MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2896354774 · doi:10.1002/cjce.23355

A CFD based empirical model for assessing gas holdup in bubble columns

2018· article· en· W2896354774 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Mehdi Ebrahimi, Andrew McGillis, Cameron Lewis, David S.‐K. Ting, Rupp Carriveau

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Mixing
Canadian institutionsHydro One (Canada)University of Windsor
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaOntario Centres of Excellence
KeywordsBubbleMechanicsComputational fluid dynamicsCoalescence (physics)Reynolds numberWork (physics)BreakupFlow (mathematics)Range (aeronautics)Materials scienceChemistryThermodynamicsPhysicsTurbulence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Bubble columns are widely used in many industrial applications. Gas holdup knowledge is an essential element in bubble column design and process optimization. Despite the simple structure of bubble columns, the behaviour of the bubbly flow is still not well understood owing to the complexity of gas–liquid interactions and coupling between the phases. Variation of gas density and initial liquid height are the most likely reasons for gas holdup changes in bubble columns. These parameters affect bubble breakup and coalescence as well as the rise velocity of small bubbles, which causes change to bubble size distribution that finally affect the gas holdup. In this work, through the application of computational fluid dynamics (CFD) and by investigating the effect of gas density and the initial liquid height on the bubbly flow condition, a new correlation for deducing the total gas holdup is developed. To achieve this, a wide range of bubbly flows are modelled, and gas holdup values are determined for different heights and operating pressures. Ranges of the normalized pressure (P/P 0 ), superficial Reynolds number (Re sup ), and the aspect ratio of the bubble column (H 0 /D) were 1 ≤ P/P 0 ≤ 15, 3000 ≤ Re sup ≤ 57000, and1.5 ≤ H 0 /D ≤ 8, respectively. The proposed correlation has been found to predict the experimental as well as CFD gas holdup data fairly well. The results of this research provide a fast and accurate method for predicting gas holdup in bubble columns that work either in atmospheric or high‐pressure conditions.

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 score0.143
Threshold uncertainty score0.468

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.212 · 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

Citations2
Published2018
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical EngineeringSame topicFluid Dynamics and MixingFrench-language works237,207