An Investigation of Heat Transfer in a Mechanically

Agitated Vessel
A. Debab 1, N. Chergui 1and J. Bertrand2
1
Université des Sciences et de la Technologie d’Oran, Département de Chimie Industrielle,
BP1505 Oran El-Mnouar (Algérie)
2
Laboratoire de Génie Chimique, INP-ENSIACET
5, Rue Paulin Talabot, B.P1301-31106 Toulouse cedex 1(France)

Email: Abdelkaderdebab@hotmail.com

ABSTRACT
The objective of this study is to optimize experimental conditions of agitating a non-Newtonian liquid using
experimental design methodology. The measurements of the temperatures have been carried out in a jacketed
vessel equipped with Turbine impellers. The rheological properties of aqueous solutions of carboxymethyl
cellulose sodium salt had been studied using shear stress/shear rate data. The results of the experimental studies,
concerning the effect of the diameter of the impeller, the impeller speed and baffled or unbaffled vessel on the
overall heat transfer coefficient have been approximated in the form of equations. Based on the optimization
criterion, an agitated vessel equipped with Flat Blade Disc Turbine (FBDT) of diameter ratio d/D = 0.6 and
baffles is proposed as the most advantageous for heat transfer processes.

KEYWORDS: Stirred vessel, non-Newtonian liquid, experimental design, heat transfer coefficient, Wilson plot.

NOMENCLATURE
2
A Heat transfer surface area (m )
Cp Specific heat (J kg-1K-1) μ Dynamic viscosity (kg m-1 s-1)
d Diameter of the agitator (m) ηa Apparent viscosity (kg m-1 s-1)
D Inner diameter of the agitated vessel (m) ρ Fluid density (kg m-3)
dt Time step (s) τ Shear stress (Pa)
h Film heat transfer coefficient (Wm-2K-1) γ& Shear rate (s-1)
k Fluid consistency (Pa s-n)
n Fluid index (-)
Dimensionless numbers
N Speed of agitation (rpm)
Np Power number (Np=P. ρ-1.N-3.d-5)
P Power consumption (W)
q Volumetric flow rate (m3s-1) Nu Nusselt number (Nu =h0.D.λ-1)
T Temperature (°C) Pr Prandtl number (Pr =μ.Cp. λ-1)
t Time (s) Re Reynolds number (Re =ρN.d2.μ-1)
U overall heat transfer coefficient (Wm-2K-1) Vi Viscosity ratio (Vi=μbulk/μwall )
V Volume of fluid (m3)
Subscripts
Greek symbols 0 at the surface internal side
λ Thermal conductivity of agitated liquid i inlet
(W m-1 K-1) j jacket
r vessel

