| Literature DB >> 35945303 |
Mehakpreet Singh1,2, Gavin Walker3.
Abstract
In this paper, we focus on providing a discrete formulation for a reduced aggregation population balance equation. The new formulation is simpler, easier to code, and adaptable to any type of grid. The presented method is extended to address a mixed-suspension mixed-product removal (MSMPR) system where aggregation and nucleation are the primary mechanisms that affect particle characteristics (or distributions). The performance of the proposed formulation is checked and verified against the cell average technique using both gelling and non gelling kernels. The testing is carried out on two benchmarking applications, namely batch and MSMPR systems. The new technique is shown to be computationally less expensive (approximately 40%) and predict numerical results with higher precision even on a coarser grid. Even with a revised grid, the new approach tends to outperform the cell average technique while requiring less computational effort. Thus the new approach can be easily adapted to model the crystallization process arising in pharmaceutical sciences and chemical engineering.Entities:
Keywords: Aggregation; Cell average technique; Finite volume scheme; Integro-partial differential equation; Reduced model
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35945303 PMCID: PMC9547794 DOI: 10.1007/s11095-022-03349-0
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Pharm Res ISSN: 0724-8741 Impact factor: 4.580
Fig. 1One dimensional domain discretization.
Fig. 2Representation of set .
Fig. 3Numerical results using additive kernel with a geometric grid of 23 cells for a batch system.
Fig. 4Numerical results using additive kernel with a geometric grid of 67 cells for a batch system.
Fig. 5Numerical results using additive kernel with a geometric grid of 110 cells for a batch system.
Computational Time Using Additive Kernel for a Batch System
| Cells | CPU time | CPU time |
|---|---|---|
| CAT | FVS | |
| 23 | 0.69 | 0.48 |
| 67 | 2.46 | 1.89 |
| 110 | 4.89 | 3.39 |
Fig. 6Numerical results using product kernel with a geometric grid of 21 cells for a batch system.
Fig. 7Numerical results using product kernel with a geometric grid of 61 cells for a batch system.
Computational Time Using Product Kernel for a Batch System
| Cells | CPU Time | CPU Time |
|---|---|---|
| CAT | FVS | |
| 21 | 1.42 | 0.80 |
| 61 | 5.19 | 3.67 |
| 101 | 14.66 | 7.26 |
Parameter Values for Running the Numerical Simulations
| Parameters | Values |
|---|---|
| 1 | |
| 500 (for sum kernel) | |
| 100 (for multiplicative kernel) | |
| Number of grids ( | 23, 67 and 110 for |
| Initial mass density | |
| Initial number density |
Exact Solutions of Tracer-Weighted Mean Particle Volume
| Cases | ||
|---|---|---|
| 1. | ||
| 2. |
Fig. 8Numerical results using additive kernel with a geometric grid of 23 cells for a continuous system.
Fig. 9Numerical results using additive kernel with a geometric grid of 67 cells for a continuous system.
Relative Error in the Mean Volume for Additive Kernel for a Continuous System
| Cells | CAT | FVS |
|---|---|---|
| 23 | 0.1715 | 0.1243 |
| 67 | 0.0179 | 0.0128 |
Computational Time for Additive Kernel for a Continuous System
| Cells | CPU Time | CPU Time |
|---|---|---|
| CAT | FVS | |
| 23 | 1.21 | 0.54 |
| 67 | 2.92 | 1.71 |
Fig. 10Numerical results using multiplicative kernel with a geometric grid of 21 cells for a continuous system.
Fig. 11Numerical results using multiplicative kernel with a geometric grid of 61 cells for a continuous system.
Relative Error in the Mean Volume for Multiplicative Kernel for a Continuous System
| Cells | CAT | FVS |
|---|---|---|
| 21 | 0.0299 | 0.0142 |
| 61 | 0.0113 | 0.0068 |
Computational Time(s) for Multiplicative Kernel for a Continuous System
| Cells | CPU Time | CPU Time |
|---|---|---|
| CAT | FVS | |
| 21 | 1.00 | 0.51 |
| 61 | 2.72 | 1.26 |