Tests of a Novel Ceiling Panel for Maintaining Space Relative Humidity by Moisture Transfer from an Aqueous Salt Solution
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Radiant ceiling panels are used to heat and cool occupied spaces as they satisfy comfort conditions better than all-air systems. Radiant panels also consume less energy as fan size and heating and cooling loads are reduced. A disadvantage of radiant ceiling panels is the lack of control of the relative humidity (RH) in the space, which can affect comfort. The goal of this research is to create a new ceiling panel that can transfer both heat and moisture to maintain temperature and RH in a space. The heat and moisture transfer panel (HAMP) is constructed from a porous membrane and uses a salt solution as the transfer media. Tests have been run on the HAMP using different salt solutions and temperatures in order to determine the amount of moisture transferred between the HAMP and the air. Given initially dry air, the HAMP is able to increase the RH of the air up to 15 % RH with water and up to 7.8 % RH with a salt solution. This results in a change in humidity ratio of 2.7 g/kg with water and 1.3 g/kg with a salt 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 | 0.000 | 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".