Performance of a Continuous Stirred Tank Reactor (CSTR): Effects of Mixing Rate

Hazel Dawn B. Patica *, Christian Paolo S. Asequia, Sheena Claire C. Bayeta, Ercille Mae O. Pacamo
Xavier University- Ateneo de Cagayan, Chemical Engineering Department, Corrales Ave. Cagayan de Oro City, Philippines
*dawnpatica@gmail.com
Abstract To determine the effect of mixing rate on the conversion of reactants performed in a continuous-stirred tank reactor, a
saponification reaction was conducted on the CSTR in a batch-mode operation. 1 M NaOH and CH3COO2H5 was allowed to react for
10 mins using 150, 200 and 300 rpm mixing rates. The samples were analyzed through titration using 0.1 M HNO 3. It was determined
that the average conversion increases from 0.0173 M CH3COONa to 0.0182 M CH3COONa when the mixing rate was increased from
150 rpm to 200 rpm respectively. However, there was a decrease in conversion from 0.0182 M CH3COONa to 0.0138 M CH3COONa
as the mixing rate was increased to 300 rpm. Results imply that the suitable mixing rate for the saponification reaction should be in the
range of 150 to 200 rpm to ensure higher product yield. On the other hand, the generated equation that describes the relationship
between the mixing rate and conversion was
y=4 x 107 x2 +0.0002 x+ 0.0028 which can be used to determine the
theoretical conversion at a specified mixing rate.
Keywords: continuous stirred tank reactor, mixing rate, agitation, stirrer speed, saponification reaction

I.

INTRODUCTION

Chemical reactors are vessels designed to contain chemical

reactions. The design of the reactor is determined by many
factors but of particular importance are the thermodynamics and
kinetics of the chemical reactions being carried out. The two
main types of reactor are termed batch and continuous. In this
experiment, continuous reactor was used. Reactors can take wide
variety of forms depending on the chemical process involved. A
type of reactor used very commonly in industrial processing is
continuous stirred tank reactor (CSTR).

In a CSTR, one or more reactants, for example in solution or as a

slurry, are introduced into a reactor equipped with an impeller
(stirrer) and the products are removed continuously. The
impeller stirs the reagents vigorously to ensure good mixing so
that there is a uniform composition throughout. The composition
at the outlet is the same as in the bulk in the reactor. These are
exactly the opposite conditions to those in a tubular flow reactor
where there is virtually no mixing of the reactants and the
products (Science, 2016). An example of a CSTR is shown in
Figure 1.

Figure 1 Continuous Stirred Tank Reactor.

In the chemical and other processing industries, many operations

are dependent to a great extent on effective agitation and mixing
of fluids. Generally, agitation refers to forcing a fluid by
mechanical means to flow in a circulatory or other pattern inside
a vessel. On the other hand, mixing usually implies the taking of
two or more separate phases, such as a fluid and a powdered
solid or two fluids, and causing them to be randomly distributed
through one another (Geankoplis, 1993).
There are a number of purposes for agitating fluids: (1) blending
of two miscible liquids , such as ethyl alcohol and water; (2)
dissolving solids in liquids, such as salt in water; (3) dispersing a
gas in a liquid as fine bubbles, such as oxygen from air in a
suspension of microorganisms for fermentation or for the
activated sludge process in waste treatment.; (4) suspending of
fine solid particles in a liquid , as in the catalytic hydrogenation
of a liquid , where solid catalyst particles and hydrogen bubbles
are dispersed in the liquid and (5) agitation of the fluid to

increase heat transfer between the fluid and a coil or jacket in the
vessel wall (Geankoplis, 1993).
In the chemical industry, agitation is an important process both
from the standpoint of the safety of the chemical reaction and
the performance of the chemical reaction (Systems, 2016).
Proper reactor design is crucial because this is where both mixing
and reaction occur. For a mixing sensitive reaction, the rate of
mixing affects both the yield and selectivity of the reaction. Poor
mixing can lead to side reactions and undesirable by-products in
competitive reactions. A common industrial example of this is
acid/base neutralization in the presence of organic substrates.
Rapid, highly turbulent mixing is needed to promote the fast
reacting neutralization reaction and inhibit the slower, unwanted
side reactions such as hydrolysis (Forum, 2015).

Figure 3. Rushton Turbine

III.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The conversion of the reactants to products was determined by

titration. The conversion was expressed as concentration of
CH3COONa produced (mol/L). Figure 4 shows the behavior of
conversion of at varying mixing rates.

The reaction to be investigated in this experiment is the

saponification of ethyl acetate (EtOAc) with dilute sodium
hydroxide (NaOH) which is shown below:

CH 3 COO2 H 5+ NaOH CH 3 COO2 Na+C 2 H 6 O

The main objective of this experiment is to determine the effect

of mixing rate on the conversion of reactants performed in a
continuous-stirred tank reactor in batch operation.

II.

EXPERIMENTAL

To evaluate the effects of mixing rate on the performance of a

continuous stirred-tank reactor, a saponification reaction under
varying mixing rates was done. 500 mL of 0.1 M NaOH and
CH3COO2H5 was allowed to react for 10 mins using 150, 200 and
300 rpm mixing rates. The operation was done in a batch-wise
manner and 20 mL samples were taken for each set of mixing
rates. The samples were analyzed through titration using 0.1 M
HNO3. The sampling was done in triplicate. The reactor used
was shown in Figure 2 while the impeller used which was a
Rushton turbine was shown in Figure 3.

