MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2073784810 · doi:10.2202/1542-6580.2069

A Review of Rapid Gas-Solid Separation Techniques

2010· review· en· W2073784810 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Chemical Reactor Engineering · 2010
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicCyclone Separators and Fluid Dynamics
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSeparator (oil production)Gas separationProcess engineeringCyclonic separationSeparation (statistics)Fluid catalytic crackingContext (archaeology)Solid fuelCyclone (programming language)Environmental scienceWaste managementMaterials scienceMechanical engineeringChemistryEngineeringCrackingComputer scienceCombustionMembranePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Rapid, effective separation of phases is an essential step in many hydrocarbon conversion gas-solid processes. In heavy oil upgrading, fluid catalytic cracking (FCC) and biomass pyrolysis, for example, very fast separation of reacting gases from catalytic or heat-bearing solids is required to inhibit further reaction. The primary functions of a rapid separator in the context of a gas-solid flow are, first, to terminate contact between the reacting gases and the catalytic or hot solid particles and, second, to recover the isolated product vapors. Uninterrupted vapor-solid contact results in degraded, overcracked and generally less valuable products. Increasing interest in rapid separation has led in the past 25 years to a wide variety of proposed separator designs in the literature.Centrifugal separation is the fundamental principle underlying cyclone operation and most rapid gas-solid separation processes. Traditional cyclones rely on centrifugal separation and are very widely applicable. They are used for the removal of solid particulate matter from gas or liquid streams, for gas demisting, and in hydrocyclones. Most FCC processes employ traditional cyclone configurations for secondary and tertiary separation. The review briefly summarizes important topics studied in reverse flow cyclone operation. For initial separation, however, most fast gas-solid separators in the literature feature only partial cyclone layouts. Separation typically occurs more quickly in these devices relative to traditional cyclones, likely at the expense of separation efficiency.The current review places emphasis on experimental results and novel separation techniques in the context of fast gas-solid separation. Several recent methods of rapid gas-solid separation employ co-current or "uniflow" centrifugal arrangements. Hence, particular attention is directed to co-current centrifugal separators. These devices have been studied much less intensively than their reverse flow counterparts. Fast co-current separators, with their novel, partial cyclone layouts, are interesting for their performance characteristics in relation to popular commercial designs.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.935
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.302 · 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