modeling of nanoparticles precipitation in a confined by ... · modeling of nanoparticles...
TRANSCRIPT
Modeling of nanoparticlesModeling of nanoparticles precipitation in a Confined
Impinging Jets Reactor by means of Computational Fluid DynamicsComputational Fluid Dynamics
E. Gavi, D.L. Marchisio, A.A. BarresiPolitecnico di Torino, Department of Material Science and Chemical Engineering
M.G. Olsen and R.O. FoxIowa State University, Mechanical Engineering and Chemical and Biological
EngineeringEngineering
Outline
Motivation• Objective• Production of polymeric nanoparticles via solvent displacement• Influence of mixing on the precipitation process• Static mixers: the Confined Impinging Jets Reactor
Background theory
• Precipitation model• Flow field modeling: RANS and LES• mPIV flow field measurements
Results
• Modeling of a test reaction: Barium sulfate precipitation• Modeling of a test reaction: Barium sulfate precipitation• Flow field in the CIJR: μPIV experiments vs Large Eddy Simulations
Conclusions and next steps
Whistler, June 15‐20, 2008
p
ObjectiveObjective
• CFD Modeling ofpolycaprolactone Acetone Waterpolycaprolactone(PCL) nanoparticles
i i i i
and PCL
precipitation via solventdisplacement in a Confined ImpingingConfined ImpingingJets Reactor (CIJR) PCL nanoparticles
Whistler, June 15‐20, 2008
Solvent displacement
Organic compound+
Water+
Polymer+
Solvent
+Stabilizer
MIXING
Whistler, June 15‐20, 2008
Solvent displacement
Organic compound+
Water+
Polymer+
Solvent
+Stabilizer
MIXINGMacroscopic interface
Water
H2OMacroscopic interface
Organic compound+
Polymer
Water+
Stabilizer
SOLVENT
Polymer+
SolventH2O
Whistler, June 15‐20, 2008
SOLVENT
Solvent displacement
Organic compound+
Water+
Polymer+
Solvent
+Stabilizer
MIXINGMacroscopic interface
Water
H2OMacroscopic interface
NANOPARTICLESOrganic compound
+Polymer
Water+
Stabilizer
SOLVENT Polymer+
O i
NANOPARTICLES PRECIPITATION
Polymer+
SolventH2O
Organiccompound
Whistler, June 15‐20, 2008
SOLVENT Stabilizer
Particle Size Distribution• Operating conditions influence PSD
– Initial reactants concentrationInitial reactants concentration
– Solvent to non‐solvent ratio
Mi ing rate– Mixing rate• Precipitation time scale smaller or comparable to the mixing time scalemixing time scale
• Static mixers allow fast mixing
Whistler, June 15‐20, 2008
Particle Size Distribution• Operating conditions influence PSD
– Initial reactants concentrationInitial reactants concentration
– Solvent to non‐solvent ratio
Mi ing rate– Mixing rate• Precipitation time scale smaller or comparable to the mixing time scalemixing time scale
• Micro reactors allow fast mixing
Whistler, June 15‐20, 2008
Particle Size Distribution• Operating conditions influence PSD
– Initial reactants concentrationInitial reactants concentration
– Solvent to non‐solvent ratio
Mi ing rate– Mixing rate• Precipitation time scale smaller or comparable to the mixing time scalemixing time scale
• Micro reactors allow fast mixing
• Micro reactors
T‐MIXER VORTEX MIXER
CIJR
Whistler, June 15‐20, 2008
Effect of mixing on PSD: experiments
Acetone Water1500
nm
and PCLWater
1000
e si
ze, n
500part
icle
0mea
n p
PCL nanoparticles
0 40 80 1200
inlet flow rate, ml/min Mw = 14000, CPCL0= 10 mg/ml; W/A = 1 ( ), W/A= 2 ( ), W/A = 3 ( ), W/A = 4 ( ).
Whistler, June 15‐20, 2008
Effect of mixing on PSD: experiments
Acetone Water1500
nm
and PCLWater
1000
e si
ze, n
500part
icle
Nanoparticles
0mea
n p
0 40 80 1200
inlet flow rate, ml/min Mw = 14000, CPCL0= 10 mg/ml; W/A = 1 ( ), W/A= 2 ( ), W/A = 3 ( ), W/A = 4 ( ).
