Cefrc3 6

Part 6: Drop Drag/Wall Impinge/Vaporization/Sprays
Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines

Prof. Rolf D. Reitz,
Engine Research Center,
University of Wisconsin-Madison
2014 Princeton-CEFRC
Summer Program on Combustion
Course Length: 15 hrs
(Mon.- Fri., June 23-27)
Copyright 2014 by Rolf D. Reitz.

This material is not to be sold, reproduced or distributed
without prior written permission of the owner, Rolf D. Reitz.
CEFRC3-6, 2014

Short course outine:
Engine fundamentals and performance metrics, computer modeling supported
by in-depth understanding of fundamental engine processes and detailed
experiments in engine design optimization.
Day 1 (Engine fundamentals)
Part 1: IC Engine Review, 0, 1 and 3-D modeling
Part 2: Turbochargers, Engine Performance Metrics
Day 2 (Combustion Modeling)
Part 3: Chemical Kinetics, HCCI & SI Combustion
Part 4: Heat transfer, NOx and Soot Emissions
Day 3 (Spray Modeling)
Part 5: Atomization, Drop Breakup/Coalescence
Day 4 (Engine Optimization)
Part 7: Diesel combustion and SI knock modeling
Part 8: Optimization and Low Temperature Combustion
Day 5 (Applications and the Future)
Part 9: Fuels, After-treatment and Controls
Part 10: Vehicle Applications, Future of IC Engines
2
CEFRC3-6, 2014
ERC Spray modeling

Breakup length
Blob
injection
model
L Ca
1
/ f(T )
2
Beale, 1999
RT Model
Kelvin-Helmoltz
Rayleigh Taylor
Linearized instability analysis
R/D
L/D
r=B0
=0et
KH Model
Spray Models
Nozzle flow/cavitation
Jet atomization
KH-RT
Drop breakup
Drop collision/coalescence
Drop drag
Multi-component fuel evaporation
Spray-wall impingement
Discrete drop
model
CEFRC3-6, 2014
Liu, 1993
Droplet drag modeling

Steady-state Stokes viscous drag, added-mass and Basset history integral
dv '
t
dv
dt dt '
dv/dt = F 6 r g v 12 ( 43 r3 g ) 6r2 g 0
dt
t t'
General form
g U2
LV d dv / dt CD A f
{U / U}
2
24 Re d1 (1 Re d2 / 3 / 6), Re d 1000
Cd
Re d 1000
0.424,
Drop distortion (TAB model)

2
l y& 8 y 2 U rel
&
y& 5
2
3
l rd l rd 3 l rd2
Cd Cd , sphere (1 2.632 y )
4
CEFRC3-6, 2014
Turbulence & drop dispersion
Gosman, 1981
Vortexstructure
Monte Carlo method

St>>1
u u u
St<<1
G(u)
4 / 3 k
3/ 2
exp(3 u / 4k)
St~1
Stokes #
Drop-eddy interaction time

Eddy life time
Residence time
tp l / u v
t e l / 2k / 3
l = C
3/ 4
3/ 2
St=te/tp
=l
t int min(t e ,t p )
5
CEFRC3-6, 2014
Wachters, 1966
Spray wall impingement

At low approach velocities (We) drops rebound elastically
With hot walls cushion of vapor fuel forms under the drop
As approach velocity is increased,
normal velocity component decreases
and drop may break up
U n2 d/2
We
Beyond We = 40 liquid
spreads into surface layer
At high temperatures
film boiling takes place
Weo =0.678Wei exp( - 0.088Wei )

We 40
We 40
CEFRC3-6, 2014
Naber, 1988
Dry wall impingement models

Stick - drops stick to the wall
Reflect - drops rebound
Slide/Jet - incident drop leaves
tangent to the surface
From mass and momentum
conservation:
p
y =- ln{1 - p (1 - exp( - b )}
b
where 0 < p <1 random number
exp( b ) +1
sin a =(
) /1 +(p / b ) 2
exp( b ) - 1
7
CEFRC3-6, 2014
Senecal, 1997
Lippert, 2000
ERC wall impingement models

