Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Article history:
Received 25 September 2013
Received in revised form 20 June 2014
Accepted 29 July 2014
Available online 7 August 2014
Keywords:
Gas engines
Numerical simulation
Underexpanded jet
Direct injection
a b s t r a c t
This paper presents a detailed discussion on the numerical simulation of the underexpanded gas efux
from an outward-opening poppet-valve injector into an engine combustion chamber. The aim of the
paper is to optimize the numerical simulation strategy for direct gas injection, in view of its application
to internal combustion (IC) engines. In the rst part of the paper, the widely studied case of a two-dimensional compressible ow is examined, and the main guidelines for the development of an effective
numerical model for compressed natural gas (CNG) direct injection simulation are given, with specic
reference to IC engines. The second part of the paper is devoted to the description of the numerical model
developed and validated by the authors within the Star-CD environment, which is characterized by the
presence of two distinct meshes. The rst is built manually and covers the region surrounding the injector
exit, whereas the second one covers most of the engine chamber and is built using the Es-ICE tool. A careful grid-independence study has been carried out in both the rst and second part of the paper, and the
inuence of the spatial discretization of the convective uxes has been discussed as well.
The analyses have shown that a resolution of 40 cells in the nozzle height should be adopted to describe
the typical phenomena that characterize an underexpanded free jet, unless a second order scheme can be
implemented. However, as far as the simulation of the jet penetration time-history and its mixing with
the surrounding air is concerned, sufciently accurate results can also be obtained by using 20 cells per
nozzle diameter and the rst-order upwind scheme. As for the direct injection engine model, 16 cells
across the nozzle lift represent a good compromise between accuracy and reliability of the results and
the required computational time. The model has been validated with the support of experimental PLIF
images in an optical-access engine, and has shown overall good accuracy and reliability, thus suggesting
it is suitable for mixture formation analysis.
2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
216
Nomenclature
ASoI
BTDC
C
cp
cv
CA
CCD
CFD
CNG
CH4
CO
CO2
DI
EC
env
EOI
ff
H
h
hneedle
HC
IC
ICCD
imep
k
LIF
Ls
M
_
m
~ in
m
MARS
MCE
~
n
ne
NG
challenging task, due to the high pressure ratios that are used and
to the substantial difference in dimensions (roughly between two
and three orders of magnitude) between the injector nozzle and
the engine cylinder length scales [5,6]. The study becomes even
more critical when the injection is carried out by means of poppet
valves instead of axial-symmetric orices, as a complex timedependent area of the nozzle cross-section is generated.
From a uid-dynamic point of view, the problem is closely
related to the widely studied case of an underexpanded compressible ow issuing from an orice. In fact, the rail pressure under
normal engine operation is 20 bar or higher, whereas the pressure
in the combustion chamber during the injection is usually between
approximately 0.5 and 3 bar, thus causing the ow to become
chocked. From a numerical point of view, the simulation of the
gas ow from a nozzle to the combustion chamber implies that a
number of additional issues must be faced, mainly connected to
the time-dependent problem geometry, which requires the adoption of a moving mesh strategy in which the cell number, size
and connectivity may vary at the same time. During this process,
since the combustion chamber generally has a complex geometry,
some cells with high skewness or a high aspect ratio may appear.
In order to keep the number of such cells to a minimum, the moving mesh strategy needs careful optimization.
Other investigations have been made, with the aim of obtaining
a better understanding of the physics of gaseous injection in
NPR
p
p0
p
PLIF
PM
R
RAFR
rpm
SU
SU,add
SCE
SI
SOI
ST
T
T
t
TDC
TMA
TVD
~
U
U
u, v, w
u00
UV
Vc
217
218
Jet
boundary
Barrel
shock
Nozzle exit
Expansion
fan
Reflected
shock
Secondary
expansion
Reflected shock
Mach
disk
Expansion
fan
Nozzle exit
Incident
shock
Subsonic
core
Triple point
Secondary
expansion
Domain exit
Inlet
Wall
wne
512 wne
Wall
Domain exit
960 wne
Fig. 2. Computational domain and boundary conditions.
that the present section is mainly meant to be a preliminary analysis to the main focus on the paper, that is, the simulation of gas
injection into the engine chamber. Since the considered injector
is known to have a slightly diverging portion downstream of the
throat section, a higher-than-unity Mach number could be
expected at the injector exit. For that reason, the value M = 1.1
has been selected in the preliminary investigations presented
hereafter.
