Group 1 - Experiment 1 - Continuous Stirred Tank Reactor (CSTR) Dynamic

CEB 2072 CHEMICAL ENGINEERING LAB II
JANUARY 2023 SEMESTER

EXPERIMENT 1: CONTINUOUS STIRRED TANK REACTOR
(CSTR) DYNAMIC
GROUP 8
NAME STUDENT ID
NORMAN MIKHAIL BIN RIZA NOR AZRIN 20000611
SIM YONG QING 20000633
WAN NORAINI BINTI WAN ISMAIL 20000643
AINUR ATHIRAH BINTI ABD AZIZ 20000646
ALYA FIRZANA BINTI FAKHRUL ANWAR 20000661
KEE YU ZHENG 20000592
DATE OF EXPERIMENT: 31st Jan 2023

LECTURER: DR MUHAMMAD AYOUB
LAB INSTRUCTOR: MS NURUL AFIQAH MOKRI
CHEMICAL ENGINEERING
UNIVERSITI TEKNOLOGI PETRONAS
JAN 2023
1
TABLE OF CONTENT
TOPIC PAGE
CHAPTER 1:INTRODUCTION
3
1.1 Background Study
3-6
1.2 Literature Review
7
1.3 Objectives
CHAPTER 2: METHODOLOGY
8-9
2.1 Materials and Apparatus
10
2.2 Safety Precautions
11-13
2.3 Experimental Procedure
CHAPTER 3 RESULTS & CONCLUSION
14-16
3.1 Experiment A: the effect of step change input
16-19
3.2 Experiment B: the effect on pulse input
19-20
CHAPTER 4: CONCLUSION
21
CHAPTER 5: REFE RENCES
2
22-29
CHAPTER 6: APPENDIX
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background Study
In a chemical process, the most vital key equioment is the reactor which consists of two
main types and those are batch reactor and continuous reactor. A batch reactor is a reactor with
no inlet flow and outlet flow when the reaction is undergone. It is known to be the simplest
reactor that us suitable for small scale processes and reactions. A continuous reactor, on the
other hand, is a reactor that operates at steady state with a continuous flow of reactants and
products. Continuous reactors are classified into four types: packed bed reactors, tubular
reactors, fluid bed reactors, and continuous stirred tank reactors (CSTR).
Continuous reactors are ideal for large-scale production and high-rate reactions. In
chemical engineering and environmental engineering, the continuous stirred-tank reactor
(CSTR) is a common model for a chemical reactor. A CSTR is a model that is frequently used
to estimate the critical unit operation variables when employing a continuous agitated-tank
reactor to achieve a specific output. A Continuous Stirred Tank Reactor (CSTR) is a batch
reactor with an impeller or other mixing device for effective mixing. Continuous stirred-tank
reactors (CSTRs) are open vessels in which materials can freely enter and exit the system.
They function on a steady-state basis, with the reactor parameters remaining constant over
time. The cross-sectional diagram of a CSTR unit is depicted in the image below.
Figure 1.1: Cross-sectional diagram of a CSTR unit
3
The behaviour of a CSTR is frequently approximated or described by that of an ideal

CSTR, implying that perfect mixing is assumed. In a perfectly mixed reactor, reagent is
instantly and uniformly blended throughout the reactor upon input. As a result, the output
composition is the same as the composition of the material inside the reactor, which varies with
residence time and reaction rate. In actuality, no reactors behave ideally, but rather fall
somewhere between the mixing limits of an ideal CSTR and PFR.
In this experiment, sodium chloride (NaCl) is employed as a tracer to determine the

conductivity given by NaCl in the fluid. The observed conductivity can then be connected to
the CSTR's residence time. This experiment is broken down into three parts. The first half of
the experiment will investigate the influence of the step change input, while the second portion
will investigate the effect of the pulse input in greater depth. The third and last component of
the experiment focuses on studying the dead time coil. For each component, three distinct
graphs must be drawn in order to investigate how the continuous stirred tank reactors behave
(CSTRs). Flow rate versus time, concentration against time, conductivity against concentration,
and residence time distribution against time are the graphs that are involved.
1.2 Literature Review
The continuous stirred reactor (CSTR) is widely utilised in many industries, including the
biodiesel and pharmaceutical sectors. Depending on the goal of the plant, CSTR might be
stacked in series or parallel. The overall conversion will be higher when CSTRs are organised
in series (University of Michigan, 2008). When CSTRs are stacked in series, the first CSTR
receives a larger concentration of reactant, and the second CSTR builds on the conversion of
the first CSTR. When utilising many CSTRs in parallel, the conversion will be the same as
when using a single CSTR.
Figure 1.2.1: General Diagram for CSTRs in series
Mole balance for CSTRs in series:
In 1st CSTR
General mass balance for 1st CSTR
4
In – Out + Generation = 0
FA0 – FA1 + rA1V1 = 0
(Eq. 1.2.1)
Where,
FA0 = inlet flowrate of reactant A into first CSTR
FA1 = outlet flowrate of reactant A from first CSTR
rA1 = rate of disappearance of reactant A during reaction in first CSTR
V1 = volume of first CSTR
Formula of conversion
Mole of reacted reactant 𝐴