Rebound or slide based on We
Enhanced breakup due to drop
B1 40
B1 3
B1 3
B1 40
We 40
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
m
e
a
s
u
r
e
d
(
N
a
b
e
r
e
t
a
l
.
)
p
r
e
d
i
c
t
e
d
(
p
r
e
s
e
n
t
)
0.5
m
e
a
s
u
r
e
d
(
B
o
o
t
h
)
p
r
e
d
i
c
t
e
d
(
p
r
e
s
e
n
t
)
00 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
tim
e(m
s)
radialpenetration(cm
)
destabilization B1 = 1.73
We 40
CEFRC3-6, 2014
Deng, 2014
Wet wall impingement grid independent model

Saffman lift force on splashed drops
gU 2
LVd dv / dt CD A f
{U / U } FSaff
2
FSaff 1.61 g d U-v Re g
Re g
Wall Jet Model
Glauert analytical solution
Drop splash criterion

E 2 WeL ,i
1
min(
ho
1
,1)
d
Re L ,i
Splash mass ratio
m& 0.1 0.4 min( o ,1)

d
C WeL ,inj
g 2 du
d
g
dy
2
Ecrit
3,330
1/ 4
C
WeL ,i
LU inj2 d noz
CEFRC3-6, 2014
Deng, 2014
Hw
Rw
Rw
Rw
10
CEFRC3-6, 2014
Deng, 2014
Effect of ambient pressure

Hw
Hw
Hw
Hw
11
CEFRC3-6, 2014
Drop Vaporization
Sirignano, 1999
Law, 1976-77
Aggarwal, 2000
well understood for single component, low ambient pressure

D2 Law
Liquid-Vapor Interface:
Equilibrium or
Non-equilibrium
Tinf
YR
Drop
Mass transfer with
surroundings: vaporization,
condensation, gas solubility
Heat transfer to drop: convection

(conduction), radiation
Y
R
Internal circulation and

profiles: temperature,
concentration, velocity
Yinf
TR
r
Relative Drop Motion
12
CEFRC3-6, 2014
Amsden, 1989
Lefebvre, 1989
KIVA vaporization models

Frossling correlation
R dr / dt DBSh / (2 1r )
Y1
Mass transfer number
B (Y Y1 ) /(1 Y )
*
1
*
1
Sherwood number
1/ 2
d
Sh (2.0 0.6 Re
1/ 3
Sc
Y 1*
ln(1 B)
)
B
Fuel mass fraction at drop surface
p
Y W1 / {W1 W0 (
1)}
pv (Td )
*
1
Vapor pressure Pv from thermodynamic tables

13
CEFRC3-6, 2014
Drop heat-up modeling
Amsden, 1989
Lefebvre, 1989
Change in drop temperature from energy balance
4 3 &
d r cd Td 4 r 2 RL(Td ) 4 r 2Qd
3
Rate of heat conduction to drop from
T
Ranz-Marshall correlation
Qd (T Td ) Nu / 2 r
r Td
where
Nu (2.0 0.6 Re
1/ 2
d
ln(1 B )
Pr )
B
1/ 3
14
CEFRC3-6, 2014
Ra, 2003
Vaporization regimes
qo
qo
m&
m&
qi
qi
Td
Ts
Normal
evaporation
heating
Td
Ts
T
T
Tb
T
Tb
Ts
Td
Boiling
heating
Td
Ts
Normal
evaporation
cooling
Flash boiling
cooling
qo
qo
m&
m&
Tqamb
i
r
qi
Td
Ts
Ts
T
Td
Ts=Tb
Td
15
Td
Ts=Tb
r
CEFRC3-6, 2014
Vaporization regimes
Ra, 2003
Normal evaporation
energy balance
C P m
m L(Ts ) hi ,eff (Td Ts )
(T Ts )
2r C m [C ]( y y Fs ) Sh
exp o P A F
1
Nu
Nu
mass balance
y y F
m g m ln(1 BM ) g m ln(1 Fs
)
1 y Fs
Boiling evaporation (Tb from Clausius Clapeyron equation)
C P m
(T Tb )
2r C m [C ]( y 1) Sh
exp o P A F
1
Nu
Nu
m
(0 T 5)
hi ,eff , e eff t
e
(5 T 25)
e
Td
Ts
m L(Tb ) (hi ,eff sh )(Td Tb )

