**Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) Modeling of Photochemical Reactors**

Masroor Mohajerani, Mehrab Mehrvar and Farhad Ein-Mozaffari *Department of Chemical Engineering, Ryerson University, Toronto, Ontario Canada* 

#### **1. Introduction**

154 Applied Computational Fluid Dynamics

machines in the field. In this case, specifically, it was possible to visualize the guides configuration and the water flow inside the frame channel preventing the need to destroy it.

The authors would like to thank all Weg colleagues that directly or indirectly participated in

Incropera, F. P. & Witt, D. P., *Introduction to Heat transfer*, second edition by John Wiley &

John H. Lienhard IV & V, *A Heat Transfer Textbook*, third edition, published by Phlogiston

Jones, W. P. & Launder, B. E. (1972), *The Prediction of Laminarization with a Two-Equation* 

Launder, B. E. & Sharma, B. I. (1974), *Application of the Energy Dissipation Model of Turbulence* 

Launder, B. E. & Spalding, D. D., *Mathematical Models of Turbulence,* Academic Press,

Menter, F. R. (1993), *Zonal Two Equation k-ω Turbulence Models for Aerodynamic Flows*, AIAA

Menter, F. R. (1994), *Two-Equation Eddy-Viscosity Turbulence Models for Engineering* 

Nailen, R. L., *Understanding the TEWAC Motor*, IEEE Transactions on Industry Applications,

Wilcox, D.C., *Multiscale model for turbulent flows*, In AIAA 24th Aerospace Sciences Meeting.

Kreith, F., *Princípio da transmissão de Calor*, translation of the 3rd american edition, 1977.

Kreith, F., *The CRC Handbook of Thermal Engineering*, CRC Press LLC, 2000.

*Applications*, AIAA Journal, vol. 32, no 8. pp. 1598-1605.

American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 1986.

Roberge, P. R., *Handbook of Corrosion Engineering*, McGraw-Hill, 2000.

*Model of Turbulence*, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, vol. 15, 1972,

*to the Calculation of Flow Near a Spinning Disc*, Letters in Heat and Mass Transfer,

Fox, R. W. & Mcdonald, A. T., *Introdução à mecânica dos Fluidos*, fifth edition, 2001.

**9. Acknowledgement** 

Sons, 1985.

Press, 2004.

pp. 301-314.

London, 1972.

Paper 93-2906.

vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 131-138.

vol. IA-11, nº. 4, July / august, 1975.

this project.

**10. References** 

Advanced oxidation processes (AOPs) play an important role in the degradation or the production of a wide range of organic materials. Many organic compounds such as pharmaceuticals, dyes, herbicides, and pesticides have been subjected to degradation and remediation purposes in water and wastewater treatment systems using AOPs. Some of the organic compounds such as drugs, vitamins, or fragrances could be also produced by oxidation processes.

As the standard of living increases, many chemicals such as pharmaceuticals, pesticides, herbicides, and dyes are extensively consumed. Each of these products may cause health issues by their accumulation in aquatic environment. Pharmaceuticals such as antibiotics are partially metabolized and excreted by humans and animals. Improper disposal, dumping, and accidental discharge of drugs lead to the increase of the concentration of compounds such as analgesics, antibiotics, steroids, and hormones in aquatic environment, which cause environmental and health problems. Residual pesticides and herbicides originate from the direct pollutant in production plant, disposal of empty containers, equipment washing, and surface runoff. High levels of these compounds are toxic, mutagenic, carcinogenic, and tumorigenic. Some other wastes such as landfill leachate are subjected to advanced treatment methods. Old landfill leachates (>10 years) are nonbiodegradable in nature due to the existence of organic compounds with high molecular weights. Although the composition of landfill leachates varies widely with respect to the age of the landfill, type of wastes, and climate conditions, they can be categorized into four groups of dissolved organic matter, inorganic macro components, heavy materials, and xenobiotic organic substances. Another type of toxic chemicals which cannot be removed using conventional treatment methods is endocrine disrupting compounds (EDCs). EDCs, especially the steroidal hormones, are well recognized exogenous agents that interfere with the synthesis, action, and/or elimination of natural hormones in the body. Conventional processes are not effective in destruction of these types of organic compounds; therefore, powerful advanced treatment processes are required in order to mineralize them. There are several options for choosing an oxidation process: wet air oxidation, supercritical water oxidation, incineration, and AOPs.

AOPs have been promising in the treatment of contaminated soils and waters. The AOPs could be employed to fully or partially oxidize organic pollutants usually using a combination of different oxidants. In contrary to the conventional physical and chemical treatment processes, AOPs do not transfer pollutants from one phase to another, i.e., organic

Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) Modeling of Photochemical Reactors 157

makes the LVREA non-uniform. A Photochemical reactor design requires the solution of momentum, energy, and mass balances. The expression for the conservation of momentum is similar to that of the conventional reactor. It is believed that light irradiation does not affect the photochemically reactive fluid flow. The mass balance or continuity equations for each compound in the system should be solved simultaneously to find the concentration

The mass and energy conservation equations are directly related to the light irradiation. The energy balance can be divided into two parts: thermal and radiant energy balances. Although for isothermal photochemical reactions, thermal balances are negligible, a complete equation of change for energy balance is required for exothermic and endothermic reactions. The first step in the LVREA evaluation is to state a radiant energy balance at steady state condition in a homogeneous system. A radiation source model is also needed to be considered. Different source models have been developed during the past years to

Gaertner and Kent (1958) were among the first group that modeled photochemical reactions. They studied the photolysis of aqueous uranyl oxalate in an annular tubular reactor. The results of their experiments were correlated with a remarkable accuracy by assuming that the rate of photolysis is proportional to the residence time multiplied by the intensity of radiation at a particular radial position. They also proposed a mathematical model without considering the reactant concentration. Therefore, their model was applicable when the conversion was

The modeling of radiation field is classified into two categories: incidence and emission models. In the former approach, a specific radiation distribution exists in the photoreactor, while in the latter approach, the photon emission rate is employed to derive an incidence model. Although incidence models are mathematically simple to implement, there is no way of using this approach without experimentally adjustable parameters. Therefore, this approach cannot be employed as a reasonable systematic method to design photoreactors. Different incidence models have been developed and used for photoreactor modeling including radial incidence model (Gaertner and Kent, 1958; Schechter and Wissler, 1960; Cassano and Smith, 1966, 1967; Cassano *et al*., 1968; Matsuura and Smith, 1970b, 1971; Santeralli and Smith, 1974; Dolan *et al*., 1965; Jacob and Dranoff 1969; Williams and Ragonese, 1970), partially diffuse model (Matsuura and Smith, 1970a), and diffuse incidence model (Jacob and Dranoff, 1969; Williams, 1978; Matsuura *et al*., 1969; Matsuura and Smith,

In emission model, a lamp is considered as an emitting line, a surface, or a volume source. Different emission models have been developed including line source with parallel plane emission model (Harris and Dranoff, 1965), line source with spherical emission model (Jacob and Dranoff, 1966, 1968, 1970; Jain *et al*., 1971; Dworking and Dranoff, 1978; Magelli and Santarelli, 1978; Pasquali and Santarelli, 1978), and line source with diffuse emission model (Akehata and Shirai, 1972). Line and surface models are classified into specular and diffuse emission models. In specular emission, the magnitude of the light intensity vector is not a function of the emission angle. Photoreactors equipped with mercury arc and neon lamps belong to this class, while fluorescent lamps, in which the magnitude of the light intensity vectors depend on the angle of the emission, fall into the diffuse emission. There are some great reviews in which developed models describing the light distribution in photoreactors are presented in details in the open literature (Alfano *et al*., 1986a,b;

small (less than 12%). The effect of diffusion was also neglected in their model.

profile of each compound inside the photoreactor.

describe the radiant energy field and to calculate the LVREA.

1970c; Harada *et al*., 1971; Roger and Villermaux, 1983).

Cassano *et al*., 1995; Alfano and Cassano, 2009).

pollutants are completely destroyed. Most AOPs are able to generate hydroxyl radicals. These hydroxyl radicals are active and powerful, capable of reacting with almost all types of organics, including non-biodegradable and recalcitrant compounds. These oxidizing hydroxyl radicals are initiated by photolysis, photocatalysis, sonolysis, radiolysis, and other AOPs alone or in combination in the presence of some reagents such as hydrogen peroxide (H2O2), ozone, and homogeneous or heterogeneous catalysts. Hydroxyl radicals are extremely powerful, short-lived oxidizing agent, and non-selective in nature and could react with a wide range of organic chemicals with reaction constant of several orders of magnitude higher than the reaction with molecular ozone under the same conditions. AOPs are used to convert toxic, non-biodegradable, inhibitory, and recalcitrant pollutants into simpler and less harmful intermediates, so they could be treated subsequently in biological processes. Due to the high operating and capital costs of AOPs, the complete mineralization of organic compounds using AOPs is practically impossible; therefore they are mainly combined with other processes such as biological systems to be cost-effective. With sufficient contact time and proper operating conditions and design, the mineralization efficiency of the AOPs is maximized by optimization of the processes in such a way that the total costs of the processes are minimized while the removal rates of organic pollutants are maximized.

Since conducting experiments is time-consuming and expensive or sometimes impossible to do, the modeling of the photoreactors is necessary. Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) is one of the numerical methods to solve and analyze the transport equations. CFD has been used recently in order to find the velocity, radiation intensity, pollutant concentration distribution inside the photoreacotrs (Mohajerani *et al*., 2010,2011; Qi *et al*., 2011; Duran *et al*., 2011a,b, 2010; Vincent *et al*., 2011; Denny *et al*., 2009,2010; Elyasi and Taghipour, 2006; Taghipour and Mohseni, 2005; Mohseni and Taghipour, 2004). In this chapter, the velocity distribution in ten different configurations of single lamp and multi-lamp photoreactors in both laminar and turbulent regimes are provided. Moreover, the light intensity distribution inside the photoreactors is also presented.

