Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Abstract
The pollution by exhaust gasses produced by the growing number of vehicles on the road increases. A way to reduce the pollution is to change to an alternative fuel. This is a solution for the long-term. A solution for the short-term is to make engines cleaner and more ecient. To accomplish this, detailed information is needed on the processes which take place in an internal combustion engine. Performing experiments on an engine is dicult because of the complexity of this mechanical system, especially when ow measurements are involved. Numerical experiments have the advantage that an expensive and time consuming measurement set-up is not necessary. Because of the increasing power of computers, the processes in an internal combustion engine can be modeled in more and more detail. The main goal of this project is to model the uid ow in an internal combustion engine with the Computational Fluid Dynamic (CFD) package Fluent. Both stationary and dynamic simulations will be performed. In case of the rst variant the cylinder head is blown through and the stationary ow eld will be visualized. Subsequently the results will be compared with Particle Image Velocimetry (PIV) experiments and simulations which are performed with the FASTEST-3D code. The dynamic simulation visualizes the ow eld in case of a running engine. Because of the high velocities of the uid inside the internal combustion engine the ow will certainly be turbulent. Turbulence also plays an important role in the mixing process between air and fuel and the accompanying combustion process. Fluent oers dierent turbulence models and these will be validated on the basis of two simulations which are relevant for the ow inside the combustion chamber. These simulation are the backward-facing step (BFS) experiment and the free air jet. The backward-facing step experiment is an example of a wall bounded ow. The performance of the dierent Reynolds-averaged Navier Stokes (RANS) turbulence models in the neighborhood of walls can be tested. The ow between the valve and its seat is comparable with this geometry. Dierent simulations are performed in which the turbulence models are tested with dierent grid resolutions and wall functions. The grid requirements of the engine simulations make it impossible to solve the complete wall region. Wall functions are semi-empirical functions which solve this viscous dominated region and have the advantage that a more coarse grid is possible which reduces the simulation time. The Realizable k turbulence model in combination with the standard wall functions is the best performing model, taking note of the grid requirements. The second experiment for the validation of the turbulence models is the air jet. This experiment tests the performance of the models in the free space where the inuence of walls can be neglected. The air entering the combustion chamber is comparable with such a ow. Also in this experiment the turbulence models are tested with dierent sorts of grids. Just like in the BFS experiment the Realizable k - model is the better performing model and it will therefore be used in the internal combustion engine simulations. It is dicult to validate the stationary engine simulations because little reference material from the PIV experiments is available. The results of the simulations show agreement with the PIV experiments, but caution must be taken. For a good comparison more experimental PIV data is necessary. Comparison with the Large-Eddy Simulation (LES) results from the FASTEST code is easier because more simulation data is available. The ow eld depicted by the Fluent simulations close to the cylinder head, matches with the FASTEST results. The results further downstream deviate more. This can be attributed to the dierence in near-wall modeling approach. 3
A dynamic grid with a moving piston and valves is constructed to simulate the ow in a running engine. The complex geometry which a simulation of this calibre needs, makes it dicult to validate the ow. This is the reason the turbulence models are validated with simpler experiments. The rotating ow structures in case of the stationary simulations are also visible in the dynamic variant. The jet-like structures between both valves and the combustion chamber are also predicted by the dynamic simulations. An important conclusion is that the compression stroke itself adds no extra energy to the ow. It is therefore important for the mixing of air and fuel and the combustion process to have as much turbulence as possible at the beginning of the compression stroke. The dynamic simulations show realistic results which are useful for a better understanding of the processes in an internal combustion engine. The way is cleared for further research on this subject. The simulations can be extended with other subjects such as injection, combustion and turbo charging to obtain a complete model of an internal combustion engine.
Samenvatting
Door het toenemende aantal voertuigen op de weg neemt de vervuiling door uitlaatgassen sterk toe. Een mogelijkheid om deze vervuiling tegen te gaan is om gebruik te gaan maken van alternatieve brandstoen. Dit is een oplossing voor de lange termijn. Om op korte termijn de uitstoot van voertuigen te verminderen moeten schonere en eci entere motoren gemaakt worden. Hiervoor is een uitgebreide kennis nodig van de processen die plaatsvinden in een interne verbrandingsmotor. Door de complexiteit van een verbrandingsmotor is het lastig experimenten uit te voeren, vooral wanneer het gaat om stromingsmetingen in de motor. Numerieke experimenten hebben het voordeel dat er geen dure testopstelling nodig is. Door de toenemende rekenkracht van computers kunnen de processen in een verbrandingsmotor steeds beter en nauwkeuriger gemodelleerd worden. De doelstelling van dit project is om de gasstromen in een interne verbrandingsmotor te modelleren in het Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) pakket Fluent. Het gaat hierbij om stationaire en dynamische simulaties. In het eerste geval wordt de cilinderkop doorgeblazen en het stationaire stromingsveld gevisualiseerd. Vervolgens worden de resultaten vergeleken met Particle Image Velocimetry (PIV) experimenten en simulaties die zijn uitgevoerd met de FASTEST-3D code. Bij de dynamische simulaties wordt het stromingsveld in een draaiende verbrandingsmotor gevisualiseerd. Door de hoge snelheid van het gas in de verbrandingsmotor is deze zeker turbulent. Turbulentie speelt bovendien een zeer belangrijke rol bij de menging van brandstof en lucht en het daarbij behorende verbrandingsproces. Fluent biedt verschillende modellen die turbulentie modelleren en deze zullen worden gevalideerd