Talk:Plug flow reactor model
Add topic | This  level-5 vital article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
 | The content of RTD studies of plug flow reactor was merged into Plug flow reactor model on 8 August 2021. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. For the discussion at that location, see its talk page. |
I agree that there are several issues with this page. At one point there is even confusion between a tube and a tank. The notation is truly ugly. Define your terms locally and use simple symbols. A universally applicable notation is an unrealistic goal. The citations are not the best choices. I do note that, contrary to the following comment, a PFR has zero axial mixing and complete radial mixing. Also, I would not introduce the unsteady state. Solutions are trivial for the constant density case unless you codger up some sort of feedback.
There are several issues with this article. PFRs do not have to be solved in a steady state fashion. Nor do they need to be solved for a single reaction, they can be solved for many reactions. The only assumption necessary is that there is perfect axial mixing of a differential volume and no interaction between individual volumes. The other assumptions are not key to the model, but only to the formulation of the quoted model. This is not to say that the assumptions might not simplify a problem drastically, just that they are not key. 60.241.185.216 10:24, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
Expression 4
[edit]Expression 4 is for concentration as function of location x. x does not appear on right-hand side. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dfarrar (talk • contribs) 17:29, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
Proposed merge with Non-ideal plug flow reactor model
[edit]It's not really worth having a separate article for non-ideal extensions to the basic PFR model. Slashme (talk) 21:24, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
- Not actionable: The article in question has been deleted. --SoledadKabocha (talk) 03:02, 16 October 2016 (UTC)
PTFR
[edit]Hello, I have seen the abbreviation "PTFR", which seems to mean "Plug flow tube reactor", alongside with "BR" for "Batch reactor" and "CSTR" for "Continuously stirred tank reactor".
Is the Plug flow tube reactor then an example for the plug flow reactor model? If yes, should the abbreviation be mentioned in the article or should there even be made a redirect? It took me some time to find this article with nothing but "PTFR" at hands, but I am still not sure, because I am an absolute noob at Technical chemistry... --Lesendes Okapi (talk) 13:01, 6 February 2020 (UTC)
- @User:Lesendes Okapi You're right - I've created a redirect at PFTR. --Slashme (talk) 20:56, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Proposed merge of RTD studies of plug flow reactor into Plug flow reactor model
[edit]RTD studies of plug flow reactor is an unnecessary fork of this article with a title that doesn't fit Wikipedia standards. Slashme (talk) 20:51, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
- I Agree. Esponenziale (talk) 09:42, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
Merge completed Klbrain (talk) 18:08, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
confusing terminology
[edit]IMO "plug flow" denotes an idealized model of flow in a tube (ie no axial or radial dispersion) so there's no such thing as a "real plug flow reactor". i think that should be just called a real tubular reactor. I guess this article should be renamed "tubular (flow?) reactors" and deal with both the ideal plug flow model and other more complex models. 181.177.14.12 (talk) 22:05, 25 June 2023 (UTC)
Edit request: anaerobic digestion application
[edit] | This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest was declined. |
Disclosure: I have a conflict of interest because of my professional connection to the biogas technology sector. For that reason I am submitting this as an edit request rather than editing directly, and I'd welcome an uninvolved editor reviewing it.
Requested change: In the "Applications" section, add the following: Plug flow models are also applied in environmental engineering, notably in plug-flow anaerobic digesters.[1] These systems treat livestock manure and high-solids organic wastes, including the organic fraction of municipal solid waste, with the material moving through the digester as a plug under limited axial mixing and a defined hydraulic retention time.[2][3][4]
Reasoning: The article currently presents plug flow mainly as a fluid-mechanics model and only briefly notes its use in chemical reactor design. This addition covers an established environmental-engineering application supported by independent government, academic, and peer-reviewed review sources, improving the article's coverage without referencing any specific company or commercial technology. If the proposed wording is too specific, I would also support a shorter version that simply mentions anaerobic digestion as one established application area.
References
- 1 2 "Anaerobic System Design and Technology". U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, AgSTAR. Retrieved 2026-06-25.
- 1 2 Hamilton, Douglas W. "Anaerobic Digestion of Animal Manures: Types of Digesters". Oklahoma State University Extension. Retrieved 2026-06-25.
- 1 2 "A comprehensive review on anaerobic digestion of organic fraction of municipal solid waste". Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 135: 110204. 2021. doi:10.1016/j.rser.2020.110637.
- 1 2 Panaro, D. B.; Mattei, M. R.; Esposito, G.; Steyer, J. P.; Capone, F.; Frunzo, L. (2022). "A modelling and simulation study of anaerobic digestion in plug-flow reactors". Communications in Nonlinear Science and Numerical Simulation. 105: 106062. doi:10.1016/j.cnsns.2021.106062.
{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: article number as page number (link)
Masipasi135 (talk) 11:26, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
Reply 2-JUL-2026
[edit]
Edit request declined
- I find it hard to believe that 3 sources are needed to reference a single line of information, and even if so, text source integrity is not preserved, as the placement of three references at the end of the sentence indicates all three references are acting as sources for all of the information that is in that sentence. That means any one of them can do the job singularly than all three are doing in unison, which means the claim is oversourced. (See WP:TSI, WP:TOOMANYREFS.)
Regards, Spintendo 03:22, 3 July 2026 (UTC)
- Ah, my bad, didn't mean for all of them to be used in the article, mainly just set them up as proof of sources and validity of the request itself. Masipasi135 (talk) 08:26, 3 July 2026 (UTC)