2003-01-1060

A New Quasi-Three Dimensional Combustion Model for

Prediction of DI Diesel Engines Performance and Pollutant
Emissions
E. G. Pariotis and D. T. Hountalas
Mechanical Engineering Department, National Technical University of Athens
Copyright 2003 Society of Automotive Engineers, Inc.

ABSTRACT
The fundamental understanding of mixture formation
and combustion process taking place in a DI diesel
engine cylinder is an important parameter for engine
design since they affect engine performance and
pollutant emissions. Multi-dimensional CFD models are
used for detailed simulation of these processes, but
suffer from complexity and require significant
computational time. The purpose of our work is to
develop a new quasi-dimensional 3D combustion model
capable of describing the air fuel mixing, combustion
and pollutant formation mechanisms, on an engine cycle
by cycle basis, needing reasonably low computational
time compared to CFD ones, while describing in a more
fundamental way the various processes compared to
existing multi-zone phenomenological models. As a
result, a number of problems associated with the
application of multi-zone models are resolved. The
combustion chamber is divided into a number of
computational cells and the equations of mass, energy
and species conservation are solved to calculate
temperature and species concentration at each node.
The gas flow field is estimated using a newly developed
semi-empirical gas motion model, based on the
assumption that the in-cylinder pressure is uniform. The
finite volume method is used for the solution of the
conservation equations. The implicit temporal and hybrid
central upwind spatial differencing scheme is used for
the discretization of the conservation equations. Spray
trajectory, fuel vaporization and combustion are
simulated using simplified sub-models based on semiempirical correlations. A first application of this new
model is made on a high speed DI diesel engine. The
effect of operating conditions on the combustion and
pollutant formation mechanism is examined. Information
concerning local air fuel ratio, temperature distribution
and species concentrations is derived. To validate the
model experiments have been conducted at the authors'
laboratory on a DI diesel engine. Comparing
experimental with calculated results, a relatively good
agreement is observed. This reveals that the proposed
model produces qualitatively reliable predictions of the
in-cylinder processes and engine performance at

reasonable computational time. Furthermore it appears

that it can be used to study pollutant formation and the
effect of various engine design parameters on the
combustion mechanism, providing results that are a
compromise between phenomenological models and
detailed CFD ones.

INTRODUCTION
Diesel engines have been widely used extensively in
heavy-duty vehicles while lately are increasingly being
used for light-duty vehicles. The attractiveness of diesel
engine lies on its high efficiency. On the other hand its
main disadvantages compared to spark-ignition engines
are lower power density and higher particulate pollutant
emission levels. To increase power density, turbocharging systems can be used, while for the reduction of
pollutant emissions various strategies have been
proposed, focusing on the improvement of the
combustion mechanism or the use of after-treatment
techniques. With the anticipated extreme tightening of
NO and PM emission standards by year 2010, an
intensive research is taking place nowadays aiming to
reduce diesel engine emissions without affecting
seriously its bsfc.
Some of the main strategies that have been proposed
for the optimization of the combustion mechanism are
improved combustion chamber design, use of advanced
high-pressure fuel injection systems, and use of EGR [16]. The determination of the optimum strategy is very
difficult due to the complexity of the combustion
mechanism, and the contribution of computer modeling
to the fundamental understanding of these processes is
essential.
Diesel engine computer simulation models are widely
used to predict the effect of various parameters on
engine performance and emissions. In this way a
considerable amount of time and effort is saved by
reducing the number of experiment, while it is possible
to focus on the effect of individual parameters, which is
difficult using experimental techniques. There exist
various computer models and the final choice depends

resulting heat absorption are computed in each spray

package and treated as source terms in the
conservation equations at the computational cells
located at each spray package neighborhood. The
combustion model computes the ignition delay of the
mixture in each computational cell and the combustion
products are treated as source terms in the species
conservation equation. As a result the spatial distribution
of enthalpy, fuel vapor, oxygen, combustion products
and temperature is obtained at each crank angle, and
the mean cylinder pressure, the heat release rate and
pollutant emissions (NO, Soot) can be calculated. The
model simulates only the closed part of the engine cycle,
using initial conditions estimated at inlet valve closure.

COMPUTATIONAL DOMAIN
The engine treated in this study has a bowl in piston and
a three-hole injector centered at the cylinder bore. Due
to symmetry, the computational domain is restricted to
one third of the cylinder volume Fig.1, to save
computational time. The area inside the cylinder is
divided into cylindrical computational cells as shown in
Fig.2a.
r direction

z direction

on the purpose of the simulation and the level of

accuracy required [7]. In the present work a new quasithree dimensional combustion model for the prediction of
DI diesel engines performance and pollutant emissions
has been developed. The main scope of this model is to
describe the fuel air mixing mechanism and the
combustion process in a more fundamental way
compared to existing multi-zone phenomenological
models, while being less time consuming and
complicated compared to existing CFD models. To
achieve this, some of the basic features of the
sophisticated multi-zone phenomenological models and
the multidimensional CFD ones have been combined.
The cylinder is divided in finite volumes (cells) where the
mass, energy and species conservation equations are
numerically solved similarly to CFD models, while the
flow field is estimated from a newly developed
phenomenological model to avoid the solution of the
momentum equation. On the other hand the fuel
injection, spray trajectory, ignition delay and pollutant
emissions (NO and Soot) are simulated using existing
semi-empirical phenomenological models that are
properly modified. As a result the spatial distribution of
temperature, species concentration and pollutant
emissions is derived at each crank angle. To validate the
model, experiments have been conducted at the
authors laboratory on a high speed DI diesel engine.
Comparing experimental with calculated results at a
wide range of engines speeds (1500-2500 rpm) and at
engine loads ranging from 20% to 80% of full engine
load, it is revealed that the model predicts adequately
engine performance and with a reasonable good
accuracy the exhaust pollutant emissions (NO and
Soot). This is quite encouraging considering the
complexity of the proposed model and the fact that it has
been developed from scratch.