T Td Tb
Superheated
droplet
correlation
(Adachi et al.,
1997)
sh 0.76T 0.26
0.027T 2.33
13.8T 0.39
(25 T )
q
16
CEFRC3-6, 2014
Multi-component fuel modeling
distribution or mole fraction [%]
diesel A
diesel B
Aromatic [%]
34
16
Sulfur [ppm]
10.5
7.3
Parafins [%]
33
42
Napthenes [%]
33
42
Olefin [%]
0.2
0.3
Cetane#
~43
~47
C/H ratio
7.014
6.393
1.6
50
Discrete gp(mwi)
1.4
gasoline composition
iso-octane approximation
Single comp approx
1.2
1
30
0.8
Continuous fp(I)
0.6
0.4
20
10
0.2
0
50
100
150
200
250
molecular weight
17
40
CEFRC3-6, 2014
0
300
distribution or mole fraction [%]
i) single component approximation

ii) continuous multi-component
iii) discrete multi-component
Lippert, 1997
Diesel
Gasoline
Common automotive fuels are

multi-component
Components: Various molecular
weights and chemical structures
Three approaches;
Ra, 2003
Multi-component model formulation

Continuous Multi-Component
Discrete Multi-Component
Continuous system of a liquid phase +

Semi-continuous mixture system of
vapor phase fuel and ambient gas:
N
Discrete system of a liquid phase +

Discrete mixture system of vapor
phase fuel and ambient gas:
NF
G p ( I ) x F f p ( I ) xs ( I I s )
p
Ns
G p ( I ) x F ( I I F ) xs ( I I s )
s 1
continuous phase
Yi, 2001
Ra, 2003, 2009
F 1
discrete phase
s 1
discrete phase of fuel

discrete phase of air/fuel mixture
Vapor phase transport equation,
I n f p ( I )dI
n
p
Vapor phase transport equation,
(n 0, 1, 2, )
n
n
[ f v ] [ f v v] I n J I dI S g
0
t
Assumed distribution function : - func
( I ) 1
(I )
f (I )
exp[
]
( )
, 2 2
18
[ yi ] [ yi v] ( Di yi ) s g ,i
t
[ y F ] [ y F v] ( D y F ) S g
t
CEFRC3-6, 2014
Ra, 2009
DMC model tests

0.030
Modeled species contents*

MW
Mass fraction
Diesel A (US narrow-cut Diesel)

c14h30
198
0.6253
c12h26
170
0.0559
c16h34
226
0.3025
c18h38
254
0.0163
probabilty density
species
Diesel A
0.025
0.020
0.015
0.010
0.005
0.000
0
Diesel B (Euro Diesel)
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
300
350
molecular weight [g/mol]
198
0.2376
0.012
ic8h18
114
0.0153
0.010
c10h22
142
0.0807
c12h26
170
0.1863
c16h34
226
0.1984
c18h38
254
0.2817
probabilty density
c14h30
Diesel B
0.008
0.006
0.004
0.002
0.000
0
19
50
100
150
200
250
molecular weight [g/mol]
CEFRC3-6, 2014
Ra, 2009
Fuel component distributions

MW=199.61
MW=196.06
0.0025
0.0120
0.0100
mass fraction
mass fraction
0.0020
0.0015
0.0010
0.0005
0.0080
0.0060
0.0040
0.0020
0.0000
0.0000
ic8h18
c10h22 c12h26 c14h30 c16h34 c18h38
ic8h18
c10h22 c12h26 c14h30 c16h34 c18h38
Diesel B
MWini=200
CA=-14 (~ first ignition timing)

