Question 6 of 9: Cooling Requirement for Immobilized-Cell Glutamic Acid Production
Nivaar worked solution (AI-drafted; not reviewed by a licensed engineer)
Notes on this paper
National Exams — May 2016 — 04-BS-13, Biology. Three-hour, closed-book exam (one double-sided aid sheet permitted, approved calculator allowed). Format: Part I offers 5 questions (any 3 constitute a complete answer, 20 marks each; Q2 itself offers two alternative sub-problems) and Part II offers 3 questions (any 2 constitute a complete answer, 20 marks each) — a full paper is 5 questions. All 8 numbered questions (with both alternatives of Q2) are solved below for completeness. Q2–Q7 are calculation/derivation questions; Q1, Q6(a)(b)(d), and Q8 are essay questions.
Reference texts: Shuler & Kargi, Bioprocess Engineering: Basic Concepts (2nd ed., Prentice Hall) — elemental/electron balances, yield coefficients, fermenter mass and energy balances, growth kinetics; Madigan et al., Brock Biology of Microorganisms (15th ed., Pearson) — bacterial/viral structure, rapid methods, MPN; Toledo, Fundamentals of Food Process Engineering (3rd ed., Springer) — plant tissue structure and mechanical properties.
Question 5: Cooling Requirement for Immobilized-Cell Glutamic Acid Production (20 marks)
Find. (a) rate of heat removal required to hold the reactor at 25°C (kJ/h); (b) adiabatic temperature rise if cooling is not provided.
Approach. The liquid feed, product, reactor and off-gas are all at 25°C, so the liquid-stream sensible-heat terms cancel; the one exception is the sparged gas, which enters at 15°C and leaves at 25°C and therefore absorbs sensible heat that the cooling system does not have to remove. The dominant term is the heat of reaction itself — found via Hess's law from the given heats of combustion (CO2 and H2O, being fully oxidized, contribute $\Delta h_c^{\circ}=0$ and drop out of the products' combustion-heat sum). Multiplying by the molar rate of glucose consumption (from a glucose mass balance on the liquid stream) gives the heat released; subtracting the sensible heat taken up by the incoming 15°C gas gives the cooling duty for part (a); letting that surplus heat instead warm both outlet streams (liquid and gas) gives part (b).
Figure 4. Control-volume energy balance: liquid streams and off-gas at 25°C; the sparged gas enters at 15°C and absorbs part of the reaction heat as it warms.
Heat of reaction via Hess's law (heats of combustion). $\Delta H_{rxn}=\sum\Delta h_c^{\circ}(\text{reactants})-\sum\Delta h_c^{\circ}(\text{products})$, with CO2 and H2O contributing zero on the product side:
$$\Delta H_{rxn}=\big[-2805+1.5(0)+(-382.6)\big]-\big[-2244.1+0+3(0)\big]=-3187.6-(-2244.1)=\boxed{-943.5\ \text{kJ/mol glucose reacted}}$$
(exothermic — 943.5 kJ released per mole glucose consumed).
Glucose consumption rate from a liquid-stream mass balance. Treating the liquid mass flow as essentially unchanged from feed to product (2000 kg/h; the dissolved-gas mass transferred is small on this scale):
$$\text{glucose in}=2000(0.04)=80\ \text{kg/h},\qquad \text{glucose out}=2000(0.005)=10\ \text{kg/h},$$
$$\text{glucose consumed}=80-10=70\ \text{kg/h}=\frac{70\,000\ \text{g/h}}{180\ \text{g/mol}}=\boxed{389\ \text{mol/h}}.$$
Heat released by reaction.
$$\dot Q_{rxn}=|\Delta H_{rxn}|\times(\text{mol glucose/h})=943.5(388.9)=3.669\times10^{5}\ \text{kJ/h}.$$
Sensible heat absorbed by the sparged gas (15°C → 25°C). Gas volumetric flow $=4\ \text{vvm}\times25\ \text{m}^3=100\ \text{m}^3/\text{min}$ at 1 atm and 15°C, so by the ideal-gas law
$$\dot n_{gas}=\frac{PV}{RT}=\frac{101\,325(100)}{8.314(288.15)}=4230\ \text{mol/min}=2.538\times10^{5}\ \text{mol/h}$$
(12% NH3 = 30 450 mol/h, 88% air = 223 300 mol/h). Taking molar heat capacities of air $\approx29.1$ and NH3 $\approx35.1$ J/(mol·K) near room temperature (the given 4.18 kJ/(kg·K) applies to the liquid, not the gas), the gas heat-capacity rate is $\dot n c_p=223\,300(29.1)+30\,450(35.1)=7.57\times10^{3}$ kJ/(h·K), and
$$\dot Q_{gas}=7.57\times10^{3}(25-15)=7.57\times10^{4}\ \text{kJ/h}.$$
The NH3 (389 mol/h) and O2 (583 mol/h) actually consumed are <1% of the gas flow, so the off-gas flow is taken equal to the inlet flow.
Part (a): cooling duty. Energy balance at steady state (all enthalpies referenced to 25°C):
$$\dot Q_{cooling}=\dot Q_{rxn}-\dot Q_{gas}=3.669\times10^{5}-0.757\times10^{5}=\boxed{2.91\times10^{5}\ \text{kJ/h}\ (\approx81\ \text{kW})}.$$
Part (b): temperature rise with no cooling. Assuming the same reaction rate and conversion, the 2.91×105 kJ/h no longer removed must instead raise the temperature of everything leaving the reactor (liquid product and off-gas) by $\Delta T$ above 25°C:
$$\Delta T=\frac{\dot Q_{cooling}}{\dot m_{liq}C_p+\dot n_{gas}c_p}=\frac{2.912\times10^{5}}{2000(4.18)+7.57\times10^{3}}=\frac{2.912\times10^{5}}{1.593\times10^{4}}=\boxed{18.3^{\circ}\text{C}}$$
— the reactor would climb from 25°C to $\approx43^{\circ}$C, well above the optimum for this organism, which is why active cooling is essential. (Crediting the liquid alone, as if the gas did not warm, would overstate the rise at $2.912\times10^{5}/8360=34.8^{\circ}$C.)
Quantity
Result
$\Delta H_{rxn}$
−943.5 kJ/mol glucose
Glucose consumed
70 kg/h = 389 mol/h
Heat released by reaction
3.67×105 kJ/h
Sensible heat taken up by sparged gas (15→25°C)
7.6×104 kJ/h
(a) Cooling requirement
2.91×105 kJ/h (≈81 kW)
(b) Temperature rise, no cooling
18.3°C (25→≈43°C)
Check
Assumptions adopted (the paper gives no gas-phase data): (1) liquid mass flow unchanged from feed to product (<1% of the gas is absorbed) when back-calculating glucose consumed; (2) gas molar heat capacities air ≈29.1 and NH3 ≈35.1 J/(mol·K); (3) evaporation of water into the sparged gas is neglected, as the paper supplies no humidity or latent-heat data — in a real plant, humidifying 100 m3/min of dry gas would carry away a large additional share of the heat. (4) Part (b) assumes reaction rate and conversion unchanged at the higher temperature.
Two assumptions are made explicit by the problem's own reference-temperature statement and are standard for this class of estimate: (1) the liquid mass flow is assumed unchanged from feed to product (dissolved/entrained gas mass is small relative to 2000 kg/h) when back-calculating glucose consumed; (2) the adiabatic temperature rise in part (b) is computed on the liquid stream alone, consistent with $C_p$ being specified for "mixture and water" rather than for the sparged air/NH3 gas phase.