MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2765427186 · doi:10.1115/pvp2017-66194

Engineering Process-Zone Model for Evaluation of Structural Strength of Fuel Channel Annulus Spacers in CANDU Nuclear Reactors

2017· article· en· W2765427186 on OpenAlexaffabout
Douglas A. Scarth, Steven X. Xu, Cheng Liu

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicNuclear Materials and Properties
Canadian institutionsKinectrics (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnnulus (botany)InconelMaterials scienceNuclear engineeringTube (container)Pressure vesselStructural materialNuclear fuelStructural engineeringComposite materialEngineeringAlloy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The core of a CANDU(1) (CANada Deuterium Uranium) pressurized heavy water reactor consists of a lattice of either 390 or 480 horizontal Zr-Nb pressure tubes, depending on the reactor design. These pressure tubes contain the fuel bundles. Each pressure tube is surrounded by a Zircaloy calandria tube that operates at a significantly lower temperature. Fuel channel annulus spacers maintain the annular gap between the pressure tube and calandria tube throughout the operating life. To meet this design requirement, annulus spacers must have adequate structural strength to carry the interaction loads imposed between the pressure tube and calandria tube. Crush tests that have been performed on specimens from as-received and ex-service Inconel X-750 alloy spacers have demonstrated that the structural strength of Inconel X-750 spacers has degraded with operating time due to irradiation damage. There was a need for an engineering model to predict the future maximum load carrying capacity of the spacer coils for use in Fitness-for-Service evaluations of spacer structural integrity. An engineering process-zone model has been developed and used to analyze the spacer crush test results, and provide predictions of the Inconel X-750 spacer coil future maximum load carrying capacities. The engineering process-zone model is described in this paper. The process-zone model is based on the strip-yield approach of a process zone with a uniform restraining stress representing the fracture region that is surrounded by elastic material.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNuclear Materials and PropertiesFrench-language works237,207