MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2796319666 · doi:10.4271/2018-01-0092

A Simplified Circuit Model for the Emulation of Glow Phase during Spark Discharge

2018· article· en· W2796319666 on OpenAlexafffund
Hua Zhu, Qingyuan Tan, Divyanshu Purohit, Shui Yu, Ming Zheng, Chen Xiang, Xiaohong Xu

Bibliographic record

VenueSAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper series · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPlasma Diagnostics and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
FundersUniversity of WindsorFord Motor Company
KeywordsEmulationSPARK (programming language)Glow dischargeSpark dischargeComputer scienceMaterials scienceElectrical engineeringVoltagePhysicsEngineeringPlasma

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The ever-growing demand to meet the stringent exhaust emission regulations have driven the development of modern gasoline engines towards lean combustion strategies and downsizing to achieve the reduction of exhaust emission and fuel consumption. Currently, the inductive ignition system is still the dominant ignition system applied in Spark Ignited (SI) engines. It is popular due to its simple design, low cost and robust performance. The new development in spark ignition engines demands higher spark energy to be delivered by the inductive ignition system to overcome the unfavorable ignition conditions caused by the increased and diluted in-cylinder charge. To meet this challenge, better understanding of the inductive ignition system is required. The development of a first principle model for simulation can help in understanding the working mechanism of the system in a better way. In this paper, an empirical model was proposed to emulate the relation between the equivalent ion channel resistance of the spark plug gap and the discharge current during the glow phase of a spark discharge. This empirical model was then embedded into a simplified physics based spark ignition circuit model which had been developed previously. Model validation was conducted against measurement results. Compared to the previous model, the proposed model can capture the electrical characteristics better during the glow phase of the spark discharge. Parametric analysis was presented using the model to study the effects caused by changing the ignition coil settings.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.243 · 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 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

Citations5
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper seriesSame topicPlasma Diagnostics and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207