Thermodynamic analysis of a wall mounted gas boiler with an organic Rankine cycle and hydrogen production unit
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A novel cogeneration system based on a wall mounted gas boiler and an organic Rankine cycle with a hydrogen production unit is proposed and assessed based on energy and exergy analyses. The system is proposed in order to have cogenerational functionality and assessed for the first time. A theoretical research approach is used. The results indicate that the most appropriate organic working fluids for the organic Rankine cycle are HFE700 and isopentane. Utilizing these working fluids increases the energy efficiency of the integrated wall mounted gas boiler and organic Rankine cycle system by about 1% and the organic Rankine cycle net power output about 0.238 kW compared to when the systems are separate. Furthermore, increasing the turbine inlet pressure causes the net power output, the organic Rankine cycle energy and exergy efficiencies, and the cogeneration system exergy efficiency to rise. The organic Rankine cycle turbine inlet pressure has a negligible effect on the organic Rankine cycle mass flow rate. Increasing the pinch point temperature decreases the organic Rankine cycle turbine net output power. Finally, increasing the turbine inlet pressure causes the hydrogen production rate to increase; the highest and lowest hydrogen production rates are observed for the working fluids for HFE7000 and isobutane, respectively. Increasing the pinch point temperature decreases the hydrogen production rate. In the cogeneration system, the highest exergy destruction rate is exhibited by the wall mounted gas boiler, followed by the organic Rankine cycle evaporator, the organic Rankine cycle turbine, the organic Rankine cycle condenser, the proton exchange membrane electrolyzer, and the organic Rankine cycle pump, respectively.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".