Whistler, June 15‐20, 2008
Study outliney
Modeling of PCL nanoparticles precipitationg p p p
Flow field Mixing PrecipitationFlow field Mixing Precipitation
RANS DQMOM IEMPopulation BalanceEquation solved withLESRANS DQMOM‐IEM Equation solved with
QMOMLES
INVESTIGATION Barium sulfate precipitationwith LES and
μPIVmeasurements
VALIDATION: experimental data on particle size
Whistler, June 15‐20, 2008
measurements
Precipitation model: effect of mixing• Nucleation and growth rate modeled fromclassical precipitation theory (Schwarzer and
k )
Nucleation rate, #/m3s
Supersaturation, mol/m3
Peukert, 2005)• Supersaturation is produced by the instantaneousreaction
• Mixing influences the reaction and therefore the 2 2 4 4BaCl Na SO BaSO ( )+2 NaCl+ ⎯⎯→ ↓g
supersaturation build‐up
Nucleation rate, #/ 3
Supersaturation, l/ 3 #/m3s mol/m3
Whistler, June 15‐20, 2008
Precipitation model: aggregation
• A transport mechanism is responsible for bringing particles into closeproximity
l ( l h k )Surface potential, V
• Two asymptotic limits (Smoluchowski, 1917)
–Brownian motions
Shear induced collisions
p
Barium excess
–Shear induced collisions• Collision efficiency is a balance between
– Attractive van der Waals forces
– Repulsive forces
• ElectrostaticElectrostatic
• Shear• A global collision efficiency coefficient isg yconsidered
Sulfate excessg E E S Sα α α α α= − +
Whistler, June 15‐20, 2008
g
Results: BaSO4 precipitation modelResults: BaSO4 precipitation modelCBaCl2=100 kmol/m3, CNa2SO4=100 kmol/m3
αg = 1
CBaCl2=800 kmol/m3, CNa2SO4=100 kmol/m3
Whistler, June 15‐20, 2008
BaCl2/ , Na2SO4
/αg = 0
Flow field modelingLES
• With the Large Eddy Simulation approach a filter is applied to the Navier-Stokes equations
• The filtered velocity field is obtained
LES
• The filtered velocity field is obtained
The bigger scales of the flow or large eddies are
( ) ( ) ( ), , ,t G t d= ∫U x r x U x - r r• The bigger scales of the flow, or large eddies are
solved exactly, while the smaller scales are modelledwith a Subgrid Scale Model
• For example the Smagorinsky-Lilly• For example the Smagorinsky Lilly
( )222 2 2rij r ij S SS l S C Sτ ν= − = − = − Δ RANS
• The Reynolds Averaged Navier Stokes approach averages in time Navier-Stokes equations and the time averaged velocity field resultstime averaged velocity field results
( ) ( )0
1 ,t T
dtT
= ∫U x U x
Whistler, June 15‐20, 2008
T
Micro Particle Image Velocimetry• PIV provides instantaneous velocity fields over global
domains (vs. point‐wisemethods)
• Displacement of particles ( ) ( ); , ,t
D t t v t t dt′′
′ ′′ = ⎡ ⎤⎣ ⎦∫X X
Whistler, June 15‐20, 2008
isplacement of particles ( ) ( ); , ,t
D t t v t t dt′
⎡ ⎤⎣ ⎦∫X X
μPIV and LES results = 64μPIV and LES results – j = 64
Whistler, June 15‐20, 2008
μPIV and LES results = 155μPIV and LES results – j = 155
Whistler, June 15‐20, 2008
μPIV and LES results = 292μPIV and LES results – j = 292
Whistler, June 15‐20, 2008
μPIV and LES results = 579μPIV and LES results – j = 579
Whistler, June 15‐20, 2008
Quantitative comparison: time averagedvelocityvelocity
Whistler, June 15‐20, 2008
Quantitative comparison: RMS velocityQuantitative comparison: RMS velocity
Whistler, June 15‐20, 2008
Conclusions and next stepsConclusions and next steps• A fully predictive model was developed to describe mixing and
precipitationprecipitation• In the aggregation term a global collision efficiency is considered in order
to take into account the effect of repulsive forces of electrostatic and hydrodynamic naturey y
• The model was applied to the precipitation of BaSO4 , good agreement with experimental data was found
• μPIV measurements and LES prediction of the flow field in a CIJR at four μ poperating conditions (Rej = 64, 155, 292, 579) were compared
• The flow field in the CIJR was proven by means of experiments to be non‐symmetrical and highly unsteady, and LES were able to predict these main f f h flfeatures of the flow
• Quantitative comparisons in terms of first and second order statistics are satisfactory, also considering the difficulties in matching the inlet conditions between experiments and simulations the issues related toconditions between experiments and simulations, the issues related to μPIV resolution, and the (numerical diffusion)
• Next steps are the application of the precipitation model to PCL precipitation via solvent displacement process and the implementation ofprecipitation via solvent displacement process and the implementation of the mixing and reactive model on LES
Whistler, June 15‐20, 2008
AcknowledgementsAcknowledgements
• Federica Lince for experiments on PCL precipitationp p
• The Italian Ministry for University and Research for the fellowship of one of theResearch for the fellowship of one of the authors (E. Gavi)
Whistler, June 15‐20, 2008
Thank you for your attention
Any question?
Whistler, June 15‐20, 2008