2017
DOI: 10.1016/j.ces.2017.05.038
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Using semidefinite programming to calculate bounds on particle size distributions

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 20 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…It can be found from Table that the change of volume diameter ( D v ) values including Dv10, Dv50, and Dv90 was insignificant, which means the particle size of the sandstone did not change. Taking the volume median diameter values (Dv50) as examples, which are defined as 50% of the cumulative volume undersize and is one of the most meaningful values for particle size distribution, , the particle sizes of raw and combusted samples were in the range of 128–133 μm. In summary, the general size of the raw and combusted sandstone samples did not change under high-temperature combustion, and high temperature mainly changed the microstructure of the rocks.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It can be found from Table that the change of volume diameter ( D v ) values including Dv10, Dv50, and Dv90 was insignificant, which means the particle size of the sandstone did not change. Taking the volume median diameter values (Dv50) as examples, which are defined as 50% of the cumulative volume undersize and is one of the most meaningful values for particle size distribution, , the particle sizes of raw and combusted samples were in the range of 128–133 μm. In summary, the general size of the raw and combusted sandstone samples did not change under high-temperature combustion, and high temperature mainly changed the microstructure of the rocks.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%