AIR FLOW AND CHARGE MOTION STUDY OF ENGINE INTAKE PORT

Vinodh Kumar B Sivagaminathan N Gopalakrishnan N

Larsen and Toubro Limited, Larsen and Toubro Limited, IES Larsen and Toubro Limited,
IES IES

Scott Morton Paul Radavich

Mercury Marine Mercury Marine

ABSTRACT test rig, “Flow Bench” is that the time it took for
realizing the final design. The cost and time involved
Design evaluation of engine port using virtual
in building a new design renders the designers to
flow bench “CFD” is significantly improved by
evaluate more and more designs. With the reduced
identifying best practices which reduces turn around
lead time for design cycle, this would lead to
time for product realization. Compressible steady
compromised design.
state CFD calculation was performed to emulate
Also, flowbench testing does not provide a
conventional test rig “Flow Bench” with close
very efficient path to the final design because the
attention to three dimensional flow field including
designers do not have an insight on the details of
design-imposed pressure losses. The calculation was
recirculation areas, turbulence and design-imposed
carried out at discrete valve lifts to obtain air flow
pressure losses.
rate and rotational speed for predefined constant
CFD (Virtual Flow Bench), an analysis tool
pressure differential between the atmosphere and the
used to improve the port design by simulating the
system. CFD and experimental results were
flow in alternative port designs. CFD simulation
compared for its accuracy and to develop a standard
provides fluid velocity and pressure throughout the
methodology for future iterations. Both flow
solution domain with complex geometries and
coefficient and swirl ratio calculated through CFD
boundary conditions. With this efficient and effective
show good agreement with experiments.
tool, designers can evaluate the effect of various
design modifications and boundary conditions on the
Keywords: Flow Bench, CFD, Flow Coefficient,
alternative port designs. This reduces the amount of
Swirl Ratio, UDF.
experimentation necessary to develop a new product,
which ultimately reduces cost and time.
In the current practice it takes considerable
time to prototype the port configuration and run a test
INTRODUCTION
that provides no information on internal flow patterns.
One of the main problems encountered in the
design investigation of inlet port using steady state

Page 1 of 9
 CFD simulation makes it possible to analyze a
new design in less time and provide complete
information on flow velocity and pressure throughout
the model.
CFD analysis was carried out to aid the design
of effective air intake system. An extensive study was
conducted to convert the physical model to
comparable computational model in order to reduce
the modeling/numerical error with fewer numbers of
iterations.
WORK FLOW CHART
The work flow chart used for both flow bench
measurement and CFD calculation is shown in the
Fig. 1.
Start
Flow Bench
for flow coefficient. Calibrated dial gauge is used to
adjust the valve lift. Clay bell mouth is used to reduce
the entrance losses. Compressor unit is used to
provide sufficient vacuum (suction pressure) inside
the cylinder. Pressure sensor is used to monitor both
the atmospheric and system pressure.
There is a compensating tank with pressure
sensor for system pressure measurement at the
bottom of the clear tube. This tank is used to recover
the dynamic head and thereby maintaining the system
pressure equal to stagnation pressure. Temperature
sensor is also present to record the atmospheric
temperature. Air flow sensor is used to measure the
flow rate across the system.
CFD

Head Preparation Flow Path

Extraction
Flow Coefficient Swirl Ratio

Geometry
Clear Tube Clear Tube Cleanup
Preparation Preparation

Meshing
Fixture Fixture
Preparation Preparation
Problem Setup/
Simulation
Setup & Paddle Wheel
Measurement Preparation

Data Setup &

Angular Momentum
Acquisition Measurement Post Processing
Flux Calculation
Data
Acquisition

Correlation
Study

Documentation

End

Fig. 1 Work Flow Chart

Fig. 2 Experimental set up for flow coefficient
CORRELATION STUDY MODEL measurement

Flow bench
Figure. 2 shows the actual flow bench set up
used to perform the steady state testing measurement

Page 2 of 9
 Charge motion model

Unlike flow bench (where there is a

compensating tank underneath the cylinder bottom
which acts as outlet), cylinder bottom is used as
outlet for the CFD calculation. 2D interior plane is
created to replicate the paddle wheel in flow bench
for swirl ratio calculation. Fig. 5 shows the location
of interior plane used to extract angular momentum
flux in CFD.
Bell mouth
Combustion
chamber

Cylinder
Hemispherical inlet

Fig. 3 Experimental set up for swirl measurement

Figure. 3 shows the paddle wheel set up for

swirl ratio measurement. Clear tube/cylinder contains Fig. 4 Computational model of intake port
the paddle wheel. Speed sensor is used to measure the
paddle wheel speed which in turn is used to calculate
the circumferential velocity.

