15214125, 2010, 3, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ceat.200900220 by Cochrane Thailand, Wiley Online Library on [27/11/2022].

See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Continuous stirred tank reactor 499

Natesan Jayakumar1 Research Article

Mohd Ali Hashim1
Merlin T. Thomas2
1
Department of Chemical
Engineering, University
of Malaya,
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
2
Institute of Science &
Technology for Advanced
Studies & Research (ISTAR)
Vallabh Vidyanagar,
Anand, Gujarat, India.
Input Multiplicity Analysis in a Non-
Isothermal CSTR for Acid-Catalyzed
Hydrolysis of Acetic Anhydride
Multiplicity analysis gives practical guidance for process design to eliminate diffi-
cult operating regions associated with input and output multiplicities. Continu-
ous stirred tank reactors (CSTRs) present challenging operational problems due
to complex behavior such as input and output multiplicities, ignition/extinction,
parametric sensitivity, and nonlinear oscillations. In the absence of a unified
mathematical theory for representing various nonlinear system characteristics,
the present study was aimed at understanding the dynamic behavior of CSTRs by
means of experiments and to link the experimental data to theoretical considera-
tions for further detection and elimination of operating problems. Theoretical
modeling and analysis of a non-isothermal CSTR with acid-catalyzed hydrolysis
of an acetic anhydride system for input multiplicity are discussed. Theoretical
modeling of a non-isothermal CSTR using a root-finding technique was carried
out for predicting steady-state temperatures. Alternatively, a mathematical model
for a non-isothermal CSTR using unsteady-state mass and energy balance equa-
tions is proposed. Computer-based simulation was carried out using a program
developed in MATLAB for final transient temperature and time-temperature data
of the CSTR system under investigation. The results of a theoretical analysis con-
ducted for confirming the existence of input multiplicity in non-isothermal
CSTRs with acid-catalyzed hydrolysis of acetic anhydride were compared with
experimental investigations for validation.

Keywords: Continuous stirred tank reactor, Input multiplicity, Modeling, Reactor dynamics,
Simulation
Received: May 13, 2009; revised: December 12, 2009; accepted: December 15, 2009
DOI: 10.1002/ceat.200900220

1 Introduction systems can exhibit a variety of dynamic patterns ranging from

Multiplicity and stability problems are encountered in indus-
trial reactors but, apparently, proprietary considerations have
prevented the disclosure of data and specific reaction. The
occurrence of different steady states under the same operating
conditions of a reactor is called output multiplicity, whereas
input multiplicity means more than one set of input variables
causes the same output variable. Nonlinearity is a necessary
condition for input and output multiplicities [1]. Nonlinear
– and classical nonlinear mechanics to examine local stability of
Correspondence: Dr. N. S. Jayakumar (nsj552000@yahoo.com, jaya_
kumar@um.edu.my), Department of Chemical Engineering, University
of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur – 50603, Malaysia.
stable operation at a unique stable steady state to oscillations,
chaos, and turbulence. In general, input multiplicities occur
due to the presence of competing effects in a nonlinear process
or due to nonideal mixing with certain nonlinear reaction ki-
netics, or due to the recycling structure of nonlinear processes.
Constraints placed on the manipulated variable of a nonlinear
process and the increase in the number of controlled variables
can eliminate input multiplicities [2]. But, one of the major
difficulties in dealing with nonlinear systems is the lack of
unified mathematical theory for representing various non-
linear system characteristics.
Early researchers in this area have made attempts to theoret-
ically demonstrate the application of linear stability analysis
a steady state, and the existence of multiple steady states and
sustained oscillations of CSTRs with and without control
[3, 4]. In the early seventies, few attempted a derivation of the

Chem. Eng. Technol. 2010, 33, No. 3, 499–507 © 2010 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim www.cet-journal.com

