MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4313511648 · doi:10.17816/rf111059

Natural refrigerants are favored by the future

2023· article· en· W4313511648 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueRefrigeration Technology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRefrigeration and Air Conditioning Technologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRefrigerantBoiling pointBoilingThermodynamicsAdiabatic processVapor-compression refrigerationMaterials scienceEnvironmental scienceChemistryGas compressor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Reducing the harmful impact on the environment is a promising way to the development of low-temperature technology. According to the amendment to the Montreal Agreement, approved by the Russian Federation, the use of hydrofluorocarbons should be reduced by 85% by 2036. AIMS: To justify the use of hydrocarbons as refrigerants in terms of their effectiveness. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Here, we have studied the losses of refrigeration plants at different temperature levels (refrigerant boiling points of 25 С, 18 С, and 13 С), while working with the refrigerants R134a, R404A, R1270, and R290 using the entropy-statistical method of thermodynamic analysis. RESULTS: Experimental results revealed that the natural refrigerants, R1270 and R290 have higher efficiency than the conventional refrigerants R134a and R404A. The values of the cooling coefficient under adiabatic compression are higher by 16.28%, 1.81%, and 1.14% compared to R404A, R1270, and R290, respectively, for installation with a boiling point of 13 C. Similarly, for installation with a boiling point of 18 C, these values are higher by 16.84%, 1.13%, and 0.58% compared to R404A, R1270, and R290, respectively. Furthermore, for installation with a boiling point of 25 C, the values of the cooling coefficient under adiabatic compression are higher by 18.53%, 0.8%, and 0.43% compared to R404A, R1270, and R290, respectively. In addition, the degree of thermodynamic perfection for R290 is higher by 27.99%, 19.2%, and 14.79% compared to R134a, R404A, and R1270, respectively, for a boiling point of 13 C. Similarly, for R290 and a boiling point of 18 C, it is higher by 21.25%, 14.71%, and 9.9% compared to R134a, R404A, and R1270, respectively.Furthermore, for R290 and a boiling point of 25 C, it is higher by 27.94%, 11.44%, and 3.61% compared to R134a, R404A, and R1270, respectively. In this study, data on the production of hydrocarbon refrigerants, in particular R1270 and R290, under the Russian Federation are presented. Moreover, quality indicators and the main areas of application for the same are provided here. CONCLUSIONS: The results of the analysis showed the prospects of using natural refrigerants (R1270 and R290) and allowed us to assess different ways to improve the refrigeration plants.

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)0.000
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.106
Threshold uncertainty score0.793

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.204 · 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