MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3142646794 · doi:10.4271/2021-01-0227

Automotive Coolant Inhibitor Protection of an EV Cooling System Having Copper and Aluminum Heat Exchangers

2021· article· en· W3142646794 on OpenAlexaff
John G. Burgers, Mehdi Jalili, Meinrad Machler, Ralf Strauss

Bibliographic record

VenueSAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper series · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMechanical Failure Analysis and Simulation
Canadian institutionsDana (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoolantHeat exchangerAutomotive industryCopperAluminiumMaterials scienceNuclear engineeringWater coolingMetallurgyMechanical engineeringEngineeringAerospace engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<div class="section abstract"><div class="htmlview paragraph">The use of copper in contact with vehicle engine coolants remains a vehicle OEM requirement in the formulation of inhibitors for modern engine coolants such as BASF’s Glysantin® G40®. Battery electric or hybrid vehicles may use copper coolers in their power electronic modules and aluminum coolers in their battery packs. This study compares the use of bare copper and nickel-plated copper coolers in an EV cooling system. An industry accepted inhibitor aging test was applied to a flowing cooling system composed of aluminum battery coolers and copper power electronic coolers. Inhibitor aging was aggravated by reducing the quantity of coolant relative to the copper and aluminum surface areas, and by lengthening the exposure time to 3000 hrs. Ionic concentration of copper, nickel, and all metals, remained below the 3ppm limit of detection confirming the inhibitor package protects for the use of both bare and nickel-plated copper power electronic coolers.</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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.952
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.222
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.

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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper seriesSame topicMechanical Failure Analysis and SimulationFrench-language works237,207