Status – Validation of Eulerian Spray Modelling University of Zagreb Faculty of Mechanical Engineering and Naval Architecture Department of Energy, Power.

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

Mid Term Meeting, Sept. 21st-22nd, 2004, Karlsruhe Presentation by: F.Pittaluga - UNIGE-DIMSET Dept. of Fluid Machinery, Energy Systems and Transportation.

Advertisements

Nathan N. Lafferty, Martin L. deBertodano,

Fuel Injection System Dr Jehad Yamin.

Primary Atomization (Near Nozzle Flows) Guidance on Experiments and Simulations to be Performed Sibendu Som: Argonne National Laboratory October 2 nd 2014.

Ta-Te Lin, Yi-Chung Chang

MODELLING OF CAVITATION FLOW IN A DIESEL INJECTION NOZZLE S. Martynov 1, D. Mason 2, M. Heikal 2 1 Department of Mechanical Engineering, University College.

Combustion in CI Engine

Analysis of the Droplet Size Reduction in a pMDI Due to the Addition of a Turbulence Generating Nozzle by Michael P. Medlar Dr. Risa Robinson.

FUEL INJECTION SYSTEMS WITH A FOCUS ON FUEL ATOMIZATION By: David Shamrell.

Gaseous And Particulate Dispersion In Street Canyons

Lecture Objectives -Finish with modeling of PM -Discuss -Advance discretization -Specific class of problems -Discuss the CFD software.

Combusting and Gasification Using Discrete Phase Method Combustion Through a Chamber.

LES Combustion Modeling for Diesel Engine Simulations Bing Hu Professor Christopher J. Rutland Sponsors: DOE, Caterpillar.

Modelling of droplet heating and evaporation in computational fluid dynamics codes Sergei SAZHIN*, Irina SHISHKOVA**, Vladimir LEVASHOV **, Morgan HEIKAL*

Flow over an Obstruction MECH 523 Applied Computational Fluid Dynamics Presented by Srinivasan C Rasipuram.

Analysis of In-Cylinder Process in Diesel Engines P M V Subbarao Professor Mechanical Engineering Department Sudden Creation of Young Flame & Gradual.

Les sprays S Sazhin 1, S Martynov 1, C Crua 1, E Sazhina 1, M Gorokhovskii 2, A Chtab 2 1 School of Engineering, Faculty of Science and Engineering, University.

11 June 2007 Franco-British INTERREG European Programme Les Sprays.

Mid Term Meeting, Sept. 21st-22nd, 2004, Karlsruhe Presentation by: F.Pittaluga - UNIGE-DIMSET Dept. of Fluid Machinery, Energy Systems and Transportation.

International Conference on Hydrogen Safety, Sep. 8-10, Pisa, Italy NUMERICAL STUDY OF A HIGHLY UNDER-EXPANDED HYDROGEN JET B P Xu, J P Zhang, J X WEN,

EFFECTS OF DROPLET BREAKUP, HEATING AND EVAPORATION ON AUTOIGNITION OF DIESEL SPRAYS S. Martynov 1, S. Sazhin 2, C. Crua 2, M. Gorokhovski 3, A. Chtab.

The Case for cavitation induced heating

Design of Port Injection Systems P M V Subbarao Professor Mechanical Engineering Department Collection of Models to Predict Multi-physics of Spray …...

Fuel Evaporation & Mixing Process in Port Injection Systems P M V Subbarao Professor Mechanical Engineering Department Locally Correct Air/Fuel Mixture.

Correlations for INTERNAL CONVECTION P M V Subbarao Associate Professor Mechanical Engineering Department IIT Delhi An Essential Part of Exchanging Heat……..

Models for Design & Selection of Injection System P M V Subbarao Professor Mechanical Engineering Department Mathematical Tools for Sizing of Hard Ware.

Analysis of Fuel Injection & Related Processes in Diesel Engines

Kern Method of SHELL-AND-TUBE HEAT EXCHANGER Analysis

Computational Analysis of Water Atomization in Spray Desuperheaters of Steam Boilers A Thesis by Paul Bovat.

Instructor: André Bakker

General Formulation - A Turbojet Engine

Wittaya Julklang, Boris Golman School of Chemical Engineering Suranaree University of Technology STUDY OF HEAT AND MASS TRANSFER DURING FALLING RATE PERIOD.

TECHNICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPROVEMENT OF LNG CARRIER’S PROPULSION MACHINERY USING JATROPHA BIAO DIESEL FUEL 1 Prof. M. A. Mosaad Naval Architecture and.

Mechanistic Modeling and CFD Simulations of Oil-Water Dispersions in Separation Components Mechanistic Modeling and CFD Simulations of Oil-Water Dispersions.

