MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2009696692 · doi:10.1115/1.1849229

Fluidelastic Instability and Work-Rate Measurements of Steam-Generator U-Tubes in Air–Water Cross-Flow

2005· article· en· W2009696692 on OpenAlexaff
Victor P. Janzen, E. Hagberg, M. J. Pettigrew, Colette E. Taylor

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pressure Vessel Technology · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Vibration Analysis
Canadian institutionsAtomic Energy (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInstabilityTurbulenceMechanicsBundleTube (container)Materials scienceTwo-phase flowVibrationFlow (mathematics)PhysicsStructural engineeringEngineeringComposite materialAcoustics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The dynamic response of U-tubes to two-phase cross-flow has been studied in tests involving a simplified U-tube bundle with a set of flat-bar supports at the apex, subjected to air–water cross-flow over the mid-span region. Tube vibration and the interaction between tubes and supports were measured over a wide range of void fractions and flow rates, for three different tube-to-support clearances. The vibration properties and tube-to-support work-rates could be characterized in terms of the relative influence of fluidelastic instability and random-turbulence excitation. For the first time, in a U-bend tube bundle with liquid or two-phase flow, fluidelastic instability was observed both in the out-of-plane and in the in-plane direction. This raises the possibility of higher-than-expected tube-to-support work-rates for U-tubes restrained by flat bars, particularly if fluidelastic instability, random turbulence and loose supports combine adversely.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.230
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 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

Citations44
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Pressure Vessel TechnologySame topicFluid Dynamics and Vibration AnalysisFrench-language works237,207