MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2054890890 · doi:10.5006/1.3299215

The Rotating Cylinder Electrode for Examining Velocity-Sensitive Corrosion—A Review

2004· article· en· W2054890890 on OpenAlexaff
D. C. Silverman

Bibliographic record

VenueCORROSION · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicCorrosion Behavior and Inhibition
Canadian institutionsEmergent BioSolutions (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCorrosionMechanicsCylinderTurbulenceMass transferReynolds numberSherwood numberMaterials scienceElectrodeFlow (mathematics)Flow velocityErosion corrosionMechanical engineeringMetallurgyPhysicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Of the laboratory devices available for examining the effects of single-phase fluid flow on corrosion, the rotating cylinder electrode is probably one of the simplest devices to construct and operate under defined hydrodynamics in the turbulent flow regime. This review examines several areas important to the use of this device for examining velocity-sensitive corrosion in single-phase fluids: —the numerous correlations that have been developed to calculate the Sherwood number (mass-transfer coefficient) from the Reynolds and Schmidt numbers for a hydraulically smooth cylinder surface—the effect that surface roughness caused by corrosion and deposits might have on the correlations—a methodology and its limitations for estimating the conditions in the rotating cylinder electrode that could best indicate if mass transfer influences corrosion in several other geometries—a survey of a variety of corrosion-related studies using the rotating cylinder electrode to provide an overview of the large number of applications of this technology and a source for further reading Although this device has been applied successfully, users have sometimes overlooked its limitations, and some of its characteristics still need further attention.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.004

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.260 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations66
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCORROSIONSame topicCorrosion Behavior and InhibitionFrench-language works237,207