Production of cryogens using wind energy for use in deep mine cooling and ventilation.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research work, named as ‘CryoVent’, was focused on determining the feasibility of using \nwind energy, to produce liquefied gases (cryogens) continuously in a safe approach that can be \nused for the cooling and ventilation of underground mines. The experimental work performed \nsuggested that the continuous production of liquefied gases with variable input work is practical. \nThe average specific power consumption for liquefaction of nitrogen in this work was 7.86 \nkWh/kg using the refrigeration produced by helium. This is ~20 times higher than that consumed \nby industrial scale gas liquefaction systems, but is practical for a small scale system. This \nspecific power consumption could probably be lowered if the working fluid itself is liquefied. \nAnalysis on wind speed variability and wind speed data synthesis were also performed \nwhich suggested presence of multi-fractal nature in wind speed data that represent the temporal \nvariation. A new method developed to generate high sampling frequency wind speed data from available low sampling frequency wind speed data can have contribution in all sectors when \nthere is a need of higher sampling frequency time series data for simulation/study purposes. \nThe liquid nitrogen mass flow rate (kg/s) increased with increase in compressor motor \nfrequency and also when operating at variable motor input frequency. However, the average \ncompressor power consumption also increased compared to average power consumption \nduring operation at standard motor frequency of 60 Hz. This was in a laboratory scale \nliquefaction system and needs to be tested in the large scale system experimentally. With 1 kg/s \nof liquefied nitrogen supplied, ~459 kWr of cooling power is available to cool the deep mine air \nwhich is at 30-400C. A volumetric flow rate of 0.062 m3/s of liquefied air can provide a cooling \npower equivalent to that provided by a volumetric flow rate of 4000 m3/s of atmospheric air, \nwhich is the requirement of some of the biggest mines in the world. The hydraulic wind turbine as proposed in this work can eliminate the system start-up \nissues following the calm period, which are typical concerns with the wind energy integrations. \nThis research work has provided the required modeling and simulation results that are crucial in \ndevelopment of the full scale ‘CryoVent’.
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 | 0.001 | 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".