MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2163498833 · doi:10.1002/cjce.22043

Modelling and simulation of raw material blending process in cement raw mix milling installations

2014· article· en· W2163498833 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Dimitris Tsamatsoulis

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMineral Processing and Grinding
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRaw materialMixing (physics)LimeProcess engineeringCementProcess (computing)MillSystem dynamicsMaterials scienceMechanical engineeringEngineeringComputer scienceMetallurgyChemistryPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A series of multivariable models composed from linear differential equations, integrals, and delays has been developed to describe the dynamics of mixing of the raw materials during the cement raw meal milling. The dynamics between the main oxides and chemical modules of raw mix in mill outlet and the materials proportions in mill entrance is investigated. The distributions of model parameters (gains, time constants, delays, steady state values) are determined. In this way, the structure of the parameters' uncertainty is clearly expressed, explained by the raw materials composition uncertainty and can be used in process simulation. A successful attempt is made to simulate the mill operation by including the main components of the process concerning mixing and dynamics. The simulator calculates the chemical analyses and modules of raw meal in the mill outlet, and also the dynamics of the main module characterizing raw meal and cement i.e., the lime saturation factor (LSF). Thus, the effect of the raw materials compositions and their uncertainty on LSF dynamics is studied. The dynamical models analyzed can be used to build robust controllers, while the simulator constitutes a tool to evaluate the efficiency of the control strategies.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.361

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.190 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations9
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical EngineeringSame topicMineral Processing and GrindingFrench-language works237,207