Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 63 (2016) 302–314

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/rser

Sonochemical reactors: Review on features, advantages and limitations

Seyedali Asgharzadehahmadi a, Abdul Aziz Abdul Raman a,n, Rajarathinam Parthasarathy b,
Baharak Sajjadi a
a
Department of Chemical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, University of Malaya, 50603 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
b
School of Civil, Environmental and Chemical Engineering, RMIT University, Victoria 3001, Australia

art ic l e i nf o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Sonochemical reactors operate based on the release of high amount of energy from ultrasonic irradia-
Received 8 July 2014 tions. More application in chemical processes are being developed using these reactors. But the potential
Received in revised form of their applications are still limited largely due to the lack of understanding about their design,
6 January 2016
operational and performance characteristics. A detail review is therefore conducted on available litera-
Accepted 3 May 2016
Available online 1 June 2016
ture in this paper. From the review, the design features of sonochemical reactors are defined by different
types, number and position of ultrasonic transducers, whereas their operational parameters are deter-
Keywords: mined by ultrasonic frequency and intensity. As in the case of stirred vessel, sonochemical reactors can be
Sonochemical reactors also characterized for their performance based on mass transfer, mixing time and flow pattern. The
Acoustic cavitations
review claims that sonochemical reactors have potential to be more energy efficient compared to stirred
Acoustic streaming
vessel if designed and operated appropriately.
Ultrasound
Operating parameters & 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Mixing

Contents

1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 302
2. Features of sonochemical reactors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 303
2.1. Type of sonochemical reactors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 303
2.2. Number and position of transducers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 304
2.3. Frequency of irradiation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 305
2.4. Ultrasonic intensity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 306
3. Performance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 306
3.1. Mass transfer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 306
3.2. Mixing time . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 307
3.3. Flow pattern . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 308
4. Applications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 309
4.1. Chemical synthesis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 309
4.2. Extraction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 310
4.3. Dissolution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 310
4.4. Filtration. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 310
5. Comparison between sonochemical reactors and stirred vessels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 310
6. Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 312
Acknowledgment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 312
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 312

1. Introduction

n
Corresponding author. Tel.: þ 60 3 79675300; fax: þ 60 3 79675319. Sonochemical reactors, based on the use of ultrasound as a
E-mail address: [email protected] (A.A. Abdul Raman). source of energy, are being used for various applications due to

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2016.05.030
1364-0321/& 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 S. Asgharzadehahmadi et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 63 (2016) 302–314 303

their special features [1,2]. The phenomenon of acoustic cavitation,

as the most important feature of sonochemical reactors, can be
defined as the generation, growth and violent collapse of micro-
bubbles under ultrasonic irradiations which can release high
amount of energy in a small location [3–6]. This released energy
causes a dramatic increase in temperature and pressure (few
thousand Kelvin temperature and few hundred atmospheric
pressure) near the ultrasonic transducer which can lead to great
amount of process intensification [7,8]. In addition to this phe-
nomenon, propagation of ultrasonic waves in the liquid medium
generates local turbulence and micro-circulation in liquid which is
known as acoustic streaming [5]. Acoustic streaming can mainly
cause physical effects and also influence chemical processing Fig. 1. Ultrasonic horn reactor, adapted from [2].
limited by mass transfer [5].
These two phenomena also lead to some other significant
properties such as high shear stress near the bubble wall, free
radical production, high rate of heating and cooling, formation of
liquid jet, generation of shock waves and streaming of the liquid
near the bubble [3,9–16]. Due to these properties, sonochemical
reactors can be effectively applied for various chemical and phy-
sical processes such as chemical synthesis, biotechnology, waste-
water treatment, polymers degradation, extraction, textile pro-
cessing, crystallization, leaching, emulsification and petrochemical
industries, etc. [5,17–21]. Despite wide range applications of
ultrasound and sonochemistry, this type of reactors mostly apply
in laboratory scale and practical usage of sonochemical reactors for
industrial scale will face with some difficulties.
The aim of this paper is to provide an overview of features,
applications and limitations of sonochemical reactors. In addition,
the hydrodynamic behavior of different sonochemical reactor
configurations and the relationships of mass transfer, mixing time
and flow pattern with operating parameters, based on some
experimental and computational case studies have been investi-
gated. Ultrasonic systems are extremely sensitive and vulnerable
to operational parameters, which cannot be controlled without a
good knowledge and understanding of physical and chemical
phenomena. Therefore, the present work also aims at discussing
the main parameters which should be considered for the intensi- Fig. 2. Locations of boundary conditions (BC). 1 at z¼ 0.05 H, 2 at z ¼0.32 H, 3 at
z¼ 0.71 H, 4 at z¼ 0.94 H. The contours represent the mean velocity magnitude in
fication of cavitational activity. Furthermore, reviewing the appli- ms  1 [32].
cation of sonochemical reactors in different areas and comparing
these reactors with stirred vessels in terms of energy efficiency and transmits the wave into the medium directly. According to the
and mixing pattern are other objectives of this article. literature, the diameter of this probe is usually between 5 mm and
1.5 cm and it is usually made of transition metals such as titanium
[29,30]. Ultrasonic horn can generate a high magnitude of inten-
2. Features of sonochemical reactors
sity close to the probe and they can be beneficial for vigorous
stirring in small scale operations [31].
Having sufficient knowledge about features and characteristics
The immersion depth of probe into the medium and also the
of sonochemical reactors leads to appropriate design and obtain-
ratio of probe diameter to vessel diameter are the parameters that
ment of optimum operating parameters which plays a crucial role
should be considered in designing horn ultrasonic reactors [32].
in process efficiency based on specific applications. Choosing the
Kumar et al. [32] analyzed the effect of this ratio on mixing time by
suitable type of transducer with proper frequency range and
modifying the size of vessels and they claimed that an optimum
power intensity, number of transducers and their positions in the
reactor can be extremely effective in optimizing the cavitational diameter for vessel could be found in order to gain a uniform
activity, acoustic streaming and enhancement of sonochemical mixing. They also studied the fluid velocity in axial, radial and
reactor efficiency. tangential direction and obtained high axial and radial velocity
close to the horn and lower at the vessel wall. In another study,
2.1. Type of sonochemical reactors Faıd̈ et al. [30] analyzed the effect of three types of sonochemical
reactor and mentioned that the number of cavitation bubble near
There are a few types of sonochemical reactors with different the transducer was much higher than other positions in ultrasonic
ultrasonic transducers which are usually applied in laboratory horn reactor. Fig. 2 shows distribution of the mean velocity and
scale applications. Ultrasonic horn is the most common type of locations of boundary conditions for CFD simulation in the vessel
sonochemical reactor which is applied in many experimental [32]. It can be seen from Fig. 2 that ultrasonic horn can provide
studies such as micromixing, transesterification of biodiesel, sac- significant cavitation in the medium by focusing its energy on a
charification, microfiltration, etc. [20,22–28]. A schematic picture specific zone of sample.
of ultrasonic horn reactor is illustrated in Fig. 1. The ultrasonic Ultrasonic horn can also be used longitudinally in the vessel for
horn involves a cylindrical probe which submerges in the liquid different applications. Bhirud et al. [33] applied a longitudinal
304 S. Asgharzadehahmadi et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 63 (2016) 302–314

numerical studies on acoustic streaming in ultrasonic bath was

carried out by Xu et al. [39] and compared with experimental data
provided by Kojima et al. [40]. They investigated the influence of
input power, liquid height and plate radius in the system. Fig. 4
illustrates the fluid velocity distribution in the right half of the
sonochemical reactor with high input power of 50 W. As observed
in the figure there are two circulations in the tank and a fountain
at the center of the liquid surface which are due to high magnitude
of input power.
Monnier et al. [41] studied the differences between probe-horn
and cup-horn for micromixing in order to study the effects of
propagation direction and performances of two transducers in
sonochemical reactors. They measured micromixing time by
Fig. 3. Ultrasonic longitudinal horn reactor [2].
modifying the acoustic intensity and noticed that cop-horn needed
more energy cost in comparison with probe-horn. Another com-
parative study among ultrasonic horn, bath and longitudinal horn
was accomplished by Csoka et al. [2] in which the magnitude of
frequency for these three reactors were 20, 204 and 36 kHz and
the amount of rated power output were 240, 220 and 150 W,
respectively. They mentioned that higher area of irradiation had a
considerable role in efficiency of transducers. As a result, they
reported that the reactor equipped by ultrasonic longitudinal horn
has a more uniform distribution of cavitational activity in com-
parison with the other sonoreactors.
Generally, ultrasonic bath should be used where a specific
power number or ultrasonic intensity is not required, because
ultrasonic power does not change in this type of sonochemical
reactors [1]. In addition, a significant disadvantage of ultrasonic
bath is decline of power with time [1]. On the other hand, it is not
easy to obtain a uniform distribution of ultrasonic energy with
ultrasonic bath, so ultrasonic horn are preferable in situations that
a localized energy is required [42]. Overall, choosing the suitable
sonochemical reactor should be carried out considering the par-
ticular usage of them. However, the use of more than one trans-
ducer is mandatory for large scale applications.