X1= Mole of reactant A in feed
𝐹𝐴0−𝐹𝐴1
X1= 𝐹𝐴0
FA0X1=FA0-FA1
(Eq. 1.2.2)
Where, X1 = conversion of reactant A in first CSTR
Substitute Equation 1.2.2 into Equation 1.2.1
FA0 X1+ rA1V1 = 0
FA0 X1 = -rA1V1
𝐹𝐴0𝑋1
V1 = −𝑟𝐴1
In 2nd CSTR
General mass balance for 2nd CSTR
In – Out + Generation = 0
FA1 – FA2 + rA2V2 = 0
(Eq. 1.2.3)
Where,
5
FA1 = inlet flowrate of reactant A into second CSTR
FA2 = outlet flowrate of reactant A from second CSTR
rA2 = rate of disappearance of reactant A during reaction in second CSTR
V2 = volume of second CSTR
Formula of conversion
Mole of reacted reactant 𝐴

X2 = Mole of reactant A in feed
FA0−FA2
X2 = FA0
FA0 X2 = FA0 - FA2
FA2 = FA0 - FA0 X2
(Eq. 1.2.4)
Where, X2 = conversion of reactant A in second CSTR
From Equation 1.2.2
FA0 X1 = FA0 - FA1
FA1 = FA0 - FA0 X1
(Eq. 1.2.5)
Substitute Equation 1.2.4 and Equation 1.2.5 into Equation 1.2.3
FA0 - FA0 X1 – (FA0 - FA0 X2) + rA2V2 = 0
- FA0 X1 + FA0 X2 + rA2V2 = 0
FA0 (X2 - X1) + rA2V2 = 0
FA0 (X2 - X1) = - rA2V2
FA0 (X2 − X1)

V2 = −rA2
6
Figure 1.2.2: General Diagram for CSTRs in parallel
Additionally, step input and impulse input are two different types of input that are
frequently employed to explore their impact on the performance of CSTR. The step input is the
input that is constant throughout the experiment and has a finite value at time t = 0. Impulse
input is input that is applied quickly and with a large magnitude. To measure the concentration
of the tracer against time, a tracer like sodium chloride is utilised. Various types of input have
different benefits and drawbacks. Impulse input will be promoted more when working with
expensive tracer because it uses less tracer overall than pulse input from an economic
standpoint. Besides, pulse input test can obtain the mean residence time and mass recovery rate
than step input test which required additional metering pumps for the experiment. However,
step input test is able to obtain the value of t10 (the time which 10% of tracer has passed through
the effluent to next reactor) more easily compared to impulse input test which require more
rigorous mathematical manipulation.
1.3 Objectives
1. To study the effect of the step change input based on the concentration of the input to
the concentration of solute in the continuous stirred-tank reactors (CSTRs).
2. To study the effect of pulse input based on the concentration of the input to the
concentration of solutes in the continuous stirred-tank reactors (CSTRs).
3. To complete the modelling of real (non-ideal) reactor by assembling the CSTR and
dead time coil in parallel.
CHAPTER 2: METHOLOGY
2.1 Materials and Apparatus
7
Figure 2.1.1: Process Diagram for CSTR Dynamics (BP 107)
Figure 2.1.2: Continuous Stirred Tank Reactors (CSTR) unit
Table 2.1.1: Materials used during the experiment
No Materials
8
1. Deionized water
2. 0.025M sodium chloride solution
Table 2.2: Apparatus used during the experiment
No Equipment Description
• Made of borosilicate glass.
• The reactors have a capacity of 2 litres.
• Each reactor came with a variable speed
1 CSTR Reactors
stirrer mounted on the top plate.
• The reactors have temperature and
conductivity sensors.
• Variable speed stirrer system with a digital
display consisting of a motor and a shaft
2 Stirred System with impellers made of stainless steel.
• Each stirrer has a speed controller for speed
adjustments.
• Two 15-L cylindrical tanks made of stainless
steel are provided with the unit.
• Each tank has a feed pump to transfer the
3 Feed tank liquid from the feed tank to the reactors.
• Each tank is fitted with a level switch to
protect the pumps from a dry run.
• 2 Feed Tanks (T1 and T2).
• A rectangular 50-L tank made of stainless

4 Water Tank
steel is placed at the bottom of the equipment.
• The material used is 3/8” stainless steel

5 Dead Time Coil tubing.
• The approximate volume is 200ml.
• The range is between 0 to 500 ml/min.

6 Flowmeter
• An output of 0 to 5 VDC
9
• The type of VDC Display is LCD digital

display.
• The sensor range is between 0 to 200 mS/cm.

• 4 sensors will be utilized (CT1, CT2, CT3,
CT4)
7 Conductivity Meter
• An output of 4 to 20 mA.
• Conductivity controller with digital display
for each sensor mounted on the control panel.
• A total of 3 sensors (TT1, TT2, TT3).
8 Temperature Sensor
• RTD typed sensor.
• Consists of valve V3, V4, V5, V6, V10, V11,
9 Valve
V12,V13, and V15
10 Pump • Consists of the pump (P1) and pump (P2).
2.2 Safety Precautions

1. All safety precautions are always observed in the laboratory.
2. Protective clothing, shoes, helmet, and goggles are always worn throughout the laboratory
session.
3. The experiment should always be run after the equipment and procedures are fully
understood.
4. All cables should always be plugged into appropriate sockets before switching on the main
power on the control panel. All cables should be inspected for any damage to avoid
electrical shock. Replacements should be done if necessary.
5. The stirrer assembly should be ensured secured properly. Any excessive load on the
electrical motor should be avoided to prevent damage.
6. The unit, including tubing and fittings, should be inspected periodically for leakage and
wear out. Leakage might cause damage to equipment by a corrosive chemical in the long
run.
2.3 Experimental Procedures
10
Experiment A: The Effect of Step Change Input
In this experiment, a step-change input would be introduced and the progression of the tracer
will be monitored via the conductivity measurements in all three reactors and after the dead
time coil.
1. The feed tank (T1) was filled up with deionised water.