500
criteria for the exhibition of input multiplicity for different re-
action schemes [5–7]. It is reported that isothermal reactions
whose rate curves go through a maximum can exhibit multi-
plicity. Most of the recent advances in the study and under-
standing of multiplicity in chemically-reacting systems have
resulted from the applications of catastrophe and singularity
theories to situations which are relatively simple (the number
of intrinsic state variables involved are limited). The applica-
tion of these catastrophe and singularity theories in deriving
the necessary and sufficient condition for the existence of
input multiplicity has been studied [8–12]. It is noted that
whenever ∂C1)/∂m = 0, the possibility of multiple steady states
must be considered. It cannot be confidently assumed that the
inverse function of C(m) exists as a one-to-one mapping from
values of C to values of m. In physical terms, there may be
more than one set of manipulated variables, m, which can pro-
duce the same desired steady state variable, C. Past studies on
multiplicity in various reacting systems have shown that pro-
cess behavior such as divergence phenomena and uncon-
strained limit cycles are caused by input multiplicity
[13, 14, 16]. The unconstrained limit cycle phenomenon is
potentially very important. There is theoretical evidence which
suggests that the same mathematical conditions necessary for
input multiplicity may also be necessary for an unconstrained
limit cycle [15].
The continuous stirred tank reactor (CSTR) is widely used
in chemical process industries for conducting single and multi-
ple reactions. CSTRs present a challenging operational prob-
lem due to the complex open-loop behavior such as input and
output multiplicities, ignition/extinction, parametric sensitiv-
ity, nonlinear oscillations, and perhaps even chaos. In the past,
few studies have taken place in the understanding of the
dynamic behavior of CSTRs, including investigations on the
existence of input multiplicity for several reaction schemes
from a theoretical standpoint. However, very few reaction sys-
tems have been tried experimentally. In the absence of a uni-
fied mathematical theory for representing various nonlinear
system characteristics, it is appropriate to link theoretical con-
siderations to experimental data for detection and elimination
of operating problems. Multiplicity analysis provides practical
guidance for process redesign to eliminate difficult operating
regions associated with input and output multiplicities.
For cases where there is not much difference between feed
temperature and coolant temperature, output multiplicity is a
necessary and sufficient condition for the existence of input
multiplicity [2]. Liou and Chien [18] also showed that one of
the conditions for the existence of input multiplicity is that the
phenomenon of output multiplicity occurs at the nonlinear
reaction rate. Preliminary investigation based on the published
values of kinetics parameters for this system showed that the
system may exhibit input multiplicity if low concentrations of
acetic anhydride were used as in the studies by Jayakumar and
Rao [19], and Haldar and Rao [20]. As this reaction generates
heat to the extent of 58.2 kJ/mol [20], it was also felt that the
system might be suitable for investigating input multiplicity of
– bCX
1) List of symbols at the end of the paper.
www.cet-journal.com © 2010 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
15214125, 2010, 3, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ceat.200900220 by Cochrane Thailand, Wiley Online Library on [27/11/2022]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
N. Jayakumar et al.
a continuous flow stirred tank reactor. Availability of kinetic
data and proof of the existence of output multiplicity has been
the primary criteria in the selection of the above reaction sys-
tem for investigating the existence of input multiplicity in
non-isothermal CSTRs. So far, no study has been reported on
the input multiplicity of CSTRs using acetic anhydride hydro-
lysis. Acid-catalyzed hydrolysis of acetic anhydride was chosen
as the reaction system for the study.
This work discusses the theoretical modeling and analysis of
a non-isothermal CSTR with acid-catalyzed hydrolysis of an
acetic anhydride system for input multiplicity. The mathemati-
cal modeling of a non-isothermal CSTR using a root-finding
technique was conducted for the prediction of steady-state
temperatures. The dynamic unsteady-state mass and energy
balance equations are considered for predicting transient tem-
perature. Computer-based simulation was carried out using a
program developed in MATLAB for final transient tempera-
ture and time-temperature data of the CSTR system under
investigation. The results of a theoretical analysis conducted
for confirming the existence of input multiplicity in an non-
isothermal CSTR with acid-catalyzed hydrolysis of acetic anhy-
dride and was also compared with experimental investigations
for validation.
2 Modeling CSTR Dynamics
2.1 Modeling Conditions that cause Input
Multiplicity
The quantum of investigations required for confirming input
multiplicity in a reaction system can be minimized and are
easily realizable in the laboratory by theoretically identifying
the regions of its existence. Through selecting a set of process
variable combinations from the regions, the trial runs required
for experimental confirmation of the input multiplicity behav-
ior of a reaction system can be reduced considerably. The con-
ditions necessary for the occurrence of input multiplicity for
the system under study is theoretically determined using the
same approach as that of Balakotaiah and Luss [2]. They pre-
dicted methods for the determination of parameter regions
with a number of solutions. They used concentration as con-
trol variable, whereas in the present work, temperature is taken
as a control variable. For a perfectly mixed continuous stirred
tank reactor (CSTR) in which a first-order exothermic reaction
occurs, the steady-state mass and energy balance equations are
modeled as follows:
q…CAf CA † Vk0 exp… E=RT†CA ˆ 0 (1)
qqCp …Tf T† ‡ Ua…Tc T† ‡ V… DH†ko exp… E=RT†CA ˆ 0
(2)
Consider the case where temperature in the reactor is con-
trolled by manipulating the flow rate (q) and the coolant flow
rate (qc). Eliminating the concentration term from Eqs. (1)
and (2), the following single steady state equation is obtained:
…C ‡ a†h ahc ˆ0 (3)
C ‡X
Chem. Eng. Technol. 2010, 33, No. 3, 499–507
 15214125, 2010, 3, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ceat.200900220 by Cochrane Thailand, Wiley Online Library on [27/11/2022]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Continuous stirred tank reactor 501

