Next Article in Journal
Process Path for Reducing Carbon Emissions from Steel Industry—Combined Electrification and Hydrogen Reduction
Previous Article in Journal
Numerical Study and Structural Optimization of Impinging Jet Heat Transfer Performance of Floatation Nozzle
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Extended Definition of Conversion and Reaction Extent for a Systematic Development of the Design Equations for Reactor Networks

by
Alessio Caravella
Department of Computer Engineering, Modelling, Electronics and Systems Engineering (DIMES), University of Calabria (UNICAL), Via P. Bucci, Cubo 42C, 87036 Rende, CS, Italy
Processes 2024, 12(1), 107; https://doi.org/10.3390/pr12010107
Submission received: 20 November 2023 / Revised: 24 December 2023 / Accepted: 27 December 2023 / Published: 1 January 2024
(This article belongs to the Section Chemical Processes and Systems)

Abstract

:
The aim of this work is to present in a systematic way a novel general methodology to develop the design equations (heat and mass balances) for networks of ideal reactors, that is, Plug-Flow Reactors (PFRs) and Continuous Stirred Tank Reactors (CSTRs). In particular, after introducing the general definition of conversion to be used for reactor networks, several case studies of interest in chemical engineering are presented as topic-examples of application: (i) adiabatic-stage reactors with recycle, (ii) adiabatic-stage reactors with split, (iii) adiabatic-stage reactors intercooled by reactants and (iv) adiabatic-stage reactors with interstage distributed feed. More generally, the presented methodology can also be applied to develop the design equations for complex networks of interconnected reactors, not restricted to those considered in the present work. The motivation behind the present study lies in the fact that, to the best of our knowledge, a systematic development of the design equations of single reactors in reactor networks is currently missing in the open literature as well as in the reference textbooks of chemical reaction engineering and reactor design.

1. Introduction

Nowadays, to increase the performance of existing production processes as well as to develop innovative and more efficient ones, there is a need to rethink the approach to the design of reaction units.
Chemical reactors represent the core of the production processes, in which lower-value raw materials are upgraded to higher-value products. Such a transformation occurs through several steps that generally involve a number of complex chemical reactions, which most of the time would be convenient to carry out in different reactors to maximise selectivity, and are pointed out in the textbook of Ming et al. (2016) [1,2,3].
Moreover, the increasing interest in modular and compact micro-reactors in chemical, biochemical and pharmaceutical processes [3,4], as well as the related technological enhancements, including complex reactor configurations [5], make a question arise about the need to develop a general design methodology for such systems.
The field of designing efficient reaction systems starting from complex reaction paths through more or less advanced techniques of Mixed-Integer Non-Linear Programming (MINLP) is called Attainable Region Theory, whose main topic is to deal with complex reactor networks [3]. MINLP techniques are necessary because the design of an optimal reactor system involves not only real variables like conversion, yields and selectivities but also integer variables like the number of reactors and their position in the network. A few literature examples of efficient reactor networks are reported in Figure 1 [6].

Objectives and Motivations

The objective of the present work is to present in a systematic and general way the design methodology of complex reactor networks with ideal reactors operated in steady state, that is, CSTRs (Continuous Stirred Tank Reactors) and PFRs (Plug-Flow Reactors). The target readers are chemical and process engineers involved in the design and optimisation of chemical reactors, as well as scientists and students in their advanced courses who may need a systematic approach to the development and analysis of reactor networks.
The reason for presenting this work is based on the fact that there are currently no systematic and specific approaches dealing with writing the design equations of the single reactors of complex reactor networks in terms of conversion or, more generally, of reaction extents [1,4,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41,42,43,44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51,52,53]. The extension of the present approach to non-ideal reactors or other types of reactors is straightforward.
To approach the design of reactor networks in a systematic way, we first generalise the concept of conversion as well as the concept of reaction extents in the case of multiple reactions. Then, we develop and report in detail the design equations—that is, mass and energy balances—for different key types of reactor networks.
For these purposes, the paper is organised to present and discuss the final equations directly in the body of the text, reporting the details of the systematic procedure in the corresponding appendices. This is performed to avoid weighing down the body of the work owing to the unavoidable presence of a high number of equations.

2. Methodology of the General Design Approach

The following sub-sections report the description of the main steps leading to the correct formalisation of the design equations, including a brief introduction to the reactor networks along with the general definition of conversion and reaction degrees.

2.1. Reactor Networks

A generic reactor network consists of a number of reactors and mix/split nodes appropriately connected to each other, whose connections represent the branches of the network (Figure 2).
In this paper, we consider just the ideal PFRs and CSTRs, as all the other reactive systems can actually be obtained by appropriate modifications/combinations of them. Each reactor represents a reactive node, characterised by a single functioning point in the case of the CSTRs and by a continuous working profile in the case of the PFRs.
Based on The Theory of Graphs [43], a reactor network can be represented by a directed graphs since the particular orientation of the arrows connecting the nodes does matter in determining its performance since a change in the connection direction causes a change in the network’s functioning.
By definition, the design equations of a device are relationships pairing mass, energy and momentum balances expressed in terms of convenient independent and dependent variables. In this work, time is not included in the independent variables, as we consider ideal reactors working in steady-state conditions. The independent variables represent a measure of the system size—usually volume, length, catalyst mass or catalytic area—whereas the dependent variables measure the extent of mass or molar flow rates, mass or molar fractions and similar.
In the description of this general approach, the momentum balance—which determines the fluid dynamics of the stream in the reactor—will not be considered because the velocity field is already fixed in the ideal PFRs and CSTRs by hypothesis. Furthermore, for pressure, the well-known Ergun equation (or its various modifications) can be satisfactorily used to calculate the pressure drop.
Depending on whether we know the values of the dependent variables or the independent ones, we have to address:
(i) a design problem—in which the dependent variables are known (in terms of final performance, conversion or a general productivity index) and the independent variables need to be evaluated;
(ii) a verification problem—in which the independent variables are known in terms of system size (volume, catalyst mass, catalyst volume, etc.) and the dependent ones need to be evaluated and compared to the target performances.
In general, we can write the mass balances either in terms of the flow rate of the species or in terms of reaction extents as well as conversion or yield in the case of a single reaction. In the following sections, the following notation is adopted to indicate the characteristic number of network objects along with the corresponding indices:
  • {n, i} = {Number of Species, Related Index};
  • {m, j} = {Number of Reactions, Related Index};
  • {r, k} = {Number of Reactors, Related Index};
  • {b, l} = {Number of Network Branches, Related Index}.

2.2. General Extension of the Definition of Conversion

To approach the reactor network design in a systematic way, we introduce the extension of the general definition of conversion (xA), which from now on refers to the limiting reactant, indicated by the subscript ‘A’.
In particular, starting from considering that each l-th branch of the network is provided with a certain non-null conversion value, we extend the general definition of conversion by taking the working conditions occurring in that branch in the absence of reaction as the reference state based on which conversion is defined (Equations (1) and (2)):
C o n v e r s i o n A ( l t h   branch ) { Flow   Rate   of   A   in the   Non - Reactive Network } ( l t h   branch ) { Flow   Rate   of   A in   the   Reactive Network } ( l t h   branch ) { Flow   Rate   of   A   in the   Non - Reactive Network } ( l t h   branch )
x A ( l ) F A ( l ) F A ( l ) F A ( l ) F A ( l ) = F A ( l ) ( 1 x A ( l ) )
where FA is the molar flow rate of the species A and the asterisk ‘*’ indicates the molar flow rate of A in the l-th branch of the network (superscripted) in the absence of reaction.
In the case of multiple reactions, it is not possible to write the design equations in terms of the sole conversion since we have as many design variables as many independent reactions. To face this problem, analogously to what is performed in the single-reaction case, we can use the molar reaction extents (ξj, Equation (3)), which are design parameters measuring the extent to which each reaction proceeds forward in each l-th branch of the network.
F A ( l ) F A ( l ) + j = 1 m ν A j ξ j ( l )
In cases where it is convenient to work with dimensionless parameters instead of using ξj, which have units of a molar flow rate, we can define the here-called reaction degrees xj in the generic l-th branch of the network as the ratio of the reaction extents ξj and the molar flow rate of the key-reactant (A) in the same branch of the network in the absence of reaction (Equation (4)).
x j ( l ) ξ j ( l ) F A ( l )
Such a definition is suggested by the form of Equation (3) and is chosen in analogy with the definition of conversion (see Equation (2)). By definition, the parameters xj can also assume values higher than unity.
For the purposes of the present paper, we will focus on the single-reaction case, which implies the use of the conversion to express the mass balances. The extension to the multi-reaction system is straightforward.
Once given the general definition of conversion, we can express the molar flow rates of the species in terms of the conversion itself as follows (Equation (5)):
F A ( l ) = F A ( l ) ( 1 x A ( l ) ) F i ( l ) = F A ( l ) ( θ i + ν i a x A ( l ) ) θ i F i ( l ) F A ( l ) ,   a = ν A > 0
where θi is the feed ratio of the i-th species, defined with respect to the key-reactant A. We remind you that the stoichiometric coefficient of the limiting species A, νA, is negative.
It is necessary to put in evidence that, in the absence of reaction and in the presence of a single feed to the network, the feed ratio θi is the same in all the branches of the network, as the mixing and split nodes do not provide a selective separation among species.
On the contrary, in the case of separate feed streams, like in the distributed-feed system analysed in Section 3, the feed ratios θi evaluated at the beginning of the network are different from those in the various network branches.
We underline that the here-presented general definition of conversion implies a paradigm change. In fact, the stoichiometric table, which represents the mass balances for all the species involved in the system, has to be written not between the inlet and outlet of the reactor but “between” the non-reactive and reactive cases on each l-th branch of the network (see Table 1).
It is easy to demonstrate that the general definition of conversion reported in Equations (1) and (2) includes the definition of conversion in single reactors as well as in the simplest reactor networks, that is, a series of reactors and reactors in parallel, as reported in Section 2.3.1 and Section 2.3.2. Figure 3 shows the general algorithm to systematically obtain the design equations of the reactors in a network.

2.3. Approach Validation Using Simple Reactor Networks

In this section, we report our general approach applied to the simplest reactor network, that is, a series of reactors and reactors placed in parallel in order to show that such networks can be seen as particular cases of more general configurations.

2.3.1. Series of Reactors in a Row

As for the series of reactors, the reference flow rate of A corresponds to the flow rate at the beginning of the series, and as in the non-reaction case, all the flow rates entering and exiting the reactors are equal (Figure 4).
Using the general definition stated in Equations (1) and (2), we obtain the conversion in the l-th branch (Equation (6)), which is found to be equivalent to the conventional expression reported in almost all the reference textbooks on reactor design (see, e.g., [1,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33]).
x A , f ( l ) F A , f ( l ) F A , f ( l ) F A , f ( l ) = F A 0 F A , f ( l ) F A 0 F A , f ( l ) = F A 0 ( 1 x A , f ( l ) )

2.3.2. Reactors in Parallel

As for reactors in parallel (Figure 5), using the same procedure, we obtain the expressions reported in Equation (7).
x A f ( l ) F A f ( l ) F A f ( l ) F A f ( l ) = S l F A 0 F A f ( l ) S l F A 0 F A f ( l ) = S l F A 0 ( 1 x A f ( l ) ) x A = F A 0 F A F A 0 F A = F A 0 ( 1 x A )
From the mass balance on the outlet mixing node, we can demonstrate that the optimal working conditions for reactors in parallel correspond to having the same conversion in all the outlet branches, as demonstrated by some algebraic calculations in Equations (8)–(10):
l = 1 r F A f ( l ) = l = 1 r S l F A 0 ( 1 x A f ( l ) ) = F A = F A 0 ( 1 x A ) l = 1 r S l ( 1 x A f ( l ) ) = ( 1 x A ) l = 1 r S l = 1 l = 1 r S l x A f ( l ) = ( 1 x A )
l = 1 r S l x A f ( l ) = x A ,   max S _ x A x A S l = 0
x A S l = S l ( l = 1 r S l x A f ( l ) ) = S l ( l = 1 r 1 S l x A f ( l ) + S r x A f ( r ) ) S l [ l = 1 r 1 S l x A f ( l ) + ( 1 l = 1 r 1 S l ) x A f ( r ) ] = x A f ( l ) x A f ( r ) = 0 x A f ( l ) = x A f ( r )

2.3.3. Adiabatic-Stage Reactors with Recycle (See Appendix A.2)

This configuration is already present in several textbooks on chemical reactor design (see, e.g., Levenspiel, 1999 [9]) and is considered here for validation purposes. Figure 6a,b show the scheme of a series of adiabatic-stage reactors with recycle along with the corresponding scheme in the absence of reaction.
It is pointed out that we denote as “stage” the repeating unit of the series, consisting of a reactor along with the recycle stream. The subscript ‘f’ indicates the outlet of the stage to distinguish it from the outlet of reactor (i.e., the stream just before the split node). In fact, in this type of system, it is convenient to express the design equations as functions of the stage variables instead of those of the reactor.
Using the aforementioned extended definition of conversion, we can express the flow rates in the k-th branch of the reactor network as functions of conversions as follows (Equation (11), see Equation (A6) in the Appendix A):
F A , 0 ( k ) = F A , 0 ( k ) ( 1 x A , 0 ( k ) ) = ( R k + 1 ) F A , f ( 0 ) ( 1 x A , 0 ( k ) ) F A ( k ) = F A ( k ) ( 1 x A ( k ) ) = ( R k + 1 ) F A , f ( 0 ) ( 1 x A ( k ) )
The mass balance on the mixing nodes leads to the following relation among inlet, outlet and stage conversions (Equation (12), see Equation (A8) in the Appendix A):
x A , 0 ( k ) = 1 ( R k + 1 ) x A , f ( k 1 ) + R k ( R k + 1 ) x A , f ( k ) x A ( k ) = x A , f ( k )
Consequently, the mass balance on the k-th PFR is obtained as follows (Equation (13)):
V R k F A , f ( 0 ) = ( R k + 1 ) 1 ( R k + 1 ) x A , f ( k 1 ) + R k ( R k + 1 ) x A , f ( k ) x A , f ( k ) d x A ( r A )
whereas the mass balance on CSTR is (Equation (14)):
V R k F A , f ( 0 ) = ( x A , f ( k ) x A , f ( k 1 ) ) ( r A k )
As for the energy balance on the mixing nodes, the final resulting inlet temperature is found, as expected, to be a weighted average of both entering temperatures (Equation (15), see Equation (A17) in the Appendix A):
T 0 ( k ) = 1 ( R k + 1 ) ( C ˜ p S + Δ C ˜ p A x A , f ( k 1 ) C ˜ p S + Δ C ˜ p A x A , 0 ( k ) ) T f ( k 1 ) + R k ( R k + 1 ) ( C ˜ p S + Δ C ˜ p A x A , f ( k ) C ˜ p S + Δ C ˜ p A x A , 0 ( k ) ) T f ( k ) T ( k ) = T f ( k ) ,   Δ C ˜ p A Δ C ˜ p a
Under the hypothesis of negligible  Δ C ˜ p A , the following relation is obtained (Equation (16), see Equation (A18) in the Appendix A):
T 0 ( k ) = 1 ( R k + 1 ) T f ( k 1 ) + R k ( R k + 1 ) T f ( k )
The energy balance on the k-th PFR is (Equation (17), see Equation (A21) in the Appendix A):
d T d V = ( Δ H ˜ r , A ) ( r A ) F A , f ( 0 ) ( R k + 1 ) ( C ˜ p S + Δ C ˜ p A x A ) ,   Δ H ˜ r , A Δ H ˜ r a
As for the energy balance on the k-th CSTR, we can express it either in terms of stage conversions or temperatures (Equation (18), see Equation (A25) in the Appendix A):
( x A , f ( k ) x A , f ( k 1 ) ) = ( R k + 1 ) C ˜ p S ( T ( k ) T 0 ( k ) ) ( Δ H ˜ r , A ) = C ˜ p S ( T f ( k ) T f ( k 1 ) ) ( Δ H ˜ r , A )

