MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2352892230

Experiments on H_2 /Air Premixed Combustion in a Micro Laval Nozzle

2014· article· en· W2352892230 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Deng Che

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the CSEE · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicCombustion and flame dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCombustionNozzleInletMechanicsPremixed flameEquivalence ratioVolumetric flow rateMaterials scienceFlame structureChemistryThermodynamicsMechanical engineeringPhysicsCombustorEngineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Experiments of H2 /air premixed combustion were carried out in a micro Laval nozzle with inner throat diameter of 1?mm and inlet/outlet diameter of 2?mm. This paper focused on the stable combustion range, wall temperature, flame starting position and flame feature. The experimental results show that the stable combustion range is extended significantly compared with the combustion in circular and T-type tube because of the converging-diverging structure, and flame can stabilize in this region with appropriate equivalence ratio as the inlet flow rate varies in the range of 3.4?m/s to 41.4?m/s. Wall temperature and flame starting position are both affected by the inlet flow rate and equivalence ratio(?). The maximum wall temperature is observed at the fuel-rich condition of ????1.4. Flame starting position moves downstream with the increase of flow rate. But it moves upstream firstly, then downstream, with the increase of equivalence ratio. By optimizing the selection of equivalence ratio and flow rate, the temperature and flame location can be controlled in the nozzle, which provides guidance for the design and improvement of micro-propulsion system.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.200
Teacher spread0.193 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations1
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the CSEESame topicCombustion and flame dynamicsFrench-language works237,207