OUTLINE OF COMPUTATIONAL MODEL

A quasi-three dimensional combustion model has been
developed for four-stroke direct injection diesel engines.
The cylinder is divided in finite volumes where the
conservation equations for the fuel vapor, combustion
products and mixture enthalpy are numerically solved by
the finite difference technique. The flow field is estimated
using a revised method proposed by the authors in the
past [8], assuming that the in-cylinder pressure is almost
uniform which is very close to reality [9]. In this way a
three-dimensional vector of the velocity is estimated at
each computational cell, avoiding the solution of the
momentum equation, as it happens in a pure CFD code
[10-13]. Although the velocity field obtained by this
method is only a rough estimation, it is more realistic
than the corresponding one used by existing
phenomenological models. In this way the effect of
combustion chamber geometry and operating conditions
is considered at least qualitatively.
As far as the spray model is concerned, the spray
consists of many packages, each having its own
velocity, which is computed using semi-empirical
equations. The rates of fuel vapor generation and the

direction
Cylinder walls
Injection
Direction

r direction
Piston cavity

-r plane view

Fig.1 Computational domain

The number of cells in the r and direction is constant,

in contrast to the number of cells outside the piston bowl
in the z direction, which is variable depending on piston
position. The number of cells inside the piston bowl in

In this study the combustion products are defined

considering dissociation, using the chemical equilibrium
scheme proposed by Vickland et al. Thus in general at
each computational cell, apart from fuel vapor and
pollutant emissions (NO, Soot), the following eleven
species are considered to be present in chemical
equilibrium:

T
Fig.2a. Computational cell and coordinates

direction z is also constant. The grid follows the piston

motion contracting and expanding [10,11,14]. The axial
grid velocity inside the piston bowl is equal to the piston
velocity, in contrast to the axial velocity of the grid in the
area between the top of the piston and the cylinder
head, which is obtained from EQ(1). In the radial
direction the cylinder is divided into an annular and inner
volume. Thus the number of nodes, referring to the r
direction, in the annular volume may differ from the
corresponding one in the inner volume.

w grid

w piston

= z
w piston

z piston

(2)

r r
1
z
r 1
+ S
+
+
=
z

r
r
r

S
z

1 zpiston 1 ( u r ) 1 ( v) ( w)
+
+
+
t
z
zpiston
r r
r

O2, N2, CO2, H2O, H, H2, N, NO, O, OH, CO

The velocities u, v, w are computed by the simplified gas
motion model which will be described later. The
diffusivity is defined by the following equation (4) and
is assumed to be the same for all the dependent
variables .
=

if z > z piston

(1)
if z z piston

In the present study the grid used for all cases examined
has in the r-direction, ten cells inside the piston bowl and
ten cells in the outer volume. In the axial direction, there
are ten cells inside the piston bowl and the number of
cells between the piston and the cylinder head range
from twelve to five, according to the piston position.
Finally in the angular direction there are fourteen cells.
The present resolution is found to give adequately gridindependent results, while it should be noticed that the
results are found to be more sensitive to the grid
resolution in the angular direction, which is consistent to
what has been observed by other researchers [15].
Moreover reducing the number of cells in the axial
direction during piston motion towards TDC a more
uniform grid is obtained, since the computational cells in
the piston bowl retain their shape in contrast to the ones
outside the bowl which contract and expand [14,15].

CONSERVATION EQUATION
The conservation equation for the species concentration
and gas enthalpy is described in terms of the cylindrical
coordinates, which expand and contract following the
piston motion EQ(2).

cp

(3)

As far as the volumetric source rate S is concerned

when the dependent variable is the enthalpy (=h) is
defined as follows:

S = h

Heat transfer

Power due to

= rate through the + pressure

cylinder boundaries variation

(4)

Heat Absorption by

+
Fuel Vaporization

S = h = S heat + S pressure + S vaporization

The heat transfer between cylinder walls and gas
computational cells is defined by:

(T
Tcell )
4
4
S heat = A h wall
+ c Twall
Tcell

V
cell

(5)

The convection heat transfer coefficient is obtained from

the following correlation:
h = c1 Re c2 Pr c3

k
l char

where: Re = w char

lchar

(6)
(7)

Pr =

cp

(8)

and c1, c2, c3, c: constants. In this study c1=0.30,

c2=0.80, c3=0.33, c=5.668E-8.
In the Reynolds number expression, lchar is the
characteristic length and wchar is the characteristic
velocity. As far as the energy source rate due to
pressure changes is concerned, it is defined as:
S pressure =

P
t

(9)

It is assumed that the gas is ideal which means that the

pressure at each computational cell can be defined by,

P = R T

(10)

The density of the gas at each computational cell is

calculated from the gas motion model described later on.
The source term Svaporization represents the energy that is
absorbed by each computational cell located in the
region where fuel vaporization occurs. It is calculated by
weighting the distance between each fuel vapor package
and the computational cells that exist in its
neighborhood. Solving EQ(2), using the finite volume
technique at each computational cell, the spatial
distribution of enthalpy is obtained and using the specific
heat of the gaseous components the local temperature
is calculated at each crank angle. Consequently the
local pressures can be computed from the perfect gas
state equation EQ(10). The calculation of the spatial
distribution of pressure is essential for the gas motion
model, as explained later on.
When the dependent variable is the fuel vapor
concentration then in order to calculate the volumetric
source rate S, the rate of fuel vapor generation
calculated at each spray package is distributed to the
computational cells that exist in its neighborhood
similarly to what is done for the calculation of Svaporization.
In this way a coupling between the mesh generated to
solve the conservation equations and the fuel spray
geometry is achieved.

