Research on a New Drag Force Model for Cylindrical Particles in Fixed Bed Reactors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fixed bed reactors play an important role in converting solid wastes to high-quality products. The solid wastes, as well as the corresponding catalysts, are often made into cylindrical particles. However, research on the drag force for cylindrical particles is still rarely reported. In this work, the fixed bed porosity was firstly predicted with the unresolved CFD-DEM method and validated against experimental data. Then, the Ergun model, Di Felice model, and Ganser model were evaluated against the reported pressure drop data for both the spherical and cylindrical particles, so that a more solid drag force theory could be selected as a candidate for cylindrical particles. Finally, a new Ganser model was proposed for cylindrical particle drag force prediction based on the reported experimental results and validated by other experimental data. It was found that, for the spherical particle bed, the relative prediction errors of the Di Felice model are approximately 10%, while those of the Ergun model are approximately 15%. For the cylindrical particle bed, the relative prediction errors of the Ganser model are approximately 10%, while those of the Di Felice model are much higher than 10%. With the new Ganser model proposed in this work, the maximum error between the predicted pressure drop and the experimental data can be lowered to approximately 5%. The research is of reference value for drag force model selection when simulating similar FBRs with cylindrical particles.
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".