2. 10-L of 0.025M sodium chloride solution was prepared in the feed tank (T2).
3. 3-way valve V3 position was being set up towards pump (P1). The valve (V6) was closed.
4. Valve (V5) was opened. Initially, all three reactors were filled up with deionised water by
switching on the pump (P1). The volume of each reactor was recorded.
5. A flow rate of 150 ml/min was obtained by adjusting the needle of the valve (V4). It was
ensured that no air bubbles were trapped in the piping.
Note: It is important to maintain the liquid level in each reactor. Adjust the flowrate
if necessary.
6. Stirrers 1, 2, and 3 were switched on. The stirrer speed was set up to approximately 200
rpm.
7. The de-ionized water was pumped continuously until all conductivity readings (CT1, CT2,
CT3) were stable at low values.
8. These conductivity values were recorded at time t0.
9. Pump (P1) was switched off. The 3-way valve V3 position is set up towards pump (P2)
quickly. The pump (P2) was switched on and the timer was started simultaneously.
10. All conductivity values (CT1, CT2, CT3) were recorded at a suitable interval in an
appropriate table
11. The conductivity values were continuing to be recorded until all readings are almost
constant.
12. Pump (P2) was switched on and valve (V4) was closed.
13. All liquids in each reactor were drained by opening valves V11, V12, and V13.
Experiment B: The Effect of Pulse Input
11
In this experiment, a pulse input would be introduced, and the progression of the tracer will be
monitored via the conductivity measurements in all three reactors and after the dead time coil.
1. The feed tank (T1) was filled up with deionised water.

2. 10-L of 0.025M sodium chloride solution was prepared in the feed tank (T2).
3. 3-way valve (V3) position was being set up towards pump P1. The valve (V6) was closed.
4. Valve (V5) was opened. Initially, all three reactors were filled up with deionised water by
switching on the pump (P1). The volume of each reactor was recorded.
5. A flowrate of approximately 150 ml/min was obtained by adjusting the needle of the valve
(V4). It was ensured that no air bubbles were trapped in the piping.
Note: It is important to maintain the liquid level in each reactor. Adjust the flowrate
if necessary.
6. Stirrers 1, 2, and 3 were switched on. The stirrer speed was set up to approximately 200
rpm.
7. The deionised water was pumped continuously until all conductivity readings (CT1, CT2,
CT3) were stable at low values.
8. These conductivity values were recorded at time t0.
9. Pump P1 was switched off. The 3-way valve (V3) position is set up towards pump (P2)
quickly. The pump (P2) was switched on and the timer was started simultaneously.
10. Pump (P2) was allowed to operate for 2 minutes, and then pump (P2) was switched off.
The 3-way valve V3 position was quickly being set back towards pump (P1). The
experiment was running till the end once the pump (P1) was switched on.
11. All the conductivity values (CT1, CT2, CT3) were recorded at a suitable interval in an
appropriate table.
12. The conductivity values continued to be recorded until all readings are almost constant.
13. Pump (P1) was switched off. Valve V4 was then closed.
14. All liquids in reactors were drained by opening valves V11, V12, and V13.
Maintenance
12
1. After each experiment, any liquid from the reactor is drained off, and the reactor and
tubing are ensured to be cleaned properly. The system is flushed with de-ionized water
until no traces of salt are detected.
2. All liquids are disposed of immediately after each experiment. No solution or waste
should be left in the tanks over a long period of time.
3. Any spillage should be wiped off from the unit immediately.
CHAPTER 3: RESULT AND DISCUSSION
Experiment Part A: The Effect of Step Change Input
13
1. Conductivity vs Time
Conductivity vs Time
3000
Conductivity (microS/cm)
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
Time (Minutes)
CT1 CT2 CT3
Figure 3A.1 Graph Conductivity vs Time
In this experiment, we performed an experimental approach to determine how the step

change input will affect the sodium chloride NaCl, concentration in the salt solution that was
used in the experiment. The feed tanks were first filled with 10 L of deionized water. Step shift
input describes how the salt solution, NaCl, is constantly fed into the reactor throughout the
experiment, filling each reactor to the same conductance level as the first and third reactors.
For the entire two minutes, the conductivity for the three distinct tanks and the graph was
calculated.
The graph demonstrates that as time passes and the tracer is constantly fed at the feed of
tank 1, the conductivity increases for all reactors. At the CSTR tanks, we could see a temporary
behaviour. The phenomena are that the tracer is continually delivered into the reactor, which
is filled with deionized water, during the step input. The conductivity values for all reactors
stabilise at about 2128 S/cm at a certain time when t = 36 min.
When t = 22 minutes, Reactor 2's conductivity value peaked. This rapid increase in
conductivity for six minutes may have been caused by the modest increase in flowrate. The
conductivity value, however, dropped to 2128 S/cm at time t=36 and remained steady until
time t=40. Overall, Reactor 2 had the highest conductivity value and Reactor 3 had the lowest
conductivity value with respect to time.
2. Concentration vs Time
14
Concentration vs Time
Concentration (microS/cm)
1.2
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
Time (Minutes)
Concentration of NaCl in Reactor 1 (g/L)

