Computational fluid dynamic (CFD) modeling of simultaneous extraction and fermentation process in a single sugar beet cossette

Mario Novak 1 , Antonija Trontel 1 , Anita Slavica 1 , Predrag Horvat 1 , and Božidar Šantek 1
  • 1 Laboratory of Biochemical Engineering, Industrial Microbiology, Malting and Brewing Technology, Department of Biochemical Engineering, Faculty of Food Technology and Biotechnology, University of Zagreb, , Zagreb, Croatia

Abstract

For simulations of flow and microbial conversion reactions, related to modeling of simultaneous extraction and fermentation process in a single sugar beet cossette a software package OpenFOAM was used. The mass transfer of the components (sucrose, glucose, fructose and ethanol) in the studied system was controlled by the convection and diffusion processes. Microbial conversion rates and yield coefficients were experimentally determined and/or estimated by mathematical simulation. Dimensions of the model sugar beet cossette (SBC) were: average length of cosettes 40.10 mm, average thickness 3.32 mm and average width 3.5 mm, and represented in the model as a square-shape cross-section mathematical simulation. Dimensions of the model sugar beet cossette (SBC) were: average length of cosettes 40.10 mm, average thickness 3.32 mm and average width 3.5 mm, and represented in the model as a square-shape cross-section used to study the mass transfer and microbial conversion rates on the scale of single sugar beet cossette in the short time scales (up to 25 s). This model can be used for simulation of extractant flow around single sugar beet cossette as well as for description of simultaneous extraction and fermentation process in the studied system.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • 1. Schurgel K, Bellgardt KH. Bioreactor engineering: Modelling and control. 2000; Springer. Berlin Heidelberg

  • 2. Cardona AC, Sanchez OJ. Fuel ethanol production: Process design trends and integration opportunities. Biores. Technol. 2007; 98: 2415 - 2457.

  • 3. Pimentel D, Patzek TW. Ethanol Production Using Corn, Switchgrass, and Wood; Biodiesel Production Using Soybean and Sunflower. Natural Resources Research. 2005; 14: 65-76.

  • 4. Sanchez OJ, Cardona, CA. Trends in biotechnological production of fuel ethanol from different feedstocks. Biores Technol. 2008; 99: 5270-5295.

  • 5. Novak M, Mathematical modeling and mass transfer research in development of sustainable bioprocesses for production of organic solvents and biofuels. 2015. PhD Thesis. Laboratory for Biochemical Engineering, Industrial Microbiology and Malting and Brewing Technology, Faculty of Food Technology and Biotechnology, University of Zagreb.

  • 6. Šantek, B, Ivancic M, Horvat P, Novak S, Maric V. (2006) Horizontal Tubular Bioreactors in Biotechnology. CABEQ. 2006; 20(4): 389-399

  • 7. Cabrera S, Arriola MC, Morales E, Micheo F, Rolz C. EX-FERM ethanol production using chipped sugarcane. App Microbiol and Biotechnol, 1982; 14(1): 21-28.

  • 8. Curien G, Ravanel S, Dumas R. A kinetic model of the branch?point between the methionine and threonine biosynthesis pathways in Arabidopsis thaliana, Eur. J. Biochem. 2003; 270: 4615-4627.

  • 9. Grosz R, Stephanopoulos G. Physiological, biochemical, and mathematical studies of micro-aerobic continuous ethanol fermentation by Saccharomyces cerevisiae. III: Mathematical model of cellular energetics and catabolism, Biotechnol. Bioeng. 1990a; 36:1030-1040.

  • 10. Rizzi M, Theobald U, Mailinger W, Baltes M, Reuss M. In Vivo Analysis of Metabolic Dynamics in Saccharomyces cerevisiae: I. Experimental Observations, Biotechnol. Bioeng. 1977; 55: 305-316.

  • 11. Rizzi M, Theobald U, Baltes M, Reuss M. In Vivo Analysis of Metabolic Dynamics in Saccharomyces cerevisiae: II. Mathematical Model, BiotechnoL Bioeng. 1997b; 55: 592- 608.

