MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2057766874 · doi:10.1002/aic.690490218

Fines deposition dynamics in gas–liquid trickle‐flow reactors

2003· article· en· W2057766874 on OpenAlexaff
Ion Iliuta, Faı̈çal Larachi, Bernard P. A. Grandjean

Bibliographic record

VenueAIChE Journal · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnhanced Oil Recovery Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTrickle-bed reactorTRICKLEPressure dropOil sandsSuperficial velocityPorosityChemistryVolumetric flow rateFiltration (mathematics)Multiphase flowFlow (mathematics)MechanicsPetroleum engineeringMaterials scienceAsphaltCatalysisComposite materialGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Nonfilterable fines, such as incipient coke particles or fines naturally occurring in oil sands bitumen, are known to be responsible for the severe plugging during the flow of (fine) solid–liquid suspensions in cocurrent gas–liquid trickle‐bed hydrotreating reactors. Accumulating fines in the porous medium causes pressure buildup, and thus the dropoff in hydrogen partial pressure in the bed, overutilizing recycling compressors and shortening the reactor operating cycles. In this work, a 1‐D transient two‐fluid hydrodynamic model based on the macroscopic volume‐average form of the multiphase system transport equations is developed, analyzed, and validated experimentally. The model hypothesizes that plugging occurs via deep‐bed filtration mechanisms. It incorporates physical effects of porosity and effective specific surface‐area changes due to the capture of fines, inertial effects of phases, and coupling effects between the fines filter rate equation and interfacial momentum exchange force terms. It is tested in the trickle‐flow regime for conditions mimicking a hydrotreating trickle‐bed process with spherical and trilobe catalysts. To rationalize deep‐bed filtration phenomena in trickle‐flow reactors, parametric studies are carried out on the effects of liquid velocity and viscosity, gas density and velocity, and fines feed concentration, on the plugging dynamics.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.364
Threshold uncertainty score0.557

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.208
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 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

Citations35
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAIChE JournalSame topicEnhanced Oil Recovery TechniquesFrench-language works237,207