Some Aspects of Materials Selection for Condensing Economizers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The use of a condensing economizer within a biomass combustion system is a potentially attractive heat recovery solution for the pulp and paper industry. Selecting materials from which to construct condensing economizers for installation within utility power boiler units is, however, not trivial considering that aqueous sulphuric acid (H2SO4) condensates are typically formed. The expected corrosiveness of the flue gas condensate derived from pulp and paper biomass fuels is likely higher than that derived from natural gas (lower sulphur and chlorine contents), but lower than that derived from fossil fuels (higher sulphur and chlorine contents). To help guide materials selection, a laboratory corrosion testing program was initiated to evaluate the corrosion resistance of candidate alloys to synthetic acidic flue gas condensates expected to be derived from pulp and paper biomass fuels. The initial work, which is reported here, was focused on evaluating the resistance of carbon steel and stainless steel to dewpoint corrosion in chloride-free aqueous H2SO4 condensates and to stress corrosion cracking in a saturated aqueous ammonium nitrate (NH4NO3) solution.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".