Skip to content
BY 4.0 license Open Access Published by De Gruyter Open Access December 31, 2022

Analysis of standard systems with solar monitoring systems

  • Ali Osman Alak EMAIL logo and Abdulhakim Karakaya
From the journal Open Chemistry

Abstract

With the increase in the need for electrical energy in the world, electricity is tried to be generated by various methods. Some of these methods cause global warming and environmental pollution to increase. Therefore, it is aimed to generate electricity using renewable energy sources instead of fossil fuels. The sun is one of these renewable energy sources. Electricity generation with solar energy is one of the methods that have become quite common in recent years. One of the most important considerations required to achieve maximum efficiency in solar power and electricity generation is to ensure that the rays are perpendicular to the panel. When this is achieved, the depreciation time of the system will be reduced and electricity generation will be carried out with high efficiency from these panels with limited service life. To achieve this, various solar tracking systems are designed. In this study, the analysis of fixed systems was performed by comparing them with single- and dual-axis solar tracking systems. Comparisons were made using a design and simulation software (PVSOL) program for photovoltaic systems. In these comparisons, the effects of single- and dual-axis solar tracking methods on depreciation time compared to fixed systems were examined.

1 Introduction

The demand for renewable energy sources is increasing due to the depletion of fossil resources and the damage they cause to the environment. As a result of this demand, many renewable energy sources have been discovered. One of them is solar energy. Electricity generation from solar energy is provided by photovoltaic panels. Many scientific studies such as solar tracking systems are carried out to obtain maximum efficiency from these panels with limited service life.

When the solar tracking systems used to obtain maximum efficiency from solar panels are examined; Seme et al. examined studies on single- and dual-axis solar tracking systems. According to the results of the examination, they found that the amount of electrical energy generated in all solar-monitored studies was higher [1]. Batayneh et al. compared two different fixed, single-axis solar tracking systems. One of the single-axis solar tracking systems was set to three locations: morning, noon, and evening, and the other continuously allowed it to follow the sun on one axis. These two solar tracking systems have a higher efficiency than the fixed system [2].

Abhilash et al. designed a single-axis solar tracking system using light-dependent resistance (LDR). They operated the irrigation pump with the system they designed. According to the results of the experiment, there was a 79.4% increase in the amount of irrigation [3]. Oral and Ucan designed a dual-axis solar tracking system instead of LDR, depending on the amount of energy generated from the panel [4]. Mamodiya and Tiwari built the single-axis solar tracking system using two LDR. According to the fixed system, the efficiency increased by 32.17% [5]. Rajesh et al. built the dual-axis solar tracking system using LDR. Compared to the fixed panel system, they observed a yield increase between 30.2 and 33.62% [6]. Morales et al. examined algorithms in active solar tracking systems. They found that it works more stable than passive solar tracking systems. In this study, 30% efficiency increase was seen compared to fixed systems [7]. Pawar et al. built the solar tracking system using eight LDRs. In this study, the angles of the panels from east to west were changed in eight steps with angles of 22.5%. They found a 40% efficiency increase compared to fixed systems [8]. Munanga et al. used a stepper motor and crank mechanism in the single-axis solar tracking system. Twenty-five percentage more efficiency was achieved than the fixed system [9]. Wu et al. controlled the dual-axis solar tracking system with a microcontroller. They determined the location of the sun with date, time, and geographical information. For this, they used a real-time clock and a satellite system (GPS) that made it possible to determine the exact position on Earth by measuring the distance between them and the satellites [10]. Jamroen et al. compared the solar monitoring system with dual-axis ultraviolet (UV) sensor with the LDR solar monitoring system and the stationary system. It was determined that the UV sensor tracking system was 19.97% more efficient than the LDR-fixed system and 11% more efficient than the solar tracking system [11]. Angulo et al. used a low-cost passive solar tracking system based on dual-axis image processing. They achieved a higher efficiency than fixed systems [12]. Akdemir and Karakaya used PVSOL in their study and examined the effects of controllers on the depreciation periods of the system [13]. Tyagi et al. talked about the decrease in the costs of solar cells and the increase in their use. In particular, they noted the high efficiency of monocrystalline solar cells [14]. Karimov et al. allowed it to follow four solar panels along a 120° angle. They have proven that the proposed system has high efficiency [15]. Akash et al. worked on solar panels, materials, and solar monitoring systems to improve efficiency. They decided that monocrystalline and dual-axis solar tracking systems were the most efficient [16]. Demirkiran and Karakaya compared the efficiencies of the same solar panels at different altitudes with PVSOL. They compared the data they obtained from the PVSOL program [17]. When such studies are examined, it has been found that single-axis solar tracking systems have higher efficiency than fixed systems, and at the same time, the installation cost is less than the dual-axis solar tracking system [18,19,20]. On the other hand, it has been found that dual-axis solar tracking systems are more efficient than fixed and single-axis solar tracking systems in terms of efficiency [21,22,23,24,25]. Many studies have been carried out to analyze the efficiency of PV systems using different programs [26,27,28,29,30]. Besides PV system, there are many different studies performed on material science for different purposes [31,32,33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41,42,43,44,45,46].