Geometrical Interpretation of Mass Balance

In order to show the geometrical meaning of the integral form of the mass balance on PFR (Equation (13)), we obtain the k-th recycle ratio Rk and (Rk + 1) as functions of the inlet and outlet conversions as follows (Equation (19)):
x A , 0 ( k ) = 1 ( R k + 1 ) x A , f ( k 1 ) + R k ( R k + 1 ) x A , f ( k ) R k = x A , f ( k 1 ) x A , 0 ( k ) x A , 0 ( k ) x A , f ( k ) ,   R k + 1 = x A , f ( k 1 ) x A , f ( k ) x A , 0 ( k ) x A , f ( k )
Substituting Equation (19) into Equation (13), Equation (20) is obtained, which can be interpreted geometrically as shown in Figure 7.
V R k F A , f ( 0 ) = x A , f ( k ) x A , f ( k 1 ) x A , f ( k ) x A , 0 ( k ) x A , 0 ( k ) x A , f ( k ) d x A ( r A ) = ( x A , f ( k ) x A , f ( k 1 ) ) 1 ( r A ) ¯ | x A , 0 ( k ) x A , f ( k )
As already demonstrated in several reference books for a single reactor (see, e.g., ref. [9]), the V/FA0 ratio is found to be the product of the inlet–outlet conversion difference and the mean value of the reaction rate inverse calculated between inlet and outlet. It can also be noted that, in the limit value of Rk = 0, we obtain the usual design equation of PFR, whereas, for Rk → ∞, the k-th reactor behaves as a perfectly mixed CSTR.

3. Application to Other Case Studies of Interest

To describe the systematic procedure for achieving the design equations for a reactor network, in the following sub-sections, we report the following three cases of a particular interest in chemical engineering, from which other possible and more complex cases can be constructed and analysed if required:
  • Adiabatic-Stage Reactors with Split;
  • Adiabatic-Stage Reactors Intercooled/Interheated by Reactants;
  • Adiabatic-Stage Reactors with Distributed Interstage Feed.
The main assumptions of the presented systematic procedure, along with the details of the intermediate calculation steps, are reported in the Appendix A.

3.1. Adiabatic-Stage Reactors with Split (See Appendix A.3)

The system considered here is similar to the previous one, with the important difference that now, in each stage, a partial split of feed is included in the inlet stream instead of a partial recycle of the outlet stream (Figure 8).
The mass balance on the mixing nodes after the reactor is stated by the following relation among stage conversions (Equation (21), see Equation (A28) in the Appendix A):
x A ( k ) = 1 1 S k x A , f ( k ) S k 1 S k x A , f ( k 1 )
The mass balance on the k-th PFR, expressed in terms of stage conversions, is obtained as follows (Equation (22), see Equation (A31) in the Appendix A):
V R k F A , f ( 0 ) = ( 1 S k ) x A , f ( k 1 ) 1 1 S k x A , f ( k ) S k 1 S k x A , f ( k 1 ) d x A ( r A )
whereas the mass balance on the k-th CSTR can be obtained in the following two forms (Equation (23), see Equations (A34) in the Appendix A):
V R k F A , f ( 0 ) = ( 1 S k ) ( x A ( k ) x A , 0 ( k ) ) ( r A k ) = ( x A , f ( k ) x A , f ( k 1 ) ) ( r A k )
As for the energy balance on the mixing nodes, it can be expressed as follows (Equation (24), see Equation (A36) in the Appendix A):
T ( k ) = ( C ˜ p S + Δ C ˜ p A x A , f ( k ) ) T f ( k ) S k ( C ˜ p S + Δ C ˜ p A x A , f ( k 1 ) ) T f ( k 1 ) [ ( C ˜ p S + Δ C ˜ p A x A , f ( k ) ) S k ( C ˜ p S + Δ C ˜ p A x A , f ( k 1 ) ) ]
In the hypothesis of negligible  Δ C ˜ p , we obtain Equation (25) (see Equation (A37) in the Appendix A):
T ( k ) = 1 ( 1 S k ) T f ( k ) S k ( 1 S k ) T f ( k 1 )
In combination with Equation (21), Equation (25) states the linearity of the working points of the streams at the mixing node in a {xA vs. T} plane.
The differential form of the energy balance on the k-th PFR is obtained as follows (Equation (26), see Equation (A39) in the Appendix A):
d T d V = ( Δ H ˜ r , A ) ( r A ) F A , f ( 0 ) ( 1 S k ) ( C ˜ p S + Δ C ˜ p a x A )
whereas the energy balance on the k-th CSTR is (Equation (27), see Equations (A43) and (A44) in the Appendix A):
( x A , f ( k ) x A , f ( k 1 ) ) = C ˜ p S ( T f ( k ) T f ( k 1 ) ) ( Δ H ˜ r , A )

Geometrical Interpretation of Mass Balance

In order to show the geometrical meaning of the integral form of the mass balance on PFR (Equation (22)), we obtain the k-th split ratio and its complement to the unity as functions of the inlet and outlet conversions (Equation (28)):
x A , f ( k ) = ( 1 S k ) x A ( k ) + S k x A , f ( k 1 ) S k = x A ( k ) x A , f ( k ) x A ( k ) x A , f ( k 1 ) ,   ( 1 S k ) = x A , f ( k ) x A , f ( k 1 ) x A ( k ) x A , f ( k 1 )
Substituting Equation (28) into Equation (22), Equation (29) is obtained, which can be interpreted geometrically as shown in Figure 9.
V R k F A , f ( 0 ) = x A , f ( k ) x A , f ( k 1 ) x A ( k ) x A , f ( k 1 ) x A , f ( k 1 ) x A ( k ) d x A ( r A ) = ( x A , f ( k ) x A , f ( k 1 ) ) 1 ( r A ) ¯ | x A , f ( k 1 ) x A ( k )
In particular, analogously to what was seen for the reactors with recycle, in this case, the V/FA0 ratio is found to be the product of the inlet–outlet conversion difference and the mean value of the reaction rate inverse calculated between the inlet and outlet conversion. It can also be noted that in the limit value of Sk = 0, we obtain the usual design equation of PFR, whereas for Sk = 1, there is a complete bypass of the reactor, which implies no reaction in the k-th reactor.

3.2. Adiabatic-Stage Reactors Intercooled/Interheated by Reactants (See Appendix A.4)

The third reactor network considered is a series of adiabatic reactors in which part of the feed of each reactor is split forward into the feed of the next one (Figure 10), with the main purpose of cooling down (for exothermic reactions) or heating up (for endothermic ones) the reactor inlet, thus pushing forward the thermodynamic equilibrium.
The mass balance on the (k − 1)-th mixing node is obtained as follows (Equation (30), see Equation (A48) in the Appendix A):
x A , 0 ( k ) = h = 1 k 1 S h h = 1 k S h x A ( k 1 ) x A , 0 ( k ) | S k = S = k 1 k x A ( k 1 )
It can be noted that, in the case of equal split ratios, the inlet conversion is not a function of the split ratio itself but just of the number of splits. The mass balance on the k-th PFR is obtained as follows (Equation (31), see Equations (A51) and (A52) in the Appendix A):
V R k F A ( 0 ) = ( h = 1 k S h ) x A , 0 ( k ) = h = 1 k 1 S h h = 1 k S h x A ( k 1 ) x A ( k ) d x A ( r A ) V R k F A ( 0 ) | S k = S = k S x A , 0 ( k ) = k 1 k x A ( k 1 ) x A ( k ) d x A ( r A ) k
The total volume of the series is the sum of all reactor volumes or the series, as reported in Equation (32):
V R T F A ( 0 ) = k = 1 r V R k F A ( 0 ) = k = 1 r { k S x A , 0 ( k ) = k 1 k x A ( k 1 ) x A ( k ) d x A ( r A ) }
The mass balance on the k-th CSTR is reported in Equation (33) (see Equation (A55) in the Appendix A):
V R k F A ( 0 ) = [ ( h = 1 k S h ) x A ( k ) ( h = 1 k 1 S h ) x A ( k 1 ) ] ( r A ) | R k V R k F A ( 0 ) | S k = S = S [ k x A ( k ) ( k 1 ) x A ( k 1 ) ] ( r A ) | R k
As for the energy balance on the mixing nodes, we obtain the following relations among temperatures (Equation (34), see Equation (A59) in the Appendix A):
T 0 ( k ) = ( h = 1 k 1 S h ) [ C ˜ p S + x A ( k 1 ) Δ C ˜ p A ] ( h = 1 k S h ) [ C ˜ p S + x A , 0 ( k ) Δ C ˜ p A ] T ( k 1 ) + S k C ˜ p S ( h = 1 k S h ) [ C ˜ p S + x A , 0 ( k ) Δ C ˜ p A ] T ( 0 )
Under the hypothesis of constant enthalpy of reaction ( Δ C ˜ p A 0 ), the following simplified expressions are obtained (Equation (35), see Equation (A60) in the Appendix A):
T 0 ( k ) = ( h = 1 k 1 S h ) ( h = 1 k S h ) T ( k 1 ) + S k ( h = 1 k S h ) T ( 0 ) T 0 ( k ) | S k = S = k 1 k T ( k 1 ) + 1 k T ( 0 )
Taking into account the expression previously reported for the conversion in Equation (30), we can observe a linear functionality between conversion and temperature on the mixing nodes. However, it is stressed that such a linearity holds only if the enthalpy of the reaction can be considered constant.
As for the energy balance on the k-th PFR, it assumes the following form (Equation (36), see Equation (A62) in the Appendix A):
{ d T d V = ( Δ H ˜ r , A ) ( r A ) ( h = 1 k S h ) F A ( 0 ) ( C ˜ p S + Δ C ˜ p A x A ) T ( V k = 0 ) = T 0 ( k )
which becomes Equation (37) in the case of an equal split ratio (see Equation (A63) in the Appendix A):
{ d T d V | S k = S = ( Δ H ˜ r , A ) ( r A ) k S   F A ( 0 ) ( C ˜ p S + Δ C ˜ p A x A ) T ( V k = 0 ) = T 0 ( k )
The energy balance on the k-th CSTR (Equation (38), see Equations (A64) and (A65) in the Appendix A):
x A ( k ) = C ˜ p s Δ H ˜ r , A 0 ( T ( k ) ) ( T 0 ( k ) T ( k ) ) + Δ H ˜ r , A 0 ( T 0 ( k ) ) Δ H ˜ r , A 0 ( T ( k ) ) x A , 0 ( k )
In the case of constant enthalpy of reaction, Equation (38) can be simplified as follows (Equation (39), see Equation (A66) in the Appendix A):
[ x A , 0 ( k ) x A ( k ) ] = C ˜ p s Δ H ˜ r , A ( T 0 ( k ) T ( k ) )
where the expressions previously obtained for  x A , 0 ( k )  and  T 0 ( k )  can be used to express the energy balance in terms of just outlet parameters, that is,  x A ( k ) T ( k ) x A ( k 1 )  and  T ( k 1 ) .

