Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Materials Today: Proceedings

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/matpr

Analysis of gyroid heat exchangers for superconducting electric motors

Oliver Bonner-Hutton a, Bastian Busch a, Yifan Lv a, Alan Caughley b, Rodney Badcock c, Grant Lumsden c,
Hubertus Weijers c, Sarat Singamneni a
a
Auckland University of Technology, Auckland, New Zealand
b
Callaghan Innovation, Christchurch, New Zealand
c
Paihau-Robinson Research Institute, PO Box 33436, Lower Hutt 5046, New Zealand

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: In this study, gyroid structured heat exchangers are critically analysed in a counterflow arrangement.
Available online xxxx These are to be analysed to measure their performance in the case of superconducting electric motors
using cryogenic fluids at low temperatures. Gyroid structures are useful in heat exchanger design, as they
Keywords: offer more varied and complex geometries that can optimise heat transfer to be more efficient, compared
Heat exchanger to traditional heat exchanger designs. The manufacture of these heat exchangers is made possible using
Additive manufacturing additive manufacturing, as the complex shape of these structures cannot be made through traditional
Superconducting electric motor
methods. Simulation analysis results of the gyroid structures are compared to a basic tubular counterflow
FEA
Cryogenic
heat exchanger arrangement, which can be made from more traditional methods. Physical printing of the
model is also demonstrated to show its practicality. The comparison of results elucidated the overall
effectiveness of the gyroid structures, and how geometries can optimise overall energy transfer, consid-
ering heat transfer from fluids, and pressure loss from fluid flow.
Copyright Ó 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the 16th Global Congress on
Manufacturing and Management 2022. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://crea-
tivecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

1. Introduction Heat exchanger geometry is a key factor in its performance.

This project arises from a need for high performance, high effi-
ciency heat exchangers for use in superconducting electric motors
using cryogenic fluids. Due to the high energy requirements, and
low margins for energy loss, heat exchangers in superconducting
electric motors must be highly efficient. This means they must
transfer the most heat as possible, while minimising overall weight
and energy expenditure through flow losses within the heat
exchanger, which is characterised by the pressure loss from inlet
to outlet [1].
Superconducting electric motors are electric motors that use
HTS material, which can be used in both stator windings and rotor
cores of the motor, providing great benefits compared to classical
synchronous motors. These benefits can include a higher power
density, reduced mass, increased efficiency going beyond 99 %,
low noise and better stability [2]. Superconducting electric motors
can be used for aircraft propulsion, as seen in Grilli et. al (2020) [3]
and Kovalev et. al (2019) [4]. This is especially useful for the air-
craft industry due to goals of lowering emissions and providing
the high energy efficiency that aircraft require.
With traditional manufacturing methods, heat exchanger geome-
try is very limited. Heat exchangers using simple tubular or fin
arrangements are common, as they can be made by drilling,
machining, extruding etc [5]. This is where additive manufacturing
becomes very useful, as it is not constrained by the typical manu-
facturing methods [6]. Typical additive manufacturing methods
include, but are not limited to, powder bed systems, powder feed
systems and wire feed systems, which make objects from 3D
model data, usually layer upon layer [7]. This opens many more
possibilities for heat exchanger geometries and arrangements.
The type of heat exchangers that are analysed in this project are
cellular matrix heat exchangers. These heat exchangers use TPMS
(Triply Periodic Minimal Surfaces) to form the complex flow
geometries for the convective heat transfer of the fluid to occur.
These are continuous free form surfaces that can be described by
various trigonometric functions. These surfaces are useful in heat
exchanger design due to their high surface area to volume ratio,
thermal dispersion, effective thermal conductivity, and interfacial
heat transfer coefficient [8]. The specific TPMS solid-network struc-
ture that will be analysed in this project is the Gyroid sheet-
network. The MATLAB code adopted from a previous work pro-

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2023.03.780
2214-7853/Copyright Ó 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the 16th Global Congress on Manufacturing and Management 2022.
This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

