Experimental Study on the Palatability Impacts of Potable Water as a Hydronic Medium
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hydronic systems installed in buildings utilize water to transport thermal energy within the building for heating and cooling purposes. These systems can be closed loop, where the water is chemically treated and circulated indefinitely, or they can be open loop, where the water is not treated and is effluxed as a result of occupant activities, such as bathing or cooking. Water in an open loop system may circulate within the system for a limited time before it is extracted from the system by occupant activities and replaced with new water from the local water supply. The implementation of open loop hydronic systems is becoming more common in multi-unit residential buildings, even though a number of questions regarding the use of such systems remain unanswered. One concern regarding the use of circulated potable water for heating purposes is the potential effects on the occupant perceptions of the palatability of the service water being delivered to their suites. In an open-loop HVAC system (Heating Ventilating, Air Conditioning System), heating water is subject to repeated thermal cycles and continuous recirculation, which creates the potential for chemical alterations of the materials present in the water or leaching of materials from the equipment and piping. Through the use of Flavor Profile Analysis (FPA) established by the American Water Works Association, and a multi-unit HVAC system constructed in a controlled environment, the palatability effects of the operational system were evaluated for a number of scenarios. The collected feedback from the study participants was then tabulated to quantify the impacts of using potable water as a recirculating heating medium on the perceptions of the occupants. The resulting observations led us to conclude that utilizing potable water as a heating medium has a negligible effect on the palatability of water in the system for average retention times under one day, and a non-objectionable, but noticeable, effect for higher average retention times.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".