MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3047191584 · doi:10.3390/en13164046

A Numerical and Experimental Study of a Novel Heat Sink Design for Natural Convection Cooling of LED Grow Lights

2020· article· en· W3047191584 on OpenAlexaff
R.C. Adhikari, Dawood Shekari Beyragh, Majid Pahlevani, David Wood

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergies · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicLight effects on plants
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHeat sinkThermal management of high-power LEDsPassive coolingNatural convectionHeat transferActive coolingAir coolingMechanical engineeringForced convectionLED lampFinEnvironmental scienceMaterials scienceNuclear engineeringThermal resistanceMechanicsEngineeringElectrical engineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Light-emitting diode (LED) grow lights are increasingly used in large-scale indoor farming to provide controlled light intensity and spectrum to maximize photosynthesis at various growth stages of plants. As well as converting electricity into light, the LED chips generate heat, so the boards must be properly cooled to maintain the high efficiency and reliability of the LED chips. Currently, LED grow lights are cooled by forced convection air cooling, the fans of which are often the points of failure and also consumers of a significant amount of power. Natural convection cooling is promising as it does not require any moving parts, but one major design challenge is to improve its relatively low heat transfer rate. This paper presents a novel heat sink design for natural convection cooling of LED grow lights. The new design consists of a large rectangular fin array with openings in the base transverse to the fins to increase air flow, and hence the heat transfer. Numerical simulations and experimental testing of a prototype LED grow light with the new heat sink showed that openings achieved their intended purpose. It was found that the new heat sink can transfer the necessary heat flux within the safe operating temperature range of LED chips, which is adequate for cooling LED grow lights.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.210 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations29
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnergiesSame topicLight effects on plantsFrench-language works237,207