The magnetically stabilized fluidized bed bioreactor: a tool for improved mass transfer in immobilized enzyme systems?

RETRACTED ARTICLE: Optimization of Biodiesel Production Using a Magnetically Stabilized Fluidized Bed Reactor

“…A magnetically stabilized fluidized bed reactor (MSFBR) offers a number of potential advantages over ASR and FBR, such as no damage to the structure of magnetic catalysts, elimination of solid mixing, low pressure drop through the bed, ease of solid transportation as well as the possibility of operation at increased fluid velocities and even countercurrent operation [8,9]. The MSFBR has been considered as an efficient system coupled with magnetic immobilized cells and enzymes for process intensification of biocatalysis and biotransformation [10].…”

Small-sized dense magnetic pellicular support for magnetically stabilized fluidized bed adsorption of protein

“…Even at high liquid-phase flow velocities, magnetic stabilization can serve to suppress mixing of the solid particles, thus, MSFB exhibits combined advantages of fixed bed and fluidized bed in a liquid fluidized bed system (Siegell, 1987;Liu et al, 1991;Webb et al, 1996;Hou and Williams, 2002;Tong and Sun, 2003). This enables the concentration and separation of soluble substances from crude feedstock containing fine particles.…”

Effect of particle size polydispersity on the yield stress of magnetofluidized beds as depending on the magnetic field orientation

“…During the next two decades, the improvement of experimental devices and techniques for the synthesis of magnetizable particles cleared the way to further research on the effect of the imposed magnetic field orientation [79,80] or the use magnetizable particles with tailored properties [81][82][83][84][85] as well as gas-liquid-solid admixtures [86][87][88]. New industrial applications have emerged in bioreactors [89,90] and aerosol filtration [91]. The interested reader may find additional details on the historical aspects and current state of the art of MFBs in extended reviews reported elsewhere [56,58,59,61,60].…”