MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3112954161 · doi:10.1515/npprj-2020-0081

Sodium salt scaling in black liquor evaporators and the effects of the addition of tall oil brine

2020· article· en· W3112954161 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Erik Karlsson, Anders Åkesjö

Bibliographic record

VenueNordic Pulp & Paper Research Journal · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicCrystallization and Solubility Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersStora EnsoEnergimyndighetenUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsBlack liquorBrineSodium carbonateChemistrySodiumCarbonateSalt (chemistry)Mother liquorScalingMineralogyChemical engineeringCrystallizationOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Sodium salt scaling, i. e. the formation of doubles salts comprised of sodium, carbonate and sulphate on the heat transfer surfaces, is a common problem that occurs during black liquor evaporation. In this study, experimental results are presented that provide new insights into the formation and composition of such scales and how they are influenced by the addition of tall oil brine. It was found that increased content of sodium carbonate and sodium sulphate in the black liquor increased scaling, while the ratio between carbonate and sulphate had a lesser influence than reported in other studies. Black liquor created loose clay-like scales comprised of aggregated crystals and black liquor, whereas salt solutions created hard mineral-like scales. The scales formed by both the black liquor and the salt solution showed a tendency to fall off during formation after primary nucleation. It was also found that both tall oil soap and alkalized tall oil brine could inhibit the formation of scales. The inhibition effect is stronger if adding the soap or brine just before scaling starts, but also depends on the amount added, the sodium carbonate and sodium sulphate content in the liquor as well as other factors.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.437
Threshold uncertainty score0.447

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.283 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations5
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNordic Pulp & Paper Research JournalSame topicCrystallization and Solubility StudiesFrench-language works237,207