Numerical Investigation of Heat Transfer Performance of Various Coiled Square Tubes for Heat Exchanger Application
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In heat exchanger application, working fluid inside the tubes is subjected to considerable temperature changes. In order to improve heat transfer performance, various strategies are proposed and evaluated; one of them is the application of coiled tubes. Coiled tubes have been used widely in heat exchanger application mainly due to the presence of secondary flow which enhances heat transfer considerably. This study addresses heat transfer performance of three configurations of coiled tubes with square cross-section, i.e. in-plane, helical and conical coiled tubes, subjected to large temperature difference. Their heat transfer performance is numerically evaluated and compared with that of a straight tube with identical cross-section and length. A concept of Figure of Merit (FoM) is introduced and utilized to fairly asses the heat transfer performance of the coiled tube configurations. The results indicate that FoM increase as the wall temperature increase. In addition, combination of temperature-induced buoyancy flow and curvature-induced secondary flow considerably affect the flow behavior and heat transfer performance inside the tubes.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".