3-D CFD Analysis of the Combustion Process in a DI Diesel Engine using a Flamelet Model
H. Bensler, F. Bühren and E. Samson
Volkswagen AG

L. Vervisch

Reprinted From: Multi-Dimensional Engine Modeling (SP–1512)

SAE 2000 World Congress Detroit, Michigan March 6–9, 2000
400 Commonwealth Drive, Warrendale, PA 15096-0001 U.S.A. Tel: (724) 776-4841 Fax: (724) 776-5760

Positions and opinions advanced in this paper are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of SAE. For permission to publish this paper in full or in part.The appearance of this ISSN code at the bottom of this page indicates SAE’s consent that copies of the paper may be made for personal or internal use of specific clients. MA 01923 for copying beyond that permitted by Sections 107 or 108 of the U. SAE. contact the SAE Publications Group. To request permission to reprint a technical paper or permission to use copyrighted SAE publications in other works. and selected books are abstracted and indexed in the Global Mobility Database No part of this publication may be reproduced in any form. Direct your orders to SAE Customer Sales and Satisfaction Department. A process is available by which discussions will be printed with the paper if it is published in SAE Transactions. The author is solely responsible for the content of the paper. or for resale. Copyright Law. without the prior written permission of the publisher. for advertising or promotional purposes. This consent does not extend to other kinds of copying such as copying for general distribution. Persons wishing to submit papers to be considered for presentation or publication through SAE should send the manuscript or a 300 word abstract of a proposed manuscript to: Secretary. Engineering Meetings Board. for creating new collective works. This consent is given on the condition. ISSN 0148-7191 Copyright © 2000 Society of Automotive Engineers. Operations Center. Danvers. standards. All SAE papers. 222 Rosewood Drive. contact the SAE Publications Group. Inc. that the copier pay a $7. in an electronic retrieval system or otherwise. Printed in USA . Quantity reprint rates can be obtained from the Customer Sales and Satisfaction Department. however.S.00 per article copy fee through the Copyright Clearance Center. SAE routinely stocks printed papers for a period of three years following date of publication. Inc.

Using engine measurements to initialize the combustion chamber conditions. the Diesel combustion process was investigated both numerically and experimentally in a VW 1. the combustion process in the engine was simulated. where the mean reaction rate is calculated using the mean values of different properties [1] • the geometric description method. ABSTRACT A 3-dimensional numerical study has been conducted investigating the combustion process in a VW 1. Bühren and E. An objective analysis of the model is presented including the results of a numerical parameter study. A brief review of turbulent combustion modeling will be presented along with the theory behind the new RTZF combustion model used for the simulations. Simulations were performed modeling the spray injection of a 5-hole Diesel injector in a pressure chamber. there is a great need to design and develop cleaner and optimized Diesel engines in ever shorter time periods.2000-01-0662 3-D CFD Analysis of the Combustion Process in a DI Diesel Engine using a Flamelet Model H. the spray injection and the 1 . INTRODUCTION Due to increasing market demands. Through the use of 3-dimensional Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) simulations. Thereafter. which uses a & stochastic approach to determine ω [4. In direct-injection (DI) Diesel engines the complexity of the CFD simulation is even higher through the presence of partially mixed combustion.5. it is necessary to propose other approaches to express the & mean reaction rate ω . In this study. where the flame is described as a geometrical entity [2] • the scalar dissipation method. the compression stroke. Satisfactory agreement has been obtained regarding the simulated and experimental spray penetration and cone angles. as a function of chemistry and flow. the spray injection and the combustion simulation was performed. The modeling of nonpremixed (and partially premixed) turbulent combustion requires expressing the mean reaction rate. the 3-D simulation of the combustion process has one of the highest levels of complexity. Finally. it is the most common regime found in internal combustion engines. COMBUSTION MODELING THEORY Although non-premixed combustion is not the most efficient way to burn.6]. Here all the various aspects and parameters of the combustion process need to be modeled including the proper flow field (main flow and it’s associated turbulence). Samson Volkswagen AG L. A comparison of numerical and experimental engine results was found to be encouraging and show potential for the further development and implementation of the combustion model. combustion process itself. the design process can be greatly speeded up with minimal costs. Of these engine processes. A graphical methodology was utilized to match the spray resulting from the widely used Discrete Droplet Spray model to pressure chamber spray images. The amount of manufacturing and testing of prototypes can be reduced through the preoptimization of engine processes via numerical simulations. the results will be discussed and improvements to the combustion model will be proposed. The following sections will describe the experimental and numerical setups utilized. F. As it is impossible to directly average the reaction rate due to its highly non-linearity. Inc.9l TDI engine. The different tools used to model turbulent combustion can be listed as follows: • the mean values method. Bensler.9l TDI Diesel engine. The novel RTZF two-zone flamelet combustion model was used for the combustion simulation and was tested for partial load operating conditions. where the reaction rate is calculated using the dissipation rate of a scalar field [3] • the statistical description method. Vervisch INSA de Rouen & LMFN – CORIA / CNRS Copyright © 2000 Society of Automotive Engineers.

