MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2054252576 · doi:10.1021/ef800849e

Anti-vapor Lock of a Top-Feed Injector for a Liquefied Petroleum Gas Liquid-Phase Injection Engine

2009· article· en· W2054252576 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Kitae Yeom, Jungseo Park, Choongsik Bae, Jeongnam Park, Sungkun Kim

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergy & Fuels · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemical Engineering
TopicAdvanced Combustion Engine Technologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInstitut National Du CancerCanada Excellence Research Chairs, Government of Canada
KeywordsInjectorLiquefied petroleum gasFuel injectionVapor lockFuel tankIgnition systemNuclear engineeringMaterials scienceEnvironmental scienceAutomotive engineeringWaste managementCombustionChemistryEngineeringMechanical engineeringCombustion chamberComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The injection spray characteristics and restart operation after hot soaking of a top-feed injector were investigated using liquid-phase injection of liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) in a spark-ignition engine. LPG is one of the well-known gaseous fuels with benefits of emission reduction. The most challenging aspect of the LPG injection system is the phase change of the fuel. LPG inside the pressurized fuel rail is liquid when the engine is in operation. However, it may become gaseous when the fuel pump is turned off. Vaporized LPG inside the fuel rail has to be removed using the fuel return line during the operation of fuel pump before cranking. The top-feed fuel injector does not have a fuel return line in the injector body. The vaporized LPG inside the fuel rail is not removed at the critical conditions and injected at the intake port instead of liquid LPG. However, the injection duration during the engine-start phase is limited, and the fuel amount is insufficient to start the engine. The resulting hot restart problem is very important and must be solved to adapt an injector for LPG liquid-phase injection systems. LPG engine test and flow visualization of the LPG injection system were carried out to investigate the feasibility of the top-feed injector. The LPG temperatures in top- and bottom-feed injection systems were measured and analyzed. Different operating pressures and temperatures of the fuel injection system were tested to identify the injection characteristics after hot soaking using an injection test rig and an engine test bench. The vaporized LPG was successfully removed with a bottom-feed injector. However, in the case of a top-feed injector, the vaporized LPG still remained inside the fuel rail, so that the engine may not be restarted. A modified design of a LPG delivery pipe with a larger volume at higher pressure was suggested to solve the vapor lock problem. A Mie-scattering technique was used to verify the successful liquid-phase injection after hot soaking. Fuel delivery pipe visualization was carried out to measure the position and size distribution of vaporized LPG inside the fuel rail. In the case of a bottom-feed injector, the injection was accomplished at every experimental condition. In the case of a top-feed injector, rail pressure over 1.2 MPa resulted in the need for an overly long injection duration, indicating that the injector solenoid was not powerful enough for such high pressure. The modified LPG delivery pipe was made with 1 × 10 −3 m 3 of volume, and LPG injection pressure was 1.05 MPa. The engine with the modified top-feed fuel injection equipment was successfully restarted after hot soaking.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.425
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.247 · 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.

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

Citations6
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnergy & FuelsSame topicAdvanced Combustion Engine TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207