ENGINEERING PRACTICE
W REACTOR
hen planning the design of a
batch-type plant to produce
commercial quan-tities of a
product or a mix of
producís, every full-size reactor in the
plant will usually have a working
CONSIDER
volume that is some múltiple of the
ca-pacity of a pilot plant reactor.
Produc-tion capability of the larger
plant is often predicted from cycle times
expe-rienced in the small-scale
equipment. Process engineers usually
have little trouble maintaining the same
cycle time for production steps such as
the charging of liquids and sohds to the
reactor. They are not so in control,
however, when it comes to the times
required to complete temperature
adjustment steps in the larger units.
Given the same vessel and jacket
configurations and restricted to the
same operating conditions as at the
small scale, the same steps take longer at
the larger scale because heat transfer
área does not scale-up at the same rate as
does reactor volume.
This series of four articles addresses
ABV =
four issues. Two are presented this
month and two next month. Part 1,
below, explains how the geometry of
scale-up "short changes" the larger unit
ofheat transfer área. Part 2 will show the
mathematics of scale-up to predict the
times for temperature adjustment steps
at the larger scale. Part 3 introduces
changing the jacket to a zoned
configura-tion. Part4 combines the aspect
ratiocor-rections to the zoned
configuration to reduce prolonged cycle
times.
Considering the aspect ratio
Go to a meeting of process engineers to
discuss scale-up. At least one oíd hand
will remind others that scale-up
geometry "short changes" the larger
reactor of heat transfer área. Next will
come the intuitive judgment, "Sure, but
SUFV =
if we make the new reactor skinnier
and taller..."
SUFA =
This státement is a suggestion to ma-
nipúlate the "aspect ratio" of the reactor.
Define that as "the tangent-to-tangent
length of the reactor divided by the reac-
tor diameter." It is usually not good
prac-tice to design reactors with large
aspect ratios. Unfortunately, the
mathematics of scale-up is too
complicated to permit even the old-hand
process engineer to offer an
instantaneous intuitive reply as to the
best ratio.
96 CHEMICAL ENGINEERING / DECEMBER 1997
The reactor
aspect ratio
in scale-up
NOMENCLATURE
factor for determining the capacity
(gal.) of tfie bottom head = 0.606
for ASME Standard F & D heads
(3fg2 - d2§)/g3, see Equation 15
aa = total heat transfer área, ft2
A= Absolute valué of p, see Equation
20
(3Pg - 2ad§)/g3, see Equation 15
bb (f3 - a2§)/g3, see Equation 15
= ce 5.875, see Equation 3 reactor
= d inside diameter, ft. defined
= D Equation 19 t + [4a(F-l J/7.48], see
= Equation 9 fraction of total volume
DV = oceupied by working volume. irF,
f = see Equation 9 straight side
F= length covered by VW,ft.
reactor straight side
(tangent-to-tangent) length, ft.
9=
J= (f+gRl), see Equation 14 (a+dR]),
see Equation 14 defined
L= Equation 17 defined Equation 18
aspect ratio, L/D, dimensionless
M= volume scale-up factor =
N= VWj/WV,
P= heat transfer área scale-up factor
QV = = A2/A1 factor for determining
R= the surface área (ft2) of the bottom
head = 0.931 for ASME Standard
F & D heads working volume, gal.
Roots of the cubic equation 21
(SUFVM3/N2), see Equation 14
angle, see Equation 20, radians
t=
wv =
YY¡ =
§=
0=
This article develops the mathemat-
ics of reactor scale-up. We will show,
when the aspect ratio of the two reac-
tors is the same, the increase in heat
transfer área is only a fraction of the
increase in volumetric capacity. We
will also develop a shorteut to quickly
compute the aspect ratio required to
make the heat transfer área increase
proportionally to the volume.
The mathematics of scale-up
Consider the reactor in Figure 1; the
working volume in that vessel is given
by the expression:
Wy=F [aD3 + 7.48(n/4)D2L] (1)
with the conversión factor 7.48 gal = 1
ft3. Next, define aspect ratio:
R = L/D (2)
and define the constant, d:
d = 7.48M4) = 5.875 (3)
Substitute d and R into Equation 1:
WV=F[aL)3 + dRD3] (4)
Solving Equation 4 for reactor diame-
ter gives:
-ÍW/-1/3
D= \ (5)
(a+dR)
Assume that the total área of the bot-
tom head is effective for heat transfer.
The total surface área of the reactor in
Figure 1 that is avaüable for heating or
cooling the working volume is a sum:
A = tV2 + nDJ (6)
Working volume can be defined as in
Equation 1 or it can be defined as
re-lated to the straight side length that
it filis. Make this expression in "J"
equal to Equation 1 with the constants
as ex-pressed by Equation 3.
F [aD3 + dD2L] = aD3 + dD^J (7)
Solving Equation 7 for J gives
 Partí