ICHS4, San Francisco, September E. Papanikolaou, D. Baraldi Joint Research Centre - Institute for Energy and Transport

Modelling of the particle suspension in turbulent pipe flow

Design & Analysis of Combustion System for Diesel Engines P M V Subbarao Professor Mechanical Engineering Department Means & Methods to Promote Matured.

A SEMINAR ON NOx REDUCTION BY FUEL WATER EMULSION INJECTION

Fluid Dynamics of Combustion System for Diesel Engines P M V Subbarao Professor Mechanical Engineering Department Use of Fluid Dynamics to Design Matured.

Environmental engineering Presentation of the research activities University of Maribor Faculty of Mechanical Engineering Institute for Power, Process.

Lecture Objectives Unsteady State Simulation Example Modeling of PM.

Auto Ignition, Premixed & Diffusive Combustion in CI Engines

SO 3 Reduction in the Heavy-oil Fired Furnace Power Engineering Dept. Faculty of Mechanical Engineering and Naval Architecture University of Zagreb, Croatia.

Modeling a Turbine with TRACE

Compression Ignition Engines

Lecture #6 Ehsan Roohi Sharif University of Technology Aerospace Engineering Department 1.

Conference on PDE Methods in Applied Mathematics and Image Processing, Sunny Beach, Bulgaria, 2004 NUMERICAL APPROACH IN SOLVING THE PDE FOR PARTICULAR.

1 NUMERICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL STUDIES OF THIN-LIQUID-FILM WALL PROTECTION SCHEMES S.I. ABDEL-KHALIK AND M. YODA G. W. Woodruff School of Mechanical Engineering.

Internal combustion engines

The Rankine Cycle: An Alternate Ideal Thermodynamic Model P M V Subbarao Professor Mechanical Engineering Department IIT Delhi A Feasible Mathematical.

1 Combustion in CI Engine In a CI engine the fuel is sprayed directly into the cylinder and the fuel-air mixture ignites spontaneously. These photos are.

Phases and Phase Changes. The Phases Solid Liquid Gas Plasma ColdestHottest.

Post Injection Process in Port Injection Systems P M V Subbarao Professor Mechanical Engineering Department Models Based Predictions of Multi-physics.

SAL COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING Department of Chemical Engineering ALA CHEMICAL ENGINEERING THERMODYNAMICS -II ( ) TOPIC : SIMPLE MODELS FOR VAPOUR/LIQUID.

Gas Dynamics of Flow through Valves Method to Estimate the Flow Capacity of Valve Passage…. P M V Subbarao Professor Mechanical Engineering Department.

Evidence of anisotropy of small scale turbulence in the laboratory model of an atmospheric cloud P.M. Korczyk, T.A. Kowalewski, S. P. Malinowski IPPT PAN,

Evidence of anisotropy of small scale turbulence in the laboratory model of an atmospheric cloud P.M. Korczyk, T.A. Kowalewski, S. P. Malinowski IPPT PAN,

CFD ANALYSIS OF MULTIPHASE TRANSIENT FLOW IN A CFB RISER

Workshop 7 Tank Flushing

APS-DFD Meeting th November 2016 Portland, OR

Date of download: 10/23/2017 Copyright © ASME. All rights reserved.

Lecture Objectives Unsteady State Ventilation Modeling of PM.

CI-DI I C Engines for Automobiles

Lecture Objectives Learn about particle dynamics modeling

Development of Design Knowledge for GDI Internal Combustion Engines

C. Habchi, B. M. Devassy, R. Kumar, N. Gillet, A.Velghe, J. Bohbot

20th Century CI-DI I C Engines for Automobiles

Post Injection Processes in Diesel Engines

Turbulent Mixing in the Presence of Liquid Droplets with Application to Spray Combustion Venkatramanan Raman Department of Aerospace Engineering and Engineering.

Boiling is a liquid-to-vapor phase change process just like evaporation, but there are significant differences between the two. Evaporation occurs at.

