Bed diameter effect on the hydrodynamics of gas‐solid fluidized beds via radioactive particle tracking (RPT) technique
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The hydrodynamics observed in large‐scale gas‐solid fluidized bed reactors are different from those observed in smaller scale beds. In this study, the effect of bed diameter on the hydrodynamics of gas‐solid fluidized bed reactors has been investigated in two bubbling fluidized beds of 44 cm and 14 cm in diameter using an advanced non‐invasive radioactive particle tracking (RPT) technique. Compressed air at room temperature was used as the gas phase, and the solid was glass beads with a particle size of 210 μm (Geldart‐B) and density of 2.5 g · cm−3. Particle velocity field, Reynolds stresses, normal stresses, turbulent kinetic energy, and axial and radial eddy diffusivities were measured in two beds at gas velocities of 1.5 , 2 , and 3 . Experimental results showed that the bed scales have a significant effect on some of these hydrodynamic parameters where the magnitude of solids velocity is much higher in the larger bed and the solids mixing and diffusion of particles are increased by increasing the column diameter.
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) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 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".