Comparison of Continuous Blend Time and Residence Time Distribution Models for a Stirred Tank
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In continuous operation, mixing in a stirred tank is often characterized by the residence time distribution (RTD) curves and the mean residence time ( V / Q ). The RTD is a measure of the history of the fluid element flowing through the reactor rather than a measure of the local mixing conditions inside the vessel. In this study, additional information about local mixing is obtained by taking measurements inside the vessel. The variance of concentration fluctuations from three probes (two located inside the tank and one at the outlet) is used to determine the continuous blend time (θ cnts ). At the limiting condition of a slow feed rate relative to the batch blend time, the CSTR is ideal, but at high flow rates the mixing inside the vessel deviates by up to 50% from the ideal case. Three design guidelines are recommended for designs where ideal mixing conditions are required. First, a line from the inlet to the outlet should pass through the impeller. Second, the feed velocity should decay to the mean impeller suction velocity by the time the feed reaches the impeller for the case of surface feed above a downpumping impeller. Third, the ratio of the mean residence time ( V / Q ) to the batch blend time (θ b ) should be at least 10. Additional guidelines will be needed for tank configurations where the feed(s) and/or outlet(s) are located on the side of the vessel.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it