MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2901290654 · doi:10.3390/w10111698

Analysis of Pressure Transient Following Rapid Filling of a Vented Horizontal Pipe

2018· article· en· W2901290654 on OpenAlexaff
Lin Li, David Z. Zhu, Biao Huang

Bibliographic record

VenueWater · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWater Systems and Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsBody orificeMechanicsCabin pressurizationOscillation (cell signaling)OverpressureTransient (computer programming)AirflowFluentAtmospheric pressureOrifice platePressure waveMaterials scienceEnvironmental scienceGeotechnical engineeringComputational fluid dynamicsGeologyChemistryMeteorologyEngineeringThermodynamicsPhysicsComposite materialMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Rapid filling/emptying of pipes is commonly encountered in water supply and sewer systems, during which pressure transients may cause unexpected large pressure and/or geyser events. In the present study, a linearized analytical model is first developed to obtain the approximate solutions of the maximum pressure and the characteristics of pressure oscillations caused by the pressurization of trapped air in a horizontal pipe when there is no or insignificant air release. The pressure pattern is a typical periodic wave, analogous to sinusoidal motion. The oscillation period and the time when the pressure attains the peak value are significantly influenced by the driving pressure and the initial length of the entrapped air pocket. When there is air release through a venting orifice, analysis by a three-dimensional computational fluid dynamics model using ANSYS Fluent was also conducted to furnish insights and details of air–water interactions. Flow features associated with the pressurization and air release were examined, and an air–water interface deformation that one-dimensional models are incapable of predicating was presented. Modelling results indicate that the residual air in the system depends on the relative position of the venting orifice. There are mainly two types of pressure oscillation patterns: namely, long or short-period oscillations and waterhammer. The latter can be observed when the venting orifice is located near the end of the pipe where the air is trapped.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.187
Teacher spread0.181 · 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

Citations26
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWaterSame topicWater Systems and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207