MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404143077 · doi:10.1016/j.fuel.2024.133562

Characterizing injection and ignition of hydrogen and hydrogen-methane blend fuels in a static combustion chamber

2024· article· en· W4404143077 on OpenAlexaff
Hengameh Delbari, Sandeep Munshi, Gordon McTaggart-Cowan

Bibliographic record

VenueFuel · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemical Engineering
TopicAdvanced Combustion Engine Technologies
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIgnition systemMethaneHydrogenCombustionCombustion chamberMaterials scienceChemical engineeringNuclear engineeringChemistryThermodynamicsPhysicsOrganic chemistryEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

• Pressure ratio between injector and chamber dominant factor for jet penetration, small effect of jet composition; • Minimum hot surface temperature for stable ignition of transient hydrogen jets was 760 °C; • Hot surface temperature of approximately 1116 °C reliably ignited jets with at least 60 % hydrogen by volume; • Ignition delay increased with higher chamber pressure and lower injection pressure due to increased transport time. Hydrogen offers a pathway to significant reductions in greenhouse gas emissions from transportation. Burning hydrogen in an internal combustion engine, either as the sole fuel or as a blend with natural gas, can leverage existing and accepted vehicle propulsion technologies. High net system efficiencies can be achieved with direct fuel injection late in the compression stroke to retain a diesel-like non-premixed combustion. Both hydrogen and methane have strong resistance to auto-ignition, meaning that a positive ignition source is required for reliable ignition. Understanding the interaction between ignition source and the gaseous fuel jet is critical to ensuring stable and robust ignition. In this work, the injection and ignition of hydrogen and blends with methane are evaluated in an optically accessible static combustion chamber. Schlieren imaging and in-chamber pressure were used to quantify the jet penetration and subsequent ignition. The impacts of changing gaseous fuel composition and injection parameters on jet penetration, momentum and dispersion are found to be minimal. Compared to methane, the lower density of hydrogen was offset by a higher nozzle exit velocity, leading to similar penetration rates. The transient jets were then ignited using a hot surface element in the path of the jet. The ignition delay was found to decrease with higher nozzle pressure ratios, with shorter transit time from the injector to the ignitor being the main factor. Reductions in chemical delay, quantified as the time between the arrival of the jet at the hot surface and subsequent ignition was primarily impacted by hot surface temperature. Under the conditions in the static chamber, ignition occurred primarily on the downstream side of the hot surface and the subsequent flame propagated in the downstream direction. Ignition delays increased substantially with methane-hydrogen blends, with stable ignition detected for concentrations of 60 % or more hydrogen by volume at the hot surface ignitor’s maximum temperature of 1116 °C, while hydrogen jets were ignitable at temperatures as low as 760 °C. The results demonstrate the importance of the geometry, chamber pressure, and transit time on the ignition of the jet.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.394
Threshold uncertainty score0.526

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.231 · 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 designBench or experimental
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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFuelSame topicAdvanced Combustion Engine TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207