MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2038426172 · doi:10.1115/icef2014-5472

Effect of Renewable Diesel and Jet Blending Components on Combustion and Emissions Performance of a HCCI Engine

2014· article· en· W2038426172 on OpenAlexaff
Hongsheng Guo, W. Stuart Neill, Wally Chippior, Rafał Gieleciak

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBiodiesel Production and Applications
Canadian institutionsDevon Energy (Canada)National Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiesel fuelUltra-low-sulfur dieselJet fuelCetane numberHomogeneous charge compression ignitionEnvironmental scienceCombustionMaterials scienceRenewable fuelsWaste managementThermal efficiencyDiesel engineCombustion chamberAutomotive engineeringBiofuelBiodieselChemistryEngineeringOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Renewable diesel and jet blending components may be produced by hydrotreating waste fats and vegetable oils. The resulting hydrocarbon components are paraffinic in nature and free of sulfur and aromatics. An isomerization process may follow to improve the cold weather properties. The main differences between renewable diesel and jet blending components is that the jet blending components are more volatile, have a lower cetane number and a much lower cloud point. In this study, different percentages of hydrotreated renewable diesel and jet components were blended into an ultra-low sulfur diesel (ULSD) fuel and their effect on homogeneous charge compression ignition (HCCI) combustion and emissions performance was investigated. The experiments were conducted using a Co-operative Fuel Research (CFR) engine coupled to an eddy-current dynamometer. The percentage of renewable blending components was varied from 0 to 100%. HCCI combustion and emissions data was collected at a single relative air/fuel ratio (λ) = 1.2 and engine speeds of 900 and 1200 rpm for each fuel blend. The experimental results indicate that the renewable diesel and jet blending components increased the heat release during low temperature stage and reduced the auto-ignition temperature compared to the ULSD fuel, which tended to advance the combustion phasing at a fixed compression ratio. The thermal efficiency was not significantly affected by renewable jet and diesel blends up to 10% by volume, but the renewable jet improved the thermal efficiency while the renewable diesel blends deteriorated thermal efficiency for higher percentage blends. The renewable jet fuel component improved unburned hydrocarbon (HC) emissions, but the renewable diesel component did not have a significant effect on HC emissions. Both renewable fuel components reduced CO emissions at a fixed compression ratio, but there was not a clear trend for CO emissions at the optimal thermal efficiency condition when renewable components were blended with the ULSD fuel. The NOx emissions were extremely low and did not show a clear trend as the percentage of renewable blending components increased.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.215
Threshold uncertainty score0.204

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.202 · 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 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

Citations5
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicBiodiesel Production and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207