Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Status – Validation of Eulerian Spray Modelling University of Zagreb Faculty of Mechanical Engineering and Naval Architecture Department of Energy, Power.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Status – Validation of Eulerian Spray Modelling University of Zagreb Faculty of Mechanical Engineering and Naval Architecture Department of Energy, Power."— Presentation transcript:

1 Status – Validation of Eulerian Spray Modelling University of Zagreb Faculty of Mechanical Engineering and Naval Architecture Department of Energy, Power Engineering and Environment Chair of Power Engineering and Energy Management Milan Vujanovic May, 2006

2 Validation: I-Level project Version v vs. Version v Nozzle D – 205 micron diameter Rail pressure – 500 bar Gas chamber pressure – 72 bar Gas temperature in chamber K

3 Test Case - Nozzle D – 205 micron diameter Experimental data – injection rate: PointRailpressure Gas chamber pressureTemperature 4500 bar72 bar900 K

4 Calculation settings Upto Time [s] Δt upto 1.0e-6 2.5e-08 upto 1.0e-4 2.5e-07 upto 2.0e-4 5.0e-07 upto e-06 Time discretisation: The liquid → Diesel → T=373 K Eulerian spray with 6 phases Primary brake-up model: Dies.Core Injection Secondary brake-up model: Wave model Evaporation model: Abramzon-Sirignano model Turbulent dispersion coefficient = 6 PhaseFluidClass diametre [m] 1gas 2droplet5e-0.6 3droplet1e-0.5 4droplet2e-0.5 5droplet4e-0.5 6droplet

5 PointRailpressure Gas chamber pressure Temperature 4500 bar72 bar900 K Penetration for liquid phase and vapour phase compared with experimental results Penetration for liquid phase and vapour phase compared with experimental results

6 Validation: I-Level project Impact of initial k and epsilon values Nozzle D – 205 micron diameter Rail pressure – 500 bar Gas chamber pressure – 72 bar Gas temperature in chamber K Case 1_1 Turb. kin. energy – 10 m 2 /s 2 Turb. length scale – 2e-05 m Turb. diss. rate – m 2 /s 3 Case 6_1 Turb. kin. energy – 250 m 2 /s 2 Turb. length scale – 2e-05 m Turb. diss. rate – 3.247e+07 m 2 /s 3

7 PointRailpressure Gas chamber pressure Temperature 4500 bar72 bar900 K Penetration for liquid phase and vapour phase compared with experimental results Penetration for liquid phase and vapour phase compared with experimental results Case 1_1 Turb. kin. energy – 10 m 2 /s 2 Turb. length scale – 2e-05 m Turb. diss. rate – m 2 /s 3 Case 6_1 Turb. kin. energy – 250 m 2 /s 2 Turb. length scale – 2e-05 m Turb. diss. rate – 3.247e+07 m 2 /s 3

8 Validation: I-Level project Impact of constant c ε2 Nozzle D – 205 micron diameter Rail pressure – 500 bar Gas chamber pressure – 72 bar Gas temperature in chamber K The constant c ε2 in the transport equation for the dissipation rate of the turbulent kinetic energy was set to c ε2 = 1.8 instead c ε2 =1.92

9 Calculation settings Upto Time [s] Δt upto 1.0e-6 2.5e-08 upto 1.0e-4 2.5e-07 upto 2.0e-4 5.0e-07 upto e-06 Time discretisation: The liquid → Diesel → T=373 K Eulerian spray with 6 phases Primary brake-up model: Dies.Core Injection Secondary brake-up model: Wave model Evaporation model: Abramzon-Sirignano model Turbulent dispersion coefficient = 6 PhaseFluidClass diametre [m] 1gas 2droplet5e-0.6 3droplet1e-0.5 4droplet2e-0.5 5droplet4e-0.5 6droplet

10 PointRailpressure Gas chamber pressure Temperature 4500 bar72 bar900 K Penetration for liquid phase and vapour phase compared with experimental results Penetration for liquid phase and vapour phase compared with experimental results c ε2 =1.92 c ε2 =1.8

11 Calculation settings Upto Time [s] Δt upto 1.0e-6 2.5e-08 upto 1.0e-4 2.5e-07 upto 2.0e-4 5.0e-07 upto e-06 / 5.0e-07 Time discretisation: The liquid → Diesel → T=373 K Eulerian spray with 6 phases Primary brake-up model: Dies.Core Injection Secondary brake-up model: Wave model Evaporation model: Abramzon-Sirignano model Turbulent dispersion coefficient = 6 PhaseFluidClass diametre [m] 1gas 2droplet5e-0.6 3droplet1e-0.5 4droplet2e-0.5 5droplet4e-0.5 6droplet

12 PointRailpressure Gas chamber pressure Temperature 4500 bar72 bar900 K Penetration for liquid phase and vapour phase compared with experimental results Penetration for liquid phase and vapour phase compared with experimental results c ε2 =1.92 c ε2 =1.8