Presentation transcript:

Status – Validation of Eulerian Spray Modelling University of Zagreb Faculty of Mechanical Engineering and Naval Architecture Department of Energy, Power Engineering and Environment Chair of Power Engineering and Energy Management Milan Vujanovic May, 2006

Validation: I-Level project Version v vs. Version v Nozzle D – 205 micron diameter Rail pressure – 500 bar Gas chamber pressure – 72 bar Gas temperature in chamber K

Test Case - Nozzle D – 205 micron diameter Experimental data – injection rate: PointRailpressure Gas chamber pressureTemperature 4500 bar72 bar900 K

Calculation settings Upto Time [s] Δt upto 1.0e-6 2.5e-08 upto 1.0e-4 2.5e-07 upto 2.0e-4 5.0e-07 upto e-06 Time discretisation: The liquid → Diesel → T=373 K Eulerian spray with 6 phases Primary brake-up model: Dies.Core Injection Secondary brake-up model: Wave model Evaporation model: Abramzon-Sirignano model Turbulent dispersion coefficient = 6 PhaseFluidClass diametre [m] 1gas 2droplet5e-0.6 3droplet1e-0.5 4droplet2e-0.5 5droplet4e-0.5 6droplet

PointRailpressure Gas chamber pressure Temperature 4500 bar72 bar900 K Penetration for liquid phase and vapour phase compared with experimental results Penetration for liquid phase and vapour phase compared with experimental results

Validation: I-Level project Impact of initial k and epsilon values Nozzle D – 205 micron diameter Rail pressure – 500 bar Gas chamber pressure – 72 bar Gas temperature in chamber K Case 1_1 Turb. kin. energy – 10 m 2 /s 2 Turb. length scale – 2e-05 m Turb. diss. rate – m 2 /s 3 Case 6_1 Turb. kin. energy – 250 m 2 /s 2 Turb. length scale – 2e-05 m Turb. diss. rate – 3.247e+07 m 2 /s 3

PointRailpressure Gas chamber pressure Temperature 4500 bar72 bar900 K Penetration for liquid phase and vapour phase compared with experimental results Penetration for liquid phase and vapour phase compared with experimental results Case 1_1 Turb. kin. energy – 10 m 2 /s 2 Turb. length scale – 2e-05 m Turb. diss. rate – m 2 /s 3 Case 6_1 Turb. kin. energy – 250 m 2 /s 2 Turb. length scale – 2e-05 m Turb. diss. rate – 3.247e+07 m 2 /s 3

Validation: I-Level project Impact of constant c ε2 Nozzle D – 205 micron diameter Rail pressure – 500 bar Gas chamber pressure – 72 bar Gas temperature in chamber K The constant c ε2 in the transport equation for the dissipation rate of the turbulent kinetic energy was set to c ε2 = 1.8 instead c ε2 =1.92

Calculation settings Upto Time [s] Δt upto 1.0e-6 2.5e-08 upto 1.0e-4 2.5e-07 upto 2.0e-4 5.0e-07 upto e-06 Time discretisation: The liquid → Diesel → T=373 K Eulerian spray with 6 phases Primary brake-up model: Dies.Core Injection Secondary brake-up model: Wave model Evaporation model: Abramzon-Sirignano model Turbulent dispersion coefficient = 6 PhaseFluidClass diametre [m] 1gas 2droplet5e-0.6 3droplet1e-0.5 4droplet2e-0.5 5droplet4e-0.5 6droplet

PointRailpressure Gas chamber pressure Temperature 4500 bar72 bar900 K Penetration for liquid phase and vapour phase compared with experimental results Penetration for liquid phase and vapour phase compared with experimental results c ε2 =1.92 c ε2 =1.8

Calculation settings Upto Time [s] Δt upto 1.0e-6 2.5e-08 upto 1.0e-4 2.5e-07 upto 2.0e-4 5.0e-07 upto e-06 / 5.0e-07 Time discretisation: The liquid → Diesel → T=373 K Eulerian spray with 6 phases Primary brake-up model: Dies.Core Injection Secondary brake-up model: Wave model Evaporation model: Abramzon-Sirignano model Turbulent dispersion coefficient = 6 PhaseFluidClass diametre [m] 1gas 2droplet5e-0.6 3droplet1e-0.5 4droplet2e-0.5 5droplet4e-0.5 6droplet

PointRailpressure Gas chamber pressure Temperature 4500 bar72 bar900 K Penetration for liquid phase and vapour phase compared with experimental results Penetration for liquid phase and vapour phase compared with experimental results c ε2 =1.92 c ε2 =1.8

Validation: I-Level project Impact of constant c ε2 Nozzle D – 205 micron diameter Rail pressure – 1200 bar Gas chamber pressure – 72 bar Gas temperature in chamber K The constant c ε2 in the transport equation for the dissipation rate of the turbulent kinetic energy was set to c ε2 = 1.8 instead c ε2 =1.92

Calculation settings Upto Time [s] Δt upto 1.0e-6 2.5e-08 upto 1.0e-4 2.5e-07 upto 2.0e-4 5.0e-07 upto e-07 Time discretisation: The liquid → Diesel → T=373 K Eulerian spray with 6 phases Primary brake-up model: Dies.Core Injection Secondary brake-up model: Wave model Evaporation model: Abramzon-Sirignano model Turbulent dispersion coefficient = 6 PhaseFluidClass diametre [m] 1gas 2droplet5e-0.6 3droplet1e-0.5 4droplet2e-0.5 5droplet4e-0.5 6droplet

