The DOI matches its Crossref record; 21 of the 21 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 10 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.
Air-side thermal hydraulic performance of multi-louvered fin aluminum heat exchangers
Overview
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
This experimental study measured air-side heat transfer and pressure drop for 45 multi-louvered fin and flat-tube aluminum heat exchangers over louver angles of 15–29°, fin pitches of 1.0/1.2/1.4 mm, flow depths of 16/20/24 mm, and air-side Reynolds numbers based on louver pitch of 100–600. General Colburn j and Fanning friction f correlations were developed with rms errors of ±14.5% and ±7%, respectively.
Key findings
- Heat transfer coefficients decrease with flow depth and increase with face air velocity; pressure drops increase with flow depth and air velocity. For 24 mm flow depth, heat transfer coefficients increase with louver angle up to a maximum at 27° and then decrease; for 16 mm flow depth they do not change much with louver angle.
- Friction factors increase with louver angle, but the effect decreases for louver angles larger than 21°. For louver angles below 19°, heat transfer coefficients decrease with fin pitch; for louver angles larger than 23°, they increase with fin pitch. The effect of fin spacing on heat transfer is relatively small (2–15%) and depends on flow depth and Reynolds number.
- The j factors for 16 and 20 mm flow depths are similar, while those for 24 mm are smaller; the f factors for 20 and 24 mm flow depths are similar, while those for 16 mm are relatively smaller. The paper attributes this partly to different tube geometry (2 mm for 20 and 24 mm flow depths and 3 mm for 16 mm).
- The j correlation predicts 225 test data points within an rms error of ±14.5%, and the f correlation within ±7%. The f correlation indicates that flow depth is an important parameter for pressure drop; the present and Sunden and Svantesson correlations reflect flow-depth effects, while other compared correlations do not.
Methods
- Tests used a suction-type wind tunnel in a constant-temperature and humidity chamber with 45 multi-louvered fin and flat-tube heat exchangers. Louver pitch, louver length, and fin height were 1.7, 6.4, and 8.15 mm; tested core size was 350×255 mm; tube pitches were 11.15 and 10.15 mm.
- Test conditions were air-side Reynolds numbers based on louver pitch and maximum velocity of 100–600, a constant tube-side water flow rate of 0.32 m³/h, and inlet air and water temperatures of 21°C and 45°C. Data were reduced using the effectiveness-NTU method for cross-flow with both fluids unmixed, and results were expressed as Colburn j and Fanning friction f factors versus Reynolds number based on louver pitch.
- Measurement uncertainties were less than ±3% for heat transfer rate, ±12% for heat transfer coefficients, and ±10% for pressure drops.
Limitations
- The paper states no dedicated limitations section. Stated constraints include that the j and f correlations were developed from 225 test data points for Fp/Lp < 1, with rms errors of ±14.5% and ±7%, and that tests covered only air-side Reynolds numbers of 100–600, a water flow rate of 0.32 m³/h, and inlet air/water temperatures of 21°C/45°C.
- Evident from the text: the 45 samples cover limited geometry ranges (louver angles 15–29°, fin pitches 1.0–1.4 mm, flow depths 16–24 mm), so extrapolation beyond these configurations and test conditions is not supported. Comparisons with other correlations use only two sample heat exchangers (type I and type II), and some explanations for differences among correlations are described as difficult to explain.