COMPUTATIONAL METHOD
The conservation equations are solved using the fully
implicit finite volume method. For the spatial differencing
the hybrid-differencing scheme is used due to its ability
to exploit the advantages of the upwind and the central
differencing scheme. It switches to the upwind
differencing when the central differencing produces
inaccurate results at high Peclet numbers. The scheme
is fully conservative and since the coefficients are
always positive it is unconditionally bounded [16]. As far
as the temporal differencing is concerned the fully
implicit method is used due to its unconditionally stable
behavior for any time step. However, the accuracy of the

scheme is only first-order in time, which is the reason for

selecting a rather small time step. In this study the time
increment is equivalent to 0.5 degree crank angle.
Discretising the energy equation results to a system of
linear algebraic equations that are solved by the tridiagonal matrix algorithm (TDMA), which is applied
iteratively, in a line-by-line fashion. In this study the TopBottom sweep direction has been applied for the line-byline solution of the system.

SIMPLIFIED GAS MOTION MODEL

The definition of the velocity field inside the cylinder is
very important given that in the conservation equations
the convection term depends on the magnitude and
direction of the local velocity field. Multidimensional
models use the momentum equation to calculate the
velocity and pressure at each computational cell.
However the solution of the momentum equation needs
special treatment given that the convective terms
contain non-linear quantities, and that the momentum
equation (containing the local pressure) and the
continuity equation are intricately coupled. Although
there have been proposed many computational fluid
dynamic methods for the calculation of the velocity field
inside the cylinder of an internal combustion engine [1113,16], they all have in common that they are
complicated and extremely time consuming. On the
other hand they appear to be quite accurate.
In this work we estimate the velocity field using a revised
version of a simplified gas motion model developed by
the authors [8]. The advantage of this method is that it is
simple and describes the physical phenomenon of mass
transfer between the computational cells in a realistic
way, based on the assumption that the in-cylinder
pressure must be practically uniform at each crank
angle. The main improvement that has been made to the
existing gas motion model is that at present is able to
handle three-dimensional cases. The velocity is
estimated at the boundaries of each computational cell,
by calculating the mass that should be transferred
through each boundary to the neighboring cell to
achieve a uniform pressure field inside the cylinder. The
velocity field is obtained following an iterative procedure.
First, at each crank angle the energy conservation
equation is solved, and a spatial distribution of the
temperature is obtained assuming that the velocity of the
gas relative to the grid is zero. Then the pressure
distribution is obtained using the perfect gas state
equation. Given that the pressure must practically be
uniform, an amount of mass dmcell should be
transferred to each computational cell through its
boundaries from the neighboring cells to eliminate the
pressure difference and make its pressure practically
equal to the mean pressure of the cylinder. The required
mass is defined from,
dm cell =

Pmean Vcell
m cell
R Tcell

(11)

The total transferred mass dmcell for all computational

cells at each crank angle should be equal to zero, given
that the total mass of the gas inside the cylinder is
constant. Thus the mean cylinder pressure can be
estimated from,

m
Pmean =

cell

i, j,k

Vcell
T
i, j, k cell

(12)

In this way the amount of mass dmcell transferred to

each computational cell is estimated.
This amount of mass is taken from the neighboring cells.
The amount of mass transferred from the neighboring
cells depends on the local pressure differences. For
example if the examined computational cell requires an
amount of mass to be added in order to increase its
pressure and make it equal to the mean cylinder one,
this mass has to be taken from each of its neighboring
cells through their common boundary. The proportion of
the total mass dmcell that each of the neighboring cells
will offer is a function of its own pressure relative to the
calculated mean cylinder pressure. This means that if a
neighboring cell has a pressure that exceeds the mean
cylinder pressure i.e DP>0 then its contribution to the
total mass needed will be directly proportional to DP,
otherwise this cell will not submit any mass. The
opposite occurs if the examined computational cell
needs to expel mass i.e. dmcell <0.
Sweeping all the computational cells, the gas velocity at
the boundaries of each cell is calculated and the same
procedure is followed at the next iteration. At each
iteration the total mass transferred to a computational
cell from the beginning is computed from:
dm total,cell = dm total,cell + dm cell

m cell,old + dm total,cell
Vcell

As the fuel spray penetrates inside the combustion

chamber, it is divided into packages (called zones) as
follows [24]: in the injection direction it is divided at each
time step, while in the radial direction it is divided into
three packages (M-direction) and in the circumferential
direction (N-direction) into eight packages (Fig.2b).
Every group of new zones that enter the cylinder at each
time step is called a parcel. The mass of fuel in each
parcel entering the cylinder can be either specified as
input, or calculated using a fuel injection sub-model. The
fuel mass of a parcel is distributed evenly to each zone.
Frame 001 31 Aug 2002 | |

Fig.2b Spray division into zones (N=8, M=3) at a certain instance.

(13)

With the new velocity field the mass conservation

equation is solved for each computational cell to
determine the local densities:
cell =

procedure where various assumptions are usually made

[17]. The primary problem in analyzing fuel spray
trajectory and dispersion lies in treating the coupling of
mass, momentum and energy between the two phases
(liquid and vapor) of the fuel and the gas mixture of the
cylinder [18]. To overcome these difficulties and due to
the different nature of the proposed model we describe
the spray trajectory using semi empirical relations, as in
most multi-zone phenomenological models [19-23].

(14)

Then the energy conservation equation is solved, to

determine a new temperature field. The final solution of
the velocity and the temperature field is achieved when
the temperature field has converged.

