Professional Documents
Culture Documents
www.elsevier.com/locate/ces
Modelling of droplet breakage probabilities in an oscillatory
baed reactor
Dimitri Mignard, Lekhraj Amin, Xiong-Wei Ni
Centre for Oscillatory Baed Reactor Application (COBRA), Chemical Engineering, School of Engineering and Physical Sciences,
Heriot-Watt University, Edinburgh EH14 4AS, UK
Received 22 May 2003; received in revised form 25 February 2004; accepted 25 February 2004
Abstract
The breakage of droplets dispersed in a continuous aqueous phase determines the performance of many mixing devices and reactors that
rely on eective contact between two phases, e.g. emulsion mills, liquidliquid extraction columns, stirred tank reactors and Oscillatory
Baed Reactors. Quantitative knowledge of the mechanisms involved in the breakage provides parameters for design and prediction. In
the work presented here, oil was dispersed in water in a continuous OBR, and a High Speed Camera was used to record the events of
breakage of individual oil droplets and probabilities of breakage were estimated. It was conrmed that breakage was more sensitive to
changes in the amplitude of oscillation than in the frequency of oscillation. A novel integral model was developed based on an analysis
of the total work eected on the deforming droplet in order to interpret the results. The quantitative results from direct observation were
compared to the model predictions. The model with tted parameters was nally extrapolated to smaller diameters, in an attempt to predict
the critical drop diameter for breakage.
? 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Droplet breakage probability; Oscillatory Baed Reactor; Dynamic balance; Dispersion; Stretch rates
1. Introduction
There has been much research on the general subject of
breakage of oil droplets, and a number of reviews can be
found in the literature (e.g. Briscoe et al., 1999). Gourdon
et al. (1994) also provided a useful overview of droplet
breakage within the context of Population Balance Mod-
elling for solvent extraction column. The following is a short
summary of the results from papers that are relevant to the
present work.
1.1. The form of the ow eld
Pioneering work on the subject was rst performed by
Taylor (1934): his four roll-mill machine produced sim-
ple and dened 2-D ow elds, such as simple shear
and plane convergent hyperbolic ow. Simple tangential
shear was found to induce deformation of droplets, but no
(D
o
d}2)
2
]=}2 D
o
d, in which D
o
is the orice diameter.
Hence, if we assume a uniform probability for the position
of the droplet within the cross-sectional area of the orice,
as well as a uniform plug-ow:
P
edge
k
1
}2 D
o
d
}4 D
2
o
= k
1
2d
D
o
. (3)
D. Mignard et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 59 (2004) 21892200 2195
This simple approximation takes into account events such
as the one recorded in Fig. 4. The parameter k
1
1 allows
for the region of intense shear extending some distance away
from the edge.
3.3. Probability of breakage after contacting the edge
It was frequently observed that the large droplets that
managed to escape breakage were those crossing the bae
at low velocity, especially towards the end of the forward
cycle. Therefore, expressions for P
energy
must take into ac-
count the time of passage of the droplet during the cycle,
t
E
, and the ratio of the instant capillary number to the criti-
cal capillary number, Ca(t
E
)}Ca
cr
. The time t elapsed after
passage will also be a factor, in line with the introduction
presented earlier. Hence, the interval of time available for
breakage to occur will be [t
E
, t]. Moreover, if one assumes
that the instant owrate of droplets is proportional to that of
the continuous phase:
P
energy
=
_
1}4[
1}4[
en
x(t
E
) dt
E
_
1}4[
1}4[
x(t
E
) dt
E
(4)
in which
en
is the probability of breakage for a droplet
touching the edge at t
E
, 1}4[ is the start of the forward
phase of the cycle and 1}4[ the end, x = 2[x
o
cos(2[
t
E
)}: + x
n
is the instant velocity at the orice, and x
n
is
the constant velocity associated with the net ow. After
some rearranging and setting a dimensionless entry time
0
E
= 2[t
E
:
P
energy
=
1
2
_
}2
}2
en
cos(0
E
) d0
E
, (5)
en
will take values 1 or 0 only. It is assumed that a droplet
will be stretched to signicant extent and susceptible to
breaking only if Ca(t
E
)}Ca
cr
1. Hence,
if Ca(t
E
)}Ca
cr
1,
en
= 0. (6)
Calculating Ca requires some knowledge of the shear rate
. This was approximated by assuming direct proportional-
ity between and the instant ow rate. Admittedly, this is a
crude, ad hoc assumption. Fortunately, the DPIV data men-
tioned in the introduction provides some degree of validity
to this claim. In these DPIV maps, the regions of the max-
imum shear are concentrated near the orice, and plotting
the observed maximum tangential shear rate and the max-
imum extensional (axial) shear rates as a function of the
pulsation intensity should be of some relevance. Such plots
are presented in Figs. 5 and 6, respectively. It can be seen
that both plots can broadly be brought around a straight line
for the operating conditions given (Re
o
= 8407500), al-
beit with some deviation. It must be noted that the straight
lines representing the strain rates do not intercept the origin.
