Experimental and Analytical Examination of the Development of Inhomogeneities and Autoignition During Rapid Compression of Hydrogen-Oxygen-Argon Mixtures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The reliable prediction of the processes leading to autoignition during the rapid compression of an initially homogeneous mixture of fuel and air requires the coupled modeling of multidimensional fluid dynamics and heat transfer together with a sufficiently detailed description of the chemical kinetics of the oxidation reactions. To satisfy fully such requirements tends at present to be unmanageable. The paper describes an improvised approach that combines multidimensional fluid dynamics modeling (CFD KIVA-3) with derived variable effective global chemical kinetic data. These were generated through a fitting procedure of the corresponding results obtained while using a detailed chemical kinetic scheme; albeit with uniform properties, at constant volume and an initial state similar to that existing during the ignition delay. It is shown while using such an approach that spatially nonuniform properties develop rapidly within the initially homogeneous charge due to piston motion, heat transfer and any preignition energy release activity. This leads autoignition to take place first within the hottest region and a reaction front progresses at a finite rate to consume the rest of the mixture. The present contribution examines the compression ignition of hydrogen-oxygen mixtures in the presence of argon as a diluent. Validation of the predicted results is made using a range of corresponding experimental values obtained in a single-shot pneumatically driven rapid compression apparatus. It is to be shown that the simulation which indicates the build up of temperature gradients during the compression stroke, predicts earlier autoignition than that obtained with a single-zone simulation. Good agreement between predicted and experimental results is achieved, especially for lean and stoichiometric mixtures under high compression ratio conditions. The CFD-based simulation results are found to be closer to the corresponding experimental results than those obtained with an assumed reactive system of uniform properties and using detailed reaction kinetics.
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) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 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".