fuel vapor and residual gases are found in the unburned zone and combustion products are in the burned zone. due to the inhomogeneous mixing of the reactants. Modeling combustion in DI diesel engines requires to take into account the possibility to burn under different regimes: premixed. H . a fully mixed and an overall mass fraction. CO 2 .Some assumptions need to be made to simplify chemistry and transport. The segregated and overall mass fractions are solved for and the fully mixed mass fraction is obtained from the other two. Depending on the conditions. combustion then consumes the fully mixed reactants and converts them into combustion products. the air. pressure and temperature. In this way. Thus the mass fractions of both the burned air and fuel are used rather than the total mass fraction of the combustible products in the burned zone. which are calculated separately. this approach is too costly and complex. using a more empirical formulation such as in the mean values and geometrical description methods. Moreover. The species concentrations of the combustion products are determined from the initial air/fuel ratio before combustion. In this model. This approach is the one of pdf-generator modeling [5]. SPECIES SCHEME – The computational cells are notionally divided by the flame front into two zones: an unburned zone and a burned zone. which uses an over-simplified scheme. based on a one-step reaction of burning at a stoichiometric air/fuel ratio. These are. Schematic of the RTZF Combustion model. the air and fuel are not mixed at a molecular level and are therefore not ready to react chemically. RTZF COMBUSTION MODEL A combination of these two methods is the novel Ricardo Two Zone Flamelet (RTZF) combustion model [7] investigated by this study. Models have to represent those phenomena accurately. only two of these are however independent. the separate mass fractions of the residual air and fuel are also used. information concerning the chemical composition of the combustion products is also not provided thus emissions formation cannot be determined. however. These represent the major chemical species in both the complete and incomplete combustion products. Their formation reactions have much slower rates and make a small contribution to the total energy balance. The current model uses a chemical equilibrium approach for the chemistry modeling. The mixture compositions consist of the mass fractions of air. O . The fluid flow and molecular diffusion convert segregated reactants to fully mixed reactants. difficulties such as the description of the flame front area can be avoided. N 2 . are always performed at fast rates. The unburned region is further divided into two regions: a segregated and a fully mixed region. as an engineering tool. The mixture components in the unburned zone have effectively three mass fractions: a segregated. NO . In the other region. A large amount of computing resources is required for the simulation of full chemical reaction schemes. H 2 . concentrations and thermal properties are calculated for a given mixture composition. there is a simple and clear relationship between the turbulence and burning velocity. . non-premixed and partially premixed. but it quickly provides the burning rate. Important effects such as the incomplete combustion of fuel-rich mixture burning are ignored with this method. The proper description of the effects of chemistry is an essential of combustion modeling. H 2 O . These chemical species concentrations are then used for the determination of the emissions. OH and N . Other ways can be followed. In addition. where diffusion and reaction are treated separately. An example of this is the previously mentioned Magnussen model [1]. In a similar manner. unburned fuel. where diffusion and reaction are coupled as in laminar flames (the laminar flamelet assumption) • finite rate chemistry. Since the reactions. which can be easily compared with measurements. There are 11 chemical species making up the combustion products: CO . In the segregated region. fuel and residuals are fully mixed. a semi-empirical approach is adopted where the turbulent burning velocity and the burning rate are estimated based on fractal geometry and basic dimensional analysis of turbulent flames. The segregated region increases in mass from newly evaporated fuel from a fuel spray or from the flow from an inlet boundary. The chemical species 2 Figure 1. they can therefore be treated at equilibrium conditions. simplified reduced reaction schemes have been developed for a few particular fuel types. On the other hand. however. lacking in generality and can be over simplified. burned air and burned fuel. which is a major requirement for combustion modeling. O 2 . Air. A fractal-based model provides limited physical insight. which are responsible for the heat release. as in probability density function (pdf) methods. several hypotheses can be made: • infinitely fast chemistry • finite rate chemistry.

