Performance Assessment of a Combined PEM Fuel Cell and Triple‐Effect Absorption Cooling System for Cogeneration Applications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In this paper, a parametric study of a combined proton exchange membrane (PEM) fuel cell and triple‐effect absorption cooling system (TEACS) is undertaken to investigate the effect of different operating conditions and system parameters on the COPs, efficiency of the fuel cell and the integrated system's overall utilisation factor. It is found that the fuel cell efficiency increases from 40% to 44.5% as the operating temperature of the fuel cell increases. However, as the fuel cell's temperature and current density increase, the COPs decrease from 2.4 to 0.9 as a result of the increase in the energy output of the fuel cell ranging from 7.4 to 10.7 kW. The efficiency of the fuel cell decreases from 41% to 32% with an increase in both fuel cell's current density and membrane thickness. The overall utilisation factor of the integrated system decreases from 84% to 35% with an increase in the current density and molar flow rate. Finally, this study reveals that the present integrated PEM fuel cell unit with a TEACS can be considered as an attractive and environmentally benign option for cogeneration purposes in sustainable buildings.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".