1. INTRODUCTION
Mixing has found wide application in chemical and
biochemical processing. Many stirred tank
bioreactors and chemical reactors require precise
control of both mixing and heat transfer to achieve
optimum productivity (J.Y.Oldshue 1983; N. Harnby
et al. 1983; S. Nagata 1975). Heat transfer in agitated
vessels is one of the most significant factors for
controlling the outcome of biochemical processes.
The temperature of fermentation generally must be
maintained within very narrow limits (T.J.S. Brian et
al. 1989; S.Yüce et al. 1999). Usually, agitated
vessels have a heat transfer surface, in the form of a
jacket or internal coils, for addition or removal of the
heat.
The intensity of heat transfer during mixing of fluids
depends on the type of the agitator, the design of the
vessel and conditions of the process. When designing
an agitated vessel, the impeller, vessel geometry and
baffles should give the degree of mixing the process
demands, but it is impractical to specify the agitator
to give a specific heat transfer coefficient. The main
factor when selecting an agitator is the nature of the
fluid. Large diameter agitators operating at low
speeds normally give excellent blending and heat
transfer characteristics with high viscosity fluids.
Small impellers operating at high speed are more
suited for low viscosity fluids. Turbine impellers are
normally used for high speed, low viscosity
applications.
The normal design of turbine impeller has either four
or six flat blades on a central disc. The ratio of
turbine diameter to vessel diameter d/D is usually in
the range from 1/3 to 2/3. Baffles are essential in
stirred batch vessels to provide good mixing patterns
throughout the vessel. They act to reduce tangential
flow and promote axial motion. As baffling increases
turbulence, it affects the heat transfer rates.
Because heat transfer in agitated vessels is complex,
an empirical approach based on dimensionless
analysis has been used to predict the average heat
transfer coefficients at the jacketed wall. Hence, the
results of many heat transfer studies are frequently
correlated using a dimensionless equation.
(1)
Table 1 Exponent for different impellers and Re
regimes
Type of agitator Re range θ10
Flat blade disc turbine
9 Unbaffled vessel Re<400 0.54
9 Baffled vessel Re>400 0.74
Propeller with three 5500 to 0.64
blades and baffled vessel 37000
The typical values for θ20, θ30 and θ40 are respectively
2/3, 1/3 and 0.14 (Chapman et al. 1965; Strek et al.
1967; Fletcher P. 1987). The constant θ10 which is
used to multiply the whole equation have been
reported to range from 0.33 to 1.0, mainly varying
due to system geometry and type of impeller.
Attempts were made to study batch heat transfer in an
agitated jacketed vessel, with a view to developing a
design equation to determine film heat transfer
coefficient, h0, in such vessels. But as the variables
influencing the heat transfer coefficient are quite
large in number, complete study covering all the
variables could not be made. It is essential to have
complete information on the effects of possible
variables on the rate of heat transfer and also a
general correlation valid over wide ranges of
operating conditions for heat transfer coefficients for
design and efficient working of the process. The aim
of the present work was to study the effect of the
impeller speed N, impeller diameter d and vessel with
or without baffles on heat transfer coefficient using
an experimental method in which the measurements
are mathematically planned.
1.1 Vessel modeling
Figure 1 shows the configuration for the agitated
vessel used in the experiments.
M
Tjo, ρj, Vj,
C
Tj

Where θ10, θ20, θ30 and θ40 are found by fitting Eq. (1) Tr
to experimental data. A review of many such Tji
correlations has been presented by Pankaj Mohan et
al. (1992). Fig. 1: A typical arrangement of a jacketed vessel
Extensive characterization work has been carried out with labels.
by authors for different agitator types. The values of
the constant θ10 reported are given in Table 1.
An energy balance in the vessel, considering the UiAi
vessel volume and the heat capacity of the vessel
βj =
(ρ jCp jVj ) and ⁄
contents to be constant, reads: φ j = q j Vj
(2)

Where and are the power terms associated with 1.2 The determination of the overall heat
the energy transfer from the stirrer and the heat of transfer coefficient
reaction, respectively.
On the other hand the energy balance in the jacket Overall inside heat transfer coefficient Ui is obtained
can be expressed as: from Eq. (2), it can therefore be rewritten to give:

· 5
(3)
A plot of time versus temperature such as shown in
It is assumed that the heat loss of the usually Fig.2 can be used to evaluate Ui with sufficient
insulated jacket is negligible. accuracy for design purposes.
When the test begins, the temperatures in the vessel
and in the jacket are respectively Tr(0) and Tj(0).
Then, the vessel temperature is forced to go up or
down when the jacket temperature is changed, Trf
suddenly or slowly, to a new set point. The jacket
inlet temperature Tji(t) is recorded, and so is the time
to go from Tr(0) to Tr(t). Tr
With known jacketed surfaces area, flow rates, heat
capacities and densities, the time-temperature
response is applied to the pertinent mathematical Tri
model. ti tf
The initial conditions are Tj(t) = Tj(0) and Tr(t) =
Tr(0). In Eq. (2), since there is no reaction the heat of Fig. 2: Temperature plot for unsteady-state heat
reaction and kinetic energy transferred from the transfer.
impeller to the vessel fluid are neglected. Equations
(2) and (3) can be rewritten in terms of dimensional If the time increment dt is evaluated as a specific
groups, as described below. Tr(t) is isolated in Eq. (3) constant time interval ∆t, and Trf and Tri are the final
as a function of dTj/dt, Tj0(t) and Tji(t). The outcome and initial temperatures respectively of the liquid
is introduced into Eq. (2) to obtain dTr/dt as a being heated, then we can write Eq. (5) as:
function of the same variables. Then, the obtained
equations are differentiated with respect to time and · 6
∆
solved by Laplace transform to yield the expression
for Tr(t):
Where