A single steady state equation relating the Table 1. Process variable combinations that cause input multiplicity.
temperature, T, and the dimensionless flow rate,
C, is obtained by eliminating the concentration Tf [°C] hc [–] c [–] B [–] CAf [kmol/m3] C [–]
term from the steady-state mass and energy bal- 20.2 0.0027 38.34 0.2387 5 16.93
ance equations for a perfectly mixed CSTR, for
3.36
a first-order exothermic reaction. The various
dimensionless numbers used in the solution of 20.2 0.0027 38.34 0.2865 6 24.85
the above equation are as follows:
2.29
q
Cˆ (4a) 20.2 0.0027 38.34 0.3342 7 32.9
Vko exp… E=RTf †
1.73

… DH†CAf 20.2 0.0027 38.34 0.382 8 40.9

bˆ (4b)
qCp Tf 1.39
24 0.009 37.85 0.235 5 20.74
Ua
aˆ (4c) 1.65
qCp Vko exp…E=RTf †
24 0.009 37.85 0.2828 6 27.91
1.22
c…T Tf †
hˆ (4d)
Tf 24 0.009 37.85 0.329 7 35.68
0.96
c…Tc Tf † 24 0.009 37.85 0.377 8 43.5
hc ˆ (4e)
Tf
0.785
31.3 0.072 36.96 0.23 5 23.81
h
X ˆ exp (4f)
…1 ‡ …h=c† 0.478
31.3 0.072 36.96 0.276 6 30.76
E
cˆ (4g) 0.37
RTf
31.3 0.072 36.96 0.322 7 38.67
Eq. (3) is quadratic in C so that at most two 0.295
values of C may exist for any specified h, the di-
mensionless temperature, which is related to X. 31.3 0.072 36.96 0.368 8 46.04
This implies the existence of a single steady-state 0.247
temperature for two manipulating flow rates.
Using the kinetic parameters for the hydroly-
sis of acetic anhydride as given by Haldar and Rao [20], the For the concrete problems of CSTRs, these approaches are well
regions of existence of input multiplicity were identified for worth the effort since considerable progress can be made both
various combinations of process variables (temperature, con- in theory and computation. Since many physical parameters of
centration, and kinetic parameters) by drawing graphs of a greatly divergent sizes actually occur, proper nondimensionali-
(dimensionless heat transfer coefficient) versus h (dimension- zation and sophisticated procedures are essential. The condi-
less temperature). The process variable combinations causing tion of instantaneous and perfect mixing throughout the con-
input multiplicity of non-isothermal CSTRs for the hydrolysis tents of a CSTR is an idealization that can never actually be
of acetic anhydride obtained by theoretical calculations are attained in a real reactor. Understanding of the dynamic be-
summarized in Tab. 1. The concentrations ranging from havior of a CSTR under input multiplicity requires accurate
5 kmol/m3 to 8 kmol/m3 were selected for further theoretical mathematical modeling of the energy balance equation.
and experimental investigations, because output multiplicity Mathematical equations characterizing the dynamic behav-
for the same system was already established with the above ior of the non-isothermal CSTR are modeled using the unstea-
concentrations by Jayakumar and Rao [19]. dy state material, and energy balance and the Arrhenius rela-
tion. The unsteady state material and energy balance for a
single CSTR are given as:
2.2 CSTR Modeling Analysis using a Root-Finding dCA
Method V ˆ q …CAf CA † V k CA (5)
dt
The theoretical modeling of systems necessitates deeper con- dT
qCp V ˆ qqCp …Tf T† ‡ Ua…Tc T† ‡ V… DH†kCA (6)
cepts and more powerful mathematical machinery in general. dt

Chem. Eng. Technol. 2010, 33, No. 3, 499–507 © 2010 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim www.cet-journal.com
 15214125, 2010, 3, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ceat.200900220 by Cochrane Thailand, Wiley Online Library on [27/11/2022]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
502 N. Jayakumar et al.

