10

15

20
-1
N/s

25

30

35

40

Figure 11:
Comparison of NoZ model mixing time prediction for a Cowles
disk with experimental data from ERT and the mixing time correlation from
Grenville and Nienow (2004)[23].
each finite element to work out the mass in each element from the element conductivity,
while the overall conductivity simply takes an average of the conductivity measurements,
ignoring the element volume even though they are of different volumes due to the
meshing technique used.
The unrealistic spikes in the total mass added (above 5 g) are probably due to
the ERT over predicting the size of the salt tracer plume initially. This is due to the
high localised values of conductivity created when the initial high conductivity tracer
is added. ERT struggles to accurately measure these sharp boundaries and ends up
smearing the boundaries, producing a wider plume. This result in a large area of
high concentration being calculated as the concentration is almost independent of the
conductivity at these high conductivities.
Figure 13 compares the concentration of salt predicted by the NoZ model to that
measured by ERT for 4 different points in the vessel. The location of these points is

21

Comparison of NoZ with ERT

(a) Average global conductivity

(b) Total mass balance

Figure 12:
The average global conductivity, (a), which when scaled using the
concentration calibration gives the total mass of salt in the vessel, (b).
shown in Figure 14. It can be seen from Figure 13 that the traces given by the NoZ

Concentration / g l

-1

Concentration / g l

-1

data agree well with that taken from the ERT data.

0.1

Point 1

Point 2

0.08 Point 3

Point 4

0.08

ERT data
NoZ data

0.06
0.04
0.02
0

0.06
0.04
0.02
0

10

20

30

40

Time / s

50

60

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Time / s

Figure 13: Concentration profiles produced by NoZ simulation compared to those

produced by ERT at the four points in the vessel shown in figure 14. The dotted line is
the true vessel final concentration, and the dashed line is the addition time.

Comparison of NoZ with ERT

22

Figure 14:
Position of the comparison points between the NoZ and the ERT
concentrations given in figure 13.
Figure 15 and Figure 16 show the images produced from the visualisation, the NoZ
model, the ERT data with the threshold taken as the final conductivity minus the final
experimental noise, and the ERT data concentration calibration. It can be seen that the
NoZ simulation gives a tracer plume that looks like the real case and the ERT data. The
only difference in the images is that the ERT data over predicts the size of the initial
plume (images for 3 and 5 s) and that the plume is slightly offset counter clockwise.
This over prediction is due to a smearing of the plume boundaries as discussed above,
and the slightly offset plume is due to a slight interference in the reconstruction due to
the front right baffle as the addition tube in the experiments was not perfectly centred.

4. Future Work
This method could be extended by developing a correlation between the conductivity
and the concentration that varies with position in the vessel. This would reflect the

(b) Feed

(c) 3 s

(d) 5 s

(e) 8 s

(f) 11 s

(g) 35 s

(h) 60 s

Comparison of NoZ with ERT

(a) Before

Figure 15: Visualisation of the vessel for the addition of a brine tracer, from above - top row, and from the side - second row; and
the network-of-zones model, from above - third row, and from the side - bottom row. (a) Before addition, (b) Feed point, (c) 3 s ,
(d) 5 s, (e) 8 s, (f) 11 s, (g) 35 s, and (h) 60 s at 100 rpm.

23

(b) Feed

(c) 3 s

(d) 5 s

(e) 8 s

(f) 11 s

(g) 35 s

(h) 60 s

Comparison of NoZ with ERT

(a) Before

Figure 16: Tomography reconstruction for the addition of a brine tracer, from above - top row, and from the side - second row;
and the salt concentration prediction, from above - third row, and from the side - bottom row. (a) Before addition, (b) Feed point,
(c) 3 s , (d) 5 s, (e) 8 s, (f) 11 s, (g) 35 s, and (h) 60 s at 100 rpm.

24

Comparison of NoZ with ERT

25

fact that the sensitivity of the measurements are highest around the outside of the
vessel and lowest in the middle. Ideally, a correlation of this sort would not be needed
if a measurement strategy is used that has much more uniform sensitivity; however,
currently no such strategy has been developed for industrial sized mixing vessels.
The calculation of the total mass could be incorporated into the reconstruction
to iteratively fix the reconstruction based on the mass. However, there are several
methods that could be incorporated and extensive study would be required to asses
the best method (e.g. reduce all the conductivities evenly, reduce all the conductivities
less than the a given percentage of the plume, real-time re-mesh around each plume
estimation for a better reconstruction[31], etc.).
The reconstruction process carried out produces about 30 frames per second, which
with the current data collection rate would be able to be used as an on-line sensor
system, which could give the mass of material added during an addition.