In literature studies, solar tracking systems have generally been compared in terms of performance with fixed panel systems. However, there was no comparison of these systems in terms of their effect on depreciation periods. Therefore, in this study, the analysis of fixed systems in terms of depreciation time was performed with single- and dual-axis solar tracking methods. A 450 kWp (kilo watt peak) solar power plant installed in Manisa, Turkey, was analyzed using the PVSOL program. Annual electrical energy generation data were obtained from the installed power plant models according to the application method. According to these data, the depreciation periods of the systems established were compared and yield analysis was performed.

2 Methods

Various methods are used in the generation of electricity from solar panels. The most commonly used method is the generation of electricity from fixed panels. In addition, various sun tracking methods are used to obtain more efficiency from the sun.

2.1 Fixed panel systems

It is the most widely used method recently. As seen in Figure 1, the panel angle is adjusted according to the latitude and longitude of the country and city. The panels are fixed on the profiles at this angle and their angles do not change. The efficiency of fixed panel systems is low as the position of sunlight relative to the panels changes continuously during the day. In general, it is the most widely used method in solar power plants and personal use recently.

Figure 1 
                  Fixed panel system.
Figure 1

Fixed panel system.

2.2 Single-axis solar tracking system

To increase the efficiency of solar panels, single-axis solar tracking systems are usually used, which provide east–west rotation. As shown in Figure 2, the panel is mounted on a designed platform. The direction it will turn is determined by sensors or the scheduled time. The rotational movement is provided by a servo, stepper motor or a chemical that evaporates at low temperature.

Figure 2 
                  Single-axis solar tracking system.
Figure 2

Single-axis solar tracking system.

2.3 Dual-axis solar tracking system

The sun is moved in the east–west direction during the day. Unlike the single-axis solar tracking system, panels are also provided to follow the sun in the north and south directions. As shown in Figure 3, the panel is mounted on a designed platform. The directions of movement of the panels are determined by using sensors or programming methods depending on the time. Horizontal and vertical rotational movement is provided by two servos, stepper motors, or a chemical.

Figure 3 
                  Dual-axis solar tracking system.
Figure 3

Dual-axis solar tracking system.

