MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2771576988 · doi:10.1115/pvs2017-3537

Effective Diaphragm Area Test Program for Air Operated Valve Actuators

2017· article· en· W2771576988 on OpenAlexaff
Zachary Leutwyler, Manmohan S Kalsi, Lisa Thidavanh, Laurie Luckhardt, Thomas Cunningham

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Sensor Technologies Research
Canadian institutionsGeneral Electric (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsActuatorDiaphragm (acoustics)Test dataComputer sciencePosition (finance)EngineeringMechanical engineeringElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

GE contracted Kalsi Engineering, Inc. (KEI) to perform actuator testing to determine the effective diaphragm area for the Model 37/38 actuator line and to develop a bounding effective diaphragm area tolerance to account for measurement uncertainties and manufacturing tolerances. The GE sponsored test matrix includes Model 37/38 Sizes 9, 11, 13, 15, 18, and 24 actuators. The test matrix was primary defined to provide EDA data for actuators used in US nuclear power plants. The test matrix was primarily designed to facilitate the evaluation of the effects of stroke position, pressure, diaphragm materials, and measurement uncertainty. The test matrix also included with and without spring test configurations, two spring options for the same actuator size and model, and two diaphragm materials: Nitrile Elastomer and Silicone. The test program provides reliable data for AOV design basis evaluations as required by the NRC RIS 2000-03. This paper presents the results for the Masoneilan Model 38 Size 11 diaphragm actuator, which show that EDA is strongly position dependent and weakly pressure-dependent. As part of the project, a method for determining the required EDA tolerance to account for manufacturing variations was developed, which allows EDA determined by testing to be used across the product line. Paper published with permission.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.301 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Sensor Technologies ResearchFrench-language works237,207