### **2. Photoreactor design**

The design and analysis of photochemical reactors have attracted researchers' interests for the past four decades. The main advantages of the photoreactors over the conventional thermal excitation reactors are their selectivity and low operating temperature. In spite of these advantages, photoreactors are not widely used in industrial scale. The use of a photoreactor results in higher product costs; therefore, the photochemical process is used when there are no other available feasible alternative conventional (thermal or catalytic) processes. Some other disadvantages such as size limitations, design and construction difficulties, and fouling on lamp walls have restricted industrial applications of these types of reactors.

Radiation field is the main characteristic of photoreactors determining the kinetics and the photoreactor performance. The photochemical reaction rate is proportional to the local volumetric rate of energy absorption (LVREA), an important parameter playing a crucial role in the photoreactor design. The LVREA depends on the radiation field presents within the photoreactor. The LVREA is a complex function of the lamp intensity, the concentration of absorbing species, the geometrical characteristics of the photoreactor system, and some other physicochemical properties. The light attenuation caused by the absorbing species

pollutants are completely destroyed. Most AOPs are able to generate hydroxyl radicals. These hydroxyl radicals are active and powerful, capable of reacting with almost all types of organics, including non-biodegradable and recalcitrant compounds. These oxidizing hydroxyl radicals are initiated by photolysis, photocatalysis, sonolysis, radiolysis, and other AOPs alone or in combination in the presence of some reagents such as hydrogen peroxide (H2O2), ozone, and homogeneous or heterogeneous catalysts. Hydroxyl radicals are extremely powerful, short-lived oxidizing agent, and non-selective in nature and could react with a wide range of organic chemicals with reaction constant of several orders of magnitude higher than the reaction with molecular ozone under the same conditions. AOPs are used to convert toxic, non-biodegradable, inhibitory, and recalcitrant pollutants into simpler and less harmful intermediates, so they could be treated subsequently in biological processes. Due to the high operating and capital costs of AOPs, the complete mineralization of organic compounds using AOPs is practically impossible; therefore they are mainly combined with other processes such as biological systems to be cost-effective. With sufficient contact time and proper operating conditions and design, the mineralization efficiency of the AOPs is maximized by optimization of the processes in such a way that the total costs of the processes are minimized while the removal rates of organic pollutants are

Since conducting experiments is time-consuming and expensive or sometimes impossible to do, the modeling of the photoreactors is necessary. Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) is one of the numerical methods to solve and analyze the transport equations. CFD has been used recently in order to find the velocity, radiation intensity, pollutant concentration distribution inside the photoreacotrs (Mohajerani *et al*., 2010,2011; Qi *et al*., 2011; Duran *et al*., 2011a,b, 2010; Vincent *et al*., 2011; Denny *et al*., 2009,2010; Elyasi and Taghipour, 2006; Taghipour and Mohseni, 2005; Mohseni and Taghipour, 2004). In this chapter, the velocity distribution in ten different configurations of single lamp and multi-lamp photoreactors in both laminar and turbulent regimes are provided. Moreover, the light intensity distribution

The design and analysis of photochemical reactors have attracted researchers' interests for the past four decades. The main advantages of the photoreactors over the conventional thermal excitation reactors are their selectivity and low operating temperature. In spite of these advantages, photoreactors are not widely used in industrial scale. The use of a photoreactor results in higher product costs; therefore, the photochemical process is used when there are no other available feasible alternative conventional (thermal or catalytic) processes. Some other disadvantages such as size limitations, design and construction difficulties, and fouling on lamp walls have restricted industrial applications of these types

Radiation field is the main characteristic of photoreactors determining the kinetics and the photoreactor performance. The photochemical reaction rate is proportional to the local volumetric rate of energy absorption (LVREA), an important parameter playing a crucial role in the photoreactor design. The LVREA depends on the radiation field presents within the photoreactor. The LVREA is a complex function of the lamp intensity, the concentration of absorbing species, the geometrical characteristics of the photoreactor system, and some other physicochemical properties. The light attenuation caused by the absorbing species

maximized.

of reactors.

inside the photoreactors is also presented.

**2. Photoreactor design** 

makes the LVREA non-uniform. A Photochemical reactor design requires the solution of momentum, energy, and mass balances. The expression for the conservation of momentum is similar to that of the conventional reactor. It is believed that light irradiation does not affect the photochemically reactive fluid flow. The mass balance or continuity equations for each compound in the system should be solved simultaneously to find the concentration profile of each compound inside the photoreactor.

The mass and energy conservation equations are directly related to the light irradiation. The energy balance can be divided into two parts: thermal and radiant energy balances. Although for isothermal photochemical reactions, thermal balances are negligible, a complete equation of change for energy balance is required for exothermic and endothermic reactions. The first step in the LVREA evaluation is to state a radiant energy balance at steady state condition in a homogeneous system. A radiation source model is also needed to be considered. Different source models have been developed during the past years to describe the radiant energy field and to calculate the LVREA.

Gaertner and Kent (1958) were among the first group that modeled photochemical reactions. They studied the photolysis of aqueous uranyl oxalate in an annular tubular reactor. The results of their experiments were correlated with a remarkable accuracy by assuming that the rate of photolysis is proportional to the residence time multiplied by the intensity of radiation at a particular radial position. They also proposed a mathematical model without considering the reactant concentration. Therefore, their model was applicable when the conversion was small (less than 12%). The effect of diffusion was also neglected in their model.

The modeling of radiation field is classified into two categories: incidence and emission models. In the former approach, a specific radiation distribution exists in the photoreactor, while in the latter approach, the photon emission rate is employed to derive an incidence model. Although incidence models are mathematically simple to implement, there is no way of using this approach without experimentally adjustable parameters. Therefore, this approach cannot be employed as a reasonable systematic method to design photoreactors. Different incidence models have been developed and used for photoreactor modeling including radial incidence model (Gaertner and Kent, 1958; Schechter and Wissler, 1960; Cassano and Smith, 1966, 1967; Cassano *et al*., 1968; Matsuura and Smith, 1970b, 1971; Santeralli and Smith, 1974; Dolan *et al*., 1965; Jacob and Dranoff 1969; Williams and Ragonese, 1970), partially diffuse model (Matsuura and Smith, 1970a), and diffuse incidence model (Jacob and Dranoff, 1969; Williams, 1978; Matsuura *et al*., 1969; Matsuura and Smith, 1970c; Harada *et al*., 1971; Roger and Villermaux, 1983).

In emission model, a lamp is considered as an emitting line, a surface, or a volume source. Different emission models have been developed including line source with parallel plane emission model (Harris and Dranoff, 1965), line source with spherical emission model (Jacob and Dranoff, 1966, 1968, 1970; Jain *et al*., 1971; Dworking and Dranoff, 1978; Magelli and Santarelli, 1978; Pasquali and Santarelli, 1978), and line source with diffuse emission model (Akehata and Shirai, 1972). Line and surface models are classified into specular and diffuse emission models. In specular emission, the magnitude of the light intensity vector is not a function of the emission angle. Photoreactors equipped with mercury arc and neon lamps belong to this class, while fluorescent lamps, in which the magnitude of the light intensity vectors depend on the angle of the emission, fall into the diffuse emission. There are some great reviews in which developed models describing the light distribution in photoreactors are presented in details in the open literature (Alfano *et al*., 1986a,b; Cassano *et al*., 1995; Alfano and Cassano, 2009).

Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) Modeling of Photochemical Reactors 159

In spherical coordinates, the spectral incident radiation could be written as follows (Cassano

Equation (3) is valid for the monochromatic radiation while for the polychromatic radiation,

sin

 

*G I d d dv*

The local volumetric rate of energy absorption (LVREA), the absorbed intensity, is the product of the spectral specific intensity and the absorption coefficient. The rate of a photochemical reaction is the product of the LVREA and the quantum yield. The quantum yield indicates the number of moles of chemicals reacted per moles of photons absorbed.

The photon balance in a photochemical reactor can be written as follows (Ozisik, 1973;

*of v photonsin leavingthe volume to emission absorption, in – scattering,* 

The right hand side of Equation (5) could be divided into two sources (emission and inscattering) and two sink (absorption and out-scattering) terms, therefore, the photon balance

> <sup>1</sup> . *vv vv v em in s ab out s*

The absorption and emission terms are useful for both homogeneous and heterogeneous photochemical reactors. The loss of photons due to the absorption could be calculated using

, ( ,) ( , ,) *<sup>v</sup>*

where *Kv* is the absorption coefficient, which shows the fraction of the incident radiation that is absorbed by the molecule per unit length along the path of the beam. The emission term highly depends on temperature as shown in Equation (8). Photolytic and photocatalytic reactors usually operate at low temperatures, therefore, this term can be neglected for

, , ( ,) ( ,) *<sup>v</sup>*

*c t* 

,, ,, ,

*I WW WW*

*timerateof change net flux of v photons net gainof v photons owning*

*the volume*

, ,

(6)

*ab W K xtI x t v v* (7)

*em W K xtI Txt v vb* (8)

 

(3)

(4)

(5)

2 2

 

an extra integration is required as follows (Cassano *et al*., 1995):

**4. Photon transport equation** 

Cassano *et al*., 1995; Alfano and Cassano, 2008):

*I*

the following expression (Cassano *et al*., 1995):

photoreactor modeling:

 

222

 

*v v v v*

, ,

,

*v*

equation could be written as follows (Cassano *et al*., 1995):

*the volume acrossthesurface A and out – scattering in* 

111

 

1 1 *G I dd v v* sin

*et al*., 1995):

Photoreactors are generally grouped into homogeneous and heterogeneous classes. Homogeneous reactors operate in a single phase, gas or liquid, in air and water purification systems. In heterogeneous photoreactors, a photocatalyst is added to the system in order to increase the process efficiency. Heterogeneous photoreactors are subcategorized into attached (immobilized) or suspended (slurry) modes. Most of the early photoreactors have employed a titanium dioxide (TiO2) suspension because it offers a high surface area for the reactions and almost no mass transfer limitation exists in the system. In slurry photoreactors, a recovery step is necessary to separate, regenerate, and reuse the photocatalyst. The efficiency of an immobilized system is less than that of the slurry photoreactor but the photocatalyst is continuously used for a longer period of time.

