MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2316647977 · doi:10.1115/imece2005-79607

A Numerical Study on a V-Shaped Laminar Stratified Flame

2005· article· en· W2316647977 on OpenAlexaff
Hongsheng Guo, Gregory J. Smallwood, Cédric Galizzi, Dany Escudié

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicCombustion and flame dynamics
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiffusion flameLaminar flowPremixed flameCombustorLaminar flame speedFlame structureDiffusionFlame speedMechanicsCombustionMaterials scienceAdiabatic flame temperatureLewis numberChemistryThermodynamicsOrganic chemistryPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A V-shaped laminar stratified flame was investigated by numerical simulation. The primitive variable method, in which the fully elliptic governing equations were solved with detailed chemistry and complex thermal and transport properties, was used. The results indicate that in addition to the primary premixed flame, the stratified charge in a combustor causes the formation of a diffusion flame. The diffusion flame is located between the primary premixed flame branches. The fuel is fully decomposed and converted to some intermediate species, like CO and H2, in the primary premixed flame branches. Due to the shortage of oxygen, the formed CO and H2 in the fuel rich region of the premixed flame branch is further transported to the downstream until they meet the oxygen from the fuel lean region. This leads to the formation of the diffusion flame. There is an interaction between the diffusion flame and the primary premixed flame branches. The interaction intensifies the burning speed of the primary premixed flame. Both the heat transfer and the diffusion of hydrogen and some radicals cause the interaction. With the increase of the stratified charge region, the diffusion flame zone is enlarged and the interaction is enhanced.

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 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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.266
Threshold uncertainty score0.672

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCombustion and flame dynamicsFrench-language works237,207