Mixed convection with flow reversal in the entrance region of inclined tubes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose To determine the axial evolution of the hydrodynamic and the thermal fields for mixed convection in inclined tubes and to investigate the presence of flow reversal. Design/methodology/approach The elliptical, coupled, steady state, three‐dimensional governing partial differential equations for heated ascending laminar mixed convection in an inclined isothermal tube were solved numerically using a finite volume staggered grid approach. Findings The axial evolution of the velocity profiles and fluid temperatures show that upstream diffusion has an important effect near the inlet of the heating region. As a result, both the wall shear stress and the Nusselt number are affected upstream of the heating zone. Flow reversal occurs of GF≥9 × 10 5 . The shape and size of the region with negative velocities depends strongly on the value of the Grashof number. The effect of the Grashof number on the axial evolution of the wall shear stress and the Nusselt number is shown to be very important in the region of developing flow. Research limitations/implications The results have been calculated for one Reynolds number (Re=100), a single fluid (air) and one tube inclination (45°). Practical implications Further results of this type can be mapped and would be useful for heat exchanger design. Originality/value This is the first time that flow reversal has been calculated numerically for inclined tubes. Most previous studies concern horizontal or vertical tubes and use axially parabolic equations which are easier to solve but can not calculate the flow field in the region with backflow.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".