MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2065913746 · doi:10.1115/fedsm-icnmm2010-30967

Experimental Investigation of Flow Patterns, Pressure Drop, and Flow Instability During Flow Boiling in a Cross-Linked Microchannel Heat Sink

2010· article· en· W2065913746 on OpenAlexaff
Ayman Megahed

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHeat Transfer and Optimization
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPressure dropMicrochannelHeat sinkMaterials scienceMechanicsBoilingMass fluxTwo-phase flowHeat fluxThermodynamicsNucleate boilingCoolantHydraulic diameterFlow visualizationSlug flowHeat transferFlow (mathematics)PhysicsReynolds numberTurbulence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper investigates experimentally flow boiling characteristics in a cross-linked microchannel heat sink at low mass fluxes and high heat fluxes. The heat sink consists of 45 straight microchannels with a hydraulic diameter of 248 μm and heated length of 16 mm. Three cross-links, of width 500 μm, are introduced in the present microchannel heat sink to achieve better temperature uniformity and to avoid flow maldistribution. Flow visualization, flow instability, and two-phase pressure drop measurements are conducted using the dielectric coolant FC-72 for the range of heat flux from 20.1 to 104.2 kW/m2, mass flux from 109 to 290 kg/m2.s, and exit quality from 0.02 to 0.65. Flow visualization studies indicate that the observed flow regime is primarily slug. Instability results show that the periods and amplitudes of inlet pressure and outlet saturation temperature oscillations decrease with increasing mass flux. The two-phase pressure drop strongly increases with the exit quality and the two-phase frictional pressure drop increases by a factor of 1.6–2, at xe, o < 0.3, as compared with that in the straight microchannel heat sink.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.278
Threshold uncertainty score0.749

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.210 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations3
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHeat Transfer and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207