The segregated air/fuel mixture causes holes in the flame front. are consumed by the combustion. using a linear relaxation model. is determined via the integral: p ig = ∫ dt τ ig (1) where c mix is the mixing constant ranging from a value of 2 to 32 (a value of 20 is the recommended default value for c mix ). the regress variable for a given cell is equal to 1. the burning rate is determined by: ω f = ρr SL I AT A Σ rvol (2) where the effective unstretched laminar burning velocity S L is derived from measured maximum laminar burning velocity where the effects of the reference condition.5 / ln  1+ u  S   L      where the coefficients A . Reaction takes place in a thin zone between burned and unburned gas. The characteristic cell length is evaluated by the cubic root of the cell volume ( Lc = 3 Vc ) and the coefficient g has an approximate value of 4. which are fully mixed. High-temperature reactions always follow after auto-ignition. the ratio of flame surface area to the projected transverse area ( AT / A ) is determined from fractal geometry: AT l = I A  lk      D −2 (6) The ignition delay is a function of temperature and pressure given by: τ ig = AP − n e (T A / T ) (7) (3) Here l I is the integral length scale and l k is the Kolmogorov scale. separated by the reaction area. For the turbulent flame. fuelair equivalence ratio and residuals are taken into account. With increasing strain. AUTO-IGNITION MODEL – Since low temperature reactions are responsible for auto-ignition and hightemperature reactions for the normal flame.MIXING AND FLAME PROPAGATION – The different components in the segregated region are converted to the fully mixed mass fraction by turbulent mixing. For the case of non-premixed flames. Only the effect of turbulence is taken into account. the ratio of the fully mixed reactant volume to the total volume ( rvol ) is estimated for the degree of segregation. Low-temperature reactions for the auto-ignition are considered as a lumped one-step reaction of a generic intermediate ignition species Yig . Thus the non-premixed burning rate is slower than a pre-mixed rate. unburned fuel and residuals ( c = Y A + YF + YRA + YRF ). [10]. p ig .75e (4) The flame projected transverse area per unit volume ( Σ = A / V ) is a shape function. the combustibles can be consumed by either more auto-ignition or by normal flame propagation. the fractal dimension D is correlated as a function of the ratio of turbulence intensity to laminar burning velocity:   ′  − 0. and is defined as Σ= gc (1 − c ) Lc (5) 3 . The contribution of heat from the low-temperature reactions is considered negligible. which is inversely proportional to the ignition time ( Yig = 1 / τ ig ). Reactants. A transport equation for the ignition probability is solved and auto-ignition occurs when p ig has reached a value of unity. n and T A (activation temperature) are determined from experimental ignition delay measurements. COMMENTS – The mixing rate is built in the same way as the Eddy Break-Up model [8]. [9] and the approach of Gouldin et al. When considering the transition from laminar to turbulent regime. For the normal flame propagation. The turbulent mixing is based on the large-eddy scale and has a mixing rate of: mix ω α = c mix k seg ρYα ε where c is the regress variable and is defined as the sum of mass fractions of unburned air. The reaction rate is then proportional to the pass frequency of the flame front. Low temperature reactions occur for autoignition and high-temperature reactions occur for the flame propagation. these two reactions are treated separately. it has a value of 0 after the completion of combustion. Thereafter. The effect of strain on flame burning velocity is represented by the flame stretch factor I . The ignition probability. assimilated to a set of laminar flames. Before the start of combustion. The BML model supposes that a point of the flow is either in the burned or in the unburned zones. Its formulation seems to be a mix between the BML model modified by Bray et al. D = 2 + 0. the propagating flame will be partially quenched and can even be extinguished.

