Effect of Particle Density on the Hydrodynamic Behavior of a Gas-Solid Fluidized Bed
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this work the effect of particle density was analyzed using two different types of materials, Canadian Hematite and glass beads with densities of 4989 kg/m 3 and 2230 kg/m 3 , respectively. Both of these materials were used in a gas-solid bed and the hydrodynamic behavior of the bed analyzed. For each material two sets of particles were created. One set of particles ranged in size from 90 to 425 μm and another from 125 to 300 μm. The 90 to 425 μm particles were mixed maintaining a specific composition presented later in this paper. For the 125 to 300 μm range the same amount of particles were mixed according to the weight percentage of each size range. Pressure drop of the bed was taken using a differential manometer. For the Hematite particle size range of 90 to 425 μm the pressure drop measured across the bed at minimum fluidization was 785 Pa. For these same conditions using the glass beads the pressure drop was measured to be 420 Pa, significantly lower than those for Hematite. This same trend was also observed for the 125-300 μm particle range for the same bed height. Using the second set of particles pressure drop at minimum fluidization for Hematite and glass beads was 981 Pa and 412 Pa, respectively. Various other measurements taken at different bed heights showed that the Hematite pressure drop was significantly higher than when using glass beads. Other results presented in this paper show that both pressure drop and minimum fluidization are significantly impacted by the increase of the material density.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".