Computational model

Air flow model

The model consists of intake port, valve stem,

valve, valve seat, spark plug, exhaust valve,
combustion chamber and cylinder. Hemispherical Swirl monitoring plane
inlet with bell mouth entrance is created to model the
atmospheric condition without entrance loss and the
cylinder bottom is closed to define enclosed volume.

Figure.4 shows the computational model used

for the CFD calculation. Fig. 5 Computational model of intake port with swirl
monitoring plane

Page 3 of 9
Computational grid
Computational grid used for the calculation is
shown in Fig. 6. Unstructured tetrahedral elements
with two layers of inflation are used to discretize the
flow domain. Fig. 7 shows the close view of inflation
created along the walls of intake valve and throat
region. Note here that the mesh is designed to capture
the jet coming through the throat.
standard condition and the theoretical mass flow
rate [9]. Cylinder bore diameter is used as
characteristic length for calculating the theoretical
mass flow rate.
m
α k = std (1)
mtheor
The actual or measured mass flow rate at standard
condition is calculated using the following expression.

Pstd
mstd = V × (2)
R × Tstd

The theoretical mass flow rate is calculated using the

following expression.

mtheor . = A × ρ s × Cs (3)

Piston area is calculated from cylinder bore diameter

π (4)
A= 2
Dcyl
4

Fig. 6 Computational grid of intake port Density is calculated for isentropic flow conditions
1
P1 ⎡ P2 ⎤ k
ρs = ⎢ ⎥ (5)
R × Tstd ⎣ P1 ⎦

Flow velocity is calculated for isentropic flow

⎡ k −1
⎤
2× k ⎛P ⎞
× R × Tstd × ⎢1 − ⎜⎜ 2 ⎥
k
Cs = ⎟⎟ (6)
k −1 ⎢ ⎥
⎢⎣ ⎝ 1 ⎠
P
⎥⎦

Fig. 7 Close view of inflation on valve and throat
CALCULATION PARAMETERS
Flow coefficient
The flow coefficient ( α k ) is defined as the
ratio of the actual or measured mass flow rate at
P1 = 101325 N / m 2
P2 = P1 − ∆P
Gauge static pressure P2 measured in the
compensating tank can be considered as stagnation
pressure for ∆P calculation as the dynamic
component is fully recovered.

Page 4 of 9
Swirl ratio The table below shows discharge coefficient
and swirl ratio obtained from flow bench.
Swirl ratio is defined as the ratio of
circumferential air speed in the cylinder to the axial Flow
speed of the air flow in the cylinder [9]. Lift Swirl Ratio (/)
Coefficient (/)
Low 0.2484 0.900
Circumferential Velocity (C ) Medium 0.4506 0.775
Swirl Ratio = u
(7) High 0.5517 0.779
Axial Velocity (C )
A

Steady state CFD calculation

Circumferential air speed in the cylinder is calculated
using, Steady state air flow calculations are
Cu = π × DMFL × n (8) performed for three different intake valve lifts viz.
low lift, medium lift and high lift to investigate the
Axial speed of the air flow in the cylinder is flow features. Sufficient mesh refinement has been
calculated using, provided near the throat area because the flow
V velocity changes rapidly in this region and capturing
C A = 2 real (9)
Dcyl × π the gradients is key for an accurate simulation.
4
Governing equation
Theoretical volumetric flow rate across the system is The calculations are performed by solving
calculated using orifice meter equation as, compressible Navier-Stokes equation for mass,
momentum and energy. Also two equation turbulence
ρ std Pstd × Tamb model, Realizable κ − ε is used to capture the flows
Vreal =V × =V × (10)
ρ real Tstd × Pamb involving rotation, boundary layer under strong
adverse pressure gradients, separation and re-
circulation. To accurately represent the flow in the
Pstd =100000 N / m 2 near wall region, Non-equilibrium wall function is
used to predict the wall bounded turbulent flows
Tstd = 288.7 K since walls are the main source of mean vorticity and
turbulence.
CALCULATION METHOD
Solver
Experimental measurement Pressure based segregated solver is used to
solve the transport equation for mass, momentum and
Flow bench is used for cylinder head steady energy. Pressure field is obtained using SIMPLE
flow measurements. Measurements are conducted at algorithm for Pressure-Velocity coupling.
a constant pressure difference between tube and
atmosphere. The test pressure is measured and Spatial discretization
adjusted automatically by the flow bench controller, Control volume technique is used as
which also measures air flow. Ambient pressure and numerical scheme for solving mass, momentum and
ambient temperature are being recorded. Swirl ratio is energy. Second order upwind scheme is used as
obtained by evaluating the rotational speed of the discretization scheme for convective terms of each
paddle wheel. governing equation.

