Nanofluids as Working Media for Loop Heat Pipes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<div class="htmlview paragraph">Nanofluids have been recently investigated as new working media for two-phase thermal control systems. However, conflicting reports have emerged, in which contradictory effects of the nanoparticles on the working performance of heat pipes have been described. Some studies have shown that gold or silver nanoparticles significantly improve heat transfer performances of heat pipes. Other studies have provided evidence that metal nanoparticles have no particular effect. This study is aimed at determining whether nanofluids are good candidates as heat carriers in a Loop Heat Pipe (LHP) system. Here, a nanofluid consisting of well-characterized citrate-stabilized gold nanoparticles in water is examined. The metallic nanoparticles are functionalized with citrate ligands in order to be soluble and stable in water at room temperature. An LHP hardware set-up was developed for this investigation. There are transparent elements in the LHP compensation chamber, which enable the visualizing of the fluid flow and phase behaviors. The experimental tests with the gold nanofluid have shown the effects of nanoparticles on the LHP operation. It was found that the nanofluid was not stable at high temperatures in the metallic casing, and after 48-hours tests, there was no physical evidence of the presence of gold nanoparticles remaining in the LHP working fluid. The LHP increased performance may be due to the positive influence of the nanofluid &amp; small amount of sodium citrate present in solution (i.e. the nanoparticle stabilizing agent) on the wettability of the wick.</div>
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".