The use of peat granules in a fluidized bed bioreactor
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This study describes the particle characteristics and fluidized hydrodynamics of peat granules. Peat granules, moistened with water, are a potential packing material in a gas–solid fluidized bed bioreactor used for treating air pollution. Information on the fluidization of wet peat granules is lacking. In order to advance this new type of bioreactor and to scale up its design for industrial use, fluidization studies of suitable packing material are required. Using abiotic experiments, three sizes of peat granules have been fluidized with air and fluidization characteristics were observed at different superficial gas velocities. Relative to other biomass particles, peat granules have a high particle density and sphericity, which contributes to favourable fluidization behaviour, without gas channelling. Fluidization experiments demonstrate that as the mean size of peat particles increased, minimum fluidization velocity increased. Increasing the moisture content of the peat granules resulted in a transition from bubbling bed fluidization to poor fluidization behaviour. Other types of moist biomass particles such as sawdust are difficult to fluidize and typically exhibit Geldart group C behaviour. In contrast, it was observed that wet peat granules could be fluidized in a bubbling bed regime, typical of group B particles.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".