However, the DPIV data did not cover the orice itself, and
some discrepancies might arise from this. For the shear rate,
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Diameter (mm)
P
b
r
1Hz, 6mm - exp. 1Hz, 6mm - model
1.5Hz, 6mm - exp. 1.5Hz, 6mm - model
2Hz, 6mm - exp. 2Hz, 6mm - model
Fig. 5. Estimated breakage probability per passage through bae, P
br
, at
constant x
o
=6 mm. Plain lines with lled symbols represent experimental
results; dotted lines and open symbols represent model predictions, with
optimal t of k
1
= 1.87, k
2
= 2339, k
3
= 2.304, k
4
= 0.261, k
5
=0.198.
(Error bars on experimental curves represent 95% condence interval).
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Diameter (mm)
P
b
r
2Hz, 5mm - exp. 2Hz, 5mm - model
2Hz, 6mm - exp. 2Hz, 6mm - model
2Hz, 7.5mm - exp. 2Hz, 7.5mm - model
Fig. 6. Estimated breakage probability per passage through bae, P
br
, at
constant [=2 Hz. Plain lines with lled symbols represent experimental
results; dotted lines and open symbols represent model predictions, with
optimal t of k
1
=1.87, k
2
=2339, k
3
=2.304 and k
4
=0.261, k
5
=0.198.
it was assumed that
s
= k
s
x
D
o
(7)
while for the extensional strain rate:
e
= k
e
x
D
o
. (8)
Eqs. (7) and (8) enable to re-write Eq. (6) by introducing
an adjustable parameter k
2
:
Ca}Ca
cr
= j
c
(c
1
e
+ c
2
s
)d}o = k
2
d
D
o
j
c
x
o
(9)
in which j
c
is the continuous phase viscosity, o the interfa-
cial tension, c
1
and c
2
some constants that were temporarily
introduced to combine the two forms of strain in a linear
expression for the total strain rate.
2196 D. Mignard et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 59 (2004) 21892200
If Ca(t
E
)}Ca
cr
1, an estimate of the energy spent on
stretching the drop has to be made.
3.4. Energy balance on the drop
We denote E
break
o
the energy required for splitting the drop.
This energy is approximated by being proportional to the
energy required to increase the surface area of a spherical
drop of diameter d, to that of two equal sized daughter
droplets of diameter d}2
1}3
. Hence,
E
break
o
=
_
2 o
d
2
2
2}3
o d
2
_
= (2
1}3
1) od
2
. (10)
A balance of the forces applied to a droplet shows that
only the inertia force F
I
and the drag force F
D
need being
considered: the eect of gravity was neglected. If as a rst
approximation, we consider one end of the droplet to re-
main within the vicinity of the orice and the other one to
experience the full amount of velocity x =2[x
o
cos(2[
t
E
)}: + x
n
, then the amount of work done on the droplet
deformation within [t
E
, t] should be
E
o
=
_
t
t
E
(F
D
+ F
I
) s dt (11)
with s being the stretch rate for the elongated droplet. As t
increased between t
E
and 1}4[, breakage was considered to
occur if and as soon as
k
o
E
o
}E
break
o
1 (12)
with a new adjustable parameter, k
3
.
