Freeze-Drying: Primary Drying Time and Product Temperature
Estimate vial primary drying time, product temperature, and margin below collapse. Explore shelf temperature and chamber pressure with an animated ice front and a thermal design-space chart.
Estimate primary drying time and product temperature for a water-based formulation in a cylindrical freeze-drying vial. This lyophilization primary drying calculation couples heat supplied by the shelf, conduction through the remaining frozen product, and vapor flow through the growing dry cake. It is useful for process engineers comparing operating points, students studying sublimation, and laboratory teams screening a proposed cycle.
Start with the vial's inner and outer diameters, liquid fill volume, and solute concentration. The inner area sets the product area; the outer area defines the basis of the vial heat-transfer coefficient Kv. Enter a constant shelf temperature and absolute chamber pressure. The defaults represent 2 mL of 5% w/v mannitol in a Schott 6R vial, with heat-transfer parameters reported for a Millrock REVO dryer. They are an example, not universal vial or formulation properties.
Use either a measured constant Kv or a pressure-dependent fit. Enter the three dry-layer resistance coefficients from formulation measurements or a suitable published study. Their SI units can look unfamiliar: Rp in m/s is equivalent to pressure divided by mass flux. Coefficient fields accept scientific notation, such as 7.68e7 for A₁. Set the measured collapse temperature, or the applicable eutectic or other critical temperature for a crystalline formulation, and select an allowance below it. The default critical temperature of −15 °C is an illustrative conservative threshold; it is not a measured mannitol collapse temperature.
Read the total drying time, peak product bottom temperature, and margin below the critical temperature. The bottom is warmer than the sublimation interface while frozen material remains, so comparing only interface temperature can miss a temperature-limit excursion. The profile chart shows both temperatures. Press play on the time input to watch the ice front move down from the product surface as the dry layer thickens. Time zero means established primary drying conditions; the final point is approached from the ice-containing side.
The freeze drying design space plots the maximum constant shelf temperature compatible with the selected product target over chamber pressure. A second boundary uses the critical temperature without the allowance. At a chosen pressure, shelf temperatures below the target boundary satisfy this sampled thermal criterion. Gaps indicate either insufficient vapor-pressure driving force at the temperature limit or an implied interface below the model's −60 °C lower bound. The pressure axis adapts to both thermal limits and includes your selected pressure. These curves omit equipment capacity, so they do not establish an approved operating region.
The model assumes a representative center vial, one-dimensional quasi-steady heat and mass transfer, dilute aqueous solution density, and constant frozen-product properties. It excludes shelf ramps, initial thermal transients, secondary drying, bound-water desorption, stopper resistance, edge-vial radiation differences, condenser capacity, and choked flow. Compare predictions with measured product temperatures and endpoint observations before transferring a cycle or using it for a different formulation, container, or dryer.
How it is calculated
The calculation follows the Pikal vial heat/mass-transfer framework, as stated in Shivkumar et al. (2019), attached source s1, pp. 4–5, Eqs. 3–5. It is implemented here for constant shelf temperature and chamber pressure, with a mass-conserving front coordinate.
For dry-layer thickness , frozen thickness , product area , and outer vial area :
A 30-iteration bracketed solve determines interface temperature at 101 front positions. Trapezoidal integration gives , where and . Frozen height is derived from consistent phase volumes instead of reproducing s1 Eq. 6:
This explicitly departs from Eq. 6 to preserve the declared total-solution-mass convention in both geometry and water inventory. At defaults, ice mass is 1.9000 g and frozen height is 6.8003 mm. A volume-balance property checks that the frozen cake contains exactly the declared ice and solute phase volumes. The last temperature is the limit immediately before ice exhaustion; the subsequent warming is excluded.
The ice vapor-pressure correlation is Pa. Constants come from the authors' LyoPRONTO constant.py and functions.py: ice density 918 kg/m³, sublimation enthalpy 2,836,752 J/kg (678 cal/g), conductivity 2.46856 W/(m·K). No program code or figures are copied.
For each design-space pressure, fix the bottom at the temperature limit, solve the interface balance at 41 front positions, and take the smallest allowable shelf temperature. This includes possible early-cycle limiting points when Rp is constant or saturating; it does not assume the last position always controls. Before displaying either boundary, check its entire interface-temperature range. With nonnegative A₁ and A₂, Rp cannot decrease and the remaining frozen thermal resistance cannot increase; at constant shelf/pressure the interface is therefore coldest at the start. The analytical shelf floor obtained by setting this initial interface to −60 °C screens each candidate against the lower temperature limit. Unsupported candidates are gaps, including the selected-pressure result card. A separate full-profile bisection property verifies the guard numerically. Sampled thermal maxima remain screening approximations.
