MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2288158181 · doi:10.1080/10789669.2013.796857

Characteristic effectiveness curves for falling-film drain water heat recovery systems

2013· article· en· W2288158181 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueHVAC&R Research · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBuilding Energy and Comfort Optimization
Canadian institutionsAgriculture Environmental Renewal Canada (Canada)University of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHeat exchangerWork (physics)Heat transferVolumetric flow rateHeat recovery ventilationEnvironmental scienceFalling (accident)Flow (mathematics)Process engineeringWater flowProcess (computing)Computer scienceMechanicsMechanical engineeringEnvironmental engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Falling-film drain water heat recovery systems have proven to be a cost-effective and reliable class of heat exchanger for reducing primary energy consumption in residential and commercial buildings and in industrial buildings and processes. It is fitting, therefore, that regulatory bodies are preparing standards by which various products can be characterized, both for rating purposes and to provide data for building energy simulation. Unfortunately, standards development is progressing in the absence of measured performance data that characterize how these heat exchangers perform. The intention of the current work is to examine drain water heat recovery performance at various equal-flow conditions. The effectiveness of three drain water heat recovery systems was examined in a counter flow as a function of volumetric flow rate. The drain water heat recovery systems represented products from two manufacturers and two lengths. One of the drain water heat recovery systems was also tested in parallel flow. While the performance characteristics generally mirrored theoretical performance, there were some key differences. For the units tested, there was a clear transition region occurring between flow rates of 5 and 10 L/min (1.3 and 2.6 gpm). While the presence of this region did not impact the proposed rating process, it could significantly impact the applicability of the data analysis to building simulation. It was also shown that the number of transfer units for the collector changed significantly with flow rate, but in a predictable manner. By fitting the number of transfer units versus flow rate data, and using this correlation in conjunction with theoretical ϵ–number of transfer units equations, the drain water heat recovery performance could be well predicted over the entire range of operation.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.079
Threshold uncertainty score0.414

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.251 · 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