MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2014801655 · doi:10.1002/cjce.20118

The influence of distributor structure on the solids distribution and flow development in circulating fluidized beds

2008· article· en· W2014801655 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Aijie Yan, Weixing Huang, Jesse Zhu

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGranular flow and fluidized beds
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDistributorTube (container)Body orificeMaterials scienceMechanicsFluidizationFluidized bedFlow (mathematics)Fluidized bed combustionEngineeringMechanical engineeringWaste managementComposite materialPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The influence of distributor structure on solids distribution is studied in two riser circulating fluidized bed reactors with different distributor structures but similar diameters. Optic fibre probes were used for the measurement of local solids distribution. The axial and radial distribution of solids holdup in the riser with a multi‐tube distributor is more uniform than that with a multi‐orifice distributor. The radial profiles of particle velocity in the riser with the multi‐tube distributor are also more uniform than that with the multi‐orifice distributor. In the riser with the multi‐tube distributor, both gas and particles are distributed more uniformly across the section, so that the flow acceleration is much more uniform and faster. The flow development is much faster and the fully developed region is reached early for the riser with the multi‐tube distributor. The distributor design is an important factor for the design of circulating fluidized bed 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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.162
Teacher spread0.157 · 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

Citations11
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical EngineeringSame topicGranular flow and fluidized bedsFrench-language works237,207