MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3210791054 · doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.129402

Analysis of energy integration opportunities in the retrofit of a milk powder production plant using the Bridge framework

2021· article· en· W3210791054 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cleaner Production · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicProcess Optimization and Integration
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBridge (graph theory)Production (economics)Energy (signal processing)Environmental scienceProcess engineeringWaste managementEngineeringEconomicsMathematicsStatisticsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The “bridge framework” is a systematic decision-making support tool for process integration retrofit of industrial plants, which proposes the use of “bridge analysis” in a structured fashion. Its potential of rigorously analysing industrial processes has been discussed, but no applications on actually operating plants considering process constraints have been presented to date. The paper demonstrates the capabilities of the bridge framework in analysing an actually operating milk powder production plant. Its step-by-step application is thoroughly described and discussed, highlighting inherent strengths and weaknesses of the method. Moreover, a clarification of the “energy transfer diagram” is proposed, distinguishing avoidable and unavoidable heat degradation in the heat exchanger network by introducing the concept of “limit heat transfer interface”. The results proved that the bridge framework is a rigorous tool, which provided valuable insight to the analyst aiding the open-ended decision-making activities related to the retrofit of both process operations and heat exchanger network. Seven design proposals were identified, out of which the best resulted in 54000 €/y of economic saving with an internal rate of return of 34% and a minimum risk level. The step-by-step application of the method demonstrated that good engineering judgement is critical for achieving beneficial solutions. Expertise on process operations as well as energy analytics is essential for completing the project. Finally, the concept of “limit heat transfer interface” allowed to completely link bridge analysis and pinch analysis and to clarify the meaning of the “grand composite curve”.

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.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.629
Threshold uncertainty score0.231

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.212 · 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