MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392711843 · doi:10.1177/09544062241235046

Experimental investigation of two-phase flow development through two-stage orifices

2024· article· en· W4392711843 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part C Journal of Mechanical Engineering Science · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFlow Measurement and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBody orificePressure dropMechanicsFlow coefficientStage (stratigraphy)Flow (mathematics)Materials scienceInletVolumetric flow rateGeologyEngineeringPhysicsMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this study, the effect of flow development length on two-stage flow orifices at an intermittent flow condition was investigated. Experiments were carried out for two-stage orifices with area ratio of 0.25–0.14 and with 1, 3, and 5D spacing between orifices. Also, experiments were carried out on single-stage orifices of the same area ratios under the same inlet flow conditions. The data suggested that restricting the flow in stages, with the smaller area of the restriction in the final stage, reduced the flow separation, enhance the mixing and improve flow development downstream as the spacing increased. Also, the total pressure drop of the two-stage orifice found to decrease as the spacing decreased especially at low gas superficial velocity. Finally, a new approach to correlate the total pressure drop was proposed and successfully implemented in order to determine the pressure drop multiplier of two-stage orifice with varying spacing.

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.

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)0.002
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.122
Threshold uncertainty score0.839

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.239 · 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