Effect of kinetic models on hot spot temperature prediction for phthalic anhydride production in a multitubular packed bed reactor
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Although there are several kinetic models for the production of phthalic anhydride from the partial oxidation of o‐xylene, only few studies have compared the effect of the kinetic model on the prediction of the hot‐spot temperature. In this work, the predicted temperature profile for the partial oxidation of o‐xylene to phthalic anhydride in a multitubular packed bed reactor was obtained for different kinetic mechanisms using one‐dimensional pseudo‐homogeneous and heterogeneous models. The predicted temperature profile using the one‐dimensional heterogeneous model with the kinetic model of Calderbank et al. but with the adjusted kinetic and transport parameters proposed by Anastasov presented a good correlation with regard to experimental data. Nevertheless, in the hot‐spot zone deviations, up to 30 K were presented. In conclusion, the temperature performance in the production of phthalic anhydride is suitably predicted by the one‐dimensional heterogeneous model and the Calderbank et al.'s kinetic model. Though, prediction using bidimensional models should be done to establish the best correlation with experimental data.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".