Performance evaluation of a dual-fuel engine using syngas produced from downdraft gasification of coconut shells
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Syngas has been produced using coconut shells through downdraft gasification and has been utilized in the performance evaluation of a dual-fuel engine. Proximate analysis and GCV test have been conducted to confirm its potential as a feasible feedstock for gasification. The generated syngas contains 9.125 % CO, 7.10 % H 2 , 3.355 % CH 4 , and 9.97 % CO 2 on average. CGE has also been calculated, and it comes out to be 52.42 %. Further, syngas has been utilized in the dual-fuel engine at different compression ratios of 14, 16, and 18 by varying the engine loads from 2 to 10 kg using a dynamometer. Performance parameters such as BTE, BSFC, and BMEP are evaluated. Results indicate that an increase in compression ratio reduces the BSFC and enhances BTE. Thus, indicating an improved fuel efficiency. Noise level from the engine has also been compared under diesel and dual fuel modes at varying compression ratios. Findings show the feasibility of coconut shell as a viable feedstock for gasification.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".