- The published record includes an erratum correcting Figs. 9 and 11 of the original paper.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
16 Own result · 7 No basis given · 5 Own interpretation · 4 Own method · 3 Sources not found · 3 Not checked yet · 2 No full text of the sources
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“the effect of louver angle on the heat transfer coefficients depends on flow depth”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For 20 mm flow depth, the effect of louver angle on the heat transfer and pressure drop varies with face velocity. It decreases with face air velocity due to more mixing for larger face velocities.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Pressure drops for all flow depths increase with louver angle”
- Also stated in: § 4. Concluding remarks · p. 10 · plain
“Pressure drops increase with louver angle and flow depth and decrease with increasing fin pitch.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § 4. Concluding remarks · p. 10 · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For 16 mm flow depth, heat transfer coefficients do not change much with louver angle.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These heat transfer behaviors with fin pitch are different, compared to the conventional finned tube heat exchangers.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Pressure drops increase with louver angle and flow depth and decrease with increasing fin pitch.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“for louver angle larger than 23 heat transfer coefficients increase with fin pitch”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The present correlation predicts the test data within rms error of 14.5%.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The correlation and test data are in good agreement within rms error of 7%.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The effect of fin spacing on the pressure drop decreases with louver angle.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“These characteristics are not consistent with the conventional finned tube heat exchangers at low Reynolds numbers [27,28].”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [27] Rich, 1975, The effect of the number of tube rows on heat transfer performance of smooth plate fin-and-tube heat exchangers, ASHRAE Trans.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [28] DeJong, 1998, A complementary experimental and numerical study of the flow and heat transfer in offset strip-fin heat exchangers, J. Heat Transfer source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For a small louver angle ( L a < 19 ), heat transfer coefficients decrease with fin pitch.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These may be caused partly from the different tube geometry ( t =2 mm for F d=20 and 24 mm and t =3 mm for F d=16 mm).”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The uncertainty in the heat transfer rate measurement is less than 3%, since accuracy of the temperature measurement is 0.1 C and accuracy of air and water flow rates are 1 and 2%, respectively.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Correlation for the friction factor f , is derived from 225 test data points for F p/ L p < 1.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The decrease in the heat transfer coefficients in case of larger flow depth and smaller velocity, suggests that the effect of boundary layer growth in the duct-directed portion of the flow is larger than the effect of adding louvers in the louver-directed portion of the flow.”
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“they can be used over a wide variety of louver configurations, especially heat exchangers with larger flow depth.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This suggests that the flow depth is one of the important parameters, which influences the friction factor significantly.”
- Also stated in: § 4. Concluding remarks · p. 10 · hedged
“The f correlation indicates that the flow depth is one of the important parameters, which affects the pressure drop significantly.”
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § 4. Concluding remarks · p. 10 · hedged
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Correlation for the j factor is obtained using 225 test data points from 45 different heat exchanger configurations with F p/ L p < 1”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“the following equation is developed based on test results obtained for the same micro-channel tubes used in this study with a rms error of 3% [21].”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [21] Kim N-H. Private communications, University of Incheon, Incheon, Korea, 1998.
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
In the paper
“suggesting that the heat exchangers with a smaller non-louvered portion have relatively higher heat transfer coefficients.”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [5] Achaichia, 1988, Heat transfer and pressure drop characteristics of flat and louvered plate fin surface, Exp. Thermal and Fluid Sci. source
hedgedcorrelationaln = 15- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- It may state two separate claims as one. 16
- Probably not a substantial claim. 4
- The quote only partly states this claim. 1
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Friction factors increase with louver angle, but the effect of louver angle on the f factor decreases for louver angles larger than 21”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“for 24 mm flow depth, heat transfer coefficients increase with louver angle, have a maximum at 27 , and again decrease with louver angle”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“the pressure drops increase with flow depth and air velocity”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“the heat transfer coefficients decrease with flow depth and increase with face velocity”
- Also stated in: § 4. Concluding remarks · p. 10 · plain
“Heat transfer coefficients decrease with flow depth and increase exponentially with face air velocity.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Also stated in: § 4. Concluding remarks · p. 10 · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The j factor increases with louver angle, but its effect on the j factor varies with flow depth.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“the j factors for F d=16 and 20 mm are similar and for F d=24 mm are smaller”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The effect of louver angle on heat transfer is different according to flow depth, fin spacing and Reynolds number, but the effect of fin spacing is relatively small.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“for F d=24 mm, j factor increases with louver angle for L a 4 27 , and decreases with louver angle for L a >27”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The effect of fin spacing on the heat transfer is relatively small (2-15%) and depends on flow depth and Reynolds number.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“the f factors for F d=20 and 24 mm are similar and for F d=16 mm are relatively smaller than those of larger flow depth”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The present, Sunden and Svantesson's [13] and Chang and Wang's correlations [16] reflect the effect of different flow depths, while the other correlations have the similar j factors for both heat exchangers since the flow depth is not included in their correlations.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [13] Sunden B, Svantesson J. Correlation of j- and f-factors for multilouvered heat transfer surfaces. In: Proceedings of the 3rd UK National Conference on Heat Transfer, 1992. pp. 805-11.