3 Application

The PVSOL program was used to compare the energy generated by fixed systems and single- and dual-axis solar tracking systems. To achieve this, three on-grid 450 kWp power plants with equivalent characteristics were designed in Manisa, Turkey. The 3D view of the built power plants is given in Figure 4. The 21-year operation of these power plants was examined. These power plants were designed in the same city and location. A total of 1,500 units of 300 W Hareon Solar HR-300-24/Ca monocrystalline panels were used in each power plant. These panels were modeled on a flat terrain with an area of 77.5 m × 74 m. To minimize the shadowing effect, 2 m gap was left between the panels. In practice, panel installation costs were calculated as 1$ (₺13.65) per watt. The cleaning and so on expenses of the power plants were determined as 2,000₺ per month. The amount of electricity consumption of the motors used for each panel group in single- and dual-axis tracking systems was neglected. In addition, 20 kW × 20 kW SolarMax 20SHT inverters were used to transfer the electricity generated to the grid. Power plant models are on-grid systems with 3 phase 230 V voltage. It was accepted that the panels used in power plants have a loss of 1% annual efficiency. The unit price of the energy generated was determined as 0.5827₺, which is the price determined in the purchase of energy generated by the Turkish state from the enterprises during the period of the study.

Figure 4 
               3D image of the plant made in PVSOL program.
Figure 4

3D image of the plant made in PVSOL program.

The location information of all power plants, the average temperature information during the year, the radiation information received from the sun throughout the year, and their electrical values are given in Figure 5.

Figure 5 
               Fixed panel switchboard information.
Figure 5

Fixed panel switchboard information.

The number of photovoltaic panels, total power, solar tracking method, sun viewpoint, and total rotation angle in the power plant, which has a single-axis solar tracking system, are included in Figure 6.

Figure 6 
               Single-axis solar tracking system switchboard information.
Figure 6

Single-axis solar tracking system switchboard information.

The number of photovoltaic panels, total power, solar tracking method, maximum inclination angle, and total rotation angle in the power plant, which has a dual-axis solar tracking system, are included in Figure 7.

Figure 7 
               Dual-axis solar tracking system switchboard information.
Figure 7

Dual-axis solar tracking system switchboard information.

4 Analysis of data

The data obtained from the power plants created in the PVSOL program are analyzed in this section. The effect of fixed and single-axis and dual-axis solar monitoring systems installed in the same position on electricity generation is examined. The cost, depreciation period, and profit amounts of these power plants are compared. The data of three power plants are shown in Table 1. When these data are examined, it is seen that only the types of power plants and the perspective of the panels toward the sun have changed. The power plants are installed at the location indicated in Figure 5.

Table 1

Switchboard data

Power plant data Power plants
Fixed system Single axis Dual axis
Where it was founded Manisa Manisa Manisa
Installed power (kWp) 450 450 450
Power plant type Constant Single axis Dual axis
Tilt deficit (degree) 34 34/Variable Variable
Annual average radiation (kWh/m²) 1,682 1,682 1,682
Average annual temperature (°C) 17 17 17

The monthly energy generation amounts of all three power plants installed during the year are seen in the graph in Figure 8. According to this graph, it is seen that the production amount decreases in all three types of power plants due to the decrease in solar radiation amounts in winter, when clouds are high and shading is high. However, it is clear that the amount of energy generation of solar monitoring systems is higher than the fixed system. In the summer months, especially in July and August, it is seen that the difference in the amount of energy generated by solar monitoring systems increases even more compared to the fixed system. According to fixed systems, the energy generation of single- and dual-axis power plants was higher throughout the year. When single- and dual-axis power plants are compared to each other, it is seen that the dual-axis power plant generates higher energy than a single-axis power plant.

Figure 8 
               Estimated generation of power plants by month.
Figure 8

Estimated generation of power plants by month.

Figure 9 displays the total amounts of energy generation of power plants within 1 year. The energy obtained from fixed and single-axis and dual-axis power plants is 651687.7–914486.7 and 992833.3 kWh, respectively.

Figure 9 
               Total annual power generation amounts of power plants.
Figure 9

Total annual power generation amounts of power plants.