SPRAY MODEL
SPRAY TRAJECTORY AND DISPERSION
In multi-dimensional models the spray trajectory is
calculated solving the momentum equation in the
computational domain. This is a very complicated

Each parcel entering the cylinder travels a distance at

constant speed, equal to the fuel injection speed, called
the break-up length. Fuel vaporization initiates after this
time has passed. After break-up the injected fuel is
distributed within a spray angle, which is unique for each
spray parcel and is calculated using empirical
correlations. In the present study the Hiroyasu and Arai
[25] correlations are used as modified by Assanis et al.
[26] to be applicable in cases where the nozzles
discharge coefficient is not equal to 0.39 as in the
original study. According to these correlations the spray
penetration for each zone before and after breakup time
is calculated as follows:
2P

S(M ) = c D
l

0.5

, 0 < t < t b (M)

(15)

S(M ) = 2.95

0.25

0.5
d 0.5
n (t + t b (1) t b (M )) , t b (M) t

(16)

where P is the pressure drop across the nozzle hole, l

and is the density of the liquid fuel and the ambient
gas respectively, and dn the nozzle hole diameter. The
velocity of each zone V(M) is derived from the temporal
differentiation of EQ(15) and EQ(16). Since the break-up
time of the zones at the edge of the spray is shorter than
the inner zones, the radial variation of the break-up time
in the spray is incorporated as follows:
t b (M ) = 4.351

ld n

c 2D

( P )

0.5

NM + 1 M
NM

(17)

The direction of each parcel (M) is computed from the

empirical relation of the spray angle [24] as follows:

0.25

After break-up a group of drops is generated in each

zone. In this study the size of the drops is assumed to
be uniform and equal to the Sauter Mean Diameter
given by the following empirical correlation [24].
D 32 = 23.9(P )0.135 ( )0.121 (Vf )0.131

M
NM

(18)

0.25

0.25
d 0.5
n (t + t b (1) t b (M ))

dm fg
dt

To estimate the injection rate of fuel and the initial

conditions at the nozzle exit, it is assumed that the flow
through the nozzle hole is quasi-steady, one
dimensional and incompressible so the fuel mass flow
rate is calculated by the following equation [7]:
& = c D A n 2 l P
m

(23)

D 32 l

dm l
dt

(24)

dm l
= D l gO D fO ln(1 + M )Sh
dt
dD l
2
=
dt
D l2 l

dm l D 3l d l dTl

dt
6 dTl dt

q = D l K gO Tg Tl

) ln(1+ T ) Nu

(25)
(26)

(27)

dTl
1
=
dt
m l C pl

(19)

INJECTION RATE

m l,zone

where ml,zone is the zone fuel mass. For evaporation the

model of Borman and Johnson [27] is followed. After
break-up the fuel evaporation rate (dmfg/dt) and the heat
supplied from the hot ambient gas to the liquid fuel
droplets for vaporization is calculated using the following
expressions:

In this study fuel spray impingement on the cylinder

walls is considered, according to the Hiroyasu et al.
model [23]. After impingement on the cylinder walls the
zones are assumed to penetrate radially from the
impingement point along the wall, retaining their width.
Given that no zone mixing is allowed, if a zone near the
edge of the spray has not yet reached the cylinder walls,
but reaches inner zones that have already impinged and
changed their direction, then this zone follows the radial
direction too. Spray wall impingement affects the
penetrating velocity of each zone, which is given by the
following correlation:
P

S(M ) = 2.95

(22)

where Vf is the volume of fuel injected per fuel injection

in (mm3). The number of droplets N within each zone is
calculated from the following expression (assuming that
the droplets are spherical):
N zone = 6

where NM is the number of zones in the radial direction

of the spray, which in the present study is NM= 3.

Pd 2
(M ) = 0.05 2 n

FUEL VAPORIZATION

dm l

q + L dt

(28)

The mean temperature at the interface between the gas

and liquid phase of the droplet, is estimated by the
following expression:
Tm,int erface =

Tg + 2Tl
3

(29)

(20)
COMBUSTION MODEL

where An is the nozzle hole area and P the local

pressure difference. The fuel injection velocity at the
nozzle tip is obtained from:
u = cD

2P
l

(21)

IGNITION
In each computational cell combustion initiates after an
ignition delay period tign calculated from the local
pressure and temperature using the following relation
[28]:

ign

1
c ign P

1.19

(4650
e

Tg

(30)

) =1

where P is the mean cylinder pressure and cign is a

constant. After ignition, evaporated fuel (which in this
study is assumed to be normal dodecane) and air react
at a rate give by the following Arrehnious type equation
[7]:
n
R fv = A 2mix Yfvm Yox
exp(

E
)
Tg

(31)

where mix is the local density of the mixture, A is the

frequency factor, E the reduced activation energy, m, n
constants, and Yfv, Yox are the local fuel vapor and
oxygen mass concentrations respectively.
POLLUTANT EMISSION FORMATION
Nitric Oxide Formation
In order to calculate the formation of nitric oxide inside
each computational cell the chemical equilibrium
scheme proposed by Vicland et al. [29] is used to
calculate the concentration of each of the following
eleven species.
O2, N2, CO2, H2O, H, H2, N, NO, O, OH, CO
The formation of nitric oxide is controlled by chemical
kinetics [7]. In the present work, the extended Zeldovich
mechanism is used to calculate the NO concentration at
each computational cell. According to the extended
Zeldovich mechanism the principal reactions that govern
the formation of NO are:

where b=[NO]/[NO]e and Vcell is the volume of each

computational cell. In the previous relations, index e
denotes equilibrium. Integrating the previous differential
equation, we obtain the NO concentration in each
computational cell.
Soot Formation and Oxidation
As far as the soot formation is concerned, the semiempirical two-rate equation model proposed by Hiroyasu
et al [24] is used. Although the detailed mechanism of
soot formation in internal combustion engines is not fully
understood, it is well established that the net soot
formation is primarily affected by pressure, temperature
and equivalence ratio. Based on this model the net soot
formation rate is given by:
dm s dm sf dm sb
=

dt
dt
dt

(35)

where dmsf/dt, dmsb/dt are the soot formation and

oxidation rates respectively defined by the following
equations:
dm sf
= A f m f ,ev P 0.5 exp[ E sf / (R mol T )]
dt
PO
dm sb
= A b m s 2
dt
P

1.8
P exp[ E sb / (R mol T )]

(36)
(37)

where mev is the mass of evaporated fuel inside the

computational cell and PO2 is the partial pressure of
oxygen. The activation energies of soot formation and
combustion Esf and Esb, are 1.25x104 kcal/kmol and
1.40x104 kcal/kmol respectively while Af and Ab are
constants.

