Some Aspects of Critical-Heat-Flux Enhancement in Tubes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This paper summarizes the effects of various types or numbers of critical-heat-flux (CHF)-enhancing inserts in tubular geometries. The impact of inserts on CHF is frequently expressed by an enhancement ratio K: the ratio of CHF with an insert to the CHF in a bare tube for the same local flow conditions. The impact on K of the following parameters was investigated: (i) fluid type (Freon-134a, water), (ii) axial spacing between inserts, (iii) shape of the insert, (iv) flow blockage of the insert, (v) number of similar/dissimilar insert planes upstream, and (vi) impact of flow conditions. The spacing and flow-obstruction area were found to be the major geometric factors that affected K: by decreasing the relative spacing, L/D, to 16, K can reach a value of from 2 to 3, depending on the flow-obstruction area. Among flow parameters, the critical quality, xc, usually has a strong effect on K: K can increase from a value of 1 to 3, when xc increases from 0 to 0.4 for a mass flux G ≥ 2 Mg/m2s. For G < 2 Mg/m2s, CHF enhancement can disappear or become negative (K < 1). No cumulative effect was found on K for a series of upstream insert planes. CHF enhancement does not depend on fluid type, provided that the conditions in the fluids meet the CHF fluid-to-fluid modelling requirements.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".