The disadvantages of the slurry photocatalysis include 1) difficulty and time consuming process of separation or filtration of the photocatalyst after the photocatalytic process; 2) particle aggregation and agglomeration at high photocatalyst concentration; and 3) difficulty of using the suspended photocatalyst in continuous processes (Sopyan *et al*., 1996). To overcome these drawbacks, immobilized photocatalysts are usually recommended. Photocatalysts could be immobilized on various supports such as glasses (Sabate *et al*., 1992; Kim *et al*., 1995; Fernandez *et al*., 1995; Wang *et al*., 1998; Piscopo *et al*., 2000; Sakthivel *et al*., 2002; Neti *et al*., 2010), tellerette packings (Mehrvar *et al*., 2002), silica (Van Grieken *et al*., 2002; Ding *et al*., 2001; Xu *et al*., 1999; Alemany *et al*., 1997; López-Muñoz *et al*., 2005; Marugán *et al*., 2006), polymers (Kasanen *et al*., 2009), and clays (An *et al*., 2008).

The analysis and design of photochemical reactors have received increasing interests in chemical engineering recently. The photochemical reactors could be used to either produce and synthesize chemicals or destroy water and wastewater contaminants. The photochemical reactors are one of the least well known industrial reactors. As mentioned earlier, the main advantages of the photochemical reactors over the conventional ones are their selectivity and low reaction temperature. These advantages have become the subject of several reviews (Doede and Walker, 1955; Marcus *et al*., 1962; Cassano *et al*., 1967; Shirotsuka and Nishiumi, 1971; Roger and Villermaux, 1979).

#### **3. Radiation field properties**

A bundle of rays with a specific energy carrying photons is called spectral specific intensity and radiance. This parameter plays a detrimental role in radiation field inside a photoreactor. The spectral specific intensity is defined as the total amount of radiative energy passing through a unit area perpendicular to the direction of propagation, per unit solid angle about the direction, per unit frequency, and per unit time. Therefore, the spectral specific intensity unit is Einstein per square meter per stradian, per unit frequency, and per second (Cassano *et al*., 1995):

$$I\_v(\mathbf{x}, \Omega, t, \upsilon) = \lim\_{\substack{dA, d\Omega, dt, dv \to 0}} \left( \frac{dE\_v}{dA \cos \theta d\Omega dt dv} \right) \tag{1}$$

Another important photochemical property is the spectral incident radiation that could be calculated by integrating the spectral specific intensity over the entire photoreactor volume as follows:

$$G\_v = \int\_{\Omega} I\_v d\Omega \tag{2}$$

In spherical coordinates, the spectral incident radiation could be written as follows (Cassano *et al*., 1995):

$$G\_v = \int\_{\theta\_1}^{\theta\_2} \int I\_v \sin \theta d\phi d\theta \tag{3}$$

Equation (3) is valid for the monochromatic radiation while for the polychromatic radiation, an extra integration is required as follows (Cassano *et al*., 1995):

$$G\_{\upsilon} = \int\_{v\_1}^{v\_2} \int\_{\theta\_1}^{\theta\_2} I\_{\upsilon} \sin \theta d\phi d\theta d\upsilon \tag{4}$$

The local volumetric rate of energy absorption (LVREA), the absorbed intensity, is the product of the spectral specific intensity and the absorption coefficient. The rate of a photochemical reaction is the product of the LVREA and the quantum yield. The quantum yield indicates the number of moles of chemicals reacted per moles of photons absorbed.

#### **4. Photon transport equation**

158 Applied Computational Fluid Dynamics

Photoreactors are generally grouped into homogeneous and heterogeneous classes. Homogeneous reactors operate in a single phase, gas or liquid, in air and water purification systems. In heterogeneous photoreactors, a photocatalyst is added to the system in order to increase the process efficiency. Heterogeneous photoreactors are subcategorized into attached (immobilized) or suspended (slurry) modes. Most of the early photoreactors have employed a titanium dioxide (TiO2) suspension because it offers a high surface area for the reactions and almost no mass transfer limitation exists in the system. In slurry photoreactors, a recovery step is necessary to separate, regenerate, and reuse the photocatalyst. The efficiency of an immobilized system is less than that of the slurry

photoreactor but the photocatalyst is continuously used for a longer period of time.

Marugán *et al*., 2006), polymers (Kasanen *et al*., 2009), and clays (An *et al*., 2008).

and Nishiumi, 1971; Roger and Villermaux, 1979).

**3. Radiation field properties** 

second (Cassano *et al*., 1995):

as follows:

The disadvantages of the slurry photocatalysis include 1) difficulty and time consuming process of separation or filtration of the photocatalyst after the photocatalytic process; 2) particle aggregation and agglomeration at high photocatalyst concentration; and 3) difficulty of using the suspended photocatalyst in continuous processes (Sopyan *et al*., 1996). To overcome these drawbacks, immobilized photocatalysts are usually recommended. Photocatalysts could be immobilized on various supports such as glasses (Sabate *et al*., 1992; Kim *et al*., 1995; Fernandez *et al*., 1995; Wang *et al*., 1998; Piscopo *et al*., 2000; Sakthivel *et al*., 2002; Neti *et al*., 2010), tellerette packings (Mehrvar *et al*., 2002), silica (Van Grieken *et al*., 2002; Ding *et al*., 2001; Xu *et al*., 1999; Alemany *et al*., 1997; López-Muñoz *et al*., 2005;

The analysis and design of photochemical reactors have received increasing interests in chemical engineering recently. The photochemical reactors could be used to either produce and synthesize chemicals or destroy water and wastewater contaminants. The photochemical reactors are one of the least well known industrial reactors. As mentioned earlier, the main advantages of the photochemical reactors over the conventional ones are their selectivity and low reaction temperature. These advantages have become the subject of several reviews (Doede and Walker, 1955; Marcus *et al*., 1962; Cassano *et al*., 1967; Shirotsuka

A bundle of rays with a specific energy carrying photons is called spectral specific intensity and radiance. This parameter plays a detrimental role in radiation field inside a photoreactor. The spectral specific intensity is defined as the total amount of radiative energy passing through a unit area perpendicular to the direction of propagation, per unit solid angle about the direction, per unit frequency, and per unit time. Therefore, the spectral specific intensity unit is Einstein per square meter per stradian, per unit frequency, and per

, ,, 0

*G Id v v* 

Another important photochemical property is the spectral incident radiation that could be calculated by integrating the spectral specific intensity over the entire photoreactor volume

*<sup>v</sup> <sup>v</sup> dA d dt dv dE I x tv*

cos

(2)

(1)

 *dA d dtdv* 

( , , , ) lim

The photon balance in a photochemical reactor can be written as follows (Ozisik, 1973; Cassano *et al*., 1995; Alfano and Cassano, 2008):

$$
\begin{bmatrix}
\text{time rate of change} \\
\text{of } \Omega, \upsilon \text{ photons in} \\
\text{the volume}
\end{bmatrix} + \begin{bmatrix}
\text{net flux of } \Omega, \upsilon \text{ photons} \\
\text{learning the volume} \\
\text{cross the surface}
\ A \\
\end{bmatrix} = \begin{bmatrix}
\text{net gain of } \Omega, \upsilon \text{ photons owning} \\
\text{to emission, absorption, in} - \text{scattering} \\
\text{and out} - \text{scattering in the volume}
\end{bmatrix} \tag{5}
$$

The right hand side of Equation (5) could be divided into two sources (emission and inscattering) and two sink (absorption and out-scattering) terms, therefore, the photon balance equation could be written as follows (Cassano *et al*., 1995):

$$\frac{1}{c}\frac{\partial I\_{\Omega,v}}{\partial t} + \nabla. \left( I\_{\Omega,v} \Omega \right) = \left( \left. \mathcal{W}\_{\Omega,v}^{em} + \mathcal{W}\_{\Omega,v}^{im-s} \right\rangle - \left( \left. \mathcal{W}\_{\Omega,v}^{ab} + \mathcal{W}\_{\Omega,v}^{out-s} \right\rangle \right) \tag{6}$$

The absorption and emission terms are useful for both homogeneous and heterogeneous photochemical reactors. The loss of photons due to the absorption could be calculated using the following expression (Cassano *et al*., 1995):

$$\mathcal{W}\_{\alpha,v}^{\text{ab}} = \mathcal{K}\_v(\mathbf{x}, t) I\_v(\mathbf{x}, \Omega, t) \tag{7}$$

where *Kv* is the absorption coefficient, which shows the fraction of the incident radiation that is absorbed by the molecule per unit length along the path of the beam. The emission term highly depends on temperature as shown in Equation (8). Photolytic and photocatalytic reactors usually operate at low temperatures, therefore, this term can be neglected for photoreactor modeling:

$$\mathcal{W}\_{\alpha,v}^{\text{em}} = \mathcal{K}\_v(\mathbf{x}, t) I\_{v,h} \boxed{T(\mathbf{x}, t)} \tag{8}$$

Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) Modeling of Photochemical Reactors 161

The momentum balance equations are applied for two flow regimes: the laminar and turbulent flow for these two single and multi-lamp photoreactors. The fluid flow in laminar regime is described by Navier-Stokes equation. For the case of the turbulent flow, different known models have been developed. Among them, the *k-ε* model has shown a great attraction to researchers for modeling turbulent flows. The *k-ε* model is a two-equation model in which fluctuating velocities and Reynolds stresses have been related to the properties of the turbulent flow itself such as *k* and *ε*. These two fluid flow properties are the turbulent kinetic energy per unit mass of the fluctuating components (*k*) and the turbulent dissipation rate of the kinetic energy (*ε*), respectively. The continuity equation and steady state momentum balances for an

> *VV P*

turbulent viscosities, respectively. *F* is also the external force on the control volume.

only on *k* and *ε* at that point according to the following expression (Bird *et al*., 2002):

*T*

 *C* 

2

*k C k <sup>k</sup> V k kC VV* 

estimation that fits reasonably well with the experimental data (Wilkes, 2005):

 

 

 

 

 

*<sup>V</sup>* 0 (11)

(13)

*k uvw* (14)

are the fluctuating velocities in *x*, *y*, and *z* directions, respectively.

