fractal and fractional
Article
Effects of Hausdorff Dimension on the Static and Free Vibration
Response of Beams with Koch Snowflake-like Cross Section
Didier Samayoa 1 , Helvio Mollinedo 2
Citation: Samayoa, D.; Mollinedo, H.;
Jiménez-Bernal, J.A.; Gutiérrez-Torres,
C.d.C. Effects of Hausdorff
Dimension on the Static and Free
Vibration Response of Beams with
Koch Snowflake-like Cross Section.
Fractal Fract. 2023, 7, 153. https://
doi.org/10.3390/fractalfract7020153
Academic Editors: Carlo Cattani and
Haci Mehmet Baskonus
Received: 22 December 2022
Revised: 24 January 2023
Accepted: 2 February 2023
Published: 4 February 2023
Copyright: © 2023 by the authors.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
4.0/).
Fractal Fract. 2023, 7, 153. https://doi.org/10.3390/fractalfract7020153
, José Alfredo Jiménez-Bernal 1 and Claudia del Carmen Gutiérrez-Torres 1,*
1 SEPI-ESIME Zacatenco, Instituto Politécnico Nacional, Unidad Profesional Adolfo López Mateos,
Mexico City 07738, Mexico
2 Engineering Department, Instituto Politécnico Nacional, UPIITA, Av. IPN, No. 2580, Col. La Laguna Ticoman,
Gustavo A. Madero, Mexico City 07340, Mexico
* Correspondence: cgutierrezt@ipn.mx
Abstract: In this manuscript, static and free vibration responses on Euler–Bernoulli beams with a
Koch snowflake cross-section are studied. By applying the finite element method, the transversal
displacement in static load condition, natural frequencies, and vibration modes are solved and
validated using Matlab. For each case presented, the transversal displacement and natural frequency
are analyzed as a Hausdorff dimension function. It is found that the maximum displacement
increases as the Hausdorff dimension increases, with the relationship ymax = k0.79 ln dH +0.37 , being
k the iteration number of pre-fractal. The natural frequencies increase as ω ∼ M2.51 , whereas the
bending stiffness is expressed as EI = 1165.4 ln(dH + k). Numerical examples are given in order to
discuss the mechanical implications.
Keywords: Euler–Bernoulli beam; Hausdorff dimension; transversal displacement; vibration modes
1. Introduction
The Euler–Bernoulli bending beam theory is a widely used framework in engineering
science, and its applications range from construction, textile, automobiles, ships, and
aircraft industries to antenna design, nano-electromechanical systems, and various items of
use in daily life.
This theory is based on three assumptions [1]: (i) there are not deformations in the
plane of the cross-section because the cross-section is infinitely rigid in its own plane, (ii) the
cross-section of a beam remains flat after deformation occurs, and (iii) the cross-section
remains normal to the deformed axis of the beam. Its geometrical interpretation can be
seen in detail in many references such as [1–3].
The mechanical behavior of classical beams has been described using numerical [4,5]
and theoretical methods [6,7], where their static and dynamic responses are studied with
ordinary calculus. Accordingly, structural studies on beams with a variable cross-section [8],
and in beams that have discontinuities [9,10] or that are cracked [2,11], have been reported.
Additionally, it has been demonstrated that almost always the natural and man-made
structures that have a complex architectural design exhibit statistical-scale invariance over
many length scales [12–15].
In this context, Euler–Bernoulli beams with complex geometry have been solved
using fractional calculus [16–18]. Meanwhile, solutions of the Euler–Bernoulli self-similar
beam equation using fractal continuum calculus [19,20], a product-like fractal measure [21],
and fractal calculus [22] were recently introduced. Furthermore, the framework of the
equivalent continuum was applied to obtain analytical solutions for vibrating fractal
composite rods and beams, which use ordinary calculus on pre-fractals [23].
Based on the Koch snowflake in [24], a solidification process was developed in a
thermal storage system with a Koch snowflake inner cross section, and it was found
that higher fractal iteration leads to the acceleration of the solidification process due to
https://www.mdpi.com/journal/fractalfract
Fractal Fract. 2023, 7, 153 2 of 8

