MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3128639029 · doi:10.11159/jffhmt.2021.006

Numerical Simulation of Steam Bubble Condensation Using Thermal Phase Change Model

2021· article· en· W3128639029 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Alok Khaware, Likitha S. Siddanathi, Vinay Kumar Gupta, Amine Ben Hadj Ali, Vishesh Aggarwal, Hemant Punekar

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Fluid Flow Heat and Mass Transfer · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Heat Transfer
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCondensationPhase changeBubbleEvaporationThermalMechanicsMaterials scienceComputer simulationThermodynamicsNuclear engineeringPhysicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Evaporation and condensation phenomena play a significant role in many of the nuclear, biochemical, and thermal processes in industrial applications.It is a complicated phenomenon as it undergoes both heat and mass transfer processes along with the complexities involved in the interfacial regions of vapor and liquid phases.Several experimental works have been carried out in the recent past to understand the condensation process in detail.However, understanding the phenomenon using computational technique is more advantageous as the interfacial mass transfer between gas and liquid can be modelled accurately.In the present work, condensation of a saturated vapor bubble in the sub-cooled liquid is studied, and various factors that influence the bubble shape change and the bubble lifetime, are evaluated.The analysis is carried out using the 'Multi-Fluid Volume of Fluid' and 'Thermal Phase Change' (TPC) models implemented in ANSYS Fluent commercial CFD solver.A detailed study is performed to obtain the best approach for calculating interfacial area density using a 'user-defined function' (UDF), and the advantage of the node-based gradient calculation method is exhibited.The numerical results obtained for the history of bubble shape and bubble lifetime are validated against the experiment and previously published works with good accuracy.The paper also elaborates on how the initial bubble diameter, the subcooling temperature, and the system pressure affects the shape and lifetime of the bubble during the condensation process.

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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.230 · 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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Fluid Flow Heat and Mass TransferSame topicFluid Dynamics and Heat TransferFrench-language works237,207