Pressure sampling combines 31 points from 0.1 Pa to just below each boundary's equilibrium-pressure ceiling (capped at 200 Pa), then inserts the exact selected pressure and removes duplicates. Thus cold cases retain dense samples below both distinct ceilings.
Default Rp coefficients are the rounded SI entries for 5% mannitol in s1 Table I (p. 6); Kv parameters are from Table III (p. 8), and vial dimensions from Table IV (p. 9). Reference drying times are from Table II and the independent 150 mTorr experiment (p. 7).
Assumptions
- One-dimensional, quasi-steady center vial with a sharp planar sublimation front and unchanged cake dimensions after freezing.
- All freezable water is removed during primary drying: initial water mass is liquid fill volume times solution density minus solute concentration. No initial unfrozen/bound-water correction.
- Constant densities: aqueous solution 1000 kg/m³ and dry solute 1500 kg/m³. Dilute aqueous formulations only; conductivity is approximated by ice.
- Kv uses outer vial area, incorporates shelf contact/gas conduction/radiation, and is either constant or a measured pressure correlation. Default coefficients are specific to the cited vial/dryer.
- The −15 °C default critical temperature is an illustrative conservative user threshold. Replace it and Rp with formulation-specific data. The 3 K allowance is a user-selected design allowance.
- No thermal storage, shelf ramp, secondary drying, stopper/chamber mass-transfer resistance, equipment-flow limit, batch variability, or edge-vial correction.
- Diagrams are original schematic sections; frozen/dry heights show calculated fractions rather than true vial aspect ratio. Diagram labels remain in SI units; input and result cards support the metric/US switch.
Where it applies
Use as a screening model for dilute aqueous vial formulations with independently characterized Kv, Rp, and critical temperature. Interface temperatures must remain between −60 and 0 °C; chamber pressure range is 0.1–200 Pa. The thermal design-space pressure axis adapts to the two temperature limits and includes 0.1 Pa and the selected pressure. Boundaries require positive sublimation pressure and a full-cycle interface temperature within the model range. A missing result or curve segment means that one of these requirements is not satisfied; it must not be treated as an allowable shelf setpoint. Check every visible boundary against actual shelf, condenser, pressure-control, and choked-flow limits.
An exceeded temperature target leaves a numerical extrapolation of the intact-cake model; the model does not predict collapse damage or resulting changes in resistance. Reduce shelf temperature or pressure before treating the time as a feasible cycle estimate.
Published comparison tolerances remain 3% at 100 and 300 mTorr and 5% at 150 mTorr. The first two use Kv fitted by the paper to those endpoints and therefore check reproduction, not independent predictive accuracy. The 150 mTorr case uses the pressure fit without refitting. This implementation uses total solution mass minus solute mass for water inventory and the same masses and phase densities for frozen geometry. It therefore differs from the authors' Eq. 6/front-advance convention; reference discrepancies of a few percent are expected. Constant setpoints and rounded SI coefficients also differ from the source's time-stepped/ramped implementation. No parameters or reference tolerances were adjusted to match the endpoint values.
A separate Python bisection/quadrature calculation with 1001 front positions gives 12.110673 h at 19.9983 Pa, compared with 12.110635 h on this 101-position grid at that pressure (less than 0.001% discretization difference). Heat, mass, frozen volume, pressure sampling, and boundary-range properties are checked in the tool.
References
- Shivkumar G., Kazarin P. S., Strongrich A. D., Alexeenko A. A. (2019). LyoPRONTO: an Open-Source Lyophilization Process Optimization Tool. AAPS PharmSciTech 20, 328. DOI: 10.1208/s12249-019-1532-7. Open access: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6823652/ (attached s1, pp. 4–9).
- Pikal M. J. (1985). Use of laboratory data in freeze drying process design: heat and mass transfer coefficients and the computer simulation of freeze drying. J. Parenter. Sci. Technol. 39(3), 115–139. Bibliographic record: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/3839016/ . Model equations and benchmark parameters consulted through the open 2019 paper.
- LyoHUB/LyoPRONTO, authors' physical constants and ice vapor-pressure correlation, consulted 28 October 2026: https://github.com/LyoHUB/LyoPRONTO/blob/main/lyopronto/constant.py and https://github.com/LyoHUB/LyoPRONTO/blob/main/lyopronto/functions.py .