N + NO N 2 + O k 1f = 1.6x1010

N + O 2 NO + O k 2f = 6.4 x10 6 T exp( 3125 / T )

(32)

N + OH NO + H k 3f = 4.2 x1010

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The variation of [NO] concentration

computational cell is expressed as follows:

2 1 R1
1 d([NO]Vcell )
=
Vcell
dt

R1

1 +

R
2 + R3

in

each

TEST ENGINE SPECIFICATIONS

(33)

To validate the model, it has been applied on a naturally

aspirated air-cooled four stroke DI Diesel engine, with a
bowl-in-piston combustion chamber and a three-hole
injector nozzle located at the center of the cylinder bore.
The main engine specifications are given in Table 1.

MODEL CALIBRATION

where

R 1 = k 1f [N ]e [NO]e
R 2 = k 2 f [N ]e [O 2 ]e

R 3 = k 3f [N ]e [OH ]e

(34)

A single operating point, which lies in the middle of the

engine speed range (2000 rpm) and at 80% of full
engine load, has been selected as the reference point
for model calibration. Once the constants of the model

80

are determined, they retain their value during the entire

range of the operating conditions examined. Model
calibration is based on the proper estimation of the
cylinder pressure diagram and the prediction of the
ignition delay period and the Soot tailpipe value.
MODEL VALIDATION
Performance
A wide range of operating conditions is selected to
validate the models ability to predict engine
performance. In Figs. 3a-d the predicted cylinder
pressure traces are compared with the experimental
ones at 2000 and 2500 rpm engine speed only for the
sake of space, for 40% and 80% of full engine load.

Cylinder Pressure (Bar)

70
60

Calculated
Experimental

50
40
30
20
10
0
40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280

Crank Angle (degree)

Fig. 3b. Comparison of predicted and measured cylinder pressure

traces at 2000 rpm engine speed, 80% load.

80
70

Cylinder Pressure (Bar)

Table 1. Engine Specifications

Type
Single Cylinder,
4-Stroke,DI
Bore
85.73mm
Stroke
82.55mm
Connecting Rod
148.59mm
Length
Compression Ratio
18
Inlet Valve Opening
15oCA before
TDC
Inlet Valve Closure
41oCA after BDC
Exhaust Valve
41oCA before
Opening
BDC
Exhaust Valve
15oCA after TDC
Closure

Cylinder Pressure
2000 rpm, 80% Load

60

Cylinder Pressure
2500 rpm, 40% Load
Calculated
Experimental

50
40
30
20
10
0
40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280

Crank Angle (degree)

Fig. 3c. Comparison of predicted and measured cylinder pressure

traces at 2500 rpm engine speed, 40% load.

Cylinder Pressure (Bar)

70
60

80

Cylinder Pressure
2000 rpm, 40% Load

70

Calculated
Experimental

50
40
30
20
10

Cylinder Pressure (Bar)

80

60

Cylinder Pressure
2500 rpm, 80% Load
Calculated
Experimental

50
40
30
20
10

0
40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280

Crank Angle (degree)

Fig. 3a. Comparison of predicted and measured cylinder pressure

traces at 2000 rpm engine speed, 40% load.

40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280

Crank Angle (degree)

Fig. 3d. Comparison of predicted and measured cylinder pressure

traces at 2500 rpm engine speed, 80% load.

70

Heat Release Rate (Joule/deg)

At all operating conditions examined a good agreement

between calculated and experimental values is observed
during the whole part of the closed engine cycle, which
means that the model is able to describe the effect of
engine speed and load on engine performance. The
previous finding is enhanced comparing the predicted
and measured values of peak cylinder pressure for all
cases examined i.e. 1500, 2000 and 2500 rpm engine
speed and 20% to 80% engine load (Fig. 4). The
maximum cylinder pressure is well-predicted at all
operating conditions. The highest differences between
calculated and measured values are observed at part
load, being always lower than 5% of the maximum
cylinder pressure.

Heat Release Rate

2000 rpm, 40% Load

60

Calculated Apparent HRR

Experimental Net HRR

50
40
30
20
10
0

160 170 180 190 200 210 220 230 240 250 260

Crank Angle (degree)

Calculated Max. Cyl. Pressure

1500 rpm

70
60

70

50
80

2000 rpm

70
60
50
80

2500 rpm

70
60
50
20

40

60

Engine Load (% of full Engine Load)

80

Fig. 4. Comparison of predicted and measured maximum cylinder

pressure at 1500, 2000, 2500 rpm engine speed and 20%, 40%, 60%,
80% load.

To validate the models ability to describe the

combustion mechanism, the predicted heat release rates
for 2000 rpm engine speed and at 40% and 80% engine
load are compared with the corresponding experimental
ones (Fig. 5a,b). It should be stated that the heat release
rate derived from the measured cylinder pressure is the
net one, whereas the calculated one is the apparent
gross, thus only a qualitative comparison is made
between them.
Examining Figs. 5a,b it is obvious that the model
predicts adequately at both engine loads examined, the
initiation of combustion and moreover the duration of the
premixed and mixing controlled phases. The highest
differences between measured and predicted heat
release rates occur during the premixed combustion
phase, due to the high heat transfer rate through the
cylinder walls (since the calculated one is the gross
while the experimental is the net one). The ability of the
model to predict the cylinder pressure and heat release
rate at various operating conditions shown above, is a
strong indicator that the various sub-models describe
adequately the fuel spray trajectory, fuel evaporation,
air-fuel mixing and combustion mechanisms.

