MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2077571603 · doi:10.1115/ipc2012-90345

Investigation of the Effects of Pipe Wall Roughness and Pipe Diameter on the Decompression Wave Speed in Natural Gas Pipelines

2012· article· en· W2077571603 on OpenAlexaff
Cheng Lü, Guillaume Michal, Alhoush Elshahomi, Ajit Godbole, Philip Venton, K. K. Botros, Leigh Fletcher, Brian Rothwell

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWind and Air Flow Studies
Canadian institutionsNova Chemicals (Canada)
FundersAustralian Government
KeywordsDecompressionSurface roughnessTube (container)Surface finishShock waveMaterials sciencePipeline transportShock tubeMechanicsComposite materialMechanical engineeringEngineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The shock tube experimental results have shown clearly that the decompression wave was slowed down in a pipe with a rough inner surface relative to that in a smooth pipe under comparable conditions. In the present paper a one-dimensional dynamic simulation model, named EPDECOM, was developed to investigate the effects of pipe wall roughness and pipe diameter on the decompression wave speed. Comparison with experimental results showed that the inclusion of frictional effects led to a better prediction than that of the widely used model implemented in GASDECOM. EPDECOM simulation results showed that the effect of roughness on the decompression wave speed is significant for pipe diameters less than 250 mm. However the decompression wave speed is nearly independent of the roughness for diameters above 250 mm as the frictional effect becomes negligible at such diameters.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.150

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.200 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations14
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicWind and Air Flow StudiesFrench-language works237,207