MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2168834818 · doi:10.1115/1.4025248

Numerical Study on the Effect of Real Syngas Compositions on Ignition Delay Times and Laminar Flame Speeds at Gas Turbine Conditions

2013· article· en· W2168834818 on OpenAlexaff
Olivier Mathieu, Eric L. Petersen, Alexander Heufer, Nicola Donohoe, Wayne K. Metcalfe, Henry J. Curran, Felix Güthe, Gilles Bourque

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and Power · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemical Engineering
TopicAdvanced Combustion Engine Technologies
Canadian institutionsRolls-Royce (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSyngasLaminar flame speedCombustionDiluentIgnition systemSyngas to gasoline plusLaminar flowPremixed flameChemistryThermodynamicsMaterials scienceOrganic chemistryCombustorHydrogen

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Depending on the feedstock and the production method, the composition of syngas can include (in addition to H2 and CO) small hydrocarbons, diluents (CO2, water, and N2), and impurities (H2S, NH3, NOx, etc.). Despite this fact, most of the studies on syngas combustion do not include hydrocarbons or impurities and in some cases not even diluents in the fuel mixture composition. Hence, studies with realistic syngas composition are necessary to help in designing gas turbines. The aim of this work was to investigate numerically the effect of the variation in the syngas composition on some fundamental combustion properties of premixed systems such as laminar flame speed and ignition delay time at realistic engine operating conditions. Several pressures, temperatures, and equivalence ratios were investigated for the ignition delay times, namely 1, 10, and 35 atm, 900–1400 K, and ϕ = 0.5 and 1.0. For laminar flame speed, temperatures of 300 and 500 K were studied at pressures of 1 atm and 15 atm. Results showed that the addition of hydrocarbons generally reduces the reactivity of the mixture (longer ignition delay time, slower flame speed) due to chemical kinetic effects. The amplitude of this effect is, however, dependent on the nature and concentration of the hydrocarbon as well as the initial condition (pressure, temperature, and equivalence ratio).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.231 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations17
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and PowerSame topicAdvanced Combustion Engine TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207