MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2056959507 · doi:10.2495/mpf110011

Hydrodynamics behaviour of slot-rectangular spouted beds: assessment of slot width effect

2011· article· en· W2056959507 on OpenAlexaffabout
Ehsan Esmaili, Nader Mahinpey, Chinten James Lim

Bibliographic record

VenueWIT transactions on engineering sciences · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGranular flow and fluidized beds
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMechanicsDragComputational fluid dynamicsMaterials scienceFluentComputer simulationWork (physics)Eulerian pathParticle (ecology)Mechanical engineeringGeologyPhysicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Spouted beds, originally invented in Canada (1955), have been widely used in drying, granulation, catalytic polymerization, residue treatment and coating of several materials.Understanding of gas and particle hydrodynamics behavior in a slot-rectangular spouted bed is important for evaluation of particle circulation rate and gas-solid contact efficiency and also for overcoming scale-up difficulties.Although have been extensively applied, the mechanisms of solid movement in spouted beds are still not completely understood.In this research, computational fluid dynamics (FLUENT 6.3) has been used to perform a complete study on the hydrodynamic behavior of spouted bed using an Eulerian-Eulerial two-phase model.The Eulerian model assumes that both phases can be considered as fluid and also take the interpenetrating effect of each phase into consideration by using inter-phase drag models.The computational work has been significantly reduced using a 2D axisymmetric mesh for the bed, operating at different conditions (i.e.different superficial gas velocities, static bed heights, size of particle).Furthermore, the effect of slot width on the hydrodynamic behavior of the bed has been predicted.The results predicted by numerical simulation have been validated with the earlier experiments conducted.The comparisons have been made in terms of fountain height for various operating conditions.The results show a good agreement between the experimental data and the numerical simulation.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.213
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWIT transactions on engineering sciencesSame topicGranular flow and fluidized bedsFrench-language works237,207