CFD‐DEM simulation of the spout–annulus interaction in a 3D spouted bed with a conical base
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Numerical simulation of the gas–solid flow in a three‐dimensionally spouted bed with a conical base is conducted on the base of the CFD–DEM coupling approach. The gas phase is tracked at the computational grid level, while the solid motion is resolved at the particle scale level. The comparison is taken between the calculated results and the experimental data in literature. Hydrodynamics and spout–annulus interaction in the bed are investigated. The results demonstrate that the gas flow in the cylindrical region of the bed shows self‐similarity property. Solid vertical velocity in the central region increases initially and then decreases with bed elevation. The vertical solid transporting intensity is dramatically larger than the lateral one. Furthermore, the spout diameter exhibits a diverging tendency along the axial direction. Spout–annulus interaction intensity can be quantitatively described with solid flux exchanging from the spout boundary. Moreover, the interaction intensity through the spout–annulus interface increases initially, and then diminishes along the axial direction. Besides, the spout diameter and the spout–annulus interaction intensity are enlarged by increasing the spouting velocity.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".