MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6981372243

Effects of hydrogen addition to fuel on soot formation and NOx emission in diffusion flames

2011· article· en· W6981372243 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueNPARC · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBioactive natural compounds
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSootDiffusion flameHydrogenCombustionNOxLaminar flowResidence time (fluid dynamics)DiffusionVolume (thermodynamics)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A numerical study of soot formation and NOx emission in axisymmetric coflow laminar methane/hydrogen-air diffusion flame was conducted using detailed gas-phase chemistry and complex thermal and transport properties. To investigate the impact of hydrogen addition, three cases were studied, namely, Case 1, maintaining a constant volume flow of fuel. Case 2, maintaining the fuel heat release rate unchanged, and the fuel nozzle diameter unchanged. Case 3, maintain the fuel heat release rate unchanged, and the fuel jet velocity constant. The results show that, in all three cases, with increasing level of H 2 addition, the flame height decreased, the reaction zone length shortened, residence time shortened, therefore, soot surface growth was inhibited, soot formation reduced, and NO x emissions reduced. Effects of hydrogen addition on soot formation and NO x emissions in Case 2 and Case 3 were much worse than that in Case 1. The results also show that while in reducing soot formation and NO x emission, effect of hydrogen addition in Case 3 was better than that in Case 2.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNPARCSame topicBioactive natural compoundsFrench-language works237,207