MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1969798908 · doi:10.1520/jai101308

Optimization of Energy Utilization and Productivity of Heat Treating Batch-Type Furnaces

2008· article· en· W1969798908 on OpenAlexaff
Abubakar Idris Hassan, M. Hamed

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of ASTM International · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRadiative Heat Transfer Studies
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProductivityMaterials scienceProcess engineeringHeat energyEnergy (signal processing)Environmental scienceWaste managementNuclear engineeringEngineeringEconomicsMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Due to the energy-intensive nature of the heat treating industry and the recent substantial increase of energy prices, the availability of predictive tools that can be used to optimize heat treatment processes has become a very pressing must. Load configuration (size and arrangement) during batch-type heat treating operations is the main factor that controls the rate of heat transfer between the furnace and the load, and hence it affects energy utilization and productivity of such operations. The main objective of this work is to develop a numerical model that can be used as a predictive tool for determining optimum loading of batch-type furnaces in order to achieve maximum productivity (mass treated per unit time) and minimum energy consumption per unit mass. A numerical model has been developed to simulate heat treatment processes in batch-type furnaces. The model has been validated by comparing numerical results with experimental data collected under laboratory and real-life conditions. Experiments have been carried out at the research facility at TPL as well as at different industrial sites. The paper presents the development and validation of the model as well as case studies of batch heat treatment cycles where best load configurations have been investigated.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.477
Threshold uncertainty score0.278

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.240
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 teacher head, 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

Citations3
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of ASTM InternationalSame topicRadiative Heat Transfer StudiesFrench-language works237,207