A mechanistic study of agglomeration in fluidised beds at elevated pressures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Effect of operating pressure on the hydrodynamics of agglomerating gas–solid fluidised bed was investigated using a combination of discrete element method (DEM) for describing the movement of particles and computational fluid dynamic (CFD) for describing the flow of the gas phase. The inter‐particle cohesive force was calculated based on a time dependent model developed for solid bridging by the viscous flow. Motion of agglomerates was described by the multi‐sphere method. Fluidisation behaviour of an agglomerating bed was successfully simulated in terms of increasing the size of agglomerates. The results showed that increasing the operating pressure postpones de‐fluidisation of the bed. Since the DEM approach is a particle level simulation and study about particle–particle interactions is possible, a micro‐scale investigation in terms of cohesive force and repulsive force during agglomeration at elevated pressures was done. The micro‐scale results showed that although the number of contacts between particles was decreased by increasing operating pressure, stronger solid bridge formed between colliding particles at higher pressures. © 2012 Canadian Society for Chemical Engineering
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".