Figure 3A.2 Graph Concentration vs Time
In Figure 3A.2, the conductivity values that have been converted to concentration
values are plotted against time. As the time goes on, the concentration rises, and after 36
minutes, the values start to stabilise at roughly 0.9666 g/L until 40 minutes have passed. Similar
to the trend in Figure 3A.1, the concentration vs. time trend follows a similar pattern. Figure
(APPENDIX) of the relationship between conductivity and concentration, which clearly
illustrates how conductivity is linearly proportionate to its concentration, can be used to explain
this.
The conductivity unexpectedly rose for 6 minutes at Reactor 2 when t=22 minutes,
which may have been brought on by the little increase in flowrate. But at t=34 minutes, the
conductivity value dropped to 0.99067 g/L, and it remained steady until t=40 minutes. Overall,
Reactor 2 and Reactor 3 had the highest and lowest concentration values, respectively, with
respect to time.
3. Residence Time vs Time
15
RESIDENCE TIME VS TIME

E(t) Reactor 1 E(t) Reactor 2 E(t) Reactor 3
2.5
RESIDENCE TIME, E(T)
1.5
0.5
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
TIME (MINUTES)
Figure 3A.3 Graph Residence Time vs Time
The residence time distribution (RTD) function for the three reactors is displayed on
the graph. All reactors' distribution of residence time exhibited a bell-shaped curve,
however Reactor 1 has the most leftward distortion of the curve, followed by Reactor 2 and
Reactor 3. The distribution of residence time is skewed or deformed to the left in this
circumstance, and the left tail of the curve is longer than the right tail, which is referred to
as "negative skewness."
The residence time distribution (RTD) and E are used to differentiate the function F(t)
(t). E(t) gives a quantitative indication of how much time different fluid elements spent in
the reactor. Based on Figure 3A.3, we may deduce that the Reactor 1 is essentially identical
to the ideal CSTR since its flow curve declines with time in contrast to the bell-shaped
curves of Reactors 2 and 3. But reactor 2's E(t) curve has the greatest value among all curve
values, indicating a higher mixing rate compared to the other two reactors.
16
Experiment Part B: The Effect of pulse Input
For part B, our aim for this experiment is to analyse the effect of pulse change input in the
series continuous stirred tank reactor (CSTR). Each of the concentration, conductivity, and
residence time of the sodium chloride solution, (NaCl) in each reactor were observed. The
tracer was injected on one shot to the feed stream to make sure that it was injected in a shirt
time as possible. The flowrate of the streams was maintained at 150 ml/min. The conductivity
for the three separate tanks were measured at two minutes intervals until it reached steady state
in each reactor.
1. Concentration vs Time
Figure 3B.1: Conductivity change in time for each reactor in pulse input
Figure 3B.1 shows the conductivity of the mixture in each reactor, CT1, CT2 and CT3
against time until each reactor in the pulse change input reaches a constant level which is steady
state. From the chart, the conductance conductivity ended with values of 58, 59 and 61 uS/cm
for reactor 1 (CT1), reactor 2 (CT2) and reactor 3 (CT3). From the graph above, we can see
the overall downward trend for 86 minutes. It shows that the conductivity of the mixture is
decreasing slowly over time until it set on a constant level. On the other hand, the conductivity
of reactor 1, CT1 is constantly decreasing g from 616 until 58 while the conductivity in reactor
2 (CT2) and reactor 3, CT3 experienced a slight increase of conductivity. Fir reactor 2, (CT2),
it increases from 360 to a peak 591 and reduces gradually to 59 uS/cm while for reactor 3,
17
(CT3), it increases from 34 to 426 and reduces gradually to 61 uS/cm. This is because the
injector of the tracer was introduced at the feed stream at the first reactor in a very short time
in one shot then it flows into the Reactor 2, CT2 followed by Reactor 3, CT3.
2. Conductivity vs time
Figure 3B.2: Concentration of NaCl change in time for each reactor in pulse input
Form this graph, we can see the concentration of NaCl solution against time for each tank, CT1,
CT2, and CT3. Based on the graph, we can see the trend is similar with the graph of
conductivity against time, as it shows an overall downward trend. This concludes that as time
increases, the concentration of NaCl decreases. rom this observation, it shows that the
conductivity and concentration behave inversely proportional to time. To compare, reactor 1
(CT1) has the highest initial concentration while reactor 3 (CT3) has the lowest initial
concentration. However, three of these reactors had a similar concentration at 86 uS/cm. The
concentration of conductance in reactor 1 decreases from 0.232300569 to 0.015342147 g/L
during the period. For the concentration of reactor 2 (CT2), it increases from 0.125244945 until
0.221491215 g/L at 10 minutes and decreases to 0.015646759 g/L at 74 minutes. For the NaCl
concentration in reactor 3, it increases from 0.040192575 g/L and drop to 0.017181244 g/L at
82 minutes. This occurs due to the tracer was injected in the first reactor as one shot, thus it
takes some time for the reaction to take place, and the minimum concentration is measured in
