Desain Sistem Pembangkit Listrik Berdasarkan Energi Gravitasi Melalui Pipa Air Hujan (Rain Water Harvesting/Rwh) Dengan Optimasi Tegangan dan Putaran Turbin Menggunakan Metode Taguchi - Weighted Principal Component Analysis (WPCA)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Designing power plant based on the gravitational force of potential energy from the Rain Water Harvesting (RWH) rainwater pipe. It consists of water collection device and Pelton Turbine type. The rainwater collection device is placed in the outlet pipe at regulated height. RWH paired the lowest position exit pipe. RWH works with the volume of water collected reaching a threshold value, so that the device works continuously. The research was conducted experimentally with the effect of the length and diameter of the collector device on the amount of electricity and the Taguchi method in optimizing the voltage and turbine rotation. The effect of the RWH height was varied, it was found 2.4359 volts at pipe length of 70 cm with diameter of 1 inch. Contribution of process variables in reducing the total variance of stress response and turbine rotation of valve opening angle 55% pipe length 17%, pipe diameter 15%. The combination setting of process variables that can significantly maximize electrical voltage and minimize turbine rotation is pipe diameter of 1 inch, pipe length of 70 cm and valve opening angle of 90 o .
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".