MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410484244 · doi:10.1016/j.ces.2025.121884

Modeling microwave heating in fluidized bed reactors: Revealing the interaction between microwave absorption and fluidization hydrodynamics

2025· article· en· W4410484244 on OpenAlexafffund
Mehdi Salakhi, Luke Di Liddo, Murray J. Thomson

Bibliographic record

VenueChemical Engineering Science · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGranular flow and fluidized beds
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCMC Microsystems
KeywordsFluidizationMicrowaveFluidized bedMicrowave heatingAbsorption (acoustics)Materials scienceNuclear engineeringWaste managementEngineeringComposite materialTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Microwaves present a promising solution for electrifying process heat in fluidized beds. The present study introduces a pioneering CFD-DEM (Computational Fluid Dynamics-Discrete Element Method) model coupled with electromagnetics, providing novel insights into microwave-particle–fluid interactions. The model utilizes a one-way frequency-transient algorithm, where Maxwell’s equation is solved in the frequency domain while coupling CFD-DEM equations in a two-way transient scheme. Results show that fluidization dynamics affects microwave power absorption and distribution. For instance, altering the fluidization regime from bubbling to sluggish helps mitigate hotspot temperatures by axially mixing particles between microwave-induced hotspot and cold spot regions. Notably, microwave-induced cold spot is heated at a rate of 0.7 °C/s which is unexpectedly higher than the heating rate of 0.02 °C/s resulting from direct microwave absorption. This is due to convective heat transfer from gas due to bubble dynamics, introducing new physics in microwave-matter interactions. Our findings imply that microwave heating in fluidized beds offers substantial flexibility in controlling the temperature profile as well as microwave power absorption and distribution, offering new opportunities for optimization, research, and development.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.215 · 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

Citations11
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChemical Engineering ScienceSame topicGranular flow and fluidized bedsFrench-language works237,207