20
CEFRC3-6, 2014
Ra, 2009
Multi-component spray vaporization
Gasoline
Do=300 m
Vinj=100 m/s
2.0 ms after SOI
21
CEFRC3-6, 2014
Jiao, 2011
Fredenslund, 1975
Non-ideal mixing using UNIFAC method
For mixtures composed of polar components, both initial and final boiling points
in the distillation curve are not well predicted assuming Ideal Mixing (Raoults Law)
- misses the azeotrope behavior of the mixture.
xi
Pvap ,i
Pm
i xL ,i
H H
H - C - C - OH
H H
Differences
Differences in
in size
size
and
and shapes
shapes of
of the
the
molecules
molecules
Pvap ,i
Energy interactions
between functional
groups [3]
Vapor pressure of pure comp. i ;
Pm
Total mixture pressure
xL ,i Mole fraction of comp. i in liquid phase; xi
Mole fraction of comp. i in gas phase
22
CEFRC3-6, 2014
Ethanol/gasoline surrogate mixture
23
Pfahl,1996
Jiao, 2011
CEFRC3-6, 2014
Jiao, 2011
lifetimesimulation
Drop- Droplet
evaporation
E10 @noUNIFAC
E10 @UNIFAC
0.008
- Temp. vs. mole fraction
0.006
80
0.004
0
Temperature [ C]
Droplet radius [cm]
0.010
0.002
0.000
0.0
0.1
0.2
Time [s]
0.3
0.4
75
noUNIFAC
UNIFAC
70
65
60
150C
55
50
45
0.0
24
0.2
0.4
0.6
xethanol
0.8
CEFRC3-6, 2014
1.0
Andersen, 2010
Distillation curve
140
noUNIFAC
E00
E10
E20
E50
E85
E100
120
Temperature [ C]
Experiment
120
Temperature [ C]
140
E20 has the lowest

initial boiling
temperature
Jiao, 2011
100
80
UNIFAC
E00
E10
E20
E50
E85
E100
100
80
Simulation
60
40
Simulation
0
20
40
60
80
Volume [%]
60
40
0
20
40
60
Volume [%]
25
80
100
CEFRC3-6, 2014
100
Anand, 2011
Surrogate fuels - 18 component model

alkanes
aromatics
cycloalkanes
PAH
corrected
26
CEFRC3-6, 2014
Anand, 2011
Diesel hydrocarbon class distributions and surrogates
20 species physical property

surrogate database
FUELS for Advanced

Combustion Engines (FACE)
Measured hydrocarbon class
distributions
27
CEFRC3-6, 2014
* Anand, 2011
Chemical structure and activity coefficients of Face #9 surrogates
Departure
from Raoults
law Non-ideal
vaporization
influences
heavy-end
of distillation
curve *
pi ,v xi ,v P
xi ,l i Psat ,i
28
CEFRC3-6, 2014
Anand, 2011
Example - face fuel #1 surrogate composition

Distillation profile
Batch distillation
modeled as
flash boiling droplet
Physical property surrogates
Chemical classes
PC normal paraffins
IP iso-paraffins
MCP mono cyclo paraffins
DCP di-cycloparaffins
AB Alkyl benzenes
PA poly aromatics
29
CEFRC3-6, 2014
Abani, 2008
Putting them all together - Grid independent spray models
Coarse mesh:
Drop drag over-predicted
Fine mesh:
Drop coalescence underpredicted
4 mm
3mm
2 mm
1 mm
0.5 mm
0.25mm
Gas-jet sub-grid momentum exchange near nozzle
30
CEFRC3-6, 2014
Spray model validation
(Wang SAE 2010-01-0626)
6-hole injector; Iso-octane; constant volume

chamber, cold ambient; Injection pressure:
120, 200bar; chamber pressure: 12bar;
Spray Tip Penetration (mm)
30
20
10
0.5 time (ms) 1.0
70
60
50
40
30
mesh=3mm, dtmax=1e-6s
experiment
20
10
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
Time (ms)
2.5
3.0
3.5
80
experiment
40
0
0.0
80
0
0.0
Droplet Axial Velocity (m/s)
Local SMD (um)
50
INJ P=120bar
90
Expts: Mitroglou, 2006

60
Wang, 2010
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0.0
1.5
31
experiment
0.5 time (ms) 1.0
CEFRC3-6, 2014
1.5
Naber, 1996
Siebers, 1998
Validation evaporating sprays
Diesel and other fuels;

Constant volume chamber; various temperatures;
Varying chamber densities: 13.9, 28.6, 58.6kg/m^3.
Schlieren imaging
Pickett, Sandia National Laboratory, "Engine Combustion Network",
https://share.sandia.gov/ecn/
32
CEFRC3-6, 2014
Wang, 2010
Evaporating diesel spray grid size and time step independency
90
80
70
Exp.-Liquid Penetration
Exp.-Vapor Penetration
100
90
100
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
80
70
60
40
30
20
10
0
0.0
3.0
Time (ms)
Exp.-Liquid Penetration
Exp.-Vapor Penetration
50
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
Time (ms)
Predicted vapor and liquid penetrations.