The estimated earnings chart for all three plants established is shown in Figure 10. When this graph is examined, the lowest gain is obtained from the fixed panel power plant, while the highest gain is obtained from the dual-axis solar monitoring system power plant. When the gain between the fixed system power plant and the single-axis solar monitoring system is examined, it is seen that there are big differences between the two. Compared to the gain obtained from single- and dual-axis solar tracking systems, it is seen that the dual-axis power plant has higher profits.

Figure 10 
               Annual earnings of power plants.
Figure 10

Annual earnings of power plants.

Investment costs and gains are given in Table 2. Many techniques are used in solar tracking systems. The costs of these techniques vary. For this reason, investment costs are taken equally to make the analyzes healthier.

Table 2

Income expense statement of power plants

Power plants
Fixed system Single axis Dual axis
Total revenues ₺7153187.11 ₺9985993.99 ₺10839390.4
Total expenses ₺42000.00 ₺42000.00 ₺42000.00
Investment cost ₺6142500.00 ₺6142500.00 ₺6142500.00
Total profit ₺968687.11 ₺3801493.99 ₺4654890.4

5 Conclusion

As a result of this study, based on the total energy generation amounts in a year; compared to the fixed system, it has been determined that the single-axis solar tracking system generates 40.33% more energy and the dual-axis solar tracking system generates 52.35% more energy. In addition, the dual-axis solar tracking system has been found to generate 8.57% more energy than the single-axis solar tracking system. At the end of the 21st year, more than 2832806.88₺ and 3686203.29₺ were obtained from single- and dual-axis solar tracking systems, respectively, according to the fixed system. The dual-axis solar tracking system was 853396.41₺ more than the single-axis solar tracking system. Depreciation periods of the systems were determined as 17.8, 12.4, and 11.4 years, respectively, in fixed and single- and dual-axis systems. In addition, it has been found that solar tracking systems increase their efficiency considerably by receiving more radiation than fixed systems in winter months or cloudy weather. For example, when the month of December, when the month of the most clouding is examined, the single-axis solar tracking system generated 166% more energy and the dual-axis solar tracking system generated 213% more energy than the fixed system. Compared to the single-axis solar tracking system, the dual-axis solar tracking system generated 18% more energy. Considering all these data, the installation of single-axis solar tracking systems may be more advantageous if the investment cost required for the motor and control units used in solar tracking systems is taken into account. In the near future, the use of solar tracking systems is predicted to increase to achieve higher efficiency from panels.

  1. Funding information: There is no funding for this article.

  2. Author contributions: Authors have equal contribution to this article.

  3. Conflict of interest: Authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.

  4. Ethical approval: The conducted research is not related to either human or animal use.

  5. Data availability statement: The datasets generated during and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

References

[1] Seme S, Stumberger B, Hadziselimovic M, Sredensek K. Solar photovoltaic tracking systems for electricity generation: A review. Energies. 2020;13:1–24. 10.3390/en13164224.Search in Google Scholar

[2] Batayneh W, Bataineh A, Soliman I, Hafees S. Investigation of a single-axis discrete solar tracking system for reduced actuations and maximum energy collection. Autom Constr. 2019;98:102–9. 10.1016/j.autcon.2018.11.011.Search in Google Scholar

[3] Abhilash P, Kumar R, Kumar R. Solar powered water pump with single axis tracking system for irrigation purpose. Mater Today Proc. 2021;39(1):553–7.10.1016/j.matpr.2020.08.336Search in Google Scholar

[4] Oral G, Ucan ON. Solar tracking systems and prototype realization. Istanb Aydın Univ J. 2012;4(15):1–14.Search in Google Scholar

[5] Mamodiya U, Tiwari N. Design and İmplementation Of An İntelligent single axis automatic solar tracking system. International Virtual Conference on Sustainable Materials-MaterialsToday: Proceedings; 2021. p. 1–4. 10.1016/j.matpr.2021.04.428.Search in Google Scholar

[6] Rajesh T, Tamilselvan KS, Vijayalakshmi A, Narendra Kumar CH, Anitha Reddy K. Design and İmplementation Of an automatic solar tracking system for A monocrystalline silicon material panel using mppt algorithm. International Conference on Advances in Materials Research – 2019, Materials Today Proceedings. Vol. 45, No. 2; 2021. p. 1783–9. 10.1016/j.matpr.2020.08.635.Search in Google Scholar

[7] Morales RFF, Ponce AD, Cruz MIP, Rodrigo PM, Coronado LMV, Chavez FM, et al. Control algorithms applied to active solar tracking systems: A review. Sol Energy. 2020;212:203–19. 10.1016/j.solener.2020.10.071.Search in Google Scholar

[8] Pawar P, Pawale P, Nagthane T, Thakre M, Jangale N. Performance enhancement of dual axis solar tracker system for solar panels using proteus Isıs 7.6 software package. Glob Transit Proc. 2021;2:455–60. 10.1016/j.gltp.2021.08.049.Search in Google Scholar

[9] Munanga P, Chinguwa S, Nyemba WR, Mbohwa C. Design for manufacture and assembly of an intelligent single axis solar tracking system. CIRP Design Conference 2020, South Africa. Vol. 91; 2020. p. 571–6.10.1016/j.procir.2020.03.109Search in Google Scholar

[10] Wu CH, Wang HC, Chang HY. Dual-axis solar tracker with satellite compass and inclinometer for automatic positioning and tracking. Energy Sustain Dev. 2022;66:308–18. 10.1016/j.esd.2021.12.013.Search in Google Scholar

[11] Jamroen C, Fongkerd C, Krongpha W, Komkum P, Pirayawaraporn A, Chindakham N. A novel UV sensor-based dual-axis solar tracking system: Implementation and performance analysis. Appl Energy. 2021;299:1–17. 10.1016/j.apenergy.2021.117295.Search in Google Scholar

[12] Angulo M, Ponce AD, Valentin L, Valdivia R, Keshtkar S. Desing and control of a passive solar tracking system using a sky imager. Lasirs. 2020;86:170–8. 10.1007/978-3-030-45402-9_17.Search in Google Scholar

[13] Akdemir A, Karakaya A. Analysis of maximum-power-tracking methods in photovoltaic panels. Emerg Mater Res. 2022;11(3):367–75.10.1680/jemmr.22.00061Search in Google Scholar

[14] Tyagi V, Rahim NA, Rahim N, Jeyraj A, Selvaraj L. Progress in solar PV technology: Research and achievement. Renew Sustain Energy Rev. 2013;20:443–61.10.1016/j.rser.2012.09.028Search in Google Scholar

[15] Karimov KS, Saqib MA, Akhter P, Ahmed MM, Chattha JA, Yousafzai SA. A simple photo-voltaic tracking system. Sol Energy Mater Sol Cell. 2005;87:49–59.10.1016/j.solmat.2004.08.010Search in Google Scholar

[16] Akash A, Shukla K, Manohar MSR, Dondariya C, Shukla KN, Porwal D, et al. Review on sun tracking technology in solar PV system. Energy Rep. 2020;6:392–405.10.1016/j.egyr.2020.02.004Search in Google Scholar

[17] Demirkiran M, Karakaya A. Efficiency analysis of photovoltaic systems installed in different geographical locations. Open Chem. 2022;20(1):748–58.10.1515/chem-2022-0190Search in Google Scholar

[18] Clifford MJ, Eastwood D. Design of a novel passive solar tracker. Sol Energy. 2004;77:269–80.10.1016/j.solener.2004.06.009Search in Google Scholar

[19] Li G, Tang R, Zhong H. Optical performance of horizontal single-axis tracked solar panels. Energy Procedia. 2012;16:1744–52.10.1016/j.egypro.2012.01.270Search in Google Scholar

[20] Sefa I, Demirtas M, Çolak I. Application of one-axis sun tracking system. Energy Convers Manag. 2009;50:2709–18.10.1016/j.enconman.2009.06.018Search in Google Scholar

[21] Bakos GC. Design and construction of a two-axis Sun tracking system for parabolic trough collector (PTC) efficiency improvement. Renew Energy. 2006;31:2411–21.10.1016/j.renene.2005.11.008Search in Google Scholar

[22] Fathabadi H. Novel high accurate sensorless dual-axis solar tracking system controlled by maximum power point tracking unit of photovoltaic systems. Appl Energy. 2016;173:448–59.10.1016/j.apenergy.2016.03.109Search in Google Scholar

[23] Batayneh W, Owais A, Nairoukh M. An intelligent fuzzy based tracking controller for a dual-axis solar PV system. Autom Constr. 2013;29:100–6.10.1016/j.autcon.2012.09.006Search in Google Scholar

[24] Yao Y, Hu Y, Gao S, Yang G, Du J. A multipurpose dual-axis solar tracker with two tracking strategies. Renew Energy. 2014;72:88–98.10.1016/j.renene.2014.07.002Search in Google Scholar

[25] Abdallah S, Nijmeh S. Two axes sun tracking system with PLC control. Energy Convers Manag. 2004;45:1931–9.10.1016/j.enconman.2003.10.007Search in Google Scholar

[26] Busson BO, Santos LO, Carvalho PCM, Carvalho CO. Experimental assessment and modeling of a floating photovoltaic module with heat bridges. IEEE Lat Am Trans 19:2079–86.10.1109/TLA.2021.9480150Search in Google Scholar

[27] Haddad S, Lekouaghet B, Benghanem M, Soukkou A, Rabhi A. Parameter estimation of solar modules operating under out-door operational conditions using artificial hummingbird algorithm. IEEE Access. 2021;10:51299–314.10.1109/ACCESS.2022.3174222Search in Google Scholar

[28] Sun Q, Long J, Li X, Dai P, Zhang Y, Xuan J, et al. The diffusion effect of copper on the flexible GaInP/GaAs solar cells. IEEE Electron Device Lett. 2022;43:584–7.10.1109/LED.2022.3156377Search in Google Scholar

[29] Milosavljević DD, Kevkić TS, Jovanović SJ. Review and validation of photovoltaic solar simulation tools/software based on case study. Open Phys. 2022;20:431–51.10.1515/phys-2022-0042Search in Google Scholar

[30] Aslam M, Lee SJ, Khang SH, Hong S. Two-stage attention over LSTM with Bayesian optimization for day-ahead solar power forecasting. IEEE Access. 2021;9:107387–98.10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3100105Search in Google Scholar

[31] Ural A, Kilimci ZH. The prediction of chiral metamaterial resonance using convolutional neural networks and conventional machine learning algorithms. Int J Comput Exp Sci Eng. 2021;7(3):156–63. 10.22399/ijcesen.973726.Search in Google Scholar

[32] Zarkooshi A, Latıf KH, Hawı F. Estimating the Concentrations of Natural Isotopes of 238 U and 232Th and Radiation Dose Rates for Wasit Province-Iraq by Gr-460 system. Int J Compu Exp Sci Eng. 2021;7(3):128–32. 10.22399/ijcesen.891935.Search in Google Scholar

[33] Caymaz T, Çalışkan S, Botsalı AR. Evaluation of ergonomic conditions using Fuzzy logic in a metal processing plant. Int J Comput Exp Sci Eng. 2022;8(1):19–24. 10.22399/ijcesen.932994; Safiddine S, Amokrane K, Debieb F, Soualhi H, Benabed B, Kadri E. How quarry waste limestone filler affects the rheological behavior of cement-based materials. Appl Rheol. 2021;31(1):63–75. 10.1515/arh-2020-0118.Search in Google Scholar

[34] Arbouz H. Modeling of a tandem solar cell structure based on CZTS and CZTSe absorber materials. Int J Comput Exp Sci Eng. 2022;8(1):14–8. 10.22399/ijcesen.843038.Search in Google Scholar

