Quantitative Study of the Gas–Solids Flow and Its Heterogeneity/Nonuniformity in a 14 m Two-Dimensional CFB Riser Reactor
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Modeling, design, and operating of circulating fluidized bed (CFB) reactors require quantitative studies on the flow structure and hydrodynamic heterogeneity, which has a significant influence on the process reactions. This study comprehensively investigates the axial and lateral distributions of the solidss concentration with superficial gas velocity of 5–9 m/s and a solidss circulation rate of 100–300 kg/(m2 s) in a pilot CFB reactor of 14 m height. Empirical models are developed based on the above experimental data for both axial and lateral solidss concentrations. The predicted values by the proposed correlations are in good agreement with the experimental data within deviation of 10–20%. An empirical correlation to calculate the radial nonuniformity index (RNI) is proposed to quantify the nonuniformity of the gas–solidss flow. Using the RNI empirical correlation, the flow development can be also calculated quantitatively, showing a good agreement with the results obtained from the data of solidss concentration directly.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".