MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1973475225 · doi:10.1115/icone18-29990

Comparison of Selected Forced-Convection Supercritical-Water Heat-Transfer Correlations for Vertical Bare Tubes

2010· article· en· W1973475225 on OpenAlex
Amjad Farah, Krysten King, Sahil Gupta, Sarah Mokry, Wargha Peiman, Igor Pioro

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

Venue18th International Conference on Nuclear Engineering: Volume 2 · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHeat transfer and supercritical fluids
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSupercritical fluidHeat exchangerHeat transferMaterials scienceThermodynamicsRange (aeronautics)MechanicsTube (container)InletFlow (mathematics)PhysicsComposite materialMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents an extensive study of heat-transfer correlations applicable to supercritical-water flow in vertical bare tubes. A comprehensive dataset was collected from 33 papers by 27 authors, including more than 125 graphs and wide ranges of parameters. The parameters ranges were as follows: pressures 22.5–34.5 MPa, inlet temperatures 85–350°C, mass fluxes 250–3400 kg/m2s, heat fluxes 75–5,400 kW/m2), tube heated lengths 0.6–27.4 m, and tube inside diameters 2–36 mm. This combined dataset was then investigated and analyzed. Heat Transfer Coefficients (HTCs) and wall temperatures were calculated using various existing correlations and compared to the corresponding experimental results. Three correlations were used in this comparison: Bishop et al., Mokry et al. and modified Swenson et al. The main objective of this study was to select the best supercritical-water bare-tube correlation for HTC calculations in: 1) fuel bundles of SuperCritical Water-cooled Reactors (SCWRs) as a preliminary and conservative approach; 2) heat exchangers in case of indirect-cycle SCW Nuclear Power Plants (NPPs); and 3) heat exchangers in case of hydrogen co-generation at SCW NPPs from SCW side. From the beginning, all these three correlations were compared to the Kirillov et al. vertical bare-tube dataset. However, this dataset has a limited range of operating conditions in terms of a pressure (only one pressure value of 24 MPa) and one inside diameter (only 10 mm). Therefore, these correlations were compared with other datasets, which have a much wider range of operating conditions. The comparison showed that in most cases, the Bishop et al. correlation deviates significantly from the experimental data within the pseudocritical region and actually, underestimates the temperature at most times. On the other hand, the Mokry et al. and modified Swenson et al. correlations showed a relatively better fit within the most operating conditions. In general, the modified Swenson et al. correlation showed slightly better fit with the experimental data than other two correlations.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.774
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.247 · 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