MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2465254696 · doi:10.14288/1.0080969

Airflow and wood drying models for woodkilns

2009· article· en· W2465254696 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Zhengbing Bian

Bibliographic record

VenuecIRcle (University of British Columbia) · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHygrothermal properties of building materials
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAirflowEnvironmental scienceWood dryingMeteorologyEngineeringGeographyMoistureMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Airflow and heat/mass transfer in a woodkiln are simulated numerically. The uniformity of drying and the quality of the wood in a kiln are strongly influenced by the airflow. A numerical model that simulates the airflow distribution is described and applied to solve the flow distribution in a kiln. The influences of the gaps between lumber pieces and the unevenness of lumber height on the velocity distribution and heat/mass transfer in the woodkiln are investigated numerically. A mathematical model for heat and mass transfer during the wood drying process is presented. The influence of kiln temperature, humidity and transport properties of wood is numerically investigated. The three key parameters in the model are moisture content M , temperature T and total pressure P in the gaseous phase. The results are compared with drying rate experiments carried out by Forintek Canada Corporation. Numerical model predictions are in satisfactory agreement with experimental results. Airflow and wood drying models are coupled to carry out a complete calculation. The model will constitute a powerful tool to optimize kiln design and to help operators improve kiln operations without entailing major new costs.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.160
Teacher spread0.150 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuecIRcle (University of British Columbia)Same topicHygrothermal properties of building materialsFrench-language works237,207