MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1981716820 · doi:10.1115/ht2013-17146

Transient Internal Forced Convection Under Step Wall Heat Flux Condition

2013· article· en· W1981716820 on OpenAlexaff
M. Fakoor-Pakdaman, Majid Bahrami

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNanofluid Flow and Heat Transfer
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNusselt numberMechanicsAsymptoteLaminar flowHeat fluxHeat transferPrandtl numberForced convectionNatural convectionThermal conductionThermodynamicsMaterials scienceReynolds numberPhysicsTurbulenceMathematicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A new closed-form analytical model is developed to predict transient laminar forced convection inside a circular tube following a time-wise step change in the wall heat flux. The proposed all-time model is based on a blending of two asymptotes; i) short-time asymptote: transient pure conduction in an infinite cylinder and ii) long-time asymptote: steady-state convective heat transfer inside a circular duct. Different fluid velocity profiles are taken into consideration and the model covers: i) Slug Flow (SF); ii) Hydrodynamically Fully Developed Flow (HFDF); and iii) Simultaneously Developing Flow (SDF) conditions. The present model is developed for the entire range of the Fourier and Prandtl numbers. As such, short- and long-time asymptotes for the fluid bulk temperature are obtained. The Nusselt number is defined based on the local temperature difference between the tube wall temperature and the fluid bulk temperature. It is shown that irrespective of the velocity profile, at the initial times the Nusselt number is only a function of time. However, at the steady state condition it depends solely upon the axial location. In addition, during the transient period, the Nusselt number is much higher than that of the long-time response. We also performed an independent numerical simulation using COMSOL Multiphysics to validate the present analytical model. The comparison between the numerical and the present analytical model shows good agreement; a maximum relative difference less than 9.1%.

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)0.000
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.191 · 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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNanofluid Flow and Heat TransferFrench-language works237,207