Numerical Analysis of Laminar Forced Convection in Sinusoidal-Wavy-, Rounded-Ellipse-, and Rounded-Vee-Shaped Corrugated-Plate Channels
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Numerical analysis of steady, two-dimensional, laminar forced convection in corrugated-plate channels is performed using a commercial CFD code: ANSYS CFX. The flow domain consists of six modules in each of three wall corrugations: sinusoidal-wavy-shaped (SWS), rounded-ellipse-shaped (RES), and rounded-vee-shaped (RVS). One ratio of minimum-to-maximum plate spacings and one module length-to-height ratio is considered. Fluid flow and heat transfer are repeating in the modules and the results are examined in a typical module in the fully-developed region for Reynolds numbers in the range of 25 to 300 for Prandtl numbers of 0.7 (air), 2.29 (water), and 34.6 (ethylene glycol). The RES corrugation produced the highest peak value of local Nusselt number as well as the highest friction factor. The SWS corrugation produced the highest average Nusselt number, except at a Prandtl number of 34.6 at higher Reynolds number where the RES corrugation had the highest value. The RVS corrugation had the lowest friction factor for the geometric configuration considered. The highest heat transfer rate per unit pumping power was found at the highest Prandtl number for the RES corrugation.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".