Comparative Study of Flow Structure in Circulating Fluidized Bed Risers with FCC and Sand Particles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The combined influences of particle properties and nozzle gas distributor design on the axial and radial flow structure in two 100 mm i.d., 15.1 m and 10.5 m long risers with FCC and sand particles were investigated by measuring the axial pressure gradient profiles, and the axial and radial profiles of solids concentration. The results show that the nozzle gas distributor design has significant effects on the axial and radial flow structure for the FCC and sand particles. At lower superficial gas velocity of less than 8.0 m/s, the upward gas‐solid flow of the sand particles decelerates in various degrees with the disappearing of the nozzle gas distributor effect. The upward gas‐solid flow of the FCC particles, however, occurs without noticeable deceleration within the range of this study. In the acceleration section, the radial distributions of the local solids concentration of the FCC particles are more uniform than those of sand particles under the same operating conditions; while in the fully developed zone, the sand particles have a more uniform radial distribution than the FCC particles. The gas‐solid flow is first developed in the center region, and then extends towards the wall. The overall flow development in the riser mainly depends on the local gas‐solid flow in the wall region.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".