Using a tracer technique to identify the extent of non-ideal flows in the continuous mixing of non-Newtonian fluids
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The identification of non-ideal flows in a continuous-flow mixing of non-Newtonian fluids is a challenging task for various chemical industries: plastic manufacturing, water and wastewater treatment, and pulp and paper manufacturing. Non-ideal flows such as channelling, recirculation, and dead zones significantly affect the performance of continuous-flow mixing systems. Therefore, the main objective of this paper was to develop an identification protocol to measure non-ideal flows in the continuous-flow mixing system. The extent of non-ideal flows was quantified using a dynamic model that incorporated channelling, recirculation, and dead volume in the mixing vessel. To estimate the dynamic model parameters, the system was excited using a frequency-modulated random binary input by injecting the saline solution (as a tracer) into the fresh feed stream prior to being pumped into the mixing vessel. The injection of the tracer was controlled by a computer-controlled on-off solenoid valve. Using the trace technique, the extent of channelling and the effective mixed volume were successfully determined and used as mixing quality criteria. Such identification procedures can be applied at various areas of chemical engineering in order to improve the mixing quality.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".