First and Second Law Analyses of Trans-critical N2O Refrigeration Cycle Using an Ejector
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An ejector-expansion refrigeration cycle using nitrous oxide was assessed. Thermodynamic analyses, including energy and exergy analyses, were carried out to investigate the effects on performance of several key factors in the system. The results show that the ejector-expansion refrigeration cycle (EERC) has a higher maximum coefficient of performance and exergy efficiency than the internal heat exchanger cycle (IHEC), by 12% and 15%, respectively. The maximum coefficient of performance and exergy efficiency are 14% and 16.5% higher than the corresponding values for the vapor-compression refrigeration cycle (VCRC), respectively. The total exergy destruction for the N2O ejector-expansion cycle is 63% and 53% less than for IHEC and VCRC, respectively. Furthermore, the highest COPs for the vapor-compression refrigeration, the internal heat exchanger and the ejector-expansion refrigeration cycles correspond to a high side pressure of 7.3 MPa, and the highest COPs for the three types of CO2 refrigeration cycles correspond to a high side pressure of 8.5 MPa. Consequently, these lead to a lower electrical power consumption by the compressor.
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 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".