Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigExact(10)
In addition, the prediction results is significantly improved compared with the four frequently used conventional correlations.
Comparing with the conventional correlations, the proposed correlation gets high prediction accuracy for different tube diameters and fluids.
A great improvement of performance with respect to five conventional correlations was found for the present modeling.
The simulated thermal resistance agrees quite well with the result of conventional correlations method with the maximum difference of 12%.
The proposed correlations are compared with other conventional correlations and with available experimental data, and show very good agreement.
It is also found that the L/D effect on the entrainment limit for a large-L/D heat pipe differs significantly from the predictions of conventional correlations.
Similar(50)
To obtain valid simulation results on the heat transfer, we used well-matched conventional correlation.
The CoMFA model produced statistically significant results with cross-validated and conventional correlation coefficients of 0.494 and 0.986 respectively.
The CoMFA model produced statistically significant results, with the cross-validated and conventional correlation coefficients being 0.544 and 0.986, respectively.
The values of the leave-one-out cross-validated correlation coefficient q2 and the conventional correlation coefficient r2 for the model are 0.613 and 0.965, respectively.
The combination of steric, electrostatic and hydrophobic fields in CoMSIA gave the best results with cross-validated and conventional correlation coefficients of 0.541 and 0.967 respectively.
Write better and faster with AI suggestions while staying true to your unique style.
Since I tried Ludwig back in 2017, I have been constantly using it in both editing and translation. Ever since, I suggest it to my translators at ProSciEditing.

Justyna Jupowicz-Kozak
CEO of Professional Science Editing for Scientists @ prosciediting.com