3.5. An estimate for the instant stretch rate
Since Ca(t
E
)}Ca
cr
1, the droplet will elongate inde-
nitely as long as it does not break apart or the ow stops
and changes direction at the end of the forward cycle. The
following relationship was assumed
s(t) = k
stretch
(t) s(t) (13)
with s(t
E
) = d. Hence,
s(t) = dexp
__
t
t
E
k
stretch
(t) dt
_
(14)
and
s(t) = d k
stretch
(t) exp
__
t
t
E
k
stretch
(t) dt
_
. (15)
Using Eqs. (7) and (8) and introducing another adjustable
parameter k
3
:
s(t) = k
3
x(t)
0.6
d
D
o
exp
_
k
3
x(t) x(t
E
)
D
o
_
. (16)
Afactor 0.6 was introduced to account for the jet contraction.
3.6. Drag force
Following Pietzsch and Pilhofers approach (1984) with
averaged r.m.s. velocities, Hu and Kintners work (1955)
was used to calculate the drag force F
D
here. One problem
is that the relative velocity between the droplet and the con-
tinuous phase was not known. Let x
d
be the droplet velocity,
and x
c
= x}0.6 the jet velocity. Assuming that the droplet is
at the boundary of the jet, the relative velocity is not actually
known. Pietzch and Pilhofer (1984) set x
d
= x
c
(with aver-
age values over half a cycle), which assumes no lag from
encountering the edge of the orice. They further assumed
that the continuous phase outside the jet was at rest, which
is not really the case in OBRs according to the DPIV data.
Fig. 4 also shows that droplets are not necessarily carried
away by the jet. However, the complexity of the problem re-
quires such simplications whenever possible. In this work,
we noted that for a droplet with a side at rest near the orice
and the other side subjected to the jet, the relative velocity
may be of similar intensity to that of a droplet pushed by the
jet into a region of low velocity. Hence, an approximation
suited to both situations would be
x
d
= k
lag
x}0.6 (17)
and
x
c
= (1 k
lag
) x}0.6 (18)
for which k
lag
1 would give the scenario shown in Fig. 4,
and k
lag
=1 would give Pietzsch and Pilhofers scenario. In
both cases, the relative velocity is x}0.6. Hence,
F
D
= C
D
d
2
4
j x
2
2 (0.6)
2
. (19)
From Hu and Kintner (1955), a dimensionless quantity Y
was rst calculated:
Y =
4
3
_
Re
o
(d, t)
P
0.15
+ 0.75
_
1.275
for 2 6Y 670, (20)
Y = 0.045
_
Re
o
(d, t)
P
0.15
+ 0.75
_
2.37
for Y 70 (21)
with Re
o
(d, t) = d xj
c
}0.6j
c
being the oscillatory Reynolds
number for the droplet; and P =(j
c
o
3
}qj
4
c
) (|j
c
j
d
|}j
c
)
a modied uid number. The drag coecient was found
to be C
D
= Y}[We(t) P
0.15
], with We(t) the instant Weber
number. The drag force is then
F
D
=
4
o d
Y(t, d)
P
0.15
. (22)
For Y 2, Stokes law is applied.
3.7. Inertia force
The inertia force is given by
F
I
=j
c
_
j
d
j
c
+ 0.5
_
d
3
6
x
d
(23)
D. Mignard et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 59 (2004) 21892200 2197
which is
F
I
= k
lag
j
c
_
j
d
j
c
+ 0.5
_
d
3
6
(2[)
2
x
o
0.6 :
sin(2[ t). (24)
In the scenario encountered in Fig. 4, the inertia force
would stabilise the droplet when accelerating, but it would
help stretching when the droplet was decelerating. From
an energy standpoint, we would have E
o
= E
D
|E
I
| dur-
ing acceleration of the droplet, with E
o
and E
D
0. This
corresponds to energy imparted from the drag force being
shared between accelerating the droplet, and deforming the
droplet. Similarly, energy from deceleration is added to E
D
and contributing to deformation. By contrast, in Pietzsch
and Pilhofers scenario (1984), inertia is always a destabil-
ising force. This may happen when the droplet is not partly
retained by the bae. In this case, the inertia force takes a
direction opposed to the drag when the acceleration is pos-
itive, and hence the droplet may be stretched apart. This
other mechanism was allowed simply by changing the sign
of the inertia term.
