MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4383498129 · doi:10.1016/j.ijft.2023.100416

Numerical study on the influence of embedded PCM tubes on the energy storage properties of the geothermal energy pile

2023· article· en· W4383498129 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Thermofluids · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPhase Change Materials Research
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersKuwait Foundation for the Advancement of Sciences
KeywordsPileThermal energy storageGeothermal energyGeothermal gradientEnergy storagePhase-change materialThermal energyEnergy recoveryEnvironmental scienceParaffin waxHeat exchangerWork (physics)Process engineeringEnergy (signal processing)Materials scienceGeotechnical engineeringPetroleum engineeringMechanical engineeringEngineeringPhase changeGeologyComposite materialThermodynamicsWaxEngineering physicsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Geothermal energy pile is a remarkable alternative energy source that can provide heating and cooling energy to meet the energy demands in buildings. This study aims to quantify and expand the knowledge on the thermal storage performance of the geothermal pile system embedded with phase change material containers as compared to the one without, as a goal to expand the wide application of the system. In this study, numerical predictions were conducted on lab-scale energy pile systems, namely Design A (i.e., no PCM) and Design B (i.e., with PCM). The work aimed to investigate and quantify the energy storage properties of geothermal energy piles, and the influence of the incorporation of paraffin wax PCM tubes in the pile, at different flow rates. Incorporating PCM in a geothermal energy pile demonstrated considerable improvement in the amount of energy stored and extracted compared to the one with no PCM. For 735, 1470 and 2100 mL/min, Design B exhibited an increase in the energy stored by 42.21%, 44.71% and 46.23%, respectively compared to Design A. On the other hand, for the flow rate 735, 1470 and 2100 mL/min Design B illustrated an increase in the energy extracted by 45.87%, 53.09% and 59.55%, respectively compared to Design A. The use of PCM in the energy pile has a promising solution to enhance the storage capacity and improve the heat exchange capacity.

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)0.001
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 score0.081
Threshold uncertainty score0.261

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.234 · 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