A numerical study of heat transfer in a turbulent pulsating impinging jet
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pulsating impinging jets can have significant influence on transfer processes. A number of studies have been done on heat transfer in a pulsating impinging jet but very divergent and sometimes contradictory results have been reported. In the present study, the flow and temperature field under a single confined pulsating turbulent impinging jet are determined numerically by the finite volume method. Effects of Pulsation function parameters (frequency and amplitude) and various geometries on the flow characteristics and heat transfer rate from hot surface are discussed. Results of simulation show that flow pulsation has different effects in various flow zones. Pulsation of jet improve cooling performance in the wall jet zone and simultaneously reduce heat transfer in the stagnation zone. As expected the effect of flow pulsation decays with distance from the jet nozzle. Under certain conditions flow oscillation adversely affects the heat transfer in comparison with the steady jet at the same mean Reynolds number. In pulsating jets we can introduce a critical frequency correspond to St = 0.26. The amount of heat transfer at the frequencies corresponding St = 0.26 is higher than other cases. In general, it is concluded that cooling performance of oscillating impinging jet is enhanced by increase in the frequency and amplitude of oscillation as well as decrease in nozzle to plate distance.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".