Impact of the fluid flow conditions on the formation rate of carbon dioxide hydrates in a semi‐batch stirred tank reactor
Bibliographic record
Abstract
CO 2 hydrate formation experiments are performed in a 20 L semi‐batch stirred tank reactor using three different impellers (a down‐pumping pitched blade turbine, a Maxblend™, and a Dispersimax™) at various rotational speeds to examine the impact of the flow conditions on the CO 2 hydrate formation rate. An original mathematical model of the CO 2 hydrate formation process that assigns a resistance to each of its constitutive steps is established. For each experimental condition, the formation rate is measured and the rate‐limiting step is determined on the basis of the respective values of the resistances. The efficiencies of the three considered impellers are compared and, for each impeller, the influence of the rotational speed on the rate‐limiting step is discussed. For instance, it is shown that a formation rate limitation due to heat transfer can occur at the relatively small scale used to perform our experiments. © 2015 American Institute of Chemical Engineers AIChE J , 61: 4387–4401, 2015
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".