aan de hand van twee simulaties die relevant zijn voor de stroming in de cilinder, namelijk de backward-facing step (BFS) en de air jet. Het backward-facing step experiment is een voorbeeld van een wand gebonden stroming. Het gedrag van de verschillende Reynolds-averaged Navier Stokes (RANS) turbulentie modellen in de buurt van wanden kan getest worden. De stroming van de lucht tussen de klep en zitting is hiermee te vergelijken. Verschillende simulaties zijn uitgevoerd waarbij de modellen in combinatie met verschillende grids en wandfuncties zijn getest. Door de grid eisen die de motor simulaties stellen, is het niet mogelijk het complete wand gebied op te lossen. Wandfuncties zijn semi-empirische functies die dit viskeus gedomineerde gebied oplossen en hebben als voordeel dat een grover grid mogelijk is wat de simulatietijd verkort. Het Realizable k - turbulentie model in combinatie met de standard wand functies presteert het beste in deze simulatie, de grideisen in acht nemend. Het tweede experiment voor de validatie van de turbulentie modellen is de air jet. Dit experiment test de verschillende modellen in de vrije ruimte waar de invloed van wanden verwaarloosbaar is. De lucht die via de kleppen de verbrandingskamer binnen stroomt is hiermee vergelijkbaar. Ook bij dit experiment zijn de modellen in combinatie met verschillende grids getest. Net zoals bij het BFS experiment is ook hier het Realizable k - model het best presterende turbulentie model en zal daarom worden gebruikt in de motor simulaties. Door gebrek aan vergelijkingsmateriaal van de PIV experimenten, is het moeilijk de stationaire motor simulaties te valideren. De resultaten van de simulaties lijken redelijk overeen te komen met de experimenten maar voorzichtigheid is geboden bij deze uitspraak. Voor een goede vergelijking zijn meer experimentele PIV data nodig. Door het uitgebreidere aanbod aan Large-Eddy Simulation (LES) resultaten van de FASTEST code zijn deze beter te vergelijken met de Fluent resultaten. Het stromingsveld 5
bij de Fluent simulaties dicht bij de cilinderkop komt goed overeen met deze code. Verder stroomafwaarts wordt door de FASTEST code het snelheidsveld overschat. Dit komt deels door het verschil tussen beide simulaties met betrekking tot het oplossen van het wand gebied. Er is een dynamisch grid met een bewegende zuiger en kleppen geconstrueerd om de gasstroom in een draaiende interne verbrandingsmotor te simuleren. Door de complexe geometrie die een simulatie van dit soort kaliber met zich mee brengt, is het moeilijk de stroming te valideren. Dit is mede de reden dat de turbulentie modellen gevalideerd zijn aan de hand van eenvoudigere experimenten. De draaiende structuren die bij de stationaire simulaties zichtbaar zijn, komen terug in de dynamische simulaties. Ook de jet-achtige structuren tussen de beide kleppen en de verbrandingskamer worden in de dynamische simulaties voorspeld. Een belangrijke conclusie is dat de compressieslag zelf geen energie toevoegt aan de lucht in de cilinder. Het is voor een goede menging en verbranding daarom van belang om zoveel mogelijk turbulentie te hebben aan het begin van de compressieslag. De dynamische simulaties laten realistische resultaten zien die van belang kunnen zijn voor het beter begrijpen van de processen in een interne verbrandingsmotor. De weg is vrijgemaakt voor verder onderzoek op dit onderwerp. Zaken als injectie, verbranding en turbo oplading kunnen toegevoegd worden om een zo volledig mogelijk beeld van de motor te krijgen.
List of symbols
Symbol a A B cp Cf D F h k kp K L m M M0 Pr p pw pf Re S Sij t t T T u uref u U U Uc Up va vc x x0 xr x Description acceleration area centreline velocity decay constant heat capacity at constant pressure skin friction coecient diameter force step height kinetic energy per unit of mass kinetic energy at point P diusion coecient length scale mass momentum ux per unit of mass momentum ux per unit of mass at orice Prandtl number absolute pressure static pressure area-averaged static pressure Reynolds number swirl number mean rate of strain tensor time dimensionless time temperature time scale velocity component centerline velocity dimensionless velocity velocity scale mean velocity centreline velocity velocity at point P axial velocity circumferential velocity Cartesian coordinate virtual origin reattachment point dimensionless position [Unit] [m s2 ] [m2 ] [] [J kg 1 K 1 ] [ ] [m] [N ] [m ] [m2 s2 ] [m2 s2 ] [m2 s1 ] [m ] [kg ] [m4 s2 ] [m4 s2 ] [] [P a] [P a ] [P a] [] [] [s1 ] [ s] [] [K ] [ s] [m s1 ] [m s1 ] [] [m s1 ] [m s1 ] [m s1 ] [m s1 ] [m s1 ] [m s1 ] [m ] [m] [m] [ ]
Symbol y yp y+ y
Description Cartesian coordinate wall distance at point P dimensionless wall distance dimensionless wall distance
Greek symbols
Symbol ij t w i ij Description half channel height delta function dissipation rate per unit of mass dimensionless position angle molecular diusion coecient thermal conductivity coecient dynamic viscosity turbulent viscosity kinematic viscosity modied turbulent kinematic viscosity density dimensionless time scale shear stress dimensionless velocity scale specic dissipation rate vorticity mean rate of rotation tensor [Unit] [m] [] [m2 s3 ] [] [rad] [mol m2 s1 ] [W m2 K ] [ N s m 2 ] [kg m3 s1 ] [m2 s1 ] [m2 s1 ] [kg m3 ] [ ] [N/m2 ] [ ] [s1 ] [s1 ] [s1 ]
Contents
Abstract Samenvatting List of symbols 1 Introduction 2 Turbulence 2.1 Turbulence in general . . . . . . . 2.1.1 Governing equations . . . . 2.1.2 Burgers equation . . . . . . 2.1.3 RANS turbulence modeling 2.1.4 Kinetic energy . . . . . . . 2.1.5 Vorticity . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2 Turbulence modeling . . . . . . . . 2.2.1 Laminar . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2.2 Spalart-Allmaras model . . 2.2.3 Standard k - model . . . . 2.2.4 RNG k - model . . . . . . 2.2.5 Realizable k - model . . . 2.2.6 Standard k - model . . . . 2.3 Wall-bounded ows . . . . . . . . . 2.3.1 Wall functions . . . . . . . 2.3.2 Near-wall modeling . . . . . 2.3.3 Mesh guidelines . . . . . . . 2.4 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Backward-facing step 3.1 Theory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.2 Performance of turbulence models 3.2.1 Laminar . . . . . . . . . . . 3.2.2 Spalart-Allmaras model . . 3.2.3 Standard k - model . . . . 3.2.4 RNG k - model . . . . . . 3.2.5 Realizable k - model . . . 3.2.6 k - model . . . . . . . . . 3.3 Model comparison . . . . . . . . . 3.4 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 5 7 11 13 13 14 15 19 20 21 23 23 23 24 24 25 26 28 28 30 30 31 33 33 35 35 35 37 38 40 41 43 44
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . 9
. . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . .
