MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414942523 · doi:10.1115/pvp2025-152045

Coke Drum Wall Thickness Sizing Based on Measured Operating Quench Loads

2025· article· en· W4414942523 on OpenAlexaff
John Fernando, Enzo Falo, Henry Kwok, Millar Iverson, Leanne Wong, Simon Yuen, K K Lee, Luke Chan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicCoal and Coke Industries Research
Canadian institutionsSuncor Energy (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThermalQuenching (fluorescence)Shell (structure)Thermal shockSizingCoke

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Coke drums experience severe thermo-mechanical loading during operation, and incur a significant portion of their total damage during the quenching period. The loading during the quenching period causes the cylindrical shell of coke drums to rapidly develop flaws and exhibit bulging patterns. To mitigate against this type of damage requires an understanding of how to incorporate the thermal loading into damage assessments. The current study uses temperature measurements to first categorize the loading during quench into four types of thermal events: cold spot thermal gradients, hot spot thermal gradients, axial thermal gradients, and circumferential thermal gradients. The probability distribution functions for each type of thermal event are then characterized using measured temperature and strain data, to be used as the forcing function to evaluate damage on the vessel. A fatigue assessment methodology that incorporates the cumulative impact of the defined forcing function on the estimated shell fatigue life is presented.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.259 · 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 designBench or experimental
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCoal and Coke Industries ResearchFrench-language works237,207