the first reactor while the maximum concentration presence in the third reactor (CT3)
3. Residence time E(t) vs time
18
Figure 3B.3: Residence time change in time for each reactor in pulse input
From this last graph, Figure 3B.3 shows that graph of residence time against time for the pulse
change input and data was recorded at 2 minutes intervals. This graph shows the overall
downward trends for these three reactors, CT1, CT2 and CT3. For reactor 1, it has the highest
value of residence time which is 0.066460517 𝑚𝑖𝑛−1 . However, the value dropped gradually
to 0.004389344 𝑚𝑖𝑛−1 in the end. For reactor 2 (CT2) and reactor 3 (CT3), the initial values
0.020917059 and 0.007363718 𝑚𝑖𝑛−1 and decrease to 0.007350077 and 0.013501316 𝑚𝑖𝑛−1
in the end. If compare, reactor 1 (CT1) has the highest average of residence time. The highest
residence time is always preferred as it allows the reactant to fully react before leaving the
reactor. In other words, for CSTR tanks arranges in series, so the first reactor will have the
highest residence time and highest efficiency and the efficiency will decreases along the tank.
19
Chapter 4: Conclusion
The Continuous Stirred Tank Reactor (CSTR) is a highly practical reactor that is
utilised extensively across a variety of industries. The effects of step change input, pulse input,
and an investigation into dead time coil are all observed in this experiment. As time goes on,
the concentration of the NaCl solution decreases.
First was the conductivity against sodium chloride (NaCl) solution concentration graph.
Concentration is found to be directly proportional to conductivity. The graph illustrates a linear
relationship where conductivity rises as NaCl solution concentration rises. This is because a
solution's conductivity rises when its concentration is higher, which indicates that there are
more ions present.
A conductivity against time graph was plotted for part A and B. To find out how the
step change input will affect the sodium chloride NaCl concentration in the salt solution that
was used in the experiment, we carried out an experimental approach. At part A, the graph
shows that the conductivity of all reactors increases over time as the tracer is continuously fed
at the feed of tank 1. There was a transient behaviour at the CSTR tanks. The phenomenon is
that during the step input, the tracer is continuously fed into the reactor, which is brimming
with deionized water. When t = 36 minutes, the conductivity values for all reactors stabilise at
roughly 2128 S/cm. At part B, the graph's overall downward trend makes it clear that the trend
is similar to that of conductivity against time. This means that the concentration of NaCl
decreases as time goes on.
After that, a concentration against time graph were plotted also for both part A and B.
In part A, a plotting against time shows the concentration values that have been converted from
conductivity values. The concentration increases with passing minutes, and after 36 minutes,
values begin to stabilise at roughly 0.9666 g/L until 40 minutes have passed. When t=22
minutes, Reactor 2's conductivity unexpectedly increased for 6 minutes. This unexpected rise
in conductivity may have been caused by the slight increase in flowrate. However, the
conductivity value fell to 0.99067 g/L at t=34 minutes and stayed there until t=40 minutes. In
part B, the mixture's conductivity in each reactor, CT1, CT2, and CT3, as a function of time
20
until each reactor's pulse-change input level is constant, or steady state. We can see the overall
downward trend for 86 minutes on the graph. It demonstrates how the mixture's conductivity
is gradually eroding until it stabilises at a constant level over time.
Last but not least, a residence time against time graph were also plotted for part A and
B. In part A, Reactor 1 has the most leftward distortion of the curve, followed by Reactor 2 and
Reactor 3, but all reactors' distributions of residence time showed a bell-shaped curve. In this
case, the residence time distribution is skewed or deformed to the left, and the left tail of the
curve is longer than the right tail, a condition known as "negative skewness." In part B, the
graph shows the overall downward trends for these three reactors, CT1, CT2 and CT3. Reactor
1 has the highest residence time value, which is 0.066460517 min1. But eventually, the value
decreased gradually to 0.004389344 min1. The initial values for reactors 2 (CT2) and 3 (CT3)
are 0.020917059 and 0.007363718 min-1, respectively, and they eventually fall to
0.007350077 and 0.013501316 min-1. Reactor 1 (CT1) has the highest average residence time
when compared.
There were two different kinds of errors that could have happened in this experiment
which is random errors and systematic errors. The section on errors and modifications analyses
any potential blunders and ambiguities that may have occurred during the experiment. For
instance, the reactor is not entirely cleaned before the start of the new experiment. Additionally,
the reactants may mix if the stirrer stirs at an inconsistent rate, and vice versa. Besides, we
considered there was a leakage or broken parts at the equipment that caused the flowrate unable
to be controlled and not stable. Therefore, the results we obtained may not be accurate.
21
Chaptert 5: Reference
1. Continuous stirred tank reactor. Continuous Stirred Tank Reactor - an overview |

