MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399862485 · doi:10.1002/cjce.25368

Optimal design of coolant jacket for cryogen transfer pipelines

2024· article· en· W4399862485 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sajikumar Pillai Sivasree, B Nitin

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSpacecraft and Cryogenic Technologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoolantPipeline transportMaterials scienceMechanical engineeringNuclear engineeringEngineeringStructural engineeringMarine engineeringPetroleum engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Cryogenic liquids such as liquid oxygen and liquid hydrogen are extensively used in many processes and manufacturing industries. In these industries, transferring cryogens via pipelines is a routine phenomenon. As the boiling points and latent heat of cryogens are low, excessive vaporization of these cryogens is innate. Therefore, ensuring that the cryogen reaches the utility in its liquid form is challenging. In the case of liquid hydrogen and liquid helium, the pipelines are jacketed with a high boiling cryogen like nitrogen. The idea is to dump most of the heat into cheap nitrogen to limit the loss of precious hydrogen or helium. From a heat inleak point, maximizing the amount of nitrogen in the jacket is advantageous by choosing large cross‐sectional areas. Also, larger flow cross sections would lower pressure drops and, therefore, lower pumping costs. However, such a choice would add to the mass of the pipeline. An increase in the mass of the pipeline increases the need for better structural support of the pipeline assembly. Therefore, the design of cryogen jackets for limiting heat inleak is a multi‐objective optimization problem. In this work, we model the heat leak into the hydrogen via the nitrogen jacket and the pressure drop of liquid nitrogen, and we find the mass of the pipeline assembly. Then, we optimize the design of nitrogen jackets fitted over hydrogen pipelines. We employ the evolutionary optimization technique, genetic algorithm (GA), to perform this optimization.cryogen; genetic algorithm; heat inleak; liquid hydrogen; optimization.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.194
Teacher spread0.179 · 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical EngineeringSame topicSpacecraft and Cryogenic TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207