3.3. Adiabatic-Stage Reactors with Distributed Interstage Feed (See Appendix A.5)

The last system considered in this analysis is depicted in Figure 11a. In particular, it involves the distributed feed of one component along a series of adiabatic reactors, with insertion in a mixing node located between two consecutive reactors. Such an interstage distributed feed can be used, for example, when the reaction rate is favoured by a low concentration of reactants and/or in the case of highly exothermic/endothermic reactions, for better and more efficient temperature control.
It must be highlighted that, in principle, the distributed stream, which we have considered here to be composed of a single species, can actually be composed of more than one species. However, the design equations related to the latter case can be easily obtained as a straightforward extension of the former one.
The scheme with the mass balance in the absence of reaction is reported as usual to express the flow rates as functions of conversion (Figure 11b). To obtain the design equations for this system, we suppose that species A is the key limiting species and the other reactants are in excess. Therefore, the feed of species A is distributed along the series at the mixing nodes placed between the inlet and outlet of two consecutive reactors.
The mass balance on the k-th mixing node is obtained as follows (Equation (40), see Equations (A69) in the Appendix A):
x A , 0 ( k ) = h = 1 k 1 S h h = 1 k S h x A ( k 1 ) = k 1 k x A ( k 1 ) | S k = S
In Equation (40), we also report the particular case in which all the split ratios are the same, where it can be observed that the inlet conversion of the k-th reactor depends on the number of splits as well as on the conversion exiting the preceding reactor. All these expressions are needed to obtain the design equations for PFR and CSTR in terms of conversion.
As for the mass balance of the generic species i ≠ A, which is required for the energy balance (see next sub-section), we first need to write down the molar flow rate of the generic species as a function of conversion, recalling the definition of the feed ratio  θ i ( l )  on the l-th branch of the network in the absence of reaction and its relation with the feed ratio θi at the beginning of the network (Equation (41)):
θ i ( l ) F i ( l ) F A ( l ) ,   θ i F i ( 0 ) F A ( 0 ) = F i ( 0 ) F A ( 0 ) F i ( l ) = F A ( l ) [ θ i ( l ) + ν i a x A ( l ) ] ,   F A ( l ) = F A ( l ) ( 1 x A ( l ) )
In fact, in this particular network configuration, the quantities  θ i  are different from  θ i ( k ) , since the ratio between the generic species i and the limiting species A in the absence of reaction is not the same in all network branches because of the partial insertion of the initial split flow rate in each reactor inlet stream.
As we wish to work with the quantities  θ i  instead of  θ i ( k )  because they are known and fixed at the inlet of the network, we can express such a relation starting directly from their respective definitions (Equation (42)):
θ i ( k ) = F i ( k ) F A ( k ) = { 1 ,   i = A F A ( 0 ) θ i F A ( 0 ) h = 1 k S h = θ i h = 1 k S h ,   i A F i A ( k ) = θ i A ( k ) F A ( k ) = θ i A h = 1 k S h F A ( k )
Therefore, by writing down the mass balance at the mixing nodes for a generic species i different from the limiting one A, we obtain Equation (43), in which we remind that the species is are not contained in the split branches  F A , S k :
F i A ( 0 ) = F i A , 0 ( 1 ) F i A ( 1 ) = F i A , 0 ( 2 ) F i A ( k 1 ) = F i A , 0 ( k )
To prove the consistency of the definitions used in Equation (41), we express Equation (43) in terms of conversion, expecting to reach the same expressions as those previously obtained in Equation (40). The result of this checking is reported in Equations (44) and (45), which just state the full consistency of the expression reported above.
0 = 0   ( Mix   node   1 ,   trivial :   no   conversion   yet ) F A ( 1 ) [ θ i A ( 1 ) + ν i a x A ( 1 ) ] = F A , 0 ( 2 ) [ θ i A , 0 ( 2 ) + ν i a x A , 0 ( 2 ) ] F A ( k 1 ) [ θ i A ( k 1 ) + ν i a x A ( k 1 ) ] = F A ( k ) [ θ i A , 0 ( k ) + ν i a x A , 0 ( k ) ] θ i A ( k 1 ) = θ i A h = 1 k 1 S h ,   θ i A , 0 ( k ) = θ i A h = 1 k S h F A ( k 1 ) = F A ( 0 ) h = 1 k 1 S h ,   F A , 0 ( k ) = F A ( 0 ) h = 1 k S h
F A ( 0 ) h = 1 k 1 S h [ θ i A h = 1 k 1 S h + ν i a x A ( k 1 ) ] = F A ( 0 ) h = 1 k S h [ θ i A h = 1 k S h + ν i a x A , 0 ( k ) ] [ θ i A + h = 1 k 1 S h ν i a x A ( k 1 ) ] = [ θ i A + h = 1 k S h ν i a x A , 0 ( k ) ] x A , 0 ( k ) = h = 1 k 1 S h h = 1 k S h x A ( k 1 )
As for the mass balance on the k-th PFR, it is reported in Equation (46) for both variable and equal split ratios (see Equations (A72) and (A73) in the Appendix A):
V R k F A ( 0 ) = ( h = 1 k S h ) h = 1 k 1 S h h = 1 k S h x A ( k 1 ) x A ( k ) d x A ( r A ) R k V R k F A ( 0 ) | S k = S = k S k 1 k x A ( k 1 ) x A ( k ) d x A ( r A ) R k
The mass balance on the k-th CSTR can be written as follows (Equation (47), see Equations (A76) and (A77) in the Appendix A):
V R k F A ( 0 ) = ( h = 1 k S h ) x A ( k ) ( h = 1 k 1 S h ) x A ( k 1 ) ( r A ) k ,   k = 1 r S k = 1 V R k F A ( 0 ) | S k = S = S [ k x A ( k ) ( k 1 ) x A ( k 1 ) ] ( r A ) k ,   k = 1 r S = r S = 1
The energy balance on the k-th mixing node is obtained as follows (Equation (48), see Equation (A85) in the Appendix A):
T 0 ( k ) = w 1 w 1 + w 2 T ( k 1 ) + w 2 w 1 + w 2 T ( 0 ) w 1 [ ( h = 1 k 1 S h ) C ˜ p A + i = 2 n θ i C ˜ p i + ( h = 1 k 1 S h ) Δ C ˜ p A x A ( k 1 ) ] w 2 S k C ˜ p A
If  ~ C ˜ p A  is negligible, we obtain Equation (49) (see Equation (A86) in the Appendix A):
T 0 ( k ) w 1 w 1 + w 2 T ( k 1 ) + w 2 w 1 + w 2 T ( 0 ) w 1 [ ( h = 1 k 1 S h ) C ˜ p A + i = 2 n θ i C ˜ p i ] w 2 S k C ˜ p A
For equal split ratios, we obtain the following expression (Equation (A50), see Equation (A87) in the Appendix A):
T 0 ( k ) | S k = S = [ ( k 1 ) S C ˜ p A + i = 2 n θ i C ˜ p i ] T ( k 1 ) + S C ˜ p A T ( 0 ) [ ( k 1 ) S C ˜ p A + i = 2 n θ i C ˜ p i + S C ˜ p A ]
The energy balance on the k-th PFR is obtained as follows (Equation (51), see Equation (A92) in the Appendix A):
[ ( C ˜ p S C ˜ p A ) Contribution of   the   species other   than   A + ( h = 1 k S h ) C ˜ p A Contribution   of the   species   A Thermal   contribution   of   the   feed + ( h = 1 k S h ) x A Δ C ˜ p A Non - linear   contribution ] d T d V = ( h = 1 k S h ) [ Δ H ˜ r , A ] Reaction   Contribution [ d x A d V ] Standalone   PFR :   ( C ˜ p S Thermal contribution of   the   feed + x A Δ C ˜ p A Non - linear contribution ) d T d V = [ Δ H ˜ r , A ] Reaction Contribution d x A d V
In particular, in Equation (51), the energy balance of the standalone PFR is also reported for comparison in order to highlight analogies and differences. As for the analogies, the structure of the equations is similar, with the presence of terms identifying the thermal contribution of the feed, the non-linear contribution, and the reaction contribution to the overall thermic extent of the system.
As for the differences, analysing the thermal contribution of the feed, it is clear the split of this contribution into two parts, respectively related to (1) the reactants fed in an all-in-one mode and (2) the part of the key-species (A) that is fed in a distributed way along the reactors series up to the k-th reactor. That is the reason why the overall contribution of species A is lower than in the standalone case.
We can make an analogous consideration for the non-linear contribution and for the reaction contribution, which are both lowered by the fraction of species A fed up to that reactor.
As for the energy balance on the k-th CSTR of the series, it is obtained as follows (Equation (52), see Equation (A96) in the Appendix A):
[ ( C ˜ p s C ˜ p A ) + ( h = 1 k S h ) C ˜ p A ] ( T 0 ( k ) T ( k ) ) + ( h = 1 k S h ) [ x A , 0 ( k ) Δ H ˜ r , A ( T 0 ( k ) ) x A ( k ) Δ H ˜ r , A ( T ( k ) ) ] = 0
If the enthalpy of reaction can be considered constant, the previous expression is simplified as follows (Equation (53), see Equation (A100) in the Appendix A):
( h = 1 k S h ) [ x A ( k ) x A ( k 1 ) ] + S k [ x A ( k 1 ) x A ( 0 ) = 0 ] = ( h = 1 k S h ) C ˜ p A + ( C ˜ p s C ˜ p A ) ( Δ H ˜ r , A ) ( T ( k ) T ( k 1 ) ) + S k C ˜ p A ( Δ H ˜ r , A ) ( T ( k 1 ) T ( 0 ) )
where it is also reported as the initial (null) conversion to highlight the analogy between conversion and temperature differences.
Figure 12 shows a numerical example of the calculation of the intermediate inlet conversions of the three reactors in the scheme. As input data, we consider certain values of conversions at the reactor’s outlet and the split ratios as known, calculating the corresponding missing conversion data from setting and solving the mass balances at the mixing nodes written in terms of conversion.
Overall, we highlight that, for an infinite number of infinitesimal reactors—composed of either PFRs or CSTRs—this system in fact coincides with a reactor that in the literature is referred to as Differential Sidestream Reactors (DSR) [3], which is of practical importance in a number of applications of interest, especially in the pharmaceutical industry.

4. Conclusions

In this work, a novel systematic way to obtain the design equations (heat and mass balances) of networks of ideal reactors (PFRs and CSTRs) was presented. For this purpose, a general definition of reaction degree and conversion was provided, considering, after validation with well-known reactor systems, several case studies of real systems of interest in chemical engineering as examples of application: (a) adiabatic-stage split reactors, (b) adiabatic-stage reactors intercooled by reactants and (c) adiabatic-stage reactors with interstage distributed feed. The methodology illustrated in this work also allows one to combine different types of reactors in the same network, widening the generality of the presented approach.

Funding

This work received funding from the “Ministero dell’Università e della Ricerca” through the Project PRIN 2022 PNRR: “Innovative Multifunctional Electrolyzer-integrated CO-generative MEmbrane Reactor for methanol production from bio-syngas (MECOMER)”, Codes: P2022K2449, CUP MASTER: F53D23009730001 and CUP UNIT: H53D23008570001. This project is funded by the European Union through the programme: “Next Generation EU, componente M4C2, investimento 1.1”. Processes 12 00107 i001

Data Availability Statement

Data are contained within the article.

Conflicts of Interest

The author declares no conflict of interest.

Abbreviations

  C ˜ p Specific heat, J mol−1 K−1
FFlow rate, mol s−1
HMolar enthalpy, J mol−1 K−1
{n, m, r, b}Number of: {species, reactions, reactors, network branches}
rAReaction rate (of the key-species A), mol s−1 m−3
RkRecycle ratio (at the k-th reactors)
SkSplit ratio (at the k-th reactors)
TTemperature, K
VVolume, m3
xAConversion (of the key-species)
Greek Symbols
θiFeed ratio, moli molA−1
νijStoichiometric coefficients
ξjReaction extent for the jth reaction
Subscripts/Superscripts
fFinal (with respect to a stage with recycle or split)
{i, j, k, l}Indices for: {species, reactions, reactors, network branches}
rReaction (enthalpy of) or number of reactors
r, AReaction enthalpy expressed per mole of A consumed
refReference (temperature)
SSummation (referred to specific heat)
‘*’Refers to the network in the absence of a reaction
0′Reference state (enthalpy)
IGIdeal gas
ResResidual quantity (with respect to the ideal-gas state)

Appendix A. Detailed Development of Design Equations

Appendix A.1. Enthalpy and Flow Rate Expressions

In general, the enthalpy rate of the i-th species in the l-th branch of the network can be written in molar form as follows (Equation (A1)):
F i ( l ) H ˜ i ( l ) = { Enthalpy   Rate   of i - th   Species   on the   l - th   Branch }
By neglecting any possible mixing enthalpy, which is usually negligible in chemical reactors, the enthalpy rate of the i-th species can be expressed as a function of pressure and temperature as (Equation (A2)):
H ˜ i ( T , P ) = { H ˜ i I G ( T ) ,   Ideal   Gas H ˜ i I G ( T ) + Δ H ˜ i R e s ( T , P ) ,   Real   Gas H ˜ i L ( T ) ,   Liquid H ˜ i I G ( T ) = Δ H ˜ f , i I G ( T r e f ) + C ˜ p i I G ( T T r e f ) Δ H ˜ i 0 , I G + C ˜ p i I G ( T T r e f ) H ˜ i L ( T ) = Δ H ˜ f , i L ( T r e f ) + C ˜ p i L ( T T r e f ) Δ H ˜ i 0 , L + C ˜ p i L ( T T r e f ) Δ H ˜ i R e s ( T , P ) Equation   of   State   for   Real   Gases
where we suppose that all specific heats are constant with temperature within the temperature range considered. Should such a hypothesis become too strong—and this occurs typically for highly exothermic/endothermic reactions in the gas phase—we would need to evaluate the integral of specific heats using, for example, temperature-dependent polynomial forms.
Provided that, neglecting also the non-ideal contribution for the real gases (which anyway is usually small unless working at relatively high pressure), the enthalpy of the i-th species in the l-th branch of the network can be expressed as (Equation (A3)):
H ˜ i ( l ) = [ Δ H ˜ f , i 0 + C ˜ p i ( T ( l ) T r e f ) ]
where  Δ H ˜ f , i 0  and Tref are the standard enthalpy of formation and the corresponding reference temperature (usually 298.15 K), respectively.
According to the extended definition of conversion reported in Equations (1) and (2), the flow rate of the i-th species is expressed in terms of conversion as follows (Equation (A4)):
F i ( l ) = F A ( l ) ( θ i + ν i a x A ( l ) )
where  F A ( l )  is the flow rate of the limiting reactant (i.e., the key-species) in the l-th branch of the network in the absence of a reaction. Therefore, combining the previous expressions, we obtain Equation (A5):
F i ( l ) H ˜ i ( l ) = F A ( l ) ( θ i + ν i a x A ( l ) ) [ Δ H ˜ i 0 + C ˜ p i ( T T r e f ) ]
Equation (A5) is the expression of the enthalpy rate that will be used to obtain the design equations for all the cases considered in this work, given that it can also be used to develop the design equations for other systems.

