Experimental Investigation of Subcooled Choking Flow in a Steam Generator Tube Crack
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Steam generator tubes have a history of small cracks and even ruptures, which lead to a loss of coolant from the primary side to the secondary side. These tubes have an important role in reactor safety since they serve as one of the barriers between radioactive and non-radioactive materials of a nuclear power plant. A rupture then signifies the loss of the integrity of the tube itself. Therefore, choking flow plays an integral part not only in the engineered safeguards of a nuclear power plant, but also to everyday operation. There is limited data on actual steam generators tube wall cracks. Here experiments were conducted on choked flow of subcooled water through two samples of axial cracks of steam generator tubes taken from US PWR steam generators. The purpose of the experimental program was to develop database on critical flow through actual steam generator tube cracks with subcooled liquid flow at the entrance. The knowledge of this maximum flow rate through a crack in the steam generator tubes of a pressurized water nuclear reactor will allow designers to calculate leak rates and design inventory levels accordingly while limiting losses during loss of coolant accidents. The test facility design is modular so that various steam generator tube cracks can be studied. Two sets of PWR steam generators tubes were studied whose wall thickness is 1.285 mm. Tests were carried out at stagnation pressure up to 6.89 MPa and range of subcoolings 16.2–59°C. Based on these new choking flow data, the applicability of analytical models to highlight the importance of non-equilibrium effects was examined.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".