Specifics of forced-convective heat transfer to supercritical CO2 flowing upward in vertical bare tubes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Heat transfer in the forced convection regime of fluids at supercritical conditions has been studied extensively for the past 60 years. The dominant approach to summarize the experimental results was by proposing empirical correlations for the data within the investigated range of parameters. It was soon realized by researchers worldwide that heat transfer coefficients become non-linear functions of wall and bulk-fluid temperatures at certain combinations of experimental parameters within the region of the peak of specific heat at supercritical pressures. Thus, it has become a standard approach to remove nonlinear experimental heat transfer coefficient values treating them as a sign of a deteriorated (as opposed to normal) heat transfer regime. There were recent attempts to address this shortcoming and extend the applicability of conventional empirical correlations to the deteriorated heat transfer regime. However, these attempts were not satisfactory.\nIn this thesis, a new methodology has been developed that allows the use conventional empirical correlations without distinguishing entrance effects or deteriorated heat transfer regime. The methodology is based on binning experimental data according to the parameter X = (h_b - h_pc) / (q/G) and then combining correlations based on wall and bulk-fluid temperature on each bin to minimize RMS and maximal overprediction of heat transfer coefficients within each of the bins.\nUsing this methodology, 95% of normal heat transfer data were predicted with a spread of ??19%, which is 1.74 times narrower compared to the prediction by the empirical correlations developed based on the conventional methodology and on the same data; while all the data (2786 points, including entrance effects and deteriorated heat transfer) were predicted with a spread of ??20% (based on 2??-level). The data correlated based on the new methodology where obtained within the following range of experimental parameters: P = 7.58 ??? 8.91 MPa, Tb = 20 ??? 142 ??C, Tw = 32 ??? 231 ??C, G = 885 ??? 3048 kg/m2s, q = 26 ??? 616 kW/m2K, D = 8.1 mm.\nThe experimental data were obtained based on a series of tests on supercritical CO2 flowing upwards in a bare tube at the MR-1 loop (located in Chalk River) of the former Atomic Energy of Canada Limited (AECL). Normal, deteriorated, and improved heat transfer regimes were covered in the experiments.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 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".