5. Discussion and Conclusions

Using a NoZ model based on experimental data provides a more useful and robust model
which can be adapted to other situations, e.g. suspension of solids and emulsions[24].
The parameters used for the Cowles disk fit the experimental data well, and produce
images similar to the photos. Calibration of the ERT data to the salt concentration
gives concentration data that fits the NoZ model very well, and provides a good mass
balance on the amount of salt. The only problem is the slight over prediction of the
tracer plume size at high concentrations by the ERT measurements. This calculation of
the total mass could be incorporated into the reconstruction method to help drive the
reconstruction to a more accurate result.

Comparison of NoZ with ERT

26

Nomenclature
C

Concentration

Agitator clearance

Agitator diameter

Agitator diameter

Liquid height

Radial element number

Jacobian matrix

Axial element number

Tangential element number

Number of finite elements

Regularisation matrix

Number of measurements

Number of tangential elements

Agitation rate

Number of axial elements

Number of frames

NEF

Total exchange flow number

NQT

Total flow number

Agitator circulation flow

Vessel diameter

Element volume

Voltage

Baffle width

Turbulent flow factor

Comparison of NoZ with ERT

A

Agitator turbulent flow multiplier

Clockwise swirl flow factor

Anti-clockwise swirl flow factor

Admittivity

CD

Cowles disk agitator

27

S m1

gsvd Generalised singular value decomposition

NoZ

Network-of-zones

SNR Signal to noise ratio

dB

Regularisation parameter

6. References
[1] G. Montante, K. C. Lee, A. Brucato, and M. Yianneskis. Numerical simulation of the dependency
of ow pattern on impeller clearance in stirred vessels. Chemical Engineering Science, 56:3751
3770, 2004.
[2] J. Derkson. Conned and agitated swirling ows with applications in chemical engineering. Flow,
Turbulence and Combustion, 69:333, 2002.
[3] P. Armenante, C.-C. Chou, and R. B. Hemrajani. Comparison of experimental and numerical
velocity distribution proles in an unbaed mixing vessel provided with a pitched-blade turbine.
In IChemE Symposium Series 136, 1994.
[4] S. L. Yeoh, G. Papadakis, and M. Yianneskis. Determination of mixing time and degree of
homogeneity in stirred vessels with large eddy simulation.

Chemical Engineering Science,

60:22932302, 2005.
[5] G. Montante, M. Mostek, M. Jahoda, and F. Magelli. Cfd simulations and experimental validation
of homogenisation curves and mixing time in stirred newtonian and pseudoplastic liquids.
Chemical Engineering Science, 60:24272437, 2005.
[6] J. Baldyga, A. Kowalski, M. Cooke, and M. Jasinska. Investigations of micromixing in the rotorstator mixer. In XIX Polish Conference of Chemical and Process Engineering, Rzesz
ow, 2007.
[7] M. Rahimi, P. R. Senior, and R. Mann. Visual 3-d modelling of stirred vessel mixing for an
inclined-clade impeller. Transactions of the Institution of Chemical Engineers, 78(Part A):348

Comparison of NoZ with ERT

28

353, 2000.
[8] E. Wabo, M. Kagoshima, and R. Mann. Batch stirred vessel mixing evaluated by visualized reactive
tracers and electrical tomography. Chemical Engineering Research and Design, 82:12291236,
2004.
[9] M. Kagoshima and R. Mann. Interactions of precipitation and uid mixing with model validation
by electrical tomography. Chemical Engineering Research and Design, 83:806810, 2005.
[10] J. Zahradnk, R. Mann, M. Fialova, D. Vlaev, S. D. Vlaev, V. Lossev, and P. Seichter.

