MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2102954869 · doi:10.1002/cjce.20596

Modelling the complex interactions between reformer and reduction furnace in a midrex‐based iron plant

2011· article· en· W2102954869 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Khalid Alhumaizi, Abdelhamid Ajbar

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIron and Steelmaking Processes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProcess engineeringScrubberMass transferSteam reformingMethaneChemistryWaste managementNuclear engineeringHydrogenEngineeringHydrogen production

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This article studies the complex mass and energy interactions between the reformer and the reduction furnace in an iron plant based on Midrex technology. The methodology consists in the development of rigorous first principle models for the reformer and the reduction furnace, in addition to models for auxiliary units such as heat recuperator, scrubber and compressor. In this regard, a one‐dimensional heterogeneous model for the catalyst tubes which takes into account the intraparticle mass transfer resistance was developed for the reformer unit, while the furnace was modelled with bottom‐firing configuration. As for the reduction furnace, the mathematical model was based on the concept of shrinking core model. The furnace was modelled as a moving bed reactor taking into consideration the effects of water gas shift reaction, steam reforming of methane and carburisation reactions. The model was first validated using data from a local iron/steel plant and was then simulated to determine key output variables such as bustle gas temperature, degree of metalisation, carbon content, ratio of hydrogen to carbon monoxide, reductants to oxidants ratio and required compression energy. The effects of key input parameters on the performance of the plant were studied. These parameters included recycle ratio, scrubber exit temperature, injected oxygen flow rate, flow rate of natural gas after reformer, to transition zone, to reformer and to cooling zone. Useful profiles were compiled to illustrate the results of the sensitivity analysis. These results may serve as guidelines for a further optimisation of the plant.

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 score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.160 · 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

Citations43
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical EngineeringSame topicIron and Steelmaking ProcessesFrench-language works237,207