Development of Micro to Milli-Scale Multiphase Reactors with and Without Solids for Integration Into Mini-Monoplants
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Typical modes of chemical processing differ between the bulk and pharmaceutical industries. Bulk chemicals are produced in large-scale, dedicated, continuous processes that are known to be more economical when flexibility in the equipment, reactions, and capacity is not required. In the pharmaceutical industry, flexibility is typically required in order to accommodate the constantly changing product market, where production campaigns may be shorter and have product amounts in the order of a few kilograms to 100 tonnes per year. Accordingly, pharmaceutical and fine chemical production is typically performed in flexible batch reactors, where larger scale vessels inherit both reduced heat transfer through a loss in surface-to-volume ratio, and decreased mass transfer through solvent dilution. As a result, pharmaceutical production processes are often run at suboptimal efficiency with large amounts of waste relative to the amount of generated product. In this work, an alternative method of intensified and dedicated pharmaceutical process design is proposed. ‘Mini-monoplant’ development is outlined through three stages; including lab-based development of best-in-class processes, factory-based development for an accelerated time to market, and mini-monoplant production at commercial scale. Within the scope of such a method of process design, several intensified reactor technologies are developed and characterized for implementation into mini-monoplants. Plate-type LL microreactors are characterized through two experimental programs. In the first, the impact of fluids (CO₂(g), water) flow rates, channel geometry, and presence of surfactant (ethanol) on the resulting gas-liquid flow regime (bubble, bubble/slug, annular), pressure drop and interphase mass transfer coefficient (𝑘𝑙𝑎) are investigated. Here, the interphase mass transfer coefficients ranged from ~0.05 to 1 s- and were found to correlate well with an energy dissipation rate model in the bubble flow regime. In the second, scale-up calculations are performed for LL microreactors within the context of running a viscous nitration reaction, leading to scale-up rules derived with the goal of maintaining mean micromixing performance. In this study, mean energy dissipation rates and relative contributions of chaotic flow were used as measures for the overall micromixing performance, with both being conserved or increased upon reactor scale-up when either water or 96 wt% H₂SO₄ (aq) were used as the fluid. Then, the solid suspension handling of a baffleless oscillatory flow coil reactor is characterized through two solid forming reactions, with the first being a model precipitation reaction and the second being a more mixing intensive phase transfer catalysis reaction having difficulties associated to gas and salt formation. In the first reaction, an oscillatory energy dissipation rate of 13 W/kg was effective in continuously keeping solids suspended at concentrations of 7.9 wt% and 5.8 wt% for 2 hours and 5 hours, respectively, whereas gas generation in the phase transfer catalysis reaction resulted in a 10-fold decrease of the oscillatory energy dissipation rate leading to subsequent clogging. Finally, and as a result of its success in continuous solid handling, a larger scale baffleless oscillatory flow coil reactor is then implemented for the continuous production of an active pharmaceutical ingredient (API) suspension at elevated temperature and pressure. Development of both the reaction apparatus itself as well as the operating conditions are outlined, leading to final operating conditions that produced 40 g/hr of the API at lab scale. A mixing-based design methodology is then proposed for maintaining geometric similarity and energy dissipation rates in a production scale reactor with an API production rate of 11.9 kg/hr. This work thus expands on the toolbox approach developed by Plouffe et al [1] for reactor selection, with the objective of implementation into continuous and dedicated pharmaceutical processes at commercial scale.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».