MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2087962514 · doi:10.1115/pvp2007-26113

Effect of Angle of Attack on Fluidelastic Instability of a Rotated Triangular Tube Bundle

2007· article· en· W2087962514 on OpenAlexaff
A. Khalvatti, Njuki Mureithi, M. J. Pettigrew

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Vibration Analysis
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInstabilityBundleMechanicsTube (container)Flow (mathematics)Heat exchangerTransverse planeFlow resistanceStructural engineeringMaterials sciencePhysicsEngineeringMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the operation of shell-and-tube heat exchangers, vibration of the tubes can be induced by fluid flowing over the tube array in cross flow. The region of concern in Steam Generators (SG) is the upper most U-bend region where the flow crosses a large number of tubes which can cause significant hydraulic resistance. This hydraulic resistance forces the flow to change direction. From a fluidelastic instability point of view, the tube bundle is excited by oblique cross flow. The purpose of this paper is to examine the instability phenomena in a rotated triangular tube bundle subjected to oblique single phase cross flow. In this present work tests are conducted in a wind tunnel on a rotated triangle tube array. Fluidelastic instability results are in agreement with what was expected. The results show that fluidelastic instability is strongly dependent on the angle of attack. The results also show that, generally, the elimination of bundle flexibility in the direction transverse to the flow, greatly affects the stability behavior of the array.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

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 integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.248 · 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
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicFluid Dynamics and Vibration AnalysisFrench-language works237,207