</ =

DESIGN
(8) TABLE 1. THEEFFECTOF
SCALIN© UP VOLUME AT
CONSTANT ASPECT PATIO
SUFv SUFA VALUÉ SUFA Os %SUFV
2 1.59 79
3 2.08 69

ATIONS
Edward H. Steve 4 2.52 63
Day& 5 2.93 59
Zimmermann 6 3.30 55
International 10 47
4.65

JaD(F-l)
+ FL

Substitute Equation 8 into Equation FIGURE 1.

6. Also use the definitions of Equations These
2 and 3 and let g = nF. A number of geometrlc
terms are collected into fas follows: parameters
f=t + [4a(F-l)/7.48] define a batch
reaction
After suitable rearrangement, this is vessel
a short equation of heat transfer área:
A = fD2+gRD2 (9)
Defíning scale-up factors
Scale-up is a ratio calcuktion. Define
scale-up factors as: SUFy = volume
scale-up factor =
wv2/wv¡
SUF¿ = heat transfer área scale-up TABLE 2. EXAMPLE OF SOLVING CUBIC EQUATION
factor =A2/Aj
where the subscript 1 refers to the pilot BASIC PROCESS DATA SOLVING 8c CHECKING OF CUBIC EQUATION
scale reactor and the subscript 2 refers Input Valué Output Valué
to the large scale reactor.
A common restriction is usually (L/D), 4 P -26.93
made that the scaled-up reactor has the SUFV 2 QV -53.78
same bottom head type (e.g., ASME
Standard F & D [1]) as the pilot-scale F 0.8 DV -0.4019 Roots are fhree, real and unequal
reactor. This keeps g and fthe same for
a 0.606 ABV 26.93
both sizes. Otherwise, the math gets
impossibly messy. t 0.931 PHI 1.350 (Angle Phi ¡n degrees.)
Calcúlate the following expression
for SUF¿ using subscripts in Equation d 5.875 PHIR 0.02357 (Angle Phi in radlans.)
9 to denote the reactor scale. f 0.866 YY, 5.992
DJif+eR*)
A (10) g 2.512 YY2 -2.955
Dfif + gRj
N 24.09 YY3 -3-037
Substitute Equation 5 versions of D¡
and D2 into Equation 10. Use the M 10.91
defin-ition of SUFy to eliminate WV. F
will remain the same in scale-up. The § 4.479 (R2)i 8.895 (Root #1) (Posltive root)
re-arranged mathematical expression aa -8.708 (R2)2 -0.05256 (Root#2)
relates the magnitude of SUF¿ to the
valué of SUFV: bb -1.653 (R2>3 -0.1341 (Root #3)

a + dRi f+i ce -0.0627

(11)
SUFA=\SUF) ROUNDED RESULT FOR (L/D), = 4 and SUFV = 2 is (L/0)2 = 9
dR¿ f
+gRi
DAVID WHITCilER
Equation 11 is a general expression
CHEMICAL ENGINEERING / DECEMBER 1997 97
ENGINEERING PRACTICE Partí

———-—^-~-
SOLVING THE CUBIC EQUATION
An Excel 5.0 spreadsheet is the easy way fo solve Equation 15. Two key 9. Compute the angle 0 (ÁBV = the absoluto valué of the pararneter p]
constants based on ASME Standard F & D vessel heads are a= 0.606 and f
= 0.931 []]. It will be easy to find three roots for nu-merous inpuf valúes of R\,
QV2 0
the aspect ratio. Table 2 shows the example calculation for R] = 4. For this
= arceos
(20)
particular cubic equaiion, the following traditional solution method applies [2], ABV¿
Read the spreadsheet this way: 27
1. Design choice inputs: R, = 4, SUFV = 2, F = 0.8 10. Calcúlate the three roots, YY,, YY2 and YY3
2. Constants:.a = 0.606, t = 0.931
3. Calcúlate d, f and g
4. Calcúlate N, M and §
-f (21)

