MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2163602691 · doi:10.5539/mas.v7n10p60

Experimental Study on Thermal Efficiency of Flat Plate Solar Collector Using TiO2/Water Nanofluid

2013· article· en· W2163602691 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hossein Chaji, Yahya Ajabshirchi, Esmaeil Esmaeilzadeh, Saeed Zeinali Heris, Mahdi Hedayatizadeh, Mostafa Kahani

Bibliographic record

VenueModern Applied Science · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicSolar Thermal and Photovoltaic Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of TabrizUniversità degli Studi di MilanoU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsNanofluidMaterials scienceVolumetric flow rateBase (topology)Mass flow rateAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Thermal efficiencyComposite materialChemistryThermodynamicsMathematicsNanoparticleChromatographyNanotechnologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this study, a small flat plate solar collector (FPSC) was fabricated and tested for studying the effects of different nano particle concentrations of in water as base fluid. Three flow rates (i.e. 36, 72 and 108 lit/m2.hr) and four particles concentration ratios (i.e. 0, 0.1, 0.2 and 0.3 % wt) were investigated. Experimental testing method was selected based on EUROPEAN STANDARD EN 12975-2 as a quasi-dynamic test method (QDT). Adding nano particles to water brought about an improvement of initial efficiency of FPSC between 3.5 and 10.5% and the index of collector total efficiency between 2.6 and 7% relative to base fluid. Also the results indicate that the initial efficiency () for 36, 72 and 108 lit/m2.hr flow rates of water as base fluid were 0.4712, 0.4998 and 0.5457, respectively which reveals the increase of 6.1 and 15.8% of it in the two latter cases in comparison with the first case, 36 lit/m2.hr flow rate. In addition, the index of collector total efficiency of 72 and 108 lit/m2.hr mass flow rates has increased by 6.7 and 15.7%, respectively in comparison with 36 lit/ m2.hr mass flow rate.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations132
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueModern Applied ScienceSame topicSolar Thermal and Photovoltaic SystemsFrench-language works237,207