2D Slurry Bubble Column Hydrodynamic Phenomena Clarified with a 3D Gas—Liquid Model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The gas hold‐up in a 2D bubble column is modelled using a 3D gas hold‐up model. The influence of the scale of 2D bubble columns on several parameters, for instance, transition gas hold‐up, transition gas velocity, and bubble rise velocities, is investigated and related to 3D bubble columns. By adapting the rise velocity of the large bubbles of an existing 3D bubble column model (Krishna et al., 2001a), the gas hold‐up in both the homogeneous and the heterogeneous regime can be described satisfactorily. By adjusting the transition points only, it is also possible to describe the gas hold‐up in systems containing small amounts of carbon particles and electrolyte. The smallest dimension of the 2D slurry bubble column, the column thickness, influences the location of the regime transition point. In the heterogeneous regime, however, it is only the largest column dimension, the column width, that influences the gas hold‐up. These observations together enable proper 2D/3D bubble column comparison in future studies.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 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".