Fig. 4. Simulation results of liquid velocity distributions in sonochemical reactors

2.2. Number and position of transducers
with input power of 50 W [39].
Most of the sonochemical reactors mentioned in the previous
horn in a batch reactor for wastewater treatment application and sections were applicable in laboratory scale due to generation of
concluded that this type of transducer was more effective for small cavitational zone which is usually close to the transducer.
degradation of formic acid in this process. The longitudinal horns Such problem leads to sonochemical reactors with multiple irra-
usually have higher surface area of irradiation in the medium and diating transducers which can be applied in large scale operations
therefore the magnitude of energy efficiency in this type of [20]. These transducers can work with different or same frequency
ultrasonic is higher than the conventional one [2]. Furthermore, and cause an increase in cavitational zones in reactors [20]. Par-
the large irradiation area of longitudinal ultrasonic horn leads to vizian et al. [43] designed a new sonochemical reactor that include
four piezoelectric transducers with high frequency of 1.7 MHz at
uniform distribution of cavitational activity in the whole reactor
the bottom of the reactor which were in direct contact with fluid.
volume which can be more beneficial in pilot scale in comparison
Diameter of tank was 15 cm and diameter of each transducer was
with simple ultrasonic horn [2,34]. Fig. 3 shows a typical ultrasonic
2.5 cm. One transducer was located in the center of the tank and
longitudinal horn reactor.
three others were placed around it with 120° circumferential
Despite common applications of ultrasonic horn in laboratory
space. They studied macro- and micromixing in their novel
scale, they are not powerful enough for scale up prospects because
sonochemical reactors and cited the effective roles number of
their capacity for transition of acoustic energy into the big tank
transducers play on mixing efficiency.
volume seems slightly week. In addition, cavitational blocking On the other hand, the location of transducers is another factor
(acoustic decoupling), particle shedding and erosion of ultrasonic for modifying the direction of ultrasonic irradiations into the fluid
probe are some of the other challenges for industrial usage of and achieving a uniform and maximum cavitational zone in sono-
ultrasonic horn reactors [20,35,36]. As a result, another type of chemical reactor [20]. Finding the optimum position of the trans-
ultrasonic system called ultrasonic bath is usually applied in scaled ducers with multiple frequencies has a key role in geometrical
up systems. design of the reactor, hence many studies have been carried out
Ultrasonic bath (or cup-horn) is another type of sonochemical with different numbers and positions of transducers in order to
reactors in which transducers are located at the bottom of the reach higher efficiency of reactor for different applications [37,44–
reactor [37] and ultrasound irradiations transmit into the system 47]. In 2001, Sivakumar and Pandit [48] accomplished an investi-
indirectly [31]. However, some authors have considered the gation on degradation of reactive dye, Rhodamine B, for wastewater
sonochemical reactors in which transducers have a direct contact treatment using three different laboratory scale sonochemical
with fluid as ultrasonic bath reactor [38]. One of the most recent reactors. They studied the efficiency of an ultrasonic horn reactor
 S. Asgharzadehahmadi et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 63 (2016) 302–314 305

frequency and power on the process yield and obtained an

increase in sonoluminescence intensity by increase in flow speed
induced by high power transducers.
Generally, the position and number of transducers should be
designed based on the reactor diameter and liquid height. The
transducer in the reactors, on the basis of many transducer
arrangement (with perhaps many frequency operation), should be
positioned in such a way that constant and maximum cavitational
activity is acquired. Cavitational activity distribution's theoretical
analysis helps to reach the most favorable position of the trans-
ducers. The more proper arrangement for large scale operation is
typically flow cell kind of arrangements. This is due to the fact that,
this certainly provides flexibility regarding the continuous opera-
tion. Moreover, it provides a choice of arranging the transducers
on the wall of the reactor on opposite faces. In this way, standing
wave pattern can be produced. Rectangular cross-sections or
hexagonal have been typically announced to provide very good
distribution of the cavitational activity. They are suggested for the
large scale operation. In the reactor system, the effective cavita-
tional intensity will be increased by the establishment of the
standing wave patterns. It also helps to increase the processing
rates of particular applications. The mixing characteristics and the
hydrodynamic behavior in the reactor which can be the most
important particularly for the physical processing applications are
affected by the location and number of transducers. For the pur-
Fig. 5. (a) Cylindrical dual frequency flow reactor. (b) Hexagonal triple frequency
flow reactor [37,49].
pose of achieving the desired objectives, it is significant to keep
similar conditions of mixing characteristics and hydrodynamics in
the reactor while keeping the geometric likeness for the design of
Table 1 large scale sonochemical reactors [20,50].
Comparison of cavitational yield in various types of sonochemical reactors [37,49]. Moreover, an increase in the immersion transducer's diameter
concerning the reactor diameter will lead to an increase in the
Type of reactor Cavitational yield (mol/W)
cavitational activity till the most favorable ratio which usually is
Ultrasonic horn 0.0005 contingent upon application. The level of turbulent dissipation of
Ultrasonic bath 0.01 energy is mainly affected by the ratio. Moreover, the ratio affects
Dual frequency flow cell 0.011 the intensity of the acoustic streaming. Therefore, it would be
Triple frequency flow cell 0.018
Longitudinally vibrating reactor 0.077
more essential in the applications where physical influences are
more significant [20,50].

(with different probe size), an ultrasonic bath reactor (with two 2.3. Frequency of irradiation
transducers at the bottom of the vessel) and a dual frequency batch
reactor including six transducers with different frequencies. Con- Choosing the suitable frequency of irradiation is one of the
sequently, Gogate et al. [49] used these three reactors for degra- most significant parameters in sonochemical reactors. According
dation of formic acid and also designed a novel triple frequency to the literature, in order to cause a physical effect in the system, a
hexagonal flow cell in large scale involving eighteen transducers low irradiation frequency of 10–100 kHz can be appropriate. This
with multiple frequencies in order to compare it with the three range of frequency usually applies in biodiesel synthesis, polymer
mentioned reactors. They found out that the hexagonal sono- degradation and extraction, textile processing, etc. [31,50–52].
chemical reactor causes a much uniform distribution of cavitational Higher range of frequencies can be used where intense chemical
activity in both axial and radial directions. As a result, it had higher effect is required in usages such as chemical synthesis and was-
cavitational yields and energy efficiencies in comparison with tewater treatment [31,50]. Koda et al. [53] analyzed the sono-
conventional sonochemical reactors. Fig. 5 depicts the arrangement chemical efficiency for potassium iodide oxidation using seven
of transducers in dual and triple frequency flow reactor. different sonochemical reactors in order to investigate the effect of
In another study, Bhirud et al. [33] applied their new sono- frequency of irradiation in the range of 19.5 kHz–1.2 MHz. They
chemical reactor using a longitudinal horn with ultrasonic fre- reported that in the range of 19.5–200 kHz, increase in the fre-
quency of 36 kHz and maximum power input of 150 W for formic quency leads to an increase in sonochemical efficiency. However, a
acid degradation in wastewater treatment and obtained the reverse influence was observed at high frequency due to low
highest amount of cavitational yield among these five sono- energy dissipation of ultrasound. Furthermore, the same results
chemical reactors (Table 1). As mentioned before, such results were obtained for Fricke solution with maximum sonochemical
show that high irradiation area of longitudinal horn has a con- efficiency at 130 kHz. Wayment and Casadonte [54] studied the
siderable effect on uniform distribution of cavitational zone. decomposition of potassium iodide under different frequency
Consequently, it can supply energy into the reactor better than between 20 and 500 kHz and reported the maximum oxidation
other configuration. rate at 300 kHz. The existence of optimum frequency of irradiation
Hatanaka et al. [44] measured the intensity of sonolumines- in sonochemical reactors has also been reported by some other
cence in a rectangular sonochemical reactor equipped with four researchers [55–58].
transducers installed to the bottom and two to the facing side of On the other hand, there are some other disadvantages using
the vessel. Considering the cavitation bubbles movement gener- high frequency of irradiation such as erosion of the transducers
ated by six transducers, they analyzed the effect of ultrasonic surface in continuous operations and high magnitude of power
306 S. Asgharzadehahmadi et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 63 (2016) 302–314

