Energy and exergy analyses of an industrial wood chips drying process
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this study, a comprehensive thermodynamic investigation through energy and exergy analyses is conducted to assess the performance of an industrial chips drying process and study how its operating conditions and efficiency can be improved further. In this regard, energy and exergy efficiencies are evaluated with the actual thermodynamic data available, as obtained from the factory, in Turkey. Energy and exergy efficiencies of the drum drying system (DDS) are found as 34.07% and 4.39%, respectively. The analysis results show that exergy efficiency is less than energy efficiency. The main reason of this low exergy efficiency for this drying process is high exergy destruction, as 41.5% of input exergy value. Energy can be recovered via an economizer from hot moist air leaving from the system. If stack gas temperature decreases from 130 to 90°C, regain energy and exergy values are to be 51 976 and 8162 kW, respectively. These recovered potentials can be used for district heating system in winter season and for district cooling system in summer season by using absorption cooling system. Energy and exergy efficiency values can be increased to 93.15 and 43.08%, respectively, by incorporating a heat exchanger into the system.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".