Recent progress on flat plate solar collectors equipped with nanofluid and turbulator: state of the art
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This paper reviews the impacts of employing inserts, nanofluids, and their combinations on the thermal performance of flat plate solar collectors. The present work outlines the new studies on this specific kind of solar collector. In particular, the influential factors upon operation of flat plate solar collectors with nanofluids are investigated. These include the type of nanoparticle, kind of base fluid, volume fraction of nanoparticles, and thermal efficiency. According to the reports, most of the employed nanofluids in the flat plate solar collectors include Al 2 O 3 , CuO, and TiO 2 . Moreover, 62.34%, 16.88%, and 11.26% of the utilized nanofluids have volume fractions between 0 and 0.5%, 0.5 and 1%, and 1 and 2%, respectively. The twisted tape is the most widely employed of various inserts, with a share of about one-third. Furthermore, the highest achieved flat plate solar collectors’ thermal efficiency with turbulator is about 86.5%. The review is closed with a discussion about the recent analyses on the simultaneous use of nanofluids and various inserts in flat plate solar collectors. According to the review of works containing nanofluid and turbulator, it has been determined that the maximum efficiency of about 84.85% can be obtained from a flat plate solar collector. It has also been observed that very few works have been done on the combination of two methods of employing nanofluid and turbulator in the flat plate solar collector, and more detailed work can still be done, using more diverse nanofluids (both single and hybrid types) and turbulators with more efficient geometries.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it