CONTENTS
10
4 Air jet 4.1 Theory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.2 Performance of turbulence models 4.2.1 Spalart-Allmaras model . . 4.2.2 Standard k - model . . . . 4.2.3 RNG k - model . . . . . . 4.2.4 Realizable k - model . . . 4.2.5 k - model . . . . . . . . . 4.3 Kinetic energy . . . . . . . . . . . 4.4 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Engine simulations 5.1 Stationary engine simulations 5.1.1 Simulation description 5.1.2 Simulation results . . 5.2 Dynamic engine simulations . 5.2.1 Simulation description 5.2.2 Simulation results . . 5.3 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
47 47 49 50 51 52 53 53 54 58 61 61 61 63 68 68 69 75 79 79 80 83 85 85 87 91 91 91 92 95 95 97
6 Conclusion and recommendations 6.1 Final conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.2 Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Bibliography A Contour plots air jet A.1 Structured mesh . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A.2 Unstructured mesh . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B In-cylinder model set-up B.1 2D model set-up . . . . . . . . . B.1.1 Geometry set-up Gambit B.1.2 Simulation set-up Fluent . B.2 3D model set-up . . . . . . . . . B.2.1 Geometry set-up Gambit B.2.2 Simulation set-up Fluent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Chapter 1
Introduction
The roads are getting more and more crowded everywhere. As a consequence, the pollution by exhaust gasses produced by the growing number of vehicles also increases. People are searching for ways to reduce the emission of vehicles. One possibility is to look for alternative fuels like hydrogen. It will take a long time to switch a whole economy from oil to an alternative. A solution for the short-term is to make engines cleaner and more ecient. Therefore a better understanding of the processes in an internal combustion engine is necessary. Performing experiments on an internal combustion engine is dicult. It is a complex mechanical system and therefore measurements are hard to carry out, especially ow measurements inside the cylinder. Numerical experiments have the advantage that an expensive and time consuming set-up is not necessary. Because of the increasing power of computers, the processes in an internal combustion engine can be modeled in more and more detail. The main goal of this project is to model a single cylinder of a heavy duty DAF 12.9 liter Diesel engine. The intake stroke with a moving piston and valves will be modeled in the Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) package Fluent. The main problem with in-cylinder simulations is that the mesh, where the geometry is build out of, is moving and deforming. This requires a special treatment in the simulation set-up. Because the velocities inside the engine are high, the ow will certainly be turbulent. Is is not possible to model all the turbulent ow characteristics because this requires too much computational time. There are several methods available which describe the processes in a turbulent ow, but not one of them is generally accepted. Validation of the dierent modeling methods is therefore necessary. In the second chapter of this thesis the essence of turbulence will be treated. The dierent models which are available in Fluent will be discussed and the mathematical basis of turbulence in general is presented. Also the governing equations, which describe the motion of the ow, will be briey treated. To choose the best turbulence model for the internal combustion engine simulations, the dierent models will be validated on the basis of two simulations. The rst one is the Backward-Facing Step (BFS) and will be treated in chapter three. This is an example of a wall bounded shear ow and the model behavior near a wall can be validated. The second simulation is the air jet. This is an example of a free wall-shear ow. With this experiment the behavior of the ow, when no wall-shear is involved, can be validated. This will be discussed in chapter four. The outcome of these two simulations will be compared with experimental data and result in a suitable turbulence model for the nal engine simulations. The fth chapter of this thesis deals with the simulations of the internal combustion engine. First a stationary simulation will be discussed. In this simulation the cylinder head is blown through and the ow prole will be compared with results found with experiments using Particle Image Velocimetry (PIV) on a stationary ow bench. Next the unsteady simulations with the moving piston and valves will be treated. Finally a general discussion will be presented. The best performing turbulence model will be chosen. The results of the engine simulation will be treated and compared with the experimental data. The last 11
12
section also includes the nal conclusion and the recommendations for further research.
Chapter 2
Turbulence
When modeling the air ow in an internal combustion engine, extreme uid velocities are involved. Because these high velocities, the Reynolds number is also substantial which indicates the presence of turbulence. Turbulent ows are characterized by uctuating velocity elds. These uctuations mix transported quantities such as momentum, energy and species concentration. Turbulence also plays an important role when modeling the combustion process in the combustion chamber. Increasing turbulence results, in case of non-premixed combustion, in a better mixing process of air and fuel. Modeling of turbulence is still an obstruction when solving practical ow problems. In practice most ows are turbulent. It requires too much computational eort to solve the governing equations exact to the smallest scales. Therefore these equations will be Reynolds-averaged. This greatly reduces the required computational eorts but introduces additional terms that need to be modeled in order to achieve a closure for the unknowns. There are a lot of turbulence models available. Not one model completely succeeded in describing the processes involved in a turbulent ow. This is because information is lost due to the averaging procedure and therefore turbulence is still an unsolved physical and mathematical problem. In this chapter dierent turbulence models will be discussed. Not the complete mathematical basis of the models will be treated but merely the properties and the dierences between them. Before the description of these models, turbulence in general will be dealt with to get a better understanding of this phenomenon. In this section the basic characteristics and equations are taken into consideration. Turbulent ows near a wall, the so called wall bounded ows, need special attention. Therefore specic boundary conditions need to be applied. The type of boundary condition to be used, depends on various properties. This will be treated in the second last part of this chapter. At the end of this chapter a sort classications will be made of the dierent models. One or more models, which are best suitable for the simulations of the internal combustion engine on the basis of the theory, will be chosen and founded.
2.1
Turbulence in general
In this section the phenomenon of turbulence will be discussed in more detail. Turbulence consists of swirl-like structures with varying dimensions, named eddies. Turbulence distinguishes itself by a chaotic, but not completely random, ow. The velocity measured in two points in the ow is correlated not only by place, but also as a function of time. A similar correlation can not be found when the ow is completely random. Certainly not all chaotic ows are turbulent, waves on the sea surface are a good example of a non-turbulent, chaotic ow. In this part dierent properties of turbulence will be discussed. First the governing equations which describe a viscous ow will be treated. This set of equations include the continuity, momentum and energy equation. This section also includes the Reynolds-averaging method which is used to reduce the computational cost of the solution of the governing equations. Secondly the Burgers equation will be treated. With this relatively simple equation the basics of turbulence can be solved analytically and give 13
14
a better insight in this chaotic phenomenon. Kinetic energy is also an important quantity in turbulence. This will also be treated in this section. Vorticity is with respect to the dynamics the most important property. A compact denition of turbulence can be Chaotic vorticity. This property will be discussed in the last section.
