Evaluation of an Inconel-625 Reactor and its Wall Effects on Ethanol Reforming in Supercritical Water
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Continuous ethanol reforming in supercritical water was investigated in an Inconel-625 reactor without catalyst addition. Experiments were carried out for different operating conditions: temperatures from 450 to 600 °C, pressures from 225 to 300 bar, ethanol concentrations from 2.5 to 10% wt, and feed flow rates from 0.88 to 2.88 g/min. Higher temperatures increased the conversion and the hydrogen production, but above 575 °C the experiments failed due to excessive tar formation, which plugged the reactor and/or the back pressure regulator. The pressure effect in the range considered here was insignificant. Ethanol dehydrogenation to acetaldehyde was the main reaction pathway, followed by acetaldehyde decomposition to CH 4 and CO. The catalytic effects of the reactor’s wall were studied by varying the reactor’s surface-to-volume ratio ( S / V ) by inserting Inconel wires. The results confirmed the significant catalytic effects of Inconel 625, especially above 525 °C, and also demonstrated that at 550 °C and for an S / V ratio of 3.1 1/mm, conversion up to 96% was achieved without carbon deposition problems. Finally, a kinetic study for the ethanol dehydrogenation was carried out. This kinetic study revealed that ethanol dehydrogenation occurs mostly through wall-catalyzed reactions and that the homogeneous reaction is negligible in the reactor system considered here. Finally, an Arrhenius expression for the rate constant of the wall-catalyzed ethanol dehydrogenation reaction is proposed.
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) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".