Numerical evaluation of the impact of using spiral innovative turbulator on improving the thermal performance of a helical double-pipe heat exchanger
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Due to the necessity of performing thermal operations, heat exchangers are widely employed in many different areas. The heat transfer and fluid flow within a spiral double-pipe heat exchanger fitted with a novel turbulator were numerically assessed in this work. The presented novel turbulator is a curved tube with holes incorporated into its thickness and spiral ribs on its inner wall. The turbulator wall's curved rib design produces secondary flows at the turbulator output when fluid flows through the tube and the perforations. A commercial CFD tool, based on the finite volume technique, was used to conduct the numerical simulations. The fluid flow regime is turbulence (Re = 8,000 – 14,000). Two sections make up this work. The first portion looked at how the hydrothermal behavior of the fluid flow inside the proposed turbulator was affected by the angle at which the curved ribs rotated. For this angle, three values were considered: θ = 30, 90, and 150°, and the outcomes were contrasted with those of a plain spiral double-tube heat exchanger (turbulator not included). Then, the number of embedded holes in the turbulator's thickness changes in the second part, and three values of N = 12, 16, and 20 were considered. According to the first part's findings, the model exhibiting θ = 90° had a greater thermal performance factor at Re = 10,000. This model has a more noteworthy thermal performance factor than the models with θ = 150 and θ = 30° by approximately 15.62 % and 22.65 %, respectively (at Re = 10,000). Furthermore, the second section's numerical findings showed that the model with N = 20 had more extraordinary thermal performance at Re = 10,000. Model N = 20 has a thermal performance factor of about 16.93 % and 17.55 % greater than models N = 16 and N = 12. Within the proposed heat exchanger, the recommended turbulator produced a sizable rotating flow, and including embedded holes significantly reduced the pressure drop this kind of turbulator causes.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".