In order to determine the time-dependent fuel injection rate for a given injector.9 liter Type Injection Arrangement Timing Valves Capacity Bore x stroke Compression ratio Connecting Rod Turbocharger Engine speed 4 in-line-cylinder Direct Row 1 overhead camshaft (belt) 2 per cylinder 1896cm 3 79 . CO .4 mg. In this study. A light source is used to illuminate the spray and a digital video camera then records the images. the flame density is expressed as a fractal surface and gives an expression quite analog to (3). which enable to take pictures of the inside-phenomena. The engine characteristics are found in Table 1 below. For more RTZF model details see [7]. and are then burned.Those models are formulated in terms of flame density. Table 1.9l direct injection Diesel engine. 2 shows a schematic of the pressure chamber. F uelpres s ure H eat ex chan ger H igh-P r es s urecom pres s or 17. Their respective setups will be discussed in the sections below.and a main-injection. an accurate injection law can be determined for any type of injector. and emissions such as NOx. the cylinder pressure. In this manner. TDI ENGINE – The experimental engine used was a VW TDI 1. in each cell. Important engine parameters were measured including the injected mass of the fuel. Here the fuel is injected into a tube filled with the same fuel. only the second step is required. Hydrocarbons. The Diesel fuel was injected with a 5-hole injector and had a temperature of 303K and an injection pressure of 400 bar. whose integral is proportional to the injected mass of fuel. Time dependent pressure waves are measured. This methodology provides an accurate description of the time dependent injected fuel mass flow rate law. measurements were made separately on a hydraulic injector test bed. The first one. The RTZF model uses the approach of Bray et al. 4 . the measured intake manifold temperature was of prime importance. P ow er U nit L ight S our ce DU T 60° 60° L ight S our ce D at a S av in g 40° 40° 20° 20° K-EFAM VOLKSWAGEN E lect rical 10° 10° D at a A quis it ion Calculat ion S ignalcon t roller O pt rical K am era D at a A quis it ion Figure 2. A high-pressure compressor and a heat exchanger allow the pressure and temperature in the chamber to be adjusted.5 mm × 95 . The corresponding injection law can be seen in Fig. a Pmep of 1 bar and with 6 mg of injected fuel. PRESSURE CHAMBER – The pressure chamber is a cylindrical chamber equipped with small windows. The model enables to simulate both non-premixed and premixed combustion. respectively. with reference of equation (5) for the formulation of the flame density. For pre-mixed combustion. the fractal formulation being used for the calculation of the surface area of the flame. Soot. The mass of the injected fuel equaled 1. Pictures were taken through the bottom window of the chamber each 50 µs for a duration of 2 ms. For non-premixed combustion. reactants are first mixed locally.6 mg and 4. Air and exhaust temperatures were measured using thermal resistance sensors at 8 different locations ranging from the air filter to the exhaust pipe. Fig. Engine measurements for this study were made for part load operating conditions with an engine speed of 1000 RPM. makes the flame density to be proportional to the crossing frequency of the flame front. [9] for the reaction rate. the chamber pressure was set to 20 bar with a constant temperature of 293K. For the numerical simulations conducted in this study. Engine Characteristics. Schematic of pressure chamber. CO 2 and O 2 .8 144 mm Garrett VNT15 1000 rpm The engine was mounted on a standard VW test bed. TDI 1. 3. The fuel was injected with a pressure of 400 bar in two phases: a pre.5 mm EXPERIMENTATION There were two experiments involved for the validation of the numerical results: a pressure chamber for the spray modeling and a TDI Diesel engine. In the other one.