Heat Release Rate (Joule/deg)

Max. Cylinder Pressure (Bar)

Fig. 5a. Comparison of heat release rates at 2000 rpm engine speed
and 40% load.

Experimental Max. Cyl. Pressure

80

Heat Release Rate

2000 rpm, 80% Load

60

Calculated Apparent HRR

Experimental Net HRR

50
40
30
20
10
0

160 170 180 190 200 210 220 230 240 250 260

Crank Angle (degree)

Fig. 5b. Comparison of heat release rates at 2000 rpm engine speed
and 80% load.

Pollutant Emissions
As far as the pollutant emissions are concerned, in Figs
6a-c the calculated concentrations of NO and Soot
emissions at the engine exhaust are compared with the
measured ones, at all test cases examined. The effect of
engine speed and load on pollutant emissions is well
predicted and the predicted values of emission (NO,
Soot) concentrations are close to the measured ones. A
better agreement between calculated and measured
values is observed as far as the NO and Soot
concentrations is concerned, at 2000 rpm which is the
engine speed selected for model calibration, while at
2500 rpm occur the highest differences. In general it
seems that, the NO emission model gives more accurate
predictions compared to the soot emission model.
However taking into account that no adjustment of the
calibration constants is made with the variation of engine
speed and load, the calculated results are promising and
indicate that the pollutant formation

400

Soot (mgr/m3)

350

mechanism is simulated reliably, since trends are

predicted with good accuracy.

1500 rpm Engine Speed

300

Calculated

250

Experimental

Spatial Distribution of Temperature

200
150
100

Detailed information on the pollutant formation and

combustion mechanism can be derived from the spatial
distribution of temperature inside the combustion
chamber, predicted by the proposed model. The
predicted temperature distribution is presented for the
case of 2000 rpm engine speed and 80% load, at certain
time instants after injection. Even though no
experimental data are available to validate the predicted
distributions, qualitative annotations can be made.

50
0
1700

NOx (ppm)

1500
1300
1100
900
700
500
300
100
20

40

60

Engine Load (% of full Engine Load)

80

Fig. 6a. Comparison of predicted and measured NOx and Soot

concentrations at 1500 rpm engine speed, 20%, 40%, 60% and 80%
engine load.
400

Soot (mgr/m3)

350

2000 rpm Engine Speed

300

Calculated

250

Experimental

850
800
750
700
650
600
550
500
450
400
350
300

200
150

Fig. 7a. Temperature in a vertical plane through the center of the fuel
spray at -12 CA degrees ATDC, 2000 rpm engine speed, 80% load.

100
50
0
1700

NOx (ppm)

1500
1300
1100
900
700
500
300
100
20

40

60

Engine Load (% of full Engine Load)

80

Fig. 6b. Comparison of predicted and measured NOx and Soot

concentrations at 2000 rpm engine speed, 20%, 40%, 60% and 80%
engine load.
400

Soot (mgr/m3)

350

2500 rpm Engine Speed

300

Calculated

250

Experimental

200
150
100
50
0
1700

2600
2400
2200
2000
1800
1600
1400
1200
1000
800
600
400

Fig. 7b. Temperature field in a vertical plane through the center of the
fuel spray, at 10 CA degrees ATDC, 2000 rpm, 80% load.

1500

NOx (ppm)

In Fig. 7a the predicted in-cylinder temperature field at

12 CA degrees ATDC in a vertical plane through the
center of the fuel spray is presented. As observed, there
is a cold region near the nozzle exit, which is attributed
to fuel evaporation. Gas temperatures near the cylinder
boundaries are lower compared to the ones towards the
center of the cylinder due to the heat transfer through
the cylinder walls.

1300
1100
900
700
500
300
100
20

40

60

Engine Load (% of full Engine Load)

80

Fig. 6c. Comparison of predicted and measured NOx and Soot

concentrations at 2500 rpm engine speed, 20%, 40%, 60% and 80%
engine load.

In Fig.7b is given the temperature field at 10 CA degrees

ATDC in a vertical plane through the center of the fuel
spray. It is obvious that higher temperatures lie in the
regions where combustion has initiated, whereas in the
regions where no combustible fuel-air mixture exists low
temperatures are prevalent. Moreover it is shown that

combustion takes place mainly inside the piston bowl, as

it is expected [7].

Max

Fuel-Air Equivalence Ratio Spatial Distribution

In Fig. 8 the local fuel-air equivalence ratio is shown at
10 CA degrees ATDC in a vertical plane through the
center of the fuel spray. As observed the main portion of
the fuel vapour is restricted inside the piston bowl.
Moreover comparing Fig. 8 with Fig. 7b, the highest
temperatures are observed in regions where the fuel-air
equivalence ratio is near the stoichiometric value.
4.0
3.6
3.2
2.8
2.4
2.0
1.6
1.2
0.8
0.4
0.0

Fig. 8. Fuel-air equivalence ratio distribution in a vertical plane through

the center of the fuel spray at 10 CA degrees ATDC, 2000 rpm engine
speed, 80% load.

Spatial Distribution of NO and Soot Concentration

As far as in-cylinder local pollutant emission
concentrations are concerned, in Figs 9a,b the
distribution of NO and Soot at 10 CA degrees ATDC in a
vertical plane through the center of the fuel spray is
shown. As revealed NO formation is predominant in
regions where high temperatures are observed (Fig. 7b)
and the gas mixture is stoichiometric to lean (Fig. 8),
whereas soot concentration is higher in regions where
fuel vapour concentration is higher and temperature is
relatively high. Thus the model achieves to describe
adequately the controversial mechanism of NO and Soot
formation (i.e. formed in different areas), which is the
main reason why it is difficult to find techniques that
would reduce both of them.
Max

Min

Fig. 9a. NO in-cylinder distribution in a vertical plane through the center

of the fuel spray at 10 CA degrees ATDC, 2000 rpm engine speed,
80% load.

