MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2018420368 · doi:10.4271/2013-01-0936

EGR Systems Evaluation in Turbocharged Engines

2013· article· en· W2018420368 on OpenAlexaff
Lurun Zhong, Marc Musial, Ronald Reese, Greg Black

Bibliographic record

VenueSAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper series · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemical Engineering
TopicAdvanced Combustion Engine Technologies
Canadian institutionsChrysler (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTurbochargerComputer scienceAutomotive engineeringAerospace engineeringEngineeringGas compressor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

EGR systems are widely applied in modern turbocharged diesel engines to reduce engine-out emissions and will, or are being used to mitigate engine knock in SI engines for improved SI engine efficiency and power. In this paper, different EGR systems are detailed and evaluated theoretically based on the thermodynamics of a turbocharged system featuring an EGR sub-system. Turbine expansion ratio is utilized as a metric to estimate engine efficiency, i.e., pumping losses during the gas exchange process. Approaches such as compressor and turbine bypassing are evaluated as well. Based on above analysis, a new approach is put forward to expand the turbocharger work zone, particularly in the high efficiency regions by correctly utilizing EGR systems at all engine speed range: low-pressure loop EGR system at lower engine speed range and high-pressure loop EGR system at high engine speed range. Both numerical simulation and dynamometer data provide evidence that the proposed approach not only improves engine power output (more than 7% increment in this study) throughout the engine speed range, but also improves fuel economy by reducing pumping losses (PMEP is reduced more than 35kPa).

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.236 · 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

Citations28
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper seriesSame topicAdvanced Combustion Engine TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207