Combustion and Emissions of Paired-Nozzle Jets in a Pilot-Ignited Direct-Injection Natural Gas Engine
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper examines the combustion and emissions produced using a prototype fuel injector nozzle for pilot-ignited direct-injection natural gas engines. In the new geometry, 7 individual equally-spaced gas injection holes were replaced by 7 pairs of closely-aligned holes (“paired-hole nozzle”). The paired-hole nozzle was intended to reduce particulate formation by increasing air entrainment due to jet interaction. Tests were performed on a single-cylinder research engine at different speeds and loads, and over a range of fuel injection and air handling conditions. Emissions were compared to those resulting from a reference injector with equally spaced holes (“single-hole nozzle”). Contrary to expectations, the CO and PM emissions were 3 to 10 times higher when using the paired-hole nozzles. Despite the large differences in emissions, the relative change in emissions in response to parametric changes was remarkably similar for single-hole and paired-hole nozzles. Compared to the reference injector, the paired-hole nozzle produced larger soot aggregates and larger numbers of particles; interestingly, soot primary particle size did not change significantly. In addition to the experimental results, select experiments were modelled using reacting-flow computational fluid dynamics. These simulations suggested that the paired-hole nozzle did enhance air and fuel mixing during some stages of the injection and combustion event, but the net effect was to increase the total residence time of natural gas in the rich, moderate-temperature conditions needed to form soot.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".