Leveraging Machine Learning for Heat Transfer Coefficient Estimation in Gas–Liquid and Gas–Liquid–Solid Bubble Columns

For a precise design of the bubble column, it is crucial to accurately estimate design parameters, such as heat and mass transfer coefficient. The heat transfer coefficient in the bubble column or slurry bubble column can be calculated by empirical or semiempirical correlations. These correlations fail to correlate the multidimensional nature of the data and lack generalization, whereas machine learning (ML) models have the advantage of doing the same. Most of the correlations in the existing literature are for gas–liquid bubble columns. In the present study, a regressive ML model for the estimation of the heat transfer coefficient for gas–liquid as well as gas–liquid–solid bubble columns was developed on published experimental data. Three different ML methods, artificial neural networks (ANN), random forest (RF), and support vector regression (SVR), were used to train the data set. Models were trained on the data set with individual parameters and dimensionless numbers. The data set consists of 962 data points with individual features such as column diameter, height of clear liquid, sparger type, sparger hole diameter, % free area, pressure, temperature, superficial gas and liquid velocity, gas density, mixture density, viscosity, specific heat capacity and thermal conductivity, surface tension, particle diameter, and heat transfer measurement location. The present study shows that SVR trained on dimensionless numbers performed better than SVR, RF, and ANN trained on individual parameters and RF and ANN trained on dimensionless numbers. The overall mean absolute percentage error (MAPE), R2, and number of outliers for the SVR model were 8.42%, 0.983, and 85 outliers out of 962 data points, respectively. The SVR model trained with dimensionless numbers could predict the effects of pressure and particle concentration.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research
Published
2025-03-29
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.iecr.4c04741
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Fluid Dynamics and Mixing
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.35
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Leveraging Machine Learning for Heat Transfer Coefficient Estimation in Gas–Liquid and Gas–Liquid–Solid Bubble Columns

Jyeshtharaj Bhalchandra Joshi, Sumit R. Hazare, Aniruddha J. Joshi, Chinmay M. Patil et al.
2 citations
Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research
Fluid Dynamics and Mixing
1.35
article

Leveraging Machine Learning for Heat Transfer Coefficient Estimation in Gas–Liquid and Gas–Liquid–Solid Bubble Columns

Jyeshtharaj Bhalchandra Joshi, Sumit R. Hazare, Aniruddha J. Joshi, Chinmay M. Patil, Ashwin W. Patwardhan, Vivek Vitankar
article en
2 citations

Abstract

For a precise design of the bubble column, it is crucial to accurately estimate design parameters, such as heat and mass transfer coefficient. The heat transfer coefficient in the bubble column or slurry bubble column can be calculated by empirical or semiempirical correlations. These correlations fail to correlate the multidimensional nature of the data and lack generalization, whereas machine learning (ML) models have the advantage of doing the same. Most of the correlations in the existing literature are for gas–liquid bubble columns. In the present study, a regressive ML model for the estimation of the heat transfer coefficient for gas–liquid as well as gas–liquid–solid bubble columns was developed on published experimental data. Three different ML methods, artificial neural networks (ANN), random forest (RF), and support vector regression (SVR), were used to train the data set. Models were trained on the data set with individual parameters and dimensionless numbers. The data set consists of 962 data points with individual features such as column diameter, height of clear liquid, sparger type, sparger hole diameter, % free area, pressure, temperature, superficial gas and liquid velocity, gas density, mixture density, viscosity, specific heat capacity and thermal conductivity, surface tension, particle diameter, and heat transfer measurement location. The present study shows that SVR trained on dimensionless numbers performed better than SVR, RF, and ANN trained on individual parameters and RF and ANN trained on dimensionless numbers. The overall mean absolute percentage error (MAPE), R2, and number of outliers for the SVR model were 8.42%, 0.983, and 85 outliers out of 962 data points, respectively. The SVR model trained with dimensionless numbers could predict the effects of pressure and particle concentration.

Industrial & Engineering Chemistry ResearchVol. 64(14)
Institute of Chemical Technology (IN), Reliable Software Resources (United States) (US), Advanced Fluidics (United States) (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 21%
Fluid Dynamics and Mixing
1.35
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.