MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1994034288 · doi:10.1115/1.4002095

Simple Models for Laminar Thermally Developing Slug Flow in Noncircular Ducts and Channels

2010· article· en· W1994034288 on OpenAlexafffund
Yuri S. Muzychka, Edmond J. Walsh, Patrick Walsh

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Heat Transfer · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectrowetting and Microfluidic Technologies
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaEnterprise Ireland
KeywordsLaminar flowPrandtl numberDimensionless quantityMechanicsReynolds numberThermodynamicsHeat transferDuct (anatomy)Constant (computer programming)Heat fluxPhysicsMaterials scienceMathematicsTurbulence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Solutions to the classical Graetz slug flow problem (uniform velocity distribution) in noncircular ducts are examined. These solutions have applications where a constant uniform velocity distribution exists across a channel or duct. These are most often realized in the laminar flow of low Prandtl number liquids, such as liquid metals, and low Reynolds number flows through porous media. Expressions are developed for a number of applications using the asymptotic correlation method of Churchill and Usagi. These expressions vary depending on the definition used for the dimensionless heat transfer coefficient, in the case of constant wall temperature boundary condition (T), and the dimensionless wall temperature for the constant flux boundary conditions (H) and (H1). Finally, simple expressions are developed for predicting the thermal entrance length and fully developed flow Nu values for noncircular ducts.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.200 · 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

Citations42
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Heat TransferSame topicElectrowetting and Microfluidic TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207