2.1.1
Governing equations
The dynamics of a ow can be described by the governing equations. This description is based on three fundamental physical principles. These principles are: Conservation of mass Conservation of momentum (Newtons second law) Conservation of energy The rst principle results in the continuity equation (equation 2.1). This equation represents the conservation of mass in a control volume for a compressible ow ui + = 0. t xi (2.1)
In here is the density and ui the velocity in direction i. The symbols t and xi represent respectively the time and the position in direction i. The momentum equation is derived using Newtons second law. This equation is better known as the Navier-Stokes equation ui ui 1 p 2 ui , + uj = + t xj xi x2 j (2.2)
where p represents the pressure and the kinematic viscosity. The second term on the left-hand side is the convective term and the second term on the right-hand side is the diusion term. It says that the net force on a uid element equals the mass times the acceleration of the element. The forces acting on the uid element can be divided into Body and Surface forces. The Body forces act directly on the mass of the uid element. An example is the force as a result of gravitation (dropped in equation 2.2). The Surface forces act directly on the surface of the uid element. Two sources account for this force, namely the pressure distribution imposed by the outside uid surrounding the uid element and the shear and normal stress distributions acting on the surface by means of friction. The last fundamental physical principle which describes the dynamics of the ow, results in the energy equation (equation 2.3), here written in terms of the temperature cp T ui 2T + cp T = 2 , t xj xj (2.3)
where T is the temperature, cp the heat capacity coecient at constant pressure and the thermal conductivity coecient. The physical principle stated here is nothing more than the rst law of thermodynamics. When applied to a ow element, it states that the rate of change of energy inside the uid element is equal to the net ux heat into that element.
Chapter 2. Turbulence
15
2.1.2
Burgers equation
Non-linearity plays a fundamental role in turbulence. Because of this non-linearity the governing equations can not be solved exactly. To gain a better insight into turbulence, the Burgers equation (2.4) will be treated [20]. This model is analytical manageable and contains the essential ingredients of a turbulent ow. It can be written as u u 2u +u = 2 , t x x (2.4)
The second expression on the left-hand side of the Burgers equation is the non-linear term and is called the convective term. It can be compared with the convection term in the Navier-Stokes equation (2.2). The expression on the right-hand side can be interpreted as friction. Both terms will be discussed separately in the following. First, only the friction term will be taken into account. The resulting equation is better known as the diusion equation (equation 2.5). u 2u = 2 t x (2.5)
To come to a solution, a problem with the following begin- and boundary conditions will be considered t=0 x , , u = I (x) u=0 t,
where (x) the Dirac-delta-function is and I a constant which represents the magnitude of the velocity. The solution of this problem reads as follows
2 I ex /(4t) . u= 2 t
(2.6)
The solution is displayed in gure 2.1 for dierent values of t. For an increasing value of t, the gradient u/x decreases. It can be concluded that friction is gradient-weakening. This is called stabilizing. Subsequently the friction term will be omitted in equation 2.4. The resulting equation is called the non-linear advection equation u u +u = 0. t x (2.7)
As can be seen, the transport velocity u is only a function of position x and time t. The general solution of this equation reads u = f (x u t), (2.8)
where f is an arbitrary, dierentiable equation. This equation shows that the velocity u in case of t = 0 travels unchanged in the x, t-plane along the characteristic: x u t = constant. The slope of this characteristic is x/t = u. This means that the slope is determined by the solution itself. This phenomena is represented in gure 2.2. It can be seen from the gure that the gradient u/x gets sharper as a function of the time. After a certain period the solution consists of more than one value. This is of course physically not possible. It can be concluded that the non-linear term is gradient-sharpening and this is called destabilizing.
16
1.2
velocity u [m/s]
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0 5
xcoordinate [m]
Figure 2.2: Solution of the non-linear advection equation. Initially a triangular shape exists
The behavior of equation 2.7 can best be compared with the analogy of the shallow water waves. Waves at the beach break because the non-linear eects make the waves more steep until their knock over and dissipate in the surf. In the previous part two eect are treated that inuence the solution of the Burgers equation. These effects counteract. The rst term is non-linear, gradient-sharpening and destabilizing. The second viscous term is gradient-weakening and stabilizing. The ratio between these two eects determines the solution of the Burgers equation. To characterize the ratio, this equation will be rewritten in dimensionless form. Therefore a set of dimensionless variables will be dened u = x = = t u U x L U t L
(2.9)
are the dimensionless velocity, position and time. U and L are the velocity- and length where u , x and t scales. When substituted in equation 2.4 this results in the dimensionless Burgers equation
Chapter 2. Turbulence
17
u u 1 2u , +u = x Re x 2 t
(2.10)
where Re = UL/ is the Reynolds number. This number represents the ratio between the non-linear advection term and the viscous term. When Re < 1 the viscous term dominates and the ow is characterized as stable or laminar. When Re 1 the non-linear advection term dominates and the ow is unstable. In the last situation the ow is characterized as turbulent. To better understand what is happening at the dierent Reynolds numbers, the exact solutions of the Burgers equation will be treated. For a Reynolds number Re 1 the term on the right-hand side of equation 2.10 is negligible and the solution is given by u= where L x L and with U= 4U 0 . 1 + 2 U 0 t/L U 2 tanh Ux 4 + x L , (2.11)
In gure 2.3 the solution of the Burgers equation is plotted. With length scales in the order of L the solution is dominated by the solution of the non-linear equation 2.7. In this case the exact solution can be approximated to U 2 U 2 x +1 L x 1 L
u u
= =
2 1.5 1 Velocity scale U [m/s] 0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 0.1 Exact solution Nonlinear term, x < 0 Nonlinear term, x > 0 Viscous term
0.05
0.05
0.1
This solution is also plotted in gure 2.3. Because of the relative large length scales, this part of the solution is called the macrostructure. The non-linear processes dominate in the macrostructure and friction can be neglected. There is a small region where the gradient is that large that the friction term can not be neglected.
