Effect of Operating Parameters on the Mixing Performance of the Superblend Coaxial Mixer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The mixing performance of a Superblend coaxial mixer, which combines a Maxblend impeller as the central impeller and a helical ribbon, was investigated experimentally in terms of power consumption and mixing time. The objective was to better understand the influence of the operating conditions on the mixing performance with Newtonian fluids. The experiment setup used allows each shaft to be driven independently. Taking advantage of individual torque-meter on each shaft and a well-developed decolorization technique, it was shown that the speed ratio R N ( N Maxblend / N helical ribbon = 1, 2, 4, 6, 8) and the rotating mode (up- and down-pumping of the helical ribbon) have the largest influence on the mixing performance and that there is no universal operating mode for minimizing power and mixing time in all conditions or flow regimes. The results are presented in terms of the power consumption and mixing time throughout the laminar, transitional, and turbulent regimes. The contribution of each impeller, the variation of flow patterns, the determination of the optimal operating conditions, and the comparison of power constant are discussed.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".