PointRailpressure Gas chamber pressure Temperature bar72 bar900 K Penetration for liquid phase and vapour phase compared with experimental results Penetration for liquid phase and vapour phase compared with experimental results c ε2 =1.92 c ε2 =1.8

Validation: I-Level project Impact of constant c ε2 Nozzle D – 205 micron diameter Rail pressure – 500 bar Gas chamber pressure – 54 bar Gas temperature in chamber K The constant c ε2 in the transport equation for the dissipation rate of the turbulent kinetic energy was set to c ε2 = 1.8 instead c ε2 =1.92

Calculation settings Upto Time [s] Δt upto 1.0e-6 2.5e-08 upto 1.0e-4 2.5e-07 upto 2.0e-4 5.0e-07 upto e-06 Time discretisation: The liquid → Diesel → T=373 K Eulerian spray with 6 phases Primary brake-up model: Dies.Core Injection Secondary brake-up model: Wave model Evaporation model: Abramzon-Sirignano model Turbulent dispersion coefficient = 6 PhaseFluidClass diametre [m] 1gas 2droplet5e-0.6 3droplet1e-0.5 4droplet2e-0.5 5droplet4e-0.5 6droplet

PointRailpressure Gas chamber pressure Temperature 4500 bar54 bar900 K Penetration for liquid phase and vapour phase compared with experimental results Penetration for liquid phase and vapour phase compared with experimental results c ε2 =1.92 c ε2 =1.8

Validation: I-Level project Impact of constant c ε2 Nozzle D – 205 micron diameter Rail pressure – 800 bar Gas chamber pressure – 54 bar Gas temperature in chamber K The constant c ε2 in the transport equation for the dissipation rate of the turbulent kinetic energy was set to c ε2 = 1.8 instead c ε2 =1.92

Calculation settings Upto Time [s] Δt upto 1.0e-6 2.5e-08 upto 1.0e-4 2.5e-07 upto 2.0e-4 5.0e-07 upto e-07 Time discretisation: The liquid → Diesel → T=373 K Eulerian spray with 6 phases Primary brake-up model: Dies.Core Injection Secondary brake-up model: Wave model Evaporation model: Abramzon-Sirignano model Turbulent dispersion coefficient = 4.5 PhaseFluidClass diametre [m] 1gas 2droplet5e-0.6 3droplet1e-0.5 4droplet2e-0.5 5droplet4e-0.5 6droplet

PointRailpressure Gas chamber pressure Temperature 4800 bar54 bar900 K Penetration for liquid phase and vapour phase compared with experimental results Penetration for liquid phase and vapour phase compared with experimental results c ε2 =1.92 c ε2 =1.8

Validation: I-Level project Impact of constant c ε2 Nozzle D – 205 micron diameter Rail pressure – 1200 bar Gas chamber pressure – 54 bar Gas temperature in chamber K The constant c ε2 in the transport equation for the dissipation rate of the turbulent kinetic energy was set to c ε2 = 1.8 instead c ε2 =1.92

Calculation settings Upto Time [s] Δt upto 1.0e-6 2.5e-08 upto 1.0e-4 2.5e-07 upto 2.0e-4 5.0e-07 upto e-07 Time discretisation: The liquid → Diesel → T=373 K Eulerian spray with 6 phases Primary brake-up model: Dies.Core Injection Secondary brake-up model: Wave model Evaporation model: Abramzon-Sirignano model Turbulent dispersion coefficient = 6 PhaseFluidClass diametre [m] 1gas 2droplet5e-0.6 3droplet1e-0.5 4droplet2e-0.5 5droplet4e-0.5 6droplet

PointRailpressure Gas chamber pressure Temperature bar54 bar900 K Penetration for liquid phase and vapour phase compared with experimental results Penetration for liquid phase and vapour phase compared with experimental results c ε2 =1.92 c ε2 =1.8

Validation: I-Level project k – zeta – f turbulence model Nozzle D – 205 micron diameter Rail pressure – 500 bar Gas chamber pressure – 72 bar Gas temperature in chamber K