enhanced thermal penetration depth. Other authors [25] proposed a Koch Snowflake
shaped microstrip terahertz antenna for superwideband spatial diversity application and
discovered that interport isolation for the MIMO antenna is less than -23 dB across the
wideband of operation, whereas the values of the MIMO performance parameters are best.
Rostami et al. [26] analyzed a Timoshenko beam, also with a Koch snowflake cross-section,
using different boundary conditions for variable properties, and it was found out that
beams with fractal geometry have the highest natural frequency compared with the ones
with Euclidean geometry. It is worth highlighting that natural frequencies (eigenvalues)
and the shape mode (eigenfunctions) problem in a fractal region defined by the Koch
snowflake geometry were numerically solved in [27,28]
In these fractal models, however, there is not a relationship that describes the influence
of fractal parameters as the Hausdorff dimension and the iteration numbers of the Koch
snowflake . Accordingly, the goal of this work is to determinate the static and free vibration
responses as the Hausdorff dimension function using a generalized Koch snowflake in
the range 1 < dH < 2 on Euler–Bernoulli beams with a fractal cross section by applying
ordinary calculus.
The rest of the paper is outlined as follows: In Section 2, we review the mathematical
aspects, whereas Section 3 is devoted to developing the main subject of this work. Section 4
presents a discussion of physical implications, and Section 5 concludes the paper.

2. Problem Statement and Formulation

In this section, we review and define the basic tools needed in the paper.

2.1. Dynamic Beam Equation

The governing differential equation for a vibration of a Euler–Bernoulli beam within
the domain x ∈ [0, 1] is defined as

∂2 ∂2 v( x, t) ∂2 v( x, t)
 
EI ( x ) + ρA = p( x, t) (1)
∂x2 ∂x2 ∂t2

where EI ( x ) is the bending stiffness, ρA is the mass per unit length, and v( x, t) is the
transversal displacement. Note that the moment-curvature relation is given by
M = EI ∂2 v/∂x2 , called the bending moment, so V = EI ∂3 v/∂x3 is the transverse

shear force and ∂V/∂x = p( x, t) is the transversal load per unit length. For the free vi-
bration analysis, p( x, t) = 0, whereas for the static bending analysis the second term in
Equation (1) is neglected.

2.2. Finite Element Formulation

Applying Galerkin’s method [29] to Equation (1), the residual equation has the follow-
ing form:

∂2 ∂2 v ∂2 v
Z L    
Wi EI ( x ) 2 + ρA 2 dx = 0, (2)
0 ∂x2 ∂x ∂t

where Wi = Wi ( x ) is the weight function. For the discretization of the domain, the beam is
partitioned in elements with 4 degrees of freedom, defined as shown in Figure 1, and using
the following Ni cubic shape functions:

3x2 2x3
N1 = 1 − +
L2 L3

2x2 x3
N2 = x − + 2
L L
3x2 2x3
N3 = −
L2 L3
Fractal Fract. 2023, 7, 153 3 of 8

x2 x3
+ 2 N4 = −
L L
Then, Equation (2) can be rewritten in discrete form for n elements using the same
shape functions for the weight functions, Wi = Ni and v = [ N ]{u}; the residual takes the
form since there is not applied load (p( x, t) = 0), and it is a free vibration problem:
n Z `
∂4 ([ N ]{u}) ∂4 ([ N ]{u})
 
∑ [ N ] T EI
∂x4
+ ρA
∂t4
dx = 0, (3)
i =1 0

where {u} = [vi , θi , v j , θ j ] T is the vector of nodal values and l is the length of element.
Integrating by parts the first integrand of Equation (3)
n Z ` ` Z `
∂3 ([ N ]{u}) ∂[ N ] T EI [ B]{u} ∂2 { u }
  
∑ [ B]T EI [ B]{u}dx + [ N ]T EI
∂x 3
−
∂x
+ [ N ]T ρA [ N ]
∂t 2
dx = 0, (4)
i =1 0 0 0

where [ B] = ∂2 [ N ]/∂x2 , then Equation (4) is as follows:

n Z ` `
∂[ N ]T M
 
∑ T T
[ B] EI [ B]{u} + ρA[ N ] [ N ]{ü} dx + [ N ] V −
∂x
T
= 0, (5)
i =1 0 0

where {ü} = ∂2 {u}/∂t2 and V is the transversal shear load, whereas M is the bending
R`
moment. The defining element stiffness matrix K e = 0 [ B] T EI [ B]dx, the element mass
R`
matrix Me = 0 ρA[ N ] T [ N ]dx, and the element load vector F e = [[ N ] T V − ∂([ N ] T M )/∂x ]0` .
Assembling the matrices and load vectors for the n elements of the beam, we have the
following dynamic equation:

