Effect of renewable fuel components on combustion and emission performance of an HCCI engine
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Renewable fuels usually consist of paraffinic hydrocarbons and are free of sulfur and aromatics. Although most renewable fuels meet the conventional fuel requirements for internal combustion engine applications, differences in fuel properties between renewable fuels and petroleum-based fuels still exist. The effect of renewable fuels on conventional diesel engines has been investigated by many researchers. However, few studies have been conducted on the effect of renewable fuels on combustion and emission performance of homogeneous charge compression ignition(HCCI)engines. In this paper, the combustion and emission characteristics of an HCCI engine are experimentally investigated when four neat renewable fuel components and their blends with a petroleum-based diesel were used. The ratios of renewable fuel components in the blends were changed from zero to 100%. The experiments were conducted over a wide range of operational conditions. Energy efficiency and regulated emissions data were collected and analyzed. The results suggest that compared to the petroleum-based diesel fuel, all four investigated renewable fuel components increase the fraction of heat release during low temperature stage and reduce the ignition temperature when applied to an HCCI engine. As a result, the investigated renewable fuel components advance combustion phasing of an HCCI engine. While three of the four investigated renewable fuel components improve the energy efficiency when blended with the petroleum-based diesel, one renewable fuel component deteriorates energy efficiency. The effects of renewable fuel components on emissions vary, with some reducing emissions while others not having a clear trend affecting emissions.
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".