MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2076372408 · doi:10.1115/gt2011-46443

Supersonic Ejectors for Hydrocarbon Emissions Capture

2011· article· en· W2076372408 on OpenAlexaff
Yuri Biba, Hector Kidd, Stephen Peifer, C. N. Scott, B. Sloof, A. Tse

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRefrigeration and Air Conditioning Technologies
Canadian institutionsTransCanada (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInjectorGas compressorSupersonic speedEngineeringAutomotive engineeringOriginal equipment manufacturerNozzleEnvironmental scienceMarine engineeringPetroleum engineeringMechanical engineeringAerospace engineeringComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Supersonic ejectors can be applied to capture low-pressure leakage gas from the gas seal vents of a centrifugal compressor. This captured gas can be re-injected into the fuel gas line of the gas turbine driver or the captured gas can be used as a fuel for gas fired utility heaters. By capturing the gas that is normally emitted to the atmosphere the operator can reduce operating cost and enjoy a reduction in hydrocarbon foot print. Because the supersonic ejector does not have moving parts, the system operating and maintenance costs are lower than functionally comparable traditional systems. In this study, a prototype of a supersonic ejector system was developed and tested at a pipeline compressor station. The obtained test data were used for developing and tuning a mean-line aerodynamic analysis tool, which predicts the ejector’s operating map. A family of three ejectors was designed to cover a range of operating conditions associated with gas turbine driven pipeline compressors. These ejectors were built, installed on a specially designed panel, described as the ejector system, and tested on inert gas at the original equipment manufacturer’s (OEM’s) facility. A comparison of predicted and as-tested supersonic ejector performance maps is discussed and conclusions are made about the system operating range.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.599
Threshold uncertainty score0.301

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.182 · 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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRefrigeration and Air Conditioning TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207