18
This region is called the microstructure and is dominated by friction. The involved length scales are in the order of x = / U and this results in a local Reynolds number Re < 1. In this case the solution can be approximated by (viscous term in gure 2.3) u= U tanh 2 Ux 4 .
The Burgers equation has led to an important insight in turbulence. For large Reynolds numbers two different structures can be found in the solution of the Burgers equation, namely the micro- and macrostructures. In the following these two structures and the properties will be discussed in more detail.
Macrostructure
The structure with the largest dimensions is called the macrostructure. This structure can be described by a length scale L and a velocity scale U and is dominated by non-linear processes. As mentioned before a Reynolds number Re 1 is involved and the viscous eects are negligible. Essentially the macrostructure is described by the limit Re and as a consequence, is independent of the Reynolds number. The only medium parameter is the kinematic viscosity and can be found in the Reynolds number. Because the macrostructures are independent of the Reynolds number, it is also independent of the kinematic viscosity. This is called the Reynoldss similarity and can be expressed as: Turbulence is a property of the ow, not the medium. A turbulent ow is dissipative. This means the ow loses its kinetic energy and as a result fades out if there is no extra energy input. The kinetic energy per unit of mass k scales with k U 2 . For the kinetic energy k the following equation holds (this will be derived later) dk = dt where is the dissipation. One of the most important results from the turbulence theory is [20] U3 , L (2.13) (2.12)
which means that dissipation scales with the macrostructure. This is better known as the Kolmogorov relation. This relation can be explained as: a turbulent eddy with energy U 2 loses in one timescale T L/U its energy, that is in period T the eddy breaks up because of instability and disintegrates into smaller eddies. This also follows from the properties of equation 2.7. Turbulence is also diusive. It is known that a turbulent ow is capable of ecient mixing. The larger eddies stir the ow round a scale L and ow parameters will likely be transported and then mixed across this distance. The diusion equation for a turbulent ow can be written as 2X X =K 2 , t x (2.14)
for the concentration X . K is the diusioncoecient, also known as the turbulent diusioncoecient, and can be scaled with K U L. The turbulent diusioncoecient K is much larger than the moleculair diusioncoecient . In case of a Prandtl-number P r / 1 the Reynolds number Re ( K/) 1, which proves that diusion belongs to the macrostructure.
Chapter 2. Turbulence
19
Microstructure
In the previous section the macrostructure is discussed. This structure loses its kinetic energy by an instability in a typical time scale. The kinetic energy can only be dissipated, that is converted into heat, by viscosity. This viscous dissipation happens in the microstructure because the velocity gradient is that large that viscosity cannot be neglected. Viscosity is the rst scale parameter of importance in the microstructure. The macro scales U and L do not play a role in the microstructures. When larger eddies break up into smaller ones, this information gets lost. The only information the microstructure receives from the macrostructure is the amount of energy that has to be dissipated. This is characterized by . The scale parameters for the microstructure are therefore and . The following scales for length, time, and velocity can be derived 3
1 2 1 4
= =
(2.15)
= ( ) 4 .
These are better known as the Kolmogorov -scales. This results in a Reynolds number for the microstructure of Re = / = 1 , which indicates that the microstructures are dominated by friction as determined by the diusion limit of the Burgers equation (equation 2.5).
Summarized: The macrostructure is fed with energy from the main ow by instability processes. The large, unstable, energy rich eddies break up in smaller ones. This process is called the cascade-process. This process is repeated until the microstructure is reached. At this point the kinetic energy is dissipated into heat by viscosity.
2.1.3
When modeling a turbulent ow through a complex geometry, the governing equations can not be solved all the way down to the Kolmogorov -scales. This will cost to much computational eort. To still model turbulence in a ow, the small-scale turbulent uctuations have to be omitted. A way to do this is Reynolds-averaging. A disadvantage of this method is that it brings an additional term in the governing equations that needs to be modeled in order to achieve a closure for the unknowns. The Reynoldsaveraged Navier Stokes (RANS) equations determine the transport of the averaged ow quantities, with the complete range of turbulent scales being modeled as mean ow properties which do not change extremely over place and time. This approach greatly reduces the computational eort and resources and is therefore used in many practical engineering applications. When using the RANS-based modeling approach the variables are split up into a mean and a uctuating component. This is often called the Reynolds decomposition. For the velocity this results in ui = ui + ui with i = 1, 2, 3
and for the other quantities like pressure and energy this results in =+ . These expressions can be substituted in the continuity and momentum equation. After taking the time
20
average this results in the time-averaged continuity and momentum equations for a compressible ow (equation 2.16 and 2.17). + (ui ) = t xi (ui ) + (ui uj ) = t xj ui uj 2 ui + ij + xj xi 3 xi
0 p + xi (ui uj ) xj
(2.16)
xj
(2.17)
Where ij is the delta function. The above set of equations is called the Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes (RANS) equations. The variables now represent the time-averaged values. In the momentum equation (equation 2.17) an additional term has appeared ui uj which represent the eects of turbulence. This term can be interpreted as the transport in the j -direction of momentum in the i -direction. This kind of momentum transport has the same eect as a stress on a surface and is therefore also called the Reynolds stress. It must be modeled in order to close the momentum equation. The closure model, which is used in all the turbulence models described in chapter 2.2, employs the Boussinesq hypothesis [9] to relate the Reynolds stresses to the mean velocity gradients. It is given by ui uj = t ui uj + xj xi 2 3 k + t ui xi ij , (2.18)
where t is the turbulent viscosity and k is the kinetic energy. The advantage of the Boussinesq approximation (or K -theory) is the relative low computational cost associated with the computation of the turbulent viscosity. A disadvantage is that the turbulent viscosity is assumed to be an isotropic scalar quantity and this is not strictly true. In the above, only the RANS-based modeling is discussed. Fluent oers another type called Large-Eddy Simulation (LES). This modeling approach computes the large eddies explicitly in a time-dependent simulation using the ltered Navier-Stokes equations. Filtering is essentially a mathematical manipulation of the exact Navier-Stokes equations to remove the eddies that are smaller than the size of the lter. This method requires a signicant amount of computational time for complex and high Reynolds number ows. It also needs a highly accurate discretization scheme. Because these reasons the LES approach is not suitable for the engine simulations and will therefore not be discussed any further.