SPRAY MODELLING – The fuel injection simulation is done using a Lagrangian stochastic spray model of discrete droplets [7]. The CFD solver provides 3-D time-dependent. The spray is modelled as a dispersed liquid phase which interacts and penetrates the surrounding continuous gas phase. Results showed that a cone angle of 10 degrees corresponded well with the experimental images. the other parameters such as droplet size distribution and droplet interaction models were tested. Measured injection rate. In addition. an iterative process was used either increasing or decreasing the old value of the cone angle. The turbulence model used is the standard k − ε model [12] based on the assumption of local isotropic turbulence at high Reynolds numbers. Differential equations for the droplet mass. -wall interaction and –breakup are also modelled. Local mesh refinement is utilized for the resolution of smallscale flow structures near boundaries and in regions of high gradients. Pressure chamber computational mesh and spray simulation. Figure 4. Both the droplet parcels and the gas phase interact with each other through drag forces and heat and mass transfer. and energy equations. compressible or incompressible solution of the continuity. The mesh density used for the pressure chamber simulations was also used later for modeling the spray and combustion in the TDI engine. other spray phenomena such as droplet-coalescence. The simulation was conducted and the width of the spray angle and the penetration were visually compared to the experimental images. The droplet-breakup model used for this study is that of Patterson and Reitz [13]. Note that the mesh in the area near the injector is twice as fine as in the area of the spray jets. temperature and size. The spray is described by an ensemble of discrete droplets parcels. Equations are solved fully-implicitly with coupling between variables and non-linear effects using iterative or predictor-corrector methods. Figure 3. -turbulence interaction. An example of the computational mesh and the corresponding spray are seen in Fig. If a poor correlation was obtained. An orthogonal structured Cartesian mesh is used with wall cell volume and face area adaptation. The standard logarithmic “law of the wall” is used for the evaluation of the wall boundary layer. 5 . Navier-Stokes. Once a suitable cone angle was obtained. It should be further noted that the only the main injection described in Fig. 3 was modeled in the pressure chamber since no photographs were available for the pre-injection. The procedure was to begin with an estimated value of the cone angle of 8 degrees resulting from correlations existing in the literature [14]. This was done to increase the numerical accuracy of the spray modeling. NUMERICAL ANALYSIS The 3-dimensional simulations were performed using the finite-volume CFD code VECTIS [11]. Several calculations were needed to get an acceptable match with the pressure chamber images. where each parcel contains a quantity of droplets with the identical velocity.DISCUSSION AND RESULTS PRESSURE CHAMBER – The two main parameters considered for the correlation of the simulated and photographed spray images were the spray cone angle and the penetration. 4. The computational meshes are generated using a fully automatic mesh generator. momentum and temperature are solved. Each of the 5 holes was modeled identically which resulted in 5 very similar jets.

local mesh refinement is used to improve the accuracy of the spray modeling. The cell size in the bowl was 1mm square that resulted in an average mesh size of 100000 internal cells. The measured pressure curve has a maximum value of about 43 bar. two pressure peaks are found at 5 and 17° ATDC. Both the simulated and photographic images were directly comparable through the use of a 10-mm square reference grid. A spray image is shown every 250 microseconds. Thereafter. spray and combustion simulation equaled about 40 hours. Comparison of simulated and pressure chamber spray penetration: Pchamber = 20 bar. The lines at the tip and sides of the sprays had identical dimensions for both the simulated and photographic images. Figure 6. 7 based on the default values of the combustion model constants. A comparison of the simulated and photographed spray results can be seen in Fig. respectively. Prail=400bar and Trail=303K. 6. One can see that although the slightly nonsymmetric nature of the photographed spray was not found in simulated spray. general good agreement was found with regards to both the spray cone angle and penetration. The injection parameters used for the simulations were the same as those for the engine measurements mentioned in the Experimentation section.Figure 5. The calculations were initialized with measured swirl ratio of 2. Note that in the area of the injector. The species in the chamber were initialized to take into account the 30% EGR set up on the experimental engine. 5. A comparison of the simulated and measured in-cylinder pressure can be seen in Fig. very good agreement is observed from – . The calculation time on a singleprocessor workstation which included the compression. Tchamber = 293 K.and main injections. TDI ENGINE – The engine numerical simulations were done from –40° CA BTDC until 40° ATDC. Cross-sectional view of the computational mesh at 10°CA ATDC. 6 A view of the computational mesh used for the engine simulations can be seen in Fig.2 bar and 735K. When considering the simulated pressure curve. The initial conditions in the combustion were taken from engine measurements where the pressure and temperature equaled 9.2 from another study done on a transparent VW TDI engine [15]. A total of six pairs of images are presented showing the cone angle and penetration for one representative jet of the spray. which indicate combustion occurring after the pre.

