MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1978678654 · doi:10.1115/ajk2011-17005

Simulation of Hydrogen Production by Using Concentrated Solar Energy Through Thermo-Chemical Water Splitting Process: Part I—Simulation of Zinc Oxide Reduction Reaction

2011· article· en· W1978678654 on OpenAlexaff
Furqan Ahmad Khan, Kamran Siddiqui

Bibliographic record

VenueASME-JSME-KSME 2011 Joint Fluids Engineering Conference: Volume 1, Symposia – Parts A, B, C, and D · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicSolar Thermal and Photovoltaic Systems
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsZincHydrogenEndothermic processSolar energySolar furnaceHydrogen productionMaterials scienceChemical engineeringChemistryMetallurgyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Due to the depleting reserves of fossil fuels and their harmful effects on the environment, there is an urgent need to explore clean alternative energy resources to fulfil the growing energy demand. Sunlight is an abundant source of energy, and its storage and utilization in the form of hydrogen is considered to be effective and cleanest. The present research is focused on the numerical investigation of hydrogen production through thermo-chemical decomposition of water. In this paper we report on the first step reaction which is the endothermic reduction of zinc oxide in a solar reactor/receiver coupled with a parabolic dish type solar energy concentrator. The simulations were conducted in a three-dimensional reactor model using the commercial CFD software FLUENT. The results of parametric study showed an increase in the fractional conversion of zinc oxide with a decrease in the diameter of the zinc oxide particles, while this fractional conversion decreased with a decrease in the zinc oxide mass flow rate. It was also observed that the particle initial temperature has no effect on the fractional conversion of the zinc oxide. The outlet temperature of the fluid mixture was also not influenced significantly by the zinc oxide fractional conversation and remained over 1800K for the entire fractional conversion range of zinc oxide.

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.194 · 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

Citations1
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueASME-JSME-KSME 2011 Joint Fluids Engineering Conference: Volume 1, Symposia – Parts A, B, C, and DSame topicSolar Thermal and Photovoltaic SystemsFrench-language works237,207