Appendix A.2. Adiabatic-Stage Reactors with Recycle

Appendix A.2.1. Mass Balances

Mass Balance on the Mixing Nodes

The flow rates in the k-th branch of the reactor network can be expressed as functions of the conversion and of the respective no-reaction flow rates in that branch (Equation (A6)):
F A , 0 ( k ) = F A , 0 ( k ) ( 1 x A , 0 ( k ) ) = ( R k + 1 ) F A , f ( 0 ) ( 1 x A , 0 ( k ) ) F A ( k ) = F A ( k ) ( 1 x A ( k ) ) = ( R k + 1 ) F A , f ( 0 ) ( 1 x A ( k ) )
To obtain the design equations in canonical form, beside the mass and energy balances on the reactors, it is also necessary to make balances on the mixing node. This holds not only for this type of reactor network but also for other ones, some of which are reported in the present work. Specifically for this case, the mass balance in the mixing node can be expressed as follows (Equation (A7)):
F A , f ( k 1 ) + R k F A , f ( k ) = F A , 0 ( k ) F A , f ( 0 ) ( 1 x A , f ( k 1 ) ) + R k F A , f ( 0 ) ( 1 x A , f ( k ) ) = ( R k + 1 ) F A , f ( 0 ) ( 1 x A , 0 ( k ) )
Equation (A7) leads to expressing the conversion at the reactor inlet as a function of the conversion at the reactor outlet, which coincides with that at the outlet of the stage (Equation (A8)):
x A , 0 ( k ) = 1 ( R k + 1 ) x A , f ( k 1 ) + R k ( R k + 1 ) x A , f ( k )
It is useful to show that, if we write Equation (A7) for a generic species of the stream (reported in Equation (A9)), we obtain the same expression as that reported in Equation (A8):
F i , f ( k 1 ) + R k F i , f ( k ) = F i , 0 ( k ) { F i , f ( k 1 ) = F A , f ( k 1 ) ( θ i + ν i a x A , f ( k 1 ) ) = F A , f ( 0 ) ( θ i + ν i a x A , f ( k 1 ) ) F i , f ( k ) = F A , f ( k ) ( θ i + ν i a x A , f ( k ) ) = F A , f ( 0 ) ( θ i + ν i a x A , f ( k ) ) F i , 0 ( k ) = F A , 0 ( k ) ( θ i + ν i a x A , 0 ( k ) ) = ( R k + 1 ) F A , f ( 0 ) ( θ i + ν i a x A , f ( k 1 ) ) F A , f ( 0 ) ( θ i + ν i a x A , f ( k 1 ) ) + R k F A , f ( 0 ) ( θ i + ν i a x A , f ( k ) ) = ( R k + 1 ) F A , f ( 0 ) ( θ i + ν i a x A , 0 ( k ) ) ( θ i + ν i a x A , f ( k 1 ) ) + ( θ i + ν i a x A , f ( k ) ) = ( R k + 1 ) ( θ i + ν i a x A , 0 ( k ) ) x A , 0 ( k ) = 1 ( R k + 1 ) x A , f ( k 1 ) + R k ( R k + 1 ) x A , f ( k )
This occurrence indicates once more the self-consistency of the so-extended definition of conversion.

Mass Balance on PFR

The general design equation for the generic k-th PFR, expressed in terms of the key-species A, mostly taken as the limiting reactant, is (Equation (A10)):
d F A d V = r A
which can be expressed in terms of conversion as follows (Equations (A11)):
( R k + 1 ) F A , f ( 0 ) d x A d V = ( r A ) ( R k + 1 ) x A , 0 ( k ) x A ( k ) d x A ( r A ) = V R k F A , f ( 0 )
The final expression of the PFR design equation, obtained by replacing the inlet “local” conversions  x A 0 ( k )  and  x A ( k )  with its expression in terms of stage conversions  x A , f ( k 1 )  and  x A , f ( k ) , is (Equation (A12)):
V R k F A , f ( 0 ) = ( R k + 1 ) 1 ( R k + 1 ) x A , f ( k 1 ) + R k ( R k + 1 ) x A , f ( k ) x A , f ( k ) d x A ( r A )

Mass Balance on CSTR

As for CSTR, the mass balance can be written as follows (Equation (A13)):
F A , 0 ( k ) F A ( k ) + r A k V R k = 0
In terms of conversion, we have the following (Equations (A33) and (A34)):
( R k + 1 ) F A , f ( 0 ) ( 1 x A , 0 ( k ) ) ( R k + 1 ) F A , f ( 0 ) ( 1 x A ( k ) ) + r A k V R k = 0
V R k F A , f ( 0 ) = ( R k + 1 ) ( x A ( k ) x A . 0 ( k ) ) ( r A k ) V R k F A , f ( 0 ) = ( x A , f ( k ) x A , f ( k 1 ) ) ( r A k )

Appendix A.2.2. Energy Balances

Energy Balance on the Mixing Nodes

The energy balance on the mixing nodes of the generic k-th stage is stated in Equation (A16):
i = 1 n F i , f ( k 1 ) H ˜ i ( T f ( k 1 ) ) + i = 1 n F i , R ( k ) H ˜ i ( T R ( k ) ) = i = 1 n F i , 0 ( k ) H ˜ i ( T 0 ( k ) ) F A , f ( 0 ) ( θ i + ν i a x A , f ( k 1 ) ) + R k F A , f ( 0 ) ( θ i + ν i a x A , f ( k ) ) = ( R k + 1 ) F A , f ( 0 ) ( θ i + ν i a x A , 0 ( k ) ) F A , f ( 0 ) i = 1 n ( θ i + ν i a x A , f ( k 1 ) ) [ Δ H ˜ i 0 + C ˜ p i ( T f ( k 1 ) T r e f ) ] + R k F A , f ( 0 ) i = 1 n ( θ i + ν i a x A , f ( k ) ) [ Δ H ˜ i 0 + C ˜ p i ( T R ( k ) T r e f ) ] = ( R k + 1 ) F A , f ( 0 ) i = 1 n ( θ i + ν i a x A , 0 ( k ) ) [ Δ H ˜ i 0 + C ˜ p i ( T 0 ( k ) T r e f ) ] C ˜ p S T f ( k 1 ) + x A , f ( k 1 ) [ Δ H ˜ r , A 0 + Δ C ˜ p A ( T f ( k 1 ) T r e f ) ] + R k [ C ˜ p S T R ( k ) + x A , f ( k ) [ Δ H ˜ r , A 0 + Δ C ˜ p A ( T R ( k ) T r e f ) ] ] = ( R k + 1 ) [ C ˜ p S T 0 ( k ) + x A , 0 ( k ) [ Δ H ˜ r , A 0 + Δ C ˜ p A ( T 0 ( k ) T r e f ) ] ]
Inserting Equation (A8) into the last of Equation (A16), the exiting temperature  T 0 ( k )  finally results in a weighted average of the temperatures of the entering streams (Equation (A17)):
T 0 ( k ) = 1 ( R k + 1 ) ( C ˜ p S + Δ C ˜ p A x A , f ( k 1 ) C ˜ p S + Δ C ˜ p A x A , 0 ( k ) ) T f ( k 1 ) + R k ( R k + 1 ) ( C ˜ p S + Δ C ˜ p A x A , f ( k ) C ˜ p S + Δ C ˜ p A x A , 0 ( k ) ) T f ( k ) T ( k ) = T f ( k )
In the particular case in which  Δ C ˜ p A  can be neglected with respect to  C ˜ p S  (conversion is always lower than unity), Equation (A17) is simplified as follows (Equation (A18)):
T 0 ( k ) = 1 ( R k + 1 ) T f ( k 1 ) + R k ( R k + 1 ) T f ( k )
which have the same form as the previously obtained one for conversion (Equation (A8)). This confirms that in a {xA vs. T} plot, the working points of the three streams of a mixing node are connected by a straight line.

Energy Balance on PFR

The energy balance for a PFR is expressed as follows (Equation (A19)):
d d V ( i = 1 n F i H ˜ i ) = 0
which leads to Equation (A20) if expressing it in terms of conversion:
d d V ( i = 1 n [ ( R k + 1 ) F A , f ( 0 ) ( θ i + ν i a x A ) ] [ Δ H ˜ i 0 + C ˜ p i ( T T r e f ) ] ) = 0 d d V ( i = 1 n ( θ i + ν i a x A ) [ Δ H ˜ i 0 + C ˜ p i ( T T r e f ) ] ) = 0 d d V ( [ C ˜ p S ( T T r e f ) + Δ H ˜ r , A 0 x A + Δ C ˜ p A x A ( T T r e f ) ] ) = 0 ( C ˜ p S + Δ C ˜ p A x A ) d T d V = ( Δ H ˜ r , A ) d x A d V d T d V = ( Δ H ˜ r , A ) d x A d V ( C ˜ p S + Δ C ˜ p A x A )
Inserting the mass balance (Equations (A11)) into Equation (A20), we finally obtain a canonical form of the energy balance for an adiabatic PFR (Equation (A21)).
d T d V = ( Δ H ˜ r , A ) ( r A ) F A , f ( 0 ) ( R k + 1 ) ( C ˜ p S + Δ C ˜ p a x A )

Energy Balance on CSTR

The energy balance for a CSTR can be written as follows (Equation (A22)):
i = 1 n F i H ˜ i | I N i = 1 n F i H ˜ i | O U T = 0
which leads to Equation (A23):
i = 1 n [ F A , f ( 0 ) ( R k + 1 ) ( θ i + ν i a x A , 0 ( k ) ) H ˜ i ( T 0 ( k ) ) ] i = 1 n [ F A , f ( 0 ) ( R k + 1 ) ( θ i + ν i a x A ( k ) ) H ˜ i ( T ( k ) ) ] = 0 i = 1 n [ ( θ i + ν i a x A , 0 ( k ) ) H ˜ i ( T 0 ( k ) ) ] i = 1 n [ ( θ i + ν i a x A ( k ) ) H ˜ i ( T ( k ) ) ] = 0 i = 1 n ( θ i + ν i a x A , 0 ( k ) ) [ Δ H ˜ i 0 ( T r e f ) + C ˜ p i ( T 0 ( k ) T r e f ) ] i = 1 n ( θ i + ν i a x A ( k ) ) [ Δ H ˜ i 0 ( T r e f ) + C ˜ p i ( T ( k ) T r e f ) ] = 0
Simplifying appropriately the previous expressions, we obtain (Equation (A24)):
C ˜ p S ( T 0 ( k ) T ( k ) ) + [ x A , 0 ( k ) Δ H ˜ r , A ( T 0 ( k ) ) x A ( k ) Δ H ˜ r , A ( T ( k ) ) ] = 0 x A , 0 ( k ) = 1 ( R k + 1 ) x A , f ( k 1 ) + R k ( R k + 1 ) x A , f ( k ) , x A ( k ) = x A , f ( k )
If the reaction enthalpy can be considered the same at inlet and outlet, Equation (A24) assumes the following form in terms of stage conversions (Equation (A25)):
C ˜ p S ( T 0 ( k ) T ( k ) ) + ( Δ H ˜ r , A ) ( R k + 1 ) ( x A , f ( k ) x A , f ( k 1 ) ) = 0 ( x A , f ( k ) x A , f ( k 1 ) ) = ( R k + 1 ) C ˜ p S ( T ( k ) T 0 ( k ) ) ( Δ H ˜ r , A )

Appendix A.3. Adiabatic-Stage Reactors with Split

Appendix A.3.1. Mass Balances

Mass Balance on the Mixing Nodes

The flow rates along the branches of the k-th stage of the series are expressed in terms of conversion as follows (Equation (A26)):
F A , 0 ( k ) = F A , 0 ( k ) ( 1 x A , 0 ( k ) ) = ( 1 S k ) F A ( 0 ) ( 1 x A , 0 ( k ) ) F A , S ( k ) = F A , S ( k ) ( 1 x A , S ( k ) ) = S k F A , f ( 0 ) ( 1 x A , S ( k ) ) F A ( k ) = F A ( k ) ( 1 x A ( k ) ) = ( 1 S k ) F A , f ( 0 ) ( 1 x A ( k ) )
where the split ratios Sk are generally different from each other.
The mass balance on the mixing nodes just after the outlet of each reactor is needed to express the conversion at the outlet of the k-th reactor as a function of the conversions at the inlet and outlet of the stage. Equation (A27) reports the steps from the mass balance to the final expression of the outlet conversion xA,0:
F A ( k ) + S k F A , f ( k 1 ) = F A , f ( k ) ( 1 S k ) F A , f ( 0 ) ( 1 x A ( k ) ) + S k F A , f ( 0 ) ( 1 x A , S ( k ) ) = F A , f ( 0 ) ( 1 x A , f ( k ) ) x A ( k ) S k x A ( k ) + S k x A , f ( k 1 ) = x A , f ( k )
which leads to the following final expression (Equation (A28)):
x A ( k ) = 1 1 S k x A , f ( k ) S k 1 S k x A , f ( k 1 )

Mass Balance on PFR

We start again from the generic k-th PFR, expressed in terms of the limiting reactant A (Equation (A29)):
d F A d V = r A
which can be expressed in terms of conversion as follows (Equation (A30)):
( 1 S k ) F A , f ( 0 ) d x A d V = ( r A ) ( 1 S k ) x A , 0 ( k ) x A ( k ) d x A ( r A ) = V R k F A , f ( 0 )
The final expression of the PFR design equation, obtained by replacing the inlet conversion with its expression in terms of stage conversions, is (Equation (A31)):
V R k F A , f ( 0 ) = ( 1 S k ) x A , f ( k 1 ) 1 1 S k x A , f ( k ) S k 1 S k x A , f ( k 1 ) d x A ( r A )

Mass Balance on CSTR

As for CSTR, the mass balance can be written as follows (Equation (A32)):
F A , 0 ( k ) F A ( k ) + r A k V R k = 0
In terms of conversion, we have the following (Equations (A33) and (34)):
( 1 S k ) F A , f ( 0 ) ( 1 x A , 0 ( k ) ) ( 1 S k ) F A , f ( 0 ) ( 1 x A ( k ) ) + r A k V R k = 0
V R k F A , f ( 0 ) = ( 1 S k ) ( x A ( k ) x A , 0 ( k ) ) ( r A k ) V R k F A , f ( 0 ) = ( x A , f ( k ) x A , f ( k 1 ) ) ( r A k )