2.1.4
Kinetic energy
The microstructures in a turbulent ow dissipate the kinetic energy into heat. This is already discussed in the previous section. In the following section this pronouncement will be founded on the basic of the kinetic energy equation. First the velocity will be split up into a mean and a uctuation ui = ui + ui , which is already called Reynolds decomposition. The kinetic energy per unit of mass of the turbulent velocity uctuations is 2 represented by the variance k = 1 2 ui . The equation of the kinetic energy k is given by equation 2.19. This equation is found by multiplying the momentum equation (2.2) with ui . k k Dk + uj = Pk + Tk + k + Dk Dt t xj where
(2.19)
Chapter 2. Turbulence
21
Pk Tk + k + Dk
= =
ui uj xj
ui xj 1 k p uj + 0 xj
uj k
2
ui xj
Density and temperature eects are neglected. The dierent terms on the right side of equation 2.19 will be discussed separately in the following. Production The rst term Pk represents the production of kinetic energy in the turbulent velocity uctuations. This term is always positive. The turbulence receives energy from the mean ow via this deformation work. Instability mechanisms like the Kelvin-Helmholtz instability take care of this energy transport. Both the velocity gradient ui /xj and the Reynoldsstress ui uj scale with the macro scales U and L, which result in a scale U 3 /L for the production term. Transport The three middle terms Tk + k + Dk form together the transport contribution; the terms describe the redistribution of the kinetic energy in the domain. It is built out of three parts. The rst part is the transport by velocity uctuations (Tk ) which scales with U 3 /L. The second expression is the transport by pressure uctuations (k ) which scales in the same way as the previous term. The last expression is the transport by viscosity (Dk ). It scales, in contrast to the previous two terms, with U 2 /L 2 . This indicates that for large Reynolds numbers the viscous contribution can be neglected with respect to the other terms. In most ows the complete transport term can be neglected because the transport of kinetic energy is minimal. Dissipation The last term which contributes to the transport expression is the dissipation . As mentioned before, dissipation converts the kinetic energy in the microstructures into heat. Because of this, the term is always negative. Equation 2.19 is a balans equation. When turbulence is in equilibrium the left-hand side of equation 2.19 is equal to zero. For most ows the transport term can be neglected, which means that the dissipation term scales with the production term U 3 /L. This is the Kolmogorov relation and is already mentioned as one of the main laws of turbulence.
2.1.5
Vorticity
Vorticity is a natural way to describe turbulence. In the previous section turbulence is characterized as Chaotic vorticity. It can be said that a ow without uctuating vorticity is not turbulent. Vorticity is dened as the rotation of the velocity eld (equation 2.20) and can be interpreted as the turning of a uid element. w =u (2.20)
When the line elements stretch, the vorticity increases. This is called vorticity-line-stretching. This phenomenon causes a vortex to rotate faster. The required energy will be provided by the deformation eld. Because of instabilities in the ow, large eddies will be formed which determine the macrostructure. The large eddies will break up into smaller eddies which results in the structure of the largest eddies being highly directional, or anisotropic, and ow dependent. This proces is already called the cascade -proces. The vorticity-line-stretching mechanism accounts for this cascade -proces. The larger eddies deform the
22
smaller eddies and because of this the vorticity of the smaller eddies increases. Energy is also transported from the larger to the smaller eddies. The largest vorticity can therefore be found in the microstructures. In the following an equation for the vorticity uctuations will be derived. First the vorticity will be 2 split up into a mean and a uctuation i = i + i . The variance 1 2 i is dened as the enstropy. For homogeneous turbulence equation 2.21 holds exactly. = i2 . (2.21)
This equation is also a good approach for ows with a large Reynolds number. In this case turbulence can locally be considered homogeneous. Enstropy will be dominated by the microstructure where the viscous dissipation takes place. Kinetic energy k gives information about the macrostructures and enstropy information about the microstructures. The equation for the enstropy is D 1 2 1 2 1 2 i i + uj = P + T + D + S Dt 2 t 2 xj 2 i where i xj 1 uj i 2 + 2 xj 1 2 2 i (2.22)
P T + D S
= uj i = xj
The left-hand side of 2.22 describes the enstropy change of a point that travels with the average velocity of the ow. The four dierent terms which describe this change will be discussed next. Production The term P is considered as the gradient production of enstropy. This expression can be compared with the gradient production term in the equation for the kinetic energy (2.19). Via this term enstropy is exchanged between the mean and the uctuating vorticity eld. Transport The redistribution of the enstropy is taken care by the transport terms T + D . The rst term T is the transport by velocity uctuations and the second term D is the transport by viscosity. Stretching This is the combination of terms S which accounts for the proces of vorticity-line-stretching. There is contribution of both the mean deformation eld sij as the uctuation deformation eld sij . Moleculair destruction This loss term describes the destruction of enstropy by the moleculair diusion. Therefore this term is always negative.
Chapter 2. Turbulence
23
2.2
Turbulence modeling
As mentioned before, turbulence is still an unsolved problem. There is not one model which completely describes the proces of this natural phenomenon. Over the last decades several models have been introduced. Every model has dierent conditions for which it performs best and has its advantages and disadvantages. The CFD package Fluent, which is used to set-up the simulations, also provides several turbulence models. In order to make a general decision which model to choose, the dierent models will be discussed briey. The pros and cons will be treated as well as the limitations and the basic equations. First the case when no turbulence is modeled, will be considered. After this the actual turbulence models will pass in review.
2.2.1
Laminar
The rst case that is mentioned, is the case when no turbulence model is used. The governing equations are solved and no extra equations for the kinetic energy and dissipation will be involved. When this method is used in case of a turbulent ow, the results deviate from the reality. It is possible to get a correct simulation but extreme requirements are necessary with regards to constructing the grid. The grid resolution must be in the order of the smallest length scales and a Direct Numerical Solution (DNS) study is performed. A grid with such a high resolution is nearly impossible to construct in case of a complex geometry and when constructed it requires far too much computational eort. Therefore this option is not feasible for a complex engine simulation.
2.2.2
Spalart-Allmaras model
The rst model that will be discussed is the Spalart-Allmaras turbulence model. This is the only oneequation model that will be treated. It is a relative simple low Reynolds number model that solves a modeled transport equation for the kinetic eddy viscosity. It was rst designed for aerospace applications involving wall-bounded ows and has shown good results for boundary layers subjected to adverse pressure gradients [6]. In this model is the transported variable. It is similar to the turbulent kinematic viscosity except near the walls. The governing equation for this transport variable is ( ) + (ui ) = G + t xi 1 A xj ( + ) xj + Cb2 xj
2
Y .
