Optimising chlorine compression design with vapour phase nitrogen trichloride destruction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Nitrogen trichloride (NCl3) is a by‐product of electrolytic chlorine manufacture, produced when the brine is contaminated with ammonia. A common treatment method is a thermal destruction process in which the NCl3 is absorbed in a solvent (CHCl3) using a distillation column with no liquid bottoms product. The chlorine gas is cooled through direct contact with liquid chlorine, which flashes and condenses the solvent and NCl3 vapours. The condensate drains through trays to a reboiler in which the NCl3 decomposes while the chlorine, solvent, NCl3 solution boils. This process is well‐known and widely practiced but is known to experience catastrophic detonations. A vapour phase thermal decomposition of NCl3 does occur, particularly when the heat added through compression is considered. The known data on this decomposition reaction have been collected and converted in a rate expression that allows for integration within an ASPENPLUS process model. Different options for the compressor, precooler, intercooler and liquefier operations are considered, and their impact on the compressor and liquefier duties is reported. A different approach to the design and operation for a chlorine compression/liquefaction train is presented and discussed. © 2013 Canadian Society for Chemical Engineering
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".