Tr (t) =
1
βj
{(β +φ +λ ).C e −(β
j j 1 1
λ1t
j +φ j + λ2 ).C2eλ2t } (4) ∆
~

2. MATERIAL AND METHOD

Where
2.1 Equipment
[ ]
C n = λ n T j ( 0 ) + β j T r ( 0 ) / (λ 1 − λ 2 ) n= 1, 2
The laboratory equipment is shown in Fig.3; the
λ1 =
1
2
(
− z 1 + z 12 − 4 z 2 ) experiments were conducted in a cylindrical jacketed
vessel of 2 liters equipped with a 6-Flat Blade Disc
1 Turbine agitator (6FBDT) as seen in Fig.4. Two
λ 2 = ⎛⎜ − z1 − z12 − 4z 2 ⎞⎟ agitator diameters were used: 81mm and 45mm,
2⎝ ⎠
positioned in the vessel at a height from the bottom
z1 = β j + φ j and z 2 = β rφ j equal to the half of the height of the liquid medium.
The speed of the agitator
a was varied
v from 2660 rpm to experiments according to the correlattion given byy
850 rpm. Werner A. et al. (1986).

2.2 Wilson
n plot meth
hod
Digital Coomputer
Trbb
Trh
The commonnly used methhod to determ mine the heatt
M  Tjo
Data Acquisition  transfer coeffficient is the W
Wilson plot meethod (Wilsonn
1 1915). The in nput data for thhis method arre the physicall
Coolingg parameters deefining the dimensions of the t equipmentt
Water
8 
(the heat trannsfer surface),, the fluids floowing in eachh
8  circuit, the mass flow rates, and the averagee
5 
temperatures in the inlet aand outlet con nnector pipes.
The heat trannsfer coefficieent on each side of the heatt
M
2  Tj transfer surfaace depends onn the flow reggime. In orderr
3  to experimenntally determinne this param meter in givenn
6 equipment, varied
v is the mass
m flow rate in one side,
and the masss flow rate in the other side is keptt
7 4 
constant. Tem mperature annd mass flow w rate are thee
Figg. 3: Schemattic representattion of the laaboratory input parametters varying dduring the experiment.
equuipment: 1-Veessel, 2-Agitattor, 3-Flow meter, The original Wilson plot method was modified in a
4-PPump, 5-Tempperature contrroller, 6-Therrmostatic variety of ways. The modiffication mainlly consisted inn
batth, 7-Electric hheater, 8-Bafffles. changing the number of ddetermined parameters. Thee
original versiion required kknowledge off the exponentt
at the Reyn nolds numbeer. Briggs et e al. (1969))
proposed an iterative methhod to determ mine both heatt
transfer coeffficients withouut knowing off the exponentt
at the Reynnolds numbeer. Further modificationss
allowed for determining
d off up to five parameters cann
be found in Joosé Fernandezz-Seara et al. (2007).
(
The overall heat
h transfer rresistance throough the walll
of the agitateed vessel is ddescribed by the followingg
approximatioon formula:

Fig. 4: Agittator used in the

t investigatiion (7)

