Evaluating the Performance of a Ceiling Radiation Cooling System in a Tropical Climate
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The intensification of efforts toward energy efficiency in buildings, especially in tropical regions, involves looking into the advancement of cooling systems. The combination of radiant cooling systems with air systems provides a potential way to reduce energy consumption without compromising thermal comfort. The investigation of a ceiling radiation cooling system in a tropical environment is the main objective of this work. The study used 3D modeling in SketchUp and simulations by TRNSYS software to examine the efficacy of the Radiant Ceiling Panel (RCP) in lowering the practical load with actual data from the Sustainable Energy Living Laboratory (SELL) at the University of Kuala Lumpur. The RCP system is integrated with a Fan Coil Unit (FCU) to conduct a comprehensive evaluation of the RCP’s efficacy in reducing the sensible load and improving thermal comfort. To prevent condensation, the panel temperature is successfully controlled by the two-stage controller. The findings indicate that while the RCP had no effect on the latent load, it reduced the sensible load by 28%, resulting in a 20% decrease in the thermal load. The sensible load decreased from 9.47 kW to 6.84 kW. The results show the effectiveness of RCP in providing thermal comfort and reducing thermal load in tropical climates.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".