consumption [20]. In order to eliminate these problems, single

high frequency operation can be replaced with dual or multiple
low frequencies where high cavitational intensities are required. In
addition, more uniform distribution of cavitational activity and
superior acoustic streaming can be obtained using dual or multiple
frequency operation [59–61]. Feng et al. [59] investigated potas-
sium iodide decomposition by combination of low frequency of
28 kHz from an ultrasonic horn with some high frequency trans-
ducers in the frequency range of 0.75–1.06 MHz. They reported
that combination of low frequencies led to higher efficacy as
compared to a high single frequency. Servant et al. [60] also
reported higher cavitation bubble volume fractions induced by
dual frequency sonochemical reactor in comparison with the one
Fig. 6. Effect of power dissipation on iodine yield [50,68].
under single frequency operation. There are also many other
reports indicating higher efficiency of dual or multiple frequency
operation as compared to single frequency sonochemical reactors summarized that choosing appropriate power rating does not only
[62–65]. increase the efficiency of operation but also leads to decrease in
For any scale of operation, the frequency selection criterion is operating cost for a given process.
determined and it is also determined for single frequency opera- In addition, in bulk of liquid, the degree of temperature
tion. However, based on literature, multi-frequency operation increase can be described as the rate of power dissipation's func-
(combination of different or same frequency) increases the overall tion which finally leads to change gas solubility and vapor pressure
cavitational activity [37,48,59,60,62]. Moreover, it generates influencing the ease of producing cavitational events and final
intensities proper for chemical processing applications at higher collapse intensity. It is of great importance to possess the knowl-
energy effectiveness and efficiencies. The cavitation medium is edge of hydrodynamic behavior such as mixing time which is
strongly disturbed because of the combination of frequencies contingent upon the power density in the development of con-
causing overall higher cavitational activity. This is because of tinuous scale sonochemical reactors. Therefore, it is significant to
generating more cavities and stronger bubble-bubble, bubble- express the quantity of the actual power disappeared in the bulk of
sound field interaction as a result of secondary and primary Bjer- liquid and available for generating cavitating conditions [50].
kens forces. In another theoretical examination, dual frequency Generally, it is very difficult to dissipate the whole power in the
system's modeling with an objective of comprehending the reli- specified reactor volume utilizing single transducer with excellent
ance of temperature, collapse pressure, time of collapse and the efficacy as a result of restrictions in the construction materials,
degree of bubble on different combinations of frequencies was vibrating piezoelectric crystal, in large scale operation with oper-
carried out by Tatake and Pandit [62]. Based on the reports, it ating volume in the range of few to few hundred liters. Moreover,
could be concluded that multiple frequency operation leads to in sonochemical reactors, active zones with preferred minimum
higher intensity of cavitational collapse. cavitational activity concentrate close to irradiating surface (2–
3 cm away). Therefore, more than one irradiating surface will be
2.4. Ultrasonic intensity
needed for attaining constant distribution of the cavitational
activity. Furthermore, the arrangement of these transducers at
Another critical operating parameter in sonochemical reactor
different places must be optimized. The power demand for spe-
design is the ultrasonic intensity which is defined as amount of
cified application, the dimensions of each transducer and the
power dissipation in the fluid per unit area of irradiating surface.
operating volume decide the exact number. The normal range of
The power dissipation rate will affect number, size and life time of
irradiation's optimum intensity (power dissipated per unit area of
bubbles in the liquid medium and also temperature rise which is
irradiating surface, W/cm2) is 5–20 W/cm2. In addition, it depends
directly related to gas solubility and vapor pressure [50]. Calori-
metric method is generally applied to get the power based on the on the final application and actual reactor system [50].
first law of thermodynamics [50]. Löning et al. [66] carried out an
investigation on energy transformation in an ultrasonic horn sys-
tem applying calorimetry and electrical power measurement 3. Performance
technique and observed that the amount of power dissipation was
considerably affected by properties of liquid medium i.e. power The performance of reactors can be analyzed in different
transfer decrease in high volatile and high viscosity medium aspects. In this paper, an attempt has been made to investigate the
which results in increase in power consumption. performance of sonochemical reactors in terms of mass transfer,
Kumar et al. [67] studied the mass transfer for a gas–liquid mixing time and flow pattern, based on the previous works in the
system in a horn ultrasonic reactor and reported that mass transfer literature.
coefficient of air into the liquid increased by increasing the power
intensity of the system. Feng et al. [59] also investigated the effects
of ultrasonic intensity on iodine liberation with different ultra- 3.1. Mass transfer
sonic frequencies and they observed that the cavitational activity
and liberation of iodine increased by increasing the intensity of Effects of ultrasonic irradiation on mass transfer characteristics
irradiation. were firstly investigated by Cadwell and Fogler [73] in a batch
On the other hand, Henglein and Gutierrez [68] investigated reactor. They quantified the absorption rate of carbon dioxide by
the effects of power dissipation on iodine yield of potassium glycerol with and without ultrasonication and obtained higher
iodide oxidation in constant frequency of 20 kHz and obtained an rate of absorption in presence of ultrasonic irradiation which was
optimum value of 50 W for power dissipation as shown in Fig. 6. due to the influence of acoustic streaming and the associated
The existence of optimum ultrasonic intensity has also been turbulence [74]. For gas–liquid mass transfer analysis in sono-
reported by many other researchers [69–72]. As a result, it can be chemical reactors, the dissolved oxygen concentration in the liquid
 S. Asgharzadehahmadi et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 63 (2016) 302–314 307

can be predicted by using the following equation [50]: that this mechanism for the induction of air into the liquid was not

   beneficial compared to surface aerators.
 d C O2 Laugier et al. [77] analyzed the solubility and mass transfer in a
K L aV C O2  C O2 ¼ V
dt 1 l stainless steel ultrasonic autoclave reactor with irradiating
where K L a is the volumetric mass transfer coefficient (1/s), V is the frequency of 20 kHz and input power of 200 W. This reactor was
volume of the liquid in the reactor (m3), C O2 is the saturation also equipped with a Rushton turbine with maximum stirring
concentration of dissolved oxygen (mmol m  3) and C O2 is the speed of 3000 rpm and power dissipation of 16.7 W. They reported
concentration of dissolved oxygen in the reactor at any time t that although solubility was not significantly improved using
(mmol m  3). However, dependency of this equation on the oper- ultrasonic irradiation in a stirred tank (due to increase in tem-
ating temperature should be considered during the experimental perature), the gas–liquid mass transfer greatly increased. They
tests in order to obtain accurate measurements. mentioned that the mass transfer coefficient would be increased
Kumar et al. [75] quantified the overall volumetric mass by 11 times by combining ultrasonic irradiation with mechanical
transfer coefficient (K L a) in ultrasonic horn and bath reactors for agitation at temperature of 323 K, stirring speed of 110 rpm and
transfer of oxygen gas from air into water. The liquid volume in absolute pressure of 10 bars. They also reported that mass transfer
conventional horn reactor was fixed at 500 mL and operated with coefficient depended highly on the operating pressure and tem-
ultrasonic frequency of 20 kHz and maximum power dissipation of perature in the reactor.
65 W while the ultrasonic bath reactor (with capacity of 3.3 L and
equipped by three transducers at the bottom of the reactor) 3.2. Mixing time
operated with ultrasonic frequency and power input of 20 kHz and
120 W. They developed two mathematical correlations for ultra- Mixing time is one of the most significant factors in designing
sonic horn and bath reactors as follows: sonochemical reactors and it generally depends on the discussed
 0:17  0:37
Ultrasonic horn K L a ¼ 0:029 P=V Vg operating parameters in previous sections. The knowledge of
 0:4  0:6 mixing time is very important when a chemical reaction occurs in
Ultrasonic bath K L a ¼ 0:0039 P=V Vg
where (P/V) is the power dissipated per unit volume (W/m3) and the sonochemical reactor. Reaction time must be higher than
Vg is superficial gas velocity (m/s). In addition, they compared the mixing time in order to achieve the effective reaction rate,
mass transfer coefficient in the two mentioned reactors with a although it is very difficult to obtain for fast reactions [22,78,79].
mechanically agitated contactor (MAC). Fig. 7 shows the MAC data Many different methods have been applied for mixing time mea-
surement in conventional reactors, but only few of them can be
estimated from equation reported by Linek et al. [76].
This figure demonstrates high difference between mass trans- used for sonochemical reactors such as measurement of pH, dis-
fer value of the mechanically agitated contactor and the ultrasonic solved oxygen, conductivity, particle image velocimetry and
computational fluid dynamics [50]. The variation of the mixing
reactors. This difference shows the significant role of convective
time in different sonochemical reactors and dependency of the
fluid motion on overall mass transfer coefficient. Furthermore, the
mixing time on reactor size, ultrasonic frequency and power has
location of sparger to release gas into the liquid is one of the other
been discussed in this section.
important parameters that should be considered in design of gas–
Monnier et al. [22,41,80] investigated the effects of operating
liquid systems [75]. In another study, Kumar et al. [67] investi-
parameters on micromixing of batch and semi-batch sonochemical
gated the induction of air into the sonochemical reactor by
reactor and measured the mixing time for a model reaction of
locating the ultrasonic horn just above the liquid surface and
iodide and iodate called Dushman Reaction. They reported that the
quantified the gas–liquid mass transfer coefficient using dynamic
mixing time decreased by increasing the ultrasonic intensity and
method. They reported that mass transfer coefficient increased by
also by increasing the Reynolds number. They obtained the mixing
increasing the power density (W/m3). However, they mentioned
time of 0.015 s for intensity of 10 W cm  2. However, they also
reported that the effect of power on mixing time reduced after this
amount of intensity. In addition, Monnier et al. [80] developed a
correlation between micromixing time and segregation index
(segregation index is equal to zero for complete mixing) based on
the continuous model as follows:

t m ¼ 0:31X 1:02
S  0:3X S

where tm is micromixing time (s) and XS is segregation index.

Vichare et al. [81] studied the mixing time variation in an ultra-
sonic horn reactor with frequency of 22.7 kHz and power dis-
sipation of 24.5 W. They found that the mixing time for horn type
reactor strongly depends on geometrical design of the vessel, horn
position and diameter of horn tip. They also developed a correla-
tion for the prediction of mixing time as follows:
" #
4
Z 3=2 T 3 ðT þ 2Z Þ  2 dh
θmix ¼ 7  106 d  0:235
ν2h g1=2 μ  2 ρ2l
where θmix mix is mixing time (s), d is distance between horn and
bottom of reactor, Z is height of liquid in reactor (m), T is diameter
of vessel (m), dh is diameter of horn (m), νh is velocity of horn (m/
s) (amplitude of oscillation in m  frequency in Hz), g is accelera-
Fig. 7. Comparison of mass-transfer coefficient in different reactors at constant tion due gravity (m/s2), μ is viscosity of liquid (N s/m2) and ρl is
power density of 11.71 kW m  3 [75,76]. bulk density of liquid (kg/m3).
308 S. Asgharzadehahmadi et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 63 (2016) 302–314

