MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2481410538 · doi:10.1109/acc.2016.7525579

Novel Exergy-wise predictive control of Internal Combustion Engines

2016· article· en· W2481410538 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Meysam Razmara, Mehran Bidarvatan, Mahdi Shahbakhti, Rush D. Robinett

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemical Engineering
TopicAdvanced Combustion Engine Technologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of AlbertaNational Science Foundation
KeywordsExergyExergy efficiencyCombustionSecond law of thermodynamicsInternal combustion engineProcess engineeringIgnition systemModel predictive controlSPARK (programming language)Environmental scienceComputer scienceAutomotive engineeringEngineeringControl (management)ThermodynamicsChemistryAerospace engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Exergy is an effective metric to evaluate the performance of energy systems. Exergy analysis has been extensively used to study and understand loss mechanisms of Internal Combustion Engines (ICEs). However knowledge from exergy analysis has not been used for control of ICEs. This paper presents the first application of exergy-based control to ICEs. In this paper, an exergy model is developed for an advanced ICE with low temperature combustion mode that has higher efficiency compared to conventional diesel and spark ignition engines. The exergy model is based on quantification of the Second Law of Thermodynamic (SLT) and irreversibilities which are not identified in commonly used First Law of Thermodynamics (FLT) analysis. An optimal control method is developed based on minimizing irreversibilities and exergy losses. The new controller finds the optimum combustion phasing at every given engine load to minimize exergy destruction/loss. Application of the new developed control algorithm is demonstrated for a Combined Heat and Power (CHP) case study. The results show that by using the exergy-based optimal control strategy, the engine output power and exhaust exergies are maximized.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.972
Threshold uncertainty score0.379

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.210 · 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 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

Citations5
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Combustion Engine TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207