MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1997760430 · doi:10.3390/e14020370

Optimal Design of ORC Systems with a Low-Temperature Heat Source

2012· article· en· W1997760430 on OpenAlexafffund
Mohammed Khennich, Nicolas Galanis

Bibliographic record

VenueEntropy · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicThermodynamic and Exergetic Analyses of Power and Cooling Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersNatural Resources CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversité de Sherbrooke
KeywordsWorking fluidHeat exchangerExergyMechanicsThermodynamicsMaximum power principleThermalTurbineVolumetric flow rateMaterials scienceExergy efficiencyPower (physics)Thermal efficiencyFlow (mathematics)Maximum temperatureNuclear engineeringEnvironmental sciencePhysicsChemistryEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A numerical model of subcritical and trans-critical power cycles using a fixed-flowrate low-temperature heat source has been validated and used to calculate the combinations of the maximum cycle pressure (Pev) and the difference between the source temperature and the maximum working fluid temperature (DT) which maximize the thermal efficiency (ηth) or minimize the non-dimensional exergy losses (β), the total thermal conductance of the heat exchangers (UAt) and the turbine size (SP). Optimum combinations of Pev and DT were calculated for each one of these four objective functions for two working fluids (R134a, R141b), three source temperatures and three values of the non-dimensional power output. The ratio of UAt over the net power output (which is a first approximation of the initial cost per kW) shows that R141b is the better working fluid for the conditions under study.

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)0.001
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.185
Teacher spread0.181 · 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

Citations42
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEntropySame topicThermodynamic and Exergetic Analyses of Power and Cooling SystemsFrench-language works237,207