MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3177241624 · doi:10.3390/pr9071150

Effect of a Baffle on Bubble Distribution in a Bubbling Fluidized Bed

2021· article· en· W3177241624 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueProcesses · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGranular flow and fluidized beds
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaChina Scholarship CouncilSyncrude
KeywordsBaffleMechanicsFluidized bedBubbleMaterials scienceInletFlow (mathematics)Jet (fluid)AgglomerateTurbulenceFluidizationThermodynamicsMechanical engineeringPhysicsComposite materialEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this study, the multi-phase Eulerian–Eulerian two-fluid method (TFM) coupled with the kinetic theory of granular flow (KTGF) was used to investigate the hydrodynamics of particle flows (Geldart Group B) in a lab-scale bubbling fluidized bed. The goal was to improve the bubble flow behavior inside the fluidized bed to improve the distribution of an injected liquid, by increasing the flow of bubbles entering the spray jet cavity and, thus, reduce the formation of wet agglomerates. The effects of a baffle on both the injection level and the whole fluidized bed were studied. Different baffle geometries were also investigated. Adding a fluxtube to a baffle can improve the bubble flows and a long fluxtube works best at redirecting gas bubbles. Baffles tend to smooth out variations in the gas distribution caused by the non-uniform inlet gas distribution. A gas pocket appears under all the baffles.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.439

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.216 · 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