Design and assessment of a combined solar energy system with storage and power production
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present study aims to develop a novel design of an integrated energy system that synergistically integrates an open-loop Brayton cycle and closed-loop Rankine cycle with solar assisted thermochemical hydrogen production system. Three tailored configurations are simulated to operate in the charging phase during peak solar hours, in low solar radiation periods, and in the discharging phase without solar radiation. The combined cycle power system is comprised of concentrated solar collectors configured to concentrate solar radiations, a topping cycle configured to generate electricity by expanding the first working fluid, and a bottoming cycle configured to generate electricity by utilizing the exhaust heat of the topping cycle. The developed configurations aim to simultaneously achieve clean power production and heat storage for later use. The Aspen Plus process simulator is employed to solve the mass and energy balances at steady-state conditions. The open loop Brayton cycle parameters (such as split ratio, and turbine pressure), discharging parameters (temperature), and system performance indicators (energy and exergy efficiencies) are also examined. For the charging configuration, the optimized turbine pressure and split fraction are 6 bar and 0.5, which results in an oil temperature of 400.64°C. The overall energy and exergy efficiencies of the charging configuration are 98.26% and 48.36% respectively. The overall energy and exergy efficiencies of the discharging configuration are 69.34% and 39.54% respectively.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".