Numerical investigation of distribution uniformity of solid particles in a gas–solid counter flow contact cyclone reactor under cold flow conditions for methanol to propylene
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract A gas–solid counter flow contact cyclone reactor (GS‐CFCCR) was proposed for the methanol to propylene process. It is expected that the mixing of gas–solid phases can be enhanced by the vortices generated by the impinging stream, while the separation can be accelerated by the swirl flow induced by the guide vane. The CFD‐DDPM tracer method was adopted to investigate the radial and circumferential distribution uniformity of solid particles in the mixing and reaction chamber. The results indicate that as particles move axially towards the guide vanes, the vortices generated by the impinging flow exhibit increased quantity and reduced size along the axial direction. This evolution causes a progressive deterioration of the radial distribution uniformity along the axial direction, with the mean deviation degree rising from 4.18 to 6.33, while the circumferential uniformity undergoes notable improvement. Furthermore, the effect of the solid particle inlet angle on the distribution performance was investigated. The results indicate that a design with a solid particle inlet angle below 90° is beneficial for achieving better mixing and separation performance. These findings provide a robust theoretical foundation for subsequent thermal modelling experiments, which hold significant potential to enhance industrial efficiency and achieve energy savings in future applications.
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".