MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3206077331 · doi:10.1115/pvp2021-61730

High Temperature Aged Leakage Relaxation Screening Tests on Confined Flexible Graphite Gaskets

2021· article· en· W3206077331 on OpenAlexaff
Abdel‐Hakim Bouzid, Shubhra Kanti Das

Bibliographic record

VenueVolume 2: Computer Technology and Bolted Joints; Design and Analysis · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicNatural Fiber Reinforced Composites
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGasketGraphiteMaterials scienceLeakage (economics)Composite materialAtmospheric temperature rangeForensic engineeringThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Flexible graphite-based gaskets are used extensively in high-temperature applications as a replacement of asbestos based gaskets. The effect of aging and temperature exposure of flexible graphite sheet gaskets was the subject of a previous work [1,2], however, the effect when flexible graphite is in a confined gasket configuration is not known. This study outlines the performance evaluation of the elevated temperature behavior of flexible graphite-based gaskets under a confined configuration and exposed over a long period employing HALR (High temperature Aged Leakage Relaxation) fixture. This ARLA-like fixture can retain the mechanical feature of the ATRS/HATR while allowing the cold leakage rate and weight loss measurement. Four different confined gasket configurations, namely corrugated metal, spiral wound, kammprofile and double jacketed, are evaluated within a temperature range of (427 to 649 °C) 800 to 1200 °F and exposure time of 2500 hours. Graphite weight loss, gasket thickness change, leakage and tightness parameter, creep and relaxation measurements were taken at regular intervals for each gasket style. To better understand the aging process, these critical mechanical and leakage properties are scrutinized; the degradation process related to mainly graphite oxidation is further discussed, and a conclusion is drawn.

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)0.000
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.206 · 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
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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVolume 2: Computer Technology and Bolted Joints; Design and AnalysisSame topicNatural Fiber Reinforced CompositesFrench-language works237,207