Using a CFD model to understand the fluid dynamics promoting E. coli breakage in a high-pressure homogenizer

Biotechnology Progress

Volumn 18, Issue 5, 2002, Pages 1060-1067

  Miller, J ^a   Rogowski, M ^a   Kelly, William ^a  

^a Villanova University   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

FLUID VISCOSITY;

CAVITATION; CELLS; COMPUTER SOFTWARE; ESCHERICHIA COLI; STRAIN RATE; TURBULENT FLOW;

COMPUTATIONAL FLUID DYNAMICS;

CELL FRACTIONATION; CELL LINE; COMPUTER SIMULATION; DNA DAMAGE; ESCHERICHIA COLI; FLOW CYTOMETRY; MODELS, BIOLOGICAL; PRESSURE; RHEOLOGY; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; STRESS, MECHANICAL; VISCOSITY;

ESCHERICHIA COLI;

EID: 0036752890     PISSN: 87567938     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1021/bp020010z     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Lander, R.; Manger, W.; Lee, A. Gaulin homogenizer: A mechanistic study. Biotechnol. Prog. 2000, 16, 80-85.
2. Doulah, M.; Brookman, J. A hydrodynamic mechanism for the disintegration of Saccharomyces cerevisiae in an industrial homogenizer. Biotechnol. Bioeng. 1975, 17, 845-858.
3. Engler, C.; Robinson, C. Disruption of Candida utilis cells in high-pressure flow devices. Biotechnol. Bioeng. 1981, 23, 765-780.
4. Brookman, J. Mechanism of cell disruption in a high-pressure homogenizer. Biotechnol. Bioeng. 1974, 16, 371-383.
5. Ayazi Shamlou, P.; Titchener-Hooker, N. A physical model of high-pressure disruption of yeast cells. Chem. Eng. Sci. 1995, 50, 1383-1391.
6. Carlson, A.; Jem, K. Mechanical Disruption of Escherichia coli for plasmid recovery. Biotechnol. Bioeng. 1995, 48, 303-315.
7. Weetman, R.; Hutchings, B. Computation of flow fields in mixing tanks with experimental verification. Annual Winter AIChE meeting, 1989.
8. Brucato, A.; Micale, G. Numerical prediction of flow fields in baffled stirred vessels: comparison of alternative modeling approaches. Chem. Eng. Sci. 1998, 53(21), 3653-3684.
9. Kleinig, A.; Middleburg, A. The correlation of cell disruption with homogenizer valve pressure gradient determined by Computation Fluid Dynamics. Chem. Eng. Sci. 1996, 51(23), 5103-5110.
10. Stevenson, M.; Chen, X. Visualization of the flow patterns in a high-pressure homogenizing valve using a CFD package. J. Food Eng. 1997, 33, 151-165.
11. Hosseinalipour, S.; Mujumbar, A. Comparative evaluation of different turbulence models for confined impinging and opposing jet flows. Numer. Heat Transfer, Part A 1995, 28, 647-666.
12. Shih, T.; Zhu, J. A new κ-ε eddy-viscosity model for high reynolds number turbulent flows-model development and validation. Comput. Fluids 1995, 24(3), 227-238.
13. Keshavarez Moore, E. New findings on fundamentals of cell disruption in high pressure homogenizers. Biol. Recombinant-Microorg. Anita. Cells. 1991. Oholo 34 Meeting. 27-92.
14. Middleburg, A.; Boyle, D. A novel technique for the measurement of disruption in high-pressure homogenization: Studies on E. coli containing inclusion bodies. 1991, 38, 367-370.
15. Agerkvist, I.; Enfors, S. Characterization of E. coli disintegrates from a bead mill and a high-pressure homogenizer. Biotechnol. Bioeng. 1990, 36, 1083-1089.
16. Middleburg, A.; O'Neill, B. A simplified model for the disruption of Escherichia Coli: The effect of cell septation. Biotechnol. Prog. 1994, 10, 109-113.
17. Patankar, S. Numerical Heat Transfer and Fluid Flow; New Hampshire Publishing Co.: Concord, NH, 1983.
18. Pandolfe, W. APV, Wilmington, MA; Internal memo: inlet pressure versus gap spacing, 1996.
19. Kleinig, A.; Middleburg, A. High-pressure homogenizer valve mechanics. In Proceedings of the 23rd Australian Chemical Engineering Conference; South Australia, 9/24/95-9/27/95; Vol. 3, 1995.