MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2618731708 · doi:10.4271/2017-24-0035

A Chemical-Kinetic Approach to the Definition of the Laminar Flame Speed for the Simulation of the Combustion of Spark-Ignition Engines

2017· article· en· W2618731708 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueSAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper series · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemical Engineering
TopicAdvanced Combustion Engine Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersUniversità di Bologna
KeywordsSPARK (programming language)Ignition systemCombustionLaminar flowFlame speedKinetic energyLaminar flame speedAutomotive engineeringMechanicsMaterials scienceNuclear engineeringAerospace engineeringMechanical engineeringComputer sciencePremixed flameEngineeringChemistryPhysicsClassical mechanicsPhysical chemistryCombustor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<div class="section abstract"><div class="htmlview paragraph">The laminar burning speed is an important intrinsic property of an air-fuel mixture determining key combustion characteristics such as turbulent flame propagation. It is a function of the mixture composition (mixture fraction and residual gas mass fraction) and of the thermodynamic conditions.</div><div class="htmlview paragraph">Experimental measurements of Laminar Flame Speeds (LFS) are common in literature, but initial pressure and temperature are limited to low values due to the test conditions: typical pressure values for LFS detection are lower than 25 bar, and temperature rarely exceeds 550 K.</div><div class="htmlview paragraph">Actual trends in spark ignition engines are to increase specific power output by downsizing and supercharging, thus the flame front involves even more higher pressure and temperature since the beginning of combustion. The most widespread models used to extrapolate the experimental data to the engine like conditions are derived from that of Metghalchi and Keck, but they often fail to correctly predict LFS values outside the experimental space.</div><div class="htmlview paragraph">Thanks to the development of accurate chemical kinetic models together with the increase of computer performance, it is possible to numerically predict the laminar flame speed over a wide range of conditions for a range of fuel mixtures, so to overcome some of the limitations of the Metghalchi and Keck model. The aim of the present work is to evaluate the effectiveness of an exploitable open source chemical solver (Cantera) for the evaluation of laminar flame speed. Results are compared against experimental data available in scientific literature and a review of the main analytical correlation for LFS is accomplished. Finally, a new correlation is proposed to better fit the numerical results in the high pressure and temperature range of the real engine design space.</div></div>

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.874
Threshold uncertainty score0.977

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.228 · 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