MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2040748485 · doi:10.1002/cjce.5450830118

Phase Distribution in a High Pressure Slurry Bubble Column via a Single Source Computed Tomography

2008· article· en· W2040748485 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Novica Rados, Ashfaq Shaikh, Muthanna H. Al‐Dahhan

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Mixing
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsSlurryMaterials scienceBubblePitot tubePhysicsMechanicsComposite materialFlow (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Due to their numerous advantages, Slurry Bubble Column Reactors (SBCR) are gaining wide importance in the petroleum, petrochemical, chemical, and biochemical industries. Most previous literature studies on the fluid dynamics and the phase holdup distribution in SBCR are limited to low superficial gas velocity, low solids loading, and the atmospheric pressure. Moreover, the presence of a solids phase poses difficulties in probe measurement techniques such as pitot tube and optical probe and see through measurement techniques such as particle image velocimetry (PIV), Laser Doppler Velocimetry (LDV). Single source γ-ray Computed Tomography (CT) has been used to measure cross-sectional phase holdup distribution in two-phase systems. In the present study, a new methodology has been developed that combines a single source CT with overall gas holdup measurement, along with valid assumptions, to measure the cross-sectional holdup distribution of the three phases in a slurry bubble column. The implementation of developed methodology has been demonstrated using air-water-glass beads (150 µm) at selected conditions of superficial gas velocity and operating pressure.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.156
Teacher spread0.152 · 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

Citations27
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical EngineeringSame topicFluid Dynamics and MixingFrench-language works237,207