Before being issued into the constant pressure downstream
environment, the uid ows in a constant section duct whose
length is three times the nozzle width (3wne). The duct has been
introduced to avoid any interference between the outowing jet
and boundary to the left of the domain. As the ow at the domain
U
M p
cRT
p qRT
U2
T T
2cp
c
c1
T
p p
T
3
4
c
c 1 2 c1
p p 1
M
2
219
NPR = p/penv
()
T
(K)
Mne
()
penv
(MPa)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
7.12
7.12
7.12
21.35
21.35
21.35
4.27
393
393
393
393
393
393
393
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.1
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
wne/10
wne/20
wne/40
wne/10
wne/20
wne/40
wne/20
3.2 wne
1.6 wne
0.8 wne
0.8 wne
0.4 wne
0.2 wne
0.1 wne
0.05 wne
Fig. 3. Grid-size distribution for the mesh with 20 cells across the nozzle section
(minimum size = 0.05 wne).
~ in Uin
SU;add m
@
@t
Z
VC
qUdV C
~U CrUdXC
~
n qU
XC
~ in Uin dV C
SU m
VC
7
In which VC denotes each nite volume of the computation
domain, XC is the boundary that delimits the volume and SU
represents the source term of U for standard cells, i.e., cells
without gas injection.
2.2. Numerical schemes and turbulence modeling
The mass, momentum and total energy conservation equations
are solved using the nite volume method with a cell-centered
colocated arrangement.
The diffusive terms are discretized using a centered scheme
while the convective uxes are treated using a rst-order upwind
scheme or the MARS scheme, depending on the test case, as specied in Section 2.3. MARS is a second-order accurate TVD scheme
that operates in two separate steps: reconstruction and advection
[29]. The scheme incorporates a variable compression level that
controls the amount of second order upwinding and which can
usually be set to 1 in the momentum equation, but cannot exceed
0.6 in the energy equation, in order to reach a stable solution. Calculations were also performed with lower compression levels.
The PISO algorithm was used to solve the pressurevelocity
coupling while an implicit scheme, based on the implicit Euler
scheme and explicit deferred correctors, is used for time marching.
The resulting method has a formal accuracy between rst and second order. As far as the allowed time-step is concerned, when the
rst order upwind scheme is selected, the time step can be
adjusted to have a maximum Courant number of between 2 and
5, depending on the grid resolution, whereas the MARS scheme
needs the Courant number to be decreased to 0.5 in order to obtain
a stable solution when high compression levels are used. If the
compression level is set to very low values, the Courant number
can be increased to a value suitable for the rst order upwind
scheme. Typical time-step values that have been used in the simulation of 2-D under-expanded jets are between 20 and 200 ns. Once
the stability had been guaranteed, the results accuracy showed to
be not affected by the adopted time-step. As a matter of fact, a time
scale for the ow under study was evaluated according to Vuorinen
et al. [30], and a value of about 1.3 ls was obtained, which was
more than six times higher than the longest time step.
220
@u00i
)
@xi
were modeled
cases were run using the rst-order upwind scheme for the spatial
discretization of convective uxes. Cases from 4 to 6 were also carried out with the MARS scheme.
Fig. 4 reports the jet Mach number distribution along the jet
symmetry axis computed with 3 different grids, using the rstorder upwind scheme for convective uxes for test cases 13, in
which the nozzle pressure ratio was 7.12. It can be inferred that
a reduced grid size leads to higher peaks in the Mach number
upstream of the shock, as well as to stronger shocks. This behavior
can be ascribed to a decrease in the grid numerical viscosity. However, for the considered pressure ratios the shock cell wavelength