The agitated vesseel is equippedd with a straigght jacket, Where: Rw is the wall resisstance. It shou uld be noticedd
whicch has a circuulating liquid in a closed looop. Heat that every liqquid can prodduce a layer or deposit off
is prrovided from this fluid byy means of ann electric extraneous materials
m on the heat tran nsfer surface,
heat exchanger annd a thermosttatic bath, as indicated which will prrovoke a timee-modificationn of both film m
in Fig.
F 3. It iis instrumentted by four PT-100 heat transfer coefficients.. In these caases, the heatt
tempperature sensoors; one is positioned in the high part transfer resistance increases considerab bly due to thee
of thhe agitated fluid (Trh) and thhe other in thee low part fact that this type of mateerials normally y has a lowerr
(Trb).
) Water circulate in the jacket and his thermal condductivity. Thiss effect is refeerred to as thee
tempperature is meeasured with two t sensors positioned
p fouling or dirrt factor, and sshould be avoided or, if thiss
at thhe inlet (Tji) annd the outlet side
s (Tjo) of th
he jacket. is not possiible, taken innto account as a furtherr
Fourr equally-spacced, flat wall baffles
b were used
u each resistance to heat
h transfer.
withh a width equaal to 1/10 of thhe inner diameeter of the Substituting to Eq. (1) deefinitions of the similarityy
vessel. numbers, thee heat transffer coefficiennt hi can bee
The Temperaturee controller controls thhe jacket expressed in the
t form:
tempperature and allows
a trackingg a desired seet point of
the vessel
v temperaature.
h i = α 0 . N θ 20 (8)
The jacket-side
j heeat transfer cooefficient hj deepends on
the flow
f of the cirrculating heatt transfer fluidd through Where, α0 is a constant.
the jacket;
j it wass calculated foor the maxim mum mass
flow
w rate, which was kept coonstant during all the According too Eq. (8), oonly the stirrer speed cann
modify the value
v of the internal film heat transferr
coefficient for a given vessel, with the same liquid The slope of the straight line is the reciprocal of α0.
and temperature conditions inside it. The value of α0 When the stirrer speed has no effects on the value of
is described by Eq. (9). hi (N → ∞), 1/U gives the parameter b.

θ 20 2.3 Planned experimental method

λ ⎡ d 2 .ρ ⎤ (9)
α 0 = θ 10 Pr θ 30 Vi θ 40 ⎢ ⎥
D ⎣ μ ⎦ The influence of different geometrical parameters of
the agitated vessel on the heat transfer coefficient can
Where θ10, θ20, θ30, θ40 are constant for every system. be determined using experimental method in which
Substituting Eq. (8) to Eq. (7) we arrive at the the measurements are mathematically planned
following equation, used in the calculations: (Goupy 1996). As detected in previous study
(Chergui N. 2005) the most influential factors on the
heat transfer coefficient are the impeller diameter
1 1 (X1), the baffles (X2) and the impeller speed (X3). In
10 order to evaluate the effects and interactions of these
three factors, a 23 factorial design is used. The
experimental conditions required by this design are
When the power generated in the vessel is small, the defined in Table 2.
viscosity number (Vi) can be neglected, if
temperature difference between the wall of the vessel Table 2 Levels of the factors
and the fluid temperature is not so large. d (m) Baffles N (rpm)
X1 X2 X3
Assuming that α0 has a constant value under the
conditions previously mentioned, it is possible to Level + 0.081 With 850
determine experimentally the value of hi, using the
baffles
Wilson plot. Level – 0.045 Without 260
Substituting the new variables: baffles
(11)
The levels chosen for each of the three parameters are
(12) also presented in this table, e.g., a low level is
transformed to the number -1 and a high level to the
(13)
number +1.
(14)
The mathematical model associated with this type of
Equation (10) can be linearized: planned experiments is a linear regression which
takes into account the effects of the factors as well as
· (15) the effects of their interactions.
A straight line can be plotted in Fig. 5 using Eq. (15). It is written as:

Y = b0 + b1 X1 + b2 X 2 + b3 X 3 + b12 X1 X 2 +
y b13 X1 X 3 + b23 X 2 X 3 + b123X1 X 2 X 3 (16)