5. Calcúlate aa, bb and ce. These are the coefficients of the cubic equation eos 0 + 7t (22)
ó. p = j[3bb~aa2] ABV (
23)
(17): yys=-2^

QV = ~ [2aa? - 9aa x bb + 27cc] (18): 11 .Calcúlate possible Rj valúes

(R21¡ =YY¡ - (aa/3) (24)
7..
12. Select the positive valué for R2 as the desired solution.
(19)
Table 3 shows the results obtained for Rj when sofving Equation 15
Dv.¡ TABLE 3. REQUIRED R2 VALÚES FOR SUFA
for various typical valúes of R) and SUFv- For
2 completeness, it also lists the raw valúes for R2
= SUFV ATVARIOUSR, VALÚES obtained in the spreadsheet calculation. In
In this example, DV<0, The three roots are real each case, these were the positive roots.
Required R Valué 2
and unequal. Because DV<0, a trigono-metric
SUFU Rounded ÜJ
solution is preferred. Raw Valué
1 2 3 bb = (3pg-2ad§)/g3 cc =
3.11 (fi-a2§)/g3
5
that describes how the heat transfer área 5.13 Select a valué for R¡ and use Equation 15
3 9
increases when increasing the vol-ume of a 4
9.14
to calcúlate the R2 for SUFA = SUFy.
1.5 2
reactor from the pilot to the production 4.01
5 6.5 Solving this cubic equation by spreadsheet
scale. 6.47
5 is covered in the box.
4.96
3 2 8
7.89
Main tainir.g aspect ratio 11 Handy rule of thumb
10.81
Because there are some advantages to 4
. 3 7 There are times when the computer-ized
6.92
maintaining geometric similarity be-tween method for solving Equation 15 may not be
2 11 10.8
the pílot and the production scale reactors practical. Suppose you are away from your
9 1
(discussion of these is outside the scope of
this article), the larger unit often has the tion) substitute SUF for SUF on 8.9
3
the left side
desk and need to quickly derive the valué
V A for R2 needed to make SUFA equal to the
same aspect ratio as the smaller unit. In this of Equation 11. Then take both sides to the
4
case, R2 = R¡ and Equation 11 reduces to: third power to clean up fractional exponents: SUFy. The rounded data in Table 3 can be
used to deduce a handy rule of thumb:
SUFA = (SUFyl2'3 (12) Ja +2dR^2 jf+gRj]3 Pilot aspect ratio
For example, if the larger reactor is twice f + gRil (13) Scale-up aspect ratio
SUFV = 3
the size of the pilot unit (SUFy=2) and the a + dR¿ Rj = l
two units share the same aspect ratio, the LH
Define the following constants to make the
heat transfer área only increases by 1.59 (= R2 = (2xSUFv)-l
rest of the ____
discussion simpler: iíj = 1.5 R2
22/3). The SUFA would, therefore, be 79%
of the SUFy. As the numérica] valúes in N=(a+dRj) L = (2.5 X SUFy) -1
Table 1 show, the SUFA becomes an M=(f+gRt). R1 = 2
increasingly smaller percentage of SUFy as § = (SUFvM3/m
the latter be-comes larger at a constant R2 = (3x SUFy) ■ 1
Make substitutions into Equation 13 and R1 = 3
aspect ratio. rearrange:
Intuitively, those who are involved in the
3 2 R2 = (4X SUFy) -1
scale-up exercise know that a full-scale (SUFyMZ/WMa+dR^ (§M /N2)x(a+dR2) =
3 R¡ = 4
reactor with a large aspect ratio will have a (f+gRJ (14)
total heat transfer área that makes up for the Rearranging this and grouping all the R2 = (5x SUFy) -1
"shortage" that would oceur at constant constants together, results in the following
For every case, the multiplier for SUFy is
aspect ratio. cubic equation for calculating the R required 2 (Rj + 1). Based on this, use the next
to make SUFA = SUFy: equation to approximate the L/D required
"Largest" aspect ratio required 3 for a scaled-oip reactor that will
To determine what aspect ratio is needed to R2 + aaR^ + bbR2 + cc = 0 (15)
haveSUFA=SUFy. When circumstances and
cause SUFA = SUFy (al-though it may not where aa = (3fg2 - d2§) Ig3
time permit, use an exact calculation.
be a practical solu-
R2 = ([R, + 1]X SUFy) -1 (16) □
Edited by Peter M. Silverberg

