MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4297917745 · doi:10.18280/psees.010101

Energy and exergy analysis of flat plate solar collector for three working fluids, under the same conditions

2017· article· en· W4297917745 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Maghsoud Abdollahi Haghghi, Seyed M. Pesteei

Bibliographic record

VenueProgress in Solar Energy and Engineering Systems · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicSolar Thermal and Photovoltaic Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExergyWorking fluidExergy efficiencySolar energyNanofluids in solar collectorsRenewable energyEnvironmental scienceSolar thermal collectorMaterials scienceEnvironmental engineeringPhotovoltaic thermal hybrid solar collectorMechanical engineeringProcess engineeringEngineeringElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The growth and expansion of the population, has caused increased the use of energy in the last few years. One of the cleanest and renewable sources of the energy is the solar energy. The solar energy can be collected by solar collectors. One of the solar collectors is the flat plate solar collector (FPC), that it is used in domestic utilization. Use of various Nano-fluids to improve the thermal properties of solar collectors, considered as one of the most effective method to optimize the flat plate collectors. In this study, a FPC in terms of energy and exergy, for three fluids (water, air and TiO2 Nano-fluid) have been investigated. According to the results obtained and under the same conditions, destruction exergy of water is more than other two fluids and TiO2 Nano-fluid has the least amount of destruction exergy. Also, by increasing in the total radiation on tilted surface (Gt) TiO2 Nano-fluid’s exergy efficiency is more than the other fluids in this study. By increasing ambient temperature, the exergy efficiency decreases, that water has the most variation. Due to the temperature range of the inlet working fluid to the collector’s tubes, observed that outlet temperature of the TiO2 Nano-fluid is about 50°C higher than when water enters it. Therefore, the initial statement about Nano-fluids is confirmed. In appropriate conditions, the collector’s efficiency is between 45% - 50%, thus FPC is one of the best devices for domestic utilization.

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)0.000
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.219 · 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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProgress in Solar Energy and Engineering SystemsSame topicSolar Thermal and Photovoltaic SystemsFrench-language works237,207