Gas holdup in a two‐phase reversed flow jet loop reactor
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Experimental investigations have been carried out in Reversed Flow Jet Loop Reactor (RFJLR) to study the influence of liquid flow rate, gas flow rate, immersion height of two‐fluid nozzle in reactor and nozzle diameter on gas holdup without circulation, that is, gas–liquid mixture in draft tube only ( E gd ) and gas holdup with circulation loop ( E g ). Also critical liquid flow rate required for transition from draft tube to circulation loop has been determined. Gas holdup was measured by isolation valve technique. Gas holdup in draft tube and circulation loop increased with increase in liquid flow rate and gas flow rate. It is observed that the increased flow rate is required for achieving a particular value of gas holdup with larger nozzle diameter. Nozzle at the top edge of draft tube have higher gas holdup as compared to other positions. It has been noted that, no significant recirculation of gas bubbles into the top of draft tube from annulus section has been observed till a particular liquid flow rate is reached. A plot of gas holdup with no circulation and with circulation mode determines minimum liquid flow rate required to achieve complete circulation loop. Critical liquid flow rate required to achieve complete circulation loop increases with increase in gas flow rate and is minimum at lowest immersion height of two‐fluid nozzle.
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".