MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2084719855 · doi:10.1002/cjce.5450810348

Modelling of Gas‐Liquid/Gas‐Liquid‐Solid Flows in Bubble Columns: Experiments and CFD Simulations

2003· article· en· W2084719855 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mohan R. Rampure, Vivek V. Buwa, Vivek V. Ranade

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Mixing
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDepartment of Science and Technology, Ministry of Science and Technology, India
KeywordsComputational fluid dynamicsBubbleMechanicsFlow (mathematics)Multiphase flowMaterials scienceGas bubbleWork (physics)Eulerian pathThermodynamicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Gas‐liquid/gas‐liquid‐solid systems are widely used in the chemical process industry for a variety of applications. In the present work, we have characterized the dynamics of gas‐liquid/gas‐liquid‐solid flows in cylindrical bubble columns using experiments and CFD simulations. The low frequency oscillations corresponding to the local re‐circulatory flow were characterized using wall pressure fluctuation measurements. Eulerian‐Eulerian two‐/three‐phase simulations were carried out with a focus on characterizing the dynamic properties of gas‐liquid/gas‐liquid‐solid flows. The effects of superficial gas velocity,H/Dratio and solid loading on the dynamic and time‐averaged flow behavior were studied experimentally and computationally. The simulated results were compared with the experimental measurements. The results presented are useful for understanding the dynamics of gas‐liquid/gas‐liquid‐solid flows in bubble columns and provide a basis for further development of CFD models for three‐phase systems.

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 score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.051

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.185 · 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

Citations75
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical EngineeringSame topicFluid Dynamics and MixingFrench-language works237,207