MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2201361911 · doi:10.1115/ipack2015-48745

Thermal Behavior of Aluminum Alloy Metal Foam Heat Sinks: A Computational and Experimental Approach

2015· article· en· W2201361911 on OpenAlexaff
Khaled S. Al-Athel, Shahzada Pamir Aly, Abul Fazal M. Arif, J. Mostaghimi

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicCellular and Composite Structures
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMetal foamMaterials scienceHeat sinkImage stitchingFinite element methodThermalPorosityAluminiumPorous mediumMechanical engineeringHeat transferWork (physics)Composite materialComputer scienceStructural engineeringMechanicsThermodynamicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Metal foams are structures of a cellular nature that contain a high percentage of porosity that can be produced in either a closed or open cell forms. The use of metal foams in engineering applications has increased significantly over the last decade due to their enhanced mechanical and thermal properties. An innovative approach for three-dimensional (3D) detailed finite element modeling of open cell metal foam has been taken to capture the versatile nature of metal foams’ geometry and predicting its thermal performance. The interior complex geometry of metal foams has limited studies to create computational model via common approaches. Therefore, not much computational work has been done in open cell metal foam applications. To overcome this difficulty, computed tomography (CT) scan has been used to extract the 3D structure surface model with extreme precision. Computer-Aided Design (CAD) software has been used for “stitching” and “healing” of the CT scan model before importing it to a finite element domain. The 3D computational model is used in a heat sink application and is calibrated against experimental results for the temperature distribution of one case. The validated and calibrated model is then used for simulating different metal foam heat sink cases to assess the thermal and mechanical behavior under different conditions.

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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.222
Threshold uncertainty score0.308

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.208 · 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

Citations2
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCellular and Composite StructuresFrench-language works237,207