MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1504714672 · doi:10.4271/2008-01-0057

Development of a Fuel Injection Strategy for Diesel LTC

2008· article· en· W1504714672 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueSAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper series · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemical Engineering
TopicAdvanced Combustion Engine Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
FundersUniversity of WindsorU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsDiesel fuelAutomotive engineeringEnvironmental scienceComputer scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<div class="htmlview paragraph">A production V-8 engine was redesigned to run on low temperature combustion (LTC) with conventional Diesel fuel. Two fuel injection strategies were used to attain reduction in soot and NOx; a) early premixed injection strategy: fuel injected early during the compression stroke and b) late premixed injection strategy: fuel injected close to TDC with heavy EGR. The early premixed injection strategy yielded low NOx and soot but struggled to vaporize the fuel as noted in unburned hydrocarbons readings. The late premixed injection strategy introduced the fuel at higher in-cylinder temperatures and densities, improving the fuel's vaporization and limited the unburned hydrocarbon and carbon monoxide. The use of high EGR and high injection pressure for late premixed injection strategy provided sufficiently long ignition delay that resulted in partially premixed cylinder charge before combustion, and thereby prevented high soot, even in presence of high EGR. The engine operation was enhanced by a specially designed controller to balance all engine cylinders with the aide of in-cylinder pressure transducers. Under early premixed injection timings, where combustion phasing control was more challenging, the controller was responsible for reducing the soot in some cases by over 50%. The engine mapping was performed for a range of BMEP up to 7 bar.</div> <div class="htmlview paragraph">The CHEMKIN simulation of the combustion process reproduced the experimental results, specially the start of cool flame reactions for the early premixed injection strategy. The simulations provided a useful development tool to frame the boundary conditions towards optimum ignition timing.</div>

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.949
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.236 · 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