MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2326039194 · doi:10.12943/anr.2013.00007

Fouling Of Nuclear Steam Generators: Fundamental Studies, Operating Experience and Remedial Measures Using Chemical Additives

2013· article· en· W2326039194 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Carl W. Turner

Bibliographic record

VenueAECL Nuclear Review · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNuclear Engineering Thermal-Hydraulics
Canadian institutionsAtomic Energy (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFoulingCoolantNuclear powerBundleNuclear engineeringEnvironmental scienceWaste managementTube (container)Boiler (water heating)Forensic engineeringEngineeringMechanical engineeringMaterials scienceChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fouling remains a potentially serious issue that if left unchecked can lead to degradation of the safety and performance of nuclear steam generators (SGs). It has been demonstrated that the majority of the corrosion product transported with the feed water to the SGs accumulates in the SG on the tube-bundle. By increasing the risk of tube failure and acting as a barrier to heat transfer, deposit on the tube bundle has the potential to impair the ability of the SG to perform its two safety-critical roles: provision of a barrier to the release of radioactivity from the reactor coolant and removal of heat from the primary coolant during power operation and under certain post accident scenarios. Thus, it is imperative to develop improved ways to mitigate SG fouling for the long-term safe, reliable and economic performance of nuclear power plants (NPPs). This paper provides an overview of our current understanding of the mechanisms by which deposit accumulates on the secondary side of the SG, how this accumulation affects SG performance and how accumulation of deposit can be mitigated using chemical additives to the secondary heat-transport system. The paper concludes with some key questions that remain to be addressed to further advance our knowledge of deposit accumulation and how it can be controlled to maintain safe, economic performance of nuclear SGs.

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)0.001
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: Observational · 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
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 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

Citations25
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAECL Nuclear ReviewSame topicNuclear Engineering Thermal-HydraulicsFrench-language works237,207