Please cite this article as: O. Bonner-Hutton, B. Busch, Y. Lv et al., Analysis of gyroid heat exchangers for superconducting electric motors, Materials Today:
Proceedings, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2023.03.780
O. Bonner-Hutton, B. Busch, Y. Lv et al.
Nomenclature
AM Additive Manufacturing
HX Heat Exchanger
CAD Computer Aided Design
CFD Computational fluid dynamics
TPMS Triply Periodic Minimal Surface
SLM Selective laser Melting
HTS High Temperature Superconducting
duces the surfaces with an enclosure for the fluid flow, and param-
eterises the geometry to independently control geometrical factors
such as thickness, thickness variance, repeatability etc.
Inspiration is drawn from other papers that have conducted
similar analysis as this project. Rasouli et. al (2022) [9] compares
theoretical and experimental results of micro-channel AM polymer
heat exchangers and compares that to a more traditional finned
tube HX. Tiwari et. al (2019) [10] designs a novel tubular manifold
microchannel heat exchanger and experimentally tests it for ther-
mal and hydraulic performance, aiming to deliver superior perfor-
mance through improved heat transfer while keeping cost and size
down. Chekurov et. al (2019) [11] designs a narrow multi-channel
HX with 144 flow channels and two fluids, and tests it by measur-
ing the heat transfer between the two fluids in a counterflow
arrangement and verifies the experimental results with analytical
calculations. Ma et. al (2019) [12] considers using additively man-
ufactured gyroid structures as bone scaffolds for bioengineering
use, but it tests the gyroid structures flow properties using CFD
with a fluid volume running through the gyroid matrix.
With the ability to create the surface structures in MATLAB,
adjust any geometrical parameters and export them in STL format,
finite element fluid analysis of the structures is possible. ANSYS
Fluent will be used for the CFD analysis of the heat exchangers
and using ANSYS Space claim, will import the structures and adjust
them for different design iterations for the geometry preparation
for meshing. A counter flow heat exchanger arrangement was
decided on for testing, as that is commonly used in such applica-
tions. A basic heat exchanger design was also created using tubular
holes in a block for the fluid flow, which will be compared to the
gyroid heat exchanger in the simulation results. From simulating
with different variables such as flow velocity, the data from each
simulation is recorded and compared to give valuable information
on the performance of the gyroid heat exchanger, compared to the
basic heat exchanger. Analytical calculations are also done to com-
pare to the numerical results and prove their accuracy.
Another aim is production of a physical model, which demon-
strates the practicability of these designs, then testing of the phys-
ical model. This test would aim to use hot and cold water as the
working fluid, with thermocouples at either end to measure the
temperature difference. This would give further data to compare
to the analytical and numerical results gained and give further evi-
dence of the design’s practical use for the given application in
superconducting electric motors.
The outcomes of this project give numerical and analytical
results of the gyroid and basic HX performance, which show that
the gyroid HX design outperforms the basic design in terms of
overall energy efficiency. This gives evidence that the gyroid struc-
tures can be useful in superconducting electric motor design where
high energy efficiency is essential. A physical model was also pro-
duced through the metal 3D printers at AUT, which show that
these designs can be physically produced and used practically,
however further work is needed to develop this. Due to the time
2
Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx
List of equations
1. cosðxÞsinðyÞ þ cosðyÞsinðzÞ þ cosðzÞsinðxÞ
2. m_ ¼ qVA
3. W flow ¼ PV_
4. Q_ ¼ hAs DT LMTD
5. Q_ ¼ mC
_ p ðT e  T i Þ
constraints of the project, analysis of multiple geometries with
varying geometrical parameters was not completed, so an opti-
mised gyroid geometry is still to be determined. This was due to
the meshing process involving many errors which took a large
amount of time through trial and error to fix. Physical testing
was not feasible either due to time constraints, however both
shortcomings offer opportunities for development in further itera-
tions of this project.
2. Design of heat exchanger geometry
2.1. Gyroid structure HX design
To simulate the gyroid structure, first the structure needs to be
created and imported into the ANSYS CAD software SpaceClaim.
MATLAB code builds the TPMS gyroid surface from scratch, based
on a certain trigonometric function. For the case of the gyroid pat-
tern, the function is defined by equation 1. The gyroid structure
consists of walls that oscillate in the direction of fluid flow, with
the wall direction changing so that the fluid spreads out both lat-
erally and axially, increasing the area for convectional heat transfer
and reducing frictional energy loss due to the smooth pattern. In
the case of heat transfer between two fluids, in either crossflow
or counterflow, the inter-mingling between fluids is extensive,
which creates even better opportunities for heat transfer.
The MATLAB code works by using Triply Periodic Minimal sur-
faces, which are mathematically defined structures described by
various trigonometric functions. They are triply periodic, meaning
