In the case of computational models of lyophilization in a vial, the intensity of drying is to a large extent controlled by the pressure conditions above the drying surface, as the drying driving force is the pressure difference between the saturation vapour pressure at the sublimation interface and the vapour partial pressure above the drying substance. In majority of studies, the effect of the vial and the rubber stopper geometry on the pressure conditions inside the vial is either neglected or taken into account by an estimated additional vapour pressure increase inside the vial. As the pressure conditions depend on the flow of sublimated solvent inside the vial-stopper conduit geometry, but are experimentally difficult to determine, a dedicated CFD analysis of flow conditions inside the vial-stopper channel was performed. The influence of imposing of the no-slip and slip conditions on the solid surfaces on the pressure drop in the system was studied and the effect of the increased partial pressure of the solvent on the sublimation rate was evaluated for the starting phase of the lyophilization by implementing the Stefan’s one sided diffusion model. The computational results show, that the effect of the additional flow resistance due to the vial conduit and the stopper is most significant at lowest system temperatures, with as much as 30% increase in vapour pressure inside the vial.
Computational fluid dynamics (CFD), heat and mass transfer, lyophilisation
 Brulls, M. & Rasmuson, A. Heat transfer in vial lyophilization. International Journal ofPharmaceutics, 246, pp. 1–16, 2002. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0378-5173(02)00353-8
 Gan, K.H., Bruttini, R., Crosser, O.K. & Liapis, A.I., Heating policies during theprimaryand secondary drying stages of the lyophilization process in vials: Effects ofthe arrangement of vials in clusters of square and hexagonal arrays on trays. DryingTechnology, 22(7), pp. 1539–1575, 2004. https://doi.org/10.1081/drt-200025596
 Daraoui, N., Dufour, P., Hammouri, H. & Hottot, A., Model predictive control duringthe primary drying stage of lyophilisation. Control Engineering Practice, 18(5),pp. 483–494, 2010. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conengprac.2010.01.005
 HriberŠek, M., Zadravec, M., Časar, Ž. & Ravnik, J., The influence of the vial stopperon the flow and mass transfer conditions inside a vial. Wit Transactions on EngineeringSciences, 120, pp. 193–200, WIT Press, 2018. https://doi.org/10.2495/afm180191
 Pikal, M.J., Roy, M.L. & Shah, S., Mass and Heat Transfer in Vial Freeze-Dryingof Pharmaceuticals: Role of the Vial. Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences, 73(9),pp. 1224–1237, 1984. https://doi.org/10.1002/jps.2600730910
 Mascarenhas, W.J., Akay, H.U. & Pikal, M.J., A computational model for finite elementanalysis of the freeze-dyring process. Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Engrg., 148,pp. 105–124, 1997. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0045-7825(96)00078-3
 Ravnik, J., GolobiČ, I., Sitar, A., Avanzo, M., Irman, Š., KoČevar, K., Cegnar, M.,Zadravec, M., Ramšak, M. & Hriberšek, M., Lyophilization model of mannitol watersolution in a laboratory scale lyophilizer. Journal of Drug Delivery Science andTechnology,45, pp. 28–38, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jddst.2018.02.015
 RamŠak, M., Ravnik, J., Zadravec, M., HriberŠek, M. & IljaŽ, J., Freeze-drying modelingof vial using BEM. Engineering Analysis with Boundary Elements, 77, pp. 145–156,2017. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enganabound.2017.01.011
 Bird, R.B., Stewart, W.E. & Lightfoot, E.N., Transport Phenomena, 2007.
 Welty, J., Wicks, C., Wilson, R. & Rorrer, G., Fundamentals Of Momentum, Heat, andMass Transfer, John Wiley and sons, 2008.
 Kleinstreuer, C., Modern Fluid Dynamics, Springer Verlag, 2010.
 Ansys CFD, CFX 17.0, 2016.
 Scutella, B., Passot, S., Bourles, E., Fonseca, F. & Trelea, I.C., How vial geometry variabilityinfluences heat transfer and product temperature during freeze-drying. Journalof Pharmaceutical Sciences, 106(3), pp. 770–778, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.xphs.2016.11.007