MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2010914002 · doi:10.1002/cjce.22103

Modelling and optimization of simultaneous styrene and hydrogen production in an industrial hydrogen‐permselective membrane reactor

2014· article· en· W2010914002 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
M. Farsi, Amir Rokhgireh, Majid Javidi

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemical Engineering
TopicCatalysts for Methane Reforming
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEthylbenzeneHydrogen productionDehydrogenationMembrane reactorHydrogenStyreneAdiabatic processSteam reformingMaterials scienceProcess engineeringMembraneChemistryChemical engineeringCatalysisThermodynamicsNuclear engineeringOrganic chemistryEngineeringPhysicsCopolymerComposite materialPolymer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Coupling reaction and separation in a membrane reactor improves process efficiency and reduces purification cost in the next stages. In this work, the performance of the hydrogen–permselective membrane reactors to produce styrene and hydrogen through ethylbenzene dehydrogenation is studied at steady state condition. In the proposed configuration, the Pd/Ag membrane tubes have been placed in the adiabatic reactors to remove hydrogen from the reaction zone. Then, the membrane reactors are modelled heterogeneously based on the mass and energy conservation laws considering a detailed thermal and catalytic kinetic model. To prove the accuracy of the considered model and assumptions, the simulation results of the conventional process are compared with the plant data. In addition, the genetic algorithm as a powerful method in the global optimization is applied to maximize the styrene production. The temperature of feed and sweep gas streams are attainable decision variables due to severe effect of temperature on the equilibrium and kinetic constant. This configuration has enhanced styrene production rate about 9.98 % compared to the industrial adiabatic reactor.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.090
Threshold uncertainty score0.498

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.195
Teacher spread0.182 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations7
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical EngineeringSame topicCatalysts for Methane ReformingFrench-language works237,207