<sup>2</sup> <sup>2</sup> <sup>2</sup> *<sup>T</sup>*

(15)

(16)

*<sup>k</sup>*

*<sup>T</sup> VV F* (12)

*<sup>T</sup>* are the dynamic and kinematic

*k*

 

(17)

*<sup>T</sup>*) at any point should depend

*<sup>T</sup>*

2

*k*

where *Cµ* is an adjustable model constant. The turbulent kinetic energy (*k*) is the average kinetic energy per unit mass of eddies in the turbulent flow that is produced by the buoyant thermal and mechanically generated eddies based on the following equation (Bird *et al*., 2002):

<sup>1</sup> 22 2

The steady state equations for the turbulent kinetic energy (*k*) and the turbulent dissipation

1 2 <sup>2</sup> <sup>2</sup> <sup>2</sup> *C k <sup>T</sup> <sup>V</sup> CCk V V C*

All five model constants have been selected as follows such that the *k-ε* model gives an

1 2 0.09; 1.44; 1.92; 1.0; and 1.3 *CC Cµ*

 

 

 

, *V*, and *P*, represent the density, time-averaged turbulent velocity, and

**6. Momentum balance and computational fluid dynamics** 

incompressible fluid are described by following equations (Bird *et al*., 2002):

time-averaged pressure, respectively. The *µ* and

The *k-ε* model depicts that the kinematic turbulent viscosity (

In these equations,

Parameters *u*

, *v*, and *w*

rate (*ε*) are as follows (Wilkes, 2005):

> 

The following two equations account for the gain and loss of photons due to in-scattering and out-scattering, respectively (Cassano *et al*., 1995). In homogeneous photoreactors, these two terms (in-scattering and out-scattering) are neglected due to the absence of semiconductors:

$$\mathcal{W}^{s-in}\_{\alpha\_{\mathcal{I}}} = \frac{1}{4\pi} \int\_{\Omega'=4\pi} \int\_{v'=0}^{v} \sigma\_v(\mathbf{x}, t) p\left(v' \to v, \Omega' \to \Omega\right) I\_{v'}(\mathbf{x}, \Omega', t) dv' d\Omega' \tag{9}$$

$$\mathcal{W}^{s-out}\_{\alpha,v} = \sigma\_v(\mathbf{x}, t) I\_v\left(\mathbf{x}, \Omega, t\right) \tag{10}$$

### **5. Principles of photocatalysis**

The photocatalytic process in a heterogeneous photoreactor takes place in the presence of a semiconductor photocatalyst, in which the whole process is divided into five stages as follows (Herrmann, 1999; Fogler, 1998; Qi *et al*., 2011):


The most common photocatalyst is titanium dioxide (TiO2) which catalyzes the reaction as a result of the interaction of the electrons and holes generated during the photocatalytic process. Titanium dioxide has a diverse range of applications especially in paint and coatings, plastics, sunscreens, ointments, and toothpaste. The whiteness, brightness, and opacity of titanium dioxide make the powder as a good option for a wide range of applications. Titanium dioxide exists in three different crystalline polymorphs: rutile, anatase, and brookite. TiO2 powders could be employed in solar and UV irradiation systems (photoreactors) because this semiconductor has a high transparency to visible light, high refractive index, and low absorption coefficient.

Wide range of metal oxides and sulfides have been used as photocatalysts including ZnO (Daneshvar *et al*., 2004; Sakthivel *et al*., 2003; Kormann *et al*., 1988; Khodj *et al*., 2001; Gouvêa *et al*., 2000; Lizama *et al*., 2002; Kansal *et al*., 2007; Chakrabarti and Dutta, 2004), WO3 (Waldner *et al*., 2007; Sayama *et al*., 2010; Saepurahmanet *et al*., 2010; Cao *et al*., 2011), WS2 (Jing and Guo, 2007), Fe2O3 (Chen *et al*., 2001; Bandara *et al*., 2001; Pal and Sharon, 1998), V2O5 (Akbarzadeh *et al*., 2010; Teramura *et al*., 2004a,b), CeO2 (Lin and Yu, 1998; Coronado *et al*., 2002; Ji *et al*., 2009; Song *et al*., 2007), CdS (Bessekhouad *et al*., 2004; Reuterġardh and Langphasuk, 1997; Tang and Huang, 1995), ZnS (Torres-Martínez *et al*., 2001), and CuO (Lim and Kim, 2004; Sathishkumar *et al*., 2011; Nezamzadeh-Ejheieg and Hushmandrad, 2010).

The light intensity in homogeneous and heterogeneous photoreactors determines the LVREA which is proportional to the rate of photochemical reaction. The light distribution in homogeneous photoreactors is well established. However, the heterogeneous photoreactor containing semiconductor particles makes the photoreactor modeling extremely difficult. In homogeneous photoreactors, the main solution parameter is the absorption coefficient, while in heterogeneous photoreactors, the absorption and scattering coefficients must be determined simultaneously.

The following two equations account for the gain and loss of photons due to in-scattering and out-scattering, respectively (Cassano *et al*., 1995). In homogeneous photoreactors, these two terms (in-scattering and out-scattering) are neglected due to the absence of

<sup>1</sup> , , ( , ,) <sup>4</sup> *<sup>v</sup>*

*W x t p v v I x t dv d*

*v v*

 , , ,, *<sup>v</sup> s out W xt I x t v v*

The photocatalytic process in a heterogeneous photoreactor takes place in the presence of a semiconductor photocatalyst, in which the whole process is divided into five stages as

Mass transfer of the organic compounds in the liquid phase to the photocatalyst surface;

The most common photocatalyst is titanium dioxide (TiO2) which catalyzes the reaction as a result of the interaction of the electrons and holes generated during the photocatalytic process. Titanium dioxide has a diverse range of applications especially in paint and coatings, plastics, sunscreens, ointments, and toothpaste. The whiteness, brightness, and opacity of titanium dioxide make the powder as a good option for a wide range of applications. Titanium dioxide exists in three different crystalline polymorphs: rutile, anatase, and brookite. TiO2 powders could be employed in solar and UV irradiation systems (photoreactors) because this semiconductor has a high transparency to visible light, high

Wide range of metal oxides and sulfides have been used as photocatalysts including ZnO (Daneshvar *et al*., 2004; Sakthivel *et al*., 2003; Kormann *et al*., 1988; Khodj *et al*., 2001; Gouvêa *et al*., 2000; Lizama *et al*., 2002; Kansal *et al*., 2007; Chakrabarti and Dutta, 2004), WO3 (Waldner *et al*., 2007; Sayama *et al*., 2010; Saepurahmanet *et al*., 2010; Cao *et al*., 2011), WS2 (Jing and Guo, 2007), Fe2O3 (Chen *et al*., 2001; Bandara *et al*., 2001; Pal and Sharon, 1998), V2O5 (Akbarzadeh *et al*., 2010; Teramura *et al*., 2004a,b), CeO2 (Lin and Yu, 1998; Coronado *et al*., 2002; Ji *et al*., 2009; Song *et al*., 2007), CdS (Bessekhouad *et al*., 2004; Reuterġardh and Langphasuk, 1997; Tang and Huang, 1995), ZnS (Torres-Martínez *et al*., 2001), and CuO (Lim and Kim, 2004; Sathishkumar *et al*., 2011; Nezamzadeh-Ejheieg and

The light intensity in homogeneous and heterogeneous photoreactors determines the LVREA which is proportional to the rate of photochemical reaction. The light distribution in homogeneous photoreactors is well established. However, the heterogeneous photoreactor containing semiconductor particles makes the photoreactor modeling extremely difficult. In homogeneous photoreactors, the main solution parameter is the absorption coefficient, while in heterogeneous photoreactors, the absorption and scattering coefficients must be

Adsorption of the pollutants onto the photoactivated semiconductor surface;

Mass transfer of the product(s) from the interface region to the bulk solution.

Desorption of the product(s) from the photocatalyst surface; and

(9)

(10)

,

4 0

*v*

follows (Herrmann, 1999; Fogler, 1998; Qi *et al*., 2011):

Heterogeneous photocatalytic reaction;

refractive index, and low absorption coefficient.

Hushmandrad, 2010).

determined simultaneously.

semiconductors:

*s in*

**5. Principles of photocatalysis** 

#### **6. Momentum balance and computational fluid dynamics**

The momentum balance equations are applied for two flow regimes: the laminar and turbulent flow for these two single and multi-lamp photoreactors. The fluid flow in laminar regime is described by Navier-Stokes equation. For the case of the turbulent flow, different known models have been developed. Among them, the *k-ε* model has shown a great attraction to researchers for modeling turbulent flows. The *k-ε* model is a two-equation model in which fluctuating velocities and Reynolds stresses have been related to the properties of the turbulent flow itself such as *k* and *ε*. These two fluid flow properties are the turbulent kinetic energy per unit mass of the fluctuating components (*k*) and the turbulent dissipation rate of the kinetic energy (*ε*), respectively. The continuity equation and steady state momentum balances for an incompressible fluid are described by following equations (Bird *et al*., 2002):

$$\nabla^\bullet V = 0\tag{11}$$

$$
\rho \rho V^\* \nabla V = -\nabla P + \nabla^\* \left( \mu + \rho \eta\_T \right) \left( \nabla V + \left( \nabla V \right)^T \right) + F \tag{12}
$$

In these equations, , *V*, and *P*, represent the density, time-averaged turbulent velocity, and time-averaged pressure, respectively. The *µ* and *<sup>T</sup>* are the dynamic and kinematic turbulent viscosities, respectively. *F* is also the external force on the control volume.