ScienceDirect Topics. (n.d.). Retrieved February 7, 2023, from
https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/engineering/continuous-stirred-tank-reactor
2. Mettler-Toledo International Inc. all rights reserved. (2022, December 19). Continuous
stirred tank reactors (cstrs). Continuous Stirred Tank Reactors | Flow Technology.
Retrieved February 7, 2023, from
https://www.mt.com/my/en/home/applications/L1_AutoChem_Applications/L2_Reac
tionAnalysis/continuous-stirred-tank-reactors-cstr.html
3. Azlan Skool Follow. (n.d.). Lab CSTR in series. Share and Discover Knowledge on
SlideShare. Retrieved February 7, 2023, from
https://www.slideshare.net/azlan.skool/lab-cstr-in-series
4. Foutch, G. L., & Johannes, A. H. (2003). Reactors in process engineering. Encyclopedia
of Physical Science and Technology, 00654-2.
5. Aziz, N., & Mujtaba, I. M. (2002). Optimal operation policies in batch reactors.
Chemical Engineering Journal, 85(2-3), 313-325.
22
CHAPTER 6: APPENDIX
Table 6.1 Calibration Data
Molarity Concentration Conductivity Value Log

Log Concentration
(mol/L) (g/L) (micro s) Conductivity
0.005 0.2922 -0.534319788 814 2.910624405
0.01 0.5844 -0.233289793 1394 3.144262774
0.015 0.8766 -0.057198534 1969 3.294245716
0.02 1.1688 0.067740203 2300 3.361727836
0.025 1.461 0.164650216 2880 3.459392488
0.05 2.922 0.465680212 5400 3.73239376
0.1 5.844 0.766710207 10100 4.004321374
0.15 8.766 0.942801466 15120 4.179551791
23
0.2 11.688 1.067740203 19300 4.285557309
CONDUCTIVITY (MICRO S) VS
CONCENTRATION (G/L)
25000
CONDUCTIVITY (MICRO S)
20000 y = 1634.5x + 483.51

R² = 0.9993
15000
10000
5000
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
CONCENTRATION (G/L)
Figure 6.1: Graph of Conductivity vs Concentrati
LOG CONDUCTIVITY VS LOG

CONCENTRATION
4.5
4
3.5
LOG CONDUCTIVITY
y = 0.8695x + 3.3408
3 R² = 0.9978
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
-0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2
LOG CONCENTRATION
Figure 6.2: Graph of Log Conductivity vs Log Concentration
The graph in Figures 6.1 and 6.2 above shows the correlation between conductivity and
sodium hydroxide concentration. Concentration is found to be directly proportional to
conductivity. As the concentration of sodium hydroxide rises, so will the conductivity. The
straight linear equation produced can be used to convert the conductivity values for sodium
hydroxide to concentration values.
24
Experiment Part A: The Effect of Step Change Input
Table 6A.1: Conductivity value for every reactor when step change input was introduced.
Time (Minutes) CT1 CT2 CT3

0 228 142 151
2 904 315 155
4 1105 455 177
6 1318 682 214
8 1432 841 302
10 1514 972 374
12 1655 1209 494
14 1742 1388 596
16 1810 1551 713
18 1920 1844 941
20 1956 1942 1072
22 2005 2010 1215
24 2014 2157 1365
26 2043 2256 1811
28 2075 2390 1897
30 2105 2270 1965
32 2117 2190 2014
34 2134 2174 2076
36 2139 2176 2128
38 2145 2161 2143
40 2145 2156 2149
Table 6A.2: Concentration of NaCl in every reactor when step change input was introduced.
Time Concentration of NaCl Concentration of NaCl Concentration of NaCl

(Minutes) in Reactor 1 (g/L) in Reactor 2 (g/L) in Reactor 3 (g/L)
0 0.07407 0.04297 0.04611
2 0.36111 0.10741 0.04752
4 0.45491 0.1664 0.05535
6 0.55714 0.26115 0.06886
8 0.61291 0.33232 0.10233
10 0.65345 0.39252 0.13086
12 0.72391 0.50448 0.18022
14 0.76785 0.5913 0.22365
16 0.80242 0.67185 0.27485
18 0.85876 0.81978 0.37816
20 0.8773 0.87009 0.43932
22 0.90263 0.90522 0.50737
24 0.90729 0.98176 0.58005
25
26 0.92233 1.03376 0.80293

28 0.93896 1.10469 0.84694
30 0.95459 1.04115 0.88195
32 0.96085 0.99067 0.90729
34 0.96973 0.99067 0.93948
36 0.97235 0.99171 0.9666
38 0.97548 0.98386 0.97444
40 0.97548 0.98124 0.97758
Table 6A.3: Residence time in every reactor when step change input was introduced.
Time F(t) E(t)

(Minutes) Reactor 1 Reactor 2 Reactor 3 Reactor 1 Reactor 2 Reactor 3
0 1 1 1 0 0 0
2 4.875253139 2.499650919 1.03057905 2.437626569 1.24982546 0.515289525
4 6.141622789 3.872469165 1.200390371 1.535405697 0.968117291 0.300097593
6 7.521803699 6.077495927 1.493385383 1.25363395 1.012915988 0.248897564
8 8.274740111 7.733767745 2.219258295 1.034342514 0.966720968 0.277407287
10 8.822060213 9.134745171 2.837996096 0.882206021 0.913474517 0.28379961
12 9.773322533 11.74028392 3.908479722 0.814443544 0.978356993 0.325706644
14 10.36654516 13.76076332 4.85035784 0.740467511 0.982911666 0.346454131
16 10.83326583 15.63532697 5.960746042 0.677079114 0.977207936 0.372546628
18 11.59389766 19.07796137 8.201257862 0.644105426 1.059886743 0.455625437
20 11.84420143 20.24877822 9.527651269 0.592210072 1.012438911 0.476382563
22 12.18617524 21.06632534 11.00346996 0.553917056 0.957560243 0.500157726
24 12.2490887 22.84756807 12.57970072 0.510378696 0.951982003 0.524154196
26 12.45213987 24.05771468 17.41335936 0.478928456 0.925296719 0.669744591
28 12.67665722 25.70840121 18.36781609 0.452737758 0.918157186 0.655993432
30 12.88767382 24.22969514 19.1270874 0.429589127 0.807656505 0.63756958
32 12.97218847 23.05492204 19.67664281 0.40538089 0.720466314 0.614895088
34 13.09207506 23.05492204 20.37475602 0.385061031 0.678085942 0.59925753
36 13.12744701 23.07912497 20.96291477 0.364651306 0.641086805 0.582303188
38 13.16970433 22.89643938 21.13294296 0.346571167 0.602537878 0.556130078
40 13.16970433 22.8354666 21.20104099 0.329242608 0.570886665 0.530026025
26
1. Calculation of Residence Time, F(t)
Consider adding a tracer to a feed at a constant rate that starts at time t = 0. No tracer had ever
been applied to the feed prior to this point. Symbolically stated, we have
0, 𝑡 < 0
𝐶0 (𝑡) = {
𝐶0 , 𝑡 ≥ 0
Dividing by C0 yields,
𝑡
𝐶𝑜𝑢𝑡
[ ] = ∫ 𝐸(𝑡′) 𝑑𝑡′ = 𝐹(𝑡)
𝐶0
0
Sample Calculation for Cumulative Distribution Function. F(t) for Reactor 1
𝐶𝑜𝑢𝑡
𝐹(𝑡) = [ ] 𝑠𝑡𝑒𝑝
𝐶0
0.36111
𝐹(𝑡) = [0.07407] 𝑠𝑡𝑒𝑝 = 4.87525
2. Calculation of the residence time, E(t)
We differentiate this expression to obtain the RTD function 𝐸(𝑡):
𝑑 𝐶𝑜𝑢𝑡
𝐸(𝑡) = [ ] 𝑠𝑡𝑒𝑝
𝑑𝑡 𝐶0
𝐶𝑜𝑢𝑡
[ ] 𝑠𝑡𝑒𝑝 = 𝐹(𝑡) = 𝑡0 𝑡𝑛𝐸(𝑡)𝑑𝑡
𝐶0
27
Experiment Part B: The Effect of pulse Input
Table 6B.1: data of pulse input
Time CT1 CT2 CT3 C1 (g/L) C2 (g/L) C3 (g/L)