The temperature dependency of the rate of reaction accord- by using Eq. (14), representing b in dependence on Z for varia-
ing to Arrhenius theory is: tions in:

k ˆ k0 exp… E=RT†: (7) b ˆ Zexp…Z†=…1 aZ† 0 ≤ Z ≤ 1/a (19)

At steady state, the right-hand side of Eqs. (5) and (6), are The characteristics of Eq. (17) make it possible to determine
equal to zero. The two temperature differences, (Tf – T) and the steady state point. Concentration CA and the steady-state
(Tc – T), which occur in Eqs. (5) and (6) suggest the choice of temperature are determined from the following equations:
an appropriate reference temperature. The identity obtained
from Eqs. (6) and (7): T=Tm ˆ 1=…1 …RTm =E†Z† (20)

qqCp …Tf T† Ua …Tc T† ˆ …qqCp ‡ Ua †…Tm T† (8)

From the identity given above, we obtain the reference tem-
perature as:
Tm ˆ …qqCp Tf ‡ Ua Tc †=…qqCp ‡ Ua † (9)
In the above equation, temperature Tm appears as a
weighted mean value of the temperature of the coolant, Tc,
and that of the feed stream temperature, Tf. Using Eq. (9),
Eq. (8) takes – for steady state conditions – the form:
…qqCp ‡ UA †…Tm T† ‡ V… DH†k0 exp…E=RT†CA ˆ 0 (10)
When the concentration term, CA, in Eq. (8) is eliminated
by the use of Eq. (5), Eq. (10) becomes:
…V… DH†kqCAf †=…q ‡ Vk0 †exp… E=RT††
(11)
ˆ …qqCp ‡ Ua †…T Tm†
The form of the rate equation, k ˆ k0 exp… E=RT†, suggests
the introduction of a dimensionless temperature, Z, as follows:
CA =CAf ˆ …1 aZ†T=Tm (21)
The analysis was carried out for all process variable combi-
nations that were under experimental investigation. The steady
state values obtained for different feed temperatures are given
in Tab. 2.
2.3 The CSTR Analysis using Simulation Modeling
Computer-based simulation was also carried out using a pro-
gram developed in MATLAB to obtain the final transient tem-
perature and time-temperature data for the CSTR system
under investigation. The unsteady-state mass and energy bal-
ances, Eqs. (5) and (6), were used as mathematical model for
the simulation of non-isothermal CSTR. The coupled non-
linear differential equations are solved numerically by using
the variable order/Gear method of Matlab (ODE15S of Matlab
version 6.0.0.88 Release 12) for time-temperature predictions.
Time-temperature plots of the simulation runs carried out for
eight variable combinations are given in Figs. 2–5.

Z ˆ …E=R†…1=Tm 1=T† (12)

3 Experimental Investigation
where k ˆ km exp…Z† and km ˆ k0 exp… E=RTm †.
While rearranging Eq. (9) using Eq. (10), we obtain: For the purpose of experimental investigations, a CSTR assem-
bly was fabricated in the laboratory. The assembly consists of
Z ˆ …E=RTm † …E=RTm †…Tm =T† (13) the necessary storage tanks, constant head feed tanks, overflow
collection tanks, a constant-temperature bath, a 330-mL stain-
…E=RTm † Z ˆ …E=RTm †…Tm =T† (14) less steel reactor with four stainless steel baffles of 0.6-cm
width, a 0.63 cm-diameter stainless steel cooling coil of six
turns, a stirrer assembly with 0.25 HP motor and a glass stirrer
…T=Tm † 1 ˆ Z=……E=RTm † Z†† (15) of diameter 4.3 cm, resistance temperature detector, and volt-
age variac and tachometer for regulating the motor speed.
when Eq. (13) is rearranged using Eq. (15), we get: Fig. 1 shows the layout details of the setup employed for con-
ducting the experiments. For the fabricated CSTR, heat loss
F…Z; a; b† ˆ ln…Z=b…1 aZ†† Zˆ0 (16) experiments were conducted for the determination of the over-
all heat transfer coefficient with nine different coolant flow
where the two parameters, a and b, are defined as: rates with water as the coolant. Based on the trial experimental
runs, an empirical equation relating Ua and qc is obtained from
a ˆ …RTm =E†f1 ‡ …Ua ‡ qqCp †Tm =… DH†qCAf g > 0 (17) various values of the heat transfer coefficient and the coolant
flow rate.
The pure acetic anhydride was kept in storage tank 1, and
b ˆ …… DH†VCAf km †…E=RTm
2
†=…Ua ‡ qqCp † > 0 (18) the mixture of glacial acetic acid-water (60:40) and analar
grade sulphuric acid catalyst were placed in storage tank 2.
Eqs. (17) and (18) can be used to characterize the entire be- The 60:40 ratio is taken to make the reaction mixture homoge-
havior of the system. The steady state values of b is obtained neous when the reaction is carried out. The reactants were

www.cet-journal.com © 2010 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim Chem. Eng. Technol. 2010, 33, No. 3, 499–507
 15214125, 2010, 3, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ceat.200900220 by Cochrane Thailand, Wiley Online Library on [27/11/2022]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Continuous stirred tank reactor 503