they repeat in 3 dimensions, and are minimal surfaces meaning
that they have the smallest possible area for some given constraint,
and have zero mean curvature meaning the sum of the principal
curvatures are zero [13].
The code first creates an initial isosurface using a mesh grid and
the TPMS equation. Then building on the initial surface a solid
structure is made by computing capping geometry using the func-
tion isocaps. Then to create the sheet network, which is repeated to
the given size constraints, the thickness values are set, and the
structure is built out upon the surface. The code is adjustable so
that certain geometrical features are parametrised and can be
easily changed. An enclosure can also be added to the structure
within MATLAB, which encloses the geometry so that fluid can
flow. Fig. 1 illustrates the created MATLAB structures with and
without the enclosures.
The enclosed gyroid structure built in MATLAB is exported as an
STL into ANSYS SpaceClaim and is the final design iteration, which
is used for the meshing and finite element analysis. Previous iter-
ations were developed, however this design was the most suitable
for the meshing stage, as this structure has a better mesh sizing
which allows ANSYS Fluent to mesh more easily. The Arrangement
is counterflow, where the fluids flow parallel to each other. The
dimensions are what were defined in MATLAB and set to
50 mm
50 mm
100 mm. This is a scaled-up version of what
O. Bonner-Hutton, B. Busch, Y. Lv et al.
Fig. 1. (a) Gyroid structure without enclosure (b) Gyroid structure with enclosure.
Fig. 2. (a) Final gyroid structure design (b) Fluid volume 1 (c) Fluid volume 2.
would realistically be used in a superconducting electric motor but
was chosen so that a physical model could be additively manufac-
tured with the printing technology available. Fig. 2 shows the HX
structure along with the fluid domains, which are also defined in
SpaceClaim.
2.2. Basic HX design
The basic HX design is based off a tube block design, where mul-
tiple tubes are set in a block of the same dimensions as the Gyroid
HX (50 mm
50 mm
100 mm). The number and size of the tubes
was determined by equating the total inlet areas for the two fluids
to that of the gyroid structure. This would ensure that the mass
flow rate of each structure would be equal, which is a critical factor
in the overall rate of heat transfer, shown in equation 2. The diam-
eter comes out to 6.89 mm for each individual tube, with each fluid
using 18 tubes each. The tubes are ordered in an alternating
arrangement, with each tube alternating between hot and cold flu-
ids, so that for example a hot fluid tube has four adjacent cold fluid
tubes to transfer heat to, which maximises heat transfer. The HX
block structure is shown in Fig. 3, along with the fluid
arrangement.
Here the fluids flowing in each tube is separated, so there is not
just one fluid volume for the hot and cold fluids, which is different
compared to the gyroid HX. If this HX design were to be put into
practise, these separated fluids would need to be redirected from
a single fluid volume into the individual channels. This isn’t neces-
sary for analysis purposes, but if a practical model were to be
designed, a redirection method similar to that seen in Chekurov
et. al (2019) [8] could be implemented.
This basic HX design is also a scaled up verison of what would
be used in a superconducting electric motor, however this struc-
ture is to show a HX that is able to be manufactured with tradi-
tional methods, for example by drilling the tubes. This
3
Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx
arrangement of multiple tubes is actually an improvement on
one of the more traditional and common heat exchanger arrange-
ments, which is a shell and tube design or a dual-pipe heat exchan-
ger design. But for the purposes of time these designs will not be
included in analysis, but we can assume that they would have even
less of a performance than this multiple tube arrangment.
3. Additive manufacturing of the gyroid heat exchanger
This CAD model was 3D printed using the Renishaw AM 400
machine at AUT. This 3D printer uses Selective Laser Melting
(SLM) technology to melt and fuse metallic powders with a power-
ful laser beam. This physical model gives insight on the practicality
of printing these geometries for use as heat exchangers. Fig. 4
shows the outcome of the physical printing, with the product being
sectioned in the middle to show the interior geometry. Support
structures which can be seen as small columns occupy some of
the space in the design. This is due to the nature of using SLM
for 3D printing of metals, where any overhanging faces need to
be supported as the process of melting the powder layers is done.
This is not ideal and shows the restrictions that still are in place
with metal AM technology. Design for manufacturing is common
for traditional manufacturing methods, but still needs to be imple-
mented in AM designs, especially with metal 3D printing. There are
opportunities to try different printing approaches, for example
printing at different angles. However, the restriction of SLM print-
ing still stands, as it is the most widely used and available technol-
ogy for metal printing. Otherwise, looking to implement the
support structures into the design is an option, or to change the
geometry so that support structures are not needed.
O. Bonner-Hutton, B. Busch, Y. Lv et al. Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx

Fig. 3. (a) Basic HX structure (b) Basic HX fluid arrangement.

Fig. 4. Physical gyroid structure 3D print outcome.

Fig. 5. (a) Surface mesh of gyroid structure (b) Volume mesh of gyroid structure.

4. Finite element analysis
4.1. Meshing
Meshing of the 3D CAD models is an essential stage of the anal-
ysis process. These surface and volume mesh, shown in Fig. 5, will
be used in the finite element analysis approach in the simulation
stage. ANSYS Fluent will be used for the meshing, as well as the
simulation, and has a seamless transition from its CAD software
SpaceClaim to its meshing and simulation stages. The meshing
stage uses a workflow which is designed to be straightforward
and easy to use to achieve the proper meshing. The fault-tolerant
meshing workflow is used to mesh the gyroid structure, as the
geometry given is complex and the meshing is still inconsistent
and can contain faults, as this section will describe. However, with
the basic HX the watertight workflow is used, which is a simpler
workflow. This can be used as the basic HX meshes much more
easily than the gyroid as the geometry is not nearly as complex.
The process of meshing the gyroid model had many different
errors, and often the cause of the errors was not at all clear. This
heavily influenced the CAD design that was discussed in the previ-
ous chapter. Firstly, the fault tolerant workflow must be used, as
the complex geometry creates faceted bodies that are very com-
plex and creates scoped sizing errors when Fluent tries to create
the surface mesh. On top of this, often the volume mesh would
contain errors, where the cell zones would not be recognised prop-
erly. This, as well as the long processing times to create the large
mesh files, meant a long process of trial and error to try to get
the meshing to work for each geometry. This meant that one of
the aims of testing different geometrical parameters of the gyroid
structure, such as repeatability, thickness, thickness variation
etc., was not able to be done. Because for each different geometry
a new mesh needed to be created, which was too great a task

4
O. Bonner-Hutton, B. Busch, Y. Lv et al.
within the time constraints. Perhaps other meshing options than
Fluent need to be explored when wanting to achieve this, or it
could be beneficial to define the fluid regions within a different
software than Fluent or SpaceClaim, which could produce a less
complex facet body for Fluent to mesh over.
4.2. Analysis
ANSYS Fluent is used for the CFD analysis of the HX designs. The
aim is to get data which shows the overall energy efficiency of the
heat exchangers and then analyse them over a various range of
fluid velocities to compare them. Fluent is a powerful software that
can allow us to do this. The key data that will be analysed is the
pressure loss from the inlet to outlet, which will then be calculated
to find the flow work required to pump the fluids, and the overall
heat transfer rate. These two values will be used to compare the
overall energy transferred into the system, which will be used to
compare the performance of the gyroid and basic HXs. Fig. 6 shows
the gyroid HX when imported to the simulation stage.
Other pieces of data such as the time to steady state will be
monitored and compared, and visual representations such as tem-
perature contours of the fluid and solid regions are displayed to see
how the fluids are interacting. Important values such as the con-
vection heat transfer coefficients will be measured and compared
to the analytical calculations. The comparison of analytical and
numerical data will prove accuracy of the analysis.
5. Results and discussion
5.1. Results
The results that are presented aim to compare the performance
of the Gyroid and Basic HXs. To compare the two, the values of
overall heat transfer are from the hot fluid to the solid surface of
the heat exchanger, and the pressure loss is for the hot fluid. Values
were recorded for each simulation. For the case with water as the
fluid, five velocities from 0.1 to 0.5 m/s were analysed and plotted.
The pressure loss shown in Fig. 7 (left) is in pascals, and is the
pressure measured at the inlets of the HXs. This accounts for the
loss in pressure over the HX, as the pressure at the outlets are at
zero (gauge pressure). The data shows that at lower velocities
(0.1 and 0.2 m/s) the pressure losses are similar, with the basic
HX having slightly less pressure loss, while at higher velocities
the pressure loss in the gyroid becomes much higher. The overall
increased pressure loss of the gyroid structure is expected, as it
has a winding flow path with causes more flow resistance. The dif-
ference in pressure loss being less at lower velocities could be due
Fig. 6. Gyroid structure imported in Fluent solution stage.
5
Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx
to lower turbulence within the gyroid structure at the lower
velocities.
The pressure loss is then converted to flow work through equa-
tion 3 [14]. This is the total amount of energy that is required to
pump the fluid through the heat exchanger and is shown in
Fig. 7 (right). This follows the same trend as the pressure loss as
it is directly proportional it.
The overall heat transfer data results, shown in Fig. 8 (left),
shows that the gyroid HX has a much higher heat transfer value
than the basic HX at each inlet velocity. The rise in Heat transfer
rate also increases monotonically for both, which is what we can
expect.
The overall energy transfer, shown in Fig. 8 (right) with Watts
as the unit, is equal to the overall heat transfer minus the flow
work. This gives a measure of the performance of the HXs based
on the heat transfer and pressure loss, which are the two most
important factors in a heat exchanger’s performance. The gyroid
HX has a much higher overall energy transfer rate and therefore
higher performance at all velocities. This shows that the overall
heat transfer in these simulations is much higher than the flow
work required to pump the fluid, so it has a greater impact on
the performance of the HX.
Analytical calculations are done using the forced internal con-
vection equations found in Cengel and Ghajar [15], which details
this type of flow through cylinders. It uses various derived and
empirically driven equations, which aim to calculate the overall
surface heat transfer from the cylinder. The calculations use two
methods, one which uses the convection heat transfer coefficient
which itself needs to be calculated and can be compared to the val-
ues simulated in Fluent, the equation for which is equation 4. The
other uses the specific heat capacity, using equation 5. These calcu-
lations are done for one of the channels in the basic HX. This will
give an idea of the accuracy of the numerical results from Fluent
and give further theoretical knowledge on what is influencing
the performance of the heat exchangers.
The results of the analytical calculations are shown in Table 1,
which includes the values simulated in Fluent. These results are
comparable to those obtained from the Fluent simulations and
serve to validate the numerical results.
5.2. Discussion
The results clearly show that the gyroid heat exchanger pro-
duces more overall heat transfer between the two fluids than the
basic heat exchanger. However, it also produces more pressure
loss, which is not ideal. These are the two key parameters in heat
exchanger performance, which is why this was a focus of the anal-
ysis. The overall energy transferred into the system is a way to
account for both key parameters, to evaluate the overall perfor-
mance of the HXs. In these simulations, the amount of heat energy
transferred between the fluids is much greater than the energy
required to pump the fluids, resulting in the gyroid heat exchanger
performing much better overall in terms of efficient energy trans-
fer. This is a good outcome and proves the effectiveness of these
designs. The analytical calculations that were performed gives
results that are comparable to the simulated results, which show
that the results can be deemed valid.
The gyroid structure was expected to produce both a higher
overall heat transfer and pressure loss. It is built off a TPMS surface,
which have high surface area to volume ratios, and a high level of
fluid interaction, due to the weaving nature of the fluid paths. An
important point is that the basic HX design that was analysed
had a high level of surface area to volume ratio itself, even higher
than the gyroid structure that was analysed. This makes this design
even better than the most simple and common heat exchanger
designs such as the shell and tube or double pipe heat exchanger
O. Bonner-Hutton, B. Busch, Y. Lv et al. Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx

Fig. 7. (left) Pressure loss (right) Flow work.

Fig. 8. (left) Overall heat transfer (right) Overall energy transfer.

Table 1
Analytical validation of numerical results.
Analytical Simulated
results results
Heat transfer (Q_ ) 268.6 W 226 W
Convective heat transfer coefficient 5568mW2 K 5478
m2 K
(h)
designs, which could have also been useful to compare to the two
designs that were analysed in this study. Thus, one of the main rea-
sons that the gyroid heat exchanger had higher levels of heat trans-
fer was due to turbulence promotion and thin-walled interactions
between the hot and cold fluids, as the geometry has a porous nat-
ure where the fluid channels weave in between each other, as com-
pared to the basic heat exchanger design which only has simple
straight tubed channels. This can be seen through the difference
in heat transfer coefficients of the two designs, where the gyroid
has much higher values. It is likely due to the weaving geometry
that produces a higher turbulence in the fluids, which directly
increases the heat transfer coefficients at the solid–fluid boundary
layer. This benefit, however, also naturally increases the resistance
to flow, as the oscillating gyroid pattern creates bends in the fluid
path. This is seen in the larger pressure loss, which means a higher
energy requirement to pump the fluid which is energy otherwise
lost.
The geometrical parameters of the gyroid structure that was
analysed was arbitrarily chosen. One the project aims at first was
W
to also adjust the parameters and compare them to find an opti-
mised geometry, using the same criteria that was used in these
tests. However due to the inconsistent meshing errors encountered
for the complex gyroid structures, only these base parameters
were tested. This leaves room for the gyroid parameters to be fully
optimised and possibly create a heat exchanger with even greater
efficiency. There are also opportunities to test the structures with
helium at cryogenic temperature more thoroughly, along with
scaled down dimensions that would realistically be used in a
superconducting electric motor. At the cryogenic level, the fluid
properties are very important, as they can vary greatly even over
a temperature range of a few degrees, so modelling these fluid
properties accurately is essential.

6
O. Bonner-Hutton, B. Busch, Y. Lv et al.
6. Conclusion
Overall, in this project knowledge from reviewed literature was
used to successfully design a heat exchanger arrangement using
the complex gyroid geometry and conduct finite element analysis
on it, while also producing a physical printed version of the design.
The results clearly demonstrated the better effectiveness of these
designs that make use of additive manufacturing, compared to
the more basic designs that can be manufactured through tradi-
tional methods. The counterflow gyroid heat exchanger design
was iterated until it could be meshed properly in ANSYS Fluent.
The basic heat exchanger uses an alternating counterflow arrange-
ment of straight tube channels. The design mas made into a version
for 3D printing using the selective laser melting metal AM technol-
ogy at AUT, which shows its ability to be practically manufactured.
The Finite element analysis was also performed in ANSYS Fluent,
where the performance of each heat exchanger design was evalu-
ated based on the overall heat transfer and pressure loss. The
results confirm the greater performance and efficiency of the
gyroid heat exchanger design, which are also validated based on
additional analytical calculations. The key goal of analysing the
gyroid heat exchanger design for its effectiveness for use in super-
conducting electric motors has been met, as well as showing that
these designs can be implemented practically for use in the
intended area of heat exchangers. However, geometrical optimisa-
tion of the gyroid parameters, along with design alterations for
better 3D printing of the physical model and then testing of phys-
ical models was not conducted in this project. Though these are
still important aims which can be worked on in the future.
Data availability
No data was used for the research described in the article.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing finan-
cial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared
to influence the work reported in this paper.
Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx
References
[1] S.A. Niknam, M. Mortazavi, D. Li, Additively manufactured heat exchangers: a
review on opportunities and challenges, Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 112 (2021)
601–618.
[2] J.F. Gieras, Superconducting electrical machines-state of the art, Organ 12
(2009) 9.
[3] Francesco Grilli et al 2020 J. Phys.: Conf. Ser. 1590 012051 ‘‘Superconducting
motors for aircraft propulsion: the Advanced Superconducting Motor
Experimental Demonstrator project”.
[4] K. Kovalev, J. Nekrasova, N. Ivanov, S. Zhurzvlev, Design of all-superconducting
electrical motor for full electric aircraft, Int. Conf. Electrotech. Complexes Syst.
(ICOECS) 2019 (2019) 1–5.
[5] Shah, R. K., & Sekulic, D. P. (1998). Heat exchangers. Handbook of heat
transfer,3.
[6] Ugur M. Dilberoglu, Bahar Gharehpapagh, Ulas Yaman, Melik Dolen, The Role
of Additive Manufacturing in the Era of Industry 4.0, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
promfg.2017.07.148.
[7] W.E. Frazier, Metal additive manufacturing: a review, J. Mater. Eng. Perform.
23 (2014) 1917–1928, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11665-014-0958-z.
[8] Inderjot Kaur, Prashant Singh, Volume 178, 2021, ‘‘State-of-the-art in heat
exchanger additive manufacturing”, International Journal of Heat and Mass
Transfer.
[9] E. Rasouli, E. Fricke, V. Narayanan, High efficiency 3-D printed microchannel
polymer heat exchangers for air conditioning applications, Sci. Technol. Built
Environ. 28 (3) (2022) 289–306, https://doi.org/10.1080/
23744731.2022.2026693.
[10] Ratnesh Tiwari, Rohit S. Andhare, Amir Shooshtari, Michael Ohadi, Volume
147, 2019, Pages 781-788, ‘‘Development of an additive manufacturing-
enabled compact manifold microchannel heat exchanger, Applied Thermal
Engineering”.
[11] S. Chekurov, J. Kajaste, K. Saari, et al., Additively manufactured high-
performance counterflow heat exchanger, Prog. Addit. Manuf. 4 (2019) 55–61.
[12] Shuai Ma, Qian Tang, Qixiang Feng, Jun Song, Xiaoxiao Han, Fuyu Guo,
Mechanical behaviours and mass transport properties of bone-mimicking
scaffolds consisted of gyroid structures manufactured using selective laser
melting, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmbbm.2019.01.023.
[13] K. Monkova, P. Monka, I. Zetkova, P. Hanzl, D. Mandulak, Three approaches to
the gyroid structure modelling as a base of lightweight component produced
by additive technology, DEStech Trans. Comput. Sci. Eng, CMSAM, 2017.
[14] M. Bahrami, ENSC 388 (F09), 1st Law of Thermodynamics: Control Volumes,
https://www.sfu.ca/mbahrami/ENSC%20388/Notes/First%20Law%20of%
20Thermodynamics_Control%20Volumes.pdf.
[15] Y.A. Cengel, A.J. Ghajar, Heat and mass transfer: Fundamentals and
applications, (5th ed.)., McGraw-Hill Professional, 2014.