Sorption Study of a Starch Biopolymer as an Alternative Desiccant for Energy Wheels
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The sorption of water vapor on high amylose starch was investigated as an alternative desiccant for air-to-air energy exchangers used in ventilation units. Sorption performance of micron-sized mesoporous high amylose starch (HAS 15, d p = 15 μm, P w = 46 Å) and two mesoporous silica gel samples (SG 13, d p = 13 μm, P w = 62 Å; P w = 62 Å; SG 55, d p = 55 μm, P w = 77 Å) were studied and compared. Transient water vapor sorption tests were performed using small-scale energy exchangers coated with HAS 15 and silica gel. Although N 2 gas adsorption tests showed lower sorption capacity for HAS 15 compared to the silica gel samples, higher sorption rates and uptake capacity were shown for HAS 15 when measured by water vapor transient sorption results. In addition, the latent effectiveness, an indicator of moisture recovery efficiency for exchangers, was calculated for each exchanger. With the same amount of desiccant coated on the energy exchanger channels, the latent effectiveness of the HAS-coated material was 2%–13% greater than that of the silica gel materials, depending on the operating conditions.
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) | 0.001 | 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".