MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2078269582 · doi:10.1021/ie060567+

Residence Time Distribution in a Multistage Agitated Contactor with Newtonian Fluids:  CFD Prediction and Experimental Validation

2007· article· en· W2078269582 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

VenueIndustrial & Engineering Chemistry Research · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Mixing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputational fluid dynamicsResidence time distributionContactorMechanicsResidence time (fluid dynamics)CascadeTurbulenceReynolds numberFlow (mathematics)ImpellerWork (physics)Non-Newtonian fluidDispersion (optics)SimulationMaterials scienceThermodynamicsChemistryComputer sciencePhysicsChromatographyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Residence time distributions (RTDs) are investigated in a multistage agitated contactor (MAC) for Newtonian fluids. A suitable computational fluid dynamics (CFD) simulation strategy is presented in this work. The effects of operating conditions, reactor geometries, and a turbulent parameter for the RTD curves are discussed. The resulting mean residence times and variances via the CFD simulation are in good agreement with the experimental data. Various liquids are used to simulate the RTD under different flow conditions. The Reynolds number with respect to the impeller speed ranged from 2600 to 50 000. The simulation results show that a cascade of stirred tanks with a back flow (CTB) model is more suitable to describe the flow behavior in a MAC with few stages than an axial dispersion model.

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)0.001
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 score0.192
Threshold uncertainty score0.789

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.249 · 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