MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3047698888 · doi:10.1002/aic.17016

Local and overall gas holdup in an aerated coaxial mixing system containing a non‐<scp>Newtonian</scp> fluid

2020· article· en· W3047698888 on OpenAlexafffund
Maryam Jamshidzadeh, Farhad Ein‐Mozaffari, Ali Lohi

Bibliographic record

VenueAIChE Journal · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Mixing
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsImpellerMixing (physics)MechanicsDispersion (optics)Computational fluid dynamicsCoaxialAerationViscosityNewtonian fluidMaterials scienceChemistryMechanical engineeringEngineeringPhysicsComposite materialOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Gas dispersion in non‐Newtonian fluids is a challenging task due to the formation of large cavities behind the impeller blades, which leads to the generation of very large bubbles. In this study, the effects of impeller speed, impeller type, pumping direction, and CMC concentration on the local and overall gas holdup inside a coaxial mixing tank comprised of two central impellers and an anchor were investigated through tomography, computational fluid dynamics (CFD), and response surface methodology (RSM). The results showed that an increase in the fluid apparent viscosity resulted in decreasing the gas holdup except for the pitched blade impeller in upward‐pumping mode. Although the highest overall gas holdup was accomplished for the downward pumping and co‐rotating mode, the local gas holdup data revealed a non‐uniform distribution of gas by this configuration. The lowest gas dispersion efficiency was achieved by a system comprised of two Scaba impellers and an anchor.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.190 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations42
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAIChE JournalSame topicFluid Dynamics and MixingFrench-language works237,207