MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4245351051 · doi:10.5383/ijtee.09.01.007

Computational Analysis of Performance and Emissions of a Compression Ignition Engine under various Air Induction Methods

2014· article· en· W4245351051 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Afaaq Mir, M. Marouf Wani

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Thermal and Environmental Engineering · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemical Engineering
TopicAdvanced Combustion Engine Technologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute of Technology Srinagar
KeywordsTurbochargerIntercoolerAutomotive engineeringNaturally aspirated engineFour-stroke engineCompression ratioIgnition systemEngine powerEnvironmental sciencePower (physics)Computer scienceExhaust gas recirculationInternal combustion engineEngineeringCombustionMechanical engineeringChemistryPhysicsTurbineGas compressorAerospace engineeringCombustion chamberThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A computational study on performance and exhaust emissions from a 4-stroke DI CI engine using different air induction methods was carried out. Using AVL Boost IC engine simulation software a model was developed with a Naturally Aspirated (NA) air induction mode, the second model was developed by incorporating a turbocharger (TC) and again a third model was developed by the introduction of a turbocharger along with an intercooler (TCI). The individual effects of all the three air induction methods on the performance and emission of engine were studied and compared. The power output for the engine with TCI was observed to be 7.8% more than that of an engine with TC, where as it was even greater i-e 20% more when compared with NA engine. Similar Improved results for torque were also observed in case of an engine with TCI. It was also observed that emissions were higher with TCI followed with TC and NA.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.397
Threshold uncertainty score0.349

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.237 · 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.

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

Citations2
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Thermal and Environmental EngineeringSame topicAdvanced Combustion Engine TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207