Next Article in Journal
A Portable, Negative-Pressure Actuated, Dynamically Tunable Microfluidic Droplet Generator
Next Article in Special Issue
Experimental Study on Capillary Microflows in High Porosity Open-Cell Metal Foams
Previous Article in Journal
Review of Optical Thermometry Techniques for Flows at the Microscale towards Their Applicability to Gas Microflows
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Numerical Study of Thermal Enhancement in a Single- and Double-Layer Microchannel Heat Sink with Different Ribs

Micromachines 2022, 13(11), 1821; https://doi.org/10.3390/mi13111821
by Miaolong Cao *, Shi Cao, Jincheng Zhao and Jiayi Zhu
Reviewer 1:
Reviewer 2:
Micromachines 2022, 13(11), 1821; https://doi.org/10.3390/mi13111821
Submission received: 21 September 2022 / Revised: 15 October 2022 / Accepted: 20 October 2022 / Published: 25 October 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Heat and Mass Transfer in Micro/Nanochannels)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Reviewer comments:

1. Explain the research gap observed and the novelty of the work clearly in the introduction.

2. Clarify the sentence “the substrate is 0.5mm” in section 2, page number 3.

3. In section 4.2, figure 11 shows the variation of the Nusselt number and thermal resistance

with the Reynolds number but the explanation is given for pressure drop distribution, please

correct it.

4. In section 4.3, explain the reasons for the mentioned effects.

5. In the title and abstract, the authors mentioned about double-layered heat sink but in the

physical model and the results section nothing showed about the double-layered heat sinks,

are the segments of heat sinks having the rib considered as a double layer? Please clarify.

6. In the literature, so much work is available on micro-channel heat sinks with advances in

geometry, fins, ribs, working fluid, jet impingement, secondary flows, etc., how the present

work is different and improved from existing works.

7. The heading of section 3.3 is “grid independence and model validation” but nothing is

mentioned about model validation, please correct it.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

请看附件

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

I have several comments and concerns on the manuscript in the attached file. Based on these concerns it is recommended that the paper need major revision before considered for publication.

Comments for author File: Comments.docx

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Novelty is missing

Reviewer 2 Report

The authors has made required corrections in the manuscript. So, it can be considered for publication in the journal.

Back to TopTop