Clustering behaviour in gas–liquid–solid circulating fluidized beds with low solid holdups of resin particles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The flow in a gas–liquid–solid circulating fluidized bed is self‐organised and manifests itself with clustering of particles and bubbles. The clustering behaviour in the fluidized bed at low solid holdups of resin particles was experimentally investigated with a high‐speed image measurement and treatment technique of complementary metal oxide semiconductor to enhance the fundamental understanding on such a flow. Several new physical quantities were suggested to characterise such ordered flow structures. The main findings are as follows. The clusters of solid particles largely exist as doublets and triplets, the mixed groups of particles and bubbles mostly exist as one bubble carrying two to four particles. Increasing superficial liquid velocity, particle diameter or density weakens the aggregation degrees of both particle and mixed clusters in the riser and downer, except that the increase of superficial liquid velocity enhances the mixed clustering behaviour in the riser. The climbing of the auxiliary liquid velocity or liquid phase viscosity intensifies the aggregation behaviour, except that the increase of liquid phase viscosity reduces the mixed clustering degree in the riser. The influences of superficial gas velocity and surface tension of liquid phase on the clustering behaviour seem to be a little complex and the trends are not simply increasing or decreasing. The life cycle of solid particle clusters in the GLS riser is not sensitive to the operation conditions, being around 0.07 s. The mixed clusters' life cycle is more sensitive to the conditions and physical properties of phases, changing from 0.02 to 0.07 s.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".