Numerical analysis of the operating characteristics of a large‐scale <scp>CFB</scp> coal‐gasification reactor with the <scp>QC‐EMMS</scp> drag model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The operating characteristics of a 60 m high industrial circulating fluidized bed (CFB) coal‐gasification reactor were investigated numerically based on the Eulerian‐Eulerian approach. The QC‐EMMS drag model was used to describe the gas‐solid drag reduction caused by particle clusters. The simulations predicted the overall characteristics of fluidization and gasification inside the CFB reactor riser. The simulated results are in agreement with measured data from the field test. Then, the numerical model was used to analyze the influences of the steam/coal ratio, pulverized coal‐particle size, and operating pressure. The results show that each of the three operating parameters has a great impact on different performance parameters, such as the solid mass circulation rate, the H2/CO ratio, the effective syngas yield, and the average bed temperature. The predicted data were then correlated to provide supports for optimizing the operations of large‐scale CFB coal gasifiers.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".