MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1514582961 · doi:10.1002/cjce.20327

On bubble column reactor design for the determination of kinetic rate constants in gas–liquid systems

2010· article· en· W1514582961 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Salvador Cardona, F. López, J. Navarro‐Laboulais

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Mixing
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersGeneralitat Valenciana
KeywordsReaction rate constantChemistryBubble column reactorMass transferKinetic energyBubbleThermodynamicsMass transfer coefficientThermal diffusivityReaction rateConstant (computer programming)ChromatographyKineticsMechanicsOrganic chemistryPhysicsGas bubbleCatalysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The design of a semibatch bubble column reactor with its mathematical description is proposed for the study of ozonation reactions. The mathematical model used to describe the gas–liquid mass transfer rate in the reactor is based on the unstationary film theory and the resulting model is theoretically analysed to identify its relevant parameters. After its structural identifiability analysis, the parameters are reduced to five, that is, the gas hold‐up, the ratio of diffusivities of the reacting species, the volumetric mass transfer coefficient and two time constants related with the kinetic rate constant. From the sensitivity analysis of this reduced model, we conclude that it is not sensible to the gas hold‐up and the diffusivity ratio of the reacting species for optimization purposes in moderate and slow kinetic regimes. The model is tested with the reaction between the ozone and the azo‐compound Acid Red 27. The experimental data match quite well the model allowing the estimation of the volumetric mass transfer coefficient together with the kinetic constant. The kinetic rate constant for the direct reaction between the ozone and the Acid Red 27 is estimated in k 2 = 3723 ± 127 M −1 s −1 at 21.2 ± 0.5°C. The self‐coherence of the model, the absence of hypothesis about the state of the film together with the proposed optimization procedure, allows to consider the proposed methodology as a viable alternative for the study of gas–liquid systems in semi‐batch bubble columns reactors in comparison with classical approaches.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.625
Threshold uncertainty score0.275

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.182
Teacher spread0.173 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations15
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical EngineeringSame topicFluid Dynamics and MixingFrench-language works237,207