is virtually unaffected by the grid size and in particular the length
of the potential-core-like region was much the same in tests 2 and
3. Similar results were obtained in [36] on an axial-symmetric jet.
Furthermore, the difference in the Mach number distributions of
tests 2 and 3 is lower than that of tests 1 and 2. The change in
the maximum Mach number is of about 6% from test 1 to test 2,
and of about 3.5% from test 2 to test 3. This is an indicator that,
in principle, completely grid independent results can be achieved
with a grid ner with respect to test 3. However, due to the very
low grid size of test 3 as well as to the associated small time step,
a further grid renement might be not feasible and the results
obtained in test 3 can be considered satisfactory. It is also worth
pointing out that the assessment of grid-independence actually
depends on what results are considered. Complete grid independence cannot be claimed for the Mach number peak values of Mesh
3, as already said. On the other hand, concerning the shock position
as well as the velocity prole after the shock-cells region, increasing further the number of cells does not produce appreciably different results with respect to those found in the paper. The jet
axial penetration (related to three different mass concentrations
of the injected gas) versus time is presented in Fig. 5 for the same
NPR. Amongst the values in Fig. 5, the mass concentration of 0.05
can be considered as a measure of the jet-tip location. The considered time interval (2.5 ms) is characteristic of an injection duration
at a part load operating condition of an IC engine. It is evident that,
as far as the mixing process and the jet penetration are concerned
(which are the main outcomes of the simulation of gas injection in
internal combustion engines), the grid size has no impact and an
almost grid independent solution can already be reached with a
resolution of 10 cells in the nozzle diameter for the analyzed
NPR. It is worth pointing out that, for high penetration values,
the result may be affected by the fact that the grid size at the jet
tip, for the considered tests, is the same. However, as already
mentioned, the 2-D jet study should be considered as a preliminary
one for the main application, which is the fuel direct injection in
test 1
2.3. Results and discussion
test 3
Mach [-]
test 2
2.5
1.5
1
0
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
x / wne [-]
Fig. 4. Mach number distribution along the jet axis at time = 2.5 ms; test cases 13,
rst order upwind scheme.
221
300
300
x / wne [-]
75
test 1
250
test 2
test 3
50
25
200
150
100
0.5
1.5
2.5
test 2
test 3
200
150
100
50
50
test 1
250
test 2
test 3
x / wne [-]
test 1
100
x / wne [-]
125
0.5
time [ms]
1.5
2.5
0.5
time [ms]
1.5
2.5
time [ms]
test 4 UW
test 5 UW
test 6 UW
4
test 4 MA
Mach [-]
test 5 MA
Table 2
Mach disk height for test cases 46, NPR = 21.35.
Mesh size
Upwind scheme
MARS scheme
wne/10
wne/20
wne/40
NA
1.95 wne
2.6 wne
2.30 wne
2.70 wne
v
!
u
c1=c
u 2
p
t
Mj
1
c 1 penv
0
0
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
x / wne [-]
Fig. 6. Mach number distribution along the jet axis at t = 6 ms. Test cases 46. Solid
lines: rst-order upwind scheme. Dotted lines: MARS scheme.
2
1
1=2 1 2 c 1M j
Ls
Md
2
M 2j 1
hne
Mj
1 12 c 1M 2d
!1c=2c1
9
222
500
500
500
400
400
test 5 UW
test 6 UW
[-]
300
ne
test 5 MA
x/w
x / w ne [-]
test 4 MA
300
x / w ne [-]
test 4 UW
400
200
100
test 4 UW
200
test 5 UW
test 6 UW
100
300
test 4 UW
200
test 5 UW
test 6 UW
100
test 4 MA
test 4 MA
test 5 MA
test 5 MA
0.5
1.5
2.5
0.5
time [ms]
1.5
2.5
0.5
time [ms]
1.5
2.5
time [ms]
Fig. 7. Jet axial penetration versus time for test-cases 46. Solid lines: rst order upwind scheme. Dotted lines: MARS scheme.
20
Tam corr.
Simulated
Ls / wne [-]
15
10
1.5
2.5
M j [-]
Fig. 8. Shock-cell spacing Ls/wne as a function of the jet Mach number Mj. Solid line:
Tams analytical solution [36]. Circles: present computations (resolution: wne/20).
thus denoting a rather good accuracy of the overall approach for the
simulation of compressible ows.
In conclusion, the preliminary analysis discussed in this section
shows that, in order to accurately describe the typical phenomena
that characterize an underexpanded free jet (PrandtlMeyer
expansion, barrel and reected shocks), a high cell resolution is
required (up to 40 cells across the nozzle diameter), unless a second-order scheme can be implemented. However, good results
can be achieved, in terms of penetration and mixing process prediction, with a cell size of 0.05wne and when the rst-order
upwind scheme is used, particularly at relatively low NPR.
