MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2032703755 · doi:10.1002/apj.275

Effect of the geometry on the performance of the Maxblend<sup>™</sup> impeller with viscous Newtonian fluids

2009· article· en· W2032703755 on OpenAlexaff
Yoann Guntzburger, Louis Fradette, Maya Farhat, Mourad Héniche, Philippe A. Tanguy, Katsuhide Takenaka

Bibliographic record

VenueAsia-Pacific Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Mixing
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBafflePaddleImpellerMixing (physics)MechanicsLaminar flowTurbulenceFlow (mathematics)Power consumptionNewtonian fluidPower (physics)Materials scienceGeometryMechanical engineeringSimulationPhysicsMathematicsThermodynamicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Experimental and numerical investigations have been carried out to assess the effect of the vessel geometry (number of baffles) and the shape of the Maxblend impeller (configuration of the bottom paddle and angle of the upper grid) with viscous Newtonian fluids in the laminar and lower turbulent mixing regimes. Two parameters have been explored namely the power consumption of the impeller and the mixing time. Videos of the discoloration process have also been taken to get access to the mixing patterns. A nominal 50‐l vessel has been used in the experiments. The number of baffles has been varied from 1 to 4, and the bottom paddle has been modified by making openings to allow flow passage. Finally, the effect of using a straight grid in the upper part of the Maxblend has been studied under the same conditions. It is shown that the number of baffles does not have a significant effect on the power consumption, the mixing evolution, and the mixing time regardless of the flow regime. Making openings in the bottom paddle allows for the destruction of the segregated zones at the bottom of the tank at the expense of a very slight increase in power consumption and mixing time. Finally, the power and mixing time are both increased with a straight grid Maxblend. Copyright © 2009 Curtin University of Technology and John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.002
GPT teacher head0.160
Teacher spread0.158 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations17
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsia-Pacific Journal of Chemical EngineeringSame topicFluid Dynamics and MixingFrench-language works237,207