References
 1. Dimoplon, W., Jr., August 1974!
How to Determine the 2. Turna, J.J., "Engineering Mathematics Hand-
Geometry of Pressure
Vessel Heads, book," p.7, McGraw-HiB, New York, 1970.
Hydro-carbon
Process., pp. 71-74,

98 CHEMICAL ENGINEERING / DECEMBER 1997

ENGINEERING PRACTICE

MORE

T
his is the second in a series of
ar-ticles that addresses selected
reactor design considerations. The
REACTOR
first (p. 96) discussed how the
geometry of scale-up "short changes"
the larger unit of heat transfer área.
This article will develop how the
math-ematics of scale-up can be used to
pre-dict the heat loads and times
required for completing temperature
CONSIDER
LMTD
ln
(t2-T) Predicting
adjust-ment steps at the larger scale.
(*x-n
Traditional Heat Transfer Model temperature
The figure shows the traditional model
used for unsteady-state heat transfer loads and times
analysis. Components are an agitated
reactor and a non-isothermal jacket
for scale-up
fluid. The mission is to cool or heat the
contents of the vessel from initial to NOMENCLATURE
final temperature.
Note 2 with the drawing All items below are introduced for Part 2. If
recom-mends including the weight of common to both parts, they will not be
the ves-sel in an analysis. The repeated.
temperature of the reactor walls must ai = UA]/wiC, see Equation 18
change along with the contents. For A= total heat transfer surface área =
simplicity, how-ever, this feature is not As + ABift2
included in the mathematics in this A¡j = heat transfer área on the bottom
article. The as-sumption is plausible head of the reactor, ft2
based on relative heat capacities and
A$ = heat transfer área on
weights.
the straight side of the reactor, ft2
Calculating the time required to
change the internal temperature of the b= (SUFv)2/3/k, see Equation 18
reactor starts with differential heat C= heat capacity of ¡acket fluid,
balance equations: Bfu/lb-°F
Cp|_ = heat capacity of mass of material in
Por Cooling:
the reactor, Btu/lb-"F
= wC(t2-t1) = UA(LMTD) (1) k= scale-up terrn for ¡acket How,
dimensionless
(b) (c)
LMTD= log mean temperature
-«**.% differ-ence, see Equations 3 and 4
(a) ML = mass of material in the reactor, Ib
For Heating: t] = ¡acket inlet temperature, °F

MLCpLd=
LMTD £ -= wC(.t1-t2) = UA(LMTD) (2) t2 = ¡acket outlet temperature, °F
■da T= temperature of mass of material
(d) (e) (í) in the reactor, °F
Then compute the log mean U= overall heat transfer coefficient,
tempera-ture differences Btu/hr-ft2-°F
(3) w= ¡acket flow, Ib/h
X= eUA/wC ¡ see Eauation 8. Sub-
scripts explained Equations 13,
14andl5.
For coohng: For fl = time required to complete the
(4) step, h

heating:

_ [(h-ry^-T)]
 u>C(t2-t1)=UA temperature at the start of the coohng
ln (5) cycle, T¡, to the temperature at the end
We will retain the lower case "t" for Clearing and of the cooling cycle, T2.
representing jacket temperature and the rearranging... When cooling, T2 < T¡. The (g) form of
upper case "T" for representing internal Equation 8 shows clearly that the
ln ¡JA
reactor temperature. It will not matter if wC (6) pre-dicted t at the start of the cycle will
2
the temperature adjustment operation is (T-h), be larger than the predicted t2 at the end
for cooling or for heating. Another of the cycle. This is an important aspect of
simplification we will assume is that
(T-H)
un-steady state heat transfer. Don't
both U and A remain constant over the Therefore, in exponential form: overlook it when completing heat load
temperature adjustment cycle. (T-t1)ICT-t2) = eÜAIwC (7) calculations.
LettingX= eUA!wC and Equate parts (e) and (f) in Equation 2
Jacket Outlet Temperature substítuting gives and use the full definition of LMTD for
Equate parts (b) and (c) in Equation 1. the heating mode. The result will be
Use the definition of LMTD for the cool- t2 = mX-V+tJ/X =T + [(tj-T)IX] (8)
ing mode. This equation allows the (g) (h)
di-rect calculation of the jacket outlet The valúes for t¡ and X in
temperature, t2, in the figure. Equation 8 are constant.
Temperature T varíes from the
[T-tt)-(T-h
100 CHEMICAL ENGINEERING / DECEMBER 1997
(T-h)/
".
/(T-h)
 Part2

