MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4236185602 · doi:10.32920/ryerson.14644479.v1

Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) analysis of mixing in styrene polymerization

2021· preprint· en· W4236185602 on OpenAlexafffund
Haresh Patel

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInnovative Microfluidic and Catalytic Techniques Innovation
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsContinuous stirred-tank reactorComputational fluid dynamicsImpellerMixing (physics)MechanicsMaterials sciencePolymerizationMechanical engineeringThermodynamicsPolymerEngineeringPhysicsChemical engineeringComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A styrene polymerization in a lab-scale CSTR equipped with a pitched blade turbine impeller was simulated using the computational fluid dynamics (CFD) approach. The impeller motion was integrated in the geometry using the multiple reference frame (MRF) technique. The presence of non-linear source term and the highly coupled nature of transport equations of the polymerization, made the convergence difficult to achieve. The effects of the impeller speed, the input-output locations and the residence time on the polymerization in the CSTR were investigated. The CFD simulation shows that good mixing remained limited to the impeller region. Regions far from the impeller remained unmixed due to high viscosity of the polymer mass. The path lines of the particles, released at the inlet, were also generated to analyze the reaction progress as the chemicals travel throughout the reactor. The monomer conversion computed using the CFD model was compared to data reported in the literature. Conversion predicted using the CFD model is in good agreement with that obtained from the CSTR model at low residence time. However, the CFD predicted coversions were higher than those calculated from the CSTR model, at high residence time. It was found that the input-output locations had significant effect on the conversion and the homogeneity in the CSTR.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicInnovative Microfluidic and Catalytic Techniques InnovationFrench-language works237,207