Experimental data of Naber and Siebers (1996) and Pickett (2007).
Diesel fuel injection, nozzle diameter 257 mm, injection
pressure 1370bar, gas temperature 1,000K, gas density 58.6 kg/m3 .
33
CEFRC3-6, 2014
3.0
L
iq
u
id
P
e
n
tra
io
n
L
e
n
g
th
(m
)
1
0
E
x
p
e
r
i
m
e
n
t
C
o
m
p
u
t
a
i
o
n
9
8
0
7
3
6
0
7
.
3
k
g
/
m
5
3
4
0
1
4
.
8
k
g
/
m
3
3
5
9
.
0
k
g
/
m
2
0
1
07
08
0T
9
0
1
0
1
0
1
2
0
1
3
0
e
m
p
e
ra
tu
re
(K
)
Juneja, 2004
Evaporating diesel spray - liquid length
Liquid Penetration Length

Siebers, 1998
Injection Pressure : 135 MPa

Fuel
: DF2
Orifice Diameter : 246 m
Comparison of model results with experimental liquid penetration length data
34
CEFRC3-6, 2014
Wang, 2014
ECN Spray A modeling

Temp [K]
O2 [vol%]
Density
[kg/m3]
Pinj [MPa]
800
15
22.8
150
850
13/15/17/21
7.6/15.2/
22.8/30.4
50/100/150
900
13/15/17/21
7.6/15.2/
22.8/30.4
50/100/150
Computational grid
1000
13/15/17/21
7.6/15.2/
22.8/30.4
50/100/150
1100
13/15/17/21
7.6/15.2/
22.8/30.4
50/100/150
1200
13/15/17/21
7.6/15.2/
22.8/30.4
50/100/150
Related sub-models
Phenomenon
Model
Spray breakup
KH-RT instability
Lift-off length
Evaporation
Discrete multicomponent
(DMC)
Turbulence
Generalized RNG k model
Onset of the
averaged OH
concentration
Combustion
SpeedChem
Ignition delay
Droplet collision
ROI model
Near nozzle flow
Gas-jet model
Maxmium dT/dt
Maxmium dOH/dt
Soot formation
Multi-step phenomenological
35
CEFRC3-6, 2014
Wang, 2014

Non-reacting mixing process
Liquid and vapor penetrations1
Ambient conditions
O2
0.0
N2
0.8971
CO2
0.0652
H2O
0.0377
Pressure
60.45 bar
Temperature
900 K
Density
22.8 kg/m3
Injector specifications
Type
Common-rail
Nozzle
Single-hole, 0.89
Nozzle diameter
0.084 mm (0.090mm)
Injection pressure
150 MPa
Injection duration
6.0 ms
Injection fuel mass
13.77 mg
1. Engine Combustion Network, http://www.sandia.gov/ecn/
36
CEFRC3-6, 2014
Wang, 2014
Vishwanathan, 2010
37
CEFRC3-6, 2014
Wang, 2013
Reaction mechanism -formulation

n-C12
reaction
pathway
n-C12H26-PAH mechanism
104 species and 444 reactions
Reduced n-dodecane
mechanism
80 species and 299 reactions
Reduced PAH mechanism
42 species and 228 reactions1
PAH mechanism
PAH
mechanism
validation
A1 formation
C3H3+C3H3=C6H6
C3H3+C3H3=C6H5+H
C4H5+C2H2=C6H6+H
C4H3+C2H2=C6H5
Larger PAH formation
1. HACA sequence
2. Small radical and molecule
3. Addition reactions between
aromatic radicals and molecules
38
CEFRC3-6, 2014
Wang, 2013
Reaction mechanism -validation

Shock Tube2
Ignition delay1
JSR3
1. Narayanaswamy, 2014
2. Mz-Ahmed, 2012
3. Malewicki, 2013
39
CEFRC3-6, 2014
Wang, 2014

Non-reacting mixing process - Fuel mixture fraction
Axial
Predicted mixture fraction

distributions agree
reasonable well with
experimental data in both
radial and axial directions
by calibrating the spray
model constants
1. Engine Combustion Network, http://www.sandia.gov/ecn/
40
CEFRC3-6, 2014

