MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3176122188 · doi:10.6000/1929-6002.2021.10.01

Numerical Modeling Prediction of Thermal Storage during Discharging Phase, PV- Thermal Solar and with Nanofluids

2021· article· en· W3176122188 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Samuel Sami Howard

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Technology Innovations in Renewable Energy · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicSolar Thermal and Photovoltaic Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNanofluidMaterials scienceHeat transferHeat transfer fluidThermodynamicsWorking fluidPhase-change materialThermal energy storageNanofluids in solar collectorsThermalMechanicsComposite materialPhotovoltaic thermal hybrid solar collector

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study is intended to present a numerical model that was established after the energy conservation equations coupled with the heat transfer equations to predict the discharge behavior of different phase change materials, paraffin under the effect of different operating conditions such as solar radiation, heat transfer fluid, using nanofluids; AI2O3, CuO, Fe304 and SiO2, at different concentrations, and heat transfer fluid temperatures. Besides, the effect of the aforementioned operating conditions on the thermal storage process using PV-Thermal hybrid system and the thermal energy conversion efficiency is presented and discussed. It has been observed in this study that the nanofluid AI2O3 has the longest discharge duration elapse compared to other nanofluids and water as base heat transfer fluid. The nanofluid Ai2O3 as heat transfer fluid exhibited the longest time compared to other nanofluids and water as base heat transfer fluid. It was also shown that the higher the nanofluid volumetric concentrations, the longer the discharge process duration elapses. The data showed that nanofluid Al2O3 has the highest discharge time at different concentrations compared to the other nanofluids during the three regions solid, mushy, and liquid. The results clearly showed that by adding 5 % Fe304 nanoparticles, the melting time of paraffin could be saved by 16.5% over the water. It is also evident that the higher the heat transfer fluid temperature, the higher the hybrid system efficiency, and nanofluids CuO and SiO2 have the highest hybrid system efficiency compared to other nanofluids and water as heat transfer fluid. Finally, a good agreement has been obtained between the model and experimental data published in the literature.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.241
Threshold uncertainty score0.573

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Technology Innovations in Renewable EnergySame topicSolar Thermal and Photovoltaic SystemsFrench-language works237,207