Where Y represents the estimated response, it

represents the overall heat transfer coefficient hi and
y = a.x+b Xi are independent variables in code. The constant b0,
is the average experimental response, the coefficients
b1, b2 and b3 are the estimated effects of the factors
b
considered and the extent to which these terms affect
x
the performance of the method is called main effect.
Fig. 5: Original Wilson plot for hi experimental The coefficients b12, b13, b23 and b123 are called the
determination interaction terms. The coefficients bij of the model are
estimated from experimental responses. Following
the model fitted for each response, we represent
graphically isoresponses surfaces which are three- We observed that the experimented fluid exhibits a
dimensional models of the relationship between the rheofluidifiant behavior governed by the Ostwald de
responses and two factors. This response surfaces Waele power-law model:
methodology allows experimental responses behavior
to be described as precisely as possible as a function τ = k .γ& n (17)
of factor variation and optimal conditions of the
factors to be determined for each experimental
response. We can see from Eq. (16) that the factorial Where k is the consistence index and n, is the flow
design provides information about the importance of behavior index.
interactions between the factors. This means that Table 3 provides some sample numerical values of k
sometimes the level in which some factors must be and n.
set is influenced by their interaction with others, so
that we can ensure a better expected experimental Table 3 Values of the index of flow and
response. consistency for various values of temperatures
The statistical significance of each term, in Eq. (16), 2% C.M.C
T,°C
was verified using the t-Student. n k , Pa.sn
30 0.7272 0.7142
3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
40 0.761 0.4661
3.1 Rheological behavior of aqueous 50 0.8153 0.2544
solution of carboxymethyl cellulose 60 0.8483 0.1646
sodium salt
The consistency index, k, decreases with increasing
A 2% dilute concentration of aqueous polymer temperature T. It is correlated with temperature as
solution of sodium carboxymethyl cellulose sodium follows:
salt (CMC) was chosen as a test fluid. To study the
effect of temperature on rheology, the measurements k = a .e bT (18)
were carried out at temperatures between 30°C to
60°C and shear rates ranging between 6.45 S-1 to 645 Where a and b are constants.
S-1. The experimental set up to perform these The fluid behavior index, n, showed no noticeable
experiments were a variable speed, coaxial cylinder variation with temperature change.
thermostated rheometer (VT550). A plot of the flow In Fig. 7 we could observe the influence of the
curves, shear stress versus shear rate at four different temperature on the apparent viscosity. A decrease in
temperatures are shown in Fig. 6. viscosity was produced when the temperature
increases.
90 1

80 T=30°C
µa(Pa.s)
τ(Pa)

T=40°C
70
T=50°C
60 T=60°C
50 T=30°C
0,1
40 T=40°C
30 T=50°C

20 T=60°C

10
0,01
0
1 10 100 γ˙(1/s) 1000
0 200 400 600 800
γ˙ (s-1) Fig. 7: The dependence of apparent viscosity
Fig. 6: The dependence of shear stress on the shear on the shear rate.
rate.
The apparent viscosity is computed from the estimation of an averaged Overall heat transfer
following equation: coefficient Ui from Eq. (6) and the experimental time-
temperature results presented in Fig.8
η a = kγ& n −1 (19) The values calculated from Eq. (6) are presented in
table 4.
Table 4 Values of N, Re and Ui
3.2 Influence of non-Newtonian flow FBDT(d=81mm) FBDT(d=45mm)
behavior on mixing process
characteristics N,rpm Re Ui Re Ui

In an agitated vessel, the rheological properties of the 260 142.80 129.30 140.78 83.95
material to be processed are of main importance
regarding the parameters which have to be considered 450 241.95 188.68 265.07 116.22
for the configuration. The viscosity influences the
formation of the flow field inside the tank and, 650 353.75 240.82 373.49 146.68
therefore, the mixing and power behavior.
Thus, the viscosity is the most important 850 430.91 276.19 573.08 189.72
characteristic value. While Newtonian fluids are
characterized by a constant viscosity, the processing
of non-Newtonian materials demands the From table 4, it can be seen that the heat transfer
consideration of a changing viscosity through a coefficient is calculated in the transition regime.
viscosity function.
For the configuration of agitators for the processing In the second part of the steady, the time response of
of non-Newtonian materials, the changing viscosity the theoretical vessel temperature Tv(t) using Eq. (4)
is presented in Fig. 8. From these plots it could be
needs to be considered, where the Reynolds number
is the decisive characteristic value. The main problem clearly seen that the agreement between the
is the determination of the correct viscosity at a set experimental data and the theoretical values
calculated using Eq. (4) is satisfactory. Similar plots
rotation rate; as a consequence the Reynolds number
cannot be calculated. This means that also the mixing prepared for the agitator of 45mm diameter also
indicated satisfactory agreement.
time and power characteristics only can be included
as approximations in the configuration stage. For this 335
Tr(K)

