MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2497399624 · doi:10.1002/cjce.22617

Characteristics of water holdup for oil and water mixture flows in horizontal, vertical, and inclined pipes

2016· article· en· W2497399624 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jing‐yu Xu, Shuo Liu, Dong Zhang, Jian Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Mixing
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsFroude numberInclination angleMechanicsFlow (mathematics)SlippageGeologyWork (physics)Environmental scienceGeometryMaterials scienceMathematicsPhysicsThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In this work, the water holdup and slippage for oil and water mixture flows in horizontal, vertical, and inclined pipes have been investigated. A large group of experimental data was collected from 21 different sources covering the whole range of inclination angles from −90° to 90° to reveal the holdup characteristics and develop the drift velocity model. The results show that in horizontal flows the water holdup is dependent to the flow pattern, and yet in vertical flows the water holdup is similar to the input one and the flow direction shows a few influences on the holdup. In inclined flows, the Froude numbers are relatively independent of inclination angles when the angles are greater than 30°. Therefore, the changes of water holdup in the pipe with small inclination angles are more severe than those with large inclination angles. In addition, a satisfactory agreement between predicted and experimental holdups substantiates the general validity of the proposed drift velocity correlation for oil and water flows, especially for those with large inclination angles.

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)0.000
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.161
Teacher spread0.157 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations4
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical EngineeringSame topicFluid Dynamics and MixingFrench-language works237,207