MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413806321 · doi:10.1051/e3sconf/202564702002

Performance Enhancement of Convective Heat Transfer in Double Pipe Heat Exchangers using Different Vortex Generators’ Configurations

2025· article· en· W4413806321 on OpenAlexaff
Mouhammad El Hassan, Abdullah Y. Al Rajeh, Nikolay Bukharin, Yara Sami H. ALGHANNAM, Jawaher Albakawi

Bibliographic record

VenueE3S Web of Conferences · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHeat Transfer and Optimization
Canadian institutionsSAIT Polytechnic
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVortex generatorHeat transfer enhancementHeat exchangerConvective heat transferMaterials scienceMechanicsHeat transferVortexConvectionMicro heat exchangerPlate fin heat exchangerHeat transfer coefficientThermodynamicsPlate heat exchangerPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Double-pipe heat exchangers (DPHEs) are important devices used for efficient heat transfer between fluids, affecting system energy Performance. This study explores different configurations for the integration of vortex generators (VGs) into DPHEs to enhance the convective heat transfer. VGs create vortical structures that enhance mixing between the near wall and outer flows, thus improving the convective heat transfer mechanism. Different VG configurations (8, 12, and 16 rows on the inner tube of the DPHE) were analyzed using CFD simulations, focusing on key performance metrics like heat transfer rates, heat transfer coefficient, effectiveness, and pressure drop. Results showed that the heat transfer enhancement increases with the number of VGs rows, with a heat transfer coefficient rises by 7.61% and effectiveness by 7.14% with 16 VG rows, for the counter-flow DPHE configuration. The parallel flow DPHE showed significantly higher enhancements, with 11.47% increase in heat transfer rate and a 9.98% improvement in effectiveness. This research underscores the potential of VGs for enhancing heat transfer in industrial heat exchangers and provides a framework for future thermal system optimization.

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 score0.150
Threshold uncertainty score0.619

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.222 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueE3S Web of ConferencesSame topicHeat Transfer and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207