3.8. Procedure for calculating P
br
with parameter
optimisation
After substituting in Eq. (11) the expressions obtained
in Eqs. (10), (16), (22) and (24), the full expression for
E
o
}E
break
o
is
E
o
E
break
o
=
_
0
0
E
_
k
3
x
o
2.4:D
o
Y(0, d)
P
0.15
+
k
I
6
_
1 +
0.5j
c
j
d
_
d
D
o
We
max
(d) sin 0
_
e
k
3
(x
o
(sin 0sin 0
E
)}0.6:D
o
)
2
1}3
1
cos 0 d0 (25)
with 0 =2[t and 0
E
=2[t
E
; k
I
=k
lag
k
3
is an adjustable
parameter, which may also hide a moment of inertia or
take a negative value; We
max
(d)=(j
d
d}o)(2[x
o
}0.6:)
2
is
a Weber number for the droplet. At this stage in the present
work, the adjustable parameters k
4
= k
3
k
o
and k
5
= k
I
k
o
were introduced, which eliminated the need for k
o
and k
I
when E
o
}E
break
o
was substituted into Eq. (12). k
o
E
o
}E
break
o
in
Eq. (12) was then computed using a RungeKutta method.
Therefore, for a set of ve parameters k
1
k
5
and a given
diameter d, it was possible to calculate P
br
with Eqs. (2),
(3), (5), (6), (9), (10), (12), (20), (21) and (25).
k
1
. . . k
5
were adjusted so as to match the experimen-
tally observed curves for P
br
. The minimisation scheme
was Fletchers version of the Marquardt method (Fletcher,
1971). The objective function to be minimised by the pro-
gramme was
,
2
=
d,[, x
o
_
P
br
(d, [, x
o
) P
EXP
br
(d, [, x
o
)
P
EXP
br
(d, [, x
o
)
_
2
(26)
with P
EXP
br
being the experimentally observed value for P
br
.
This formula used the relative rather than the absolute resid-
uals, which allowed comparable weighting to the results
from dierent diameters. This approach was preferred be-
cause low values were of signicant for the purpose of ex-
trapolation to small diameters. However, the occurrence of
some nil values for P
EXP
br
could prevent it from working, and
it was decided that Eq. (26) had to be used with a modica-
tion: an absolute dierence term would replace any relative
dierence term for which P
EXP
br
0.05.
3.9. Extrapolation to small diameters, and comparison
with Pietzch and Pilhofers equation
Once the optimal set of parameters was found, the model
could be extrapolated to small diameters in order to deter-
mine the minimum diameter for breakage d
min
for which
P
br
= 0. This value could be compared to that returned by
the simple dynamic model that was proposed by Pietzch and
Pilhofer (1984). Their equation was applied with the oscilla-
tory velocity being set at its maximum (in the middle of the
forward phase of a cycle). Since the OBR was horizontal,
the terms related to gravity were dropped, and the equation
became
d
min
=
0.9: o
2
j
d
x
o
[
2
+
1
2.56
_
C
D
x
o
j
c
:j
d
_
2
1
1.6
C
D
x
o
j
c
:j
d
. (27)
4. Results and discussion
Experimental curves for breakage probabilities and
least-squares match using Eq. (25) are presented in
Figs. 5 and 6. In both gures, the solid lines represent the
experimental data, and the dotted lines the model results af-
ter the parameters of k
1
k
5
were adjusted. The signicance
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Parameter value
2
k1
k2 .1e-3
k3
10xk4
-10xk5
Fig. 7. Eect on ,
2
of the variation of one parameter at a time around
the optimised solution.
2198 D. Mignard et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 59 (2004) 21892200
of the k-values found for the optimised parameters can be
checked at a glance in Fig. 7, which presents the variation of
the objective function ,
2
as a function of the values of pa-
rameters, with one parameter at a time being varied around
the optimal solution. It can be seen that a clear local min-
imum is achieved for each of the ve tting parameters,
indicating a high degree of condence in the minimisation
methodology. It should be noted that the parameter k
5
was
less signicant, since it could vary to some extent without
aecting the match to the experimentally observed curves.
This means that inertia forces had less of an inuence than
drag for the conditions tested.
Two features can be extracted from Fig. 5: rstly, the
probability of breakage P
br
increases with the increase of
droplet diameters for both experimental and modelling meth-
ods. Partly as a result of using the relative residuals in Eq.
