MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2052083252 · doi:10.1002/cjce.20148

Scale‐up strategy for the jetting fluidized bed using a CFD model based on two‐fluid theory

2009· article· en· W2052083252 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Qicheng Wang, Kai Zhang, Stefano Brandani, Jianchun Jiang

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGranular flow and fluidized beds
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersKey Technologies Research and Development ProgramNational Key Research and Development Program of ChinaHigher Education Discipline Innovation ProjectNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaNational Science Foundation
KeywordsDimensionless quantityScalingComputational fluid dynamicsJet (fluid)Scale (ratio)MechanicsFluidized bedScale modelSCALE-UPStatistical physicsMaterials sciencePhysicsMathematicsAerospace engineeringClassical mechanicsEngineeringThermodynamicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Based on a hydrodynamic two‐fluid model [Brandani and Zhang, Powder Technol. 2006; 163(1–2): 80–87], the scaling relations developed by Glicksman et al., are modified to improve the understanding of the scale‐up of jetting fluidized beds (JFBs). To estimate the ability of the proposed scaling rules to give similar results, simulations are conducted in CFX 4.4. We investigate in detail the effects of jet gas velocity on the scale‐up rule. The similarities of jet evolutions and time‐averaged radial viodage distributions are compared between large and small beds. The computational results confirm that the modified scaling rules are valid for JFBs when all dimensionless groups are matched between the prototype and large‐scale beds.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.250
Threshold uncertainty score0.657

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.203 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations12
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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