Numerical analysis reliability control for a double‐pipe heat exchanger with virtual entropy generation method
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract There are two primary laws including the first and second laws of thermodynamics that should be used to assess a process. Generally, only the first law of thermodynamics is investigated in numerical solutions, so it is possible to exist some numerical results that do not satisfy the second law of thermodynamics because of numerical errors. To achieve reliable numerical outcomes, it is better to apply two indexes of HEAT BALANCE ERROR and VIRTUAL ENTROPY GENERATION, which come from the second law of thermodynamics. In other words, an approach to develop computational fluid dynamics investigations is to take second law of thermodynamics into consideration. In this study, two different models including counterflow double‐pipe heat exchanger and single‐pipe with constant wall temperature are simulated in various cases with different efficiencies and temperature ratios. It is found that 46 cases of total 523 double‐pipe models and 24 cases of total 402 simulations of single‐pipe models had unacceptable results regarding to two mentioned criteria. The results revealed that it is less likely to gain unreliable results in smaller efficiency and lower inlet temperature for double‐pipe heat exchanger and single‐pipe respectively.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".