(mins) (us/cm) (us/cm) (us/cm)
0 616 360 134 0.232301 0.125245 0.040193
2 544 519 233 0.201357 0.190752 0.075937
4 501 550 262 0.183163 0.203913 0.086905
6 455 575 284 0.163959 0.214609 0.09535
8 408 588 311 0.144636 0.220199 0.105848
10 378 591 330 0.132474 0.221491 0.113318
12 328 582 373 0.112529 0.217616 0.13046
14 275 557 402 0.091883 0.206901 0.142192
16 227 501 421 0.073693 0.183163 0.149949
18 204 475 426 0.065173 0.172274 0.151999
20 179 448 423 0.056075 0.161061 0.150768
22 158 410 417 0.048578 0.145452 0.148311
24 141 372 399 0.042617 0.130058 0.140973
26 125 338 387 0.037104 0.116483 0.136108
28 114 308 370 0.033374 0.104674 0.129254
30 103 281 353 0.029698 0.094192 0.122448
32 95 251 331 0.027061 0.082722 0.113713
34 88 227 309 0.024781 0.073693 0.105065
36 82 204 293 0.022848 0.065173 0.098833
38 78 188 276 0.021571 0.059329 0.092267
40 74 172 259 0.020303 0.05356 0.085762
42 71 157 241 0.01936 0.048224 0.078944
44 68 145 227 0.018422 0.04401 0.073693
46 65 134 214 0.01749 0.040193 0.06886
48 64 125 201 0.017181 0.037104 0.064072
50 63 118 191 0.016873 0.034724 0.060419
52 61 111 182 0.016258 0.032366 0.057157
54 61 105 172 0.016258 0.030362 0.05356
56 60 101 164 0.015952 0.029036 0.050705
58 59 96 148 0.015647 0.027389 0.045059
60 59 92 139 0.015647 0.026081 0.041922
62 59 78 126 0.015647 0.021571 0.037445
64 58 71 117 0.015342 0.01936 0.034386
66 58 65 109 0.015342 0.01749 0.031696
68 58 63 101 0.015342 0.016873 0.029036
70 58 61 87 0.015342 0.016258 0.024457
72 58 60 79 0.015342 0.015952 0.021889
74 58 60 78 0.015342 0.015952 0.021571
76 58 59 73 0.015342 0.015647 0.019988
28
78 58 59 69 0.015342 0.015647 0.018734

80 58 59 67 0.015342 0.015647 0.018111
82 58 59 64 0.015342 0.015647 0.017181
84 58 59 61 0.015342 0.015647 0.016258
86 58 59 61 0.015342 0.015647 0.016258
Time CT1 CT2 CT3 E(t) 1 (min-1) E(t) 2 (min-1) E(t) 3 (min-1)
(mins) (us/cm) (us/cm) (us/cm)
0 616 360 134 0.066460517 0.020917059 0.007363718
2 544 519 233 0.057607625 0.031857296 0.013912547
4 501 550 262 0.052402444 0.034055379 0.052402444
6 455 575 284 0.046908 0.035842 0.017469
8 408 588 311 0.04138 0.036775 0.019392
10 378 591 330 0.0379 0.036991 0.020761
12 328 582 373 0.032194 0.036344 0.023902
14 275 557 402 0.026287 0.034554 0.026051
16 227 501 421 0.021083 0.03059 0.027472
18 204 475 426 0.018646 0.028771 0.027848
20 179 448 423 0.016043 0.026899 0.027622
22 158 410 417 0.013898 0.024292 0.027172
24 141 372 399 0.012192 0.021721 0.025828
26 125 338 387 0.010615 0.019454 0.024936
28 114 308 370 0.009548 0.017482 0.023681
30 103 281 353 0.008497 0.015731 0.022434
32 95 251 331 0.007742 0.013815 0.020834
34 88 227 309 0.007742 0.013815 0.020834
36 82 204 293 0.006537 0.010884 0.018107
38 78 188 276 0.006171 0.009909 0.016904
40 74 172 259 0.005809 0.008945 0.015713
42 71 157 241 0.005539 0.008054 0.014463
44 68 145 227 0.00527 0.00735 0.013501
46 65 134 214 0.005004 0.006713 0.012616
48 64 125 201 0.004916 0.006197 0.011739
50 63 118 191 0.004827 0.005799 0.01107
52 61 111 182 0.004651 0.005405 0.010472
54 61 105 172 0.004651 0.005071 0.009813
56 60 101 164 0.004564 0.004849 0.00929
58 59 96 148 0.004476 0.004574 0.008255
60 59 92 139 0.004476 0.004356 0.007681
62 59 78 126 0.004476 0.003603 0.00686
64 58 71 117 0.004389 0.003233 0.0063
66 58 65 109 0.004389 0.002921 0.005807
68 58 63 101 0.004389 0.002818 0.00532
70 58 61 87 0.004389 0.002715 0.004481
29
72 58 60 79 0.004389 0.002664 0.00401

