Download presentation

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Published byFaith Rodin Modified over 2 years ago

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 v8.5006 vs. Version v8.5014 Nozzle D – 205 micron diameter Rail pressure – 500 bar Gas chamber pressure – 72 bar Gas temperature in chamber - 900 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 0.0026 1.0e-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 6droplet0.000205

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 8.5014 8.5006

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 - 900 K Case 1_1 Turb. kin. energy – 10 m 2 /s 2 Turb. length scale – 2e-05 m Turb. diss. rate – 259 808 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 – 259 808 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 - 900 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 0.0026 1.0e-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 6droplet0.000205

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 0.0026 1.0e-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 6droplet0.000205

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 - 900 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 0.0026 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 6droplet0.000205

15
PointRailpressure Gas chamber pressure Temperature 41200 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 - 900 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 0.0026 1.0e-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 6droplet0.000205

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 - 900 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 0.0026 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 = 4.5 PhaseFluidClass diametre [m] 1gas 2droplet5e-0.6 3droplet1e-0.5 4droplet2e-0.5 5droplet4e-0.5 6droplet0.000205

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 - 900 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 0.0026 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 6droplet0.000205

24
PointRailpressure Gas chamber pressure Temperature 41200 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 - 900 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 0.0026 1.0e-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 6droplet0.000205

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 - 900 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 0.0026 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 6droplet0.000205

30
PointRailpressure Gas chamber pressure Temperature 41200 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 - 900 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 0.0026 1.0e-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 6droplet0.000205

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 - 900 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 0.0026 1.0e-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 6droplet0.000205

36
PointRailpressure Gas chamber pressure Temperature 41200 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 31200 bar54 bar900 K 4500 bar72 bar900 K 5800 bar72 bar900 K 61200 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:

Similar presentations

OK

Analysis of the Droplet Size Reduction in a pMDI Due to the Addition of a Turbulence Generating Nozzle by Michael P. Medlar Dr. Risa Robinson.

Analysis of the Droplet Size Reduction in a pMDI Due to the Addition of a Turbulence Generating Nozzle by Michael P. Medlar Dr. Risa Robinson.

© 2017 SlidePlayer.com Inc.

All rights reserved.

Ads by Google

Ppt on couplets by alexander pope Games we play ppt on website Download ppt on computer vs books essays Ppt on porter's five forces model Ppt on indian construction industry Download ppt on mind controlled robotic arms for manufacturing Ppt on event driven programming examples Ppt on artificial intelligence and global risk Backgrounds for ppt on social media Ppt on public health administration in india