MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2082174987 · doi:10.4271/2014-01-1148

LES Analysis of Cyclic Variability in a GDI Engine

2014· article· en· W2082174987 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueSAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper series · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemical Engineering
TopicAdvanced Combustion Engine Technologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of British Columbia
KeywordsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<div class="section abstract"><div class="htmlview paragraph">The paper critically discusses Large-Eddy Simulation (LES) potential to investigate cycle-to-cycle variability (CCV) in internal combustion engines. Particularly, the full load/peak power engine speed operation of a high-performance turbocharged GDI unit, for which ample cycle-to-cycle fluctuations were observed during experimental investigations at the engine test bed, is analyzed through a multi-cycle approach covering 25 subsequent engine cycles. In order to assess the applicability of LES within the research and development industrial practice, a modeling framework with a limited impact on the computational cost of the simulations is set up, with particular reference to the extent of the computational domain, the computational grid size, the choice of boundary conditions and numerical sub-models [<span class="xref">1</span>, <span class="xref">2</span>, <span class="xref">3</span>]. In order to evaluate the applicability of the adopted approach to the resolution of an adequate portion of the overall turbulent energy spectrum, different grid metrics are at first introduced, based on criteria available in literature [<span class="xref">4</span>, <span class="xref">5</span>]. A qualitative comparison between CFD results and experimental evidence is then carried out in terms of both in-cylinder pressure envelope and coefficients of variation for any of indicated mean effective pressure, 10%, 50% and 90% of fuel burnt distributions among the investigated cycles. Particularly, a detailed analysis of the physical factors influencing the exhibited cycle-to-cycle variability is performed through the use of correlation coefficients, aiming at highlighting possible hierarchies between the many involved phenomena and the observed engine behavior. Finally, a phase-dependent Proper Orthogonal Decomposition (POD). Particularly, while POD applications available in literature mainly cover vector fields and flow structures [<span class="xref">6</span>, <span class="xref">7</span>], in the present paper the analysis is extended to scalar fields describing the combustion process evolution and its cyclic variability, and results are critically analyzed and commented.</div></div>

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.983
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.241 · 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