Numerical simulation of the transient temperature distribution inside moving particles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This work is devoted to the two‐dimensional (2D) numerical simulation of heat and fluid flow by granular mixing in a horizontally rotating kiln. The heat and fluid flow in the gas phase are solved directly using a fixed Eulerian grid. At the same time, the particle dynamics and their collisions are solved on a Lagrangian grid. The no‐slip boundary condition on the particle surface is implemented using the fictitious boundary method. The heat transfer inside the particles is calculated utilising two models: the first is the direct solution of the energy conservation equation in Lagrangian and Eulerian space and the second is the so‐called linear model, which assumes a homogeneous distribution of the temperature inside each particle. Numerical simulations showed that if the thermal diffusivity of the gas phase significantly exceeds the same parameter of the particles, the linear model over‐predicts the heating rate of the particles. The analysis of the time‐averaged flow field inside the kiln showed that in the gas phase a double vortex structure is formed which increases the convective heat transfer in the upper part of the particulate bed. The influence of the particle size, the angular velocity of the drum and the fluid on the heating rates of particles is studied and discussed.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".