MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2325499092 · doi:10.1002/cjce.22495

Centrifugal pump performance when handling highly non‐Newtonian clays and tailings slurries

2016· article· en· W2325499092 on OpenAlex
John M. Furlan, Robert Visintainer, Anders Sellgren

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydraulic flow and structures
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersGlobal Institute for Water Security, University of Saskatchewan
KeywordsSlurryAerationSump (aquarium)TailingsMaterials scienceCentrifugal pumpEnvironmental scienceMechanicsSuctionWaste managementEnvironmental engineeringMechanical engineeringEngineeringMetallurgyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Recent loop testing performed at the GIW Hydraulic Lab [1,2] has provided pump performance data for two highly non‐Newtonian slurries with significantly different characteristics: a high clay content slurry with minimal coarse solids; and a typical, low clay content, two‐component tailings slurry. The importance of air removal in the sump and pipe loop was demonstrated using a simple, yet novel de‐aeration system. In addition to the measurement of performance losses, determination of the upper limit of “pumpability” for these slurries relative to their concentration and associated yield stress was investigated. However, once the slurry was de‐aerated, no limits could be found, other than those dictated by suction side losses (NPSHA) or excessive pipeline friction gradients, indicating that the only true limit in practice is one of system economics, i.e. pump operating and capital cost. Experimentally measured pump head and efficiency were compared against corresponding predictions from two different models: the Walker and Goulas technique [3] and the Graham et al. technique, [4] with special focus given to the dependence of the losses on pump rotary speed.

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.

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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.049
Threshold uncertainty score0.406

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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.148
Teacher spread0.145 · 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