MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4232496787 · doi:10.1504/ijgw.2018.093747

Characteristics of a double-swirl combustor for the thermal destruction of waste HFC refrigerants

2018· article· en· W4232496787 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Tae In Ohm, Jong Seong Chae, Sin Young Kim, Soo‐Yeon Kim, Seung Hyun Moon

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Global Warming · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicCombustion and Detonation Processes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCombustorRefrigerantIncinerationWaste managementCombustionPyrolysisEnvironmental scienceHeat exchangerChemistryEngineeringOrganic chemistryMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The use of chlorofluorocarbons and hydrochlorofluorocarbons has been banned since the Montreal Protocol. Hydrofluorocarbon (HFC) series refrigerants were developed as an alternative, but HFC-134a has been found to have a high global warming potential. Thus, an eco-friendly, economical, and stable technology for removing waste HFCs is required. Existing methods involving pyrolysis for destruction of waste HFC include incineration, catalytic oxidation, and plasma pyrolysis. In this study, an economical and eco-friendly combustor that consumes little auxiliary fuel and easily neutralising hydrofluoric acid gas was developed to destroy waste HFC-134a. The conceptual design of a double-swirl combustor was developed based on numerical simulations and used to manufacture a prototype, which was used in a combustion experiment. When the auxiliary fuel LPG was used at a flow rate of 1.0 kg/h with an air ratio of 1.1, the average temperature at the vertical section in the combustion chamber was 1,300 K, which is sufficient to destroy waste HFCs. In the waste refrigerant destruction test, the destruction ratio of waste HFCs was 100% when waste HFCs were injected at a flow rate of 2.8 kg/h or less and 99.37% at a flow rate of 2.9 kg/h.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.264 · 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 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

Citations5
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Global WarmingSame topicCombustion and Detonation ProcessesFrench-language works237,207