Numerical study of an oil–water flow in a gravitational separator
Bibliographic record
Abstract
During their operation or in the event of an accident, power transformer can release a certain amount of oil in the subjacent soil. In order to avoid a fire hazard or any contamination to the environment, it is critical to capture any oil that was accidentally spilled. For this reason, catchment basins are placed below each power transformer and each basin is connected through pipes to a gravitational oil-water separator, which allows the oil droplets carried by the water flow to rise toward the surface and coalesce near the free surface. By doing so, the oil phase is separated from the mixture and it can be properly disposed afterwards. Prior to 1995, gravitational separators at Hydro-Qubec have not been designed according to the American Petroleum Institute (API) standards [1] but this does not necessarily imply that such separators do not comply with the environmental legislation in place. Thus, in order to evaluate if modifications to the existing gravitational separators are required, Hydro-Qubec has launched in 2012 an R&D project aimed at performing separator efficiency studies through a Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD). In this paper, a numerical simulation of a gravitational oil-water separator in service at Hydro-Qubec using an inhomogeneous multiphase model is presented. Moreover, a new configuration of the existing separator is numerically tested and the results show that its performance is significantly improved.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".