[35] Salima B, Seloua D, Djamel F, Samir M. Structure of pumpkin pectin and its effect on its technological properties. Appl Rheology. 2022;32(1):34–55. 10.1515/arh-2022-0124.Search in Google Scholar

[36] Çilli A, Beken M, Kurt N. Determination of theoretical fracture criteria of layered elastic composite material by ANFIS method from artificial intelligence. Int J Comput Exp Sci Eng. 2022;8(2):32–9. 10.22399/ijcesen.1077328.Search in Google Scholar

[37] Rwashdı QAAD, Waheed F, Gunoglu K, Akkurt İ. Experimental Testing of the Radiation Shielding Properties for Steel. Int J Comput Exp Sci Eng. 2022;8(3):74–6. 10.22399/ijcesen.1067028.Search in Google Scholar

[38] Tan T, Zhao Y, Zhao X, Chang L, Ren S. Mechanical properties of sandstone under hydro-mechanical coupling. Appl Rheology. 2022;32(1):8–21. 10.1515/arh-2022-0120.Search in Google Scholar

[39] Waheed F, İmamoğlu M, Karpuz N, Ovalıoğlu H. Simulation of neutrons shielding properties for some medical materials. Int J Comput Exp Sci Eng. 2022;8(1):5–8. 10.22399/ijcesen.1032359.Search in Google Scholar

[40] Karaali R, Keven A. Evaluation of four different cogeneration cycles by using some criteria. Appl Rheology. 2022;32(1):122–37. 10.1515/arh-2022-0128.Search in Google Scholar

[41] Boodaghi Malidarre R, Akkurt İ, Gunoglu K, Akyıldırım H. Fast neutrons shielding properties for HAP-Fe2O3 composite materials. Int J Comput Exp Sci Eng. 2021;7(3):143–5. 10.22399/ijcesen.1012039.Search in Google Scholar

[42] ALMisned G, Baykal DS, Susoy G, Kilic G, Zakaly HeshamMH, A, Ene, et al. Determination of gamma-ray transmission factors of WO3–TeO2–B2O3 glasses using MCPX Monte Carlo code for shielding and protection purposes. Appl Rheology. 2022;32(1). 10.1515/arh-2022-0132.Search in Google Scholar

[43] Şen Baykal D, Tekin H, Çakırlı Mutlu R. An investigation on radiation shielding properties of borosilicate glass systems. Int J Comput Exp Sci Eng. 2021;7(2):99–108. 10.22399/ijcesen.960151.Search in Google Scholar

[44] Tekin HO, Cavli B, Altunsoy EE, Manici T, Ozturk C, Karakas HM. An Investigation on Radiation Protection and Shielding Properties of 16 Slice Computed Tomography (CT) Facilities. Int J Comput Exp Sci Eng. 2018;4(2):37–40. 10.22399/ijcesen.408231.Search in Google Scholar

[45] ALMisned G, Baykal DS, Susoy G, Kilic G, Zakaly HeshamMH, A, Ene, et al. Assessment of the usability conditions of Sb2O3-PbO-B2O3 glasses for shielding purposes in some medical radioisotope and a wide gamma-ray energy spectrum. Appl Rheology. 2022;32(1). 10.1515/arh-2022-0133.Search in Google Scholar

[46] Arslankaya S, Çelik MT. Prediction of heart attack using fuzzy logic method and determination of factors affecting heart attacks. Int J Comput Exp Sci Eng. 2021;7(1):1–8. 10.22399/ijcesen.837731.Search in Google Scholar

Received: 2022-11-18
Revised: 2022-12-02
Accepted: 2022-12-05
Published Online: 2022-12-31

© 2022 the author(s), published by De Gruyter

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Downloaded on 22.2.2024 from https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/chem-2022-0265/html
Scroll to top button