reason, several methods, which enabled the

construction of a stirring apparatus for the processing 330

of non-Newtonian fluids by relating speed and

325
viscosity to each other, were developed in the past.
For power law fluids, a linear correlation between 320 Tr-model

rotation rate of the stirrer and mean shear rate γ& in the Tr-exp
315
agitated vessel can be described by a linear
correlation according to the method of Metzner and 310

Otto (1957).
305

γ& = K s N (20) 300

295
Where the constant Ks in pseudo-plastic fluids has the 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000
value 11.5, when a flat blade disc turbine is used; for time (s)
the pitched blade turbine (θ=45°) the value is 13 and
for the propeller it is 10 (Reinhold P. et al. 1980). Fig. 8: Time-Temperature Plots for FBDT
d= 81mm and N=850 rpm.
3.3 Heat transfer calculation
3.3.1 Experimental determination of heat The third step deals with the determination of the
transfer coefficients by Wilson Plot partial heat transfer coefficient hi using Wilson plot
method.
A computer programme was used to analyze the data
taken from the experiments in this heat transfer study. The calculated values of the local heat transfer
The first step of the calculation deals with the coefficient hi from the Wilson graphs have been
plottted against the speed of th he impeller for each of
the impellers. From m this plots itt has been ded
ducted the
correelations givenn in table 5.
Table 5 Valu
ues of hi
FBDT(d=81mm) F
FBDT(d=45mmm)

hi= 3.697 N2/3 hi = 2.158 N2/3

2

3.3.22 Prediction n of the film heat transfer

coeffficient by thee planned exp
perimental method
m Fig. 9: Response
R surfaace contours for
fo X2=-1.
The mathematiccal model derived frrom the
expeerimental resuults is presen
nted by the following
f
equaation:

Y = 428
4 ,37 + 113,533 X 1 + 21,29 X 2 + 90,45 X 3 +
(21)
17,055 X 1 X 2 + 23,844 X 1 X 3 + 15,1X 2 X 3 +
9,23 X 1 X 2 X 3

Wheere d − 0,063 and X 3 = N − 526,5

X1 =
0,018 266,5
A seecond test was done in ord der to check th he test of
Fischher (Goupy 1996), this test shows that the
mathhematical mod del is represeentative. To beb able to Fig. 10: Response
R surfaace contours for
f X2=+1.
repreesent graphicaally this equaation; it is neccessary to
stay constant one of the param meters, for exaample the The applicability of the mmodels for the prediction off
bafflles referred by the param meter (X2,), then we the overall heat
h transfer coefficient in
n the agitated
d
obtaiin the followinng equations: vessel used in this study iis demonstrateed in Fig. 11,
where all ex xperimental ddata obtained d for variouss
For X2 = +1 (vessel with baffless) operating co onditions aree compared with thosee
predicted from
m Eq. (6).
449.66 130.58 105
5.55
07
33.0 (22)

For X2=-1 (vessell without bafffles)

407.06 96
6.48 75.3
35
61
14.6 (23)

