MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Heat Transfer in the Downer and the Riser of a Circulating Fluidized Bed - A Comparative Study

2001· article· en· W2073629333 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueChemical Engineering & Technology · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGranular flow and fluidized beds
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsHeat transferSuspension (topology)Fluidized bed combustionHeat transfer coefficientMechanicsFluidized bedThermodynamicsMaterials scienceFluidizationFlow (mathematics)Particle (ecology)ChemistryGeologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The characteristics of heat transfer were studied in both a gas-solids concurrent downflow fluidized bed (downer) and a gas-solids concurrent upflow fluidized bed (riser) with FCC particles. The radial and axial distribution profiles of the heat transfer coefficient between a suspended surface and the gas-solids flow suspension were obtained using a miniature heat transfer probe, under different operating conditions. Comprising the results of the heat transfer in the downer and the riser shows that there exists some significant distinction between the heat transfer processes in the two reactors. The characteristics of heat transfer in both cases are closely related to their hydrodynamics and the distinct flow structures determinate the different heat transfer behaviors. The results also indicate that the operating conditions present some different effects in the two 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.

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 score0.190
Threshold uncertainty score0.449

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.201 · 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