networks-of-zones analysis of mixing and mass transfer in three industrial bioreactors. Chemical
Engineering Science, 56:485492, 2001.
[11] A. Brucato, F.Magelli, M. Nocentini, and L. Rizzuti. An application of the network-of-zones model
to solids suspension in multiple impeller mixers. Chemical Engineering Research and Design,
69:4352, 1990.
[12] F. Ruzinsky and C. P.J. Bennington. Aspects of liquor ow in a model chip digester measured
using electrical resistance tomography. Chemical Engineering Journal, 130:6774, 2007.
[13] L. K. Hui, C. P. J. Bennington, and G. A. Dumont. Cavern formation in pulp suspensions using
side-entering axial-ow impellers. Chemical Engineering Science, 64:509519, 2009.
[14] G. P. Lucas, J. C. Cory, R. C. Waterfall, W. W. Loh, and F. J. Dickin. Measurement of the
solids volume fraction and velocity distributions in solids-liquid ows using dual-plane electrical
resistance tomography. Flow Measurement and Instrumentation, 10:249258, 1999.
[15] G. P. Lucas, J. C. Cory, and R. C. Waterfall. A six-electrode local probe for measuring solids
velocity and volume fraction proles in solids-water ows. Measurement Science and Technology,
11:14981509, 2000.
[16] P. Ying. Development and Validation of a 3-D Mixing Model for a Strred Vessel. PhD thesis,
UMIST, 1993.
[17] W.-M. Lu, H.-Z. Wu, and M.-Y. Ju. Eects of bae design on the liquid mixing in an aerated
stirred tank with standard rushton turbine impellers. Chemical Engineering Science, 52:3843
3851, 1997.
[18] T. Kumaresan and J. B. Joshi. Eect of impeller design on the ow pattern and mixing in stirred
tanks. Chemical Engineering Journal, 115:173193, 2006.
[19] J. Costes and J. P. Couderc. Study by laser doppler anemometry of the turbulent ow induced
by a rushton turbine in a stirred tank: Inuence of the size of the units - 1. mean ow and

Comparison of NoZ with ERT

29

turbulence. Chemical Engineering Science, 43:27512764, 1988.

[20] J. M. T. Vasconcelos, S. S. Alves, and J. M. Barata. Mixing in gas-liquid contactors agitated by
multiple turbines. Chemical Engineering Science, 50:23432354, 1995.
[21] D. A. Deglon and C. J. Meyer. Cfd modelling of stirred tanks: Numerical considerations. Minerals
Engineering, 19:10591068, 2006.
[22] D. R. Stephenson, J. L. Davidson, W. R. B. Lionheart, B. D. Grieve, and T. A. York. Comparison
of 3d image reconstruction techniques using real electrical impedance measurement data. In 4th
World Congress on Industrial Process Tomography, Aizu, Japan, 2005.
[23] R. K. Grenville and A. W. Nienow. Handbook of Industrial Mixing: Science and Practice, chapter 9,
pages 507542. John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, New Jersey, 2004.
[24] T. L. Rodgers. Multiple-Scale Approach to Understanding Formulated Product Production. PhD
thesis, The University of Manchester, 2011.
[25] D. R. Stephenson, T. A. York, and R. Mann. Performance and requirements of process ert
instruments. In 5th World Congress on Industrial Process Tomography, Bergen, Norway, 2007.
WCIPT5.
[26] D. R. Stephenson.

Choices and Implications in Three-Dimensional Electrical Impedence

Tomography. Engd thesis, University of Manchester, 2008.

[27] J. Sch
oberl. Netgen. an advancing front 2d/3d-mesh generator based on abstract rules. Computing
and Visualization in Science, 1:4152, 1997.
[28] P. C. Hansen. Regularization, gsvd and truncated gsvd. BIT Numerical Mathematics, 29:491504,
1989.
[29] M. Vauhkonen. Electrical impedance tomography and prior information. PhD thesis, University
of Kuopio, 1997.
[30] P. C. Hansen. The discrete picard condition for discrete ill-posed problems. BIT Numerical
Mathematics, 30:658672, 1990.
[31] M. Molinari, S. J. Cox, B. H. Blott, and G. J. Daniell. Adaptive mesh renement techniques for
electrical impedance tomography. Physiological Measurement, 22:9196, 2001.

Comparison of NoZ with ERT

30

7. Acknowledgements
Tom Rodgers would like to thank The University of Manchesters EPSRC CTA
(Collaborative Training Account) and Unilever for financial support during his PhD.
The authors would like to thank the SCEAS workshop staff who helped with equipment
modifications and construction.