(2.23)
The rst term on the left-hand side of equation 2.23 is the increase of turbulent viscosity. The second term represents the convective transport by the mean ow. On the right-hand side of 2.23 the terms represent respectively the production of turbulent viscosity from the mean ow gradients (G ), the transport of the viscosity due to both molecular and turbulent viscosity, the dissipation of turbulent viscosity by the small scales and last the destruction of turbulent viscosity in the near-wall regions due to viscous damping (Y ). The turbulent viscosity t is computed from t = f , where the viscous damping function f is given by f = 3 3 3 + C 1 and = .
24
Because the Spalart-Allmaras model is relatively new, its applicability in complex ows is uncertain. One-equation models can not rapidly accommodate changes in the length scales. This is the case when a ow changes suddenly from a wall-bounded ow to a shear ow. When simulating the ow in an internal combustion engine, this is certainly the case. The air ows for example through the narrow opening between valve and valve seat into the combustion chamber.
2.2.3
Standard k - model
Another class of turbulence models are the two-equation models. The simplest one is the standard k model, which is proposed by Launder and Spalding (Launder [16]). It is widely used in turbulence simulations because of its general applicability, robustness and economy. The two transport equations for the kinetic energy and dissipation rate are solved to form a characteristic scale for both turbulent velocity and length. These scales represent the turbulent viscosity. The equations for the kinetic energy (2.24) and dissipation rate (2.25) are given below. (k ) + (kui ) = t xi xj ( ) + ( ui ) = t xi xj + t t k k + Gk xj
(2.24) (2.25)
2 + C1 Gk C2 xj k k
where C is a constant. It is not dependent on the direction and is therefore isotropic. The term Gk in 2.24 and 2.25 represents the generation of turbulence kinetic energy due to the mean velocity gradients. This energy is fed to the small scales by the large scales via the vortex stretching mechanism. The small scales dissipate this energy into heat when it reaches the Kolmogorov scales. Gk is calculated using equation 2.27. The term in front of the velocity gradient uj /xi is the Reynolds stress which is mentioned at the beginning of this chapter (equation 2.18). Gk = ui uj uj . xi (2.27)
The rst term on the right-hand side of both equation 2.24 and 2.25, is the transport due to molecular and turbulent viscosity. The second term on the right-hand side of the dissipation equation (2.25) represents the rate at which the large scales supply energy to the smaller scales. The last term of equation 2.25 represents the dissipation at the small scales. In this semi-empirical model the equation for the kinetic energy is derived mathematically, while the equation for the dissipation is derived using physical reasoning. Further, in the derivation of the standard k - model, it is assumed that the ow is fully turbulent and the eects of molecular viscosity are negligible. Therefore this model is only valid for fully turbulent core ows. This is generally not an issue in case of the simulation of the internal combustion engine.
2.2.4
RNG k - model
The RNG k - turbulence model is derived from the Navier-Stokes equations using a mathematical technique called renormalization group (RNG) methods [2]. The analytical derivation results in a model with dierent constants than those in the standard k - model. Also additional terms and functions will appear in the transport equations for the kinetic energy and the dissipation which will be discussed in the following.
Chapter 2. Turbulence
25
In equation 2.28 and 2.29 the transport equations of the RNG k similar form as the standard k - model with a few dierences. (k ) + (kui ) = t xi xj ( ) + ( ui ) = t xi xj ef f xj k xj
k ef f + C1
+ Gk
2
G k C2
The main dierence with the standard k - model is an additional term R in the term is given by equation 2.30 R = C 3 (1 /0 ) 2 1 + 3 k
u
(2.30)
ui j where Sk/ , S = 2Sij Sij , Sij = 1 the mean rate of strain tensor and 0 and are 2 xj + xi constants. The last two terms of equation 2.29 can be merged. This results in a new term 2.31.
C2
where
C2 + C2
C 3 (1 /0 ) 1 + 3
(2.31)
becomes In regions of relative low strain rates ( < 0 ) the R term makes a positive contribution and C2 larger than C2 . As a result, for weakly to moderately strained ows, the RNG model tends to give results largely comparable to the standard k - model. On the other hand, for large strain rates ( > 0 ), the becomes less than C2 . In comparison with R term makes a negative contribution. The value of C2 the standard k - model the smaller destruction of increases , reducing k and eventually the eective viscosity. As a result, in rapidly strained ows, the RNG model yields a lower turbulent viscosity than the standard k - model. Thus the RNG k - model is more responsive to the eect of rapid strain and streamline curvature than the standard k - model, which explains the better performance of the RNG model for a wider class of ows.
Another dierence with the standard k - model is the calculation of the turbulent viscosity. In case of the RNG model the viscosity is calculated by the following equation d 2 k = 1.72 d , 3 1 + C (2.32)
where = ef f /. Equation 2.32 is integrated to obtain an accurate description of how the eective turbulent transport varies with the eective Reynolds number, allowing the model to better handle lowReynolds number and wall-bounded ows. In case of high Reynolds numbers equation 2.32 reduces to t = C k2 , (2.33)
2.2.5
Realizable k - model
The last member of the k - family is the Realizable k - model [21]. It is a relative new turbulence model. In contrast to the other two models, this model is Realizable. This means the model satises certain mathematical constraints on the Reynolds stresses which are consistent with the physics of turbulent ows. It diers from the standard k - model in two major ways. The rst dierence is the formulation
26
of the turbulent viscosity and the second dierence is the new transport equation for the dissipation rate. The transport equation has been derived from an exact equation for the transport of the mean-square vorticity uctuation. In 2.34 and 2.35 the transport equations for both the kinetic energy and the dissipation rate are given. (k ) + (kui ) = t xi xj ( ) + ( ui ) = t xi xj where C1 = max 0.43, , +5 k =S , S= 2Sij Sij + t t k k + Gk xj
(2.34) (2.35)
2 + C1 S C2 xj k+
The equation for the kinetic energy has the same expression as the standard and RNG k - models. Only the equation for the dissipation rate is quite dierent. The production term in the equation (all but last term on right-hand side of equation 2.35) does not involve the production of k . This in contrast with the other two family members. It is believed that the present form better represents the spectral energy transfer [21]. The last term in equation 2.35 is the destruction term. A desirable feature is that this term does not have any singularity. The denominator never vanish, even if k vanishes or becomes smaller than zero. Like the other k - models, the turbulent viscosity is calculated using equation 2.26. The only dierence is the constant C . In case of the Realizable k - model this term is no longer a constant. It is computed from C = 1 , A0 + AS kU / (2.36)
1 2
uj ui xi xj
where A0 and AS are constants and ij is the mean rate-of-rotation tensor. It can be seen that C is a function of the mean strain and rotation rates, the angular velocity of the systems rotation and the turbulence elds (k and ). The turbulent viscosity is dependent of the direction and is therefore anisotropic The Realizable k - model has shown substantial improvements over the standard k - model [21]. Especially when the ow features include strong streamline curvature, vortices and rotation. Since the model is relatively new, it is not clear in exact which aspects the Realizable k - model outperforms the RNG model. However, initial studies have shown that the Realizable model provides the best performance of all the k - models for several validations of separated ows and ows with complex secondary ow features. These properties make this turbulence model very suitable for the engine simulations.
