MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4281958843 · doi:10.1002/cjce.24490

Shape optimization of pipeline components

2022· article· en· W4281958843 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jéssica Guarato de Freitas Santos, Francisco José de Souza, Bruno Silva de Lima

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicErosion and Abrasive Machining
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPipeline (software)Flow (mathematics)ErosionSensitivity (control systems)Mathematical optimizationComputer scienceParticle (ecology)Work (physics)MechanicsMathematicsEngineeringMechanical engineeringPhysicsGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract When it comes to shape optimization of processes and equipment in an industrial environment, adjoint methods together with computational fluid dynamics have been a great solution. The success of these methods is due to the total cost of obtaining the sensitivity derivatives once it is independent of the number of shape parameters. However, few developments for multiphase flows have been proposed, as there are still fundamental limitations in adjoint models that might prevent their common use. The adjoint theory is not applicable, for example, to the Lagrangian formulation, which has been the workhorse in particle‐induced erosion simulations. Despite these circumstances, it is intuitively possible to think that the optimization of the carrier flow is also expected to ‘optimize’ the particle flow. For instance, reducing total losses in a pipe junction will lead to a more streamlined design. This, in turn, will prevent sudden changes in fluid motion and, consequently, in particle path. As a direct outcome, erosion is expected to be mitigated, as it is mostly influenced by the particle velocity. Given the lack of rigorous mathematical proof of that, the present work investigates how the optimization of single‐phase flow can also mitigate erosion. The erosive wear problem was tackled in three different bend pipes, and the correlation with Stokes number was further explored. As general results, substantial reductions in peak erosion have been found as a consequence of minimizing total losses for all addressed cases. Accordingly, these pipeline components may have an increase in their service life.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.082
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0020.000

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 head0.183
Teacher spread0.173 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical EngineeringSame topicErosion and Abrasive MachiningFrench-language works237,207