MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2765617754 · doi:10.1115/fedsm2017-69240

Effective Particle Size Representation for Erosion Wear in Centrifugal Pump Casings

2017· article· en· W2765617754 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Krishnan V. Pagalthivarthi, John M. Furlan, Robert Visintainer

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGranular flow and fluidized beds
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersGlobal Institute for Water Security, University of Saskatchewan
KeywordsParticle sizeParticle-size distributionSlurryComputational fluid dynamicsComputationMechanicsRange (aeronautics)Representation (politics)Particle (ecology)Sample size determinationInletWork (physics)Materials scienceComputer scienceMathematicsMechanical engineeringPhysicsAlgorithmEngineeringComposite materialStatisticsGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For the purpose of Computational Fluid Dynamic (CFD) simulations, the broad particle size distribution (PSD) encountered in industrial slurries is classified into a discrete number of size classes. Since mono-size simulations consume much less computational time, especially in 3D simulations, it would be advantageous to determine an equivalent single particle size representation which yields the same wear distribution predictions as the multi-size simulations. This work extends the previous two-dimensional study [1], which was for a specific PSD slurry flow through three selected pumps, to determine an effective equivalent mono-size representation. The current study covers two-dimensional simulations over a wide range of pumps of varying sizes (40 pumps), 2 inlet concentrations and 4 different particle size distributions. Comparison is made between the multi-size wear prediction and different possible representative mono-size particle wear predictions. In addition, a comparison of multi-size and different mono-size results using three dimensional simulations is also shown for a typical slurry pump as a sample case to highlight that the conclusions drawn for two dimensional simulation could hold good for three dimensional simulations as well. It is observed that by using a mono-size equivalent, the computation time is 20–25% of the computation time for multi-size (6-particle) simulation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.081
Threshold uncertainty score0.297

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations7
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGranular flow and fluidized bedsFrench-language works237,207