Modelling of powder hydrodynamics in a screw reactor

Chatre, Lucas; Bataille, Marc; Debacq, Marie; Randriamanantea, Tojonirina; Nos, Jérémy; Herbelet, Florian

doi:10.1016/j.powtec.2023.118367

Cited by 5 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Unlike SVM, there is a dearth of studies on the application of GPR for modelling the prediction of gas hold-up. However, the GPR model has been employed to model different processes such as the prediction of hydrodynamic interactions [15], the prediction of dynamic viscosity in a nanofluid [16], and the prediction of powder hydrodynamics in a screw reactor [17]. An extensive literature search showed that SVM and GPR models have not been comparatively employed for modeling gas holdup of two-phase ebullated bed reactor.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Numerical Analysis of Gas Hold-Up of Two-Phase Ebullated Bed Reactor

Almukhtar,

Yahya,

Mahdy

et al. 2023

ChemEngineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Due to the significant increase in heavy feedstocks being transported to refineries and the hydrocracking process, the significance of adopting an ebullated bed reactor has been reemphasized in recent years. The predictive modelling of gas hold-up in an ebullated two-phase reactor was performed using 10 machine learning methods based on support vector machine (SVM) and Gaussian process regression (GPR) in this study. In an ebullated bed reactor, the impacts of three features, namely liquid velocity, gas velocity, and recycling ratio, on the gas hold-up were examined. The liquid velocity has the most impact on the predicted gas hold-up, according to the feature significance analysis. The rotational-quadratic, squared-exponential, Matern 5/2, and exponential kernel functions integrated with the GPR models and the linear, quadratic, cubic, fine, medium, and coarse kernel functions integrated with the SVM model performed well during training and testing, with the exception of the fine SVM model, whose R2 is very low. According to the R2 > 0.9 and low RMSE and MAE values, the rotational-quadratic, squared-exponential, and Matern 5/2 GPR models performed the best.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%