Min

Fig. 9b. Soot in-cylinder distribution in a vertical plane through the

center of the fuel spray at 10 CA degrees ATDC, 2000 rpm engine
speed, 80% load.

CONCLUSIONS
Under the present work a new quasi-three dimensional
combustion model has been developed. The main
objective of the proposed model is to simulate in a
simple and reliable way the air-fuel mixing, combustion
and pollutant formation mechanism and the spatial
distribution of the in-cylinder temperature and gas
mixture concentration, in a reasonable computational
time. In this model the basic features of multi-zone
phenomenological models are embodied in the
computational procedure followed by CFD models.
Thus, although the results may be less detailed than
those that a pure CFD model would give, it seems that
the newly proposed model can be used to investigate
the parameters affecting the fuel-air mixing and
combustion mechanism and provide results on a cycle
basis.
To validate the model an extended experimental
investigation is conducted at the authors laboratory on a
high speed DI Diesel engine. Cylinder pressure and
pollutant emissions are measured at various engine
speeds and loads covering the entire engine operating
range. Comparing measured and predicted values of
cylinder pressure traces a good agreement is observed
for all operating conditions examined without the need to
vary the model constants. Similar results are observed
for pollutant emissions (NO and Soot). The proposed
model predicts the effect of operating parameters on NO
and Soot quite well, which is the most important role of
modelling, although differences between calculated and
experimental emission concentrations have been
observed when comparing absolute values.
Moreover the predicted in-cylinder spatial distribution of
temperature, fuel-air equivalence ratio and pollutant
emission (NO, Soot) concentrations seems to be reliable
and in accordance to the existing conceptual models for
the fuel spray trajectory, fuel evaporation, combustion,
and pollutant emission formation [7, 30]. Examining the
key features of the model, it manages to describe in a
more reliable way the air-fuel mixing mechanism
compared to existing multi-zone models, where the air
entrainment into each zone is estimated only based on

empirical relations. Moreover in the proposed model the

in-cylinder local conditions (temperature and fuel
equivalence ratio), that affect combustion mechanism,
are better estimated compared to multi-zone models,
thus the effect of operating conditions on engine
performance and pollutant emissions is simulated in a
more detailed and fundamental way.
Concluding, the proposed model manages to describe
reliably the various processes taking place inside the
cylinder during the close part of the engine cycle, in a
more fundamental way, compared to existing multi-zone
models while being less time consuming and
complicated compared to existing CFD models.

u
v
Vcell
Vf
w
wchar
wgrid
wpiston
Y
z
zpiston

:Radial component of gas velocity

:Circumferential component of gas velocity
:Volume of a computational cell
:Volume of fuel injected per fuel injection
:Axial component of gas velocity
:Characteristic velocity
:Axial velocity of grid lines
:Axial velocity of the piston
:Mass concentration
:Axial direction
:Distance between the gas face of the cylinder
head and the piston top

GREEK SYMBOLS
NOMENCLATURE
A
An
BM
BT
cD
cp
dmcell

:Area
:Nozzle hole area
:Transfer number for mass
:Transfer number for heat
:Nozzle Discharge coefficient
:Specific heat of the gas
:Mass which need to be transferred to a
computational cell in order to have a pressure
equal to the mean pressure
:Nozzle hole diameter
dn
D32
:Sauter mean Diameter
DfO
:Diffusivity of fuel vapor at the interface between
gas and liquid
:Droplet diameter
Dl
h
:Specific enthalpy of the gas
k
:Conduction heat transfer coefficient
:Characteristic length
lchar
L
:Heat of evaporation
:Mass of the gas which is contained in a
mcell
computational cell
:Mass of fuel vapor
mfg
ml
:Liquid droplet mass
NM
:Number of zones in the radial direction of the
fuel spray
P
:Pressure
Pmean :Mean pressure of the gas in the cylinder
q
:Convective heat transfer from the hot gas to
liquid fuel droplets
r
:Radial direction
R
:Gas constant
:Universal gas constant
Rmol
S
:Volumetric source rate
Sconvection:Volumetric source rate due to heat transfer
through the cylinder walls
Spressure :Volumetric source rate due to the change of the
pressure with respect to time
Svaporization:Volumetric source rate due to heat absorption
for liquid fuel evaporation
S(M) :Penetration of fuel spray package M
t
:Time
:Spray Break-up time
tb
T
:Gas Temperature
:Gas Temperature of a computational cell
Tcell
Tl
:Droplet Temperature
Twall
:Temperature of the cylinder boundaries

:Diffusion coefficient
:Circumferential direction
:Dynamic viscocity
:Density
:Crank angle degree
:Spray Angle
:Angular crankshaft speed

SUBSCRIPTS

fv
gO
l
mix
ox
s
sf
sb

:Ambient gas mixture

:Fuel vapor
:Interface between gas and liquid
:Liquid
:Mixture
:Oxygen
:Soot
:Soot formation
:Soot burnt

DIMENSIONLESS GROUPS
Re
Pe
Pr

:Reynolds number
:Peclet number
:Prandtl number

ABBREVIATIONS
ATDC
bsfc
CA
DI
NO
ppm
TDC

:After Top Dead Centre

:Brake Specific Fuel Consumption
:Crank Angle
:Direct Injection
:Nitric Oxide
:Parts per million (volume)
:Top Dead Centre

REFERENCES
1. Tow, T.C., Pierpont, D.A., Reitz, Reducing
Particulate and NOx Emissions by Using Multiple
Injections in a Heavy Duty D.I. Diesel Engine, SAE
Transactions paper No 940897

