MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2022555858 · doi:10.2495/cmem090411

Two-phase modelling of nanofluid heat transfer in a microchannel heat sink

2009· article· en· W2022555858 on OpenAlexafffund
C.T. Nguyen, M. Le Menn

Bibliographic record

VenueWIT transactions on modelling and simulation · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNanofluid Flow and Heat Transfer
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Moncton
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsNanofluidHeat transferMaterials scienceMechanicsMicrochannelLaminar flowThermodynamicsHeat transfer coefficientThermal conductivityReynolds numberTurbulencePhysicsComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The problem of a steady, two-dimensional, laminar forced flow and heat transfer of a nanofluid, Water-Al 2 O 3 mixture, circulating inside a microchannel, 0.1mm thickness by 25mm length, was numerically studied. The nanofluid considered is composed of saturated water and alumina metallic particles with different average diameters, 36nm and 47nm. All fluid properties are assumed temperature-dependent and evaluated using classical two-phase mixtures formulas, while for thermal conductivity and dynamic viscosity, recent in-house experimental data were used. The particle diffusion constant due to Brownian motion was estimated using the Einstein's relation. The fluid exhibits a parabolic axial velocity, uniform temperature and particle concentration profiles at the inlet; the usual non-slip and uniform wall temperature conditions prevail on both walls; at the exit, the 'outflow boundary' condition is imposed. The system of governing equations (conservation of mass, momentum, energy, and species) was successfully solved using a FEM imbedded within a commercial powerful code and a 28558-cell non-uniform grid. Results obtained for the Reynolds range of 200-2500 clearly show the beneficial effects due to the use of nanofluids on the heat transfer coefficient. Results using the two-phase model show that the spatial distribution of particle concentration is highly non uniform; it has been found to vary considerably in the vicinity of the heated walls while remains nearly uniform in a large central region of the channel. The effects due to the particle concentration and size were also studied. A 'single-phase fluid v/s twophase fluid model' comparison has clearly shown a certain discrepancy among the results obtained.

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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.220 · 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

Citations8
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWIT transactions on modelling and simulationSame topicNanofluid Flow and Heat TransferFrench-language works237,207