Feeding reactant into side to keep concentration high

In summary, maximizing selectivity of a particular product with two competing reactions involves running at a high concentration. Feeding through the side may not be beneficial as streams 1 and 2 do not maintain their individual integrities beyond the location at which stream 2 is introduced. The concept of siphoning off reactant and feeding it alongside the reactor may be helpful, but further numerical analysis would be necessary to determine its effectiveness. Modelling can be utilized to better understand this concept.
  • #1
gfd43tg
Gold Member
950
50
Hello, I am studying the maximizing of selectivity of a particular product with two competing reactions

##A \xrightarrow {k_{D}} D##, ##r_{D} = k_{D}C_{A}^{\alpha_{1}}##
##A \xrightarrow {k_{U}} U##, ##r_{U} = k_{U}C_{A}^{\alpha_{2}}##

where D is the desirable species, and U is the undesirable species. The selectivity is ##S_{DU} = \frac {k_{D}}{K_{U}}C_{A}^{a}##, where ##a = \alpha_{1} - \alpha_{2}##. In this case, ##a > 0##, so to maximize selectivity, I wish to run at a high concentration.

Now I was reading a section about feeding into the side. I am confused about their explanation for why it is not beneficial to feed through the side. It seems like injecting high concentration into the reacting mixture will keep the concentration higher throughout the PFR. How is stream 2 diluted, as it is just be separated from stream 1 and fed into the side. Just separating a stream won't dilute it.
 

Attachments

  • sidefeed.jpg
    sidefeed.jpg
    34.6 KB · Views: 456
  • sidefeed2.jpg
    sidefeed2.jpg
    24.7 KB · Views: 457
Last edited:
Engineering news on Phys.org
  • #2
When streams 1 and 2 are intimately mixed at the cross section where stream 2 is introduced, the concentration of the new overall stream will be a weighted average of the concentrations of streams 1 and 2. Streams 1 and 2 do not maintain their individual integritiesbeyond the location at which stream 2 is introduced.

Chet
 
  • #3
That is confusing me. Isn't stream 2 just being siphoned off a stream 1? I mean, it's like saying having red dye mixed in a cup of water. If I take half the water and pour it into a new cup, they both have the same concentration of red dye, no?
 
  • #4
Maylis said:
That is confusing me. Isn't stream 2 just being siphoned off a stream 1? I mean, it's like saying having red dye mixed in a cup of water. If I take half the water and pour it into a new cup, they both have the same concentration of red dye, no?
I think I'm beginning to get the idea of what you are saying. The way they are describing this system is that reaction can not take place until a stream "officially" enters the reactor. Before streams 1 and 2 enter the reactor, no reaction is occurring. They failed to mention that in their underlying assumptions.

But, once a fluid parcel is "officially" inside the reactor, the reaction can proceed according to the prescribed rate law. How something like this could be done in practice would be to introduce catalyst just before the stream enters the reactor, or heat the stream up to reaction temperature just before it enters. More typically, the residence time in the inlet piping to the reactor is much shorter than the residence time in the reactor, so that the amount of reaction taking place in the inlet piping (including the distribution manifold for stream 2 is negligible.

Chet
 
Last edited:
  • #5
I see, somehow I totally missed what they were trying to say. Would the concept of siphoning off reactant and feeding it alongside the reactor be helpful though? The stream that enters down the reactor will have a smaller residence time, but due to its higher concentration, it makes the reaction throughout the reactor faster. I guess it would require further numerical analysis to determine if it would be worth pursuing.
 
  • #6
Maylis said:
I see, somehow I totally missed what they were trying to say. Would the concept of siphoning off reactant and feeding it alongside the reactor be helpful though? The stream that enters down the reactor will have a smaller residence time, but due to its higher concentration, it makes the reaction throughout the reactor faster. I guess it would require further numerical analysis to determine if it would be worth pursuing.
I don't exactly follow. But, if it seemed complicated to reason through, I would just do what you suggested and try some modelling calculations.

Chet
 
  • #7
What I mean is this. Suppose the reaction rate increases with a higher concentration of the reactant.

If you siphon off reactant and put a parcel of fluid halfway through the PFR, the center will have a higher concentration of reactant than it would otherwise have without a side feed.

However, since the reactant was inserted halfway into the reactor, that particular parcel of fluid will have spent less time in the reactor since it was introduced halfway through.
 
  • #8
Maylis said:
What I mean is this. Suppose the reaction rate increases with a higher concentration of the reactant.

If you siphon off reactant and put a parcel of fluid halfway through the PFR, the center will have a higher concentration of reactant than it would otherwise have without a side feed.

However, since the reactant was inserted halfway into the reactor, that particular parcel of fluid will have spent less time in the reactor since it was introduced halfway through.
What I would do with this situation would be to do some modeling to help me understand what's involved. I could specify the problem that I would start with, but I wouldn't want to deprive you of this learning experience.

Chet
 

1. How does feeding reactant into the side help keep concentration high?

Feeding reactant into the side helps keep concentration high by continuously introducing fresh reactant into the reaction mixture. This ensures that the concentration of reactant remains high throughout the reaction, allowing for a faster and more efficient reaction.

2. Can feeding reactant into the side be used for all types of reactions?

Yes, feeding reactant into the side can be used for various types of reactions, including chemical, biological, and enzymatic reactions. It is a common technique used in many scientific fields to control and maintain reaction conditions.

3. How often should reactant be fed into the side during a reaction?

The frequency of feeding reactant into the side depends on the specific reaction and its conditions. In general, it is recommended to feed reactant into the side continuously or at regular intervals to maintain a steady high concentration of reactant.

4. What are the benefits of feeding reactant into the side?

Feeding reactant into the side has several benefits, including improving reaction kinetics, increasing yield, and reducing unwanted by-products. It also allows for better control of reaction conditions and can lead to a more efficient and cost-effective process.

5. Are there any potential drawbacks to feeding reactant into the side?

The main potential drawback of feeding reactant into the side is the cost associated with continuously supplying fresh reactant. It may also require additional equipment and expertise to implement, but the benefits often outweigh these potential drawbacks in most cases.

Similar threads

  • Materials and Chemical Engineering
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
7
Views
8K
  • Materials and Chemical Engineering
Replies
10
Views
36K
  • Engineering and Comp Sci Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • Engineering and Comp Sci Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • Other Physics Topics
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • MATLAB, Maple, Mathematica, LaTeX
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • Engineering and Comp Sci Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
5K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
21
Views
3K
Replies
9
Views
1K
Back
Top