MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4229629474 · doi:10.14356/kona.2011004

Seeded Granulation

2011· article· en· W4229629474 on OpenAlexaff
Nejat Rahmanian

Bibliographic record

VenueKONA Powder and Particle Journal · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Disease Management Techniques
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Particle Physics
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceGranulationProcess engineeringComposite materialEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We have serendipitously found that we can make 'seeded granules' by Cyclomix under certain operating conditions and feed powder particle size distribution.The Scanning Electron Micrograph on the front cover shows a number of seeded granules, embedded in a resin on a plane and cut and polished to show the internal structure.Every granule has consistently a seed, which is a large particle from the top end of the size distribution of the feed powder.Cyclomix is manufactured by Hosokawa Micron (B.V.), the Netherlands, and falls in the category of high shear mixers and granulators.It is a very fast mixer, as shown by our mixing studies 1) , using the Positron Emission Particle Tracking facilities of the University of Birmingham.It has also been developed into a high shear granulator 2) , the context in which we have been using it.In a research programme supported by the Granulation Consortium, consisting of Borax Europe, Hosokawa Micron (B.V.), Pfizer, Procter and Gamble and the Engineering and Physical Research Council of UK, we have been investigating the effect of scaling up of granulators on the internal structure and physical and mechanical properties of the granules 3,4) .Different commercial grades of calcium carbonate were used as model materials and aqueous polyethylene glycol (PEG) as the binder.Using the X-ray microtomography facility of our Institute, we observed that under certain conditions we got a feature at the core of the granules, as shown in the figure below 5) .Detailed examinations revealed this to be a large particle from the feed powder, due to the fact that we had been using a wide size distribution.We could also produce the same structure by adding some course powder to the feed.The particular noteworthy feature is that each coarse particle can produce a granule, but only under certain conditions.A regime map has been identified for production of consistent seeded granule structure 5) , based on the size distribution of the feed powder and the concept of critical Stokes numbers for coalescence, deformation and breakage of wet granules 6) .

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.158 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations2
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueKONA Powder and Particle Journal→Same topicPlant Disease Management Techniques→French-language works237,207→