MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1562648283 · doi:10.1002/cjce.22233

Experimental investigation of hydrodynamics of gas‐solid flow in an internally circulating fluidized bed

2015· article· en· W1562648283 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ravi Gujjula, Narasimha Mangadoddy

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGranular flow and fluidized beds
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPressure dropFluidizationDraft tubeMechanicsFluidized bedTube (container)DistributorFluidized bed combustionSuperficial velocityMaterials scienceFlow (mathematics)ThermodynamicsComposite materialPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hydrodynamic study of gas and solid flow in an internally circulating fluidized bed (ICFB) is made in this paper using a high‐speed camera and pressure probes for the laboratory 0.3 m × 0.27 m column having an internal draft tube. Experiments were conducted using sand particles of Geldart B and Geldart B‐D groups. At each run the standard pressure‐flow curves for both the draft tube and annular region beds, and the moving wall particle velocity in the annular bed region were measured. The effects of superficial gas velocity, static bed height, and draft tube gap height on pressure drop profiles, solid circulation patterns, and gas bypassing dynamics for the ICFB were investigated extensively. Unlike the conventional CFB, the pressure drop in ICFB is further decreased with superficial gas velocity after the minimum spouting fluidization, followed by yielding a cross‐over in the pressure drop of the annular bed compared to the draft tube. Pressure drop in the draft tube increases with an increase of static bed height and gap height between the draft tube bottom and the air distributor. The gas bypassing fraction increases with an increase in gap height and decreases with increased bed height and mean particle size. The mechanism governing the solid circulation and the pressure losses in an ICFB has been elaborated based on gas and solid dynamics obtained from the experimental data.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.268
Threshold uncertainty score0.472

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.193 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations17
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical EngineeringSame topicGranular flow and fluidized bedsFrench-language works237,207