4.7 Article

A method for predicting the number of active bubbles in sonochemical reactors

Journal

ULTRASONICS SONOCHEMISTRY
Volume 22, Issue -, Pages 51-58

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.ultsonch.2014.07.015

Keywords

Number of bubbles; Ultrasonic reactors; Bubble dynamics; Chemical kinetics; Sonochemistry; Ultrasonic frequency

Funding

  1. Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research of Algeria [J0101120120098]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Knowledge of the number of active bubbles in acoustic cavitation field is very important for the prediction of the performance of ultrasonic reactors toward most chemical processes induced by ultrasound. The literature in this field is scarce, probably due to the complicated nature of the phenomena. We introduce here a relatively simple semi-empirical method for predicting the number of active bubbles in an acoustic cavitation field. By coupling the bubble dynamics in an acoustical field with chemical kinetics occurring in the bubble during oscillation, the amount of the radical species (OH)-O-center dot and HO2 center dot and molecular H2O2 released by a single bubble was estimated. Knowing that the H2O2 measured experimentally during sonication of water comes from the recombination of hydroxyl ((OH)-O-center dot) and perhydroxyl (HO2 center dot) radicals in the liquid phase and assuming that in sonochemistry applications, the cavitation is transient and the bubble fragments at the first collapse, the number of bubbles formed per unit time per unit volume is then easily determined using material balances for H2O2, (OH)-O-center dot and HO2 center dot in the liquid phase. The effect of ultrasonic frequency on the number of active bubbles was examined. It was shown that increasing ultrasonic frequency leads to a substantial increase in the number of bubbles formed in the reactor. (C) 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available