MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2153324782 · doi:10.1002/cjce.22364

Investigation of impingement heat transfer for air‐sand mixture flow

2015· article· en· W2153324782 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mustafa J. Al‐Dulaimi, Adnan A. Abdul Rasool, Faik Hamad

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHeat Transfer Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMechanicsStagnation pointNozzleJet (fluid)Materials scienceHeat transferNusselt numberTurbulenceFlow (mathematics)Particle (ecology)Mass transferThermodynamicsPhysicsGeologyReynolds number

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Heat transfer between a heated flat plate and normal impinging gas‐solid two‐phase jet flow was investigated. A single jet from a nozzle of 10 mm diameter at nozzle‐to‐plate distance/nozzle diameter ratio in the range of 2–8 was used. Natural sand particles with average diameters of 220, 350, and 550 μm were used as a solid phase. The effects of particle size and loading ratio (mass of sand/mass of air) at different jet velocities on impingement cooling characteristics of the flat plate are investigated. The numerical simulations were performed with ANSYS Fluent 14.7 for a steady, three‐dimensional, incompressible turbulent flow using Eulerian simulation for the gas phase and Lagrangian simulation for sand particles. The experimental results show that the existence of sand particles decreases the Nusselt number compared to air jet flow. The single and two‐phase flow experimental results are close to predictions when the particle reflection option is used in the simulation. The discrepancy in local values near the stagnation point can be attributed to the complex nature of the two‐phase flow at the stagnation point that includes reflection of sand particles at different angles.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.183
Teacher spread0.165 · 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 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

Citations5
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical EngineeringSame topicHeat Transfer MechanismsFrench-language works237,207