(26), the predicted curves in Fig. 5 lie mostly below the
experimental ones, but attempts at correcting this problem
would lead to discrepancies at lower diameters and an in-
creased ,
2
. This highlights the diculty in ensuring that the
model can be extrapolated to small diameters, while also
account for the behaviour of large drops. Secondly, the pre-
dicted trend of P
br
(the dotted lines) is that P
br
always in-
creases when the oscillation frequency increases. This is in
line with the general trend reported in the previous para-
graph for the experimental data, but does not account for the
crossing-over of the curves of 1 and 1.5 Hz cases. Similar
phenomena can be seen in Haverlands work: for droplets of
a given diameter and when increasing oscillation frequency,
the breakage probability sometimes decreased to a mini-
mum before increasing again (Haverland, 1988). Neverthe-
less, the similar trends with similar magnitudes of breakage
probability are clear for both experimental and modelling
methods.
In Fig. 6, the two features showing in Fig. 5 are also appli-
cable here. In this case, the modelling predictions are closer
to the experimental data than those shown in Fig. 5, with
the exception that there was no further increase of P
br
when
the oscillation amplitude was raised from 6 to 7.5 mm. In
fact, the curves for x
o
= 6 and 7.5 mm are intertwined in
Fig. 6, crossing over 4 times. No obvious explanation for
this was present. However it is worth noting that some of the
Haverlands gures for breakage probability showed a cer-
tain degree of meandering, and also the duplicate measure-
ments in those gures seemed to demonstrate a spread of re-
sults (Haverland, 1988). Therefore, it might be the case that
in both this work and the Haverlands study, some unknown
factors were not controlled, however inuenced the repro-
ducibility or the shape of the breakage probability curves.
In Fig. 6 it can be seen that the three predicted curves (the
dotted lines) for three dierent amplitudes at a xed oscil-
lation frequency are in parallel, whereas the experimental
curves show a large increase in P
br
from x
o
= 5 to 6 mm,
while there is little change fromx
o
=6 to 7.5 mm. The former
may be interpreted as a consequence of an exponential-like
stretch of the droplets, and this was reected in the model
Table 1
Minimum diameters for breakage extrapolated from the model, and com-
pared with that using the Pietzch and Pilhofers equation
[ (Hz) x
o
(mm) d
min
(mm) d
min
from
Pietzch and Pilhofer (mm)
1 6 3.52 5.66
1.5 6 2.79 3.76
2 6 2.53 2.84
2 5 3.43 3.31
2 7.5 1.75 2.32
as a suitable expression for the stretch rate s. However, ex-
plaining the latter eect is more dicult. In order to do so,
it was rst assumed in the model that all drops touching the
edge of the bae would break anyway if x
o
was greater than
6 mm. This would imply that Ca(t
E
)}Ca
cr
1, and that Eq.
(12) be always satised for x
o
6 mm and [ =2 Hz. This
would then impose a value for k
1
of around 1.4 in order to
match the curves for 6 and 7.5 mm. However, an optimal
set of parameters k
1
k
5
could not be found with these con-
ditions.
Comparing the experimental curves of Fig. 5 with Fig. 6,
it shows that a 20% increase in the oscillation amplitude x
o
from 5 to 6 mm produced an increase of P
br
of the order of
0.20.35. This eect was bigger than that produced when
doubling the frequency from 1 to 2 Hz, where the maximum
increase of P
br
was only of 0.2. This suggests that the oscil-
lation amplitude has stronger eect on breakage probability
than that of the frequency, which was the rationale behind
the development of the model presented here.
4.1. Extrapolation to smaller diameters
The minimum drop diameters for breakage are presented
in Table 1 and were extrapolated fromEq. (25) together with
the optimised tting parameters. The values obtained from
the Pietzch and Pilhofers equation (27) are also included
for comparison. Table 1 shows that the extrapolated mini-
mum drop diameters were signicantly smaller than those
obtained from Eq. (27), with one exception of x
o
= 5 mm
and [ = 2 Hz. The discrepancies are due to that Eq. (27)
used an approximation for the average inertia force com-
bined with a value for the maximum drag force, whereas
the model considered the instant values of the drag force
and the inertia force. Therefore, the model developed in this
paper should, in principle, be more accurate than Eq. (27).
