MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2025615874 · doi:10.1109/intlec.2011.6099826

Optimum battery size selection in standalone renewable energy systems

2011· article· en· W2025615874 on OpenAlexaff
Hossein Delavaripour, Hamid Reza Karshenas, Alireza Bakhshai, Praveen Jain

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Battery Technologies Research
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBattery (electricity)Renewable energyReliability engineeringReliability (semiconductor)Energy storageWind powerComputer scienceAutomotive engineeringPhotovoltaic systemWork (physics)SimulationEngineeringElectrical engineeringPower (physics)Mechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents the optimum calculation of battery size when used as energy storage in standalone systems with renewable energy resources. The focus in this analysis is on the effect of battery charging/discharging characteristics on system reliability and cost. Renewable resources such as wind and PV cannot be the only source of energy in standalone system due to their fluctuating nature. Therefore, additional means of energy is required to achieve a reliable and continuous energy system. Battery energy storage systems are widely used in such applications. In this regard, the size of batteries plays an important role in the overall system reliability and cost. This paper uses the Loss of Load Expectation (LOLE) index to evaluate the reliability of a standalone system consisting of wind turbines and battery storage system. The analysis is carried out based on time series simulation, i.e. different system parameters are arranged in sampled time series format. The main contribution of the work is in modeling the complete charging/discharging characteristics of battery. It is shown that by taking the charging efficiency and discharge rate into consideration, the resulted LOLE is lower than what is expected. Simulation results for a case study are presented in the paper.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.889
Threshold uncertainty score0.464

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.205 · 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

Citations12
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Battery Technologies ResearchFrench-language works237,207