2. Montajir, R.M., Trunemoto, H., Ishitani, H., Minami,

T., Fuel Spray Behavior in a Small DI Diesel Engine
: Effect of Combustion Chamber Geometry, SAE
Transactions paper No 2000-01-0946
3. Assanis D.N., Heywood, J.B., Development and
Use of a Computer Simulation of the
Turbocompounded Diesel System for Engine
Performance and Component Heat Transfer
Studies, SAE Transactions paper No 860329
4. Hountalas D.T., Available Strategies for Improving
the Efficiency of DI Diesel Engines-A Theoretical
Investigation, SAE paper No 2000-01-1176
5. Kouremenos D.A., Hountalas, D.T., Binder K.B.,
The Effect of EGR on the Performance and
Pollutant Emissions of Heavy-Duty Diesel Engines
Using Constant and Variable AFR, SAE
Transactions paper No 2001-01-0198
6. Greeves, G., Response of Diesel Combustion
Systems to Increase of Fuel Injection Rate, SAE
Transactions paper No 790037
7. Heywood, J.B., Internal Combustion Engine
Fundamentals, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1988
8. Hountalas, D., Pariotis, E., A Simplified Model for
the Spatial Distribution of Temperature in a Motored
DI Diesel Engine, SAE Transactions paper No
2001-01-1235
9. Fitzgeorge, D. and Allison, J.L., Air Swirl in a RoadVehicle Diesel Engine, Proc. Instn. Mech. Engrs.
(A.D.), No 4,pp. 151, 1962-63
10. Griffin, M.D., et al., Computational Fluid Dynamics
Applied to Flows in an Internal Combustion Engine,
AIAA, paper 78-57.
11. Ahmadi-Befrui, B., Gosman, A.D., Issa, R.I.,
Watkins, A.P., EPISO Implicit non-iterative
solution procedure for the calculation of flows in
reciprocating engine chambers, Computer Methods
in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, Vol. 79,
pp.249-279, 1990.
12. Gosman, A.D., et al., Axisymmetric Flow in a
Motored Reciprocating Engine, Proc. Inst. Mech.
Engrs, Vol. 192, No. 11, pp. 213-223, 1978.
13. Ramos, J.I., Humphrey. A.C., and Sirignano, W.A.,
Numerical Prediction of Axisymmetric Laminar and
Turbulent Flows in Motored, Reciprocating Internal
Combustion Engines, SAE Transactions, paper No
790356, 1979
14. Theodorakakos, A., Bergeles, G., Numerical
investigation of the flow inside a 4-X IC model diesel
engine, Journal Entropie, No 200, pp 53-63, 1996.
15. Patterson, M., Kong, S., Hampson, G., Reitz, R.,
Modeling
the
Effects
of
Fuel
Injection
Characteristics on Diesel Engine Soot and NOx
Emissions, SAE Transactions paper No 940523
16. Patankar, S. V., Numerical Heat Transfer and Fluid
Flow, Hemisphere Publishing Corporation, Taylor &
Francis Group, New York
17. Bo, T., Clerides, D, Gosman, A., Theodossopoulos,
P., Prediction of the Flow and Spray Process in an
Automobile DI Diesel Engine, SAE paper No
970882

18. Crowe, C., Sharama, M., Stock, D., The ParticleSource-in-Cell (PSI-Cell) Model for Gas-Droplet
Flows, ASME 75-WA/HT-25
19. Kouremenos, D.A., Rakopoulos, C.D., and
Hountalas, D.T., Multi-Zone Combustion Modeling
for the Prediction of Pollutants Emissions and
Performance of DI Diesel Engines, SAE
Transactions, paper No 970635, 1997.
20. Rakopoulos,
C.D.,
and
Hountalas,
D.T.,
Development and validation of a 3-D multi-zone
combustion model for the prediction of DI diesel
engines performance and pollutants emissions,
SAE Transactions, paper No 981021, 1998
21. Payri, F., Benajes, J., and Tinaut, F.V., A
Phenomenological Combustion Model for Direct
Injection, Compression Ignition Engines, Applied
Math. Modeling, Vol. 12, pp.293-304, 1988
22. Bazarri, Z., A DI Diesel Combustion and Emission
Predictive Capability for Use in Cycle Simulation,
SAE paper 920462
23. Long, Y., Gakuma, H., Hiroyasu, H., The Simulation
of the Distribution of Temperature and Mass of
Liquid and Vapor Fuels, and the Wall Impingement
Spray Pattern in a Diesel Combustion Champer,
SAE paper No 2000-01-1887
24. Nishida, K., and Hiroyasu, H., Simplified ThreeDimensional Modeling of Mixture Formation and
Combustion in a D.I. Diesel Engine, SAE
Transactions, paper No 890269, 1989
25. Hiroyasu, H., Arai, M., Fuel Spray Penetration and
Spray Angle of Diesel Engines, Transactions of
JSAE, Vol. 21, pp.5-11, 1980
26. Jung, D., Assanis, D., Multi-Zone DI Diesel Spray
Combustion Model for Cycle Simulation Studies of
Engines Performance and Emissions, SAE paper
2001-01-1246
27. Borman,
G.L.,
Johnson,
J.K.,
Unsteady
Vaporization Histories and Trajectories of Fuel
Drops injected into Swirling Air, SAE paper
598C,1962
28. Wolfer, H.H., Ignition Lag in Diesel Engines, VDIForschungsheft 392, 1938; Translated by Royal
Aircraft Establishment, Farnborough Library No.
358, UDC 621-436.047, August 1959
29. Vickland, C.W., Strange, F.M., Bell, R.A., Starkman,
E.S., A consideration of the high temperature
thermodynamics of internal combustion engines,
SAE Transactions, 70, 785-793.
30. Dec, J., A Conceptual Model of DI Diesel
Combustion Based on Laser-Sheet Imaging, SAE
Transactions paper No 970873