Reacting conditions - Soot formation vs. Ambient temperature
850K
900K
1000K
1100K
Wang, 2014
Skeen, 2013
1200K
Soot
ppm
1.2
20
Z(mm)
50
60
-10
0
R(mm)
10
30
0.6 40
Z(mm)
0.8
40
20
30
10
0.4 50
0.2
60
-10
0
R(mm)
10
0
14
10
12
20
10
30
40
6
4
50
60
-10
0
R(mm)
10
0
16
10
14
10
20
12
20
30
10
30
40
50
60
-10
0
R(mm)
41
10
20
15
10
40
Z(mm)
1.4
10
Z(mm)
Z(mm)
50
60
-10
0
R(mm)
10
CEFRC3-6, 2014
Wang, 2014
0
R(mm)
10
-10
8
6
40
60
Peak
16 nm
12
20
10
30
40
6
4
50
60
-10
0
R(mm)
10
10
10
30
-10
12
20
30
30
10
30
4
3
50
60
-10
0
0
R(mm)
10
1.5
60
-10
0
0
R(mm)
40
50
0.5
12
20
10
8
40
6
4
50
60
60
0
R(mm)
10
-10
0
R(mm)
-7
10
10
-4
x 10
5
20
30
1.5
50
0.5
60
0
R(mm)
10
-10
0
-7
x 10
16
10
14
0
R(mm)
10
0
-7
x 10
16
10
14
20
12
20
12
30
10
30
10
40
50
60
-10
The soot formation

regions agree with the
high A4 concentration
regions;
40
60
-10
0
R(mm)
10
50
x 10
14
10
-10
-4
40
10
30
30
-10
-6
20
50
0
x 10
2
10
40
60
x 10
2.5
10
20
50
10
-5
14
0
R(mm)
10
Z(mm)
60
15
40
6
4
x 10
16
10
50
-7
10
0
R(mm)
30
20
0
x 10
14
Z(mm)
Dsoot
10
-10
Z(mm)
0
R(mm)
-6
Z(mm)
Z(mm)
60
x 10
8
40
50
-10
10
10
10
30
0
R(mm)
20
40
50
-7
20
60
40
50
x 10
10
12
Z(mm)
0.2
60
30
20
20
Z(mm)
40
0.4
50
A4
0.6
10
10
14
Z(mm)
Z(mm)
40
0.8
30
20
0
16
10
12
Z(mm)
30
-10
20
10
Z(mm)
20
Soot
ppm
10
0
14
Z(m m )
1.2
Z(mm)
10
0
7
0
R(mm)
42
10
40
Z(mm)
0
1.4
Z(mm)
50
60
-10
0
R(mm)
Predicted soot particle

size is in the reasonable
range compared to
experimental data;
10
CEFRC3-6, 2014
Wang, 2014
Reacting conditions - Soot formation Overview

Total soot mass @4.5ms
Soot
Lift-off length
Lift-off
43
CEFRC3-6, 2014
Wang, 2014
Reacting conditions - Soot formation & model sensitivity

baseline
0
10
10
10
20
30
20
Z(m m )
50
10
44
1
-10
1.4
1.2
30
1
0.8
40
Z(m m )
0.6
50
0.4
0.2
60
0
R(mm)
10
1.6
1.4
1.2
30
1
0.8
40
0.6
50
0.4
0.2
60
0
R(mm)
10
0
R(mm)
10
-6
20
-10
x 10
1.8
10
-10
60
10
Z(m m )
1.6
0
R(mm)
-6
20
-10
x 10
1.8
10
C2H2 assisted surface growth process is the

most important process that affects the soot
emission, followed by OH oxidation process;
The surface growth process and the
coagulation process affect the soot particle
size;
40
60
0
R(mm)
50
50
60
-10
30
40
20
30
40
Z(m m )
Soot particle coagulation
Z(m m )
-6
x 10
1.8
10
1.6
1.4
20
1.2
30
1
0.8
40
0.6
Z(m m )
C2H2 surface growth
50
0.4
0.2
60
-10
CEFRC3-6, 2014
0
R(mm)
10
Wang, 2010
Validation Cummins-Sandia optical engine

