Interaction between a hollow‐cone spray and the co‐axial swirling stratified flow in a novel spray pyrolysis furnace
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pressure‐swirl nozzles producing hollow‐cone sprays are widely used in many engineering applications, but the induced high‐speed stream along the centreline of the spray cone was ignored in designing spray chambers. The high‐speed stream influences the flow field especially in minimized spray chambers, but it is difficult to characterize experimentally. Hence, computational fluid dynamics was applied to investigate the multi‐phase flow interactions inside a novel spray pyrolysis furnace for liquid ore exploitation. The mass flow rate distribution of the co‐axial swirling stratified flow inside the furnace, the gas‐solid separation efficiency, particle size distribution, and residence time were investigated under different positions and directions of the hollow‐cone spray. The results proved that different spray operations would cause variation in the air mass flow rate distribution and gas‐solid separation efficiency, which should be paid attention to in the design of process intensification. The distribution of particles sized from 30 to 40 μm were most sensitive under different flow rates. The recommended operating conditions of the spray pyrolysis process were confirmed as the inlet velocity of 5 m/s and downward spray from the top of the furnace chamber.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 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".