Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32781638›Full record

ArticleMicromachines2020

Comparison of Swing and Tilting Check Valves Flowing Compressible Fluids.

Zhi-Xin Gao, Ping Liu, Yang Yue, Jun-Ye Li, Hui Wu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Micromachines, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Zhi-Xin GaoSUFA Technology Industry Co., Ltd., CNNC, Suzhou 215129, China.
Ping LiuSUFA Technology Industry Co., Ltd., CNNC, Suzhou 215129, China.
Yang YueSUFA Technology Industry Co., Ltd., CNNC, Suzhou 215129, China.
Jun-Ye LiSUFA Technology Industry Co., Ltd., CNNC, Suzhou 215129, China.
Hui WuSUFA Technology Industry Co., Ltd., CNNC, Suzhou 215129, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Although check valves have attracted a lot of attention, work has rarely been completed done when there is a compressible working fluid. In this paper, the swing check valve and the tilting check valve flowing high-temperature compressible water vapor are compared. The maximum Mach number under small valve openings, the dynamic opening time, and the hydrodynamic moment acting on the valve disc are chosen to evaluate the difference between the two types of check valves. Results show that the maximum Mach number increases with the decrease in the valve opening and the increase in the mass flow rate, and the Mach number and the pressure difference in the tilting check valve are higher. In the swing check valve, the hydrodynamic moment is higher and the valve opening time is shorter. Furthermore, the valve disc is more stable for the swing check valve, and there is a periodical oscillation of the valve disc in the tilting check valve under a small mass flow rate.

Indexed as

check valvecomputational fluid dynamicsdynamic characteristicsMach number

Identifiers

PMID32781638
PMCPMC7464032

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.