MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4254019194 · doi:10.32920/ryerson.14663796.v1

Determining the Thermal Effects of Channels on Porous Heat Sinks Under Forced Convection Conditions with Nanofluid: An Experimental and Numerical Study

2021· preprint· en· W4254019194 on OpenAlexaff
Christopher Welsford

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHeat and Mass Transfer in Porous Media
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNanofluidMultiphysicsMaterials scienceNusselt numberHeat sinkHeat transferPorous mediumMechanicsHeat fluxThermodynamicsMetal foamDarcy numberPorosityThermalNatural convectionComposite materialRayleigh numberReynolds numberFinite element methodPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The present study determines the effects which foam metals and Nanofluid have on the performance of a simulated CPU. The present study employs yAl2O3-water Nanofluid and 6061- T6 Aluminum foam metal with a porosity of 0.91 and permeability of 40 pores per linear inch formed in bulk media and porously filled channels. The concentrations evaluated are 0.1%, 0.3%, and 0.6% by volume. The study shall consider both original empirical results and numerical results obtained from COMSOL Multiphysics, showing good agreement with a maximum error of 4.3%. The present study. When considering the average Nusselt number as the representation of the strength of the heat transfer mechanism, and as such ignoring pumping requirements, it is shown that the use of porously filled channels interacting with 0.6% Nanofluid produces the most effective combination. However, when pumping power is relevant, a combination of bulk porous media interacting with 0.3% Nanofluid is observed. The results obtained herein can be applied to the cooling of electronics, or any other system wherein a general inward heat flux is applied.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.202
Threshold uncertainty score0.905

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.239 · 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.

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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHeat and Mass Transfer in Porous MediaFrench-language works237,207