MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2136520317 · doi:10.1002/cjce.20510

Residence time distribution in spouted bed drying of maltodextrin solutions on a bed of inert particles

2011· article· en· W2136520317 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Guillermo Osorio‐Revilla, Tzayhrí Gallardo‐Velázquez, Arturo Ramírez‐Torres, Yadira Rivera‐Espinoza

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicMicroencapsulation and Drying Processes
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSecretaría de Investigación y Posgrado, Instituto Politécnico Nacional
KeywordsResidence time distributionMaltodextrinPelletsResidence time (fluid dynamics)Draft tubeMaterials scienceInertPolypropyleneChromatographyChemistryComposite materialMineralogyMechanicsGeotechnical engineeringSpray dryingGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Residence time distributions (RTD) for aqueous maltodextrin solutions were determined in two kinds of spouted bed dryers: (1) conventional spouted bed (CSB) 0.305 m diameter with a bed of polypropylene beads and (2) spout‐fluid bed 0.143 m diameter with draft tube submerged in a bed of FEP® pellets (S‐FBDT). RTD, mean residence time tm, and spread of the distribution σ2, were determined at different drying temperatures, spouting velocities, bed depths, spraying pressures, and feed concentrations. Average values of tm and σ2 were 6.5 min and 26.6 min2 for the CSB and 6.9 min and 36 min2 for the S‐FBDT, respectively, for all operating conditions except spraying pressure. RTD curves were well represented by the response of an ideal stirred tank with a superimposed bypass of 15% on average for the CSB and 7% on average for the S‐FBDT dryer for all operating conditions. Increase in spraying pressure produced a reduction of tm and an increase in the bypass fraction of the product in both dryers. © 2011 Canadian Society for Chemical Engineering

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.187
Teacher spread0.157 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations4
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical EngineeringSame topicMicroencapsulation and Drying ProcessesFrench-language works237,207