MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2013570469 · doi:10.1002/ceat.200401996

Coaxial Mixer Hydrodynamics with Newtonian and non‐Newtonian Fluids

2004· article· en· W2013570469 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueChemical Engineering & Technology · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Mixing
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsImpellerNon-Newtonian fluidNewtonian fluidMechanicsCoaxialMixing (physics)Power consumptionRheologyMaterials sciencePower (physics)PhysicsMechanical engineeringThermodynamicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The performance of several combinations of a wall scraping impeller and dispersing impellers in a coaxial mixer operated in counter‐ and co‐rotating mode were assessed with Newtonian and non‐Newtonian fluids. Using the power consumption and the mixing time as the efficiency criteria, impellers in co‐rotating mode were found to be a better choice for Newtonian and non‐Newtonian fluids. The hybrid impeller‐anchor combination was found to be the most efficient for mixing in counter‐rotating or co‐rotating mode regardless of the fluid rheology. For both rotating modes, it was shown that the anchor speed does not have any effect on the power draw of the dispersing turbines. However, the impeller speed was shown to affect the anchor power consumption. The determination of the minimum agitation conditions to achieve the just suspended state of solid particles ( N js ) was also determined. It was found that N js had lower values with the impellers having the best axial pumping capabilities.

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 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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.695
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.001
GPT teacher head0.145
Teacher spread0.144 · 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