RSF=1. their conversion from a segregated to a mixed condition.e. since the fired engine was run with an 7 Figure 9. An explanation for this discrepancy is that the combustion chamber gas temperature and pressure could be influenced by wall heating effects since a unfired engine would have lower wall temperatures than a fired engine. one can see that there is a difference of about 0. Moreover. The simulations also show two peaks smaller in magnitude. In addition. EGR level of 30%. 20 and 32. however both beginning very close to the measured start of combustion. Percent difference between simulated and measured combustion chamber pressure for varying mixing coefficient as a function of crank angle (RSF=1. 8. Figure 8.4 bar (approximately 1%) between the measured pressure curves with and without combustion where the unfired pressure curve is lower in magnitude. ISF=1).7).5%. Fig. the values of RSF and ISF were left at their default values of 1. in order to further test the model. ISF=1). The area of combustion in Fig. Figure 7. In addition. 7 from 0 to 20 °CA is shown in more detail in Fig. When Cmix=32. RSF=1. The default value of Cmix=20 is very similar to Cmix=32 with a mean difference of -2. For Cmix=10. It can be seen that combustion begins at about 3° CA ATDC for all the three Cmix values. Finally. the ISF tunes the auto-ignition pdf. a parameter study was conducted by changing the mixing coefficient (Cmix). the chemical composition of the chamber gases would be in effect different compared to the unfired engine. Comparison of simulated and measured incylinder pressure using the default values of the combustion model constants (Cmix=20. The other two parameters investigated are used for fine-tuning of the model. Measured and simulated in-cylinder pressure with and without combustion with default values of the combustion model constants (zoom of Fig. effecting the rate of the low-temperature reactions that lead to auto ignition. Cmix has a strong influence on the overall combustion reaction rate.40 to –5° CA BTDC. In order to investigate the effects of varying Cmix. However. . The mixing coefficient is a real constant in the model and directly controls the rate of mixing of the species. three simulations were performed with Cmix set at 10.2% and has a higher value of the pressure over the entire 25°CA.0 %. The default values for the parameters are Cmix=20. i. The RSF controls the burning velocity and thus the overall reaction rate. 9 shows the percentage difference between the simulated and the measured cylinder pressure curves as a function of °CA. and ISF=1. Here it can be seen that there is a general under-prediction of the calculated pressure curve except in a region between 10° and 12° CA ATDC. the smaller was the mean difference between the simulated and measured pressure. the pressure is always more under-predicted than for the case of the other two Cmix values and has a mean difference of –3. The simulation results based on the default values of the combustion model constants already showed an encouraging correlation compared to the measured pressure curve. Thus the higher the value of Cmix. the mean difference equals –2. the Reaction Scaling Factor (RSF) and the Ignition Scaling Factor (ISF).