Table 1 also shows that the predicted minimumdiameters are
all larger than 1.75 mm, while for the same operating condi-
tions, the mean drop sizes in the continuous OBR (Ni et al.,
2002) are much smaller than these minimum drop diameters
extrapolated here. This discrepancy could be explained by
the fact that large drops are much more susceptible to defor-
mation (since they correspond to higher capillary numbers)
and hence have very dierent drag coecients and inertia
D. Mignard et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 59 (2004) 21892200 2199
moments. Therefore, the model may not extrapolate very
well to sizes below the minimum diameter of drops observed
in this work (ca. 3 mm). Moreover, dynamic models like the
one used here ignore the turbulent eddies in the universal
equilibrium range that may arise on the smaller scales. Tur-
bulent eddies may have sizes comparable to those of small
droplets of a few hundred micrometre, and may break those
small drops. Although the probability of breakage may be
very low for these small drops, the cumulative eect of a
large number of baes would bring about some visible ef-
fects. A more appropriate model there would be the one
presented by Tjaberinga et al. (1993), which involved Kol-
mogorov eddies in the viscous or inertial subrange that are
generated behind a contraction.
5. Conclusion
The breakage probabilities of large droplets (3.48 mm
diameter) in a continuous OBR were measured using the
High Speed Camera. A model of the force balance was de-
veloped with the help of the direct visual observation of
the stretching and breakage process, and the parameters of
the model were adjusted to match best the observed prob-
abilities. The trends for the predictions were mostly in line
with the observations, with the amplitude of the oscillations
having a much bigger eect on breakage probability than
the frequency. Extrapolations to the minimum diameters for
breakage was in line with other models, but seemed to con-
tradict observations in OBRs where smaller diameters were
usually aected after a number of baes. The change in
drop shape at large diameter was a possible cause, and the
inuence of turbulent eddies at the sub-millimetric scale was
also invoked. Further work will make use of the isotropic
theory for the small drop sizes.
Notation
Ca(t
E
) droplet capillary number at time t
E
Ca
cr
critical droplet capillary number
C
D
drag coecient
D
o
orice diameter, m
d droplet diameter, m
d
min
minimum diameter for breakage, m
E
D
drag force work during stretch, J
E
o
interfacial tension work during stretch, J
E
break
o
energy required for splitting a drop, J
F
D
drag force, N
F
I
inertia force, N
[ frequency of oscillation, Hz
q average breakage rate, s
1
k
1
k
5
adjustable parameters
P modied uid number, P=(j
c
o
3
}qj
4
c
) (|j
c
j
d
|}j
c
)
P
br
probability of breakage when passing a bae,
from model
P
EXP
br
probability of breakage when passing a bae,
from experiment
P
edge
probability that the droplet touches the orice
edge
en
probability of breakage for a droplet touching
the edge at t
E
P
energy
probability of breakage, conditional to the
droplet touching the edge
Re
n
net ow droplet Reynolds number
Re
o
oscillatory droplet Reynolds number
s droplet stretch rate, m s
1
t time, s
t
E
initial time for droplet passing the orice, s
x instant velocity at the orice, m s
1
x
c
jet velocity, m s
1
x
d
droplet velocity, m s
1
x
o
amplitude of oscillations, m
We(t) instant Weber number for the drop
We
max
maximum Weber number for the drop,
We
max
(d) = j
d
d(2[x
o
)
2
}o}(0.6:)
2
Y a dimensionless quantity dened in Eqs. (20)
and (21)
Greek letters
: plate free area ratio
shear rate, s
1
0 time
0
E
dimensionless entry time
z viscosity ratio j
d
}j
c
j
c
dispersed phase viscosity, kg m
1
s
1
j
d
continuous phase viscosity, kg m
1
s
1
o interfacial tension coecient, N m
1
t
c
average residence time within a cell, s
,
2
sum of squared residuals (merit function)
References
Barth es-Biesel, D., Acrivos, A., 1973. Deformation and burst of a liquid
droplet freely suspended in a linear shear eld. Journal of Fluid
Mechanics 61 (1), 121.
Bentley, B.J., Leal, L.G., 1986. An experimental investigation of drop
deformation and breakup in steady, two-dimensional linear ows.
Journal of Fluid Mechanics 167, 241283.
Briscoe, B.J., Lawrence, C.J., Mietus, W.G.P., 1999. A review of
immiscible uid mixing. Advances in Colloid and Interface Science
81, 117.
Coulaloglou, C.A., Tavlarides, L.L., 1977. Description of interaction
processes in agitated liquidliquid dispersions. Chemical Engineering
Science 32, 12891297.
