MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3038691301 · doi:10.18186/thermal.764153

A SIMULATED STUDY ON THE EFFECT OF WATER TEMPERATURE ON COOLING EFFICIENCY OF WATER MIST FIRE EXTINGUISHERS

2020· article· en· W3038691301 on OpenAlexaff
Amir Omidvar, Amirhossein Mahdavi, Reza Mehryar

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Thermal Engineering · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFire dynamics and safety research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMistMaterials scienceEvaporationEnvironmental sciencePenetration (warfare)Water coolingThermalMechanicsMeteorologyThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, the effect of initial water temperature on the cooling performance of a water mist fire suppression system has been investigated. A zero-dimensional analytical model was first developed to study the thermal and dynamic behavior of a single water droplet. The developed model was validated against available experimental data in the literature. The developed model was further extended to simulate the transient heating, evaporation, break-up, and liquid penetration length of a hollow-cone water spray. Results indicated that increasing the initial temperature of the water spray before injection resulted in a decrease in the initial size distribution of the spray droplets. It was further found that the evaporation time of the injected droplets decreased by about 11% and the cooling power of the pre-heated water mist system enhanced by 12% in exchange for increasing the initial temperature of the water spray by 10˚C. It was concluded that pre-heating the sprayed water droplets would likely improve the cooling efficiency of the water mist system. It could be also inferred that at equal cooling power, less water was consumed by the pre-heated spray compared to conventional water mist systems.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.206 · 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

Citations6
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Thermal EngineeringSame topicFire dynamics and safety researchFrench-language works237,207