Handling of Solids and Flow Characterization in a Baffleless Oscillatory Flow Coil Reactor
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The solid handling ability and flow patterns of a baffleless oscillatory flow coil reactor are investigated and characterized. Previous works in oscillatory flow have been generally conducted in straight channels with various baffled geometries. Solid handling capabilities of the reactor are examined through two reactions, namely, a precipitation reaction and a phase transfer catalysis reaction. In the first reaction, the reactor geometry proved capable of continuously handling liquid–solid suspensions of 5.8 wt % for 5 h and up to 7.9 wt % for 2 h. No signs of clogging were observed during these tests, and the maximum run time of the reactor is currently unknown. However, when gas was formed in the second reaction, rapid system clogging is observed due to a 10-fold decrease in the energy dissipation rate as a result of the pulsation dampening effect by the gas. A broadening of residence time distributions with oscillation intensity is observed and, accordingly, is accompanied by a broadening of solid product particle size distributions. Lower pulsation amplitude and frequencies were capable of keeping solids suspended in the precipitation reaction and may therefore be employed to achieve a tighter residence time and particle size distributions.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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".