13 Validation: I-Level project Impact of constant c ε2 Nozzle D – 205 micron diameter Rail pressure – 1200 bar Gas chamber pressure – 72 bar Gas temperature in chamber K The constant c ε2 in the transport equation for the dissipation rate of the turbulent kinetic energy was set to c ε2 = 1.8 instead c ε2 =1.92

14 Calculation settings Upto Time [s] Δt upto 1.0e-6 2.5e-08 upto 1.0e-4 2.5e-07 upto 2.0e-4 5.0e-07 upto e-07 Time discretisation: The liquid → Diesel → T=373 K Eulerian spray with 6 phases Primary brake-up model: Dies.Core Injection Secondary brake-up model: Wave model Evaporation model: Abramzon-Sirignano model Turbulent dispersion coefficient = 6 PhaseFluidClass diametre [m] 1gas 2droplet5e-0.6 3droplet1e-0.5 4droplet2e-0.5 5droplet4e-0.5 6droplet

15 PointRailpressure Gas chamber pressure Temperature bar72 bar900 K Penetration for liquid phase and vapour phase compared with experimental results Penetration for liquid phase and vapour phase compared with experimental results c ε2 =1.92 c ε2 =1.8

16 Validation: I-Level project Impact of constant c ε2 Nozzle D – 205 micron diameter Rail pressure – 500 bar Gas chamber pressure – 54 bar Gas temperature in chamber K The constant c ε2 in the transport equation for the dissipation rate of the turbulent kinetic energy was set to c ε2 = 1.8 instead c ε2 =1.92

17 Calculation settings Upto Time [s] Δt upto 1.0e-6 2.5e-08 upto 1.0e-4 2.5e-07 upto 2.0e-4 5.0e-07 upto e-06 Time discretisation: The liquid → Diesel → T=373 K Eulerian spray with 6 phases Primary brake-up model: Dies.Core Injection Secondary brake-up model: Wave model Evaporation model: Abramzon-Sirignano model Turbulent dispersion coefficient = 6 PhaseFluidClass diametre [m] 1gas 2droplet5e-0.6 3droplet1e-0.5 4droplet2e-0.5 5droplet4e-0.5 6droplet

18 PointRailpressure Gas chamber pressure Temperature 4500 bar54 bar900 K Penetration for liquid phase and vapour phase compared with experimental results Penetration for liquid phase and vapour phase compared with experimental results c ε2 =1.92 c ε2 =1.8

19 Validation: I-Level project Impact of constant c ε2 Nozzle D – 205 micron diameter Rail pressure – 800 bar Gas chamber pressure – 54 bar Gas temperature in chamber K The constant c ε2 in the transport equation for the dissipation rate of the turbulent kinetic energy was set to c ε2 = 1.8 instead c ε2 =1.92

20 Calculation settings Upto Time [s] Δt upto 1.0e-6 2.5e-08 upto 1.0e-4 2.5e-07 upto 2.0e-4 5.0e-07 upto e-07 Time discretisation: The liquid → Diesel → T=373 K Eulerian spray with 6 phases Primary brake-up model: Dies.Core Injection Secondary brake-up model: Wave model Evaporation model: Abramzon-Sirignano model Turbulent dispersion coefficient = 4.5 PhaseFluidClass diametre [m] 1gas 2droplet5e-0.6 3droplet1e-0.5 4droplet2e-0.5 5droplet4e-0.5 6droplet

21 PointRailpressure Gas chamber pressure Temperature 4800 bar54 bar900 K Penetration for liquid phase and vapour phase compared with experimental results Penetration for liquid phase and vapour phase compared with experimental results c ε2 =1.92 c ε2 =1.8

22 Validation: I-Level project Impact of constant c ε2 Nozzle D – 205 micron diameter Rail pressure – 1200 bar Gas chamber pressure – 54 bar Gas temperature in chamber K The constant c ε2 in the transport equation for the dissipation rate of the turbulent kinetic energy was set to c ε2 = 1.8 instead c ε2 =1.92

23 Calculation settings Upto Time [s] Δt upto 1.0e-6 2.5e-08 upto 1.0e-4 2.5e-07 upto 2.0e-4 5.0e-07 upto e-07 Time discretisation: The liquid → Diesel → T=373 K Eulerian spray with 6 phases Primary brake-up model: Dies.Core Injection Secondary brake-up model: Wave model Evaporation model: Abramzon-Sirignano model Turbulent dispersion coefficient = 6 PhaseFluidClass diametre [m] 1gas 2droplet5e-0.6 3droplet1e-0.5 4droplet2e-0.5 5droplet4e-0.5 6droplet

24 PointRailpressure Gas chamber pressure Temperature bar54 bar900 K Penetration for liquid phase and vapour phase compared with experimental results Penetration for liquid phase and vapour phase compared with experimental results c ε2 =1.92 c ε2 =1.8

25 Validation: I-Level project k – zeta – f turbulence model Nozzle D – 205 micron diameter Rail pressure – 500 bar Gas chamber pressure – 72 bar Gas temperature in chamber K