Kumar et al. [32] also studied the effects of power density and found the velocity value of 0.01–0.03 m/s and 0.05–0.10 m/s for
reactor geometry on mixing time. They reported that mixing time electrical powers of 40 W and 100 W respectively in a PVC cylind-
decreased by increasing the power density and measured the rical body with diameter of 0.10 m and height of 0.10 m. Another
mixing time value of 131–17 s for power density of 15–35 kW/m3. point mentioned in this paper was that experimental outlet
In addition, they analyzed the effects of D/T ratio (where D is horn response of the system did not change by increasing the ultrasonic
diameter and T is reactor diameter) on mixing time variation by power and there was an ideal flow in the sonochemical reactors
changing the reactor diameter in constant horn diameter of under ultrasonic irradiation.
0.013 m and power density of 35 kW/m3. Mixing time of 62 and Another investigation in frequency of 500 kHz was accom-
12 s were obtained for reactor diameters of 0.11 and 0.14 m plished by Chouvellon et al. [88]. They measured the flow velocity
respectively which were attributed to the fact that average tur- in different situations by modifying the electrical power, the water
bulent kinetic energy (TKE) was lower for the larger vessel. Yusaf height and the fluid viscosity using laser tomography technique.
and Buttsworth [82] also investigated the mixing time variation in The velocity calculated was in the range of 0.005–0.033 m/s for the
a sonochemical batch reactor and discussed the dependency of electrical power range of 12.5–150 W. However, the maximum rate
mixing time on applied ultrasonic power. of velocity achieved was until 100 W after which the flow velocity
In 2008, Deshpande et al. [83] developed a new correlation for increased slowly. They also reported that the average velocity
mixing time based on the flow structure pattern which could be decreased in a linear way by increasing the water height. Fur-
used for different types of chemical reactors. They considered the thermore, they observed that the flow velocity increased by
operating and geometrical conditions of the reactor and also the increasing the liquid viscosity until it reached the threshold.
statistical parameters in developing this unified correlation. In 1998, Laborde et al. [89] utilized particle image velocimetry
However, one of the most recent investigations on macro- and (PIV) to measure the amount of velocity in a sonochemical reactor.
micromixing in sonochemical reactors were carried out by Parvi- PIV is an optical method for studying fluid dynamic, flow velocity
zian et al. [84,85] in which mixing time was also measured using measurement, flow structure, etc. by determining particle dis-
Monnier et al. [80] correlation. The obtained micromixing time placement over time using a double-pulsed laser technique
values were in the range of 0.001–0.01 s. This low range of [90,91]. The liquid media needs to be seeded by tracers in PIV [92].
micromixing time could be due to high ultrasonic frequency and Laborde et al. [89] took cavitation bubbles as tracer for measuring
generated jet streams which assisted the local micro agitation and the flow velocity by PIV at low and high frequencies. Although the
micromixing. Table 2 depicts some representative studies on cavitation bubbles were considerably stable and a velocity vector
mixing time. The presented table provides information about the around 1 cm/s were reported, the measurement of velocity could
variation of mixing time in different sonochemical reactor with be more inaccurate at low frequency due to increment in number
different operating parameters. This information can be used in of cavitation bubbles. The velocity vectors reported in this paper
design of new sonochemical reactors with similar conditions. were in the range of 50–85 cm/s which were not so reliable due to
non-uniform distribution and difference in kinds of cavitation
3.3. Flow pattern bubbles.
Dahlem et al. [93] measured the velocity of acoustic streaming
Using ultrasonic waves in medium generates acoustic streaming with frequency of 20 kHz in two different sonochemical reactors
in liquid phase which causes an increment in the mass and heat applying PIV technique. The average velocity of an ultrasound reactor
transfer [32]. Rayleigh [86] carried out the first analysis about with volume of 3.5 l and equipped with the telsonic horn (radial
acoustic streaming and many investigations were accomplished horn) was about 0.05 m/s while for the other sonochemical reactor
after that in order to measure the fluid velocity and increase it by with the laboratory stepped horn (Longitudinal horn) and volume of
applying various approaches. Cadwell and Fogler [73] calculated the 0.3 l, the velocity was measured to be around 0.35 m/s. Frenkel et al.
acoustic streaming velocity generated by low frequency of 20 kHz in [94] used PIV technique to measure the amount of flow velocity in a
the range of 0.7–1.0 m/s and high frequency of 800 kHz near the 6 l glass tank with dimensions of 0.25  0.17  0.14 m3 and ultrasonic
ultrasound horn in the range of 0.3–0.5 m/s. Some other investi- frequency of 3 MHz. They obtained a linear relationship as follows:
gations have also been carried out in high frequency (500 kHz) to
analyze the effects of power on flow velocity. Gondrexon et al. [87] V S ¼ 0:0992  I

Table 2
Overview of some important works on mixing time.

Sr. no Details of sonochemical reactor and operating parameters Other variable parameters Mixing time (s) Ref.

1 The experiments were performed in three cylindrical glass vessels with different volume. Reactor capacity of 100 ml 0.1 [22]
Ultrasonic horn with diameter of 5 mm, dissipated power of 30 W/kg and frequency of Reactor capacity of 500 ml 0.01
20 kHz were used. Reactor capacity of 3750 ml and Reynolds 0.005
number of 100,000.
2 The experiments were performed in a cylindrical sonochemical reactor with diameter of Coupling with Rushton turbine, Reynolds 0.01 [41]
40 mm and height of 56 mm. Ultrasonic horn with diameter of 13 mm and frequency of number of 100,000
20 kHz were used. Ultrasonic intensity of 10 W/cm2 0.015
3 An ultrasonic horn with irradiation frequency of 22.7 kHz and energy dissipation of 24.5 W Reactor capacity of 1 l 4–6 [81]
and different cross sectional area of the horn tip were used. Reactor capacity of 2 l. 5–8.5
4 The experiments were performed in a cylindrical sonochemical reactor with diameter of Power density range of 15–35 kW/m3 17–131 [32]
0.135 m and volume of 2000 ml. (experimental)
Power density range of 15–35 kW/m3 16.8–139.21
(predicted by CFD)
5 A cylindrical sonochemical reactor with high frequency of 1.7 MHz was used. T ¼ 298 K,  0.028 [43]
P¼ 1 atm, f¼ 1.7 MHz.
6 A new continuous tubular sonochemical reactor with capacity of 370 ml and irradiation  0.001–0.01 [84]
frequency of 1.7 MHz was applied.
 S. Asgharzadehahmadi et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 63 (2016) 302–314 309

where VS is acoustic streaming velocity in cm/s and I is the irradiation reactor and compared their results with experimental ones
intensity in W/cm2. Another investigation on acoustic streaming in obtained by Kojima et al. [40] at the same ultrasound frequency.
frequency of 40 kHz was carried out by Kumar et al. [32] for mea- They investigated the effect of acoustic power at 10, 30 and 50 W
suring the mean flow and turbulence parameters applying laser in a cylindrical vessel with radius and height of 0.1 m filled with
Doppler anemometer (LDA) in a cylindrical vessel with diameter of water. They demonstrated that for the high and middle input
0.135 m and volume of 2000 ml. Maximum magnitude which they power the experimental results agreed well with simulation
determined for axial velocity near the ultrasound horn was 1.6, results. However, the results were not completely similar to the
1.3 and 0.57 m/s for dissipated power density of 35, 25 and 15 kW/ experimental ones for the low acoustic power of 10 W. Xu et al.
m3 and intensities of 527.6, 376.8 and 226.1 kW/m2, respectively. [39] concluded that experimental test could not measure the low
Axial velocity increases with power and decreases with axial and fluid velocity and as a result the circulation was not depicted in
radial distance but increases near the wall. Radial and tangential experimental results. They also mentioned that the thermal con-
velocities are almost in the same range but lower than axial velocity vection could influence the experimental results.
and they also increase with power. Moreover, the effect of vessel size
on flow behavior has been investigated and observed that the opti-
mum diameter of vessel and power intensity should be determined
in order to obtain a uniform mixing in sonochemical reactor. 4. Applications
In 2009, Mandroyan et al. [92] also used PIV to study the
velocity distribution induced by ultrasonic irradiation at fre- The use of ultrasonic in laboratory scale and industrial areas
quencies of 20 and 40 KHz, taking fluorescent seeds as tracer has increased in recent years. Acoustic cavitation is the most sig-
which could not be disturbed by cavitation bubble. For both fre- nificant characteristics of sonochemical reactors leading to high
quencies, the axial flow velocity presents a greater magnitude in effective temperature and pressure locally, high shear stress near
comparison with the recirculation velocity and it exceeded 1 m/s the bubble wall, creation of microjets, etc. which can provide an
in some specific situations. In addition, Mandroyan et al. [92] appropriate situation for numerous applications [50]. It is worth-
added an electrode in front of the transducer, which could reflect while to review the various applications, where sonochemical
the ultrasonic waves in order to analyze the new hydrodynamic reactors can be applied effectively.
behavior of the fluid within the sonochemical reactor and also
investigated the influence of electrode distance from transducer
4.1. Chemical synthesis
on ultrasonic system. This electrode generated a new flow on its
both sides correspond to tangential flow. Fig. 8 demonstrates the
Ultrasonic irradiation has been used in many chemical reac-
effects of electrode distance on average velocity vectors at fre-
tions in order to enhance the kinetics and selectivity [1,38,95–99].
quency of 20 KHz and input power of 45 W.
One of the recent studies on flow velocity was carried out by Under suitable operating parameters, ultrasonic can considerably
Kojima et al. [40] in a rectangular parallelepiped sonochemical decrease the time of reactions and also increase the reaction yield
reactor under 490 KHz ultrasonic frequency. They concluded that [5]. Determination of the oxidative stability of edible oils is a
the average flow velocity increases by increasing the electric typical example of oxidation which is significantly accelerated by
power after analyzing the effect of electric input power. However, ultrasonic [1,100]. In environmental area, the ultrasonic decom-
the efficiency of reactor diminished up to a particular amount of position of toxic organic compound such as phenolic compounds,
electric power due to the lack of active bubbles per unit volume. In aromatic compounds, esters and textile dyes into the short chain
addition, Kojima et al. [40] enhanced the efficiency of sonochem- organic acid, inorganic ions or carbon dioxide can be carried out
ical reactor about 100% by adding a stirrer to the sonochemical 10,000 times faster than natural oxidation [101,102]. In addition,
reactor and combining the mechanical flow with acoustic the use of acoustic cavitation can be beneficial in biotechnology
streaming. On the other hand, Xu et al. [39] accomplished a and biochemical reactions such as cell disruption and enzymatic
numerical study on liquid velocity distribution in an ultrasonic hydrolysis [101,103,104].