74 58 60 78 0.004389 0.002664 0.003952
76 58 59 73 0.004389 0.002613 0.003662
78 58 59 69 0.004389 0.002613 0.003432
80 58 59 67 0.004389 0.002613 0.003318
82 58 59 64 0.004389 0.002613 0.003148
84 58 59 61 0.004389 0.002613 0.002979
86 58 59 61 0.004389 0.002613 0.002979
Sample calculation
1. Calculation of residence time , E(t)

∞
Calculate the ∫0 𝐶(𝑡)𝑑𝑡 : Simpson’s 3/8 Rule is used as i=43
3ℎ
[(𝑦𝑜 + 𝑦𝑛 ) + 2(𝑦3 + 𝑦6 + 𝑦9 … ) + 3(𝑦1 + 𝑦2 + 𝑦4 … )]
8
𝑏−𝑎 86−0
Where ℎ = 𝑛
= 43
=2
∞
0
∫ 𝐶(𝑡)𝑑𝑡 = 3.495316912
2. Calculate the residence time, E(t)
𝐶(𝑡)
𝐸(𝑡) = ∞
∫0 𝐶(𝑡)𝑑𝑡
0.232301
𝐸(𝑡) = = 0.066460517
3.495316912
30
31
32

Group 1 - Experiment 1 - Continuous Stirred Tank Reactor (CSTR) Dynamic

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Group 1 - Experiment 1 - Continuous Stirred Tank Reactor (CSTR) Dynamic

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Group 1 - Experiment 1 - Continuous Stirred Tank Reactor (CSTR) Dynamic

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

CEB 2072 CHEMICAL ENGINEERING LAB II

CEB 2072 CHEMICAL ENGINEERING LAB II

JANUARY 2023 SEMESTER

NORMAN MIKHAIL BIN RIZA NOR AZRIN 20000611

SIM YONG QING 20000633

WAN NORAINI BINTI WAN ISMAIL 20000643

AINUR ATHIRAH BINTI ABD AZIZ 20000646

ALYA FIRZANA BINTI FAKHRUL ANWAR 20000661

KEE YU ZHENG 20000592

DATE OF EXPERIMENT: 31st Jan 2023

CHAPTER 3 RESULTS & CONCLUSION

Figure 1.1: Cross-sectional diagram of a CSTR unit

The behaviour of a CSTR is frequently approximated or described by that of an ideal

In this experiment, sodium chloride (NaCl) is employed as a tracer to determine the

1.2 Literature Review

Figure 1.2.1: General Diagram for CSTRs in series

Mole balance for CSTRs in series:

General mass balance for 1st CSTR

FA0 – FA1 + rA1V1 = 0

FA0 = inlet flowrate of reactant A into first CSTR

FA1 = outlet flowrate of reactant A from first CSTR

rA1 = rate of disappearance of reactant A during reaction in first CSTR

V1 = volume of first CSTR

Mole of reacted reactant 𝐴

Where, X1 = conversion of reactant A in first CSTR

Substitute Equation 1.2.2 into Equation 1.2.1

FA0 X1+ rA1V1 = 0

General mass balance for 2nd CSTR

FA1 – FA2 + rA2V2 = 0

FA1 = inlet flowrate of reactant A into second CSTR

FA2 = outlet flowrate of reactant A from second CSTR

rA2 = rate of disappearance of reactant A during reaction in second CSTR

V2 = volume of second CSTR

Mole of reacted reactant 𝐴

FA0 X2 = FA0 - FA2

FA2 = FA0 - FA0 X2

Where, X2 = conversion of reactant A in second CSTR

From Equation 1.2.2

FA0 X1 = FA0 - FA1

FA1 = FA0 - FA0 X1

Substitute Equation 1.2.4 and Equation 1.2.5 into Equation 1.2.3

FA0 - FA0 X1 – (FA0 - FA0 X2) + rA2V2 = 0

- FA0 X1 + FA0 X2 + rA2V2 = 0

FA0 (X2 - X1) + rA2V2 = 0

FA0 (X2 - X1) = - rA2V2

FA0 (X2 − X1)

Figure 1.2.2: General Diagram for CSTRs in parallel

Figure 2.1.1: Process Diagram for CSTR Dynamics (BP 107)

Figure 2.1.2: Continuous Stirred Tank Reactors (CSTR) unit

Table 2.1.1: Materials used during the experiment

2. 0.025M sodium chloride solution

Table 2.2: Apparatus used during the experiment

• A rectangular 50-L tank made of stainless

• The material used is 3/8” stainless steel

• The range is between 0 to 500 ml/min.

• The type of VDC Display is LCD digital

• The sensor range is between 0 to 200 mS/cm.

2.2 Safety Precautions