MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411039940 · doi:10.18280/jesa.580413

Cycle-to-Cycle Combustion Stability Evaluation of HCNG Blends in Multi-Cylinder Engines via Coefficient of Variation Analysis

2025· article· fr· W4411039940 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Prasanna S Sutar, Ravi Sekhar, S. S. Thipse, S. D. Rairikar, Shailesh Sonawane, Debjyoti Bandyopadhyay

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal Européen des Systèmes Automatisés · 2025
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldChemical Engineering
TopicAdvanced Combustion Engine Technologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCombustionCylinderVariation (astronomy)Materials scienceCoefficient of variationAutomotive engineeringEngineeringMathematicsChemistryMechanical engineeringPhysicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigates the effect of hydrogen enrichment on combustion stability in a CNG-fueled multi-cylinder spark-ignition engine.Hydrogen was blended into CNG at 0%, 18%, 25%, and 30% by volume, and the blends were tested under constant-speed, fullload conditions.Combustion stability was assessed using the coefficient of variation (CoV) of peak cylinder pressure (Pmax), mass burn fraction at 50% (MBF50), and heat release rate (HRR).A correlation matrix analysis was employed to examine interrelationships between these stability parameters.Results indicated that the 18% HCNG blend provided the best overall improvement, achieving the lowest CoV values for MBF50 and HRR, and significantly reducing CoV_Pmax compared to pure CNG.Increasing hydrogen content to 25% maintained stability but introduced minor irregularities, while 30% hydrogen further improved Pmax consistency yet adversely impacted MBF50 and HRR stability.Correlation analysis highlighted a strong positive relationship between MBF50 and HRR stability, emphasizing the critical role of combustion phasing control.The study concludes that hydrogen enrichment in the range of 18-25% optimally enhances combustion stability without inducing combustion irregularities.These findings offer valuable insights for optimizing HCNG blends to achieve cleaner and more efficient future engine designs.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.577
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.274 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal Européen des Systèmes AutomatisésSame topicAdvanced Combustion Engine TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207