Fig. 8. The average velocity vectors field at 20 kHz – input power ¼ 45 W. The electrode/horn distance ¼ 30 mm (a) and 10 mm (b) [92].
310 S. Asgharzadehahmadi et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 63 (2016) 302–314

4.2. Extraction mixing for a dead-end ultrafiltration process. They changed the
classical stirrer speed and ultrasonic power at constant frequency
Ultrasonic-assisted extraction has usually been accomplished of 20 kHz for the purpose of the study. The maximum electrical
in terms of solid-liquid extraction and liquid-liquid extraction in power of ultrasonic was 40 W. They demonstrated that increment
order to remove a number of analytes from various types of of ultrasonic power as well as increment of stirrer speed led to an
samples [105–107]. Sonochemical reactors can be effectively increment in volumetric permeates flux and enhancement in
applied for various extraction operations due to high temperature dead-end ultrafiltration efficiency. However, they did not distin-
and pressure which enhance solubility and penetration between guish which one could be more effective for this process. Guo et al.
different phase interface, and oxidative energy of the radicals [119] also compared the ultrasound mixing with the stirring type
released by sonication of the solvent [108–111]. Priego-Capote and applying a Kodak motion analyzer to observe the dispersion of ink
Luque de Castro [1] reviewed about sixty experimental studies on in the ethanol and to trace of sugar crystals in a 55 mm diameter
continuous and discontinuous ultrasonic-assisted leaching appli- jacketed vessel. The power and frequency of ultrasonic processor
cations and concluded that in many cases, using ultrasonic- were 750 W and 20 KHz, respectively and the stirred vessel were
assisted leaching was more beneficial compared with conven- equipped with a 4-blade impeller. For the amplitude of 41% of
tional or microwave-assisted leaching due to higher efficiency and maximum power and the stirring rate of 400 rpm they found that
kinetics.
the movement of particles in the stirring vessel was more orderly
in comparison with the vessel equipped by ultrasound. The par-
4.3. Dissolution
ticles in the ultrasonic vessel moved erratically and the collision
rate between them increased in the system due to their chaotic
Dissolution of soluble sample is generally accomplished by
movements. As a result, a uniform distribution of sugar crystals
mechanical or manual stirring, which is usually time-consuming
was obtained in the vessel with ultrasound while for the stirring
and it leads to random error as a result of manipulation. Ultrasonic
vessel the particles were not dispersed in the whole vessel as well
energy can be applied to assist the dissolution process with the
as in the ultrasonic one and the majority of sugar crystals were
purpose of saving time and accelerating the dissolution of great
precipitated in the bottom of the vessel. In addition, velocity var-
variety of samples [112]. Ultrasonic irradiations is not only used for
analytical laboratory applications, but also for analyzing the raw iance was applied in order to show the difference of turbulence
samples by dissolving the minerals in metallurgical industries between ultrasound and stirring and it was indicated that the
[113]. The most significant advantage of ultrasonic in comparison velocity variance of particles in the vessel with ultrasound was
with other equipment is that it needs only the presence of liquid much higher than in the stirred vessel.
medium for transmission of energy. Furthermore, low frequency Another comparative investigation on ultrasonic and impeller
irradiation of ultrasonic with high intensity can be combined with mixing was accomplished by Wu et al. [120] for producing bio-
fibrinolytic therapy for dissolving clots in pharmacological diesel during the Alkali-catalyzed transesterification process. The
thrombolysis in order to reduce the treatment time [114]. parameter investigated in this paper using both mixing method
was the droplet size distribution. The experiments were carried
4.4. Filtration out in a 1 gallon tank with diameter and height of 17 and 20 cm,
respectively. The ultrasonic frequency was 24 kHz and the impeller
The process of filtration is generally carried out by using a was a flat blade turbine with six blades with diameter of 5 cm.
porous medium for separating two phases (solid–liquid or gas– They also used a critical agitator speed for the impeller in order to
liquid) [115]. Ultrasonic irradiation can assist the performance of diminish a separated layer of two immiscible liquids [121] and
membrane-based filtration devices by countering their dis- presented the below empirical equation:
advantages such as membrane fouling, short lifetime, high costs  1=9  0:26
μc ρc  ρd
and mechanical complexity [1]. Ultrasonic-based devices can Nc ¼ KD  2=3
enhance the membrane permeability by increasing the diffusion of ρc ρc
a solute in membrane barrier for electrolyte membrane dialysis
where Nc is the critical agitator speed, K is a proportional coeffi-
and also by removing particles from the filters [116].
cient, D is the vessel diameter ρc and ρd are the densities of the
In addition to the mentioned applications, ultrasonic irradia-
continuous and dispersed phases, respectively and μc is the visc-
tion can also greatly promote some other processes such as
osity of the continuous phase. Taking K as 750 at the center of the
digestion, reagent generation, slurry formation, cleaning, degas-
vessel, the amount of Nc obtained was 493 rpm and by comparing
sing, homogenization and emulsification [1,117]. However, it
it with the highest rate of impeller at 1000 rpm and ultrasonic
should be considered that the use of suitable ultrasonic device is
power of 30 W, Wu et al. [120] found that the mean droplet size
very important to obtain the appropriate effects. For example,
obtained by impeller mixing was 2.4 times larger than the ultra-
ultrasonic bath cannot be used for the applications in which par-
sonic type, so ultrasonic reactor was a more efficient tool for
ticular ultrasonic amplitude or uniform distribution of ultrasonic
energy is required. breaking methanol into small droplets at equivalent power input.
In 2011, Parvizian et al. [43] analyzed the macro- and micro-
mixing of a new type of sonochemical reactor with four piezo-
5. Comparison between sonochemical reactors and stirred electric transudcers (with diameter of 2 cm and high frequency of
vessels 1.7 MHz) and they compared the new sonochemical reactor mix-
ing efficiency and power consumption with Rushton turbine
As mentioned in the previous section, ultrasound could be used impeller in a brief part of this work. Macromixing investigations
in diversity of application for intensification of chemical and were analyzed visually while micromixing was studied by using
physical processes. In this section, the performance of sono- Dushman reaction (iodide–iodate) coupled with a neutralization
chemical reactors was compared with different types of stirred reaction. Fig. 9 demonstrates the comparison between the power
vessels in terms of energy efficiency and mixing patterns. consumption of these two mixing vessels versus increase in
In 2000, Simon et al. [118] carried out a comparative study micromixing efficiency which is defined
as below:
 tm
between classical mechanical stirrer and ultrasonic-assisted Increase in micromixing efficiency ¼ tm0tm0 100
 S. Asgharzadehahmadi et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 63 (2016) 302–314 311

[120]
[119]
[118]

[43]

[85]

[26]
[41]
Ref.

2 L, diameter of 15 cm and height of 15 cm Macromixing visualizing / micromix- By increasing the power input, the US reactor can reduce

Velocity distribution by CFD / Mixing More uniform velocity distribution in the sonochemical

1.3695 s for the stirred tank and sonochemical reactor,

Ultrasound (US) may be as effective as classic stirring.
Increment of US power as well as increment of stirrer

The mean droplet size obtained by impeller mixing is

Flux enhancement, power dissipated Flux enhancement is much higher for the US-assisted
ing characterizing and time / viscosity the micromixing time more effectively in comparison
Uniform distribution of sugar crystals obtained in the

reactor/the average axial circulation time is 7.12 and

vessel with US/higher velocity variance with US.
speed leads to increase in efficiency.

2.4 times larger than the US one.

with the stirring one.

Comments/results

microfiltration.
respectively.
Volumetric permeate flux / dead-end
Fig. 9. Comparison between efficiency of piezoelectric transudcer and Rushton

Velocity of ink and sugar crystals

turbine impeller. T ¼ 298 K, P¼ 1 atm, f¼ 1.7 MHz [43].

Micromixing times/viscosity

by stirrer and ultrasonic

Investigated parameters

ultrafiltration efficiency

1 gallon tank (Dinside ¼ 17 cm, H ¼20 cm, Droplet size in Alkali

where tm0 is mixing time without power input and tm is mixing

Transesterification
time in different power inputs. Fig. 9 presents that the ultrasonic
reactor can reduce the micromixing time more effectively in
comparison with the stirring type by increasing the power input.

time
Furthermore, it can be concluded from this figure that the differ-
ences in efficiencies of these two setups decrease at higher power
inputs.

diameter of 14 cm and height of 14 cm

liquid fill level¼ 10 cm) with 4 baffles
Consequently, they have investigated the mechanical mixing in
same stirred tank and sonochemical reactor by focusing on the
55 mm diameter jacketed vessel

velocity distribution and mixing time in a liquid medium in

50 mm in diameter, 100 ml

another study [85]. Parvizian et al. [85] studied only mechanical

mixing in both systems without any chemical reactions and the
Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) modeling was applied in
(width¼ 1.7 cm)
Tank properties

order to report the results. The predicted results related to the

Overview of important works on comparison of sonochemical reactors and stirred vessels.

stirred tank with Rushton turbine impeller were compared with

the experimental results reported by Ranade and Joshi [122], Vlaev
et al. [123], Ranade et al. [124] and Wang et al. [125] for validation.



The obtained results were compared with the Frenkel et al. [94]
Rushton turbine impeller, diameter of

Rushton turbine impeller, diameter of

works for the ultrasonic reactor. Considering the reasonable

7.5 cm and bottom clearance of 4 cm

7.5 cm and bottom clearance of 3 cm

agreement between the CFD modeling results and experimental

(d ¼ 5 cm, height of the blade/dia-
Flat blade turbine with six blades

Adjustable from 0 to 2000 rpm.

data, they compared the operation of two setups and reported a

meter ¼ 0.2)/300–1000 rpm

higher and more uniform velocity distribution in the sonochemical

4-blade impeller/400 rpm

reactor. Furthermore, they obtained the average axial circulation

Impeller properties

time of 7.12 and 1.3695 s for the stirred tank and sonochemical
reactor, respectively, which was another reason for efficacious of
Classical stirrer

sonochemical reactor in comparison with the stirred tank reactor.