DESIGN
TABLE . PARAMETERSFORTHi
AGITATED REACTOR
AB s75 ft2
■:■. As s188.9 (t2
= 1.0Btu/lb-°F
.c CpL = 0.516 Btu/lb-°F

ATIONS
Edward H. Steve ML = 29,962 Ib
Day& : ti = 104°F
T,
Zimmermann
.:•■
• = 221°F
International h = 158°F 2
u = 73.5 Btu/hr-ft -°F
w = ; 28,798 Ib/h

Equation 8 for the direct calctdation of

the jacket outlet temperature, t2. It
should be evident that the predicted t2 at 1 Vw=waterf low needed to achieve
the start of the heating cycle will be 5 ft/s (usual máximum valué) in the
smaller than the predicted t2 at the end partial pipe jacket.
2. ML has been simplified forthls
of that cycle. article. DZI recommends including
the heat required to adjust the
Temperature -adjusting time temperature of the vessel Itself.
3. Overall heat transíer coeff icient
Equate parts (a) and (b) in Equation 1 is determined separately for reactor
and substitute t2 from Equation 8. Steps contents with DZI reactor-design
to Equation 11 will be shown. It allows computer program.
the direct calculation of the time
required to complete a cooling Jacket fluid in, at t,,w,C
tempera-ture-adjustment step in the FIGURE. Thls sketch defines the ÜA,/
reactor. X1 = e Jwfl (14)
parameters used in the table for an
U
agitated batch reactor X2 = e %,C (15)
X - (9) ^2 =
M,C t. If the larger reactor has a
(10) Heat Removal
¡da = - L^PÍA X larger size half-pipe-jacket, the jacket
lj'T-t t2,°F Btu/h
flow in-crease is linear: w2 = kuij Use
wC IX-li'T-tx Integration Tons
the defi-nition for the heat transfer área
over the appropriate in-terval (Time Start of step 161.3 1,650,000 137.5
scale-up factor from Part 1, (SUFA =
from 0 to fl, T from T¡ to T2) End of step 130.5 763,000
A2/Ai). We can readily determine that
gives: (11) 63.6 m
Use Equation 11 for the entire cool- ^-. ^%p
[x-i. I "21-íi (16)
ing step and, -Ȓl = 0.85 h Scale-up is thought of in terms of
»-[3§
wC n l The results show quantitatively the re
actor volume. If the reactor is scaled-up
To get the heating significance of considering both
temperature-ad-justment time, do a bound-aries of the unsteady state with the same aspect ratio (L/D) as the
similar calculation. Equate parts (d) and operation. The load needed at the end pilot model, Equation 12 from Part 1
(e) in Equation 2. Use Equation 8 for t2. of the step is less than one half the load applies. Repeated here as Equation 17.
Equation 12 is the result. needed at the start of the step. SUFA = lSUFvpl3 (17)
(12) Substitute Equation 17 into Equation
Reporting the valué at only one
MrC
L^pL íi-T, boundary could be misleading. For 16. Apply the algebraic law of powers. A
n= simple expression for X2 emerges.
wC IX íi-3». example, the total heat load (provided
X2=(Hb (18)

m by chillers or heaters) from múltiple

Calculation example No. 1
The table lists valúes for the process
parameters related to the agitated re-
actor with a partial-pipe coil jacket
shown in the figure. These are used in
the following example for completing a
cooling temperature adjustment step in
that reactor. Calcúlate A = Ag + Ag
Calcúlate X as eUA'wC = 1.961.
Apply Equation 8 and wC(t2 -1¡) for
conditions at the start and at the end of
the cycle:
reactors with overlap-ping
temperature-adjustment cycles could
be skewed if the changes within those
cycles are not considered.
Adjust the time for scale-up
1. General Considerations: For
a reactor at any scale
X¡=e /wfi (i3)
Where X¿, A¿ and u>i are specific valúes
for the scale being considered. For
in-stance, when scaling-up from WV¡
to WV2:
where a/ = UAJ/WJC and b =
(SUFv)2'3/k
2. Jacket Outlet Temperature
Substitute X2 into Equations 8, 11
and 12 to determine the effect of
scale-up on the jacket outlet
temperature and on the time required to
complete the temperature adjustment
step. To pre-dict directly the expected
valué for the outlet temperature (t^
from the jacket of a reactor scaled-up
by some volume
CHEMICAL ENGINEERING/DECEMBER 1997 101
ENGINEERING PRACTICE Part2

