Assessment of Heat-Transfer Correlations Against Experimental Data Obtained With Supercritical Water in Vertical Annuli
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Eleven correlations proposed for supercritical heat-transfer coefficients were assessed against a set of experimental data obtained recently with supercritical water flow in a vertical annular test section at Xi’an Jiaotong University. The inner heated rod of the test section had an outer diameter of 8 mm, while the outer unheated tube had an inner diameter of 16 mm (resulting in a gap size of 4 mm). The experiment covered pressure range from 23 to 28 MPa, mass-flux range from 350 to 1000 kg/m2s, and heat-flux range from 200 to 1000 kW/m2. The assessment shows relatively good agreement between predicted and experimental heat-transfer coefficients for several correlations. Some discrepancies have been observed at the region where deteriorated heat transfer, and are attributed to the modified Dittus-Boelter formulation that captures mainly the normal heat-transfer region. Overall, the Dittus-Boelter correlation is shown applicable only for the normal heat-transfer region, and significantly overpredicts the heat-transfer coefficient at the deteriorated heat-transfer region. The correlation of Bishop et al. appears valid for the current experimental database, particularly for high mass fluxes.
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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".