Bibliographic record
Abstract
A new theoretical model is presented for the performance of dehumidifier wheels. The model is aimed at providing design guidance for manufacturers and selection and operation advice for HVAC system designers. To characterize the performance of dehumidifier wheels, water vapor effectiveness, ∊w, and water vapor mass ratio, Δw/Δw*, are defined. The theoretical model uses the transient response characteristics of the flow channel in the wheel matrix to predict the base case physical characteristics for fully developed laminar flow through the matrix where the heat transfer characteristics are first decoupled from the water vapor transfer. The simple algebraic equations, deduced for this base case of a dehumidifier wheel water vapor effectiveness, ∊w, and water vapor mass ratio, Δw/Δw*, show that the mass rate of the supply and regenerator flows should be equal and that both ∊w and Δw/Δw* go toward zero as the wheel speed decreases to low values. Corrections are made to these base case performance factors, which account for the coupling of the heat and water vapor transfer, as well as other smaller factors caused by entrance, heat conduction, carryover, and flow channel variation effects. It is concluded that more dehumidifier wheel performance data, along with a thorough analysis of uncertainties, will permit researchers to decrease the range of physical factor coefficients used in this model.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".