MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1525649241 · doi:10.13182/nt04-a3565

Development and Validation of the 3-D Computational Fluid Dynamics Model for CANDU-6 Moderator Temperature Predictions

2004· article· en· W1525649241 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Churl Yoon, Bo Wook Rhee, Byung-Joo Min

Bibliographic record

VenueNuclear Technology · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNuclear Engineering Thermal-Hydraulics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputational fluid dynamicsSubcoolingTurbulenceMechanicsBuoyancyThermal hydraulicsFluid dynamicsNozzleNuclear engineeringThermodynamicsPhysicsHeat transferEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A computational fluid dynamics (CFD) model for predicting the moderator circulation inside the Canada deuterium uranium (CANDU) reactor vessel has been developed to estimate the local subcooling of the moderator in the vicinity of the Calandria tubes. The buoyancy effect induced by internal heating is accounted for by Boussinesq approximation. The standard k-[curly epsilon] turbulence model associated with logarithmic wall treatment is applied to predict the turbulent jet flows from the inlet nozzles. The matrix of the Calandria tubes in the core region is simplified to porous media, in which anisotropic hydraulic impedance is modeled using an empirical correlation of the frictional pressure loss. The governing equations are solved by CFX-4.4, a commercial CFD code developed by AEA Technology. The CFD model has been successfully verified and validated against experimental data obtained at Stern Laboratories Inc. in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.053
Threshold uncertainty score0.106

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.180
Teacher spread0.175 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations20
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNuclear TechnologySame topicNuclear Engineering Thermal-HydraulicsFrench-language works237,207