MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2028912340 · doi:10.1115/1.1400741

Acoustic Fatigue of a Steam Dump Pipe System Excited by Valve Noise

2001· article· en· W2028912340 on OpenAlexaff
Suzanne Michaud, Samir Ziada, Henri Pastorel

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pressure Vessel Technology · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydraulic and Pneumatic Systems
Canadian institutionsHydro-QuébecMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPipingGate valveControl valvesVibrationNoise (video)Structural engineeringEngineeringNuclear power plantMechanical engineeringAcousticsComputer sciencePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The steam dump system in Gentilly Nuclear Power Plant consists of four parallel steam pipes, each of which comprises a steam control valve. Two pipes of this system experienced high-cycle fatigue damage. In-situ vibration and dynamic strain measurements were therefore conducted to identify the cause of the damage and formulate suitable counter-measures. The test results pointed to the high-frequency noise of the valve as the primary source causing the fatigue failure. By means of small-scale model tests, using a compressed air network, a new valve stem was developed, which produces a substantially lower noise level than that generated by the original valve stem. Implementing this new stem in the plant, without any other modifications in the valve body or the piping system, significantly reduced the dynamic stresses of the piping, but increased the vibration level of the valve itself. An alternative valve stem, which is a simpler version of the new design, was therefore tested and found to reduce the pipe stresses sufficiently while not increasing the level of valve vibration.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.210 · 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

Citations28
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Pressure Vessel TechnologySame topicHydraulic and Pneumatic SystemsFrench-language works237,207