MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4286822721 · doi:10.55632/pwvas.v91i1.577

Numerical simulations towards optimizing the burner design for efficient staged pressurized oxy-coal combustion.

2019· article· en· W4286822721 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Gideon Ozioma Udochukwu, Akkerman V’yacheslav

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the West Virginia Academy of Science · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicCombustion and flame dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanada Excellence Research Chairs, Government of CanadaU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsCombustorCombustionCoalWaste managementOxy-fuelProcess engineeringEnvironmental scienceComputer scienceNuclear engineeringEngineeringChemistryOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Staged pressurized oxy-coal combustion (SPOC) – a technology developed at Washington University at St. Louis (WUSTL) – is nowadays a promising tool for low-cost/emissions, high-efficiency power generation. The present computational simulations, performed at West Virginia University (WVU) by means of the ANSYS Fluent package, compliment the experimental research for better understanding of the impacts of turbulence, fluid flow, flame/particle dynamics, and heat transfer on oxy-coal combustion. Here, CO2 is injected alongside the coal, for its carriage, while a small amount of CH4 is also injected alongside the coal to maintain a steady flame. Out of 100 kW in a lab-scale reactor, 10 kW originates from CH4-air burning and 90 kW comes from coal combustion. Steady and unsteady RANS simulations are performed resulting in an asymmetric flame shape. Three causes of the flame asymmetry are hypothesized: (i) coal injection, (ii) onset of the shear-layer instability due to various stream velocities and densities in a shear layer, where mixing occurs, and (iii) presence of the vortex shedding due to the flow past a bluff body, which is used to stabilize the flame. As a result, an impact of the presence of coal on the flame symmetry is demonstrated, and a benchmark at which further increase of coal would result in flame asymmetry is found. The present simulations also shows occurrence of the vortex shedding when the flow passes over a disk in the reactor used to stabilize the flame, constituting a potential reason for the periodic flame oscillations experienced in the result.This work is performed in cooperation with the Washington University at St. Louis (WUSTL). It is sponsored by the US Department of Energy (DoE) through the US-China Clean Energy Research Center – Advanced Coal Technology Consortium (CERC-ACTC).

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)0.000
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 score0.080
Threshold uncertainty score0.419

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.255
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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the West Virginia Academy of ScienceSame topicCombustion and flame dynamicsFrench-language works237,207