Page 5 of 9
Boundary condition V,V (m/s)
m/s
Stagnation pressure at the hemispherical inlet
and static pressure at the cylinder bottom outlet
(which is same as test pressure) is given as boundary
condition and the walls are assumed as adiabatic and
no-slip.
The table below shows flow coefficient and
swirl ratio obtained from steady state CFD
calculation.

Flow
Lift Swirl Ratio (/)
Coefficient (/)
Low 0.2431 1.360 Low Lift
Medium 0.4575 0.903
High 0.6025 0.716 V,V (m/s)
m/s

Swirl ratio UDF

A User Defined Function (UDF) is developed
to calculate the angular momentum flux at the swirl
monitoring plane shown in Fig. 5. The various inputs
like mass flux, cell centroid from the swirl axis and
also velocity magnitude at each cell face in the
monitoring plane is obtained from the solver by the
UDF at the end of the calculation. The collected
inputs were used to calculate angular
velocity/circumferential velocity and axial velocity
which are needed to calculate swirl ratio. Medium Lift

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION V, m/s

V (m/sec)

The results obtained from CFD analysis are

correlated with experimentally measured values from
flow bench. Mass flow rate and swirl ratio were
compared between CFD and flow bench.

General flow field

Much of the flow coming from the inlet goes
directly into the chamber but some hugs the outer
diameter of the port around the valve stem.
Especially, the flow coming from the lower part of
the port (flow from inner diameter) exits in the same High Lift
direction whereas the flow from upper part (flow
from outer diameter) of the port exits in the opposite Fig. 8 Streamlines colored by velocity magnitude
direction.

Page 6 of 9
 The flow from upper part is mainly
responsible for swirl inside the engine cylinder.
Streamlines released from inlet shows this flow
feature and is shown in Fig.8. Swirl created is
stronger and visible near top of the cylinder during
lower lifts but as the valve opens up, the swirl
location moves down and gets weaker.
Pressure and velocity distribution
Strong pressure differential exists near the
throat which resulted in flow acceleration through the
throat and hence high velocity. Fig. 9 and 10 shows
the static pressure and velocity across the throat for
various valve lifts.
V, m/s

Ps, Pa
Low Lift Low Lift

V, m/s

Ps, Pa Medium Lift

Medium Lift

Ps, Pa V, m/s High Lift

High Lift

Fig. 9 Static pressure contours Fig. 10 Velocity magnitude vectors

Page 7 of 9
 At lower lifts the flow is attached to the wall and uncertainty in the measurements like the
causing less turbulence near the throat. The jet of difference in the outlet pressure measurement
flow coming out of the throat causes recirculation location (cylinder bottom in CFD and compensating
below the valve head. A portion of high velocity flow tank in Flow bench) and 2D monitoring plane in CFD
out from throat creates strong swirl inside the engine instead of paddle wheel in test. Moreover, the flow is
cylinder at low lifts compared to high lifts. highly three dimensional, so it is very difficult to
accurately match the circumferential velocity
Flow coefficient comparison calculated from CFD with flow bench.
Mass flow rate matches closely with flow
bench at lower lifts and starts to over predict during Swirl Ratio Comparison
Flow Bench Vs CFD
higher valve lifts. This could be because at higher 1.600

lifts the flow starts to separate from the wall creating 1.400

1.200

turbulence near the throat. The flow thus rushing into

Swirl Ratio
1.000

the chamber creating more suction upstream of the

0.800

0.600

throat which resulted in more air flow at high lift 0.400

0.200
FB
CFD

position of the valve and this flow behavior is clearly 0.000

0 Low
3 Medium
6 High
9 12

visible in Fig. 9 and Fig. 10. Valve Lift (mm)