[K ]{U } + [ M] Ü = { F }. (6)

Note that for the free vibration analysis load vector, F = 0. So, the eigenvalue problem
is defined as follows:
 
[K ] − ω2 [ M] { x } = 0 (7)

where ω = ( β n L)( EI/ρAL4 )1/2 is the angular natural frequency in radians per second and
{ x } is the mode shape.
(a)

(b)
ui uj

θi θj

Figure 1. Cantilever beam. (a) With cross section type classical Koch snowflake and (b) beam
element modelling.
Fractal Fract. 2023, 7, 153 4 of 8

2.3. Koch Snowflakes-like cross Section

In previous publications, beams with fractal cross section have been studied, specif-
ically with Sierpinski’s carpet-like, where the beam also is a fractal [20]. However, this
manuscript is devoted to analyze the response of Euclidean beams with a fractal cross
section, whose fractal geometry is Koch snowflake-like [26]. It is well-known that the Haus-
dorff dimension of the classical Koch snowflake is given by dH = 2 log 2/ log 3. In order to
obtain a series of analyses including all possibles areas of a cross section with Hausdorff
dimensions 1 < dH < 2, a generic Koch snowflake with a Hausdorff dimension is defined
as [30]:

2 log 2
dH = (8)
log Ω

where Ω = 2[1 + sin(γ/2)] is a scale factor, and γ is the indentation angle. If γ = 60◦
and the initiator is a line segment that corresponds to the classical Koch curve, but if the
initiator is an equilateral triangle, the fractal curve is called a Koch snowflake. In Figure 2
is sketched, the cross sections are used.

(a) (b) (c) (d)

γ = 20◦ γ = 40◦ γ = 60◦ γ = 80◦

dH = 1.62 dH = 1.40 dH = 1.26 dH = 1.16

Figure 2. Fractal cross section of beams for the first four iterations of the Koch snowflake. The side of
the equilateral triangle is 20 mm, with an indentation angle of: (a) γ = 20◦ , (b) γ = 40◦ , (c) γ = 60◦ ,
and (d) γ = 80◦ .

3. Numerical Examples
This section is devoted to application examples of concepts reviewed in the behold section.

3.1. Bending of a Cantilever Beam

The bending analysis has been carried out on a cantilever beam Figure 1a subjected to a
concentrated stationary load applied at its free end. The length of the beams for all cases was
L = 1 m, and the cross section is the Koch snowflake with the side of the equilateral triangle
of the initiator a = 0.02 m. The indentation angles of the Koch snowflake cross section
used in the analysis are γ = 20◦ 40◦ , 60◦ , 80◦ , 90◦ , 100◦ , whose Hausdorff dimension can
be seen in Figure 2. The material is AISI 1020 steel with elastic modulus E = 200 GPa,
Fractal Fract. 2023, 7, 153 5 of 8

Poisson’s ratio equal to 0.29, and mass density ρ = 7900 kg/m3 . The concentrated applied
load is F = 50N.
The boundary conditions for the fixed support at x = 0 are null displacement v(0) = 0
and null rotation ∂v(0)/∂x = 0 .

3.2. Modal Analysis of a Cantilever Beam

The boundary conditions for the fixed support at x = 0 are null displacement
v(0, t) = 0 and null rotation ∂v(0, t)/∂x = 0, and there is not applied load, F = 0.

4. Results and Discussion

In the case of a beam with a fractal cross section such as the Koch snowflake, the mo-
ment of inertia with respect to the bending axis presents an increase in its value with each
iteration. Figure 3a shows the transversal displacement for a cross section with Hausdorff
dimension dH = 1.26 for iterations k = 1, 2, 3, 4. Moreover, it can be seen that the deflection
decreases as the flexural stiffness EI increases with each iteration as

EI ∼ 1165.4 ln(dH + k), (9)

which was obtained by non-linear regression, whereas the analytical maximum displace-
ment is described by (Figure 3b)

ymax ∼ k0.79 ln(dH )+0.37 , (10)