Appendix A.3.2. Energy Balances

Energy Balance on the Mixing Nodes

The energy balance on the mixing nodes can be expressed as follows (Equation (A35)):
i = 1 n F i ( k ) H ˜ i ( T ( k ) ) + i = 1 n F i , S ( k ) H ˜ i ( T f ( k 1 ) ) = i = 1 n F i , f ( k ) H ˜ i ( T f ( k ) ) i = 1 n F i ( k ) H ˜ i ( T ( k ) ) + i = 1 n S k F i , f ( k 1 ) H ˜ i ( T f ( k 1 ) ) = i = 1 n F i , f ( k ) H ˜ i ( T f ( k ) ) i = 1 n ( 1 S k ) F A , f ( 0 ) ( θ i + ν i a x A ( k ) ) [ Δ H ˜ i 0 + C ˜ p i ( T ( k ) T R e f ) ] + i = 1 n S k F A , f ( 0 ) ( θ i + ν i a x A , f ( k 1 ) ) [ Δ H ˜ i 0 + C ˜ p i ( T f ( k 1 ) T R e f ) ] = i = 1 n F A , f ( 0 ) ( θ i + ν i a x A , f ( k ) ) [ Δ H ˜ i 0 + C ˜ p i ( T f ( k ) T R e f ) ] ( 1 S k ) [ C ˜ p S T ( k ) + x A ( k ) Δ H ˜ r , A ( T k ) ] + S k [ C ˜ p S T f ( k 1 ) + x A , f ( k 1 ) Δ H ˜ r , A ( T f ( k 1 ) ) ] = [ C ˜ p S T f ( k ) + x A , f ( k ) Δ H ˜ r , A ( T f ( k ) ) ]
which leads to the following explicit expression (Equation (A36)):
T ( k ) = ( C ˜ p S + Δ C ˜ p A x A , f ( k ) ) T f ( k ) S k ( C ˜ p S + Δ C ˜ p A x A , f ( k 1 ) ) T f ( k 1 ) [ ( C ˜ p S + Δ C ˜ p A x A , f ( k ) ) S k ( C ˜ p S + Δ C ˜ p A x A , f ( k 1 ) ) ]
If  Δ C ˜ p A  can be neglected with respect to  C ˜ p S , Equation (A36) can be simplified as follows (Equation (A37)):
T ( k ) = 1 ( 1 S k ) T f ( k ) S k ( 1 S k ) T f ( k 1 )

Energy Balance on PFR

The energy balance on the generic k-th PFR is written as follows (Equation (A38)):
d d V ( i = 1 n [ ( 1 S k ) F A , f ( 0 ) ( θ i + ν i a x A ) ] [ Δ H ˜ i 0 + C ˜ p i ( T T r e f ) ] ) = 0 ( C ˜ p S + Δ C ˜ p A x A ) d T d V = ( Δ H ˜ r , A ) d x A d V d T d V = ( Δ H ˜ r , A ) d x A d V ( C ˜ p S + Δ C ˜ p A x A )
Combining Equation (A30) (differential mass balance) and Equation (A38), we finally obtain the following expression (Equation (A39)):
d T d V = ( Δ H ˜ r , A ) ( r A ) F A , f ( 0 ) ( 1 S k ) ( C ˜ p S + Δ C ˜ p a x A )

Energy Balance on CSTR

The general expression of the energy balance on the generic k-th CSTR is (Equation (A40)):
i = 1 n F i H ˜ i | I N i = 1 n F i H ˜ i | O U T = 0
which leads to Equation (A.41) when expressing the flow rates in terms of the respective conversions:
i = 1 n [ F A , f ( 0 ) ( 1 S k ) ( θ i + ν i a x A , 0 ( k ) ) H ˜ i ( T 0 ( k ) ) ] i = 1 n [ F A , f ( 0 ) ( 1 S k ) ( θ i + ν i a x A ( k ) ) H ˜ i ( T ( k ) ) ] = 0 i = 1 n [ ( θ i + ν i a x A , 0 ( k ) ) H ˜ i ( T 0 ( k ) ) ] i = 1 n [ ( θ i + ν i a x A ( k ) ) H ˜ i ( T ( k ) ) ] = 0
Simplifying appropriately the previous expressions and expressing the outlet conversion as a function of the stage conversions, we obtain (Equation (A42)):
C ˜ p S ( T 0 ( k ) T ( k ) ) + [ x A , 0 ( k ) Δ H ˜ r , A ( T 0 ( k ) ) x A ( k ) Δ H ˜ r , A ( T ( k ) ) ] = 0 x A ( k ) = 1 1 S k x A , f ( k ) S k 1 S k x A , f ( k 1 ) ,               x A , 0 ( k ) = x A , f ( k 1 )
If the reaction enthalpy can be considered the same at the inlet and outlet ( Δ C ˜ p A 0 ), Equation (A42) assumes the following form in terms of stage conversions (Equation (A43)):
C ˜ p S ( T 0 ( k ) T ( k ) ) + ( Δ H ˜ r , A ) 1 S k [ x A , f ( k ) x A , f ( k 1 ) ] = 0 ( x A , f ( k ) x A , f ( k 1 ) ) = ( 1 S k ) C ˜ p S ( T ( k ) T 0 ( k ) ) ( Δ H ˜ r , A )
Expressing inlet and outlet temperatures as functions of the respective stage temperatures, we obtain the following expression (Equation (A44)), in which there is no formal dependency on the split ratio:
T 0 ( k ) = T f ( k 1 ) , T ( k ) = 1 ( 1 S k ) T f ( k ) S k ( 1 S k ) T f ( k 1 ) ( x A , f ( k ) x A , f ( k 1 ) ) = C ˜ p S ( T f ( k ) T f ( k 1 ) ) ( Δ H ˜ r , A )

Appendix A.4. Adiabatic-Stage Reactors Intercooled/Interheated by Reactants

Appendix A.4.1. Mass Balances

Mass Balance on the Mixing Nodes

Similarly to what was performed in the previous cases, we make here the mass balance on the mixing nodes to express the inlet conversion as a function of the outlet ones (Equation (A45)):
F A ( k 1 ) + F A , S ( k ) = F A , 0 ( k ) F A ( k 1 ) + S k F A ( 0 ) = F A , 0 ( k )
Such a balance can be serialised to the k-th node, as shown in Equation (A46):
F A , 0 ( 1 ) = F A , 0 ( 1 ) ( 1 x A , 0 ( 1 ) ) = S 1 F A ( 0 ) ( 1 x A , 0 ( 1 ) ) = S 1 F A ( 0 ) F A ( 1 ) = F A ( 1 ) ( 1 x A ( 1 ) ) = S 1 F A ( 0 ) ( 1 x A ( 1 ) ) F A , 0 ( 2 ) = F A , 0 ( 2 ) ( 1 x A , 0 ( 2 ) ) = ( S 1 + S 2 ) F A ( 0 ) ( 1 x A , 0 ( 2 ) ) F A ( 2 ) = F A ( 2 ) ( 1 x A ( 2 ) ) = ( S 1 + S 2 ) F A ( 0 ) ( 1 x A ( 2 ) ) F A , 0 ( k ) = F A , 0 ( k ) ( 1 x A , 0 ( k ) ) = ( h = 1 k S h ) F A ( 0 ) ( 1 x A , 0 ( k ) ) F A ( k ) = F A ( k ) ( 1 x A ( k ) ) = ( h = 1 k S h ) F A ( 0 ) ( 1 x A ( k ) ) h = 1 r S h = 1
Therefore, we obtain the following compact form stating the relationship among conversions (Equation (A47)):
( h = 1 k 1 S h ) ( 1 x A ( k 1 ) ) + S k = ( h = 1 k S h ) ( 1 x A , 0 ( k ) )
Making the inlet conversion explicit, we obtain (Equation (A48)):
x A , 0 ( k ) = h = 1 k 1 S h h = 1 k S h x A ( k 1 ) x A , 0 ( k ) | S k = S = k 1 k x A ( k 1 )

Mass Balance on PFR

The differential form of the mass balance on PFR is (Equation (A49)):
d F A d V = r A | R k
Using the general definition of conversion on the reactor branch, we obtain Equation (A50):
F A = ( h = 1 k S h ) F A ( 0 ) ( 1 x A ) ( h = 1 k S h ) F A ( 0 ) d x A d V = ( r A ) | R k
The corresponding integral form is obtained (Equation (A51)):
V R k F A ( 0 ) = ( h = 1 k S h ) h = 1 k 1 S h h = 1 k S h x A ( k 1 ) x A ( k ) d x A ( r A )
For equal values of split ratio, we can simplify Equation (A51) as follows (Equation (A52)):
V R k F A ( 0 ) | S k = S = k S k 1 k x A ( k 1 ) x A ( k ) d x A ( r A )

Mass Balance on CSTR

The mass balance on the k-th CSTR is written as follows (Equation (A53)):
F A , 0 ( k ) F A ( k ) = V R k ( r A ) | R k
Expressing the flow rates as functions of the respective conversions, we obtain (Equation (A54)):
F A ( k ) = ( h = 1 k S h ) F A ( 0 ) ( 1 x A ( k ) ) F A , 0 ( k ) = ( h = 1 k S h ) F A ( 0 ) ( 1 x A , 0 ( k ) ) ( h = 1 k S h ) F A ( 0 ) ( 1 x A , 0 ( k ) ) ( h = 1 k S h ) F A ( 0 ) ( 1 x A ( k ) ) = V R k ( r A ) | R k V R k F A ( 0 ) = ( h = 1 k S h ) ( x A ( k ) x A , 0 ( k ) ) ( r A ) k
Expressing the inlet conversion as a function of the outlet conversion of the previous stage, we obtain Equation (A55):
V R k F A ( 0 ) = [ ( h = 1 k S h ) x A ( k ) ( h = 1 k 1 S h ) x A ( k 1 ) ] ( r A ) k V R k F A ( 0 ) | S k = S = S [ k x A ( k ) ( k 1 ) x A ( k 1 ) ] ( r A ) k

Appendix A.4.2. Energy Balances

Energy Balance on the Mixing Nodes

The energy (enthalpy) balance on the mixing nodes is reported in Equation (A56):
i = 1 n F i ( k 1 ) H ˜ i ( T ( k 1 ) ) + i = 1 n F i , S ( k ) H ˜ i ( T ( 0 ) ) = i = 1 n F i , 0 ( k ) H ˜ i ( T 0 ( k ) )
Expressing Equation (A56) in terms of conversions, Equation (A57) is obtained:
i = 1 n ( h = 1 k 1 S h ) F A ( 0 ) ( θ i + ν i a x A ( k 1 ) ) H ˜ i ( T ( k 1 ) ) + i = 1 n S k F A ( 0 ) θ i H ˜ i ( T ( 0 ) ) = i = 1 n ( h = 1 k S h ) F A ( 0 ) ( θ i + ν i a x A , 0 ( k ) ) H ˜ i ( T 0 ( k ) )
Using some algebraic calculations, Equation (A57) is expressed in terms of specific heat and enthalpy of reaction (Equation (A58)):
[ C ˜ p S T ( k 1 ) ( h = 1 k 1 S h ) + x A ( k 1 ) ( h = 1 k 1 S h ) Δ H ˜ r , A ( T ( k 1 ) ) ] + S k C ˜ p S T ( 0 ) = [ C ˜ p S T 0 ( k ) ( h = 1 k S h ) + x A , 0 ( k ) ( h = 1 k S h ) Δ H ˜ r , A ( T 0 ( k ) ) ] [ C ˜ p S T ( k 1 ) ( h = 1 k 1 S h ) + x A ( k 1 ) ( h = 1 k 1 S h ) [ Δ C ˜ p A ( T ( k 1 ) T 0 ( k ) ) ] ] + S k C ˜ p S T ( 0 ) = [ C ˜ p S T 0 ( k ) ( h = 1 k S h ) ] Δ C ˜ p A Δ C ˜ p a
Finally, we obtain the inlet temperature as the weighted mean value of the outlet temperature of the previous stage and the initial temperature (Equation (A59)):
T 0 ( k ) = ( h = 1 k 1 S h ) [ C ˜ p S + x A ( k 1 ) Δ C ˜ p A ] ( h = 1 k S h ) [ C ˜ p S + x A , 0 ( k ) Δ C ˜ p A ] T ( k 1 ) + S k C ˜ p S ( h = 1 k S h ) [ C ˜ p S + x A , 0 ( k ) Δ C ˜ p A ] T ( 0 )
If  Δ C ˜ p A 0 , we obtain the following expressions for the inlet temperature (Equation (A60)):
T 0 ( k ) = ( h = 1 k 1 S h ) ( h = 1 k S h ) T ( k 1 ) + S k ( h = 1 k S h ) T ( 0 ) T 0 ( k ) | S k = S = k 1 k T ( k 1 ) + 1 k T ( 0 )

Energy Balance on PFR

The energy balance on PFR is expressed as follows (Equation (A61)):
d d V ( i = 1 n ( h = 1 k S h ) F A ( 0 ) ( θ i + ν i a x A ) [ Δ H ˜ f , i 0 + C ˜ p i ( T T r e f ) ] ) = 0 i = 1 n ( ν i a d x A d V ) [ Δ H ˜ f , i 0 + C ˜ p i ( T T r e f ) ] + i = 1 n ( θ i + ν i a x A ) C ˜ p i d T d V = 0 d x A d V i = 1 n [ ν i a Δ H ˜ f , i 0 + ν i a C ˜ p i ( T T r e f ) ] + d T d V i = 1 n ( θ i C ˜ p i + ν i a C ˜ p i x A ) = 0 Δ H ˜ r , A d x A d V + ( C ˜ p S + Δ C ˜ p A x A ) d T d V = 0 ( C ˜ p S + Δ C ˜ p A x A ) d T d V = ( Δ H ˜ r , A ) d x A d V
After substituting the expression of the conversion derivative in terms of reaction rate, the differential equation reported in Equation (A62) is obtained:
{ d T d V = ( Δ H ˜ r , A ) ( r A ) ( h = 1 k S h ) F A ( 0 ) ( C ˜ p S + Δ C ˜ p A x A ) T ( V k = 0 ) = T 0 ( k )
If the split ratios are equal, Equation (A62) turns into Equation (A63):
{ d T d V | S k = S = ( Δ H ˜ r , A ) ( r A ) k S   F A ( 0 ) ( C ˜ p S + Δ C ˜ p A x A ) T ( V k = 0 ) = T 0 ( k )