26 Calculation settings Upto Time [s] Δt upto 1.0e-6 2.5e-08 upto 1.0e-4 2.5e-07 upto 2.0e-4 5.0e-07 upto e-06 Time discretisation: The liquid → Diesel → T=373 K Eulerian spray with 6 phases Primary brake-up model: Dies.Core Injection Secondary brake-up model: Wave model Evaporation model: Abramzon-Sirignano model Turbulent dispersion coefficient = 6 PhaseFluidClass diametre [m] 1gas 2droplet5e-0.6 3droplet1e-0.5 4droplet2e-0.5 5droplet4e-0.5 6droplet

27 PointRailpressure Gas chamber pressure Temperature 4500 bar72 bar900 K Penetration for liquid phase and vapour phase compared with experimental results Penetration for liquid phase and vapour phase compared with experimental results k – epsilon k –zeta - f

28 Validation: I-Level project k – zeta – f turbulence model Nozzle D – 205 micron diameter Rail pressure – 1200 bar Gas chamber pressure – 54 bar Gas temperature in chamber K

29 Calculation settings Upto Time [s] Δt upto 1.0e-6 2.5e-08 upto 1.0e-4 2.5e-07 upto 2.0e-4 5.0e-07 upto e-07 Time discretisation: The liquid → Diesel → T=373 K Eulerian spray with 6 phases Primary brake-up model: Dies.Core Injection Secondary brake-up model: Wave model Evaporation model: Abramzon-Sirignano model Turbulent dispersion coefficient = 6 PhaseFluidClass diametre [m] 1gas 2droplet5e-0.6 3droplet1e-0.5 4droplet2e-0.5 5droplet4e-0.5 6droplet

30 PointRailpressure Gas chamber pressure Temperature bar54 bar900 K Penetration for liquid phase and vapour phase compared with experimental results Penetration for liquid phase and vapour phase compared with experimental results k – epsilon k –zeta - f

31 Validation: I-Level project Calculation with nozzle interface Coupling internal nozzle flow simulation and initialisation of spray calculation Nozzle D – 205 micron diameter Rail pressure – 500 bar Gas chamber pressure – 72 bar Gas temperature in chamber K Using the data of the two phase flow calculation inside the nozzle as a start and boundary condition for Eulerian spray calculation

32 Calculation settings Upto Time [s] Δt upto 1.0e-6 2.5e-08 upto 1.0e-4 2.5e-07 upto 2.0e-4 5.0e-07 upto e-06 Time discretisation: The liquid → Diesel → T=373 K Eulerian spray with 6 phases Primary brake-up model: Dies.Core Injection Secondary brake-up model: Wave model Evaporation model: Abramzon-Sirignano model Turbulent dispersion coefficient = 6 PhaseFluidClass diametre [m] 1gas 2droplet5e-0.6 3droplet1e-0.5 4droplet2e-0.5 5droplet4e-0.5 6droplet

33 PointRailpressure Gas chamber pressure Temperature 4500 bar72 bar900 K Penetration for liquid phase and vapour phase compared with experimental results Penetration for liquid phase and vapour phase compared with experimental results without nozzle interface with nozzle interface

34 Validation: I-Level project Calculation with nozzle interface Coupling internal nozzle flow simulation and initialisation of spray calculation Nozzle D – 205 micron diameter Rail pressure – 1200 bar Gas chamber pressure – 72 bar Gas temperature in chamber K Using the data of the two phase flow calculation inside the nozzle as a start and boundary condition for Eulerian spray calculation

35 Calculation settings Upto Time [s] Δt upto 1.0e-6 2.5e-08 upto 1.0e-4 2.5e-07 upto 2.0e-4 5.0e-07 upto e-06 Time discretisation: The liquid → Diesel → T=373 K Eulerian spray with 6 phases Primary brake-up model: Dies.Core Injection Secondary brake-up model: Wave model Evaporation model: Abramzon-Sirignano model Turbulent dispersion coefficient = 6 PhaseFluidClass diametre [m] 1gas 2droplet5e-0.6 3droplet1e-0.5 4droplet2e-0.5 5droplet4e-0.5 6droplet

36 PointRailpressure Gas chamber pressure Temperature bar72 bar900 K Penetration for liquid phase and vapour phase compared with experimental results Penetration for liquid phase and vapour phase compared with experimental results without nozzle interface with nozzle interface

37 The end The end University of Zagreb Faculty of Mechanical Engineering and Naval Architecture Department of Energy, Power Engineering and Environment Chair of Power Engineering and Energy Management

38 Nozzle D – 205 micron diameter Experimental data – injection rate: Experimental data – injection rate: PointsRailpressure Gas chamber pressureTemperature 1500 bar54 bar900 K 2800 bar54 bar900 K bar54 bar900 K 4500 bar72 bar900 K 5800 bar72 bar900 K bar72 bar900 K 2 nd phase of validation: I-Level project

39 Test Case: I-Level project Nozzle D – 205 micron diameter Experimental data – injection rate:


Download ppt "Status – Validation of Eulerian Spray Modelling University of Zagreb Faculty of Mechanical Engineering and Naval Architecture Department of Energy, Power."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google