The *k-ε* model depicts that the kinematic turbulent viscosity (*<sup>T</sup>*) at any point should depend only on *k* and *ε* at that point according to the following expression (Bird *et al*., 2002):

$$
\eta\_T = \mathcal{C}\_{\mu} \frac{k^2}{\varepsilon} \tag{13}
$$

where *Cµ* is an adjustable model constant. The turbulent kinetic energy (*k*) is the average kinetic energy per unit mass of eddies in the turbulent flow that is produced by the buoyant thermal and mechanically generated eddies based on the following equation (Bird *et al*., 2002):

$$k = \frac{1}{2} \left( \overline{\mu'^2} + \overline{v'^2} + \overline{w'^2} \right) \tag{14}$$

Parameters *u*, *v*, and *w* are the fluctuating velocities in *x*, *y*, and *z* directions, respectively. The steady state equations for the turbulent kinetic energy (*k*) and the turbulent dissipation rate (*ε*) are as follows (Wilkes, 2005):

$$
\rho \rho V \,^\bullet \nabla k = \nabla \cdot \left[ \left( \mu + \rho \frac{\mathbb{C}\_{\mu} k^2}{\sigma\_k \varepsilon} \right) \nabla k \right] + \rho \mathbb{C}\_{\mu} \frac{k^2}{\varepsilon} \left( \nabla V + \left( \nabla V \right)^T \right)^2 - \rho \varepsilon \tag{15}
$$

$$\rho \rho V \,^\bullet \nabla \varepsilon = \nabla \cdot \left[ \left( \mu + \rho \frac{\mathbf{C}\_{\mu} k^2}{\sigma\_{\varepsilon} \varepsilon} \right) \nabla \varepsilon \right] + \rho \mathbf{C}\_{\varepsilon\_1} \mathbf{C}\_{\mu} k \left( \nabla V + \left( \nabla V \right)^T \right)^2 - \rho \mathbf{C}\_{\varepsilon\_2} \frac{\varepsilon^2}{k} \tag{16}$$

All five model constants have been selected as follows such that the *k-ε* model gives an estimation that fits reasonably well with the experimental data (Wilkes, 2005):

$$\mathbf{C}\_{\mu} = \text{ 0.09}; \qquad \mathbf{C}\_{\varepsilon 1} = \mathbf{1.44}; \qquad \mathbf{C}\_{\varepsilon 2} = \mathbf{1.92}; \qquad \sigma\_{k} = \mathbf{1.0}; \quad \text{and} \qquad \sigma\_{\varepsilon} = \mathbf{1.3} \tag{\text{l}\mathcal{T}}$$

Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) Modeling of Photochemical Reactors 163

Annular photoreactors are the most common continuous photoreactors. These types of photoreactors contain one or more UV lamps with quartz sleeve around them. In this study, 10 different photoreactor configurations were considered for modeling purposes as listed below: a. Single lamp photoreactor, the UV lamp is located at the center of the photoreactor; b. Two lamp photoreactor, each of them located at 0.5*R* from the center line of the

c. Two lamp photoreactor, each of them located at 0.25*R* from the center line of the

d. Two lamp photoreactor, each of them located at 0.75*R* from the center line of the

e. Four lamp photoreactor, each of them located 0.5*R* from the center line of the

f. Four lamp photoreactor, each of them located 0.25*R* from the center line of the

g. Four lamp photoreactor, each of them located 0.75*R* from the center line of the

h. Four lamp photoreactor, two of them at 0.5*R* and two at 0.25*R* from the center line of the

i. Four lamp photoreactor, two of them at 0.5*R* and two at 0.75*R* from the center line of the

j. Four lamp photoreactor, two of them at 0.25*R* and two at 0.75*R* from the center line of

In all cases, the diameter of the quartz sleeve is assumed to be 15 mm with the photoreactor radius (*R*) of 200 mm. The cross sections of these photoreactors (a to j) are shown in Figures

The flow domains inside these photoreactors were simulated both in laminar and turbulent regimes. The inlet velocities for laminar and turbulent regimes were assumed to be 0.01 and 1 ms-1, respectively. In laminar flow, the 3D Navier-Stokes equations were solved in cylindrical coordinates for single lamp and Cartesian coordinates for multilamp photoreactors. In turbulent regime, the *k-ε* turbulent model was used. The velocity field determination is important in the photoreactor design. The local velocity determines the residence time of the solution at a specific point. As mentioned earlier, the radiation intensity inside the photoreactor is highly non-uniform; therefore, there must be a trade-off between the residence time and the radiation intensity received at particular location. Figures 1 and 2 depict the velocity distributions at the outlet of the photoreactors in turbulent and laminar regimes, respectively. From these two figures, three distinct regions could be considered: the region around the UV lamp(s), the region around the photoreactor wall, and the remaining parts. A lower velocity is observed around the UV lamps due to the no-slip boundary condition; therefore, a higher residence time is obtained near the UV lamps. On the other hand, around the UV lamp, a higher LVREA exist. Both higher residence time and greater radiation intensity result in a higher degradation of pollutants in water. The region near the photoreactor wall also has lower velocity and higher residence time, but the LVREA in this region is the lowest compared to those of the other regions. The light intensity was also simulated for these ten photoreactors as shown in Figure 3. In multilamp photoreactors, the light intensity of UV lamps could provide a synergetic effect depending on their location. Although closer UV lamps (in four lamp photoreactor) provide

**7. Case study** 

photoreactor;

photoreactor;

photoreactor;

photoreactor;

photoreactor;

photoreactor;

photoreactor;

photoreactor; and

the photoreactor.

1, 2, and 3.

Equations (15) and (16) along with continuity and momentum Equations (11) and (12) should be solved simultaneously. Boundary conditions for the momentum balance are as follows: *Inlet of the photoreactor:* The inflow velocity is specified by the ratio of the volumetric flow rate to the surface area. The *k* and *ε* are also calculated as follows:

$$k = \left(\frac{3I\_T}{2}\right) \left(\overline{V}^2\right); \quad \varepsilon = C\_\mu \frac{\left[\frac{3I\_T}{2} \left(\overline{V}^2\right)\right]^{1.5}}{L\_T};\tag{18}$$

where *IT* and *LT* are the turbulent intensity scale (initial turbulence intensity) and turbulent length scale (eddy length scale). Their magnitudes could be calculated by Equations (19) and (20), respectively (Wilkes, 2005):

$$I\_T = 0.16 \text{Re}^{\cdot 1/8} \tag{19}$$

$$L\_T = 0.07L\tag{20}$$

*Outlet of the photoreactor*: A normal flow is assumed so that the normal stress in the outlet is zero. Therefore, the gradient of *k* and *ε* are also calculated as follows (Wilkes, 2005):

$$
\nabla k = 0 \quad ; \qquad \nabla \varepsilon = 0 \tag{21}
$$

*Walls of the photoreactor:* No slip boundary condition could be assumed for the photoreactors and all the walls of the lamps. However, the logarithmic wall function is used for walls as a modification of the *k-ε* model. The boundary conditions for the *k-ε* model at a no-slip wall are obvious, but the near-wall behavior of the model, especially the *ε*-equation, is not appropriate. Therefore, the model produces poor results when integrated to the wall without modification. In fact, the integration of the *k-ε* model through the near-wall region and application of the noslip conditions yield unsatisfactory results. Therefore, the logarithmic wall function is used as the boundary condition on the walls of the photoreactor and lamps. In the near-wall region, therefore, the equation is solved for the first grid node away from the wall. The logarithmic wall function for a smooth pipe, therefore, is as follows (Wilkes, 2005):

$$\begin{aligned} \mu\_z^+ &= 5.5 + 2.5 \ln y^+ \\ &\quad \text{where} \\ y^+ &= \frac{y \sqrt{\tau\_w / \rho}}{\mu / \rho} \end{aligned} \tag{22}$$
 
$$y^+ = \frac{y \sqrt{\tau\_w / \rho}}{\mu / \rho} \qquad \text{and} \qquad \mu\_z^+ = \frac{\overline{\mu\_z}}{\sqrt{\tau\_w / \rho}}$$

in which *y+*, *uz <sup>+</sup>*, and *τw* are the dimensionless distance from the wall, the dimensionless velocity, and the wall shear stress, respectively. The *y* and *uz* are the distance from the wall and time-averaged axial velocity, respectively.

Simultaneous solution of Equations (11), (12), (15), and (16) as well as applying boundary conditions give various flow characteristics such as velocity distribution, minimum and maximum velocities, turbulent kinetic viscosity, turbulent kinetic energy, turbulent dissipation rate distribution, and vorticity. Equations (10) to (21) are applicable to both single and multi-lamp photoreactors.

### **7. Case study**

162 Applied Computational Fluid Dynamics

Equations (15) and (16) along with continuity and momentum Equations (11) and (12) should be solved simultaneously. Boundary conditions for the momentum balance are as follows: *Inlet of the photoreactor:* The inflow velocity is specified by the ratio of the volumetric flow

<sup>2</sup> <sup>2</sup> 0.75

3 2

where *IT* and *LT* are the turbulent intensity scale (initial turbulence intensity) and turbulent length scale (eddy length scale). Their magnitudes could be calculated by Equations (19) and

*Outlet of the photoreactor*: A normal flow is assumed so that the normal stress in the outlet is

*k* 0; 0

*Walls of the photoreactor:* No slip boundary condition could be assumed for the photoreactors and all the walls of the lamps. However, the logarithmic wall function is used for walls as a modification of the *k-ε* model. The boundary conditions for the *k-ε* model at a no-slip wall are obvious, but the near-wall behavior of the model, especially the *ε*-equation, is not appropriate. Therefore, the model produces poor results when integrated to the wall without modification. In fact, the integration of the *k-ε* model through the near-wall region and application of the noslip conditions yield unsatisfactory results. Therefore, the logarithmic wall function is used as the boundary condition on the walls of the photoreactor and lamps. In the near-wall region, therefore, the equation is solved for the first grid node away from the wall. The logarithmic

/ /

*<sup>+</sup>*, and *τw* are the dimensionless distance from the wall, the dimensionless

*w*

*<sup>w</sup> <sup>z</sup> <sup>z</sup>*

*where y u*

velocity, and the wall shear stress, respectively. The *y* and *uz* are the distance from the wall

Simultaneous solution of Equations (11), (12), (15), and (16) as well as applying boundary conditions give various flow characteristics such as velocity distribution, minimum and maximum velocities, turbulent kinetic viscosity, turbulent kinetic energy, turbulent dissipation rate distribution, and vorticity. Equations (10) to (21) are applicable to both

zero. Therefore, the gradient of *k* and *ε* are also calculated as follows (Wilkes, 2005):

wall function for a smooth pipe, therefore, is as follows (Wilkes, 2005):

*u y*

 

 

*z*

and time-averaged axial velocity, respectively.

single and multi-lamp photoreactors.

in which *y+*, *uz*

5.5 2.5ln

/

*y and u*

*-1 / 8*

1.5 <sup>2</sup> <sup>2</sup>

; (18)

*T*

*TI = 0.16Re* (19)

0.07 *L L <sup>T</sup>* (20)

(21)

(22)

*L*

3

*T*

*<sup>I</sup> <sup>V</sup>*

rate to the surface area. The *k* and *ε* are also calculated as follows:

*T*

(20), respectively (Wilkes, 2005):

; <sup>2</sup>

*<sup>I</sup> k VC*

Annular photoreactors are the most common continuous photoreactors. These types of photoreactors contain one or more UV lamps with quartz sleeve around them. In this study, 10 different photoreactor configurations were considered for modeling purposes as listed below:


In all cases, the diameter of the quartz sleeve is assumed to be 15 mm with the photoreactor radius (*R*) of 200 mm. The cross sections of these photoreactors (a to j) are shown in Figures 1, 2, and 3.