The comparison of flow coefficient between

flow bench and CFD is shown in Fig. 11. Fig. 12 Swirl ratio comparison

Flow Coefficient Comparison CONCLUSION

Flow Bench Vs CFD
0.7

0.6
The following conclusions were made with regard to
flow parameters:
Flow Coefficient (/)

0.5

0.4

0.3
ƒ The CFD predicted values are close to flow bench
measured values for all the valve lifts except high
0.2

0.1 FB 62mbar

0.0
0 3
Low 6
Medium
CFD 62mbar WRH (Profilometer)

9
High 12
lift.
Valve Lift (mm)
ƒ Maximum % deviation is occurring at the high lift
because (i) CAD geometry might be a little
Fig. 11 Flow coefficient comparison different compared to flow bench, (ii) Error in
dial gauge indicator for valve lift measurement,
Swirl ratio comparison (iii) Type of turbulence model used to resolve
CFD was over predicting the swirl ratio in all boundary layer at the throat.
the valve lifts but the magnitude is higher at lower lift ƒ Discrepancy in the suction pressure measurement
(48%) and as the lift increases the % deviation is location between CFD and Flow bench.
getting smaller (+/-15%), Fig.12. This could be The following conclusions were made with regard to
because at lower lift CFD was over predicting the charge motion:
circumferential velocity and under predicting the ƒ Even though the paddle wheel speed is different
mass flow rate. When the lift increases the deviation between Flow bench and CFD, the trend
starts to come down. exhibited by CFD is closely matching with Flow
Overall, CFD was exhibiting the same trend bench. The main reason for this difference could
as observed in flow bench but on the higher side. be (i) 2D monitoring plane instead of a paddle
This agrees with the anticipation because of the drag wheel, (ii) the paddle wheel speed calculation
on the physical paddle wheel in the flowbench test between CFD and Flow bench.

Page 8 of 9
 REFERENCES
NOMENCLATURE
1. Padmesh Mandloi, Nidhesh Jain and Laz Foley.
Symbols Port Flow Meshing Guidelines, ANSYS
A Piston area FLUENT Technical Document.
Cs Flow velocity 2. Laz Foley. Solution Strategies for Port Flow
Analysis, ANSYS FLUENT Technical Document.
Dcyl Cylinder bore diameter 3. Xiao Hu. Angular Momentum Flux UDF,
DMFL Mean paddle wheel diameter ANSYS FLUENT User Defined Function
k Specific heat ratio = 1.40 Database.
4. Andras Horvath, Zoltan Horvath., 2003.
n Paddle wheel speed (Swirl) Application Of CFD Numerical Simulation For
P1 Stagnation pressure upstream of valve Intake Port Shape Design Of A Diesel Engine,
P2 Static pressure in compensating tank Journal of Computational and Applied Mechanics,
Vol. 4, No. 2, 129-146.
Pamb Test ambient pressure 5. Takenaka, Y., Yabe, M., Aoyagi, Y., and
Pstd Standard ambient condition Shiozaki., T., 1990. Three Dimensional
Computation of In-Cylinder Flow with Intake
R Universal gas constant
Port in DI Diesel Engine, International
Tamb Test ambient temperature Symposium COMODIA 90: 425-430.
Tstd Stanandard ambient temperature 6. Befrui, B.A., 1994. CFD Simulation and
V Volume flow rate measured in flow bench Comparison with Measurement Steady Flow in
Intake Ports and Combustion Chambers,
Vreal Theroretical volume flow rate International Symposium COMODIA 94: 535-
ρ real Density under test ambient conditions 540.
ρs Density under isentropic conditions 7. Kang, Kern Y., and Reitz, R.D., 1999. The effect
of intake valve and alignment on swirl generation
ρ std Density under standard ambient conditions in a DI diesel engine, Experimental Thermal and
Fluid Sciences, 20, 94-103.
Subscripts 8. John B. Heywood. Text book on Internal
s Isentropic condition Combustion Engine Fundamentals, McGraw-Hill
Book Company.
Notation 9. Frank M. White. Text book on Fluid Mechanics,
∆ Difference Fourth Edition, McGraw-Hill Book Company.

Abbreviation
cyl Cylinder bore
MFL Mean paddle wheel
std Standard condition
real Theoretically calculated
amb Ambient condition

Page 9 of 9