MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4383557248 · doi:10.1115/1.4062918

Numerical Prediction of the Streamwise Fluidelastic Instability

2023· article· en· W4383557248 on OpenAlexaff
Sameer Abdul Rehman, Salim El Bouzidi, Osama Elbanhawy, Marwan Hassan, David Weaver

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pressure Vessel Technology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Vibration Analysis
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityCanadian Nuclear LaboratoriesUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInstabilityMechanicsBundleTransverse planePerturbation (astronomy)PhysicsFlow (mathematics)Classical mechanicsStructural engineeringEngineeringMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Recent experimental investigations have shown that tube arrays can become unstable in the streamwise direction. This is contrary to the long-held notion that fluidelastic instability is only a concern in the direction transverse to the flow. The possibility of the streamwise fluidelastic instability (SFEI) as a potential threat to the integrity of tube bundles was confirmed by the recent failures of newly installed replacement steam generators. A number of investigations were conducted to uncover the nature of this mechanism. A theoretical framework was developed by Hassan and Weaver (2016, “Modeling of Streamwise and Transverse Fluidelastic Instability in Tube Arrays,” ASME J. Pressure Vessel Technol., 138(5), p. 051304) to model streamwise fluidelastic instability in a bundle of flexible tubes. The model utilized a simple time lag expression for the flow channel area perturbation. The current work aims at developing a numerical model to precisely predict the flow perturbation characteristics in a tube bundle due to streamwise tube motion. Flow simulations were carried out for single phase fluid flow in a parallel triangle tube bundle array with 1.2, 1.5, and 1.7 pitch to diameter ratios. The numerical model was validated against numerical and experimental results available in the fluidelastic instability literature. Simulations were carried out for a range of reduced flow velocities. The model results showed that the upstream flow perturbation magnitude and phase are different from those obtained downstream of the moving tube. The obtained flow perturbation characteristics were implemented in the Hassan and Weaver (2016, “Modeling of Streamwise and Transverse Fluidelastic Instability in Tube Arrays,” ASME J. Pressure Vessel Technol., 138(5), p. 051304) model and the streamwise FEI threshold was predicted.

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 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 score0.055
Threshold uncertainty score0.211

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.201 · 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.

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

Citations5
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Pressure Vessel TechnologySame topicFluid Dynamics and Vibration AnalysisFrench-language works237,207