MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1762490694 · doi:10.1115/imece2014-36560

Effect of Free Stream Turbulence on Air Cooling of a Surrogate PV Panel

2014· article· en· W1762490694 on OpenAlexaff
Frantzis Iakovidis, David S.‐K. Ting

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicSolar Thermal and Photovoltaic Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNusselt numberTurbulenceTurbulence kinetic energyMechanicsReynolds numberHeat transferLaminar flowWind tunnelHeat transfer coefficientK-epsilon turbulence modelIntensity (physics)Forced convectionPhysicsMaterials scienceThermodynamicsOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Flow over a heated flat plate (surrogate photovoltaic panel) was investigated experimentally in a closed loop wind tunnel to examine the influence of free stream turbulence intensity on the convection heat transfer coefficient. First, the near laminar (background turbulence intensity < 0.5%) free stream case was considered at velocities ranging from 4 to 10 m/s; this resulted in Reynolds numbers ranging from 1 × 105 to 2.4 × 105 based on the plate length. The turbulence free stream case was realized by installing an orificed perforated plate upstream to generate turbulence intensities of 4, 8 and 12% at the leading edge of the surrogate panel. Local heat transfer coefficient and Nusselt number were determined along the span of the plate for each case; Nusselt number was presented in terms of Reynolds number and turbulence intensity. It was revealed that by increasing the turbulence intensity from 4% to 12% the rate of heat transfer increased up to ∼40%, such considerable increase can significantly improve performance of some applications such as PV panels.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.214 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSolar Thermal and Photovoltaic SystemsFrench-language works237,207