Energy Balance on CSTR

The energy balance on a generic adiabatic CSTR of the series is stated in the expressions reported in Equations (A64) and (A65):
F A ( 0 ) ( h = 1 k S h ) ( i = 1 n ( θ i + ν i a x A , 0 ( k ) ) H ˜ i ( T 0 ( k ) ) i = 1 n ( θ i + ν i a x A ( k ) ) H ˜ i ( T ( k ) ) ) = 0 i = 1 n ( θ i + ν i a x A , 0 ( k ) ) [ Δ H ˜ f , i 0 + C ˜ p i ( T 0 ( k ) T r e f ) ] + i = 1 n ( θ i + ν i a x A ( k ) ) [ Δ H ˜ f , i 0 + C ˜ p i ( T ( k ) T r e f ) ] = 0 i = 1 n [ ( θ i Δ H ˜ f , i 0 + ν i Δ H ˜ f , i 0 a x A , 0 ( k ) ) + ( θ i C ˜ p i + ν i C ˜ p i a x A , 0 ( k ) ) ( T 0 ( k ) T r e f ) ] + i = 1 n [ ( θ i Δ H ˜ f , i 0 + ν i Δ H ˜ f , i 0 a x A ( k ) ) + ( θ i C ˜ p i + ν i C ˜ p i a x A ( k ) ) ( T ( k ) T r e f ) ] = 0 [ ( Δ H ˜ r , A 0 x A , 0 ( k ) ) + ( C ˜ p s + Δ C ˜ p A x A , 0 ( k ) ) ( T 0 ( k ) T r e f ) ] + [ ( Δ H ˜ r , A 0 x A ( k ) ) + ( C ˜ p s + Δ C ˜ p A x A ( k ) ) ( T ( k ) T r e f ) ] = 0 ( Δ H ˜ r , A 0 x A , 0 ( k ) Δ H ˜ r , A 0 x A ( k ) ) + C ˜ p s ( T 0 ( k ) T ( k ) ) + Δ C ˜ p A x A , 0 ( k ) ( T 0 ( k ) T r e f ) Δ C ˜ p A x A ( k ) ( T ( k ) T r e f ) = 0 C ˜ p s ( T 0 ( k ) T ( k ) ) + x A , 0 ( k ) Δ H ˜ r , A 0 ( T 0 ( k ) ) x A ( k ) Δ H ˜ r , A 0 ( T ( k ) ) = 0
x A ( k ) Δ H ˜ r , A 0 ( T ( k ) ) = C ˜ p s ( T 0 ( k ) T ( k ) ) + x A , 0 ( k ) Δ H ˜ r , A 0 ( T 0 ( k ) ) x A ( k ) = C ˜ p s Δ H ˜ r , A 0 ( T ( k ) ) ( T 0 ( k ) T ( k ) ) + Δ H ˜ r , A 0 ( T 0 ( k ) ) Δ H ˜ r , A 0 ( T ( k ) ) x A , 0 ( k )
The previous equation is simplified into Equation (A66) if the enthalpy of the reaction can be considered constant with temperature:
[ x A , 0 ( k ) x A ( k ) ] = C ˜ p s Δ H ˜ r , A ( T 0 ( k ) T ( k ) )

Appendix A.5. Adiabatic-Stage Reactors with Distributed Interstage Feed

Appendix A.5.1. Mass Balances

Mass Balance on the Mixing Nodes

The mass balance of A on the mixing node before the entrance of each reactor allows us to express the inlet molar flow rate  F A , 0 ( k )  as a function of the outlet one exiting the preceding reactor  F A ( k 1 )  and of the initial split flow rate  F A , S ( k ) = S k F A ( 0 )  (Equation (A67)).
S 1 F A ( 0 ) = F A , 0 ( 1 ) F A ( 1 ) + S 2 F A ( 0 ) = F A , 0 ( 2 ) F A ( k 1 ) + S k F A ( 0 ) = F A , 0 ( k ) F A ( r 1 ) + S r F A ( 0 ) = F A , 0 ( r )
The flow rates at the inlet and outlet of reactors are expressed in terms of conversion as follows (Equation (A68)):
F A , 0 ( 1 ) = F A , 0 ( 1 ) ( 1 x A , 0 ( 1 ) ) = S 1 F A ( 0 ) ( 1 x A , 0 ( 1 ) ) F A ( 1 ) = F A ( 1 ) ( 1 x A ( 1 ) ) = S 1 F A ( 0 ) ( 1 x A ( 1 ) ) F A , 0 ( 2 ) = F A , 0 ( 2 ) ( 1 x A , 0 ( 2 ) ) = ( S 1 + S 2 ) F A ( 0 ) ( 1 x A , 0 ( 2 ) ) F A ( 2 ) = F A ( 2 ) ( 1 x A ( 2 ) ) = ( S 1 + S 2 ) F A ( 0 ) ( 1 x A ( 2 ) ) F A , 0 ( k ) = F A , 0 ( k ) ( 1 x A , 0 ( k ) ) = ( h = 1 k S h ) F A ( 0 ) ( 1 x A , 0 ( k ) ) F A ( k ) = F A ( k ) ( 1 x A ( k ) ) = ( h = 1 k S h ) F A ( 0 ) ( 1 x A ( k ) ) h = 1 r S h = 1
where the split ratios Sk are generally different from each other and can be subjected to optimisation to maximise the reactive network performance. Substituting the mass balances reported in Equation (A68) into Equation (A67), we obtain the inlet conversions xA,0 as functions of the outlet ones (Equation (A69)), in analogy to the previously detailed case of recycle reactors.
x A , 0 ( 1 ) = 0 x A , 0 ( 2 ) = S 1 S 1 + S 2 x A ( 1 ) = S k = S S 2 S x A ( 1 ) = 1 2 x A ( 1 ) x A , 0 ( k ) = h = 1 k 1 S h h = 1 k S h x A ( k 1 ) ,   x A , 0 ( k ) | S k = S = k 1 k x A ( k 1 )

Mass Balance on PFR

In the same way as performed before, we first write the general differential mass balance inside the generic PFR in terms of the key-species A (Equation (A70)):
d F A d V = r A
Then, for each k-th reactor, we express the molar flow rate as a function of the respective conversion—defined as usual with respect to the molar flow rate of A in the absence of reaction (Equation (A71)):
S 1 F A ( 0 ) d x A d V = ( r A ) 1 ( S 1 + S 2 ) F A ( 0 ) d x A d V = ( r A ) 2 ( k = 1 r 1 S k ) F A ( 0 ) d x A d V = ( r A ) r 1 F A ( 0 ) d x A d V = ( r A ) r
From these expressions, we finally obtain the design equation for the generic k-th reactor written in its canonical integral form along with the necessary integration upper and lower limits (Equation (A72)):
V R 1 F A ( 0 ) = S 1 0 x A ( 1 ) d x A ( r A ) R 1 V R 2 F A ( 0 ) = ( S 1 + S 2 ) S 1 S 1 + S 2 x A ( 1 ) x A ( 2 ) d x A ( r A ) R 2 V R k F A ( 0 ) = ( h = 1 k S h ) h = 1 k 1 S h h = 1 k S h x A ( k 1 ) x A ( k ) d x A ( r A ) R k
In the particular case in which all the split ratios are equal, we obtain the following simplified expressions (Equation (A73)):
S 0 x A ( 1 ) d x A ( r A ) R 1 = V R 1 F A ( 0 ) 2 S 1 2 x A ( 1 ) x A ( 2 ) d x A ( r A ) R 2 = V R 2 F A ( 0 ) k S k 1 k x A ( k 1 ) x A ( k ) d x A ( r A ) R k = V R k F A ( 0 )

Mass Balance on CSTR

The mass balances on the CSTRs of the series are (Equation (A74)):
S 1 F A ( 0 ) S 1 F A ( 0 ) ( 1 x A ( 1 ) ) = ( r A ) 1 V R 1 ( S 1 + S 2 ) F A ( 0 ) ( 1 x A , 0 ( 2 ) ) ( S 1 + S 2 ) F A ( 0 ) ( 1 x A ( 2 ) ) = ( r A ) 2 V R 2 ( h = 1 k S h ) F A ( 0 ) ( 1 x A , 0 ( k ) ) ( h = 1 k S h ) F A ( 0 ) ( 1 x A ( k ) ) = ( r A ) k V R k
After a further simplification, Equation (A74) becomes (Equation (A75)):
S 1 F A ( 0 ) x A ( 1 ) = ( r A ) 1 V R 1 ( S 1 + S 2 ) F A ( 0 ) ( x A ( 2 ) x A , 0 ( 2 ) ) = ( r A ) 2 V R 2 ( h = 1 k S h ) F A ( 0 ) ( x A ( k ) x A , 0 ( k ) ) = ( r A ) k V R k
Eliminating the inlet conversions xA,0, we finally obtain (Equation (A76)):
S 1 F A ( 0 ) x A ( 1 ) = ( r A ) 1 V R 1 ( ( S 1 + S 2 ) x A ( 2 ) S 1 x A ( 1 ) ) = ( r A ) 2 V R 2 F A ( 0 ) [ ( h = 1 k S h ) x A ( k ) ( h = 1 k 1 S h ) x A ( k 1 ) ] = ( r A ) k V R k F A ( 0 ) V R k F A ( 0 ) = [ ( h = 1 k S h ) x A ( k ) ( h = 1 k 1 S h ) x A ( k 1 ) ] ( r A ) k
If all split ratios are equal, we obtain (Equation (A77)):
S F A ( 0 ) x A ( 1 ) = ( r A ) 1 V R 1 S ( 2 x A ( 2 ) x A ( 1 ) ) = ( r A ) 2 V R 2 F A ( 0 ) S [ k x A ( k ) ( k 1 ) x A ( k 1 ) ] = ( r A ) k V R k F A ( 0 ) V R k F A ( 0 ) = S [ k x A ( k ) ( k 1 ) x A ( k 1 ) ] ( r A ) k

