Micromixing efficiency in a multiphase reactor with a foam block stirrer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT A rotating foam reactor (RFR), which comprises a solid foam block stirrer as opposed to the agitator blade in stirred tanks, has recently received a significant amount of research interest due to its high mass transfer rates. For a deeper insight into the RFR the work herein investigated the micromixing efficiency of the RFR in terms of segregation index (Xs) using the iodide‐iodate reaction system. The effects of various operating parameters including injection time, rotational speed, acid concentration, volume of liquid, volumetric ratio, and gas flow rate on segregation index were systematically examined. Results showed that the segregation index remained constant when injection time exceeded 100 s. Moreover, the Xs increased with an increase in acid concentration but decreased with an increase in rotational speed, volume of liquid, volumetric ratio, and gas flow rate. Micromixing time was also calculated based on the incorporation model and was established to range from 1.1 × 10−3–4.5 × 10−2 s, which is much shorter than that of conventional reactors. The results herein demonstrate that an RFR exhibits excellent micromixing efficiency and has a significant potential for use in chemical industries.
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".