Particulate Matter Reduction From a Pilot-Ignited, Direct Injection of Natural Gas Engine
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper reports an evaluation of various combustion strategies aiming to reduce engine-out particulate matter (PM) emissions from a natural-gas fuelled heavy-duty engine. The work is based on a Westport HPDI fuelling system, which provides direct injection of both natural gas and liquid diesel into the combustion chamber of an otherwise unmodified diesel engine. The diesel acts as a pilot to ignite the natural gas, which normally burns in a non-premixed fashion, leading to significant PM formation. The concepts to reduce PM evaluated in this work are: 1) adjusting the relative phasing of the natural gas and diesel injections to allow more premixing of the natural gas prior to ignition; 2) reducing the pilot quantity to increase the ignition delay of the gas jet; and 3) reducing the level of EGR at select modes to reduce PM formation. These strategies are evaluated at steady state using single- and multi-cylinder research engines, supported by CFD analysis. The results demonstrate that allowing limited premixing of the gas jet prior to ignition can significantly reduce PM emissions. Excessive premixing can lead to high rates of pressure rise; EGR can be used to moderate the combustion under these conditions, without causing increased PM emissions. Reducing pilot quantity is another effective technique to reduce PM, primarily by allowing more air to mix with the gas jet before ignition. These various techniques can be combined to form a new operating strategy that significantly reduces engine-out PM and NOx emissions compared to the baseline strategy without significantly impacting fuel consumption.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".