Calculation settings Upto Time [s] Δt upto 1.0e-6 2.5e-08 upto 1.0e-4 2.5e-07 upto 2.0e-4 5.0e-07 upto e-06 Time discretisation: The liquid → Diesel → T=373 K Eulerian spray with 6 phases Primary brake-up model: Dies.Core Injection Secondary brake-up model: Wave model Evaporation model: Abramzon-Sirignano model Turbulent dispersion coefficient = 6 PhaseFluidClass diametre [m] 1gas 2droplet5e-0.6 3droplet1e-0.5 4droplet2e-0.5 5droplet4e-0.5 6droplet

PointRailpressure Gas chamber pressure Temperature 4500 bar72 bar900 K Penetration for liquid phase and vapour phase compared with experimental results Penetration for liquid phase and vapour phase compared with experimental results k – epsilon k –zeta - f

Validation: I-Level project k – zeta – f turbulence model Nozzle D – 205 micron diameter Rail pressure – 1200 bar Gas chamber pressure – 54 bar Gas temperature in chamber K

Calculation settings Upto Time [s] Δt upto 1.0e-6 2.5e-08 upto 1.0e-4 2.5e-07 upto 2.0e-4 5.0e-07 upto e-07 Time discretisation: The liquid → Diesel → T=373 K Eulerian spray with 6 phases Primary brake-up model: Dies.Core Injection Secondary brake-up model: Wave model Evaporation model: Abramzon-Sirignano model Turbulent dispersion coefficient = 6 PhaseFluidClass diametre [m] 1gas 2droplet5e-0.6 3droplet1e-0.5 4droplet2e-0.5 5droplet4e-0.5 6droplet

PointRailpressure Gas chamber pressure Temperature bar54 bar900 K Penetration for liquid phase and vapour phase compared with experimental results Penetration for liquid phase and vapour phase compared with experimental results k – epsilon k –zeta - f

Validation: I-Level project Calculation with nozzle interface Coupling internal nozzle flow simulation and initialisation of spray calculation Nozzle D – 205 micron diameter Rail pressure – 500 bar Gas chamber pressure – 72 bar Gas temperature in chamber K Using the data of the two phase flow calculation inside the nozzle as a start and boundary condition for Eulerian spray calculation

Calculation settings Upto Time [s] Δt upto 1.0e-6 2.5e-08 upto 1.0e-4 2.5e-07 upto 2.0e-4 5.0e-07 upto e-06 Time discretisation: The liquid → Diesel → T=373 K Eulerian spray with 6 phases Primary brake-up model: Dies.Core Injection Secondary brake-up model: Wave model Evaporation model: Abramzon-Sirignano model Turbulent dispersion coefficient = 6 PhaseFluidClass diametre [m] 1gas 2droplet5e-0.6 3droplet1e-0.5 4droplet2e-0.5 5droplet4e-0.5 6droplet

PointRailpressure Gas chamber pressure Temperature 4500 bar72 bar900 K Penetration for liquid phase and vapour phase compared with experimental results Penetration for liquid phase and vapour phase compared with experimental results without nozzle interface with nozzle interface

Validation: I-Level project Calculation with nozzle interface Coupling internal nozzle flow simulation and initialisation of spray calculation Nozzle D – 205 micron diameter Rail pressure – 1200 bar Gas chamber pressure – 72 bar Gas temperature in chamber K Using the data of the two phase flow calculation inside the nozzle as a start and boundary condition for Eulerian spray calculation

Calculation settings Upto Time [s] Δt upto 1.0e-6 2.5e-08 upto 1.0e-4 2.5e-07 upto 2.0e-4 5.0e-07 upto e-06 Time discretisation: The liquid → Diesel → T=373 K Eulerian spray with 6 phases Primary brake-up model: Dies.Core Injection Secondary brake-up model: Wave model Evaporation model: Abramzon-Sirignano model Turbulent dispersion coefficient = 6 PhaseFluidClass diametre [m] 1gas 2droplet5e-0.6 3droplet1e-0.5 4droplet2e-0.5 5droplet4e-0.5 6droplet

PointRailpressure Gas chamber pressure Temperature bar72 bar900 K Penetration for liquid phase and vapour phase compared with experimental results Penetration for liquid phase and vapour phase compared with experimental results without nozzle interface with nozzle interface

The end The end University of Zagreb Faculty of Mechanical Engineering and Naval Architecture Department of Energy, Power Engineering and Environment Chair of Power Engineering and Energy Management

Nozzle D – 205 micron diameter Experimental data – injection rate: Experimental data – injection rate: PointsRailpressure Gas chamber pressureTemperature 1500 bar54 bar900 K 2800 bar54 bar900 K bar54 bar900 K 4500 bar72 bar900 K 5800 bar72 bar900 K bar72 bar900 K 2 nd phase of validation: I-Level project

Test Case: I-Level project Nozzle D – 205 micron diameter Experimental data – injection rate: