Energy Input and Quality of Pellets Made from Steam-Exploded Douglas Fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ground softwood Douglas fir ( Pseudotsuga menziesii ) was treated with pressurized saturated steam at 200−220 °C (1.6−2.4 MPa) for 5−10 min in a sealed container. The contents of the container were released to the atmosphere for a sudden decompression. The steam-exploded wood particles were dried to 10% moisture content and pelletized in a single-piston−cylinder system. The pellets were characterized for their mechanical strength, chemical composition, and moisture sorption. The steam-treated wood required 12−81% more energy to compact into pellets than the untreated wood. Pellets made from steam-treated wood had a breaking strength 1.4−3.3 times the strength of pellets made from untreated wood. Steam-treated pellets had a reduced equilibrium moisture content of 2−4% and a reduced expansion after pelletization. There was a slight increase in the high heating value from 18.94 to 20.09 MJ/kg for the treated samples. Steam-treated pellets exhibited a higher lengthwise rigidity compared to untreated pellets.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".