MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4241634031 · doi:10.32920/14640681.v1

CoFlame: A refined and validated numerical algorithm for modeling sooting laminar coflow diffusion flames

2021· preprint· en· W4241634031 on OpenAlexafffund
Nick A. Eaves, Qingan Zhanga, Fengshan Liu, Hongsheng Guo Guo, Seth B. Dworkin, Murray J. Thomson

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicCatalytic Processes in Materials Science
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council CanadaToronto Metropolitan UniversityCanadian Natural ResourcesUniversity of TorontoUniversity of New Brunswick
FundersUniversity of TorontoNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaQueen's UniversityDeutsches Zentrum für Luft- und RaumfahrtGovernment of OntarioCompute Canada
KeywordsSootDiffusion flameLaminar flowNumerical diffusionNucleationDiffusionDomain decomposition methodsThermophoresisCombustionMechanicsMaterials scienceThermalChemistryThermodynamicsPhysicsCombustorPhysical chemistryFinite element method

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mitigation of soot emissions from combustion devices is a global concern. For example, recent EURO 6 regulations for vehicles have placed stringent limits on soot emissions. In order to allow design engineers to achieve the goal of reduced soot emissions, they must have the tools to so. Due to the complex nature of soot formation, which includes growth and oxidation, detailed numerical models are required to gain fundamental insights into the mechanisms of soot formation. A detailed description of the CoFlame FORTRAN code which models sooting laminar coflow diffusion flames is given. The code solves axial and radial velocity, temperature, species conservation, and soot aggregate and primary particle number density equations. The sectional particle dynamics model includes nucleation, PAH condensation and HACA surface growth, surface oxidation, coagulation, fragmentation, particle diffusion, and thermophoresis. The code utilizes a distributed memory parallelization scheme with strip-domain decomposition. The public release of the CoFlame code, which has been refined in terms of coding structure, to the research community accompanies this paper. CoFlame is validated against experimental data for reattachment length in an axi-symmetric pipe with a sudden expansion, and ethylene–air and methane–air diffusion flames for multiple soot morphological parameters and gas-phase species. Finally, the parallel performance and computational costs of the code is investigated.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.257 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations6
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCatalytic Processes in Materials ScienceFrench-language works237,207