  • 12. Novak M, Koller M, Braunegg G, Horvat P. Mathematical modelling as a tool for optimized PHA production. CABEQ special issue. 2015; 29(2): 183-220.

  • 13. Alvarez-Vasquez F, Gonzlez-Alcn C, Torres NV. Metabolism of citric acid production by Aspergillus niger: Model definition, steady-state analysis and constrained optimisation of citric acid production rate. Biotechnol. Bioeng. 2000; 70(1): 82-108.

  • 14. Generalis SC, Glover GMC. Modelling a Biochemical Reaction with Computational Fluid Dynamics, International Journal of Chemical Reactor Engineering. 2005; 3(1): ISSN (Online) 1542-6580.

  • 15. Buttersack C, Schiliephake D. Extraction, In: Sugar Technology, (Poel, P.W., Schiweck, H., Schwartz, T., Ed.). Verlag Dr. Albert Bartens, KG-Berlin. 1998; 309-327.

  • 16. Hills EE, Abraham MH, Hersey A, Bevan CD. Diffusion coefficients in ethanol and in water at 298 K: Linear free energy relationships, Fluid Phase Equilibria. 2011; 303: 45-55.

  • 17. Mogi N, Sugai E, Fuse Y, Funazukuri T. Infinite dilution binary diffusion coefficient for six sugars at 0,1 MPa and temperatures from (273,2 to 353,2) K. J. Chem. Eng. Data. 2007; 52: 40-43.

  • 18. Ribeiro ACF., Ortona O, Simoes SMN., Santos CIAV, Prazeres PMRA, Valente AJM, Lobo VMM, Burrows H. D. (2006) Binary Mutual Diffusion Coefficients of Aqueous Solutions of Sucrose, Lactose, Glucose, and Fructose in the Temperature Range from (298.15 to 328.15) K, J. Chem. Eng. Data. 2006; 51: 1836-1840.

  • 19. Levenspiel O. The monod equation: A revisit and a generalization to product inhibition situations, Biotechnol. Bioeng. 1980; 22: 1671-1687.

  • 20. Aiba S, Shoda M. Reassessment of the product inhibition in alcohol fermentation, J. Ferm. Technol. 1969; 47: 790-794.

  • 21. Andrews JF. A mathematical model for the continuous culture of microorganisms utilizing inhibitory substrates, Biotechnol Bioeng. 1968; 10: 707-723.

  • 22. Berkeley Madonna (2007) Berkeley Madonna modeling and analysis of dynamic systems v. 8.3.14, Berkeley, CA, USA http://www.berkeleymadonna.com.

  • 23. Novak M, Horvat P. Mathematical modelling and optimisation of a waste water treatment plant by combined oxygen electrode and biological waste water treatment model. Appl. Math. Model. 2012; 36:3813-3825.

  • 24. OpenFOAM. OpenFoam user guide, 1.4.1 ed. 2007. http://www.opencfd.co.uk/openfoam/.

  • 25. Jasak H. Error Analysis and Estimation for the Finite Volume Method with Applications to Fluid Flow, PhD Thesis, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Imperial College of Science, Technology, and Medicine, London. 1996; 146-152.

  • 26. Issa RI. Solution of the Implicitly Discretized Fluid Flow Equations by Operator-Splitting. J. of Computational Physics. 1985; 62:40-65.

  • 27. Issa RI, Gosman AD, Watkins AP. The Computation of Compressible and Incompressible Recirculating Flow by a Non-Iterative Implicit Scheme, J. of Computational Physics. 1986; 62:66-82.

  • 28. Janardhanan VM, Deutschmann O. Computational Fluid Dynamics of Catalytic Reactors, in “Modeling of Heterogeneous Catalytic Reactions: From the molecular process to the technical system”, O. Deutschmann (Ed.), Wiley-VCH, Weinheim 2011.

  • 29. Koynov A, Khinast, JG. Effects of hydrodynamics and Lagrangian transport on chemically reacting bubble flows. Chem. Eng. Sci. 2004; 59: 3907-3927.

OPEN ACCESS

Journal + Issues

Search