MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3043625738 · doi:10.1016/j.proci.2020.06.015

An experimental and kinetic modeling study of the auto-ignition of natural gas blends containing C1–C7 alkanes

2020· article· en· W3043625738 on OpenAlexafffund
A. Abd El-Sabor Mohamed, Snehasish Panigrahy, Amrit Bikram Sahu, Gilles Bourque, Henry J. Curran

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Combustion Institute · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemical Engineering
TopicAdvanced Combustion Engine Technologies
Canadian institutionsSiemens (Canada)
FundersSiemens CanadaScience Foundation Ireland
KeywordsIgnition systemKinetic energyNatural gasThermodynamicsMaterials scienceChemistryPhysicsOrganic chemistryClassical mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ignition delay time measurements for multi-component natural gas mixtures were carried out using a rapid compression machine at conditions relevant to gas turbine operation, at equivalence ratios of 0.5–2.0 in ‘air’ in the temperature range 650–1050 K, at pressures of 10–30 bar. Natural gas mixtures comprising C1–C7 n-alkanes with methane as the major component (volume fraction: 0.35–0.98) were considered. A design of experiments was employed to minimize the number of experiments needed to cover the wide range of pressures, temperatures and equivalence ratios. The new experimental data, together with available literature data, were used to develop and assess a comprehensive chemical kinetic model. Replacing 1.875% methane with 1.25% n-hexane and 0.625% n-heptane in a mixture containing C1–C5 components leads to a significant increase in a mixture's reactivity. The mixtures containing heavier hydrocarbons also tend to show a strong negative temperature coefficient and two-stage ignition behavior. Sensitivity analyses of the C1–C7 blends have been performed to highlight the key reactions controlling their ignition behavior.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.229 · 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

Citations88
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Combustion InstituteSame topicAdvanced Combustion Engine TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207