Numerical Simulation of the Soot and NO<sub>x</sub> Formations in a Biodiesel-Fuelled Engine
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The importance of using biodiesel as an alternative in diesel engines has been demonstrated previously. A reduction in the soot, CO and HC emissions and an increase in the NO emission burning biodiesel fuels were reported consistently in previous technical papers. However, a widely accepted NO formation mechanism for biodiesel-fueled engines is currently lacking. As a result, in past multi-dimensional simulation studies, the NO emission of biodiesel combustion was predicted unsatisfactorily. In this study, the interaction between the soot and NO formations is considered during the prediction of the soot and NO emissions in a biodiesel-fueled engine. Meanwhile, a three-step soot model and an eight NO model which includes both the thermal NO mechanism and prompt mechanism are implemented. To simulate biodiesel combustion, a biodiesel combustion model containing 56 species and 158 reactions is currently developed based on an existing reduced model which consists of 53 species and 156 reactions. The results show that the predicted in-cylinder pressure using the current combustion model matches well with the experimental measurements. The ignition delay of the biodiesel combustion is also satisfactorily predicted using the current biodiesel combustion model. It is found that an increase in the soot formation leads to a reduction in the NO formation as the soot formation and the prompt NO formation compete for the CH species. The results also reveal that the NO emission is underpredicted using a NO model without the prompt NO mechanism. The NO emission in the biodiesel engine is acceptably predicted in this study. Moreover, the trend of the lift-off length changing versus crank angle is also reasonably predicted using the current biodiesel combustion model.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".