MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1979578207 · doi:10.1179/174328109x445732

Optimisation of dual purging location for better mixing in ladle: a water model study

2009· article· en· W1979578207 on OpenAlexaff
Kinnor Chattopadhyay, Arunava Sengupta, S. K. Ajmani, S. Lenka, Vaibhav Kumar Singh

Bibliographic record

VenueIronmaking & Steelmaking Processes Products and Applications · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMetallurgical Processes and Thermodynamics
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMixing (physics)LadleArgonTRACERVolumetric flow rateMechanicsPorosityFlow (mathematics)Dual purposeMaterials scienceChemistryMetallurgyMechanical engineeringComposite materialEngineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mixing time studies were performed on a one-fifth scale aqueous model of a single tapered ladle with different bottom purging locations. Two porous plugs were used simultaneously to purge compressed air as an analogue to argon and this was referred as dual purging. KCl solution (1 N) was used as the tracer for measuring mixing time. The scaled down gas flowrate varied from 10 to 80 L m–1. Around 400 experiments were done including all possible dual purging locations and the location which gives least mixing time was identified. The results were compared with corresponding single purging experiments and it was found that dual purging can reduce mixing time to a great extent even in the lower flowrate range and a location better than ±R/2 has been suggested. Effect of differential flow on mixing time has also been reported.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations23
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIronmaking & Steelmaking Processes Products and ApplicationsSame topicMetallurgical Processes and ThermodynamicsFrench-language works237,207