A tractable methodology for assessing the pressure scaling of sooting processes in a counterflow diffusion flame from 1 to 6 bar
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A parametric study using ethylene as fuel was undertaken which examines the efficacy of concentration based and soot production rate (SPR) based parameters for assessing the pressure scaling of sooting processes in a counterflow diffusion flame. Two experimental designs pertaining to constant flow residence times (Case A), and constant carbon mass flux (Case B) were respectively implemented for pressures between 1 to 6 bars and across peak temperatures ranging from ∼ 2300 − 2600 K for Y f = Y ox = 0 . 35 , ∼ 2100 − 2400 K for Y f = Y ox = 0 . 30 , and ∼ 1800 − 2100 K for Y f = Y ox = 0 . 25 flames. A diffuse line-of-sight based extinction imaging diagnostic was employed for the measurement of soot concentrations. The evaluation of SPR follow a transport based coupling of inferred gaseous precursors, temperatures and velocity fields from detailed 1D OpenSMOKE++ simulations and soot concentrations from extinction measurements. The use of concentration based parameters, namely peak ( ∼ p 2 . 5 − 4 . 5 ) and integrated soot volume fractions ( ∼ p 2 . 1 − 3 . 9 ), is noted to be dependent on the Case A or B with little information discernible about the pressure effects in an experimental setting. The use of production rate based parameters, namely mean SPR ( ∼ p 2 . 2 − 3 . 4 ) removes the disparity of pressure scaling exponents across cases A and B but inherits the dependency to peak flame temperature, and gaseous precursor concentrations. An empirical fit of local SPR to acetylene and pyrene concentrations reveals a universal Arrhenius activation energy parameter in the high-temperature region (1300–2000 K) of the studied flames. The global activation energy is noted to remain roughly constant across varying peak flame temperatures, fuel flux, flow residence times and pressure. Consequently, we propose a soot yield parameter ( Ω ), calculated as the mean soot production rate normalized to acetylene and pyrene mass fractions which is noted to universally scale with pressure as Ω ∼ p 1 . 7 .
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".