Bolted Flange Joint Reliability Improvement Using Profiled Wire Gasket
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The paper presents a case study of the application of profiled winding wire gasket (referred to as PWG) in a De-Methanizer heat exchanger and the subsequent improvement achieved in the bolted joint connection at Waterton gas plant operated by Pieridae Energy. A comparison is made between the PWG and the kammprofile gaskets in terms of gasket compression characteristics and performance in cyclic environment to highlight the benefits of using the former. The paper also highlights the importance of gasket design selection in a bolted joint rather than depending solely on the existing numerical methods of determining assembly bolt stress. A finite element analysis (FEA) is conducted in order to understand the effect of thermal gradients and pass-partition plates on the circumferential deflections at the gasket seating area. Using the PWG a leak-free start-up was achieved and the mean time between failure (MTBF) was increased from 8 months to 37 months for the same bolted joint. A cost benefit analysis is performed to show that the payback period on any gasketing technology upgrade is minute, and the operational savings obtained are substantial.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".