Analysis of Computational Fluid Dynamics Code FLUENT Capabilities for Supercritical Water Heat-Transfer Applications in Vertical Bare Tubes
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, the computational fluid dynamics (CFD) code FLUENT was used to predict wall-temperature profiles inside vertical bare tubes with supercritical water (SCW) as the cooling medium, to assess the capabilities of FLUENT for SCW heat-transfer applications. Numerical results are compared to experimental data and current one-dimensional (1D) models represented by existing heat-transfer empirical correlations. Wall-temperature and heat-transfer coefficients were analyzed to select the best model to describe the fluid flow before, at, and after the pseudocritical region. k−ϵ and k−ω turbulent models were evaluated in the process, with variations in the submodel parameters such as viscous heating, thermal effects, and low-Reynolds-number correction. Results of the analysis show a fit of ±10% for wall temperatures using the SST k−ω model within the deteriorated heat-transfer regime and less than ±5% within the normal heat-transfer regime. The accuracy of the model is higher than any empirical correlation tested in the mentioned regimes and provides additional information about the multidimensional effects between the bulk-fluid and wall temperatures.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 it