The Effect of Ethanol-Diesel Blends on The Performance of A Direct Injection Diesel Engine
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The experiment was conducted on a conventional direct injection diesel engine. Performance test was carried out to evaluate the performance and emission characteristics of a conventional diesel engine that operates on ethanol-diesel blends. The test procedure was performed by coupling the diesel engine on the eddy current dynamometer. Fuel consumption was measured using the AVL Fuel Balance, and a hotwire anemometer was used to measure the air consumption. Some of the emission test devices were mounted on the exhaust pipe. The test of fuel variations started from 100% diesel fuel (D100) to 2.5% (DE2.5), 5% (DE5), 7.5% (DE7.5), and 10% (DE10) ethanol additions. Performance test was conducted at 1500 rpm with load variations from 0 to 60 Nm by increasing the load on each level by 10 Nm. The addition of 5% ethanol to diesel (DE5) increased the average pressure of combustion chamber indication to 48% as well as reduced the specific fuel consumption to 9.5%. There were better exhaust emission characteristics at this mixture ratio than diesel engine which used pure diesel fuel (D100), the reduction of CO to 37%, HC to 44% and opacity to 15.9%.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".