MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Three-Dimensional CFD Model Development and Validation for Once-Through Steam Generator (OTSG): Coupling Combustion, Heat Transfer and Steam Generation

2022· article· en· W4220801941 on OpenAlexaff
Ehsan Askari, Mario A. Forcinito, Laurent Fitschy, Arthur Maesen

Bibliographic record

VenueChemEngineering · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicCombustion and flame dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCombustionHeat transferComputational fluid dynamicsMechanicsBoiler (water heating)Combustion chamberConvectionNuclear engineeringFlow (mathematics)Materials scienceMechanical engineeringThermodynamicsEngineeringChemistryWaste managementPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The current research studies the coupled combustion inside the furnace and the steam generation inside the radiant and convection tubes through a typical Once-Through Steam Generator (OTSG). A 3-D CFD model coupling the combustion and the two-phase flow was developed to model the entire system of OTSG. Once the combustion simulation was converged, the results were compared to field data showing a convincing agreement. The CFD analysis provides the detailed flow behavior inside the combustion chamber and the stack, as well as the two-phase flow steam generation process in the radiant and convective sections. The flame shape and orientation, the velocity, the species, and the temperature distribution at the various parts of the furnace, as well as the steam generation and the steam distribution inside the pipes were investigated using the developed CFD model

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)0.001
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.189 · 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

Citations8
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChemEngineeringSame topicCombustion and flame dynamicsFrench-language works237,207