Once again the point of combustion begin at 5°CA ATDC was not affected. it can be clearly seen that the time of ignition begin occurs progressively later as ISF is decreased. In order to better understand the RTZF model and to provide ways in which the model could be improved. Figure 11. 11. the effect of changing ISF becomes smaller with increasing °CA. As the RSF value decreased.5. Percent difference between simulated and measured combustion chamber pressure for varying ignition scaling factor as a function of crank angle (CMIX=20. the magnitude of the initial pressure peak also becomes progressively smaller. 8 . Thus the default value of RSF=1 showed the better fit to the experimental pressure curve. Percent difference between simulated and measured combustion chamber pressure for varying reaction scaling factor as a function of crank angle (CMIX=20. In Fig. The mixture fraction dissipation rate is one of the key quantities of nonpremixed turbulent combustion. The control parameters of a reaction-diffusion layer are: a diffusive time measured from the diffusive flux of mixture fraction. ignition is more or less uniformly distributed. when local turbulent micro-mixing leads to possibilities of non-uniform ignition. Figure 12.18] have reported that the time evolution of the mixture during auto-ignition strongly depends on the time evolution of the mixture fraction dissipation rate itself. and a chemical time.0.5% at RSF=1 to –3. moreover. the percent difference increased from a mean difference of –2. 0.5 to -2. Both are retained to build a Damkohler number useful for characterising various combustion regimes [20]. Figure 10.The variation of RSF is shown in Fig.7%. 12. data from the literature were analyzed. In Fig. edge-flame combustion involving partially premixed flames will control the development of the heat release rate. 10.1% at RSF=0. when all the local characteristic micro-mixing times (inverse of the scalar dissipation rate) are much smaller than the local ignition times of the stoichiometric mixture (or of the most reactive mixture). RSF=1). DNS results suggest that one important point to reproduce auto-ignition is to capture the time history of the mean mixture fraction dissipation rate evaluated under stoichiometric conditions. RSF=1). the point of ignition begin was influenced. Direct Numerical Simulation (DNS) studies [16.5. it is shown that the percent difference in the pressure for the different ISF values becomes relatively similar with increasing °CA where the mean difference ranges from –2. by changing the ISF.75 and 1. The ISF was simulated at three different values: 0. Measured and simulated in-cylinder pressure with and without combustion as a function of crank angle for varying ISF values (CMIX=20. Accordingly. Practically speaking. used to define the inverse of the scalar dissipation rate. ISF=1). where the extent of mixing between evaporated fuel and oxidiser is usually measured using a mixture fraction [19]. After the initial point of preinjection combustion.17. As expected.

