Corrosion Resistance of Next Generation Composite Tube Alloys for Recovery Boilers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Composite tubes made with either 304L, A825 or A625 exterior layers are commonly used to construct the lower-furnace waterwalls of black liquor recovery boilers currently operated in North America. While these composite tubes have been very successful in resisting sulphidation corrosion, they have experienced unanticipated problems with the exterior layer, namely cracking, and, to a lesser extent, preferential corrosion of port opening tubes. In an attempt to evaluate the suitability of alternative composite tube alloys, a laboratory-based testing program was conducted to evaluate the corrosion resistance of ferritic stainless steels (Types 430 and 446) and nickel-based alloys (Alloys 600 and 690) in simulated black liquor recovery boiler lower-furnace environments. An effort was made to utilize simulated environments that are believed to reproduce the key features of the various damage modes typically observed in the lower-furnace sections of high-pressure recovery boilers. This report documents the major findings of this effort.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".