Inputs
| Input | Symbol | Unit | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vial inner diameter | D_i | mm | 20 |
| Vial outer diameter | D_o | mm | 22 |
| Liquid fill volume | V_fill | mL | 2 |
| Solute mass per liquid volume 50 kg/m³ is 5% w/v. Density assumptions: solution 1000 kg/m³, dry solute 1500 kg/m³. | c_s | kg/m^3 | 50 |
| Shelf temperature Constant temperature from the start of primary drying; shelf ramp time is excluded. | T_sh | °C | -5 |
| Chamber pressure 20 Pa ≈ 150 mTorr. Enter absolute pressure. | P_ch | Pa | 20 |
| Collapse or eutectic temperature Replace this illustrative value with a measured formulation limit. | T_crit | °C | -15 |
| Temperature allowance below critical | dT_safe | K | 3 |
| Initial dry-layer resistance R₀ Rp = R₀ + A₁ Ld/(1 + A₂ Ld). Default: 5% mannitol, 1.4 cm²·h·Torr/g ≈ 67200 m/s. | R_0 | m/s | 67200 |
| Resistance growth coefficient A₁ Default: 76800000 s⁻¹ = 7.68e7 s⁻¹. Scientific notation (for example 7.68e7) is accepted. Equivalent to 16 cm·h·Torr/g for the cited 5% mannitol. | A_1 | 1/s | 76800000 |
| Resistance saturation coefficient A₂ | A_2 | 1/m | 0 |
| Vial heat-transfer model | Kv_mode | Pressure-dependent Kv | |
| Measured Kv Must use outer vial cross-sectional area. Held constant over the design-space chart. | Kv_fixed | W/(m^2*K) | 16.75 |
| Pressure-independent coefficient Kc Defaults are for Schott 6R vials in Millrock REVO (Shivkumar 2019, Table III). | K_c | W/(m^2*K) | 11.51 |
| Gas-conduction coefficient Kp | K_p | W/(m^2*K*Pa) | 0.28 |
| Pressure saturation coefficient Kd | K_d | 1/Pa | 0.00345 |
| Drying time shown ▶ Play to follow the front. The endpoint is the instant the last ice disappears. | t_view | h | 6 |
Results
With the default inputs above, the calc gives:
| Result | Value |
|---|---|
| Primary drying time | 12.11 h |
| Peak product bottom temperature | -21.49 °C |
| Margin below critical temperature | 6.49 K |
| Margin below target temperature | 3.49 K |
| Thermal shelf limit at selected pressure | 6.91 °C |
| Vial heat-transfer coefficient | 16.75 W/(m²·K) |
| Initial frozen fill height | 6.8 mm |
| Mean ice removal per vial | 0.157 g/h |
Checked against sources
Each case below was calculated by this calc and agrees with the value from its source (within the tolerance where one is shown).
REVO 6R, 100 mTorr measured endpoint
Source: Shivkumar et al. 2019, Table II, p. 8: experimental endpoint 12.82 h, Kv 15.06 W/(m²·K). Geometry/fill: pp. 5 and 9; Rp: Table I. ±3% comparison tolerance accounts for the different water-mass/front correction and rounded SI parameters. Kv was calibrated to this endpoint in the paper; this is a reproduction check.
Inputs: Chamber pressure = 13.332 Pa; Vial heat-transfer model = Constant measured Kv; Measured Kv = 15.06 W/(m²·K); the others as above.
| Result | Source | This calc |
|---|---|---|
| Primary drying time | 12.82 ± 0.3846 h | 12.547 h |
REVO 6R, 300 mTorr measured endpoint
Source: Shivkumar et al. 2019, Table II, p. 8: experimental endpoint 11.62 h, Kv 21.34 W/(m²·K). Same 2 mL 5% mannitol setup. ±3% comparison tolerance; actual-water mass is conserved here. Kv was fitted to this endpoint in the source, so this is a reproduction check rather than independent predictive validation.
Inputs: Chamber pressure = 39.997 Pa; Vial heat-transfer model = Constant measured Kv; Measured Kv = 21.34 W/(m²·K); the others as above.
| Result | Source | This calc |
|---|---|---|
| Primary drying time | 11.62 ± 0.3486 h | 11.378 h |
Independent REVO 6R experiment at 150 mTorr
Source: Shivkumar et al. 2019, p. 7, experimental endpoint at 150 mTorr: 12.62 h. This pressure was not used to fit the three Kv coefficients. ±5% screening tolerance allows the different water-mass/front correction, rounded coefficients, and omission of shelf ramping. The paper's own simulation was 12.36 h; this calculator's time is not forced to that value.
Inputs: Chamber pressure = 19.998 Pa; the others as above.
| Result | Source | This calc |
|---|---|---|
| Primary drying time | 12.62 ± 0.631 h | 12.111 h |







Responses