Table 2. Steady-state temperature in the CSTR from the root-finding method.

Feed temperature Feed Feed flow rate, Coolant a B Z Steady-state

[°C] concentration q · 106 [m3/s] flow rate, [m2] [–] [–] temperature
[kmol/m3] qc · 106 [m3/s] [°C]

20.2 5 0.4370 630 2.14 0.319 0.21 23.41

0.0887 720 2.14 0.319 0.21 23.41
20.2 6 0.67 630 1.20 0.37 0.318 25.09
3.69 800 1.20 0.37 0.318 25.09
20.2 7 0.8867 630 0.804 0.429 0.42 26.69
0.04633 818 0.804 0.429 0.42 26.69
20.2 8 1.0997 630 0.585 0.481 0.57 29.09
0.0367 875 0.585 0.481 0.57 29.09
24 5 0.8997 590 1.105 0.497 0.41 30.50
0.0715 700 1.105 0.497 0.41 30.50
24 6 1.2103 590 0.713 0.58 0.60 33.7
0.0529 720 0.713 0.58 0.60 33.7
24 7 1.5473 590 0.501 0.657 0.86 37.98
0.0415 752 0.501 0.657 0.86 37.98
24 8 1.8863 590 0.377 0.688 1.25 44.86
0.0345 797 0.377 0.688 1.25 44.86
31.3 5 2.7217 530 0.405 1.164 1.7 45.97
0.0546 700 0.405 1.164 1.7 45.97
31.3 6 3.5160 530 0.288 1.303 3.02 58.38
0.04217 830 0.288 1.303 3.02 58.38
31.3 7 4.420 530 0.219 1.41 4.36 72.00
0.03367 950 0.219 1.41 4.36 72.00
31.3 8 5.2562 530 0.177 1.512 5.55 85.00
0.02817 1020 0.177 1.512 5.55 85.00

allowed to flow through the coils in the bath and through the
feed lines into the collection tank for a sufficient amount of
time such that the reactants attained stable feed temperatures.
When feed temperatures have attained constant values, the
drain tube of the reactor are closed. The reactor is then filled,
at the same time, with the feed mixtures with known composi-
tion and inlet temperatures up to the level of the outlet flow
tube. Stirring is done immediately after pouring the reacting
liquids into the reactor. The experimental runs were allowed to
continue until the temperature of the reactor reached a steady
value. The transient reactor temperature with time readings
and the steady-state temperature were noted.
Sixty-four experimental runs were conducted with various
process variable combinations covering feed temperature, feed
concentration, feed and coolant flow rate, etc., that were iden-
tified theoretically for the existence of input multiplicity. The
variable combinations include three feed temperatures
(20.2 °C, 24.0 °C, and 31.3 °C), four feed concentrations
(5 kmol/m3, 6 kmol/m3, 7 kmol/m3, and 8 kmol/m3), and three
initial reactor temperatures (20.6 °C, 32.0 °C, and 40 °C). For
each feed temperature, feed concentration and initial reactor
temperature were varied. Each combination had different feed
flow rates (q) and coolant flow rates (qc). In the case of feed
temperature 31.3 °C, only two initial reactor temperatures
(32.0 °C and 40 °C) were considered due to practical limita-
tions. Input multiplicity were observed for all 32 sets (each
with two different flow rates) of the process variable combina-
tions tried. Input multiplicity is confirmed in the experimental
runs by observing the same steady-state temperature in the
CSTR with two different feed flow rates (q values), while all
other variables remained the same. The steady-state tempera-
tures observed for feed temperature at different feed concen-

Chem. Eng. Technol. 2010, 33, No. 3, 499–507 © 2010 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim www.cet-journal.com
 15214125, 2010, 3, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ceat.200900220 by Cochrane Thailand, Wiley Online Library on [27/11/2022]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
504 N. Jayakumar et al.

