MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2011104875 · doi:10.1115/gt2014-25556

Numerical Simulation of Lean Premixed Stagnation Flames

2014· article· en· W2011104875 on OpenAlexafffund
Hsu Chew Lee, A. A. Mohamad, Lei‐Yong Jiang, Jeffrey M. Bergthorson, Sean D. Salusbury

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemical Engineering
TopicAdvanced Combustion Engine Technologies
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityNational Research Council CanadaUniversity of Calgary
FundersBioFuelNet Canada
KeywordsSyngasMethaneSyngas to gasoline plusCombustionPremixed flameDilutionFlame speedWork (physics)Materials scienceLaminar flame speedHydrogenThermodynamicsMechanicsChemistryCombustorSteam reformingOrganic chemistryHydrogen productionPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Lean premixed combustion counterflow model coupled with detailed chemical kinetics mechanisms are used to study the effects of methane dilution on syngas mixture numerically. The work critically evaluates and examines the effects of methane additions at various methane/syngas ratios and various equivalence ratios (φ = 0.6, 0.65, and 0.7) using the CANTERA package. The results of this study increase the feasibility of incorporating syngas mixture diluted with methane based fuel for lean premixed gas turbine engines. This study indicates that the flame velocity of a syngas mixture (H2:CO-75:25) can be reduced to the flame speed of a methane mixture at an equivalence ratio of 0.6 and standard conditions (1 atm and 298 K) by mixing it with 50% of methane. This could reduce the flashback propensity that syngas mixtures will incur due to the significantly high flame speed. Moreover, this study substantiates that the current detailed mechanism is capable of predicting the one-dimensional reacting flows and it matches remarkably well with experimental data. The approach employed herein can be used to optimize and validate detailed chemical kinetics mechanism without the need to correct the flame speed to zero strain or stretch free from the measured datasets.

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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.940
Threshold uncertainty score0.257

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.239 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Combustion Engine TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207