MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4307445081 · doi:10.1002/cjce.24741

Coke deposition and run length in industrial naphtha thermal cracking furnaces via a quasi‐steady state coupled <scp>CFD</scp> model

2022· article· en· W4307445081 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mohsen Rezaeimanesh, Ali Asghar Ghoreyshi, S.M. Peyghambarzadeh, Seyed Hassan Hashemabadi

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicCombustion and flame dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputational fluid dynamicsCokeCrackingTurbulenceCombustionMechanicsNuclear engineeringSteady state (chemistry)Materials scienceProcess engineeringEngineeringWaste managementChemistryPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Mathematical modelling of the thickness of the coke layer growing over months in millisecond cracking reactors is a dilemma in computational fluid dynamics (CFD) simulation. To address the time scale issue, a quasi‐steady state (QSS) approach was employed through a comprehensive coupled reactor/firebox CFD model in the current study. The model was applied to predict the time‐dependent behaviour of coke deposition and to determine the appropriate operating conditions for maximum olefin yields over an industrial furnace run length. A novel algorithm was designed to overcome the complexity of QSS simulation of the CFD model, which is a combination of reactive turbulence flow, combustion, and radiation models. The furnace parameters were studied as a function of two variables: the dilution steam‐to‐feed ratio and the liberated heat by the burners. The results indicated that the run length can be extended by up to 20% while retaining the main product yields. This study offers practical suggestions to maximize the run length in the operation.

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 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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.647

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.180
Teacher spread0.170 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations9
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical EngineeringSame topicCombustion and flame dynamicsFrench-language works237,207