An Analytical Model of Flow Boiling Heat Transfer for Slug Flow in a Single Circular Horizontal Micro-Channel
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Slug flow is one of the most common flow patterns that occur during flow boiling in horizontal micro-channels. In the present work, an analytical model of flow boiling heat transfer is developed for slug flow in a single circular horizontal micro-channel under a uniform heat flux. The heat transfer is affected mainly by the liquid film thickness confined between the vapor slug and the channel wall. For more physical and reliable flow boiling heat transfer model, the liquid film thickness variation and pressure gradient effects on the flow boiling heat transfer coefficient are considered. The influence of vapor quality on heat transfer coefficient, vapor velocity and liquid film velocity is studied. The model is constructed based on the conservation equations of the separated two phase flow. The interphase surface is assumed to be smooth and the flow is a laminar flow. The obtained model applied for flow boiling of R-134a refrigerant in the slug flow at a narrow vapor quality range (0.0 < x < 0.1). The heat transfer coefficient showed a high increase close to the low vapor quality while decreases gradually after the peak. Furthermore, the vapor velocity increases linearly by increasing the vapor quality while, the liquid film velocity decreases.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".