MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1979015142 · doi:10.1115/1.4023609

Characteristics of Deposits in Gas Turbine Combustion Chambers Using Synthetic and Conventional Jet Fuels

2013· article· en· W1979015142 on OpenAlexaffabout
Greg Pucher, W. Allan, Pierre Poitras

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and Power · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemical Engineering
TopicAdvanced Combustion Engine Technologies
Canadian institutionsCommunications Security EstablishmentRoyal Military College of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCamelinaCombustionJet fuelCombustion chamberEnvironmental scienceSynthetic fuelCamelina sativaSynthetic jetWaste managementBiofuelEngineeringChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The synthetic fuel industry is poised to experience large-scale growth and profoundly affect current aviation fuel infrastructure. New candidate technologies, such as Camelina oil-derived synthetic fuel have been demonstrated to not only provide satisfactory quasi drop-in characteristics for conventional fuels, but in life cycle analysis studies have also been shown to potentially offer positive improvements relative to conventional feedstocks with respect to economic, environmental, and land use considerations. As part of a multiyear study at the Royal Military College of Canada to evaluate combustion related parameters of fuel additives and alternative fuels for gas turbine applications, a Camelina-derived synthetic fuel blend was assessed to determine potential combustion related benefits as compared to conventional and other synthetic blends. The Combustion Chamber Sector Rig (CCSR) which houses a Rolls Royce T-56-A-15 combustion section was utilized for the evaluation of emissions and deposits. Following combustion testing, several combustion system components, including the combustion chamber, fuel nozzle, and igniter plug were analyzed for relative levels of deposit build-up. As with other Fischer Tropsch derived synthetic fuels, there were positive benefits found with Camelina blends in terms of emissions performance and deposit production tendencies.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.215 · 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

Citations17
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and PowerSame topicAdvanced Combustion Engine TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207