Numerical investigation of the performance of several static mixers

The performance of six static mixer (Kenics, Inliner, LPD, Cleveland, SMX and ISG) are compared using 3D numerical simulations in laminar creeping flow regime. Numerical pressure drop results are tested against experimental ones, showing overall a good agreement. Besides pressure drop, four criteria...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Canadian journal of chemical engineering 1998-06, Vol.76 (3), p.527-535
Main Authors: Rauline, Damien, Tanguy, Philippe A., Le Blévec, Jean-Marc, Bousquet, Jacques
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
dispersion
extensional efficiency
laminar flow
static mixer
stretching
three-dimensional simulation
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:The performance of six static mixer (Kenics, Inliner, LPD, Cleveland, SMX and ISG) are compared using 3D numerical simulations in laminar creeping flow regime. Numerical pressure drop results are tested against experimental ones, showing overall a good agreement. Besides pressure drop, four criteria (extensional efficiency, stretching, mean shear rate and intensity of segregation) are chosen to compare the static mixers. It appears that Kenics, Inliner, LPD and Cleveland mixers are rather similar. The ISG mixer seems better than this first group of mixers, but pressure drop is too high compared to other advantages. From our numerical results, SMX appears to be the most efficient of the six compared static mixers. Grǎce à des simulations 3D en régime laminaire, les performances de six mélangeurs statiques (Kenics, Inliner, LPD, Cleveland, SMX et ISG) sont comparées. Les résultats numériques en terme de perte de charge sont en général très proches des résultats expérimentaux. Outre la perte de charge, quatre critères d'efficacité (efficacité élongationnelle, étirement, cisaillement moyen et intensité de ségrégation) permettent de différencier ces mélangeurs. II n'apparaǐt pas de différence nette entre les mélangeurs Kenics, Inliner, LPD et Cleveland. Par contre, les SMX et ISG sont plus performants, mais à cause d'une perte de charge trop élevée pour ce dernier, le SMX semble le plus efficace.
ISSN:0008-4034
1939-019X
DOI:10.1002/cjce.5450760325