Appendix A.5.2. Energy Balances

Energy Balance on the Mixing Nodes

Applying Equation (A41) to the generic branches entering and exiting the mixing node just before the k-th reactor, the energy balance on the k-th mixing node is written as a function of conversion as follows (Equation (A78)):
i = 1 n F i ( k 1 ) H ˜ i ( T ( k 1 ) ) + F A , S ( k ) H ˜ A ( T A ( 0 ) ) = i = 1 n F i , 0 ( k ) H ˜ i ( T 0 ( k ) ) F i ( k 1 ) = { F A ( 0 ) ( h = 1 k 1 S h ) ( 1 x A ( k 1 ) ) ,   i = A F A ( 0 ) ( h = 1 k 1 S h ) ( θ i A ( k 1 ) + ν i a x A ( k 1 ) ) ,   i A = { F A ( 0 ) ( h = 1 k 1 S h ) ( 1 x A ( k 1 ) ) ,   i = A F A ( 0 ) ( θ i A + h = 1 k 1 S h ν i a x A ( k 1 ) ) ,   i A F i , 0 ( k ) = { F A ( 0 ) ( h = 1 k S h ) ( 1 x A , 0 ( k ) ) ,   i = A F A ( 0 ) ( h = 1 k S h ) ( θ i A , 0 ( k 1 ) + ν i a x A , 0 ( k ) ) ,   i A = { F A ( 0 ) ( h = 1 k S h ) ( 1 x A , 0 ( k ) ) ,   i = A F A ( 0 ) ( θ i A + h = 1 k S h ν i a x A , 0 ( k ) ) ,   i A
Developing Equation (A78) through the algebraic calculations detailed in Equations (A79)–(A84), we obtain Equation (A85), which states, as expected, that the resulting temperature  T 0 ( k )  exiting the mixing k-th node is comprised between the temperature entering the node from the preceding reactor  T ( k 1 )  and the temperature of the split initial feed e  T A ( 0 )  of the limiting reactant A.
F A ( k 1 ) H ˜ A ( T ( k 1 ) ) + i = 2 n F i ( k 1 ) H ˜ i ( T ( k 1 ) ) + F A , S ( k ) H ˜ A ( T A ( 0 ) ) = i = 1 n F i , 0 ( k ) H ˜ i ( T 0 ( k ) ) F A ( 0 ) ( h = 1 k 1 S h ) ( 1 x A ( k 1 ) ) H ˜ A ( T ( k 1 ) ) + F A ( 0 ) i = 2 n [ θ i + ( h = 1 k 1 S h ) ν i a x A ( k 1 ) ] H ˜ i ( T ( k 1 ) ) + F A ( 0 ) S k H ˜ A ( T ( 0 ) ) = F A ( 0 ) ( h = 1 k S h ) ( 1 x A , 0 ( k ) ) H ˜ A ( T 0 ( k ) ) + F A ( 0 ) i = 2 n [ θ i + ( h = 1 k S h ) ν i a x A , 0 ( k ) ] H ˜ i ( T 0 ( k ) ) ( h = 1 k 1 S h ) H ˜ A ( T ( k 1 ) ) ( h = 1 k 1 S h ) H ˜ A ( T ( k 1 ) ) x A ( k 1 ) + i = 2 n [ θ i H ˜ i ( T ( k 1 ) ) + ( h = 1 k 1 S h ) ν i a H ˜ i ( T ( k 1 ) ) x A ( k 1 ) ] + S k H ˜ A ( T ( 0 ) ) = ( h = 1 k S h ) H ˜ A ( T 0 ( k ) ) ( h = 1 k S h ) x A , 0 ( k ) H ˜ A ( T 0 ( k ) ) + i = 2 n [ θ i H ˜ i ( T 0 ( k ) ) + ( h = 1 k S h ) ν i a H ˜ i ( T 0 ( k ) ) x A , 0 ( k ) ]
( h = 1 k 1 S h ) [ Δ H ˜ f , A + C ˜ p A ( T ( k 1 ) T r ) ] ( h = 1 k 1 S h ) [ Δ H ˜ f , A + C ˜ p A ( T ( k 1 ) T r ) ] x A ( k 1 ) + i = 2 n [ θ i [ Δ H ˜ f , i + C ˜ p i ( T ( k 1 ) T r ) ] + ( h = 1 k 1 S h ) ν i a [ Δ H ˜ f , i + C ˜ p i ( T ( k 1 ) T r ) ] x A ( k 1 ) ] + S k [ Δ H ˜ f , A + C ˜ p A ( T ( 0 ) T r ) ] = ( h = 1 k S h ) [ Δ H ˜ f , A + C ˜ p A ( T 0 ( k ) T r ) ] ( h = 1 k S h ) x A , 0 ( k ) [ Δ H ˜ f , A + C ˜ p A ( T 0 ( k ) T r ) ] + i = 2 n [ θ i [ Δ H ˜ f , i + C ˜ p i ( T 0 ( k ) T r ) ] + ( h = 1 k S h ) ν i a [ Δ H ˜ f , i + C ˜ p i ( T 0 ( k ) T r ) ] x A , 0 ( k ) ]
( h = 1 k 1 S h ) Δ H ˜ f , A + ( h = 1 k 1 S h ) C ˜ p A ( T ( k 1 ) T r ) + ( h = 1 k 1 S h ) ν A a Δ H ˜ f , A x A ( k 1 ) + ( h = 1 k 1 S h ) ν A a C ˜ p A x A ( k 1 ) ( T ( k 1 ) T r ) + [ i = 2 n θ i Δ H ˜ f , i + ( T ( k 1 ) T r ) i = 2 n θ i C ˜ p i ] + ( h = 1 k 1 S h ) x A ( k 1 ) i = 2 n ν i a Δ H ˜ f , i + ( T ( k 1 ) T r ) x A ( k 1 ) ( h = 1 k 1 S h ) i = 2 n ν i a C ˜ p i + [ S k Δ H ˜ f , A + S k C ˜ p A ( T ( 0 ) T r ) ] = ( h = 1 k S h ) Δ H ˜ f , A + ( h = 1 k S h ) C ˜ p A ( T 0 ( k ) T r ) + ( h = 1 k S h ) x A , 0 ( k ) ν A a Δ H ˜ f , A + ( h = 1 k S h ) ν A a C ˜ p A x A , 0 ( k ) ( T 0 ( k ) T r ) + i = 2 n θ i Δ H ˜ f , i + i = 2 n θ i C ˜ p i ( T 0 ( k ) T r ) + ( h = 1 k S h ) x A , 0 ( k ) i = 2 n ν i a Δ H ˜ f , i + ( h = 1 k S h ) x A , 0 ( k ) i = 2 n ν i a C ˜ p i ( T 0 ( k ) T r )
( h = 1 k 1 S h ) Δ H ˜ f , A + ( h = 1 k 1 S h ) C ˜ p A ( T ( k 1 ) T r ) + ( h = 1 k 1 S h ) ν A a Δ H ˜ f , A x A ( k 1 ) + ( h = 1 k 1 S h ) ν A a C ˜ p A x A ( k 1 ) ( T ( k 1 ) T r ) + i = 2 n θ i Δ H ˜ f , i + ( T ( k 1 ) T r ) i = 2 n θ i C ˜ p i + ( h = 1 k 1 S h ) x A ( k 1 ) i = 2 n ν i a Δ H ˜ f , i + ( T ( k 1 ) T r ) x A ( k 1 ) ( h = 1 k 1 S h ) i = 2 n ν i a C ˜ p i + [ S k Δ H ˜ f , A + S k C ˜ p A ( T ( 0 ) T r ) ] = ( h = 1 k S h ) Δ H ˜ f , A + ( h = 1 k S h ) C ˜ p A ( T 0 ( k ) T r ) + ( h = 1 k 1 S h ) x A ( k 1 ) ν A a Δ H ˜ f , A + ( h = 1 k 1 S h ) ν A a C ˜ p A x A ( k 1 ) ( T 0 ( k ) T r ) + i = 2 n θ i Δ H ˜ f , i + i = 2 n θ i C ˜ p i ( T 0 ( k ) T r ) + ( h = 1 k 1 S h ) x A ( k 1 ) i = 2 n ν i a Δ H ˜ f , i + ( h = 1 k 1 S h ) x A ( k 1 ) i = 2 n ν i a C ˜ p i ( T 0 ( k ) T r )
( h = 1 k 1 S h ) C ˜ p A T ( k 1 ) ( h = 1 k 1 S h ) C ˜ p A T r + ( h = 1 k 1 S h ) ν A a Δ H ˜ f , A x A ( k 1 ) + ( h = 1 k 1 S h ) ν A a C ˜ p A x A ( k 1 ) T ( k 1 ) ( h = 1 k 1 S h ) ν A a C ˜ p A x A ( k 1 ) T r + i = 2 n θ i Δ H ˜ f , i + i = 2 n θ i C ˜ p i T ( k 1 ) i = 2 n θ i C ˜ p i T r + ( h = 1 k 1 S h ) x A ( k 1 ) i = 2 n ν i a Δ H ˜ f , i + x A ( k 1 ) ( h = 1 k 1 S h ) i = 2 n ν i a C ˜ p i T ( k 1 ) x A ( k 1 ) ( h = 1 k 1 S h ) i = 2 n ν i a C ˜ p i T r + [ S k Δ H ˜ f , A + S k C ˜ p A T ( 0 ) S k C ˜ p A T r ] = S k Δ H ˜ f , A + ( h = 1 k S h ) C ˜ p A T 0 ( k ) ( h = 1 k S h ) C ˜ p A T r + ( h = 1 k 1 S h ) x A ( k 1 ) ν A a Δ H ˜ f , A + ( h = 1 k 1 S h ) ν A a C ˜ p A x A ( k 1 ) T 0 ( k ) ( h = 1 k 1 S h ) ν A a C ˜ p A x A ( k 1 ) T r + i = 2 n θ i Δ H ˜ f , i + i = 2 n θ i C ˜ p i ( T 0 ( k ) T r ) + ( h = 1 k 1 S h ) x A ( k 1 ) i = 2 n ν i a Δ H ˜ f , i + ( h = 1 k 1 S h ) x A ( k 1 ) i = 2 n ν i a C ˜ p i T 0 ( k ) ( h = 1 k 1 S h ) x A ( k 1 ) i = 2 n ν i a C ˜ p i T r
( h = 1 k 1 S h ) C ˜ p A T ( k 1 ) + [ C ˜ p s C ˜ p A ] T ( k 1 ) + S k C ˜ p A T ( 0 ) + T ( k 1 ) ( h = 1 k 1 S h ) Δ C ˜ p A x A ( k 1 ) = T 0 ( k ) [ ( h = 1 k 1 S h ) C ˜ p A + S k C ˜ p A + C ˜ p s C ˜ p A + ( h = 1 k 1 S h ) Δ C ˜ p A x A ( k 1 ) ] T 0 ( k ) = [ ( h = 1 k 1 S h ) C ˜ p A + i = 2 n θ i C ˜ p i + ( h = 1 k 1 S h ) Δ C ˜ p A x A ( k 1 ) ] T ( k 1 ) + S k C ˜ p A T ( 0 ) [ ( h = 1 k 1 S h ) C ˜ p A + i = 2 n θ i C ˜ p i + ( h = 1 k 1 S h ) Δ C ˜ p A x A ( k 1 ) ] + S k C ˜ p A
T 0 ( k ) = w 1 w 1 + w 2 T ( k 1 ) + w 2 w 1 + w 2 T ( 0 ) w 1 [ ( h = 1 k 1 S h ) C ˜ p A + i = 2 n θ i C ˜ p i + ( h = 1 k 1 S h ) Δ C ˜ p A x A ( k 1 ) ] w 2 S k C ˜ p A
If  Δ C ˜ p A  can be neglected with respect to the other terms of the sum, we obtain Equation (A86):
T 0 ( k ) [ ( h = 1 k 1 S h ) C ˜ p A + i = 2 n θ i C ˜ p i ] T ( k 1 ) + S k C ˜ p A T ( 0 ) [ ( h = 1 k 1 S h ) C ˜ p A + i = 2 n θ i C ˜ p i ] + S k C ˜ p A T 0 ( k ) w 1 w 1 + w 2 T ( k 1 ) + w 2 w 1 + w 2 T ( 0 ) w 1 [ ( h = 1 k 1 S h ) C ˜ p A + i = 2 n θ i C ˜ p i ] w 2 S k C ˜ p A
If the split ratios are the same, we obtain the expression reported in Equation (A87):
T 0 ( k ) | S k = S = [ ( k 1 ) S C ˜ p A + i = 2 n θ i C ˜ p i ] T ( k 1 ) + S C ˜ p A T ( 0 ) [ ( k 1 ) S C ˜ p A + i = 2 n θ i C ˜ p i + S C ˜ p A ]

Energy Balance on PFR

The general energy balance for a PFR is recalled here from Equation (A19):
d d V ( i = 1 n F i H ˜ i ) = 0
For the k-th reactor of the series, expressing this balance in terms of conversion, we obtain the final expression (Equation (A92)) through Equation (A89)–(A91):
d d V ( [ F A [ Δ H ˜ f , A 0 + C ˜ p A ( T T r e f ) ] ] + i = 2 n [ F i ] [ Δ H ˜ f , i 0 + C ˜ p i ( T T r e f ) ] ) = 0 d d V ( [ F A ( 0 ) ( h = 1 k S h ) ( 1 x A ) [ Δ H ˜ f , A 0 + C ˜ p A ( T T r e f ) ] ] + + i = 2 n [ F A ( 0 ) ( θ i A + h = 1 k S h ν i a x A ) ] [ Δ H ˜ f , i 0 + C ˜ p i ( T T r e f ) ] ) = 0 F i = { F A ( 0 ) ( h = 1 k S h ) ( 1 x A ) ,   i = A F A ( 0 ) ( θ i A + h = 1 k S h ν i a x A ) ,   i A ,   in   the   k - th   reactor
d d V ( [ F A ( 0 ) ( h = 1 k S h ) ( 1 x A ) [ Δ H ˜ f , A 0 + C ˜ p A ( T T r e f ) ] ] ) + d d V ( i = 2 n [ F A ( 0 ) ( θ i A + h = 1 k S h ν i a x A ) ] [ Δ H ˜ f , i 0 + C ˜ p i ( T T r e f ) ] ) = 0 ( F A ( 0 ) ( h = 1 k S h ) i = 1 n ν i H ˜ i ( T ) a [ d x A d V ] ) + F A ( 0 ) ( ( 1 h = 1 k S h ) C ˜ p A + i = 1 n θ i C ˜ p i + ( h = 1 k S h ) i = 1 n ν i a C ˜ p i x A ) d T d V = 0
[ C ˜ p S + ( h = 1 k S h ) x A Δ C ˜ p A ( 1 h = 1 k S h ) C ˜ p A ] d T d V = ( h = 1 k S h ) [ Δ H ˜ r , A ] [ d x A d V ]
[ ( C ˜ p S C ˜ p A ) Contribution of   the   species other   than   A + ( h = 1 k S h ) C ˜ p A Contribution   of the   species   A Thermal   contribution   of   the   feed + ( h = 1 k S h ) x A Δ C ˜ p A Non - linear   contribution ] d T d V = ( h = 1 k S h ) [ Δ H ˜ r , A ] Reaction   Contribution [ d x A d V ]

Energy Balance on CSTR

The energy balance on the k-th CSTR is obtained starting from Equation (A93):
F A , 0 ( k ) [ H ˜ A ( T 0 ( k ) ) ] + i = 2 n [ F i , 0 ( k ) ] [ H ˜ i ( T 0 ( k ) ) ] + F A ( k ) [ H ˜ A ( T ( k ) ) ] i = 2 n [ F i ( k ) ] [ H ˜ i ( T ( k ) ) ] = 0 F i , 0 ( k ) = { F A ( 0 ) ( h = 1 k S h ) ( 1 x A , 0 ( k ) ) ,   i = A F A ( 0 ) ( θ i A + h = 1 k S h ν i a x A , 0 ( k ) ) ,   i A F i ( k ) = { F A ( 0 ) ( h = 1 k S h ) ( 1 x A ( k ) ) ,   i = A F A ( 0 ) ( θ i A + h = 1 k S h ν i a x A ( k ) ) ,   i A
After some algebraic calculations (see Equations (A94), (A95) and (A99)), we can finally obtain the form reported in Equation (A96).
F A ( 0 ) ( h = 1 k S h ) ( 1 x A , 0 ( k ) ) [ H ˜ A ( T 0 ( k ) ) ] + i = 2 n F A ( 0 ) ( θ i A + h = 1 k S h ν i a x A , 0 ( k ) ) [ H ˜ i ( T 0 ( k ) ) ] + F A ( 0 ) ( h = 1 k S h ) ( 1 x A ( k ) ) [ H ˜ A ( T ( k ) ) ] + i = 2 n F A ( 0 ) ( θ i A + h = 1 k S h ν i a x A ( k ) ) [ H ˜ i ( T ( k ) ) ] = 0
( 1 h = 1 k S h ) H ˜ A ( T 0 ( k ) ) + i = 1 n [ θ i A H ˜ i ( T 0 ( k ) ) ] + i = 1 n [ ( h = 1 k S h ) ν i a H ˜ i ( T 0 ( k ) ) x A , 0 ( k ) ] + ( 1 h = 1 k S h ) H ˜ A ( T ( k ) ) i = 1 n [ θ i A H ˜ i ( T ( k ) ) ] + i = 1 n [ ( h = 1 k S h ) ν i a H ˜ i ( T ( k ) ) x A ( k ) ] = 0
[ ( C ˜ p s C ˜ p A ) + ( h = 1 k S h ) C ˜ p A ] ( T 0 ( k ) T ( k ) ) + ( h = 1 k S h ) [ x A , 0 ( k ) Δ H ˜ r , A ( T 0 ( k ) ) x A ( k ) Δ H ˜ r , A ( T ( k ) ) ] = 0
[ ( C ˜ p s C ˜ p A ) + ( h = 1 k S h ) C ˜ p A ] ( T 0 ( k ) T ( k ) ) + ( h = 1 k S h ) [ x A , 0 ( k ) x A ( k ) ] Δ H ˜ r , A = 0
We remind that, from the previously obtained mass and energy balance on the mixing nodes, the following relationships hold for the inlet conversion and temperature (Equations (A98) and (A99)):
x A , 0 ( k ) = h = 1 k 1 S h h = 1 k S h x A ( k 1 )
T 0 ( k ) [ ( h = 1 k 1 S h ) C ˜ p A + i = 2 n θ i C ˜ p i ] T ( k 1 ) + S k C ˜ p A T ( 0 ) [ ( h = 1 k 1 S h ) C ˜ p A + i = 2 n θ i C ˜ p i ] + S k C ˜ p A
Substituting Equations (A98) and (A99) into Equation (A97), we obtain the following expression (Equation (A100)):
( h = 1 k S h ) [ x A ( k ) x A ( k 1 ) ] + S k [ x A ( k 1 ) x A ( 0 ) = 0 ] = ( h = 1 k S h ) C ˜ p A + ( C ˜ p s C ˜ p A ) ( Δ H ˜ r , A ) ( T ( k ) T ( k 1 ) ) + S k C ˜ p A ( Δ H ˜ r , A ) ( T ( k 1 ) T ( 0 ) )

