MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4210328445 · doi:10.1115/imece2021-69716

A Reactor Train System for Efficient Solar Thermochemical Fuel Production

2021· article· en· W4210328445 on OpenAlexaff
Aniket S. Patankar, Xiaoyu Wu, Wonjae Choi, Harry L. Tuller, Ahmed F. Ghoniem

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicChemical Looping and Thermochemical Processes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNuclear engineeringProcess engineeringHeat exchangerHydrogen productionThermochemical cycleSolar energyHeat recovery ventilationMaterials scienceThermalThermal energyHeat transferHydrogenThermal energy storageWaste managementEnvironmental scienceChemistryThermodynamicsMechanical engineeringEngineeringElectrical engineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Thermochemical redox cycles are a promising route for the production of solar fuels. In this paper we present a novel Reactor Train system for efficient conversion of solar thermal energy to hydrogen. This system is capable of recovering thermal energy from redox materials, which is necessary for achieving high efficiency, but has been difficult to realize in practice. The Reactor Train System overcomes technical challenges of high temperature thermochemical reactors like solid conveying and sealing, while enabling continuous, round-the-clock fuel production and incorporating efficient gas transfer processes and thermal energy storage. The Reactor Train is comprised of several identical reactors arranged in a closed loop and cycling between reduction and oxidation steps. In between these steps, the reactors undergo solid heat recovery in a radiative counterflow heat exchanger. We report a heat recovery effectiveness of 75–82% with a train consisting of 56 reactors and a cycle time of 84 minutes. With ceria as the redox material, 23% of the high temperature thermal energy input is converted to hydrogen, while 49% is recovered as intermediate-temperature heat at 750 °C.

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 score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.473

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.194 · 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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicChemical Looping and Thermochemical ProcessesFrench-language works237,207