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [16] Chang, 1997, A generalized heat transfer correlation for louvered fin geometry, Int. J. Heat Transfer source
plaindirectn = 2- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“The present and Sunden and Svantesson's [13] correlations reflect the effect of flow depth on the pressure drop, while other correlations do not reflect.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [13] Sunden B, Svantesson J. Correlation of j- and f-factors for multilouvered heat transfer surfaces. In: Proceedings of the 3rd UK National Conference on Heat Transfer, 1992. pp. 805-11.
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The air-side thermal-hydraulic performance of multilouvered fin and flat tube heat exchangers depends on louver geometry such as fin and louver pitches, louver angle, and flow depth.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“All louver geometries were checked before brazing and overall heat exchanger quality after brazing was excellent.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“the general f correlation for the pressure drop is not available in the open literature.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“When Reynolds number and louver angle are small and the ratio of fin pitch to louver pitch is large, friction loss along the flow depth becomes less significant so the airflow becomes duct-directed. This decrease of flow efficiency causes the heat transfer coefficient to decrease.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“indicating that Davenport's correlation [3] is more suitable for the heat exchangers with larger flow depth and does not reflect the effect of flow depth.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [3] Davenport, 1983, Correlation for heat transfer and friction characteristics of louvered fin, AICHE Sym. Ser.
hedgedn = 2- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“A multi-louver fin and flat tube heat exchanger is one of the potential alternatives for replacing conventional finned tube heat exchangers [1].”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [1] Webb RL. Advances in air-cooled heat exchanger technology. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Heat Exchangers for Sustainable Development, Lisbon, Portugal, 1998. p. 677–92.
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Not matched
In the paper
“uncertainties for the heat transfer coefficients and pressure drops were 12 and 10%, respectively [24].”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [24] Moffat, 1988, Describing the uncertainties in experimental results, Exp. Thermal and Fluid Sci. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one. The quote only partly states this claim.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“As can be seen from the previously discussed four correlations, all the correlations by Chang and co-works and Kim and Bullard can only correlate less than 67% (as low as 36.56%) of the current experimental data with a deviation of ± 25%.”
From A heat transfer and friction factor correlation for low air-side Reynolds number applications of compact heat exchangers (1535-RP) (2017) · cites this paper as Kim and Bullard (2002)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Also, Kim and Bullard [61] presented fluid-flow and heat transfer correlations for dry air using 40 configurations.”
From Compact and microchannel heat exchangers: A comprehensive review of air-side friction factor and heat transfer correlations (2018) · cites this paper as [61]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ 2.3. Test condition and method · p. 4
“| 16 | 1.0, 1.2, 1.4 | 11.15 | 8 | 23, 25, 27, 29 |”
§ 3.1. Heat transfer correlation · p. 9
“| I | 23 | 1.4 | 1.7 | 6.4 | 8.15 | 10.15 | 16 | 0.1 |”
Citations
Cites
Describing the uncertainties in experimental results
Moffat, R. J. (1988) · Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science · doi:10.1016/0894-1777(88)90043-x · Cited by 9,860
Fundamentals of heat and mass transfer
Larkin, A. V. (2018) · BSU Digital Library (Belarusian State University) · Cited by 8,034
Fundamentals of Heat and Mass Transfer
Incropera, F. P. (1985) · Cited by 3,679
Kays, W. M., London, A. L., & Eckert, E. R. G. (1960) · Journal of Applied Mechanics · doi:10.1115/1.3644004 · Cited by 2,846
(1978) · Cited by 1,056
A generalized heat transfer correlation for Iouver fin geometry
Chang, Y.-J., & Wang, C.-C. (1997) · International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer · doi:10.1016/0017-9310(96)00116-0 · Cited by 493
Heat transfer and pressure drop characteristics of flat tube and louvered plate fin surfaces
Achaichia, A., & Cowell, T. A. (1988) · Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science · doi:10.1016/0894-1777(88)90032-5 · Cited by 235
Flow structure in the louvered fin heat exchanger geometry
Webb, R. L., & Trauger, P. (1991) · Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science · doi:10.1016/0894-1777(91)90065-y · Cited by 119
Air Side Performance of Brazed Aluminum Heat Exchangers
Chang, Y., & Wang, C. (1996) · Enhanced heat transfer/Journal of enhanced heat transfer · doi:10.1615/jenhheattransf.v3.i1.20 · Cited by 93
Research works printed but not linked: 8
- Webb RL. Advances in air-cooled heat exchanger technology. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Heat Exchangers for Sustainable Development, Lisbon, Portugal, 1998. p. 677–92.
