MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1516736063 · doi:10.4271/2004-01-2955

The Effects of Varying EGR Test Conditions on a Direct Injection of Natural Gas Heavy-Duty Engine with High EGR Levels

2004· article· en· W1516736063 on OpenAlexaff
Gordon McTaggart-Cowan, W. Kendal Bushe, Steven N. Rogak, Philip G. Hill, Sandeep Munshi

Bibliographic record

VenueSAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper series · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicVehicle emissions and performance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAutomotive engineeringHeavy dutyNatural gasExhaust gas recirculationEnvironmental scienceWaste managementEngineeringInternal combustion engine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Determining what exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) control parameters have the largest impact on engine performance and emissions is of critical importance when developing an EGR-equipped engine. These tests studied the effects of varying the net charge mass, the fresh air charge mass, the indicated power, and the oxygen equivalence ratio at various EGR fractions. The research was carried out on a direct-injection, natural gas fuelled, pilot-ignited four-stroke heavy-duty engine using Westport Innovations Inc.'s pilot-ignited, direct injection of natural gas technology. The testing was carried out using a prototype injector and the standard diesel-fuelled engine's combustion chamber. The results indicate that fuel efficiency, as well as emissions of Nitrogen Oxides (NOx) and Carbon Monoxide (CO) depend primarily on the EGR level, and not on the values of the EGR control parameters. Total Hydrocarbon (tHC) and particulate matter (PM) emissions were more dependant on the parameter combination, due primarily to changes in the combustion heat release rate and in the ignition delay time.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
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 integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations12
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper seriesSame topicVehicle emissions and performanceFrench-language works237,207