Investigation of Latent Heat Thermal Energy Storage System for AirConditioning Applications
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this study an experimental setup was constructed to investigate the solidification process of PCM using two different types of heat exchangers: pipe heat exchanger and horizontal finned-pipe heat exchanger. The PCM used in this study is Rubitherm (RT-18) that has a melting point of 18°C, and the heat transfer fluid (HTF) is water. To investigate the performance of pipe heat exchanger versus finned-pipe heat exchanger, two experiments were performed under identical initial, thermal and boundary conditions. The PCM is cooled down from 20°C to 5°C in both heat exchangers. Result of the temperature distribution as a function of time during the solidification process inside the TES system is presented and investigated. Visualization of the solidification process inside the TES system is also presented. Generally, the PCM is solid when its temperature is lower than the melting point, and it is liquid when its temperature is higher. PCM stores thermal energy during melting and releases heat as it solidifies. Both visualization and periodic temperature distribution results showed that as time progresses, the amount of the solid PCM increases in both heat exchangers. At a certain time, finnedpipe heat exchanger has higher amount of the solid PCM than the pipe heat exchanger. Also, the solidification time is reduced significantly when fins are added to the TES system. After 75,000 seconds of solidification, the average PCM temperature of pipe heat exchanger reached to 8.5°C. Whereas, the average PCM temperature of the finned-pipe heat exchanger reached to 8.5°C after 19,000 seconds of solidification.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.001 |
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 it