Exergy and Energy Analysis of Solar-driven Dual-loop ORC with Nano Organic Fluid
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A thermodynamic analysis of a regenerative solar-driven combined cooling, heating and power system of dual-loop organic rankine cycle (DORC) with flat plate solar collectors is conducted to determine the energy and exergy efficiency of the system, exergy destructions and losses along with their magnitudes and exact locations. The DORC consists of a high-temperature and a low-temperature loop, and nanofluid is used in the solar thermal sub-system to improve the heat absorption from solar collectors. In this study two recuperators are added to the DORC to improve the performance of the regenerative organic Rankine cycle and its effect on the overall produced power. The impact of connecting cooling by adding an ejector refrigeration cycle in the hightemperature loop is explored using an exergy analysis. The performance of the regenerative DORC using nanofluid in comparison to the regular DORC counterpart is discussed in terms of energy and exergy efficiencies. Energy and exergy analysis is presented to determine the irreversibilities within the systems, and based on the location of the irreversibilities, improvements are implemented. It was found that implementing recuperators in the proposad configuration increased the thermal energy efficiency and exergy efficiency by 5% and 4%, 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 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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".