<scp>CFD‐DEM</scp> simulation of wall sheeting and particles charge in fluidized beds
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The effect of the electrostatic charge of particles was investigated in fluidized beds with conductive and nonconductive walls. For this purpose, changes in the wall surface charge density and particle contact time near the wall were examined. Computational fluid dynamics/discrete element method (CFD‐DEM) was utilized to simulate the accumulation of particle and wall‐induced electrostatic charges in a quasi‐two‐dimensional fluidized bed. Particles and walls were initially considered neutral and gained charge with time. The simulations showed that aggregated particles are formed due to the presence of the opposite electrostatic charges. Agglomerates are produced by joining the aggregated particles together. Agglomerates have a layered‐like structure and are made of positive and negative particles. Accumulation of these agglomerates and aggregated particles on the wall forms wall sheeting, which has a layered‐like structure. In other words, particles do not accumulate on the wall individually. A significant accumulation of particles near the wall was seen in the presence of electrostatic charges compared with the neutral bed. Also, the contact time of particles on the wall in the conductive case was more prolonged than in the nonconductive case. The results indicate that the CFD‐DEM approach is a helpful technique for predicting particles behaviour in the presence of the electrostatic charge.
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 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".