MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389541175 · doi:10.17118/11143/20845

Blending of hydrogen into a natural gas distribution pipeline in BritishColumbia through a tee junction for reducing GHG emissions

2023· article· en· W4389541175 on OpenAlexaff
Arash J. Khabbazi, Mojtaba Zabihi, Ri Li, Matthew Hill, Vincent Chou, John A. Quinn

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIntegrated Energy Systems Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGreenhouse gasNatural gasPipeline (software)Environmental scienceHydrogenNatural (archaeology)Waste managementComputer scienceEngineeringGeologyGeographyChemistryArchaeologyOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract: Integrating renewable hydrogen into the existing natural gas infrastructure network can reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and enhance electricity storage efficiency. To ensure a functional and durable network, attaining homogeneous mixing as quickly as possible is crucial. This study employs CFD analysis to evaluate hydrogen and methane mixing homogeneity in a pipeline with a vertical top-side Tee junction. The coefficient of variation (CoV) of hydrogen mole fraction is analyzed along cross-sectional slices of a distribution pressure (DP) pipe where the ideal gas law is applicable due to low pressures. The findings reveal that reducing the diameter of the side pipe while maintaining the main pipe diameter results in a shorter mixing homogeneity length due to enhanced side flow jet penetration and increased diffusion. Notably, a sharp drop in the CoV figure is evidenced when reducing the side pipe from NPS 1.25 to NPS 1.0, leading to a substantial decrease in the mixing homogeneity length from 143 main pipe diameters from the branch center to 38 diameters.

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 score0.329
Threshold uncertainty score0.541

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.224 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicIntegrated Energy Systems OptimizationFrench-language works237,207