MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2031728567 · doi:10.1115/pvp2014-28442

Crack Growth Prediction and Leakage Potential of Steam Generator Tubes Subjected to Flow Induced Vibrations

2014· article· en· W2031728567 on OpenAlexafffund
Salim El Bouzidi, Marwan Hassan, Jovica Riznic

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicVibration and Dynamic Analysis
Canadian institutionsCanadian Nuclear Safety CommissionUniversity of Guelph
FundersCanadian Nuclear Safety Commission
KeywordsBoiler (water heating)Leakage (economics)VibrationMechanicsVortex-induced vibrationTurbulenceStructural engineeringPressurized water reactorMaterials scienceFinite element methodMonte Carlo methodLeakEngineeringNuclear engineeringPhysicsAcoustics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nuclear steam generators are critical components of nuclear power plants. Flow-Induced Vibrations (FIV) are a major threat to the operation of nuclear steam generators. The two main manifestations of FIV in heat exchangers are turbulence and fluidelastic instability, which would add mechanical energy to the system resulting in great levels of vibrations. The consequences on the operation of steam generators are premature wear of the tubes, as well as development of cracks that may leak radioactive heavy water. This paper investigates the effect of tube support clearance on crack propagation. A crack growth model is used to simulate the growth of Surface Flaws and Through-Wall Cracks of various initial sizes due to a wide range of support clearances. Leakage rates are predicted using a two-phase flow leakage model. Non-linear finite element analysis is used to simulate a full U-bend subjected to fluidelastic and turbulence forces. Monte Carlo Simulations are then used to conduct a probabilistic assessment of steam generator life due to crack development.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

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 integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.177
Teacher spread0.173 · 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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicVibration and Dynamic AnalysisFrench-language works237,207