Oil Sand Slurry Conditioning Tests in a 100 mm Pipeline Loop
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Fresh oil sand slurries were prepared and tested in a 100 mm pipeline loop at 37°C to evaluate the effects of average flow velocity, slurry air content and air injection method (bulk or continuous) on slurry conditioning, i.e., the evolution of the in‐pipe processes that promote gravity separation of bitumen‐air aggregates from the remainder of the slurry. The potential separability of the bitumen in the slurry was evaluated using a slurry Conditioning Index (CI). When no air was injected into the slurry, the slurry CI was low (≤0.1), indicating very poor conditioning. An increase in flow velocity from 2 m/s to 4 m/s and injection of 5% air (by volume) dramatically improved the slurry CI, to ∼ 0.6. The improved slurry conditioning observed at the higher velocity is explained by the increased force of fluid turbulence experienced by the particles and the greatly enhanced bitumen‐air contact.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".