Conversion versus Mixing Speed

Conversion (Concentration of CH3COONA, mol/L)

Mixing speed (rpm)

Figure 4. Conversion versus mixing rate

It can be seen from Figure 4

Figure 2. Stirred Tank Reactor

that the average conversion

increases from 0.0173 M CH3COONa to 0.0182 M CH3COONa
when the mixing rate was increased from 150 rpm to 200 rpm
respectively. However, there was a decrease in conversion from
0.0182 M CH3COONa to 0.0138 M CH3COONa as the mixing
rate was increased to 300 rpm. This implies that at this mixing
range, the conversion of the reactants had been slowed down. It
also implies that the suitable mixing rate for the saponification
reaction should be in the range of 150 to 200 rpm to ensure
higher product yield. This claim can be supported by the study
conducted by (Mohd Danish, 2015). According to this study, the
conversion of CH3COO2H5 and NaOH to CH3COONa exhibited
an increasing trend as the mixing rate was increased from 90 rpm
to 170 rpm. The higher conversion achieved was 43.1 % at stirrer
rate of 170 rpm as compared to conversion of 39.4% at stirrer
rate of 90 rpm. Stirrer in conjunction with baffle arrangement is
necessary for maintaining the uniform temperature throughout
the reactor and hence the conversion of the reaction (Mohd
Danish, 2015). The increasing conversion trend corresponding
the usage of the mixing range of 150-200 rpm implies that at this
mixing rate range, the reactants are effectively mixed. The
contact between the CH3COO2H5 and NaOH molecules are
promoted well thereby resulting to increasing conversion. On the
other hand, the decrease in conversion when the mixing rate was

increased to 300 rpm perhaps didnt allow good contact between

CH3COO2H5 and NaOH molecules due to high mixing motion.
As observed also on Figure 4, the converted amount of products
has very small values (0.0173 M, 0.0182 M and 0.0138 M). This
was perhaps due to the small reaction time used which was only
10 minutes.
The generated equation that describes the relationship between
the
mixing
rate
and
conversion
was
7 2
.
This
equation
can
y=4 x 10 x +0.0002 x+ 0.0028
be used to determine the theoretical conversion at a specified
mixing rate. However, this equation might be only valid for
mixing rate ranging from 150 to 300 rpm.

Mohd Danish, M. K. (2015). Effect of Operating Conditions on

CSTR performance: an Experimental Study. Int.
Journal of Engineering Research and Applications, 5.
Nowakowska, J. (1939). The Refractive Indices of Ethyl Alcohol
and Water. Loyola University Chicago, 29,31.
Porter, E. (2011). DISTILLATION.
Science, C. P. (2016). Chemical Reactors. York: University of
York.
Slken, W. (2016). Distillation Columns: Column Internals.
Systems, D. D. (2016). Mixing Technology.

In sum, it is suggested to increase reaction time to ensure good

contact of reactants. Also, it is suggested to conduct more
variations of mixing rate to verify the relationship between the
conversion of reactants to products and the mixing speed.

IV. CONCLUSION
The average conversion increases from 0.0173 M CH3COONa to
0.0182 M CH3COONa when the mixing rate was increased from
150 rpm to 200 rpm respectively. However, there was a decrease
in conversion from 0.0182 M CH3COONa to 0.0138 M
CH3COONa as the mixing rate was increased to 300 rpm. It
implies that the suitable mixing rate for the saponification
reaction should be in the range of 150 to 200 rpm to ensure
higher product yield.
On the other hand, the generated equation that describes the
relationship between the mixing rate and conversion was
y=4 x 107 x2 +0.0002 x+ 0.0028 which can be used
to determine the theoretical conversion at a specified mixing rate.

V. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The students would like to thank Engr. Christylene S.
Balagtas for sharing her knowledge and sparing her time to
watch over us through this experiment. The researchers would
like to extend their heartfelt thanks to our laboratory technician,
Mr. Carl Angelo Fallares, for keeping the laboratory in good
condition and for helping us with the things we need. This
experiment would have not been possible without their help.
Lastly, we thank one another for supporting each other and
always willing to help and give our best suggestions. It would
have been difficult to carry out the experiment without each of us
working together.

VI. REFERENCES
Biochemistry. (2016). Centrifugation.
Forum, N. A. (2015). Mixing of The Production of Bulk
Chemicals.
Geankoplis, C. J. (1993). Transport Processes and Separation
Process Principles. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
M.M.C. Vieira, P. H. (2008)). Experiments in Unit Operations
and Processing of Foods. New York: Springer
Science + Business Media.

APPENDICES
A. Generated Data
N=150 rpm
Initia
l
1
2
3

Fina
l

0.1
1.4
3.7

1.4
3.7
9.2

N=200 rpm
Initia
l

Fina
l

1
2
3

9.2
13.4
16.9

13.4
16.9
20.1

N=200 rpm
Initia
l

Fina
l

1
2
3

20.1
23.1
26.1

23.1
26
28.5

V
HNO
3
1.3
2.3
5.5

Sample
(L)

V
HNO
3
4.2
3.5
3.2

Sample
(L)

V
HNO
3
3
2.9
2.4

Sample
(L)

0.01
0.02
0.02
Average
Molarity

0.02
0.02
0.02
Average
Molarity

0.02
0.02
0.02
Average
Molarity

M
CH3COONa
0.013
0.0115
0.0275
0.0173
M
CH3COONa
0.021
0.0175
0.016
0.0182
M
CH3COONa
0.015
0.0145
0.012
0.0138

B. Sample Calculations

CH 3 COO2 H 5+ NaOH CH 3 COO2 Na+C 2 H 6 O

( 0.0023 L HNO 3 )
M CH COO Na=
3

CH COO Na
M
( 0.1 molLHNO )( 1 mol1 mol
) =0.0115 M
HNO
3

0.020 L

2
CH 3 COO2 Na
3