4.6 Article

Mechanistic Model of Amine Hydrochloride Salts Precipitation in a Confined Impinging Jet Reactor

期刊

INDUSTRIAL & ENGINEERING CHEMISTRY RESEARCH
卷 59, 期 47, 页码 20877-20891

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acs.iecr.0c02816

关键词

-

资金

  1. Huntsman International

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A mechanistic model was developed to study the industrial synthesis of the polyurethane precursor, amine hydrochloride, in a confined impinging jet reactor (CUR). Two chemical reaction steps occur in a competitive-consecutive sequence, which results in the precipitation of two amine hydrochloride salts. The formation of the di-amine byproduct means loss of starting material and expensive reprocessing of highly insoluble salts. The predictive mechanistic model includes equations for chemical reaction kinetics, nucleation, particle growth, and the first reported mixing model for the CIJR. In our previous study [Maluta, F. et al. Comput. Chem. Eng. 2017, 106, 322], we used a full factorial design to determine physically realizable values of the 11 physical constants involved in the model. In this study, we show the importance of using a mixing model to account for imperfect mixing in the impingement zone. The mixing model treats the impingement zone as a radial jet and resolves the local mixing into 198 discrete compartments. The model was able to predict an unexpected and sudden change in the reaction product distribution as the reactant inlet concentration is increased. Without the local mixing model, it was not possible to replicate this major trend in the experimental results. The local mixing model allows us to determine the conditions under which significant byproduct formation will occur. A second industrially important question is whether fine particles or larger particles will be produced. This process outcome was also dominated by local mixing conditions in the impingement region. The model results show a strong influence of local mixing on two key process outcomes.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据