Some of the most important representative works on comparison
of sonication with stirring for different applications are depicted in
–

Table 3. In addition, the combination of ultrasonic irradiation with

mechanical stirring has been studied by some researchers in order
24 kHz/400 W/The amplitude
20 kHz / 750 W (41% of max-

are adjustable from 20% to

to achieve more uniform agitation. Table 4 depicts some important

20-540-1000 kHz/67 W

studies on combination of sonication and stirring.

Ultrasonic properties

Based on the reviewed literature, it can be concluded that using

imum power)

sonochemical reactors results in more uniform mixing and

20 kHz/40 W

reduction of micro-mixing time compared with stirred vessels. In

1.7 MHz

1.7 MHz

100%.

addition, in term of power consumption sonochemical reactors

24 kHz
Table 3

have been found more efficient due to their unique properties

such as acoustic cavitation and acoustic streaming.
312 S. Asgharzadehahmadi et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 63 (2016) 302–314

Table 4
Overview of important works on coupling of sonication and stirring.

Ultrasonic Impeller Tank properties Investigated Comments/results Ref.

properties properties parameters

20 kHz/50-100- Rushton turbine Three cylindrical glass vessel 100, Micromixing time Coupling of Rushton turbine to ultrasound was not effi- [22]
150 W 500, 3750 ml (semi-batch cient. More interesting was the coupling of a propeller (at
reactor) low velocity) with ultrasound.
1 MHz/2 W/cm2 Motor driven  Acceleration of of If ultrasound was applied together with stirring, only 30% [126]
plastic stirrer, enzymatic plasma acceleration by ultrasound was documented.
20 kHz/30-60- 6-blade impeller / Continuously irradiated stirred Kinetic and time This reactor was efficient in enzymatic saccharification of [25]
250 W 300 rpm tanks / 3.2 and 6.4 l various waste papers.
20 kHz/max Simple impeller  Nanoparticle distribu- Nanoparticle dispersion improved. [29]
500 W tion in system

6. Conclusions Ministry of Higher Education Malaysia and Postgraduate Research

Fund (PV139-2012A) from University of Malaya which financially
Sonochemical reactors are gaining attention from researchers supported this work.
and the industries. From the review the following conclusion can
be drawn:

1. Despite their potential, sonochemical reactors are not widely References

used industrially due to unavailability of information about
their features and performance. [1] Priego-Capote F, Luque de Castro M. Analytical uses of ultrasound I. Sample
2. For a specific application, appropriate choice of sonochemical preparation. TrAC Trends Anal Chem 2004;23:644–53.
[2] Csoka L, Katekhaye SN, Gogate PR. Comparison of cavitational activity in
reactors is necessary. The choices available are ultrasonic horn, different configurations of sonochemical reactors using model reaction
bath, longitudinal horn and multiple transducers. supported with theoretical simulations. Chem Eng J 2011;178:384–90.
3. Sonochemical reactor types need to be specific for respective [3] Leighton T. The acoustic bubble. Academic press; 1994.
[4] Ashokkumar M, Mason TJ. Sonochemistry. Kirk-Othmer Encycl Chem Technol
applications. Ultrasonic bath cannot be applied where stable
2007.
power or uniform distribution of ultrasonic energy is required. [5] Gogate PR. Cavitational reactors for process intensification of chemical pro-
Ultrasonic horn is suitable for focusing the energy on particular cessing applications: a critical review. Chem Eng Processing: Process Intensif
sample zone. 2008;47:515–27.
[6] Gogate PR, Mujumdar S, Pandit AB. Large-scale sonochemical reactors for
4. Single ultrasonic transducer is not effective for large scale process intensification: design and experimental validation. J Chem Technol
operations. Use of multiple transducers with multiple fre- Biotechnol 2003;78:685–93.
quencies is recommended for large system which can provide [7] Gogate PR, Pandit AB. Sonochemical reactors: scale up aspects. Ultrason
Sonochem 2004;11:105–17.
sufficient cavitational effect for different processes. In addition, [8] Suslick KS. The chemical effects of ultrasound. Sci Am 1989;260:80–6.
hexagonal geometry can be suggested for the configuration of [9] Mason TJ, Phillip J. Applied sonochemistry. Wiley-VCH Weinheim; 2002.
reactor and positions of transducers. [10] Suslick KS, Price GJ. Applications of ultrasound to materials chemistry.
Annual Rev Mater Sci 1999;29:295–326.
5. Frequency of irradiation and ultrasonic power are the most [11] Lifka J, Ondruschka B, Hofmann J. The use of ultrasound for the degradation
significant operating parameters in sonochemical reactors. of pollutants in water: aquasonolysis – a review. Eng life Sci 2003;3:253–62.
Lower frequencies (o100 kHz) are suitable where the physical [12] González-García J, Sáez V, Tudela I, Díez-Garcia MI, Deseada Esclapez M,
Louisnard O. Sonochemical treatment of water polluted by chlorinated
effects are required and higher frequency can be used for che-
organocompounds. A review. Water 2010;2:28–74.
mical effects. Larger irradiation surface of transducers is [13] Ohl CD, Kurz T, Geisler R, Lindau O, Lauterborn W. Bubble dynamics, shock
recommended for ensuring lower power intensity. waves and sonoluminescence. Philos Trans R Soc Lond Ser A: Math, Phys Eng
6. Mass transfer, mixing time and flow pattern can be considered Sci 1999;357:269–94.
[14] Ohl C-D, Arora M, Ikink R, de Jong N, Versluis M, Delius M, et al. Sono-
as the most important factors for evaluating the performance of poration from jetting cavitation bubbles. Biophys J 2006;91:4285–95.
sonochemical reactors. The knowledge of hydrodynamic char- [15] Marmottant P, Versluis M, de Jong N, Hilgenfeldt S, Lohse D. High-speed
acteristics and mixing behavior is important for selecting the imaging of an ultrasound-driven bubble in contact with a wall: “Narcissus”
effect and resolved acoustic streaming. Exp Fluids 2006;41:147–53.
reactor dimensions and position of ultrasonic transducers. In [16] Ashokkumar M. The characterization of acoustic cavitation bubbles – an
addition, more investigation should be conducted on mixing overview. Ultrason Sonochem 2011;18:864–72.
time and mass transfer for sonochemical reactors with multiple [17] Luche J-L. Synthetic organic sonochemistry. Springer; 1998.
[18] Thompson L, Doraiswamy L. Sonochemistry: science and engineering. Ind
transducers in future works.
Eng Chem Res 1999;38:1215–49.
7. Uniform distribution of cavitational activity in reactor is one of [19] Gogate PR. Cavitation: an auxiliary technique in wastewater treatment
the most important challenges in scale up design of sono- schemes. Adv Environ Res 2002;6:335–58.
chemical reactors. However, it should be considered that in [20] Sutkar VS, Gogate PR. Design aspects of sonochemical reactors: techniques
for understanding cavitational activity distribution and effect of operating
spite of higher operating costs of these reactors in comparison parameters. Chem Eng J 2009;155:26–36.
with the conventional ones, sonochemical reactor can be eco- [21] Oztekin R, Sponza DT. Treatment of wastewaters from the olive mill industry
nomically beneficial due to their special features such as by sonication. J Chem Technol Biotechnol 2013;88:212–25.
[22] Monnier H, Wilhelm A, Delmas H. The influence of ultrasound on micro-
acoustic cavitation and acoustic streaming. mixing in a semi-batch reactor. Chem Eng Sci 1999;54:2953–61.
[23] Ji J, Wang J, Li Y, Yu Y, Xu Z. Preparation of biodiesel with the help of
ultrasonic and hydrodynamic cavitation. Ultrason 2006;44:e411–4.
[24] Singh AK, Fernando SD, Hernandez R. Base-catalyzed fast transesterification
Acknowledgment of soybean oil using ultrasonication. Energy Fuels 2007;21:1161–4.
[25] Li C, Yoshimoto M, Ogata H, Tsukuda N, Fukunaga K, Nakao K. Effects of
ultrasonic intensity and reactor scale on kinetics of enzymatic saccharifica-
The authors are grateful to the University of Malaya High tion of various waste papers in continuously irradiated stirred tanks. Ultra-
Impact Research Grant (HIR-MOHE-D000038-16001) from the son Sonochem 2005;12:373–84.
 S. Asgharzadehahmadi et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 63 (2016) 302–314 313

