Sorbent based enthalpy recovery ventilator (SERV) in northern building applications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sorbent-based enthalpy recovery ventilator (SERV) is a potential replacement for conventional heat or enthalpy recovery ventilator (HRV/ERV) that require defrosting mechanisms in cold climates, such as in Canada. Sorbent materials (e.g. silica gel, CaCl2, alumina oxide) are non-toxic, inexpensive materials. However, the bulkiness, high pressure drop and large mass of adsorbent are major disadvantages of SERV in packed bed form. In this study, a novel design of sorbent discs with air channels is investigated which feature high heat and mass transfer performance with low pressure drop. A theoretical model is developed for heat and mass transfer in air channels in sorbent discs. A sensitivity analysis performed on design parameters e.g. channel diameter and spacing to achieve an optimum design. A prototype SERV is built in our laboratory. A custom-made experimental set-up equipped with thermocouples, humidity sensors, and an orifice plate air flow meter is designed based on ASHRAE 84 standards to evaluate the performance of the SERV prototype. The performance of the SERV is evaluated for several air flow rate, cycle time and outdoor air temperatures down to -15°C. It is shown that the proof of concept SERV consisting of 2.5 kg of heat storage materials and 2.1 kg of active sorbent material can recover up to 70% of heat and 80% of moisture from exhaust air (up to 20 CFM). It corresponds to 103 W of heat and 43 g of moisture recovery per hour which is comparable to the packed bed sorbent system reported in the literature, however, the proposed SERV offer a 60% less pressure drop.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".