Preliminary CFD Analysis on the Effects of Conjugate Problems for a Smooth Duct and a Kagome Lattice Channel: Average Results for Heat Transfer and Pressure Losses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The compactness of electronic devices and mechanical components and the constant increase in power density pose significant challenges in thermal management.These geometric constraints imply the reduced length of the channels dedicated to their cooling, hence the need to properly analyze the conjugate heat transfer problem and develop new innovative heat dissipation systems, such as lattice structures.This paper aims to numerically investigate the thermo-fluid dynamics properties of a short empty duct 80 mm long, named K0, with a cross-section of 15x5 mm in two different flow conditions: fully developed and developing flow.Then, the same channel is equipped with a Kagome-truss lattice with a truss diameter of 0.8 mm, named K1 and characterized by a porosity 휙=87%, and the analysis is repeated for both outflow conditions.The thermal fluid is air, and the operating Reynolds numbers range from 2852 to 17115 for all the studied cases, thus falling within the transitional flow regime.Results for the smooth duct show its sensitivity to flow conditions, revealing a substantial increase in the Nusselt number by up to 13% at the cost of a higher friction factor, as is expected from existing studies in the literature.On the contrary, no significant variation in friction factor and Nusselt number is observed for the K1, suggesting that its thermo-fluid dynamic properties are more influenced by the lattice structure rather than the flow profile.Finally, the two ducts are compared in terms of energy efficiency, evaluated as Nu/λ 1/3 , revealing that at the same Reynolds number, the efficiency of the Kagome duct is up to 2.2 and 2.4 times greater than that of the empty duct in fully developed and developing flow condition respectively.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".