MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3039408063 · doi:10.22215/etd/2015-10937

Modelling and Optimization Methods for a Microchannel Heat Exchanger

2015· dissertation· en· W3039408063 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Joshua McLellan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHeat Transfer and Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Resources CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMicrochannelMicro heat exchangerMechanicsHeat exchangerHeat transferWork (physics)Materials scienceVolume (thermodynamics)ThermodynamicsFlow (mathematics)InletNuclear engineeringHeat transfer coefficientMechanical engineeringEngineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Microchannel heat exchangers are being considered for use in the Generation IV nuclear reactors for their ability to provide increased thermal efficiency in a small volume relative to other types of heat exchangers via an extremely high surface area-to-volume ratio.Three distinct analysis methods that may be used to evaluate the technology are presented in this work: finite element method modelling, application of smoothed particle hydrodynamics, and Kriging-based optimization.The finite element method model generated for a single pair of channels for the hot and cold working fluids yields results that agree with those produced using the effectiveness-number of transfer units method, and is a suitable base for the optimization performed.More complex free surface flows are effectively modelled using smoothed particle hydrodynamics in a number of demonstrative cases, including boiling flow through a heated channel.The I would first like to express the most sincere gratitude to my supervisors, Dr. John Goldak and Dr. Tarik Kaya of Carleton University, for their excellent guidance and seemingly endless patience throughout this process.Furthermore, I owe a debt of gratitude to the Goldak Technologies Inc c staff, which has included Dan Downey, Stanislav Tchernov, and Jianguo Zhou, for their technical support throughout my endeavours with the VrSuite software.Their assistance has been tremendous.I offer

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)0.001
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.276 · 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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHeat Transfer and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207