Figure 2b). Time versus temperature profile for Tf = 20.2 °C,

1&2 Storage tanks for the feed reactants CAf = 5 kmol/m3, Ti = 20.6 °C, and q = 0.4367 · 10–6 m3/s.
3&4 Constant head feed tanks
5&6 Overflow collection tanks
7 Thermometer
8 Resistance temperature detector
9 Stirrer assembly
10 CSTR
11 Coil pre-heaters

Figure 1. Experimental setup.

Figure 3a). Time versus temperature profile for Tf = 20.2 °C,

CAf = 7 kmol/m3, Ti = 40 °C, and q = 0.04633 · 10–6 m3/s.

Figure 2a). Time versus temperature profile for Tf = 20.2 °C,

CAf = 5 kmol/m3, Ti = 20.6 °C, and q = 0.08867 · 10–6 m3/s.

trations are summarized in Tabs. 3–5 along with results ob-

tained from theoretical modeling of the reaction system. The
experimental observations confirm the existence of input mul-
tiplicity for the chosen reaction system. In total, all 64 experi-
mental runs (32 sets of feed flow rates) exhibited the phenom- Figure 3b). Time versus temperature profile for Tf = 20.2 °C,
ena of input multiplicity. CAf = 7 kmol/m3, Ti = 40 °C, and q = 0.8867 · 10–6 m3/s.

www.cet-journal.com © 2010 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim Chem. Eng. Technol. 2010, 33, No. 3, 499–507

Figure 4a). Time versus temperature profile for Tf = 24 °C,
CAf = 5 kmol/m3, Ti = 25 °C, and q = 0.0715 · 10–6 m3/s.
Figure 4b). Time versus temperature profile for Tf = 24 °C,
CAf = 5 kmol/m3, Ti = 25 °C, and q = 0.8997 · 10–6 m3/s.
4 Results and Discussion
Final transient temperatures in the reactor system obtained
from experimental investigation as well as theoretical analysis
are summarized in Tabs. 3–5. The comparison is given for all
the sixty-four process variable combinations for which experi-
ments were conducted and input multiplicity phenomena were
confirmed. All the steady-state temperatures obtained from
the root-finding method agreed well with the experimental
steady-state temperatures. The simulation results also agreed
reasonably well with the experimental results. For reaction sys-
tems involving lower feed temperatures (20.2 °C and 24 °C)
and lower feed concentrations, the steady-state temperature
values obtained from simulation runs closely match experi-
mental values. However, it appears from the results (Tab. 5)
that wherever a reaction system involving a higher value of the
feed temperature or feed concentration is employed, the differ-
Chem. Eng. Technol. 2010, 33, No. 3, 499–507 © 2010 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
15214125, 2010, 3, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ceat.200900220 by Cochrane Thailand, Wiley Online Library on [27/11/2022]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Continuous stirred tank reactor 505
Figure 5a). Time versus temperature profile for Tf = 31.3 °C,
CAf = 5 kmol/m3, Ti = 40 °C, and q = 0.0545 · 10–6 m3/s.
Figure 5b). Time versus temperature profile for Tf = 31.3 °C,
CAf = 5 kmol/m3, Ti = 40 °C, and q = 2.7217 · 10–6 m3/s.
ence between the final steady-state temperature obtained from
experiments and theoretical simulation is greater. These differ-
ences are primarily due to the uncertainty in the values of
kinetic parameters and the role of impurities at higher temper-
atures. The steady-state temperatures of non-isothermal
CSTRs are sensitive to small errors in the system parameters.
Janssen et al. [22] are of the opinion that if the value of the
concentration of acetic anhydride or water is in excess, the
deviation in the rate equation could be observed. In the pres-
ent case, a high concentration level of acetic anhydride and
acetic acid along with possible impurities might have affected
the values of the rate constant. It is also reported by Golding
and Dussault [23] that the heat of reaction could also vary
with respect to a change in the concentration. Though acetic
anhydride was purified using batch distillation, there are possi-
bilities that some impurities remain in the feed. It also appears
from the results that there is no influence of initial reactor
www.cet-journal.com
 15214125, 2010, 3, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ceat.200900220 by Cochrane Thailand, Wiley Online Library on [27/11/2022]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
506 N. Jayakumar et al.

Table 3. Steady-state temperature of the CSTR at feed temperature 20.2 °C.