[26] Liu D, Vorobiev E, Savoire R, Lanoisellé J-L. Comparative study of ultrasound- [57] Kang J-W, Hung H-M, Lin A, Hoffmann MR. Sonolytic destruction of methyl
assisted and conventional stirred dead-end microfiltration of grape pomace tert-butyl ether by ultrasonic irradiation: The role of O3, H2O2, frequency,
extracts. Ultrason Sonochem 2013;20:708–14. and power density. Environ Sci Technol 1999;33:3199–205.
[27] Worapun I, Pianthong K, Thaiyasuit P. Optimization of biodiesel production [58] Beckett MA, Hua I. Impact of ultrasonic frequency on aqueous sonolumi-
from crude palm oil using ultrasonic irradiation assistance and response nescence and sonochemistry. J Phys Chem A 2001;105:3796–802.
surface methodology. J Chem Technol Biotechnol 2012;87:189–97. [59] Feng R, Zhao Y, Zhu C, Mason T. Enhancement of ultrasonic cavitation yield
[28] Badday AS, Abdullah AZ, Lee KT, Khayoon MS. Intensification of biodiesel by multi-frequency sonication. Ultrason Sonochem 2002;9:231–6.
production via ultrasonic-assisted process: a critical review on fundamentals [60] Servant G, Laborde J, Hita A, Caltagirone J, Gerard A. On the interaction
and recent development. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2012;16:4574–87. between ultrasound waves and bubble clouds in mono-and dual-frequency
[29] Goyat MS, Ray S, Ghosh PK. Innovative application of ultrasonic mixing to sonoreactors. Ultrason Sonochem 2003;10:347–55.
produce homogeneously mixed nanoparticulate-epoxy composite of improved [61] Yasui K, Tuziuti T, Iida Y. Dependence of the characteristics of bubbles on
physical properties. Compos Part A: Appl Sci Manuf 2011;42:1421–31. types of sonochemical reactors. Ultrason Sonochem 2005;12:43–51.
[30] Faıd̈ F, Contamine F, Wilhelm A, Delmas H. Comparison of ultrasound effects [62] Tatake PA, Pandit AB. Modelling and experimental investigation into cavity
in different reactors at 20 kHz. Ultrason Sonochem 1998;5:119–24. dynamics and cavitational yield: influence of dual frequency ultrasound
[31] Gole VL, Gogate PR. A review on intensification of synthesis of biodiesel from sources. Chem Eng Sci 2002;57:4987–95.
sustainable feed stock using sonochemical reactors. Chem Eng Process: [63] Barati AH, Mokhtari-Dizaji M, Mozdarani H, Bathaie Z, Hassan ZM. Effect of
Process Intensif 2012;53:1–9. exposure parameters on cavitation induced by low-level dual-frequency
[32] Kumar A, Kumaresan T, Pandit AB, Joshi JB. Characterization of flow phe- ultrasound. Ultrason Sonochem 2007;14:783–9.
nomena induced by ultrasonic horn. Chem Eng Sci 2006;61:7410–20. [64] Zhao Y, Zhu C, Feng R, Xu J, Wang Y. Fluorescence enhancement of the
[33] Bhirud US, Gogate PR, Wilhelm AM, Pandit AB. Ultrasonic bath with long- aqueous solution of terephthalate ion after bi-frequency sonication. Ultrason
itudinal vibrations: a novel configuration for efficient wastewater treatment. Sonochem 2002;9:241–3.
Ultrason Sonochem 2004;11:143–7. [65] Prabhu AV, Gogate PR, Pandit AB. Optimization of multiple-frequency
[34] Kumar A, Gogate PR, Pandit AB. Mapping the efficacy of new designs for sonochemical reactors. Chem Eng Sci 2004;59:4991–8.
large scale sonochemical reactors. Ultrason Sonochem 2007;14:538–44. [66] Löning J-M, Horst C, Hoffmann U. Investigations on the energy conversion in
[35] Chivate M, Pandit A. Quantification of cavitation intensity in fluid bulk. sonochemical processes. Ultrason Sonochem 2002;9:169–79.
Ultrason Sonochem 1995;2:S19–25. [67] Kumar A, Gogate PR, Pandit AB, Wilhelm AM, Delmas H. Investigation of
[36] Horst C, Chen Y-S, Kunz U, Hoffmann U. Design, modeling and performance induction of air due to ultrasound source in the sonochemical reactors.
of a novel sonochemical reactor for heterogeneous reactions. Chem Eng Sci Ultrason Sonochem 2005;12:453–60.
1996;51:1837–46. [68] Henglein A, Gutierrez M. Chemical effects of continuous and pulsed ultra-
[37] Gogate PR, Sivakumar M, Pandit AB. Destruction of Rhodamine B using novel sound: a comparative study of polymer degradation and iodide oxidation. J
sonochemical reactor with capacity of 7.5 l. Separation Purif Technol Phys Chem 1990;94:5169–72.
2004;34:13–24. [69] Contamine RF, Wilhelm A, Berlan J, Delmas H. Power measurement in
[38] Gogate PR, Katekhaye SN. A comparison of the degree of intensification due sonochemistry. Ultrason Sonochem 1995;2:S43–7.
to the use of additives in ultrasonic horn and ultrasonic bath. Chem Eng [70] Whillock G, Harvey B. Ultrasonically enhanced corrosion of 304L stainless
steel II: The effect of frequency, acoustic power and horn to specimen dis-
Process: Process Intensif 2012;61:23–9.
tance. Ultrason Sonochem 1997;4:33–8.
[39] Xu Z, Yasuda K, Koda S. Numerical simulation of liquid velocity distribution
[71] Hodnett M, Choi MJ, Zeqiri B. Towards a reference ultrasonic cavitation
in a sonochemical reactor. Ultrason Sonochem 2013;20:452–9.
vessel. Part 1: Preliminary investigation of the acoustic field distribution in a
[40] Kojima Y, Asakura Y, Sugiyama G, Koda S. The effects of acoustic flow and
25 kHz cylindrical cell. Ultrason Sonochem 2007;14:29–40.
mechanical flow on the sonochemical efficiency in a rectangular sono-
[72] Nanzai B, Okitsu K, Takenaka N, Bandow H, Tajima N, Maeda Y. Effect of
chemical reactor. Ultrason Sonochem 2010;17:978–84.
reaction vessel diameter on sonochemical efficiency and cavitation dynam-
[41] Monnier H, Wilhelm A-M, Delmas H. Influence of ultrasound on mixing on
ics. Ultrason Sonochem 2009;16:163–8.
the molecular scale for water and viscous liquids. Ultrason Sonochem
[73] Cadwell M, Fogler H. Ultrasonic gas absorption and acoustic streaming
1999;6:67–74.
observations. Chem Eng Prog Symp Ser 1971 1224-127.
[42] Pugin B. Qualitative characterization of ultrasound reactors for hetero-
[74] Lighthill SJ. Acoustic streaming. J Sound Vibrat 1978;61:391–418.
geneous sonochemistry. Ultrason 1987;25:49–55.
[75] Kumar A, Gogate PR, Pandit AB, Delmas H, Wilhelm AM. Gas  liquid
[43] Parvizian F, Rahimi M, Faryadi M. Macro-and micromixing in a novel sono-
mass transfer studies in sonochemical reactors. Ind Eng Chem Res
chemical reactor using high frequency ultrasound. Chem Eng Processing:
2004;43:1812–9.
Process Intensif 2011;50:732–40.
[76] Linek V, Vacek V, Beneš P. A critical review and experimental verification of
[44] Hatanaka S-i, Mitome H, Yasui K, Hayashi S. Multibubble sonoluminescence
the correct use of the dynamic method for the determination of oxygen
enhancement by fluid flow. Ultrasonics 2006;44:e435–8.
transfer in aerated agitated vessels to water, electrolyte solutions and viscous
[45] Loranger E, Paquin M, Daneault C, Chabot B. Comparative study of sono-
liquids. Chem Eng J 1987;34:11–34.
chemical effects in an ultrasonic bath and in a large-scale flow-through
[77] Laugier F, Andriantsiferana C, Wilhelm AM, Delmas H. Ultrasound in gas–
sonoreactor. Chem Eng J 2011;178:359–65. liquid systems: Effects on solubility and mass transfer. Ultrason Sonochem
[46] Memoli G, Gélat PN, Hodnett M, Zeqiri B. Characterisation and improvement
2008;15:965–72.
of a reference cylindrical sonoreactor. Ultrason Sonochem 2012;19:939–52. [78] Baḱldyga J, Podgorska W, Pohorecki R. Mixing-precipitation model with
[47] Gonze E, Gonthier Y, Boldo P, Bernis A. Standing waves in a high frequency application to double feed semibatch precipitation. Chem Eng Sci
sonoreactor: Visualization and effects. Chem Eng Sci 1998;53:523–32. 1995;50:1281–300.
[48] Sivakumar M, Pandit AB. Ultrasound enhanced degradation of Rhodamine B: [79] Baldyga J, Bourne J, Gholap R. The influence of viscosity on mixing in jet
optimization with power density. Ultrason Sonochem 2001;8:233–40. reactors. Chem Eng Sci 1995;50:1877–80.
[49] Gogate PR, Mujumdar S, Pandit AB. Sonochemical reactors for waste water [80] Monnier H, Wilhelm A, Delmas H. Effects of ultrasound on micromixing in
treatment: comparison using formic acid degradation as a model reaction. flow cell. Chem Eng Sci 2000;55:4009–20.
Adv Environ Res 2003;7:283–99. [81] Vichare NP, Gogate PR, Dindore VY, Pandit AB. Mixing time analysis of a
[50] Gogate PR, Sutkar VS, Pandit AB. Sonochemical reactors: Important design sonochemical reactor. Ultrason Sonochem 2001;8:23–33.
and scale up considerations with a special emphasis on heterogeneous [82] Yusaf TF, Buttsworth DR. Characterisation of mixing rate due to high power
systems. Chem Eng J 2011;166:1066–82. ultrasound. Ultrason Sonochem 2007;14:266–74.
[51] Pejin DJ, Mojović LV, Pejin JD, Grujić OS, Markov SL, Nikolić SB, et al. [83] Deshpande SS, Joshi JB, Kumar VR, Kulkarni B. Identification and character-
Increase in bioethanol production yield from triticale by simultaneous sac- ization of flow structures in chemical process equipment using multi-
charification and fermentation with application of ultrasound. J Chem resolution techniques. Chem Eng Sci 2008;63:5330–46.
Technol Biotechnol 2012;87:170–6. [84] Parvizian F, Rahimi M, Azimi N. Macro- and micromixing studies on a high
[52] Ramachandran K, Suganya T, Nagendra Gandhi N, Renganathan S. Recent frequency continuous tubular sonoreactor. Chem Eng Process: Process
developments for biodiesel production by ultrasonic assist transesterifica- Intensif 2012;57–58:8–15.
tion using different heterogeneous catalyst: a review. Renew Sustain Energy [85] Parvizian F, Rahimi M, Faryadi M, Alsairafi AA. Comparison between mixing
Rev 2013;22:410–8. in novel high frequency sonoreactor and stirred tank reactor. Eng Appl Comp
[53] Koda S, Kimura T, Kondo T, Mitome H. A standard method to calibrate Fluid Mech 2012;6:295–306.
sonochemical efficiency of an individual reaction system. Ultrason Sono- [86] Rayleigh L. The theory of sound, 1894. New York: Republished by Dover
chem 2003;10:149–56. Publications; 1945.
[54] Wayment DG, Casadonte Jr DJ. Design and calibration of a single-transducer [87] Gondrexon N, Renaudin V, Petrier C, Clement M, Boldo P, Gonthier Y, et al.
variable-frequency sonication system. Ultrason Sonochem 2002;9:189–95. Experimental study of the hydrodynamic behaviour of a high frequency
[55] Mark G, Tauber A, Laupert R, Schuchmann H-P, Schulz D, Mues A, et al. OH- ultrasonic reactor. Ultrason Sonochem 1998;5:1–6.
radical formation by ultrasound in aqueous solution–Part II: Terephthalate [88] Chouvellon M, Largillier A, Fournel T, Boldo P, Gonthier Y. Velocity study in
and Fricke dosimetry and the influence of various conditions on the sono- an ultrasonic reactor. Ultrason Sonochem 2000;7:207–11.
lytic yield. Ultrason Sonochem 1998;5:41–52. [89] Laborde JL, Bouyer C, Caltagirone JP, Gérard A. Acoustic bubble cavitation at
[56] Hung H-M, Hoffmann MR. Kinetics and mechanism of the sonolytic degra- low frequencies. Ultrasonics 1998;36:589–94.
dation of chlorinated hydrocarbons: frequency effects. J Phys Chem A [90] Adrian RJ. Particle-imaging techniques for experimental fluid mechanics.
1999;103:2734–9. Annual Rev Fluid Mech 1991;23:261–304.
314 S. Asgharzadehahmadi et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 63 (2016) 302–314

