Thermal Spreading Resistance in a Multilayered Orthotropic Circular Disk With Interfacial Resistance and Variable Heat Flux
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Thermal spreading resistance in a multilayered orthotropic disk is considered. Interfacial resistance between each layer is prescribed by means of a contact conductance hc using a Robin type boundary condition. Orthotropic properties are considered by transforming the orthotropic system into an equivalent isotropic system using stretched coordinates. A recursive modeling approach is presented to account for the effects of two or more layers in the structure from the simple case of a single isotropic layer. This approach simplifies the analysis considerably. Finally, variable heat flux distribution is considered for three special cases: uniform, parabolic, and inverse parabolic. Numerous special cases can be derived from the general result including perfect interfacial contact and perfect sink plane conductance. Additional issues are also discussed in detail. The expressions for the total thermal resistance and spreading resistance can be easily implemented in any mathematical software or coded in Fortran, C, or BASIC. Since the method is strictly analytical, thermal analysts can quickly assess changes in layer properties, material sequence, heat flux distribution, and effects of interfacial contact resistance, with little extra effort.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".