MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4210696038 · doi:10.3390/en15030960

A Redesign Methodology to Improve the Performance of a Thermal Energy Storage with Phase Change Materials: A Numerical Approach

2022· article· en· W4210696038 on OpenAlexaff
Itamar Harris, A.M. James, Maria De Los Ángeles Ortega Del Rosario, M. Ziad Saghir

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergies · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPhase Change Materials Research
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersSecretaría Nacional de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación
KeywordsThermal energy storagePhase-change materialHeat exchangerProcess engineeringPhase changeThermalEnvironmental scienceEnergy storageThermal energyThermal conductivityEfficient energy useNuclear engineeringMaterials scienceComputer scienceMechanical engineeringEngineeringMeteorologyThermodynamicsElectrical engineeringEngineering physicsComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In recent years, phase change materials (PCMs) have been presented as a suitable alternative for thermal energy storage (TES) systems for solar water heater (SWH) applications. However, PCMs’ low thermal conductivity and the high dependence on external conditions are the main challenges during the design of TES systems with PCMs. Design actions to improve the performance of the TES systems are crucial to achieve the necessary stored/released thermal energy and guarantee the all-day operation of SWHs under specific system requirements. In this study, a TES with PCM in the configuration of a heat exchanger was redesigned, focused on achieving two main targets: an outlet water temperature over 43 °C during discharging time (15 h) and efficiency over 60% to supply the hot water demand of two families (400 L). A four-step redesign methodology was proposed and implemented through numerical simulations to address this aim. It was concluded that the type, encapsulation shape, and amount of PCM slightly impacted the system’s performance; however, selecting a suitable sensible heat storage material had the highest impact on meeting the system’s targets. The redesigned TES reached 15 operating hours with a minimum outlet water temperature of 45.30 °C and efficiency of 76.08%.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.096
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.207 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations18
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnergiesSame topicPhase Change Materials ResearchFrench-language works237,207