Initial reactor temperature, 20.6 32.0 40.0 20.6 32.0 40.0 20.6 32.0 40.0
Ti [°C]
Process variables Experimental steady state Steady-state temperature Steady-state temperature
3 6 3 temperatures, values, Ts, from the root-finding values, Ts, from the MATLAB
CAf [kmol/m ] q · 10 [m /s]
Ts [°C] method [°C] simulation [°C]

5 0.4367 23.00 23.00 23.00 23.41 23.41 23.41 24.20 24.24 24.16
5 0.08867 23.00 23.00 23.00 23.41 23.41 23.41 24.60 24.57 24.72
6 0.670 24.96 24.92 24.92 25.09 25.09 25.09 24.66 24.62 24.35
6 0.0615 25.10 25.10 25.10 25.09 25.09 25.09 25.02 25.02 25.03
7 0.8867 26.10 26.10 26.10 26.69 26.69 26.69 25.06 25.08 25.20
7 0.04633 26.10 26.10 26.10 26.69 26.69 26.69 25.35 25.33 25.34
8 1.0997 29.60 29.60 29.60 29.09 29.09 29.09 25.46 25.74 26.14
8 0.0367 29.56 29.56 29.56 29.09 29.09 29.09 25.49 25.48 25.49

Table 4. Steady-state temperature of the CSTR at feed temperature 24 °C.

Initial reactor temperature, 25 32.0 40.0 25 32.0 40.0 25 32.0 40.0

Ti [°C]
Process variables Experimental steady state Steady-state temperature Steady-state temperature
temperatures, values, Ts, from the root-finding values, Ts, from the MATLAB
Ts [°C] method [°C] simulation [°C]
CAf [kmol/m3] q · 106 [m3/s] 30.80 30.80 30.80 30.50 30.50 30.50 31.98 31.94 31.30

5 0.0715 30.80 30.80 30.80 30.50 30.50 30.50 31.66 31.65 31.60
6 1.2103 33.40 33.40 33.40 33.70 33.70 33.70 30.89 30.71 30.88
6 0.0529 33.30 33.36 33.30 33.70 33.70 33.70 31.13 31.15 31.71
7 1.5473 38.00 38.00 37.94 37.98 37.98 37.98 30.86 30.88 30.82
7 0.4162 38.00 38.00 37.92 37.98 37.98 37.98 31.22 31.22 31.26
8 1.8863 45.00 45.00 45.00 44.86 44.86 44.86 30.08 30.07 30.16
8 0.03453 45.08 45.08 45.08 44.86 44.86 44.86 34.45 34.53 33.83

Table 5. Steady-state temperature of the CSTRs at feed temperature 31.3 °C.

Initial reactor temperature, 32.0 40.0 32.0 40.0 32.0 40.0

Ti [°C]
Process variables Experimental steady state Steady-state temperature Steady-state temperature
temperatures, values, Ts, from the root-finding values, Ts, from the MATLAB
Ts [°C] method [°C] simulation [°C]
CAf [kmol/m3] q · 106 [m3/s] 44.10 44.10 45.87 45.97 37.69 36.88

5 0.05463 44.00 44.00 45.97 45.97 38.46 37.50

6 3.5160 56.20 56.25 58.38 58.38 37.30 37.02
6 0.04217 56.00 56.10 58.38 58.38 37.88 37.52
7 4.420 70.00 70.00 72.00 72.00 39.60 39.52
7 0.03367 69.50 69.50 72.00 72.00 39.60 39.57
8 5.2562 83.00 83.10 85.00 85.00 42.26 42.23
8 0.0282 83.60 83.65 85.00 85.00 42.12 42.20

www.cet-journal.com © 2010 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim Chem. Eng. Technol. 2010, 33, No. 3, 499–507
 15214125, 2010, 3, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ceat.200900220 by Cochrane Thailand, Wiley Online Library on [27/11/2022]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Continuous stirred tank reactor 507

temperature on the final steady state temperate in the reactor. q [m3/s]
Both experimental as well as theoretical results confirm the qc [mL/s]
above. R [J/mol K]
Few cases of times versus temperature plots comparing the rA [kmol/s m3]
theoretically-predicted results and the experimental results are Ti [°C]
shown in Figs. 2–5. As discussed in the case of final transient Tf [°C]
temperatures, the predicted temperature profile of the reactor T [°C]
matches the experimentally-obtained results for feed tempera- Tc [°C]
tures, 20.2 °C and 24 °C (with lower feed concentration levels). U [W/(m2 K)]
However, deviation is found more in the case of higher feed V [m3]
temperature/feed concentrations. X [–]
feed flow rate (qA + qB)
coolant flow rate
universal gas constant
rate of reaction
initial reactor temperature
feed temperature
reactor temperature
temperature of the coolant
overall heat transfer coefficient
volume of the reactor
dimensionless temperature ratio

