Parametric investigation of drying processes for graphene nanomaterials: Heat and mass transfer analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Graphene nanomaterials, due to their unique properties, require precise drying techniques to preserve both their structural integrity and functional performance. This study presents a comprehensive parametric investigation into the drying processes of graphene, with a focus on the interplay between key parameters such as temperature, airflow velocity, and material thickness. Using advanced computational fluid dynamics (CFD) and molecular dynamics (MD) simulations, we evaluate the effects of these parameters on heat and mass transfer dynamics, moisture removal efficiency, thermal stress distribution, and the overall structural stability of the nanomaterials during the drying process. The results reveal that critical temperature gradients significantly influence moisture diffusion rates, with higher drying temperatures (90°C) enhancing moisture removal but increasing thermal stress to ~200 MPa. In contrast, moderate drying at 70°C minimizes stress (~80 MPa) while maintaining efficient diffusion. The study identifies optimal airflow conditions (1.5–2.5 m/s) that maximize convective heat transfer, ensuring uniform drying and reducing energy consumption. Additionally, thicker graphene layers (>1 mm) exhibit higher thermal resistance, prolonging drying times, whereas thinner layers (<0.5 mm) dry faster but are more susceptible to overheating. These findings provide new insights into the fundamental drying mechanisms of graphene, offering a robust framework for optimizing drying techniques in industrial applications, particularly in nanomaterial processing.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".