MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4312359758 · doi:10.1115/gt2022-82683

Numerical Study of Methane Pyrolysis Inside a Single-Channel Shock Wave Reformer

2022· article· en· W4312359758 on OpenAlexaff
S.V. Mahmoodi-Jezeh, Stefan Tüchler, Ghislain Madiot, Mark Davidson, Pejman Akbari, Colin Copeland

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicCombustion and Detonation Processes
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMechanicsShock waveMethaneReynolds-averaged Navier–Stokes equationsTurbulenceComputational fluid dynamicsStagnation pressurePhysicsMaterials scienceThermodynamicsChemistryMach number

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The paper describes a numerical investigation of the thermal decomposition of methane to hydrogen and carbon within a single-channel, four-port wave rotor using a three-dimensional (3-D), Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes (RANS) CFD model. This work is in support of the New Wave Hydrogen, Inc. (NWH2) proprietary technology development. A Menter’s k-ω SST turbulence is used for the closure of the mean momentum equations and is coupled to multispecies transport equations with a one-step finite-rate chemistry model. The kinetic model is validated based on a set of measurement data of a double-diaphragm shock tube case. To further examine the predictive accuracy of the numerical approach, the results of the 3-D single-channel wave rotor are compared with those of quasi-one-dimensional unsteady model that has been previously reported extensively in literature. It is observed that when the wave rotor channel is exposed to the high-pressure driven gas (HPDRV N) port, a secondary right-running shock wave is generated, which greatly energizes the flow around the HPDRV N port, resulting in large magnitudes of pressure and temperature; and consequently, the cracking of methane into hydrogen and carbon. The comparison between 1-D and 3-D simulation results indicate that the LPDRV N gas penetration is around 75% of the channel width in the case of 1-D, but is below 50% in the 3-D case. Furthermore, the conversion rate of methane in the 3-D case is one order of magnitude smaller than that in the 1-D case.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.217
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.203 · 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 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

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCombustion and Detonation ProcessesFrench-language works237,207