Air-to-fuel Ratio Modulation Experiments over a Pd/Rh Three-way Catalyst
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The benefits of deliberately modulating air-to-fuel ratio over a three-way catalyst are disputed. In this work, engine test cell experiments were carried out to assess the performance of a warmed-up Pd/Rh three-way catalyst. The objectives were threefold: first, to determine the best mode of operation; second, to determine if air-to-fuel ratio modulation enhances robustness to transient air-to-fuel ratio disturbances; third, to determine if the conversion efficiency can be manipulated by controlling the shape of the air-to-fuel ratio oscillation. It was observed that the highest conversion efficiency is obtained using a steady air-to-fuel ratio just rich of stoichiometric; however, this mode of operation lacks robustness with respect to transient disturbances and UEGO sensor errors. Robustness can be improved using an oscillating air-to-fuel ratio, but with a sacrifice in peak conversion efficiency. Definite conclusions regarding the benefits of various waveform shapes could not be drawn, but a periodic triangular air-to-fuel ratio input which ramps to the lean slower than it ramps to the rich appears to have superior efficiency than a waveform which ramps to the rich slower than it ramps to the lean.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".