MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Performance of a Run-Around System for HVAC Heat and Moisture Transfer Applications Using Cross-Flow Plate Exchangers Coupled with Aqueous Lithium Bromide

2006· article· en· W1987877489 on OpenAlexaff
Haisheng Fan, Carey J. Simonson, Robert W. Besant, Wei Shang

Bibliographic record

VenueHVAC&R Research · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdsorption and Cooling Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of SaskatchewanUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRecuperatorLithium bromideHeat exchangerHVACHeat recovery ventilationPlate fin heat exchangerMaterials scienceEnergy recovery ventilationAirflowEnvironmental scienceMechanicsThermodynamicsPlate heat exchangerNuclear engineeringMechanical engineeringAir conditioningEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A two-dimensional steady-state mathematical model is developed to study the heat and water vapor transport in a run-around heat and moisture exchanger coupled with a lithium bromide solution for air-to-air exchanger applications. A finite difference method is employed to solve the governing equations of the heat and moisture exchange, which gives the outlet air properties and effectiveness for selected operating conditions for each cross-flow exchanger. Using algorithms for the HVAC supply and exhaust exchangers coupled with a run-around liquid loop, the overall effectiveness of the run-around energy recovery system is shown to be dependent on the flow rate of both the pumped fluid and each airflow, the size and design of each exchanger, and the inlet operating conditions. It is shown that an overall effectiveness of 70% can be achieved when the run-around exchanger sizes and operating conditions are correctly chosen.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.033
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.263 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations52
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHVAC&R ResearchSame topicAdsorption and Cooling SystemsFrench-language works237,207