Modelling study of emulsion latex coagulation processes in coagulators
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This paper presents a numerical study of emulsion latex coagulation processes in continuous coagulators based on the full computational fluid dynamics approach. The RANS approach together with the k ‐ε turbulence model was used to describe the detailed flow field in the coagulators. The coagulant mixing process was modelled by the convection‐diffusion equation and the emulsion latex coagulation process was formulated by the population balance equation of the particle size with a coagulation kernel including a perikinetic and orthokinetic combined mechanism. The flow and coagulation models were independently validated by means of comparing simulated results to the relevant experimental data from the literature. A series of simulations were carried out to study the effects of coagulator bottom shape, salt solution feeding location, residence time and agitation speed, as well as the influence of four typical scale‐up criteria on the latex particle coagulation process. The presented results would be helpful for the relevant process design, development, and scale‐up of continuous latex coagulators.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it