References

  1. Missen, R.W.; Mims, C.A.; Saville, B.A. Introduction to Chemical Reaction Engineering and Kinetics; John Wiley & Sons: New York, NY, USA, 1999. [Google Scholar]
  2. Feinberg, M. Foundations of Chemical Reaction Network Theory; Springer Nature: Cham, Switzerland, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  3. Ming, D.; Glasser, D.; Hildebrandt, D.; Glasser, B.; Metgzer, M. Attainable Region Theory: An Introduction to Choosing an Optimal Reactor, 1st ed.; John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  4. Moser, A.; Manor, P. Bioprocess Technology: Kinetics and Reactors, 1st ed.; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 1988. [Google Scholar]
  5. Yao, X.; Zhang, Y.; Du, L.; Liu, J.; Yao, J. Review of the applications of microreactors. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2015, 47, 519–539. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Rooney, W.C.; Biegler, L.T. Multiperiod reactor network synthesis. Comput. Chem. Eng. 2000, 24, 2055–2068. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Xie, M.; Freund, H. Fast synthesis of optimal chemical reactor networks based on a universal system representation. Chem. Eng. Process. Process Intensif. 2018, 123, 280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Suresh, S.; Sundaramoorthy, S. An Introduction to Catalysis, Kinetics, and Chemical Processes; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA; Taylor & Francis: New York, NY, USA, 2015. [Google Scholar]
  9. Levenspiel, O. Chemical Reaction Engineering, 3rd ed.; John Wiley & Sons: New York, NY, USA, 1999. [Google Scholar]
  10. Fogler, H.S. Essentials of Chemical Reaction Engineering; Pearson Education, Inc.: Boston, MA, USA, 2011. [Google Scholar]
  11. Smith, J.M. Chemical Engineering Kinetics, 2nd ed.; McGraw-Hill, Inc.: New York, NY, USA, 1970. [Google Scholar]
  12. Davis, M.E.; Davis, R.J. Fundamentals of Chemical Reaction Engineering, 1st ed.; McGraw-Hill Inc.: New York, NY, USA, 2003. [Google Scholar]
  13. Froment, G.F.; Bischoff, K.B. Chemical Reactions Analysis and Design; John Wiley & Sons: New York, NY, USA, 1979. [Google Scholar]
  14. Schmidt, L.D. The Engineering of Chemical Reactions; Oxford University Press, Inc.: New York, NY, USA, 1998. [Google Scholar]
  15. Hills, C.G., Jr.; Root, T.W. Introduction to Chemical Engineering Kinetics and Reactor Design, 2nd ed.; John Wiley & Sons: New York, NY, USA, 2014. [Google Scholar]
  16. Harriot, P. Chemical Reactor Design; Marcel Dekker, Inc.: New York, NY, USA, 2003. [Google Scholar]
  17. Rawlings, J.B.; Ekerdt, J.G. Chemical Reactor Analysis and Design Fundamentals; Nob Hill Publishing: Madison, WI, USA, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  18. Rase, H.F. Chemical Reactor Design for Process Plants. Volume 2: Case Studies and Design Data; John Wiley & Sons: New York, NY, USA, 1977. [Google Scholar]
  19. Roberts, G.W. Chemical Reactions and Chemical Reactors, 1st ed.; John Wiley & Sons: New York, NY, USA, 2008. [Google Scholar]
  20. Aris, R. Elementary Chemical Reactor Analysis; Dover Publications: Mineola, NY, USA, 1969. [Google Scholar]
  21. Mann, U. Principles of Chemical Reactor Analysis and Design: New Tools for Industrial Chemical Reactor Operations, 2nd ed.; John Wiley & Sons: New York, NY, USA, 2009. [Google Scholar]
  22. Kramers, K.R.; Westerterp, H. Elements of Chemical Reactor Design and Operation, 1st ed.; Academic Press, Inc.: Cambridge, MA, USA, 1963. [Google Scholar]
  23. Doraiswamy, L.K.; Uner, D. Chemical Reaction Engineering: Beyond the Fundamentals; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  24. Salmi, T.O.; Mikkola, J.-P.; Varna, J.P. Chemical Reaction Engineering and Reactor Technology, 2nd ed.; (Chemical Industries); Heinemann, H., Ed.; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  25. Ravi, R.; Vinu, R.; Gummadi, S.N. Coulson and Richardson’s Chemical Engineering: Volume 3A: Chemical and Biochemical Reactors and Reaction Engineering; Chhabra, R., Ed.; Butterworth-Heinemann: Oxford, UK; IchemE: Rugby, UK; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2017. [Google Scholar]
  26. Hayes, R.E.; Mmbaga, J.P. Introduction to Chemical Reactor Analysis, 2nd ed.; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2012. [Google Scholar]
  27. Schmal, M. Chemical Reaction Engineering: Essentials, Exercises and Examples; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2014. [Google Scholar]
  28. Santacesaria, E.; Tesser, R. The Chemical Reactor from Laboratory to Industrial Plant: A Modern Approach to Chemical Reaction Engineering with Different Case Histories and Exercises; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  29. Rase, H.F. Fixed-Bed Reactor Design and Diagnostics: Gas-Phase Reactions; Butterworth Publishers: Boston, MA, USA, 1990. [Google Scholar]
  30. Carberry, J.J.; Varma, A. (Eds.) Chemical Reaction and Reactor Engineering (Chemical Industries, Book 26); Marcel Dekker: New York, NY, USA, 1986. [Google Scholar]
  31. Butt, J.B. Reaction Kinetics and Reactor Design (Chemical Industries Book 79), 2nd ed.; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2000. [Google Scholar]
  32. Worstell, J. Adiabatic Fixed-Bed Reactors: Practical Guides in Chemical Engineering, 1st ed.; Elsevier: Oxford, UK, 2014. [Google Scholar]
  33. Walas, S.M. Chemical Reaction Engineering Handbook of Solved Problems; Gordon & Breach Publishers—Taylor & Francis: London, UK, 1995. [Google Scholar]
  34. Ghatak, H.R. Reaction Engineering Principles, 1st ed.; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA; Taylor & Francis: New York, NY, USA, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  35. Ancheyta, J. Chemical Reaction Kinetics: Concepts, Methods and Case Studies, 1st ed.; John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2017. [Google Scholar]
  36. Marchetti, J. Reaction Engineering, Catalyst Preparation, and Kinetics, 1st ed.; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  37. Datsevich, L.B. Conventional Three-Phase Fixed-Bed Technologies: Analysis and Critique. Briefs in Applied Sciences and Technology, Book 7, 2012th ed.; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2012. [Google Scholar]
  38. Murzin, D.Y. Chemical Reaction Technology, 1st ed.; De Gruyter: Berlin, Germany, 2015. [Google Scholar]
  39. Liu, S. Bioprocess Engineering: Kinetics, Sustainability, and Reactor Design, 2nd ed.; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  40. Nauman, B. Handbook of Chemical Reactor Design, Optimization, and Scaleup (McGraw-Hill Professional Engineering), 1st ed.; McGraw-Hill Education: New York, NY, USA, 2001. [Google Scholar]
  41. Westerterp, K.R. Chemical Reactor Design and Operation, 2nd ed.; John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 1984. [Google Scholar]
  42. Thoenes, D. Chemical Reactor Development: From Laboratory Synthesis to Industrial Production, 1994th ed.; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 1994. [Google Scholar]
  43. Chartrand, G. Introductory Graph Theory; Dover: New York, NY, USA, 1985. [Google Scholar]
  44. Achenie, L.E.K.; Biegler, L.T. Algorithmic Synthesis of Chemical Reactor Networks using Mathematical Programming. Ind. Eng. Chem. Fund. 1986, 25, 621. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Achenie, L.E.K.; Biegler, L.T. Developing Targets for the Performance Index of a Chemical Reactor Network. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 1988, 27, 1811. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Balakrishna, S.; Biegler, L.T. A Constructive Targeting Approach for the Synthesis of Isothermal Reactor Networks. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 1992, 31, 300. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Balakrishna, S.; Biegler, L.T. Targeting Strategies for Synthesis and Energy Integration of Nonisothermal Reactor Networks. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 1992, 31, 2152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Balakrishna, S.; Biegler, L.T. A Unified Approach for the Simultaneous Synthesis of Reaction Energy and Separation Systems. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 1993, 32, 1372. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Lakshmanan, A.; Biegler, L.T. Synthesis of Optimal Chemical Reactor Networks. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 1996, 35, 1344–1353. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Lee, K.Y.; Aris, R. Optimal Adiabatic Bed Reactors for Sulfur Dioxide with Cold Shot Cooling. Ind. Eng. Chem. Process Des. Dev. 1963, 2, 301. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Malenge, J.P.; Vincent, L.M. Optimal Design of a Sequence of Adiabatic Reactors with Cold Shot Cooling. Ind. Eng. Chem. Process Des. Dev. 1967, 11, 465. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Soltani, H.; Shafiei, S. Adiabatic reactor network synthesis using coupled genetic algorithm with quasi linear programming method. Chem. Eng. Sci. 2015, 137, 601. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Carberry, J.J. Chemical and Catalytic Reaction Engineering, 2nd ed.; Dover Publications Inc.: New York, NY, USA, 2001. [Google Scholar]
Figure 1. Examples of complex reactor networks from (a,b) Rooney and Biegler (2000) [5] and (c) Xie and Freund (2018) [7]. Rearranged with the permission of Elsevier.
Figure 1. Examples of complex reactor networks from (a,b) Rooney and Biegler (2000) [5] and (c) Xie and Freund (2018) [7]. Rearranged with the permission of Elsevier.
Processes 12 00107 g001
Figure 2. Example of a generic reactor network connected to each other in series/parallel through several oriented branches.
Figure 2. Example of a generic reactor network connected to each other in series/parallel through several oriented branches.
Processes 12 00107 g002
Figure 3. Systematic procedure to write the design equations for a reactor network.
Figure 3. Systematic procedure to write the design equations for a reactor network.
Processes 12 00107 g003
Figure 4. Scheme of reactors in series in reactive and no-reaction cases.
Figure 4. Scheme of reactors in series in reactive and no-reaction cases.
Processes 12 00107 g004
Figure 5. Scheme of reactors in parallel in (a) reactive and (b) no-reaction cases.
Figure 5. Scheme of reactors in parallel in (a) reactive and (b) no-reaction cases.
Processes 12 00107 g005
Figure 6. (a) Scheme of adiabatic-stage rectors with recycle (the position of the exchangers can be conveniently different based on the particular reactions considered) and (b) scheme of the generic k-th stage with explicit mass balance (in terms of molar flow rates) in the no-reaction case.
Figure 6. (a) Scheme of adiabatic-stage rectors with recycle (the position of the exchangers can be conveniently different based on the particular reactions considered) and (b) scheme of the generic k-th stage with explicit mass balance (in terms of molar flow rates) in the no-reaction case.
Processes 12 00107 g006
Figure 7. Sketch of the geometrical interpretation of the integral form of the design equation of PFR for a generic k-th reactor with recycle. The red area represents the ratio of the reactor volume and the flow rate of the limiting reactant A in that branch in the absence of reaction.
Figure 7. Sketch of the geometrical interpretation of the integral form of the design equation of PFR for a generic k-th reactor with recycle. The red area represents the ratio of the reactor volume and the flow rate of the limiting reactant A in that branch in the absence of reaction.
Processes 12 00107 g007
Figure 8. (a) Scheme of adiabatic-stage reactors with split and (b) scheme of the generic k-th stage with explicit mass balance (in terms of molar flow rates) in the no-reaction case.
Figure 8. (a) Scheme of adiabatic-stage reactors with split and (b) scheme of the generic k-th stage with explicit mass balance (in terms of molar flow rates) in the no-reaction case.
Processes 12 00107 g008
Figure 9. Sketch of the geometrical interpretation of the integral form of the design equation of the generic k-th PFR with split. The red area represents the ratio of the reactor volume and the flow rate of the limiting reactant A in that branch in the absence of reaction.
Figure 9. Sketch of the geometrical interpretation of the integral form of the design equation of the generic k-th PFR with split. The red area represents the ratio of the reactor volume and the flow rate of the limiting reactant A in that branch in the absence of reaction.
Processes 12 00107 g009
Figure 10. (a) Scheme of a series of adiabatic-stage reactors intercooled/interheated by reactants (example of three reactors) and (b) corresponding scheme of network with explicit mass balance (in terms of molar flow rates) in the no-reaction case.
Figure 10. (a) Scheme of a series of adiabatic-stage reactors intercooled/interheated by reactants (example of three reactors) and (b) corresponding scheme of network with explicit mass balance (in terms of molar flow rates) in the no-reaction case.
Processes 12 00107 g010
Figure 11. (a) Scheme of a series of adiabatic-stage reactors (example of three reactors) with the feed of one species distributed between two consecutive reactors and (b) corresponding scheme of network with explicit mass balance (in terms of molar flow rates) in the no-reaction case.
Figure 11. (a) Scheme of a series of adiabatic-stage reactors (example of three reactors) with the feed of one species distributed between two consecutive reactors and (b) corresponding scheme of network with explicit mass balance (in terms of molar flow rates) in the no-reaction case.
Processes 12 00107 g011
Figure 12. Example of application of the presented approach in terms of calculation of inlet conversions to reactors.
Figure 12. Example of application of the presented approach in terms of calculation of inlet conversions to reactors.
Processes 12 00107 g012
Table 1. General stoichiometric table written on the l-th branch of the network.
Table 1. General stoichiometric table written on the l-th branch of the network.
Stoichiometric Table on the l-th Branch of the Network
Species iNon-Reactive CaseReactive Case
A (limiting species)   F A ( l )   F A ( l ) = F A ( l ) ( 1 x A ( l ) )
i   F i ( l ) = F A ( l ) θ i   F i ( l ) = F A ( l ) ( θ i + ν i a x A ( l ) )
Z   F Z ( l ) = F A ( l ) θ z   F Z ( l ) = F A ( l ) ( θ Z + ν Z a x A ( l ) )
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Caravella, A. Extended Definition of Conversion and Reaction Extent for a Systematic Development of the Design Equations for Reactor Networks. Processes 2024, 12, 107. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr12010107

AMA Style

Caravella A. Extended Definition of Conversion and Reaction Extent for a Systematic Development of the Design Equations for Reactor Networks. Processes. 2024; 12(1):107. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr12010107

Chicago/Turabian Style

Caravella, Alessio. 2024. "Extended Definition of Conversion and Reaction Extent for a Systematic Development of the Design Equations for Reactor Networks" Processes 12, no. 1: 107. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr12010107

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop