MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389584875 · doi:10.17118/11143/20882

3D CFD modelling of dense granular flow down an inclined rotatingkiln

2023· article· en· W4389584875 on OpenAlexaff
Jarod Ryan, Markus Bussmann, NIKOLAI DEMARTINI

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGranular flow and fluidized beds
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputational fluid dynamicsKilnFlow (mathematics)MechanicsEnvironmental scienceComputer scienceMaterials sciencePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Rotary lime kilns are long, cylindrical heat exchangers, used in the pulp and paper industry, to supply enough heat to granular solids for decomposition of lime mud to lime to occur as part of the kraft chemical recovery process, while additionally providing efficient mixing to ensure a uniform product. The operating conditions in a kiln can have a significant impact on the flow dynamics of the solid material, which in turn impacts the product quality as well as lime nodule formation. Nodule size is correlated with the efficiency of a lime kiln, and therefore understanding the physics behind nodulation is of great importance. A dense granular flow model using Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) and the Kinetic Theory of Granular Flows (KTGF) is implemented to understand the physics and flow regimes within the kiln. A modified form of the frictional viscosity model is implemented to account for the constant frictional contact between particles. While previous work has been done on 3D CFD granular flow models for rotary drums, these models lack the axial flow of material, limiting the flow and energy analysis. Therefore, we present our progress towards a 3D CFD model for dense, granular flow down an inclined rotating kiln to analyze the impact of operating conditions on both the flow and energy field of solid material. A 2D kiln model combined with a 1D bed model has already been developed, where bed effects are treated as heat and mass sources/sinks. This 3D model is an extension of the previous kiln model, with the 2D model providing inputs for the simulation. The 3D CFD model is generated in ANSYS Fluent 2022 R2. The physical model and geometry of the kiln is based on data given from a real industrial lime kiln. Due to computational expense, a slice of the kiln is modelled, where periodic boundary conditions are implemented to copy the flow field of the solid material. The KTGF model is implemented along with an additional modified frictional stress model to account for dense granular flow. The inlet velocity and temperature field, as well as fill ratio, are determined from the previous 2D kiln model for steady-state conditions. Axial velocities are solved by Fluent and scaled to match the expected steady-state mass flow rate from 1D model. Current work is being done to obtain and analyze the dynamic angle of repose, flow field, and energy field throughout the bed.

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 score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.067

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.200 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGranular flow and fluidized bedsFrench-language works237,207