MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2363811512

Correlation and Prediction of Solids Holdups of Gas-Solid Two-Phase Flow in Fully Developed Region of CFB Risers

2005· article· en· W2363811512 on OpenAlexaff
Shi Yan-fu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Chemical Engineering of Chinese Universities · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Mixing
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFluidized bed combustionMechanicsWork (physics)Particle (ecology)Flow (mathematics)Phase (matter)ChemistryThermodynamicsPhysicsGeologyFluidized bed
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To investigate the solids holdups in fully developed region of CFB risers, experiments were carried out in two CFB risers with the heights of 15.1m and 10.5m, respectively. FCC particles (Geldart A) and sand particles (Geldart B) were used in the experiments and the solids holdups were calculated by using measured pressure gradients. The experimental results obtained from 175 sets of operation conditions, under which the lengths of fully developed section are longer than 2.8 m, show that when the superficial gas velocity is between 3 m?s?1 and 8 m?s?1, it has a significant effect on the variations of the average solids holdups in fully developed region with the terminal solids holdups, but when it is less than 3 m?s-1 or greater than 8 m?s-1, the effect becomes inapprecible and the average solids holdups vary linearly with the terminal solids holdups. By taking into account the effects of superficial gas velocity, particle properties and riser geometry, a new empirical correlation for the average solids holdups in fully developed region of CFB riser were developed, which is in good agreement with the experimental data of this work and accords with the correlations reported in literatures

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.280
Threshold uncertainty score0.475

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.004
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.192 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Chemical Engineering of Chinese UniversitiesSame topicFluid Dynamics and MixingFrench-language works237,207