MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408218512 · doi:10.1016/j.aitf.2025.100006

Impact of submerged substrate roughness on nanofluid swirling impinging jet arrays

2025· article· en· W4408218512 on OpenAlexaff
M.D. Tanvir Khan, Sudipta Debnath, Zahir U. Ahmed, A. Kaur, Kuljeet Singh

Bibliographic record

VenueAI Thermal Fluids · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHeat Transfer Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Prince Edward Island
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNanofluidJet (fluid)Materials scienceSubstrate (aquarium)MechanicsSurface finishSurface roughnessComposite materialNanotechnologyPhysicsGeologyNanoparticle

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Analyzing turbulent swirling jet impingement poses significant challenges, especially when incorporating nanofluids into the analysis, which further exacerbates the complexity. The limited body of research in this specific domain primarily focuses on turbulent swirling/non-swirling air or water jets, or laminar-impinging nanofluid jets. This study delves into investigating the thermos-hydrodynamic behavior of low-concentration non-aqueous nanofluid swirling jets impingement on submerged heated rough surfaces for high Reynolds number. Ethylene glycol-based aluminum oxide [CH 2 OH) 2 +Al 2 O 3 ] nanofluid is considered along with water for different controlling parameters including swirl intensity (0 ∼ 1), and surface roughness height (0 ∼ 1500 μ m ). The findings reveal that (CH 2 OH) 2 +Al 2 O 3 exhibits superior heat transfer performance compared to water, attributed to enhanced nanoparticle resolution in (CH 2 OH) 2 . A rough surface enhances heat transfer by disrupting the thermal boundary layers and increasing the interaction area between a hot solid surface and a cold fluid. However, excessive roughness can impede heat transfer. Swirling flow contributes to more uniform cooling by intensifying turbulence and inducing recirculation zones with stronger vortices, particularly noticeable on rough surfaces. Implementing a staggered array configuration improves cooling performance by minimizing interference between jets. Notably, heat transfer rates are higher at shorter impinging distances, and high swirl conditions generate increased turbulence and turbulence kinetic energy. A correlation is developed between various controlling parameters and the average Nusselt number. Finally, through Gaussian process regression (GPR), this study achieved a highly accurate predictive model for local Nusselt number estimation in swirling nanofluid jet cooling systems, reaching an optimal cross-validation root mean squared error (RMSE) of 0.04342 and a final test RMSE of 0.0596.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAI Thermal FluidsSame topicHeat Transfer MechanismsFrench-language works237,207