2.2.6
Standard k - model
The last turbulence model that will be discussed, is the k - model. This model is based on the Wilcox k - model [24] [20]. It incorporates modications for low-Reynolds number eects, compressibility and shear ow spreading. The Wilcox model predicts free shear ow spreading rates that are in close agreement with measurements for far wakes, mixing layers and dierent types of jets [6]. Therefore this model
Chapter 2. Turbulence
27
is applicable to both wall-bounded ows and free shear ows. The k - model is a two equation semi-empirical turbulence model. The transport equation for the kinetic energy is comparable with the previous k - models. The equation for the dissipation on the other hand, is dierent. Instead of the dissipation per unit of mass , the specic dissipation rate is used. This quantity can be seen as the ratio of to k . The two transport equations for the kinetic energy and specic dissipation rate are represented by (k ) + (kui ) = t xi xj ( ) + (ui ) = t xi xj t k k + Gk Yk xj + G Y , xj
+ +
(2.37) (2.38)
where Gk represents the generation of kinetic energy and G the generation of the specic dissipation rate. The dissipation of k and due to turbulence are represented by Yk and Y respectively. The turbulent viscosity t is calculated using t = k , (2.39)
where Ret =
k ,
(2.40)
and Rk is a constant. As can be seen, for large Reynolds numbers this coecient is equal to one. The generation of kinetic energy Gk is calculated using equation 2.27. The generation of the specic dissipation on the other hand, is computed by G = Gk , k (2.41)
where is again the low-Reynolds correction factor. It is calculated in a slightly dierent way, namely = 0 + Ret /R 1 + Ret /R , (2.42)
where R is a constant. It can again be seen that for large Reynolds numbers this coecient is equal to one. For the calculation of the dissipation of k and the reader is referred to the Fluent users guide [6]. As mentioned earlier in this section, the k - turbulence model gives good results for both wall bounded ows and free shear ows because the low Reynolds number correction factors. This property makes the k - model also very suitable for the engine simulations. Fluent oers a modied version of the k - model, named the Shear-Stress Transport (SST) k - model. This model diers from the standard k - model in one major way. This main dierence is the gradual change from the standard k - model in the inner region of the boundary layer to a high-Reynolds number version of the k - model in the outer part of the boundary layer. This ensures that the model equations behave appropriately in both the near-wall and far-eld zones. The SST k - model will not be discussed any further, for more information the reader is referred to the Fluent users guide [6].
28
Turbulence model constants In tabel 2.1 the constants which are used in the dierent turbulence models are grouped. Table 2.1: Turbulence Cb1 = 0.1355 Cb2 = 0.622 Cw1 = 3.266 Cw3 = 2.0 C1 = 1.44 C2 = 1.92 C1 = 1.42 C2 = 1.68 = 0.012 C1 = 1.44 C2 = 1.9 =1 = 0.52 R = 8 Rk = 6 k = 2.0 = 2.0 k,1 = 1.176 ,1 = 2.0 i,2 = 0.0828
model constants
SST k -
2.3
Wall-bounded ows
Turbulent ows need special attention near walls. This is because turbulent ows are signicantly aected by the presence of walls. In the rst place the mean velocity eld is aected through the no-slip condition that has to be satised at the wall. Another issue is that close to the wall the viscous damping reduces the tangential velocity uctuations, while kinematic blocking reduces the normal uctuations. Toward the outer part of the near-wall region however, the turbulence is rapidly increased by the production of turbulence kinetic energy due to the large gradients in the mean velocity. The near-wall modeling signicantly aects the reliability of the solution because the walls are the main source of vorticity and turbulence. After all, it is in the near-wall region that the solution variables have large gradients. Therefore an accurate representation of the ow near walls is necessary for successful predictions of wall-bounded ows. Experiments have shown that the near-wall region can be divided into three layers. The innermost region is called the viscous sublayer. In this region the molecular viscosity plays an important role in momentum and mass transfer. On the other side of the near-wall region the fully turbulent or log-law region can be found. Like the name says, this region is dominated by turbulence. Between these two layers an interim region can be found. This region is called the buer layer or blending region. In gure 2.4 the dierent layers are displayed. There are two ways to solve the near-wall region. The rst one does not solve the viscous aected region, that is the buer layer and viscous sublayer. Instead it uses semi-empirical formulas to bridge the region between the wall and the fully turbulent ow. These formulas are called wall functions. The second approach modies the turbulence models to enable the viscosity aected region to be resolved all the way to the wall. In this case the mesh must be ne enough. This method is called near-wall modeling. Both approaches are presented in gure 2.5 and will be discussed in the following sections.
2.3.1
Wall functions
As mentioned before, the region close to the wall can be solved in two dierent ways. The rst approach uses semi-empirical formulas called wall functions and is used in the dierent k - models. These functions are used to link the solution variables at the near-wall cells and the corresponding quantities on the wall. The viscosity aected region does not have to be resolved which saves computational resources. This is why the wall function approach is very popular in high Reynolds number ows and is therefore often
Chapter 2. Turbulence
29
eperimental data
U* 1
inner layer
ln ( Ey * )
Dimensionless velocity U *
U * y*
viscous sublayer
buffer layer
y 5
y 60
log-law region
outer layer