The free vibration analysis of the cantilever beam has been carried out by obtaining
the first four natural frequencies and their respective modes of vibration, as shown in
(Figure 4a). The behavior of the natural frequency (ω) with respect to each iteration of the
cross section of the Koch snowflake is shown in (Figure 4b). A mathematical relationship
has been obtained, and it approximates the natural frequency values for each iteration of
the cross section as Hausdorff dimension function:

1165.4 ln(dH + k ) 1/2

 
ω n = ( β n L )2 , (11)
ρAL4

where β n L = (2n − 1)π/2 and the numerator of second fraction is the flexural stiffness
given in Equation (9). Specifically, ω can be computed using ω ∼ M2.515 (where M is the
mode shape) once that natural frequencies have been determined by Equation (11) (see
Figure 4b).
(a) (b)
·10−2 ·10−2
3
0.9
k=1 S = 0.79 lndH + 0.37
k=2 0.8

k=3 2.5
Slope

0.7
2 k=4
[m]

0.6
[m]

R2 = 0.98
0.5
2
ymax (x)
y(x),

dH = 1.26
100.05100.1100.15100.2100.25
1 dH
dH

dH = 1.09
1.5
dH = 1.16
dH = 1.26

0 dH = 1.40

ymax ∼ kS
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1
1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4
x [m] Iteration

Figure 3. Static response of beams (a) displacement for a cross section with dH = 1.26 and (b) maxi-
mum lateral displacement for several cross sections with different Hausdorff dimensions.
Fractal Fract. 2023, 7, 153 6 of 8

(a) (b)

2 5,000
1st mode 1st iteration
2nd mode 2nd iteration
3rd mode 3rd iteration
4th mode 4,000
1 4th iteration

[m]

[rad/s]
3,000
y(x), 0
2,000

ω,
−1
1,000 ω ∼ M 2.515

−2 0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1 2 3 4 5
x [m] Mode

Figure 4. Mode shapes and natural frequency for solid cross section. (a) Cross section is the first
iteration of Koch snowflake and (b) natural frequency for shape modes 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5.

These results can be used to evaluate variations in the design of soft robot arms
modelling such as the Euler–Bernoulli beam [5] in order to know quantitatively and
methodically address questions of soft-arm capability with other materials, as well as
to study the effects of snowflake hierarchies of tunable locally resonant metamaterials [31].
Several engineering applications of snowflake geometry have been reported as, for example,
wave propagation in snowflakes plates [32], antenna design for Wi-Fi applications [33,34],
the thermal transfer analysis of tubes with extended surface with fractal design [35], and
experimental studies on divertor with snowflakes-like configurations in nuclear reactor
was carried out in [36].

5. Conclusions
A generalized study of static and dynamic response of the Euler–Bernoulli beam with
complex cross section type Koch’s snowflake fractal was carried out. The governing equa-
tions of the beam were solved by applying the finite element method. So, the transversal
displacement, rotation, mode shapes, and frequencies on the beam were obtained using
Matlab. The effects of the fractal parameters on the mechanical properties of beams were
found, and the conclusions and outlooks are as follows:
i The cross-sectional area and its inertia change when the iteration does. This implies
that when the iteration k i increases, the flexural rigidity EI increases as the cross-
section Hausdorff dimension decreases see Equation (9)).
ii As the iteration of the cross-section increases, the maximum displacement decreases.
It can be described by the power law expression presented in Equation (10) and
depicted in Figure 3.
iii The natural frequency grows with the analytical expression given in Equation (11) for
all Hausdorff dimensions of Koch’s snowflake, as is shown in Figures 4.
iv The beam solution with the classical cross-section is obtained for the first iteration of
the Koch’s snowflake fractal.
v In an upcoming report, the dynamic responses of fractal beams with the Euler–Bernoulli
theory will be given using the fractal calculus framework [13,19,20] .

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, D.S. and C.d.C.G.-T.; methodology, J.A.J.-B. and H.M.;
validation, D.S. and J.A.J.-B.; formal analysis, D.S., J.A.J.-B., H.M. and C.d.C.G.-T.; investigation, D.S.
and C.d.C.G.-T.; writing—review and editing, D.S., J.A.J.-B. and H.M. All authors have read and
agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This work was supported by the Instituto Politécnico Nacional under the research SIP-IPN
grants nos. 20230048, 20230960, 20231176, and 20231406.
Fractal Fract. 2023, 7, 153 7 of 8

Data Availability Statement: All data are contained within the paper, and a report of any other data
is not included.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. Wang, C.M.; Reddy, J.N.; Lee, K.H. Shear Deformable Beam and Plates; Elsevier: Kidlington, UK, 2000.
2. Cicirello, A. On the response bounds of damaged Euler–Bernoulli beams with switching cracks under moving masses. Int. J.
Solids Struct. 2019, 172–173, 70–83. [CrossRef]
3. Bauchau, O.A.; Craig, I.J. Structural Analysis with Application to Aerospace Structures; Springer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands;
Heidelberg, Germany; London, UK; New-York, NY, USA, 2009.
4. Shang, H.; Machado, R.; Abdalla-Fillo, J. Dynamic analysis of Euler–Bernoulli beam problems using the Generalized Finite
Element Method. Comput. Struct. 2016, 173, 109–122. [CrossRef]
5. Olson, G.; Hatton, R.; Adams, J.; Menguc, Y. An Euler–Bernoulli beam model for soft robot arms bent through self-stress and
external loads. Int. J. Solids Struct. 2020, 207, 113–131. [CrossRef]
6. Ishaquddin, M.; Gopalakrishnan, S. Differential quadrature-based solution for non-classical Euler–Bernoulli beam theory. Eur. J.
Mech./A Solids 2021, 86, 104135. [CrossRef]
7. Ruiz, A.; Ramírez, M. Exact general solution and first integrals of a remarkable static Euler–Bernoulli beam equation. Commun.
Nonlinear Sci. Numer. Simul. 2019, 69, 261–269. [CrossRef]
8. Yong, H.; Ling-E, Y.; Qi-Zhi, L. Free vibration of axially functionally graded Timoshenko beams with non-uniform cross-section.
Compos. Part B Eng. 2012, 45, 1493–1498. [CrossRef]
9. Juarez, G.; Ayala, A. Finite element variational formulation for beams with discontinuities. Finite Elem. Anal. Des. 2012, 54, 37–47.
[CrossRef]
10. Failla, G.; Santini, A. On Euler–Bernoulli discontinuous beam solutions via uniform-beam Green’s functions. Int. J. Solid Struct.
2007, 44, 7666–7687. [CrossRef]
11. Palmeri, A.; Cicirello, A. Physically-based Dirac’s delta functions in the static analysis of multi-cracked Euler–Bernoulli and
Timoshenko beams. Int. J. Solids Struct. 2011, 48, 2184–2195. [CrossRef]
12. Delsanto, P.; Gliozzi, S.; Bruno, L.; Pugno, N.; Carpinteri, A. Scaling laws and fractality in the framework of a phenomenological
approach. Chaos Solitons Fractals 2009, 41, 2782–2786. [CrossRef]
13. Golmankhaneh, A.K. Equilibrium and non-equilibrium statistical mechanics with generalized fractal derivatives: A review. Mod.
Phys. Lett. A 2021, 35, 2140002. [CrossRef]
14. Li, J.; Ostoja-Starzewski, M. Fractal solids, product measures and fractional wave equations. Proc. R Soc. A Math. Phys. 2009,
465, 2521–2536. [CrossRef]
15. Balankin, A.; Patino, J.; Patino, M. Inherent features of fractal sets and key attributes of fractal models. Fractals 2022, 30, 2250082.
[CrossRef]
16. Stempin, P.; Sumelka, W. Formulation and experimental validation of space-fractional Timoshenko beam model with functionally
graded materials effects. Comput. Mech. 2021, 68, 697–708. [CrossRef]
17. Lazopoulos, K.A.; Lazopoulos, A.K. On fractional bending of beams with A-fractional derivative. Arch. Appl. Mech. 2020,
90, 573–584. [CrossRef]
18. Blaszczyk, T.; Siedlecki, J.; Sun, H. An exact solution of fractional Euler–Bernoulli equation for a beam with fixed-supported and
fixed-free ends. Appl. Math. Comput. 2021, 396, 125932. [CrossRef]
19. Samayoa, D.; Kriyvko, A.; Velázquez, G.; Mollinedo, H. Fractal Continuum Calculus of Functions on Euler–Bernoulli Beam.
Fractal Fract. 2022, 6, 552. [CrossRef]
20. Samayoa, D.; Damián, L.; Kriyvko, A. Map of bending problem for self-similar beams into fractal continuum using Euler–Bernoulli
principle. Fractal Fract. 2022, 6, 230. [CrossRef]
21. Shen, L.; Ostoja-Starzewski, M.; Porcu, E. Bernoulli–Euler beams with random field properties under random field loads: Fractal
and Hurst effects. Arch. Appl. Mech. 2014, 84, 1595–1696. [CrossRef]
22. Golmankhaneh, A.; Ali, K.; Yilmazer, R.; Awad-Kaabar, M. Local fractal Fourier transform and applications. Comput. Methods
Differ. Equ. 2022, 10, 595–607. [CrossRef]
23. Davey, K.; Rasgado, M. Analytical solutions for vibrating fractal composite rods and beams. Appl. Math. Model. 2011,
35, 1194–1209. [CrossRef]
24. Alizadeh, M.; Hosseinzadeh, K.; Mehrzadi, H.; Ganji, D. Investigation of LHTESS filled by Hybrid nano-enhanced PCM with
Koch snowflake fractal cross section in the presence of thermal radiation. J. Mol. Liq. 2019, 273, 414–424. [CrossRef]
25. Singhal, S. CPW fed koch snowflake superwideband terahertz spatial diversity antenna. Opt.-Int. J. Light Electron. Opt. 2020,
206, 16432. [CrossRef]
26. Rostami, H.; Najafabadi, M.; Ganji, D. Analysis of Timoshenko beam with Koch snowflake cross-section and variable properties
in different boundary conditions using finite element method. Adv. Mech. Eng. 2021, 13, 1–12. [CrossRef]
27. Neuberger, J.; Sieben, N.; Swift, J. Computing eigenfunctions on the Koch Snowflake: A new grid and symmetry. J. Comput. Appl.
Math. 2006, 191, 126–142. [CrossRef]
Fractal Fract. 2023, 7, 153 8 of 8

28. Neuberger, J.; Sieben, N.; Swift, J. Symmetry and Automated Branch Following for a Semilinear Elliptic PDE on a Fractal Region.
SIAM J. Appl. Dyn. Syst. 2006, 5, 476–507. [CrossRef]
29. Neuberger, J.; Swift, J. Newton’s method and Morse index for semilinear ellipctic PDEs. Int. J. Bifurc. Chaos 2001, 11, 801–820.
[CrossRef]
30. Arzamastseva, G.; Evtikhov, M.; Lisovsky, F.; Mansvetova, E. Family of generalized triadic Koch fractals: Dimensions and Fourier
images. Radioelectron. Nanosyst. Inf. Technol. 2016, 8, 81–90. [CrossRef]
31. Sepehri, S.; Jafari, H.; Mashhadi, M.M.; Yazdi, M.R.H.; Fakhrabadi, M.M.S. Study of tunable locally resonant metamaterials:
Effects of spider-web and snowflake hierarchies. Int. J. Solids Struct. 2020, 204, 81–95. [CrossRef]
32. Jiao, J.; Chen, C.; Yu, D. Observation of topological valley waveguide transport of elastic waves in snowflake plates. Compos.
Struct. 2022, 286, 115297. [CrossRef]
33. Tumakov, D.; Chikrin, D.; Kokunin, P. Miniaturization of a Koch-Type Fractal Antenna for Wi-Fi Applications. Fractal Fract. 2020,
4, 25. [CrossRef]
34. Krzysztofik, W.J. Fractal Geometry in Electromagnetics Applications-from Antenna to Metamaterials. Microw. Rev. 2013,
19, 3–14. Available online: http://www.mtt-serbia.org.rs/files/MWR/MWR2013dec/Vol19No2-02-WKrzysztofik.pdf (accessed
on 24 January 2023).
35. Llano-Sanchez, L.; Domínguez-Cajeli, D.; Ruiz-Cardenas, L. Thermal transfer analysis of tubes with extended surface with fractal
design. Rev. Fac. Ing. 2018, 23, 29–35. [CrossRef]
36. Labit, B.; Canal, G.P.; Christen, N.; Duval, B.P.; Lipschultz, B.; Lunt, T.; Nespoli, F.; Reimerdes, H.; Sheikh, U.; Theiler, C.; et al.
Experimental studies of the snowflake divertor in TCV. Nucl. Mater. Energy 2017, 12, 1015–1019. [CrossRef]

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual
author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to
people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.