- Davenport CJ. Heat transfer and fluid flow in louvered triangular ducts. PhD thesis, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Lanchester Polytechnic, 1980.
- Davenport, 1983, Correlation for heat transfer and friction characteristics of louvered fin, AICHE Sym. Ser., 79, 19
- Achaichia A. The performance of louvered tube-and-plate fin heat transfer surface. PhD thesis, Department of Mechanical and Production Engineering, Brighton Polytechnic, 1987.
- Webb, 1992, Air-side performance of enhanced brazed aluminum heat exchangers, ASHRAE Trans., 98, 391
- Rugh, 1992, A study of a very compact heat exchanger used for passenger compartment heating in automobiles, ASME Symp. Ser. HTD-Vol. 201, 15-24
- Sunden B, Svantesson J. Correlation of j- and f-factors for multilouvered heat transfer surfaces. In: Proceedings of the 3rd UK National Conference on Heat Transfer, 1992. pp. 805-11.
- Rich, 1973, The effect of fin spacing of the heat transfer and friction performance of multi-row, smooth plate fin-and-tube heat exchangers, ASHRAE Trans., 79, 137
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Fundamental process and system design issues in CO2 vapor compression systems
Kim, M.-H. (2003) · Progress in Energy and Combustion Science · doi:10.1016/j.pecs.2003.09.002 · Cited by 733
“The heat transfer coefficients and the pressure drops for the wet conditions revealed the importance of the role of condensate drainage [119].”
BackgroundSelf-citationHeat transfer enhancement in fin-and-tube heat exchangers – A review on different mechanisms
Sadeghianjahromi, A., & Wang, C.-C. (2021) · Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.rser.2020.110470 · Cited by 240
Heat transfer and pressure drop correlations for the multi-louvered fin compact heat exchangers
Dong, J., Chen, J., Chen, Z., Zhang, W., & Zhou, Y. (2007) · Energy Conversion and Management · doi:10.1016/j.enconman.2006.11.023 · Cited by 173
Qasem, N. A. A., & Zubair, S. M. (2018) · Energy Conversion and Management · doi:10.1016/j.enconman.2018.06.104 · Cited by 134
Lei, Y., He, Y.-L., Tian, L., Chu, P., & Tao, W.-Q. (2010) · Chemical Engineering Science · doi:10.1016/j.ces.2009.10.017 · Cited by 123
Metadata
- Authors
- Kim, M.-H., & Bullard, C. W.
- Affiliations
- University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign (US)
- Corresponding author
- Kim, Man-Hoe
- ORCID
- Kim, Man-Hoe
- Venue
- International Journal of Refrigeration
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2002-05
- Volume
- 25
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 390-400
- ISSN
- 0140-7007 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2066694433
- Semantic Scholar
- 49cfbe56084c4f5d7d84db303ee3d9a6eff9b535
- Cited by
- 280
- References
- 21
- Citations by year
- 2026: 12 · 2025: 21 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 17 · 2017: 26 · 2016: 21 · 2015: 20 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 12
- FWCI
- 10.64
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- International Journal of Refrigeration (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Mechanical Engineering › Heat Transfer and Optimization
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Mechanical Engineering › Heat Transfer Mechanisms
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Computational Mechanics › Heat transfer and supercritical fluids
- Keywords
- louvered fin heat exchanger, aluminum heat exchangers, air-side heat transfer, pressure drop, fin angle, fin spacing, flow depth, Colburn j-factor, Fanning friction factor, heat transfer coefficient, cross-flow heat exchanger, effectiveness-NTU method, flat tube heat exchanger, air-to-water heat exchanger
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-11-05, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-11-05 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
