Heat transfer and flow pattern in co‐current downward steam condensation in vertical pipes‐II: Comparison with published work
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The condensation of pure steam flowing downward inside a vertical tube has been extensively studied. Considerable amount of experimental and analytical efforts can be found due to the significance of this subject in practice. In this work, a critical review of the most important experimental, analytical and computational fluid dynamic (CFD) investigations have been presented. CFD simulations for the geometries of Goodykoontz and Dorsch [Goodykoontz and Dorsch, NASA TN D‐3326, 1966; Goodykoontz and Dorsch, NASA TN D‐3953, 1967], Kim and No [Kim and No, Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 2000;43:4031–4042] and the present work have been performed and compared with the experimental data reported in these investigations. CFD predictions of the pressure drop and the heat transfer coefficient (HTC) were in close agreement with the experimental values. A preliminary regime map has been constructed for downward flow steam condensation inside pipes. Finally, all the published semi‐empirical correlations for the HTC have been critically analysed and compared with the CFD predictions. An attempt has been made to make specific recommendations. © 2012 Canadian Society for Chemical Engineering
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".