Greek symbols
5 Conclusion a [–] dimensionless heat transfer
coefficient
Using the unsteady-state mass and energy balance, mathemati-
c [–] dimensionless activation energy
cal modeling of non-isothermal CSTRs is carried out and,
h [–] dimensionless temperature
using a root-finding technique, steady-state temperatures in
hc [–] dimensionless coolant
CSTRs corresponding to various process variable combina-
temperature
tions are predicted. The results obtained from the root-finding
q [kg/m3] density of the reaction mixture
method agreed well with experimentally-observed steady-state
C [–] dimensionless flow rate
temperatures.
Computer-based simulation was also carried out using a
program developed in MATLAB to obtain the final transient References
temperature and time-temperature data for the CSTR system
under investigation. For the acid-catalyzed hydrolysis of the
[1] M. Chidambaram, G. P. Reddy, J. IETE 1995, 41 (5), 297.
acetic anhydride reaction system involving lower feed tempera-
[2] V. Balakotaiah, D. Luss, Chem. Eng. Commu. 1985, 39, 309.
tures and lower feed concentrations, the steady-state tempera-
[3] R. Aris, N. R. Amundson, Chem. Eng. Sci. 1958, 7, 121.
ture values obtained from simulation runs are in close agree-
[4] O. Bilous, N. R. Amundson, AICh.E. Journal 1955, 1, 513.
ment with the experimental values. However, for high values
[5] T. Matsura, M. Kato, Chem. Eng. Sci. 1967, 22, 171.
of the feed temperature and feed concentration, the time-tem-
[6] D. Luss, Chem. Eng. Sci. 1971, 26, 1713.
perature profile obtained from the simulation model exhibits
[7] M. Moo-Young, T. Kobayashi, Can. J. Chem. Eng. 1972, 50,
greater differences to experimental data. These differences are
162.
mainly due to the uncertainty in the values of kinetic parame-
[8] H. S. Chang, J. M. Calo, Chem. Eng. Sci. 1979, 34, 285.
ters and the role of impurities.
[9] H. S. Chang, J. M. Calo, Chem. Eng. Sci. 1980, 35, 2377.
[10] L. M. Pismen, Chem. Eng. Sci. 1984, 39, 1063.
[11] R. Aris, Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 1979, 1, 314.
Symbols used [12] G. Eigenberger, Inter. Chem. Eng. 1981, 21, 17.
[13] J. J. Carberry, A. Varma, Chemical reaction and reactor engi-
a [m2] heat transfer area of the coil
neering, Marcel Dekker, New York 1987.
B [–] dimensionless exothermicity
[14] L. F. Razon, R. A. Schmitz, Chem. Eng. Sci. 1987, 42, 1005.
parameter
[15] L. B. Koppel, Chem. Eng. Edu. 1983, spring, 59.
Cp [J/kg K] specific heat of the reaction
[16] L. F. Razon, L. B. Schmitz, Chem. Eng. Sci. 1987, 42 (5),
mixture
1005.
E [J/kmol] activation energy
[17] V. Balakotaiah, D. Luss, Chem. Eng. Comm. 1981, 13, 111.
CAf [kmol/m3] concentration (of acetic
[18] C. T. Liou, Y. S. Chien, Chem. Eng. Sci. 1991, 46 (8), 2113.
anhydride) in the feed
[19] N. S. Jayakumar, D. P. Rao, in Frontiers in Chemical Reaction
CA [kmol/m3] concentration of reactant (acetic
Engineering (Eds: M. M. Sharma, R. Mashelkar), Wiley East-
anhydride) in the reactor
ern, New Delhi 1984.
(–DH) [J/kmol] heat of reaction
[20] R. Haldar, D. P. Rao, Chem. Eng. Sci. 1991, 46, 1197.
k [s–1] rate constant of the reaction
[21] H. C. Chang, L. H. Chen, Chem. Eng. Sci. 1984, 39, 1127.
k0 [s–1] frequency factor
[22] H. J. Jansen, C. H. Haydel, L. H. Greathome, Ind. Eng. Chem.
qA [m3/s] flow rate of acetic anhydride
1957, 49(2), 197.
qB [m3/s] flow rate of the acetic acid-water
[23] J. A. Golding, R. Dussault, Can. J. Chem. Eng 1978, 56, 564.
mixture

Chem. Eng. Technol. 2010, 33, No. 3, 499–507 © 2010 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim www.cet-journal.com