MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3139368184 · doi:10.1049/rpg2.12155

Performance assessment of a novel power generation system

2021· article· en· W3139368184 on OpenAlexaff
N. Shankar Ganesh, G. Uma Maheswari, T. Srinivas, Bale V. Reddy

Bibliographic record

VenueIET Renewable Power Generation · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicThermodynamic and Exergetic Analyses of Power and Cooling Systems
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceReliability engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This paper introduces a novel power generation system using solar energy as a heat source. The proposed cycle incorporates heat sources from two solar collectors for the effective utilisation of heat energy. To aid the performance of the proposed system, the turbine flow rate is increased with the specific heater arrangements. Energy and exergy balances of the novel system were generated using Python software. The investigation of the present system was evaluated with high sink temperature. Turbine inlet concentration, turbine inlet pressure, HE 4 outlet temperature from the turbine, condenser concentration of ammonia, isentropic efficiency of the turbine and pressure ratio are the design variables considered for the exergy and thermoeconomic investigation. The energy and exergy analyses resulted in suitable design variables to optimise the performance. The optimum Kalina cycle efficiency, solar plant efficiency, exergy efficiency and network output were determined to be 18.51%, 8.28%, 34.51% and 295.24 kW, respectively. Among the components involved in the system, the mixers account for the highest exergy destruction followed by the turbine. The cycle performance can be improved by reducing the exergy destruction rate. The thermal efficiency is maximised by the turbine inlet pressure and temperature. Moreover, a higher relative cost difference has resulted in heat exchanger 5 and pump 2.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.411
Threshold uncertainty score0.756

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.218 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIET Renewable Power GenerationSame topicThermodynamic and Exergetic Analyses of Power and Cooling SystemsFrench-language works237,207