Case A
(Early Injection, Low
Temperature)
Case B
(Late Injection, Low
Temperature)
Case C
(Long Ignition Delay,
High Temperature)
IMEP [bar]
3.9
4.1
4.5
Injection Pressure [bar]
1600
1600
1200
SOI [deg ATDC]
-22
-5
Injection Quantity [mg]
56
56
61
DOI [deg]
10
Peak Temperature
2200 K
2200 K
2700 K
O2 Concentration [Vol
%]
12.7
(with EGR)
12.7
(with EGR)
21
(without EGR)
45
CEFRC3-6, 2014
2007
(B) Low Temperature, Late Singh,
Injection
(A) Low
Injection
Liquid
andTemperature,
vapor fuelEarly
penetration
Liquid Penetration [mm]
60
50
40
30
Wang, 2010
Exp
Exp Ave
1mm5e-6
1mm2e-6
1mm1e-6
1mm5e-7
2mm2e-6
3mm2e-6
20
10
0
-22
-21
-20
-19 -18 -17 -16 -15 -14

CAD ATDC
(C) High Temperature,
Long Injection delay
46
CEFRC3-6, 2014
Singh, 2007
Summary
Extensively validated spray models accurately capture the physics of
vaporizing sprays under engine conditions
Realistic fuels with non-ideal vaporization effects can be represented
Improved spray models provide consistent fuel distribution predictions, which
is a prerequisite for combustion modeling and engine optimization.
Spray predictions can be independent of mesh size and time step;
Recent experimental and modeling work can be accessed through the
Sandia Engine Combustion Network (ECN) http://www.sandia.gov/ecn/
Blue:
Liquid Scatter
Green:
UV Fluorescence
47
CEFRC3-6, 2014

Cefrc3 6

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Cefrc3 6

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Part 6: Drop Drag/Wall Impinge/Vaporization/Sprays

Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines

Copyright 2014 by Rolf D. Reitz.

Part 6: Drop Drag/Wall Impinge/Vaporization/Sprays

Part 6: Drop Drag/Wall Impinge/Vaporization/Sprays

ERC Spray modeling

Part 6: Drop Drag/Wall Impinge/Vaporization/Sprays

Droplet drag modeling

Drop distortion (TAB model)

Part 6: Drop Drag/Wall Impinge/Vaporization/Sprays

Turbulence & drop dispersion

Monte Carlo method

Drop-eddy interaction time

Part 6: Drop Drag/Wall Impinge/Vaporization/Sprays

Spray wall impingement

Weo =0.678Wei exp( - 0.088Wei )

Part 6: Drop Drag/Wall Impinge/Vaporization/Sprays

Dry wall impingement models

Part 6: Drop Drag/Wall Impinge/Vaporization/Sprays

ERC wall impingement models

Part 6: Drop Drag/Wall Impinge/Vaporization/Sprays

Wet wall impingement grid independent model

Wall Jet Model

Glauert analytical solution

Drop splash criterion

Splash mass ratio

m& 0.1 0.4 min( o ,1)

Part 6: Drop Drag/Wall Impinge/Vaporization/Sprays

Part 6: Drop Drag/Wall Impinge/Vaporization/Sprays

Effect of ambient pressure

Part 6: Drop Drag/Wall Impinge/Vaporization/Sprays

well understood for single component, low ambient pressure

Heat transfer to drop: convection

Internal circulation and

Relative Drop Motion

Part 6: Drop Drag/Wall Impinge/Vaporization/Sprays

KIVA vaporization models

Mass transfer number

Fuel mass fraction at drop surface

Vapor pressure Pv from thermodynamic tables

Part 6: Drop Drag/Wall Impinge/Vaporization/Sprays

Drop heat-up modeling

Change in drop temperature from energy balance

Part 6: Drop Drag/Wall Impinge/Vaporization/Sprays

Part 6: Drop Drag/Wall Impinge/Vaporization/Sprays

m L(Tb ) (hi ,eff sh )(Td Tb )

Part 6: Drop Drag/Wall Impinge/Vaporization/Sprays

Multi-component fuel modeling

distribution or mole fraction [%]

Single comp approx

distribution or mole fraction [%]

i) single component approximation

Common automotive fuels are

Part 6: Drop Drag/Wall Impinge/Vaporization/Sprays

Multi-component model formulation

Continuous system of a liquid phase +

Discrete system of a liquid phase +

discrete phase of fuel

Vapor phase transport equation,

Vapor phase transport equation,

Part 6: Drop Drag/Wall Impinge/Vaporization/Sprays

DMC model tests

Modeled species contents*