The flow domains inside these photoreactors were simulated both in laminar and turbulent regimes. The inlet velocities for laminar and turbulent regimes were assumed to be 0.01 and 1 ms-1, respectively. In laminar flow, the 3D Navier-Stokes equations were solved in cylindrical coordinates for single lamp and Cartesian coordinates for multilamp photoreactors. In turbulent regime, the *k-ε* turbulent model was used. The velocity field determination is important in the photoreactor design. The local velocity determines the residence time of the solution at a specific point. As mentioned earlier, the radiation intensity inside the photoreactor is highly non-uniform; therefore, there must be a trade-off between the residence time and the radiation intensity received at particular location.

Figures 1 and 2 depict the velocity distributions at the outlet of the photoreactors in turbulent and laminar regimes, respectively. From these two figures, three distinct regions could be considered: the region around the UV lamp(s), the region around the photoreactor wall, and the remaining parts. A lower velocity is observed around the UV lamps due to the no-slip boundary condition; therefore, a higher residence time is obtained near the UV lamps. On the other hand, around the UV lamp, a higher LVREA exist. Both higher residence time and greater radiation intensity result in a higher degradation of pollutants in water. The region near the photoreactor wall also has lower velocity and higher residence time, but the LVREA in this region is the lowest compared to those of the other regions. The light intensity was also simulated for these ten photoreactors as shown in Figure 3. In multilamp photoreactors, the light intensity of UV lamps could provide a synergetic effect depending on their location. Although closer UV lamps (in four lamp photoreactor) provide

Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) Modeling of Photochemical Reactors 165

g) h)

i) j)

Fig. 1. Velocity distribution at the outlet of the photoreactors (turbulent regime). All

geometries are defined in Section "Case study".

higher light intensity in the photoreactor center, the shadowing effect of the lamps reduces the light intensity in the region near the photoreactor wall. A comparison between Figures 3e and 3f show that the photoreactor in Figure 3f performed a higher light intensity at the center, however, the shadowing effect is high, therefore, Figure 3e shows a good trade-off between the synergetic effect and the shadowing effect.

higher light intensity in the photoreactor center, the shadowing effect of the lamps reduces the light intensity in the region near the photoreactor wall. A comparison between Figures 3e and 3f show that the photoreactor in Figure 3f performed a higher light intensity at the center, however, the shadowing effect is high, therefore, Figure 3e shows a good trade-off

a) b)

c) d)

e) f)

between the synergetic effect and the shadowing effect.

Fig. 1. Velocity distribution at the outlet of the photoreactors (turbulent regime). All geometries are defined in Section "Case study".

Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) Modeling of Photochemical Reactors 167

g) h)

i) j)

Fig. 2. Velocity distribution at the outlet of the photoreactors (laminar regime). All

geometries are defined in Section "Case study".

a) b)

c) d)

e) f)

Fig. 2. Velocity distribution at the outlet of the photoreactors (laminar regime). All geometries are defined in Section "Case study".

Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) Modeling of Photochemical Reactors 169

g) h)

i) j)

Fig. 3. Light intensity distribution at the outlet of the photoreactors for both laminar and

The degradation and mineralization of polluted waters containing non-biodegradable compounds have become increasingly important. CFD modeling helps to design, optimize, and scale-up photochemical reactors. Velocity, light, and pollutant(s) concentration distribution would give better understanding of photoreactors operation for further

turbulent regimes. All geometries are defined in Section "Case study".

**8. Conclusions** 

a) b)

c) d)

e) f)

Fig. 3. Light intensity distribution at the outlet of the photoreactors for both laminar and turbulent regimes. All geometries are defined in Section "Case study".

### **8. Conclusions**

The degradation and mineralization of polluted waters containing non-biodegradable compounds have become increasingly important. CFD modeling helps to design, optimize, and scale-up photochemical reactors. Velocity, light, and pollutant(s) concentration distribution would give better understanding of photoreactors operation for further

spherical coordinate, rad

**11. References** 

Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) Modeling of Photochemical Reactors 171

Akbarzadeh, R.; Umbarkar, S.B.; Sonawane, R.S.; Takle, S. & Dongare, M.K. (2010) Vanadia-

Akehata, T. & Shirai, T. (1972) Effect of light-source characteristics on the performance of circular annular photochemical reactor. *J. Chem. Eng. Japan* Vol. 5 pp.385-391. Alemany, L.J.; Bañares, M.A.; Pardo, E.; Martin, F.; Galán-Fereres, M. & Blasco, J.M. (1997)

Alfano, O.M.; Romero, R.L. & Cassano, A.E. (1986a) Radiation field modelling in photoreactors-II. Heterogeneous media. *Chem. Eng. Sci.*, Vol. 41 No. 5 pp. 1137-1153. Alfano, O.M.; Romero, R.L. & Cassano, A.E. (1986b) Radiation field modelling in photoreactors-I. Homogeneous media. *Chem. Eng. Sci.*, Vol. 41 No. 5 pp. 421-444. Alfano, O.M. & Cassano, A.E. (2008) Photoreactor modeling: applications to advanced

Alfano, O.M. & Cassano, A.E. (2009) Scalling-up of photoreactors. Applications to advanced

An, T.; Chen, J.; Li, G.; Ding, X.; Sheng, G.; Fu, J.; Mai, B. & O'Shea, K.E. (2008)

Bandara, J.; Mielczarski, J.A.; Lopez, A. & Kiwi, J. (2001) Sensitized degradation of

Bessekhouad, Y.; Robert, D. & Weber, J.V. (2004) Bi2S3/TiO2 and CdS/TiO2 heterojunctions

Bird, R.B.; Steward, W.E. & Lightfood, E.N. Transport Phenomena, 2nd ed. John Wiley &

Cao, J.; Luo, B.; Lin, H. & Chen, S. (2011) Photocatalytic activity of novel AgBr/WO3

Cassano, A.E. & Smith, J.M. (1966) Photochlorination in a tubular reactor. *AIChE J.*, Vol. 12

Cassano, A.E. & Smith, j.M. (1967) Photochlorination of propane. *AIChE J.*, Vol. 13, pp. 915-925. Cassano, A.E.; Silverston, P.L. & Smith, J.M. (1967) Photochemical reaction engineering. *Ind.* 

Cassano, A. E.; Matsuura, T. & Smith, J.M. (1968) Batch recycle reactor for slow photochemical reactions. *Ind. Eng. Chem. Fundam.,* Vol. 7 pp. 655-660. Cassano, A.E.; Martín, C.A.; Brandi, R.J. & Alfano, O.M. (1995) Photoreactor analysis and

Characterization and the photocatalytic activity of TiO2 immobilized hydrophobic montmorillonite photocatalysts. Degradation o decabromodiphenyl ether (BDE

chlorophenols on iron oxides induced by visible light comparison with titanium

as an available configuration for photocatalytic degradation of organic pollutant. *J.* 

composite photocatalyst under visible light irradiation for methyl orange

design: Fundamentals and applications. *Ind. Eng. Chem. Res.,* Vol. 34, No. 7, pp.

oxidation processes. *Int. J. Chem. Reactor Eng.*, Vol. 6, P2, pp.1-18.

oxidation process. *Adv. Chem. Eng*., Vol. 36 pp. 229-287.

oxide. *Appl. Catal. B: Environ*, Vol. 34 No. 4 pp. 321-333.

*Photochem. Photobiol. A: Chemistry*, Vol. 163 No. 3 pp. 569-580.

degradation. *J. Hazard.s Mater.*, Vol. 190 No. 1-3 pp. 700-706.

209). *Catal. Today* Vol. 139 No. 1-2, pp. 69-76.

Sons, Inc.: NY, 2002

pp. 1124-1133.

2155-2201.

*Eng. Chem*., Vol. 59, pp. 18-38.

titania thin films for photocatalytic degradation of formaldehyde in sunlight. *Appl.* 

Photodegradation of phenol in water using silica-supported titania catalysts. *Appl.* 

Ω unit vector in the direction of propagation, dimensionless

*Catal. A: General*, Vol. 374 No. 1-2 pp. 103-109.

*Catal. B: Environ.,* Vol. 13, No. 3-4, pp. 289-297.

decisions. Velocity and light intensity distribution in ten different annular photoreactors were described. Velocity profiles were sketched for both laminar and turbulent flows. The effect of number and location of UV lamps was studied to find the enhancement in light distribution in multi-lamp photoreactors. Closer UV lamps performed a higher light intensity in the center of the photoreactor but the closer lamps provided a higher shadowing effect.

### **9. Acknowledgements**

The financial support of Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC) and Ryerson University is greatly appreciated.

### **10. Nomenclature**


### Greek letters



#### **11. References**

170 Applied Computational Fluid Dynamics

decisions. Velocity and light intensity distribution in ten different annular photoreactors were described. Velocity profiles were sketched for both laminar and turbulent flows. The effect of number and location of UV lamps was studied to find the enhancement in light distribution in multi-lamp photoreactors. Closer UV lamps performed a higher light intensity in the center of

The financial support of Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada

the photoreactor but the closer lamps provided a higher shadowing effect.

(NSERC) and Ryerson University is greatly appreciated.

