MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2970901143 · doi:10.1002/cjce.23637

Multiscale modelling of mass transfer in gas jets and bubble plumes

2019· article· en· W2970901143 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Devin O’Malley, Jan B. Haelssig

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Mixing
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaOffshore Energy Research AssociationCompute Canada
KeywordsSpargingBubbleMass transferMechanicsComputational fluid dynamicsFluid dynamicsVolume of fluid methodHeat transferRange (aeronautics)Multiphase flowMaterials scienceChemistryPhysicsFlow (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The injection of high‐speed gas streams into liquids is common in many industrial applications, such as sparging in multiphase reactors and contacting in mass transfer devices. Modelling the fluid dynamics and associated heat and mass transfer processes in such a system is complex because it involves many governing scales and drastic changes in physical properties. In this study, one formulation of a multiscale computational fluid dynamics model is proposed to simulate the fluid dynamics and mass transfer in such systems. The model uses volume‐of‐fluid interface capturing in regions where high mesh resolution can be attained and the drift‐flux or mixture model approximation in regions where mesh resolution is too low to directly resolve interface dynamics. The model was developed to provide a tunable, automatic transition between the two modelling approaches for both fluid dynamics and mass transfer predictions. The approach was validated through a comparison with results from two published studies. In the first case, the implementation of the drift‐flux model was validated through the simulation of a dispersed gas bubble plume injected into a cylindrical tank. In the second case, the fluid dynamics and mass transfer predictions were compared to results from an experimental study involving the horizontal injection of air into a rectangular tank filled with water for the application of aeration. The results show that the modelling approach can provide a good prediction of the experimental data using only limited fitting of empirical parameters, making it applicable to a broad range of other applications.

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 score0.133
Threshold uncertainty score0.307

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.145
Teacher spread0.140 · 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

Citations5
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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