Transient Operation of Sensible Fixed-Bed Regenerators
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Fixed-bed regenerator is a type of air-to-air energy exchanger and recently introduced for energy recovery application in heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) systems because of their high heat transfer effectiveness. The testing of fixed-bed regenerators (FBRs) is essential for performance evaluation and product development. American Society of Heating Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) and Canadian Standards Association (CSA) recently included guidelines for testing of FBRs in their respective test standards. The experiments on FBRs are challenging as they never attain a steady-state condition, rather undergoes a quasi-steady-state operation. Before reaching the quasi-steady state, FBRs undergo several transient cycles. Hence, the test standards recommend getting measurements after one hour of operation, assuming FBR attains the quasi-steady state regardless of test conditions. However, the exact duration of the initial transient cycles is unknown and not yet studied so far. Hence, in this paper, the duration of FBR’s transient operation is investigated for a wide range of design and operating conditions. The test standards’ recommendation for the transient duration is also verified. The major contributions of this paper are (i) quantifying the effect of design parameters (NTUo and Cr*) on the duration of transient operation and (ii) the investigation of the effect of sensor time constant on the transient temperature measurements. The results will be useful to predict and understand the transient behavior of FBRs accurately.
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 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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 it