The mathematicaal models desscribed by Eq.22 E and

Eq.223, reported ass response surrface contourss in Fig.9
and Fig.10 respeectively. We note that tw wo factors
havee more weig ght than the third, which h is the
impeeller speed X3 and the diam meter of the agiitator X1.
The film heat traansfer coefficiient hi (repressented by mparison of thhe experimentaal values and
Fig. 11: Com
Y) increases
i whhen the diam meter of the agitator those calculated fr
from equation (22).
increeases from 0.0
045m to 0.081m, this is du ue to flow
patteern and the ciirculation loops generated by each
impeeller.
 4. CONCLUSION
In this work, experimental design methodology has
been used in order to determine the effects of the
impeller diameter, the speed of the impeller and the
baffles on the overall heat transfer coefficient in a
mechanically stirred tank equipped with a jacket.
Response surface contours methodology allowed the
optimal parameters to be determined. The film heat
transfer coefficient is strongly dependent on the speed
of the impeller so that it is proportional to N2/3.
The rheological characterization of the aqueous
solution of CMC employed in this study allows
concluding that the concentration of 2% mass
represent a non-Newtonian behavior in the range of
shear rates studied. The fluid behavior index, n,
showed no noticeable variation with temperature
change but the consistency index, k, decreases with
increasing temperature.
The present analysis demonstrated the feasibility to
use the Wilson method to predict the heat transfer
coefficient in an agitated vessel. The experimental
and the calculated values of the mean overall heat
transfer coefficient compare favorably.
REFERENCES
Brain, T.J.S. and K.L. Man (1989). Heat transfer in stirred
tank bioreactors, Chem. Eng. Progress, 76-80.
Briggs D.E. and Edwin H. Young (1969). Modified Wilson
plot techniques for obtaining heat transfer correlations
for shell and tube heat exchangers, Chem. Eng. Prog.
Symposium Series, 92(65), 35-45.
Chapman, F.S. and F.A. Holland (1965). Heat transfer
correlations for agitated liquids in process vessels,
Chem. Eng., January 18, 153-158.
Chergui, N. (2005). Modeling transfer in agitated vessel,
Master Thesis, University of Science and Technology
of Oran (USTO), Algeria.
Debab, A. (2002). Effects of mixing on heat transfer in
jacketed vessel, PhD Thesis, the Institute National
Polytechnic (ENSIACET), Toulouse, France.
Fernandez-Seara, J., Fransisco J. Uhia, Jaime Sieres and
Antonio Campo (2007). A general review of the
Wilson plot method and its modifications to determine
convection coefficients in heat exchange devices,
Applied Thermal Engineering, 27, 2745-2757.
Fletcher, P. (1987). Heat transfer coefficients for stirred
batch reactor design, The Chem. Eng. April, 33-37.
Goupy, J. (1996). La méthode des plans d’expériences, Ed.
Dunod, Paris.
Harnby, N., M.F. Edwards and A.W. Nienow (1985).
Mixing in the process industries, Butterworths, London.
Metzner, A. B., Otto, R. O. (1957). Agitation of non-
Newtonian fluids, A.I.Ch.E.J., 3(1), 3-11.
Mohan Pankaj, Anthony Nicholas Emery and Tariq Al-
Hassan (1992). Heat transfer to Newtonian fluids in
mechanically agitated vessels, Experimental Thermal
and Fluid Science, 5, 861-883.
Nagata, S. (1975). Mixing, Principles and applications,
Halsted, New York.
Oldshue, J.Y. (1983). Fluid mixing Technology, McGraw-
Hill, New York.
Reinhold, P., S. Artur and W. Paul-Michael (1980). Heat
transfer in agitated vessels with single-phase liquids,
Ger. Chem. Eng. 3, 163-174.
Strek, F. and S. Masiuk (1967). Heat transfer in liquid
mixers, Int. Chem. Eng. 7(4), 693-702.
Yüce, S., A.Hasaltun, S.Erdogan and M.Alpbaz (1999).
Temperature control of a batch polymerization reactor,
Trans. IChemE, Vol.77, Part A, 413-420.
Werner, A. and W. Schmidt (1986). Heat transfer in
agitated tank with liquid media, Ger. Chem. Eng. 9,
362-37.
Wilson E.E. (1915). A basis of rational design of heat
transfer apparatus, ASME Journal of Heat Transfer 37,
47-70.