MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3130014609 · doi:10.3390/su13042401

Latent Heat Thermal Storage in Non-Uniform Metal Foam Filled with Nano-Enhanced Phase Change Material

2021· article· en· W3130014609 on OpenAlexaff
Mohammad Ghalambaz, S.A.M. Mehryan, Ahmad Hajjar, Mehdi Fteïti, Obai Younis, Pouyan Talebizadehsardari, Wahiba Yaïci

Bibliographic record

VenueSustainability · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPhase Change Materials Research
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPorosityMaterials scienceMetal foamPhase-change materialHeat transferComposite materialThermal energy storageNatural convectionLatent heatPorous mediumThermalThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The melting heat transfer of CuO—coconut oil embedded in a non-uniform copper metal foam—was addressed. Copper foam is placed in a channel-shaped Thermal Energy Storage (TES) unit heated from one side. The foam is non-uniform with a linear porosity gradient in a direction perpendicular to the heated surface. The finite element method was applied to simulate natural convection flow and phase change heat transfer in the TES unit. The results showed that the porosity gradient could significantly boost the melting rate and stored energy rate in the TES unit. The best non-uniform porosity corresponds to a case in which the maximum porosity is next to a heated surface. The variation of the unit placement’s inclination angle is only important in the final stage of charging, where there is a dominant natural convection flow. The variation of porous pore size induces minimal impact on the phase change rate, except in the case of a large pore size of 30 pore density (PPI). The presence of nanoparticles could increase or decrease the charging time. However, using a 4% volume fraction of nanoparticles could mainly reduce the charging time.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.266 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations8
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSustainabilitySame topicPhase Change Materials ResearchFrench-language works237,207