An experimental and numerical investigation of the three‐phase flow in the washing chamber of an entrained flow gasifier
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 study established a cold experimental platform and a mathematical model to examine the gas–liquid–solid three‐phase flow in the washing process of the gas–solid flow as it passes through a liquid pool in an entrained flow coal gasifier. It visualized the three‐phase flow process and separation of the solid particles, including the bubble motion and particle separation processes. The concentration distribution and separation efficiency of the particles were quantitatively analyzed considering various major influencing factors. The particle separation mechanism was analyzed based on the characteristics of the three‐phase flow, and the results confirm that a multi‐peak distribution of particle concentration exists in the liquid pool along the axial and radial directions. There is considerable variation in peak particle concentration points with different particle sizes; as particle size increases, the particle separation efficiency also rises. Based on the calculation conditions in this study, the separation efficiencies obtained with particle diameters of 50, 20, and 10 μm were 96.98%, 94.48%, and 87.31%, respectively.
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