[91] Xia K-Q, Sun C, Zhou S-Q. Particle image velocimetry measurement of the and mono-ortho-substituted PCBs, and 26 organochlorine pesticides as
velocity field in turbulent thermal convection. Phys Rev E 2003;68:066303. demonstrated in heron eggs. Anal Chem 2003;75:1058–66.
[92] Mandroyan A, Doche M, Hihn J, Viennet R, Bailly Y, Simonin L. Modification [109] Wu J, Lin L, Chau F-t. Ultrasound-assisted extraction of ginseng saponins
of the ultrasound induced activity by the presence of an electrode in a sono- from ginseng roots and cultured ginseng cells. Ultrason Sonochem
reactor working at two low frequencies (20 and 40kHz). Part II: Mapping 2001;8:347–52.
flow velocities by particle image velocimetry (PIV). Ultrason Sonochem [110] Romdhane M, Gourdon C. Investigation in solid–liquid extraction: influence
2009;16:97–104. of ultrasound. Chem Eng J 2002;87:11–9.
[93] Dahlem O, Reisse J, Halloin V. The radially vibrating horn: a scaling-up [111] Rostagno MA, Palma M, Barroso CG. Ultrasound-assisted extraction of soy
possibility for sonochemical reactions. Chem Eng Sci 1999;54:2829–38. isoflavones. J Chromatogr A 2003;1012:119–28.
[94] Frenkel V, Gurka R, Liberzon A, Shavit U, Kimmel E. Preliminary investiga- [112] Yebra M, Moreno-Cid A, Cespón R, Cancela S. Preparation of a soluble solid
tions of ultrasound induced acoustic streaming using particle image veloci- sample by a continuous ultrasound assisted dissolution system for the flow-
metry. Ultrasonics 2001;39:153–6. injection atomic absorption spectrometric determination of iron in milk
[95] Priego-López E, de Castro ML. Ultrasound-assisted derivatization of phenolic powder and infant formula. Talanta 2004;62:403–6.
compounds in spiked water samples before pervaporation, gas chromato- [113] St Slaczka A. Effect of ultrasound on ammonium leaching of zinc from galmei
graphic separation, and flame lonization detection. Chromatographia ore. Ultrasonics 1986;24:53–5.
2003;57:513–8. [114] Birnbaum Y, Luo H, Nagai T, Fishbein MC, Peterson TM, Li S, et al. Non-
[96] Hsiao M-C, Lin C-C, Chang Y-H, Chen L-C. Ultrasonic mixing and closed invasive in vivo clot dissolution without a thrombolytic drug recanalization of
microwave irradiation-assisted transesterification of soybean oil. Fuel thrombosed iliofemoral arteries by transcutaneous ultrasound combined
2010;89:3618–22. with intravenous infusion of microbubbles. Circulation 1998;97:130–4.
[97] Stavarache C, Vinatoru M, Nishimura R, Maeda Y. Fatty acids methyl esters [115] ́
Gallego-Juárez JA, Elvira-Segura L, Rodrıguez-Corral GA. Power ultrasonic
from vegetable oil by means of ultrasonic energy. Ultrason Sonochem technology for deliquoring. Ultrasonics 2003;41:255–9.
2005;12:367–72. [116] Wang RY, Jarratt JA, Keay PJ, Hawkes JJ, Coakley WT. Development of an
[98] Son Y, Lim M, Khim J, Kim L-H, Ashokkumar M. Comparison of calorimetric automated on-line analysis system using flow injection, ultrasound filtration
energy and cavitation energy for the removal of bisphenol-A: the effects of and CCD detection. Talanta 2000;52:129–39.
frequency and liquid height. Chem Eng J 2012;183:39–45. [117] Erden G, Filibeli A. Ultrasonic pre-treatment of biological sludge: con-
[99] Wang Z, Li Y, Wang J, Jin X, Zou M, Han G, et al. Sonocatalytic damage of sequences for disintegration, anaerobic biodegradability, and filterability. J
bovine serum albumin (BSA) under ultrasonic irradiation with TiO2/tooth Chem Technol Biotechnol 2010;85:145–50.
composite. J Chem Technol Biotechnol 2012;87:523–9. [118] Simon A, Penpenic L, Gondrexon N, Taha S, Dorange G. A comparative study
́
[100] Canizares-Macıas M, Garcıa-Mesa JA, Luque de Castro M. Fast ultrasound- between classical stirred and ultrasonically-assisted dead-end ultrafiltration.
assisted method for the determination of the oxidative stability of virgin Ultrason Sonochem 2000;7:183–6.
olive oil. Anal Chim Acta 2004;502:161–6. [119] Guo Z, Jones A, Li N, Germana S. High-speed observation of the effects of
[101] Chitra S, Paramasivan K, Sinha P, Lal K. Ultrasonic treatment of liquid waste ultrasound on liquid mixing and agglomerated crystal breakage processes.
containing EDTA. J Clean Prod 2004;12:429–35. Powder Technol 2007;171:146–53.
[102] Adewuyi YG. Sonochemistry: environmental science and engineering appli- [120] Wu P, Yang Y, Colucci JA, Grulke EA. Effect of ultrasonication on droplet size
cations. Ind Eng Chem Res 2001;40:4681–715. in biodiesel mixtures. J Am Oil Chemists' Soc 2007;84:877–84.
[103] Save S, Pandit A, Joshi J. Use of hydrodynamic cavitation for large scale [121] Nagata S. Mixing: principles and applications. Tokyo, Japan: Kodansha; 1975.
microbial cell disruption. Food Bioprod Process 1997;75:41–9. [122] Ranade V, Joshi J. Flow generated by a disc turbine. II: Mathematical mod-
[104] Save S, Pandit A, Joshi J. Microbial cell disruption: role of cavitation. Chem elling and comparison with experimental data. Chem Eng Res Des
Eng J Biochem Eng J 1994;55:B67–72. 1990;68:34–50.
[105] Capelo J, Dos Reis C, Maduro C, Mota A. Tandem focused ultrasound (TFU) [123] VLAEV S, GEORGIEV D, NIKOV I, ELQOTBI M. The CFD approach for shear
combined with fast furnace analysis as an improved methodology for total analysis of mixing reactor: verification and examples of use. J Eng Sci Technol
mercury determination in human urine by electrothermal-atomic absorption 2007;2:177–87.
spectrometry. Talanta 2004;64:217–23. [124] Ranade VV, Tayalia Y, Krishnan H. CFD predictions of flow near impeller
[106] Huang J-H, Ilgen G, Matzner E. Simultaneous extraction of organotin, orga- blades in baffled stirred vessels: assessment of computational snapshot
nolead and organomercury species from soils and litter. Anal Chim Acta approach. Chem Eng Commun 2002;189:895–922.
2003;493:23–34. [125] Wang Y, Rao Q, Fan J, Fei W. PIV measurements and CFD simulation of viscous
[107] Miege C, Dugay J, Hennion M. Optimization, validation and comparison of fluid flow in a stirred tank agitated by a Rushton turbine. In: Proceedings of
various extraction techniques for the trace determination of polycyclic aro- the 5th international conference on CFD in the process industries; 2006.
matic hydrocarbons in sewage sludges by liquid chromatography coupled to [126] Sakharov DV, Hekkenberg RT, Rijken DC. Acceleration of fibrinolysis by high-
diode-array and fluorescence detection. J Chromatogr A 2003;995:87–97. frequency ultrasound: the contribution of acoustic streaming and tempera-
[108] Chu S, Hong C-S, Rattner BA, McGowan PC. Methodological refinements in ture rise. Thromb Res 2000;100:333–40.
the determination of 146 polychlorinated biphenyls, including non-ortho-