Furthermore.). VECTIS Theory Manual. Ricardo Consulting Engineers Ltd. 719-727. Academic Press. Springer.A. “On mathematical modelling of turbulent combustion”. W. A presumed beta-pdf for the mixture fraction could be used to average over the range of variation of mixture fraction. Hentschel. “The coherent flame model of non-premixed turbulent combustion”. K. Spalding.. F.3. 155170.. Sci.W..D. K. and Mjertager B. Ravet F. 1985. 15. The Combustion Institute. Phys. pp. “Modeling the effects of fuel spray charactreristics on Diesel eingine combustion and emission”. 16th International Symposium on Combustion. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The authors would like to thank Arno Homburg and Reinhard Schulz for their help concerning the pressure chamber measurements and diagrams.. 1998.9 liter direct injection diesel engine”. and Libby P. D. and Chen. 245-292. 1971. Vol.. 13th Symposium (International) on Combustion. Energy Combust. 9.V. “The structure of diffusion flames”. Project Squid TRW-9-PU. Magnussen B. S. The resulting ignition times would be a function of the mean temperature. 3.. 77. 4. 13. the ignition table look-up could be implemented using a detailed chemical mechanism. pp.H. Turbulent Reacting Flows. pp. Project Squid Headquarters. 1977. This modification of the model would lead to a more accurate description of the first stage of combustion in the engine. Inst.B. A graphical methodology was used which matched the simulated spray well with the spray images taken in the pressure chamber. Annu. “Mechanisms of atomization of a liquid jet”. pp. 1988. and Bracco. Gouldin. Bilger R.-J. Vol. Ricardo Consulting Engineers Ltd. “Direct numerical simulation of non-premixed turbulent flame”. 1976. 1989. Pittsburgh. Vol. would consist of modifying the calculation of the probability of finding ignition. the probability of finding ignition for each possible instantaneous value of the mixture fraction is then measured from the probability of having micro-mixing times greater than the ignition time. Murphy (Eds. Vol. 30.In the light of these DNS observations. Oberg for his useful discussions during the course of this study..P “Flow and combustion in a . combustion would occur. Finally.4. L.. Reitz. 1982.B. Vol. 541-563. Prog.D.. 655-692. 241-259. 13. 36th Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit AIAA. Arcoumanis. R. Version 3.. Finally. M. Purdue University. pp. Vol. and to mimic these important features of auto-ignition. Release 3. Simulations and measurements were conducted in both for the case of a pressure chamber and the engine. 1998. Fluid Mech. January. 11. 6. F. Chaffee Hall. “Modelling non-premixed turbulent combustion in aeronautical engines using pdf-generator”. and Schindler. 1999. “Chemical closure model for fractal flamelets”.. one possibility to improve the combustion model. R. 2. VECTIS Users Guide. and Reitz. “Pdf method for turbulent reacting flows”.. In conclusion. Combust. M. A comparison of the calculated and measured in-cylinder pressure indicated good agreement at partial load operating conditions with a mean difference between the simulation and measurement pressure equalling 3%. 12. Launder. Mech. pp. CONCLUSION A numerical and experimental study was conducted investigating the combustion process in a 1. December. REFERENCES 1. Proce. this would allow for better accuracy in the determination of the burning rate. Pope. 1976. The Combustion Institute..1730-1742. E. pp. SAE 980131. paper 98-1027. 1972. Patterson. transparent 1. based on an idea first proposed by Borghi [4]. H. The existence of characteristic mixing times smaller than ignition delay would prevent auto-ignition and then combustion. Bray. “Turbulent combustion modelling”. Bray.9L TDI Diesel engine. pp. Prog..191-205. Marble F. Reno. Vervisch. 8.. However. 9 . this study has shown that the RTZF flamelet model tested shows encouraging results and thus merits further development and investigation at other engine operating conditions. Introducing the probability density distribution of micro-mixing time. Engrs. 25.. 1999. Vol. Whitelaw.. The novel RTZF flamelet model was used for the combustion simulations. thanks are given to Dr. C. 16. “The interaction between turbulence and chemistry in premixed turbulence flames”. T. when ignition prevails over micro-mixing. 208. “Mixing and chemical reaction in steady confined turbulent flames”. 10. Computational Fluid Dynamics. Borghi R. 5. pp. and Spalding D. J. J. and Poinsot.. Mathematical Models of Turbulence. 649657. suggestions based on Direct Numerical Simulations from the literature have been proposed how to improve the auto-ignition model utilized. B. R. mean species mass fraction and position in mixture fraction space. 1994. pp. Rev. USA. Volume 40 of Lecture Notes in Engineering. Following the work of Ravet and Vervisch [5].. 14. 1998. and Broadwell J. Combustion Science Technology.. a table look up of ignition time delay could be constructed. New York. 1989. 7. 14. Sci. Nevada. Pittsburgh. 11. Energy Combust. and Vervisch L. Fluids. Champion. Borghi and S. Flame. 119-195. K.

1231-1250. P. 19. “Laminar flamelet concepts in turbulent combustion”.J. 1996. 233-240. The Combustion Institute. T. Irvine. and M. Domingo. 1996.. 18. Mastorakos.. Poinsot. Baritaud. and Vervisch. Pittsburgh. Naples. pp. 1974. 26th International Symposium on Combustion. The Combustion Institute. T. “Triple flames and partially premixed combustion in autoignition of nonpremixed turbulent mixtures”. N... Peters. Pittsburgh. pp. A.. Linán. 20. 1986. 242-276. Baum (Eds). Acta Astronautica 1007 (1). L. Baritaud. “The asymptotic structure of counter flow diffusion flames for large activation energies”. 10 .17. and Poinsot. Direct numerical simulation for turbulent reacting flows. Editions Technip. T. “Numerical simulations of autoignition in turbulent mixing flows”. pp. T. 21st International Symposium on Combustion. E.

Master your semester with Scribd & The New York Times

Special offer for students: Only $4.99/month.

Master your semester with Scribd & The New York Times

Cancel anytime.