Davenport, W.B., 1970. Probability and Random Processes, International
Student Edition, McGraw-Hill Kogakusha Ltd., pp. 328332.
Elemans, P.H.M., Bos, H.L., Janssen, J.M.H., 1993. Transient phenomena
in dispersive mixing. Chemical Engineering Science 48 (2), 267276.
Fitch, A.W., 2003. Characterisation of ow in an oscillatory baed
column using digital particle image velocimetry and laser induced
2200 D. Mignard et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 59 (2004) 21892200
uorescence. Ph.D. Thesis, Heriot-Watt University, School of Physical
Sciences and Engineering, Edinburgh, UK.
Fitch, A.W., Ni, X., Stewart, J., 2001. Characterisation of exible baes
in an oscillatory baed column. Journal of Chemical Technology and
Biotechnology 76, 10741079.
Fletcher, R., 1971. A modied Marquardt subroutine for non-linear
least squares. AERE-R 6799, Atomic Energy Research Establishment,
Harwell, England.
Gourdon, C., Casamatta, G., Muratet, G., 1994. Population balance based
modelling of solvent extraction columns. In: Godfrey, J.C., Slater,
M.C. (Eds.), LiquidLiquid Extraction Equipment. Wiley & Sons Ltd.,
New York, pp. 136226 (Chapter 7).
Grace, H.P., 1982. Dispersion phenomena in high viscosity immiscible
uid systems and application of static mixer as dispersion
devices in such systems. Chemical Engineering Communications 14,
225277.
Hakimi, F.S., Schowalter, W.R., 1980. The eects of shear and vorticity
on deformation of a drop. Journal of Fluid Mechanics 98 (3), 635645.
Haverland, H., 1988. Untersuchungen zur Tropfendispergierung
in ussigkeitpulsierten Siebboden-Extractionskolonnen. Dissertation,
Technische Universit at Clausthal, Germany, pp. 124138.
Hu, S., Kintner, R.C., 1955. The fall of single liquid drops through water.
A.I.Ch.E. Journal 1 (1), 4248.
Jare s, J., Proch azka, J., 1987. Break-up of droplets in Karr reciprocating
plate extraction column. Chemical Engineering Science 42 (2),
283292.
Mietus, W.G.P., Matar, O.K., Lawrence, C.J., Briscoe, B.J., 2002.
Droplet deformation in connced shear and extensional ow. Chemical
Engineering Science 57, 12171230.
Mignard, D., Amin, L.P., Ni, X., 2003. Population balance modelling of
droplets in an oscillatory baed reactor, using direct measurements
of breakage rate constants. Journal of Chemical Technology and
Biotechnology 78 (2/3), 364369.
Ni, X., Mignard, D., Saye, B., Johnstone, J.C., Pereira, N., 2002. On the
evaluation of droplet breakage and coalescence rates in an oscillatory
baed reactor. Chemical Engineering Science 57, 21012114.
Pietzch, W., Pilhofer, T.H., 1984. Calculation of the drop size in pulsed
sieve-plate extraction columns. Chemical Engineering Science 39 (6),
961965.
Stone, H.A., Leal, L.G., 1989a. Relaxation and breakup of an initially
extended drop in an otherwise quiescent uid. Journal of Fluid
Mechanics 198, 399427.
Stone, H.A., Leal, L.G., 1989b. The inuence of initial deformation on
drop breakup in subcritical time-dependent ows at low Reynolds
numbers. Journal of Fluid Mechanics 206, 223263.
Stone, H.A., Bentley, B.J., Leal, L.G., 1986. An experimental study of
transient eects in the breakup of viscous drops. Journal of Fluid
Mechanics 173, 131158.
Taylor, G.I., 1934. The formation of emulsions in denable elds of ow.
Proceedings of the Royal Society, A 146, 501523.
Tjaberinga, W.J., Boon, A., Chesters, A.K., 1993. Model experiments and
numerical simulations on emulsication under turbulent conditions.
Chemical Engineering Science 48 (2), 285293.
Tomotika, S., 1935. On the instability of a cylindrical thread of a viscous
liquid surrounded by another viscous liquid. Proceedings of the Royal
Society, A 150, 322337.
Tsouris, C., Tavlarides, L.L., 1994. Breakage and coalescence models for
drops in turbulent dispersions. A.I.Ch.E. Journal 40 (3), 395406.