MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2005924235 · doi:10.4271/2013-01-1074

Design Improvements of Urea SCR Mixing for Medium-Duty Trucks

2013· article· en· W2005924235 on OpenAlexaff
Guanyu Zheng, Manoj Kumar Sampath, William Alcini, Gabriel Salanta, Adam Kotrba, Bryan Axe

Bibliographic record

VenueSAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper series · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Heat Transfer
Canadian institutionsChrysler (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTruckMixing (physics)Automotive engineeringUreaEnvironmental scienceComputer scienceEngineeringChemistryPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To meet the 2010 diesel engine emission regulations, an aftertreatment system was developed to reduce HC, CO, NOx and soot. In NOx reduction, a baseline SCR module was designed to include urea injector, mixing decomposition tube and SCR catalysts. However, it was found that the baseline decomposition tube had unacceptable urea mixing performance and severe deposit issues largely because of poor hardware design. The purpose of this article is to describe necessary development work to improve the baseline system to achieve desired mixing targets. To this end, an emissions Flow Lab and computational fluid dynamics were used as the main tools to evaluate urea mixing solutions. Given the complicated urea spray transport and limited packaging space, intensive efforts were taken to develop pre-injector pipe geometry, post-injector cone geometry, single mixer design modifications, and dual mixer design options. Weighing these geometries and design options led to the redesigned SCR module geometry that was able to achieve the desired mixing targets with significant performance enhancements. Discussions on the results and roles of tests and CFD spray models are provided. Development methodologies are provided and discussed.

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)0.001
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.212 · 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

Citations15
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper seriesSame topicFluid Dynamics and Heat TransferFrench-language works237,207