MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2064884282 · doi:10.1002/cjce.5450780516

Simulation of fine particle formation by precipitation using computational fluid dynamics

2000· article· en· W2064884282 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Damien Piton, Rodney O. Fox, Bruno Marcant

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicCrystallization and Solubility Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Science Foundation
KeywordsComputational fluid dynamicsMicromixingTurbulenceMechanicsFluentMixing (physics)Turbulence kinetic energyPrecipitationDissipationFluid dynamicsMaterials scienceThermodynamicsPhysicsMeteorologyViscosity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The 4‐environment generalized micromixing (4‐EGM) model is applied to describe turbulent mixing and precipitation of barium sulfate in a tubular reactor. The model is implemented in the commercial computational fluid dynamics (CFD) software Fluent. The CFD code is first used to solve for the hydrodynamic fields (velocity, turbulence kinetic energy, turbulent energy dissipation). The species concentrations and moments of the crystal size distribution (CSD) are then computed using user‐defined transport equations. CFD simulations are performed for the tubular reactor used in an earlier experimental study of barium sulfate precipitation. The 4‐EGM CFD results are shown to compare favourably to CFD results found using the presumed beta PDF model. The latter has previously been shown to yield good agreement with experimental data for the mean crystal size at the outlet of the tubular reactor.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.213 · 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

Citations52
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical EngineeringSame topicCrystallization and Solubility StudiesFrench-language works237,207