scale-up factor (SUFy), plug Equation 2 indicates the scaled-up reactor.) substituted into Equation 11.
18 into form (h) of Equation 8. 'SUFvjML1CpL~
ML2CpL _¡SUFV]ML1CpL
i,=T + Q=
h-T
H (19) To predict directly the expected
*J Tiz- (21)
3. Final Adjustment Time valué for the time required to complete ln
h
Equation 20 results because M¿¿ = a cooling step in a reactor scaled-up by T2-h rf-i
SUFy x Mi2 and u>2 = kwp (Subscript some volume scale-up factor {SUFy),
Equations 18 and 20 can be
Coade has raised the bar another notch with Calculation example No. 2 The
CAESAR II Versión 4.0, the new, native Plus you get all these tools ¡n one package: objective is to scale up the reactor to
Windows 95/NT versión of the world's most twice the volume. i.e., SUFy = 2.
CAESAR II
popular program for pipe stress analysis and
Versión
• Pipe stress analysis
As-sume U2 = Uj. Assume that the size
of the half-pipe jacket is identical at
4.0 both scales. In other words, k = 1,
therefore w2 = lXw}.
Pipe Stress Analysis Use Equation 18 and calcúlate a»
and b

for Windows 5^51

a, = 1.961
b = (SUFyp/3/k = 22/3/1 = 1.588
Apply Equation 19 and wC (í¿ - íj)
.■•SaiPlatelri.riiit -.."-i Jien-;Wi.ma
for conditions at the start and at the
r7
^¡r. I :~l;.»S£:Frv. :■:■: endofthecycle.
Heat Removal
t2,°F Btu/h Tons
Start of step 180.8 2,212,000 184.3
Endofstep 139.5 1,022,000
85.2
There are increased heat loads at the
larger reactor scale because the heat
transfer área is 1.59 times larger. The
coolant rate has remained constant.
Use Equation 21 for the entire cool-
ing step. Result: O = 1.26h. The time
required is also larger. It computes to
be approximately 48% more than the
0.85 h predicted at the smaller scale.
design. CAESAR II 4.0 provides: •API, NEMA, WRC, AISC component Múltiple temperature adjustment
evaluation steps usually occur in a chemical reac
• Wireframe plots & rendered graphics
• Automatic spring sizing tor production cycle. The sum of such
• Simultaneous display of input spreadsheet
• Component databases cycle time increases could be signífi-
and plot
• Structural steel modeling (now with
• Cut & paste capabilities cant. The plant capacity at the larger
spreadsheet input)
• Automatic underground pipe modeling
scale will be adversely impacted if the
• Complete material datábase with allowable cycle times are not corrected. ■
stress data Edited by Peter M. Silverberg
• 2 codes for fiberglass reinforced plástic pip
ENGINEERING SOFTW ARE
• API, WRC & BS nozzle flexibilities Author
HOUSTON, TEXAS USA • Bi-directional link to CADWorx/PIPE™ Edward H. Steve is a director
drafting package of technology for the
Process & Industrial División, Day
Phone: 281-890-4566 & Zimmermann International, Inc.
CAESAR II is the world's standard because (1818 Market St, Philadelphia, PA
Fax: 281-890-3301
it is technically comprehensive, flexible, 19103; Phone: 215-299-8795, Fax:
WWW: http://www.coade.com 215-299-2236) Formerly, he was a
easy to use, reliable, and is supported by
lead process engineer in the Life
the industry's best technical support team. Sciences División. He prepares the
conceptual engi-neering for
specialty chemical and
petrochemical plant design prqjects
and contributes to technical development, technical su-
pervisión and business development. He has worked in
design, operations and research for more than thirty
years and is the author of sev-eral technical articles. He
is a gradúate of Cornell University (B.Ch.E.), a Member
CALL FOR FREE BROCHURE 1 -800-899-8787 of AIChE and a Professional Engineer in six states.

For More Information, Circle 71

102 CHEMICAL ENGINEERING / DECEMBER
1997