*Iv* Specific intensity for frequency *v*, Einstein.s-1.m-2.sr-1

*Ev* activation energy for frequency *v*, J.mol-1

*IT* turbulent intensity scale, dimensionless

*L* equivalent diameter of the photoreactor, m

*u'* fluctuating velocity in x direction, m.s-1

*V* time-averaged turbulent velocity, m.s-1 *v'* fluctuating velocity in *y* direction, m.s-1 *w'* fluctuating velocity in *z* direction, m.s-1 *W* gain or loss of energy, Einstein.s-1.m-3.sr-1

*y+* dimensionless distance from the wall

*<sup>T</sup>* turbulent kinematic viscosity, m2.s-1

σ volumetric scattering coefficient, m-1

*ε* turbulent dissipation rate, m2.s-3

*θ* spherical coordinate, rad *µ* dynamic viscosity, kg.m-1.s-1

*τw* wall shear stress, kg.m-1.s-2

*v* frequency, s-1

density, kg.m-3

*y* position on *y*-axis (distance from the wall), m

*Gv* incident radiation, Einstein.s-1.m-2

*k* turbulent kinetic energy, m2.s-2 *K* reaction rate constant, m3.mol.-1s-1

*LT* turbulent length scale, m

*P* time-averaged pressure, pa *R* photoreactor radius, m

*<sup>+</sup>* dimensionless velocity

**9. Acknowledgements** 

**10. Nomenclature** 

*c* light speed, m.s-1

*F* external force, kg.m.s-2

*A* area, m2

*t* time, s

Greek letters

*uz*

*T* temperature, K

*x* position vector, m


Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) Modeling of Photochemical Reactors 173

Gouvêa, C.A.K.; Wypych, F.; Moraes, S.G.; Durán, N.; Nagata, N. & Peralta-Zamora, P.

Harada, J.; Akehata, T. & Shirai, T. (1971) Light intensity distribution in an elliptical

Harris, P.R. & Dranoff, J.S. (1965) A study of perfectly mixed photochemical reactors. *AIChE* 

Herrmann, J.-M. (1999) Heterogeneous photocatalysis: Fundamentals and applications to

Jacob, S.M. & Dranoff, J.S. (1966) Radial scale-up of perfectly mixed photochemical reactors.

Jacob, S.M. & Dranoff, J.S. (1968) Design and analysis of perfectly mixed photochemical

Jacob, S.M. & Dranoff, J.S. (1969) Light intensity profiles in an elliptical photoreactor. *AIChE* 

Jacob, S.M. & Dranoff, J.S. (1970) Light intensity profiles in a perfectly mixed photoreactor.

Jain, R.L.; Graessley, W.W. & Dranoff, J.S. (1971) Design and analysis of a photoreactor for styrene polymerization. *Ind. Eng. Chem. Prod. Res. Develop.*, Vol. 10 pp. 293-298. Ji, P.; Zhang, J.; Chen, F. & Anpo, M. (2009) Study of adsorption and degradation of acid

Jing, D. & Guo, L. (2007) WS2 sensitized mesoporous TiO2 for efficient photocatalytic

Kansal, S.K.; Singh, M. & Sud, D. (2007) Studies on photodegradation of two commercial

Kasanen, J.; Suvanto, M. & Pakkanen, T.T. (2009) Self-cleaning, titanium dioxide based,

Kim, D.H.; Anderson, M.A. & Zeitner, W.A. (1995) Effects of firing temperature on

Khodja, A.A.; Sehili, T.; Pilichowski, J.-F. & Boule, P. (2001) Photocatalytic degradation of 2-

Kormann, C.; Bahnemann, D.W. & Hoffmann, M.R. (1988) Photocatalytic production of

Lim, T.H. & Kim (2004), S.D. Trichloroethylene degradation by photocatalysis in annular

orange 7 on the surface of CeO2 under visible light irradiation. *Appl. Catal. B:* 

hydrogen production from water under visible light irradiation. *Catal. Commun.*,

dyes in aqueous phase using different photocatalysts. *J. Hazard. Mater.*, Vol. 141 No.

multilayer coating fabricated on polymer and glass surfaces. *J. Appl. Polym. Sci.*,

photocatalytic and photoelectrocatalytic properties of TiO2. *J. Environ. Eng.,* Vol. 121

phenylphenol on TiO2 and ZnO in aqueous suspensions. *J. Photochem. Photobiol. A:* 

H2O2 and organic peroxides in aqueous suspensions of TiO2, ZnO, and desert sand.

flow and annulus fluidized bed photoreactors. *Chemosphere*, Vol. 54 No. 3 pp. 305-

aqueous solution. *Chemosphere*, Vol. 40 No. 4 pp. 433-440.

photoreactor. *Kagaku Kogaku,* Vol. 35 pp. 233-239.

*Chem. Eng. Prog. Symp. Ser.*, Vol. 62 pp.47-55.

*Environment.*, Vol. 85 No. 3-4 pp. 148-154.

reactors. *Chem. Eng. Prog. Sym. Ser.*, Vol. 64 pp. 54-63.

*J.*, Vol. 11 pp. 497-502.

*J.,* Vol. 15 pp. 141-144.

Vol. 8 No. 5 pp. 795-799.

Vol. 111 No. 5 pp. 2597-2606.

*Chemistry*, Vol. 141 No. 2-3 pp. 231-239.

*Environ. Sci. Technol.*, Vol. 22 No. 7 pp. 798-806.

3 pp. 581-590.

No. 8 pp. 590-594.

312.

*AIChE J.*, Vol. 16 pp. 359-363.

115-129.

(2000) Semiconductor-assisted photocatalytic degradation of reactive dyes in

the removal of various types of aqueous pollutants. *Catal. Today*, Vol. 53 No. 1 pp.


Chakrabarti, S. & Dutta, B.K. (2004) Photocatalytic degradation of model textile dyes in

Chen, F.; Xie, Y.; Zhao, J. & Lu, G. (2001) Photocatalytic degradation of dyes on a

Coronado, J.M.; Javier Maira, A.; Martínez-Arias, A.; Conesa, J.C. & Soria, J. (2002) EPR

Daneshvar, N.; Salari, D. & Khataee, A.R. (2004) Photocatalytic degradation of azo dye acid

Denny, F.; Scott, J.; Pareek, V.; Peng, G.-D. & Amal, R. (2010) Computational fluid dynamics

Ding, Z.; Hu, X.; Yue, P.L.; Lu, G.Q. & Greenfield, P.F. (2001) Synthesis of anatase TiO2

Doede, C.M. & Walker, C.A. (1955). Photochemical engineering. *Chemical Engineering,* pp.

Dolan, W.J.; Dimon, C.A. & Dranoff, J.S. (1965) Dimensional analysis in photochemical

Duran, J.E.; Taghipour, F. & Mohseni, M. (2011a) Evaluation of model parameters for

Duran, J.E.; Mohseni, M. & Taghipour, F. (2011b) Design improvement of immobilized

Duran, J.E.; Taghipour, F. & Mohseni, M. (2010) Irradiance modeling in annular

Dworkin, D. & Dranoff, J.S. (1978) Free radical transport in a photochemical reactor. *AIChE* 

Elyasi, S. & Taghipour, F. (2006) Simulation of UV photoreactor for water disinfection in

Elyasi, S. & Taghipour, F. (2010) Simulation of UV photoreactor for degradation of chemical

Fernandez, A.; Lassaletta, G.; Jimenez, V.Z.; Justo, A.; Gonzalez-Elipe, A.R.; Herrmann, J.M.;

Fogler, H.S. Elements of Chemical Reaction Engineering, third ed., Prentic Hall PTR, New

Gaertner, R.F. & Kent, J.A. (1958) Conversion in a continuous photochemical reactor. *Ind.* 

Eulerian Framework. *Chem. Eng. Sci.*, Vol. 61 No. 14 pp. 4741-4749.

*Photochem. Photobiol. A: Chemistry*, Vol. 150 No. 1-3 pp. 213-221.

pp. 269-278

*Chemosphere*, Vol. 44 No. 5 pp. 1159-1168.

*Chemistry*, Vol. 162; No. 2-3; pp.317-322.

*Eng. Sci.*, Vol. 65 No. 17 pp. 5029-5040.

reactor design. *AIChE J.*, Vol. 11 pp. 1000-1005.

No.: 1-3; pp. 173-182.

*Res.,* Vol. 50 No. 2 pp. 824-831.

Vol. 215 No. 1 pp. 81-89.

*J.,* Vol. 24 pp. 1134-1137.

No. 6 pp. 2056-2063.

Jersey, 1998.

*Catal. B: Environ.,* Vol. 7 No. 1-2 pp. 49-63.

*Eng. Chem. Res*., Vol. 50 No. 9, pp. 1223-1226.

159-178.

wastewater using ZnO as semiconductor catalyst. *J. Hazard. Mater.,* Vol. 112 No. 3

magnetically separated photocatalyst under visible and UV irradiation.

study of the radicals formed upon UV irradiation of ceria-based photocatalysts. *J.* 

red 14 in water on ZnO as an alternative catalyst to TiO2 *J. Photochem. Photobiol. A:* 

modelling and optimal configuring of a channeled optical fibre photoreactor. *Chem.* 

supported on porous solids by chemical vapor deposition. *Catal. Today*, Vol. 68,

simulating TiO2 coated UV reactors. *Water Sci. Technol*., Vol. 63 No. 7 pp. 1366-1372.

photocatalytic reactors using a CFD-Taguchi combined method. *Ind. Eng. Chem.* 

photoreactors using the finite-volume method. *J. Photochem. Photobiol. A: Chemistry*,

contaminants: Model development and evaluation. *Environ. Sci. Technol.,* Vol. 44

Tahiri, H. & Ait-Ichou, Y. (1995) Preparation and characterization of TiO2 photocatalysts supported on various rigid supports (glass, quartz and stainless steel). Comparative studies of photocatalytic activity in water purification. *Appl.* 


Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) Modeling of Photochemical Reactors 175

Pasquali, G. & Santarelli, F. (1978) Radiant energy transfer in batch photoreacting media.

