MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2223989032 · doi:10.4271/2008-01-0733

Transient One-Dimensional Thermal Analysis of Automotive Components for Determination of Thermal Protection Requirements

2008· article· en· W2223989032 on OpenAlexaff
Alaa El‐Sharkawy

Bibliographic record

VenueSAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper series · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEngineering Applied Research
Canadian institutionsChrysler (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransient (computer programming)Automotive industryThermalThermal analysisTransient analysisComputer scienceAutomotive engineeringMaterials scienceEngineeringTransient responseElectrical engineeringThermodynamicsAerospace engineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During initial phases of vehicle development process, it is usually required to understand the temperature profile for all components. It is usually more effective and less costly if the thermal issues are determined and addressed before actual vehicles are built. Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) analysis tools are typically used for thermal management of the vehicle environment. However, for transient thermal analysis problems, running a full CFD requires solving the mass, momentum, and energy equations. This typically requires a lengthy computation time and extensive computer resources. The problem becomes more challenging when trying to conduct CFD analysis for several design iterations and for different duty cycles that may be of a transient nature. Therefore, the application of one-dimensional analysis early in the development phase can help point out the areas of prime concern. Therefore, more accurate component temperature estimates using CFD tools can be conducted after most of the issues are screened out. In this paper, a one-dimensional thermal analysis model is applied to determine the temperature of different components in the under-body and under-hood areas under transient test cycles. Empirical values for heat transfer coefficients and averaged airflow around different components are used to determine the component temperatures. Analytical and test results for transient test conditions such as city traffic and build up are presented.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper seriesSame topicEngineering Applied ResearchFrench-language works237,207