Talk:Plug flow reactor model

message: 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)

message: 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)
thread_title:  Expression 4 

message: 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)
replies: text: Not actionable: The article in question has been deleted. --SoledadKabocha (talk) 03:02, 16 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed merge with [[Non-ideal plug flow reactor model]] 

message: 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)
replies: text: @User:Lesendes Okapi You're right - I've created a redirect at PFTR. --Slashme (talk) 20:56, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  PTFR 

message: 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)
replies: text: I Agree. Esponenziale (talk) 09:42, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  Klbrain (talk) 18:08, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed merge of [[RTD studies of plug flow reactor]] into [[Plug flow reactor model]] 

message: 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)
thread_title:  confusing terminology