Piscopo, A.; Robert, D.; Marzolin, C. & Weber, J.V. (2000) TiO2 supported on glass fiber for

Qi, N.; Zhang, H.; Jin, B. & Zhang, K. (2011) CFD modelling of hydrodynamics and

Reuterġardh, L.B. & Langphasuk, M. (1997) Photocatalytic decolourization of reactive azo

Roger, M. & Villermaux, J. (1983) Modelling of light absorption in photoreactors. Part II.

Roger, M. & Villermaux, J. (1979) Modelling of light absorption in photoreactors. Part I.

Sabate, J.; Anderson, M.A.; Aguado, M.A.; Giménez, J.; Cervera-March, S. & Hill Jr., C.G.

Saepurahman, Abdullah, M.A. & Chong, F.K. (2010) Preparation and characterization of

Sakthivel, S.; Shankar, M.V.; Palanichamy, M.; Arabindoo, B. & Murugesan, V. (2002)

Sakthivel, S.; Neppolian, B.; Shankar, M.V.; Arabindoo, B.; Palanichamy, M. & Murugesan,

Sathishkumar, P.; Sweena, R. & Wu, J.J. (2011) Anandan, S. Synthesis of CuO-ZnO

Sayama, K.; Hayashi, H.; Arai, T.; Yanagida, M.; Gunji, T. & Sugihara, H. (2010) Highly

Schechter, R.S. & Wissler, E.H. (1960) Photochemical reactions in an isothermal laminar-

Shirotsuka, T. & Nishiumi, H. (1971) Theoretical basis for making an apparatus for

flow chemical reactor. *Appl. Sci. Res*., Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 334-344

photochemical reactions. *Kagaku Kogaku*, Vol. 35, pp. 1329-1338.

reduction of chromium. *J. Mol. Catal.,* Vol. 71 No. 1 pp. 57-68.

*Hazard. Mater*., Vol. 176 No. 1-3 pp. 451-458.

solution. *Chem. Eng. J*., Vol. 171 No. 1 pp. 136-14.

the photocatalytic degradation of benzamide. *J. Mater. Sci. Lett*., Vol. 19 No. 8 pp.

degradation kinetics in an annular slurry photocatalytic reactor for wastewater

dye: A comparison between TiO2 and CdS photocatalysis. *Chemospher*e, Vol. 35 No.

Density profile and efficiency of light absorption in a cylindrical reactor. Experimental comparison with complex kinetics. *Chem. Eng. Sci*., Vol. 38 pp.

General formulation based on the laws of photometry. *Chem. Eng. J*., Vol. 17, pp.

(1992) Comparison of TiO2 powder suspensions and TiO2 powder suspensions and TiO2 ceramic membrans supported on glass as photocatalytic systems in the

tungsten-loaded titanium dioxide photocatalyst for enhanced dye degradation. *J.* 

Photocatalytic decomposition of leather dye. Comparative study of TiO2 supported on alumina and glass beads. *J. Photochem. Photobiol. A: Chemistry*, Vol. 148 No. 1-3

V. (2003) Solar photocatalytic degradation of azo dye: Comparison of photocatalytic efficiency of ZnO and TiO2. *Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cells*, Vol. 77 No. 1, pp.65-82. Santarelli, F. & Smith, J.M. (1974) Rate of photochlorination of liquid n-heptane. *Chem. Eng.* 

nanophotocatalyst for visible light assisted degradation of a textile dye in aqueous

active WO3 semiconductor photocatalyst prepared from amorphous peroxotungstic acid for the degradation of various organic compounds. *Appl. Catal. B: Environ*.,

*Chem. Eng. Commun*., Vol.2 pp. 271-274.

treatment. *Chem. Eng. J.*, (in press).

683-684.

3 pp. 585-596.

1593-1605.

219-226.

pp. 153-159.

*Commun*., Vol. 1, pp. 297-302.

Vol. 94 No. 1-2 pp.150-157.


Lin, J. & Yu, J.C. (1998) An investigation on photocatalytic activities of mixed TiO2-rare earth

Lizama, C.; Freer, J.; Baeza, J. & Mansilla, H.D. (2002) Optimized photodegradation of reactive blue 19 on TiO2 and ZnO suspensions. *Catalysis Today,* Vol. 76 No. 2-4 pp. 235-246. López-Muñoz, M.-J.; Grieken, R.V.; Aguado, J. & Marugán, J. (2005) Role of the support on

Magelli, F. & Santarelli, F. (1978) The modelling of batch photoreactors. *Chem. Eng. Sci*., Vol.

Marcus, R.J.; Kent, J.A. & Schenck, G.O. (1962) Industrial photochemistry. *Ind. Eng. Chem*.,

Marugán, J.; Hufschmidt, D.; López-Muñoz, M.-J.; Selzer, V. & Bahnemass, D. (2006)

Matsuura, T.; Cassano, A.E. & Smith, J.M. (1969) Acetone photolysis: kinetic studies in a

Matsuura, T. & Smith, J.M. (1970a) Light distribution in cylindrical photoreactors. *AIChE J.*,

Matsuura, R. & Smith, J.M. (1970b) Kinetics of photocomposition of dodecyl benzene

Matsuura, R. & Smith, J.M. (1970c) Photodecomposition kinetics of formic acid in aqueous

Matsuura, R. & Smith, J.M. (1971) Photodecomposition kinetics of formic acid in aqueous

Mehrvar, M.; Anderson, W.A. & Moo-Young, M. (2002) Preliminary analysis of a tellerette packed-bed photocatalytic reactor, *Adv. Environ. Res.* Vol. 6 No. 4, pp. 411–418. Mohajerani, M.; Mehrvar, M. & Ein-Mozaffari, F. (2011) Photoreactor design and CFD

Mohajerani, M.; Mehrvar, M. & Ein-Mozaffari, F. (2010) CFD modeling of metronidazole

Mohseni, M. & Taghipour, F. (2004) Experimental and CFD analysis of photocatalytic gas phase vinyl chloride (VC) oxidation. *Chem. Eng. Sci*., Vol. 59 No. 7 pp. 1601-1609. Neti, N.R.; Parmar, G.R.; Bakardjieva, S. & Subrt, J. (2010) Thick film titania on glass

Nezamzadeh-Ejhieh, A. & Hushmandrad, S. (2010) Solar photodecolorization of methylene

Ozisik, M.N. (1973) Radiative transfer and interactions with conduction and convection,

Pal, B. & Sharon, M. (1998) Photocatalytic degradation of salicylic acid by colloidal Fe2O3

particles. *J. Chem. Technol. Biotechnol.*, Vol. 73 No. 3 pp. 269-273.

photoreactors. *Ind. Eng. Chem. Res*., Vol. 49 No. 11 pp. 5367-5382.

ethanol. *Chem. Eng. J*., Vol. 163 No. 3 pp. 219-229.

modelling of a UV/H2O2 process for distillery wastewater treatment. *Can. J. Chem.* 

degradation in water by the UV/H2O2 process in single and multilamp

supports for vapour phase photocatalytic degradation of toluene, acetone, and

blue by CuO/X zeolite as a heterogeneous catalyst. *Appl. Catal. A: General,* Vol. 388

photocatalysis. *Catal. Today*, Vol. 101, pp. 307-314.

flow reactor. *AIChE J.,* Vol. 15 pp. 495-501.

solutions. *AIChE J*., Vol. 16 pp.1064-1071.

sulfonate. *Ind. Eng. Chem. Fund*., Vol. 9 pp. 252-260.

solutions. *Ind. Eng. Chem. Fundam*., Vol. 10, pp. 316-318.

116 No. 1 pp. 63-67.

33 pp. 611-614.

201-207.

Vol. 54, pp. 20-28

Vol. 16 pp. 321-324.

*Eng*. (in press).

No. 1-2 pp. 149-159.

Wiley, New York

oxides for the oxidation of acetone in air. *J. Photochem. Photobiol. A: Chemistry*, Vol.

the activity of silica-supported TiO2 photocatalysts: structures of the TiO2/SBA-15

Photonic efficiency for methanol photooxidation and hydroxyl radical generation on silica-supported TiO2 photocatalysts. *Appl. Catal. B: Environ*, Vol: 62, No.: 3-4, pp.


**9**

*Italy* 

**Aerodynamic Design of the Vertical Takeoff** 

In the frame of the Future Launchers Preparatory Program, carried out by the European Space Agency, the vertical take-off (VTO) Hopper - reusable launch vehicle concept is

The VTO Hopper is a reusable, winged sub-orbital single stage vehicle, featuring a circular cross-section, designed for vertical take-off. The launch vehicle is composed of a reusable booster (the Hopper) and an expendable upper stage, mounted on top of it (Pezzella et al.,

After the staging at suborbital altitude (> 130 km), the reusable booster will follow a ballistic arc trajectory, will re-enter the Earth's atmosphere, and will then perform a downrange

In this chapter the current aerodynamic analysis related to the launcher design is described. The goal was to define the aerodynamic data-base of the vehicle in order to provide the

Different design approaches were adopted in this work. In fact, aerodynamic analysis has been performed starting from engineering based methods, in order to rapidly accomplish the preliminary aerodynamic database to generate a number of possible re-entry trajectories, able to fulfill the program requirements. To do these analyses, a three dimensional (3-D) panel methods code, based on the simplified Newtonian approach and local inclination

Increasing the order of complexity, a number of detailed computational fluid dynamics (CFD) analyses have been carried out to more deeply characterize the hypersonic re-entry

To this end, 3-D Euler and Navier-Stokes numerical flowfield computations were performed at different Mach numbers and angles of attack, at the most critical flight conditions of the

In the chapter, qualitative summaries of the results are given for each aerodynamic force and moment coefficient as function of Mach number, Reynolds number and angle of

The upper stage will deliver a payload up to 8 Mg in geostationary transfer orbit.

**1. Introduction** 

landing (Pezzella et al., 2009).

environment of the vehicle.

vehicle descent trajectory.

attack.

2009).

investigated (Guédron, 2003) (Kauffmann, 2006).

necessary input for the Flight Mechanics analysis.

methods typical of hypersonics, was employed (Bertin, 1994).

**Hopper Concept of Future Launchers** 

*Italian Aerospace Research Centre - CIRA, via Maiorise, Capua* 

**Preparatory Programme** 

Giuseppe Pezzella

