MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414920343 · doi:10.1016/j.mineng.2025.109812

Wet screen performance prediction using coupled DEM and SPH: separation, wear and comparison to plant measurement

2025· article· en· W4414920343 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Paul W. Cleary, Matthew D. Sinnott

Bibliographic record

VenueMinerals Engineering · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGranular flow and fluidized beds
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersGoldcorp
KeywordsSlurryVolumetric flow rateFlow (mathematics)Abrasion (mechanical)Mass flow rateScale modelScale (ratio)Fraction (chemistry)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

• Large industrial scale wet screen performance is predicted using coupled DEM-SPH. • The screen cloth has around 30,000 apertures which are well resolved in the model. • Predicted slurry draining distance matches plant observations. • Discharge flow rate and oversize distribution agree with plant measurements. • Bed depth, resident screen load and wear patterns are sensitive to feed rate. A fully coupled multiphase DEM-SPH model is used to predict rock and slurry flow to better understand the performance of a very large industrial scale wet fine screen. Dependence on feed rate and the evenness of slurry flow onto the screen are investigated. The single deck banana screen is 8.22 m long and uses a cloth with combinations of rectangular slots and more complex shaped apertures. The model predictions are validated for the lower flow rate by comparing the draining distance for the slurry, the discharge mass flow rate and the screen oversize distribution with plant measurements yielding good agreement. The oversize mass fraction is found to be consistent with long-term site measurements while the predicted overflow size distribution has a very similar form to the measured data. These indicate that the modelling approximations and numerical resolution used in the model construction are suitable for obtaining good solution accuracy. Bed depth, resident load on the screen and wear patterns are found to be sensitive to feed rate but the flow field and general nature of the screen separation behaviour are not greatly influenced. Wear due to abrasion appears to be dominant in the upper half of the screen whereas impact damage is more uniformly distributed over the entire screen. At high feed rates, impact damage in the upper half of the screen becomes more significant.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.628
Threshold uncertainty score0.737

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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.208 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMinerals EngineeringSame topicGranular flow and fluidized bedsFrench-language works237,207