MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2004008744 · doi:10.1021/ie001032y

Mechanistic Model for Structured-Packing-Containing Columns:  Irrigated Pressure Drop, Liquid Holdup, and Packing Fractional Wetted Area

2001· article· en· W2004008744 on OpenAlexaff
Ion Iliuta, Faı̈çal Larachi

Bibliographic record

VenueIndustrial & Engineering Chemistry Research · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicProcess Optimization and Integration
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPressure dropStructured packingCountercurrent exchangeMechanicsWettingPacked bedDistributorChemistryChromatographyThermodynamicsMaterials scienceMechanical engineeringMass transferEngineeringComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An implicit one-dimensional two-zone two-fluid mechanistic model was developed for the prediction of the irrigated two-phase pressure drop, the total liquid holdup, and the packing fractional wetted area in gas−liquid countercurrent columns containing structured packings and operated in the preloading zone. The model was an offshoot of the well-known “single-slit” mechanistic approach to cocurrent down-flow trickle-bed reactors. It mimicked the actual bed void by means of two hypothetical, recurrent, and geometrically similar inclined slits consisting of a dry slit and a wet slit. This mechanistic model required no single adjustable parameter and proved powerful in the prediction of the column hydraulics under various operational conditions such as atmospheric scrubbing or high-pressure/temperature distillation conditions. In this context, a collection of data relative to the irrigated pressure drop, liquid holdup, and packing fractional wetted area obtained under low/high pressure/temperature has been compiled from the literature for columns equipped with structured packings and operated below the loading point and under partial wetting. This databank provided pertinent information for successful validation of the model. The satisfactory results obtained highlight the breadth of applicability of the proposed approach, especially for new designs or for optimal rating of existing equipment.

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.087
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.221 · 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

Citations46
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIndustrial & Engineering Chemistry ResearchSame topicProcess Optimization and IntegrationFrench-language works237,207