MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1977851852 · doi:10.1115/icone21-16453

Heat Transfer Correlation for Supercritical Carbon Dioxide Flowing in Vertical Bare Tubes

2013· article· en· W1977851852 on OpenAlexaffabout
Sahil Gupta, Eugene Saltanov, Igor Pioro

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHeat transfer and supercritical fluids
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSupercritical fluidHeat transferDimensionless quantityNuclear engineeringThermodynamicsEnvironmental scienceMaterials scienceMechanicsEngineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Canada among many other countries is in pursuit of developing next generation (Generation IV) nuclear-reactor concepts. One of the main objectives of Generation-IV concepts is to achieve high thermal efficiencies (45–50%). It has been proposed to make use of SuperCritical Fluids (SCFs) as the heat-transfer medium in such Gen IV reactor design concepts such as SuperCritical Water-cooled Reactor (SCWR). An important aspect towards development of SCF applications in novel Gen IV Nuclear Power Plant (NPP) designs is to understand the thermodynamic behavior and prediction of Heat Transfer Coefficients (HTCs) at supercritical (SC) conditions. To calculate forced convection HTCs for simple geometries, a number of empirical 1-D correlations have been proposed using dimensional analysis. These 1-D HTC correlations are developed by applying data-fitting techniques to a model equation with dimensionless terms and can be used for rudimentary calculations. Using similar statistical techniques three correlations were proposed by Gupta et al. [1] for Heat Transfer (HT) in SCCO2. These SCCO2 correlations were developed at the University of Ontario Institute of Technology (Canada) by using a large set of experimental SCCO2 data (∼4,000 data-points) obtained at the Chalk River Laboratories (CRL) AECL. These correlations predict HTC values with an accuracy of ±30% and wall temperatures with an accuracy of ±20% for the analyzed dataset. Since these correlations were developed using data from a single source - CRL (AECL), they can be limited in their range of applicability. To investigate the tangible applicability of these SCCO2 correlations it was imperative to perform a thorough error analysis by checking their results against a set of independent SCCO2 tube data. In this paper SCCO2 data are compiled from various sources and within various experimental flow conditions. HTC and wall-temperature values for these data points are calculated using updated correlations presented in [1] and compared to the experimental values. Error analysis is then shown for these datasets to obtain a sense of the applicability of these updated SCCO2 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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.476
Threshold uncertainty score0.648

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 integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.201 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations8
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHeat transfer and supercritical fluidsFrench-language works237,207