MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2148150012 · doi:10.1177/1468087410395873

Effects of different cetane number enhancement strategies on HCCI combustion and emissions

2011· article· en· W2148150012 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Engine Research · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemical Engineering
TopicAdvanced Combustion Engine Technologies
Canadian institutionsShell (Canada)Natural Resources CanadaNational Research Council Canada
FundersNatural Resources Canada
KeywordsCetane numberDiesel fuelCombustionHomogeneous charge compression ignitionIgnition systemExhaust gas recirculationEnvironmental scienceAutoignition temperatureWaste managementSootAutomotive engineeringChemistryCombustion chamberBiodieselEngineeringAerospace engineeringOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cetane number is the accepted indicator for quantifying the autoignition characteristics of diesel fuels in compression ignition engines. Diesel fuel specifications typically require a minimum cetane number to achieve satisfactory combustion behaviour in conventional diesel engines. In contrast, a high cetane number fuel may not be beneficial for implementing high efficiency, clean combustion strategies such as homogeneous charge compression ignition (HCCI). The purpose of this study was to investigate cetane number effects on HCCI combustion and emissions. The experiments were conducted in a single-cylinder, variable compression ratio, cooperative fuel research engine operated in HCCI combustion mode. The fuels were finely atomized and partially vaporized in the intake manifold. The base fuel was a low cetane refining stream derived from oil sands sources. Three different methods were employed to increase the base fuel cetane number, namely hydroprocessing, cetane improver addition, and blending with a renewable fuel component. Results show that the three methods of cetane number enhancement produce significantly different HCCI combustion behaviour. The hydroprocessed fuels exhibited more stable and complete combustion than the base fuel, which resulted in a wider operating region, reduced carbon monoxide, unburned hydrocarbon, and nitrogen oxide (NO x ) emissions, and lower indicated specific fuel consumption (ISFC). The main disadvantages of the hydroprocessed fuels were the higher exhaust gas recirculation rates required to retard the combustion phasing, which limits the maximum indicated mean effective pressure for a given intake pressure, and increased knock intensity due to a faster combustion process. In comparison, the other two methods of fuel cetane enhancement increased ISFC compared to the base fuel. The addition of nitrate cetane improver resulted in higher NO x emissions, while blending with a renewable fuel component increased hydrocarbon emissions. The experimental data provide evidence that the magnitude and phasing of low temperature heat release, as well as fuel volatility, play important roles in HCCI combustion.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.187
Threshold uncertainty score0.364

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.316 · 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