MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1992079145 · doi:10.1080/19401491003653611

Convective heat transfer in domed skylight cavities

2010· article· en· W1992079145 on OpenAlexaff
AmirAbbas Sartipi, Abdelaziz Laouadi, David Naylor, Ramdhane Dhib

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Building Performance Simulation · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBuilding Energy and Comfort Optimization
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council CanadaToronto Metropolitan UniversityAtomic Energy (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHeat transferLaminar flowNusselt numberSolar gainMechanicsConvective heat transferNatural convectionThermalComputational fluid dynamicsSkylightMaterials scienceOpticsTurbulenceMeteorologyEngineeringMechanical engineeringPhysicsReynolds number

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Domed skylights are important architectural design elements that deliver daylight and solar heat into buildings, and connect the building's occupants to the outdoor environment. Despite the widespread use of domed skylights, there is limited information on the convective heat transfer within cavities of multi-glazed domes. This information is required to evaluate the thermal performance of domed skylights for product rating purposes, or to evaluate the heat loss or gain of installed skylights in buildings. This article presents a numerical study on the laminar natural convection in horizontal concentric domed cavities heated from the inside surface. A commercial CFD package is used to solve for the flow and temperature fields. The results show that for large cavity gap spacing-to-radius ratios, the cavity flow is mono-cellular and steady state. For small gap spacing ratios, however, the cavity flow may be multi-cellular and transient periodic. Practical correlations for the heat transfer coefficient as a function of the cavity shape and gap spacing ratio are developed for both flow regimes. The critical gap spacing ratio that yields the maximum Nusselt number is quantified for each cavity shape.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.207 · 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

Citations10
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Building Performance SimulationSame topicBuilding Energy and Comfort OptimizationFrench-language works237,207