New Approaches to Improve the Uniformity of the Radial Solids Concentration Distribution in CFB Risers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The so-called core-annulus structure, that is, lower solids concentration in the center region and higher solids concentration in the near wall region along the circulating fluidized beds (CFB) riser, usually has a negative effect on the performance of CFB risers since it may greatly decrease the reactor efficiency and controllability. In order to improve the performance of industrial CFB risers, two potential approaches are proposed in this study: (1) the use of the center-sparse side-dense air jets arrangement for the gas distributor and the side-covered arrangement for the solids distributor and (2) the use of the air jet from the riser circumference. The results show that the patterns of the inlet gas distributor and solids distributor have significant effect on the flow structure in both the entrance region and the fully-developed region in the riser. The gas distributor with center-sparse side-dense air jet arrangement improves the uniformity of the radial solids distribution, while the center-dense side-sparse air jet arrangement steepens the non-uniformity of the solids radial profile. The core-annulus structure can also be greatly flattened by applying a side-covered solids distributor, while it can be heavily steepened by employing the center-covered solids distributor. The results also show that by employing the circumferential air jet approach under appropriate jet velocities, the maximum solids concentration in the near wall region can be greatly reduced, the entrance region can be shortened, and the uniformity of the flow structure can be greatly improved.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".