Modeling of Deposition from “Waxy” Mixtures in a Pipeline under Laminar Flow Conditions via Moving Boundary Formulation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A mathematical model, based on the moving boundary approach, is developed for the growth of the deposit from paraffinic mixtures due to heat transfer in a pipeline. The model extends a recent study on the deposition from “waxy” mixtures by including unsteady-state energy balance and heat transfer in both radial and axial directions for hydrodynamically established laminar flow. Numerical solutions were obtained for the growth of deposit with time, both radially and axially, from a binary eutectic mixture of n -C 16 H 34 and n -C 28 H 58 . Two different scenarios for the initiation of the deposition process were investigated. Even though the transient results for the temperature profile and deposit thickness differed significantly, identical steady-state predictions were obtained for the two scenarios. For a constant pipe-wall temperature, the steady-state deposit thickness was predicted to increase with the pipe length. The predicted deposit thickness was lower for a higher inlet mixture temperature, pipe-wall temperature, and Reynolds number. The trends in model predictions were compared with the published results from deposition experiments performed on similar waxy mixtures.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".