The results presented in Figs. 48 were obtained by adopting
the Standard ke model for the turbulence closure. However, the
inuence of the specic ke model on results was investigated as
well. The Standard and the Realizable variants were considered
and the results are shown in Figs. 9 and 10. Fig. 9 shows that the
Realizable ke model predicts a slightly higher shock intensity
and, correspondingly, jet penetrations. However, such differences
are lower than those related to the mesh size and discretization
scheme. Moreover, from Fig. 10 one can infer that the jet shape
and the Mach distribution are almost identical for the two models.
Tests 2 and 5 were also repeated using source cells to model the
injection, in order to validate this approach. Fig. 11 shows that the
results are completely equivalent to those obtained with the standard inlet boundary condition. This conrms that the source cell
approach allows consistent results to be obtained when underexpanded compressible ows are simulated and confers further reliability to the application of the virtual injector model [5] in the
engine-ow simulations.
223
Test 2; t = 2.5 ms
Test 2; t = 2.5 ms
1
Standard
2.5
Realizable
Mach [-]
Standard
0.75
0.5
Realizable
1.5
0.25
0
0
100
200
300
400
500
x / wne [-]
10
20
30
40
x / wne [-]
Fig. 9. Standard versus Realizable ke model: injected-gas concentration (left) and Mach number (right) along the jet axis.
Fig. 10. Standard versus Realizable ke model: injected-gas concentration (left) and Mach number (right) contours.
seat mesh, as well as the interface between the injector seat and
the Es-ICE meshes and nally the arrangement of the different
regions within the Es-ICE grid.
The injector seat region can be considered as the most critical
domain from the computational point of view, owing to the very
high velocity and density gradients that occur within very short
distances. The overall grid resolution has a signicant inuence
on the numerical results in a direct injection process. However,
the main inuence stems from the cell size within the nozzle exit
[19]. The 2D test cases described in Section 2 suggest employing a
higher spatial resolution than 1/10 of the needle lift (whose maximum value ranged from 0.15 to 0.25 mm in the considered tests)
and this grid size constraint has been respected in the mesh for the
engine model, in order to maintain an high degree of accuracy in
the supersonic region. The manual denition of the injector seat
mesh (Fig. 14) allows a very high cell quality hexahedral structure
to be obtained. Moreover, a cylindrical-based structure has dened
in the region around the injector axis, in order to t the axially
symmetric geometry of the injector throat section. As far as the
mesh size transition is concerned, 6 renement levels are needed
to obtain a smooth transition from the high cell density zones near
the nozzle area to the relatively coarser grids adopted for the
224
Test 5; t = 2.5 ms
Test 2; t = 2.5 ms
5
inlet
inlet
4
source
Mach [-]
Mach [-]
2.5
1.5
source
3
2
1
0
1
0
10
20
30
40
10
20
30
Test 2; t = 2.5 ms
Test 5; t = 2.5 ms
inlet
0.75
inlet
source
40
x / wne [-]
x / wne [-]
0.5
0.25
0.75
source
0.5
0.25
0
0
100
200
300
400
500
x / wne [-]
100
200
300
400
500
x / wne [-]
Fig. 11. Comparison of the results obtained with the standard inlet boundary condition (solid lines) and the source cell approach (dotted lines). From left to right, NPR = 7.12
and NPR = 21.35. First row: Mach number distribution along the jet axis. Second row: injected gas mass concentration along the jet axis.
Table 3
Characteristics of the InGAS SCE engine.
Number of cylinders
Bore
Stroke
Conrod length
Cylinder displacement
Compression ratio
1
82 mm
85 mm
136.5 mm
449 cm3
8.7
correspond to at least 45 cell layers. In view of this, the dimensions of the injector seat mesh should be increased as much as possible, also to cover most of the domain characterized by the
supersonic ow. However, its dimension is limited in the radial
direction by the presence of the grid blocks that are necessary to
simulate the valve motion and in the axial direction by the piston
position at TDC. The triangular shape adopted for the injector seat
domain allows the structure of the Es-ICE grid to be tted. In fact,
the seat mesh dimensions perfectly correspond to those of the centrally located triangular-shaped region of the Es-ICE mesh (see the
2D template in Fig. 15). Another important aspect is the quality of
the interface (transition) between the Prostar and the Es-ICE
Fig. 12. Combustion chamber of the InGAS engine: cylinder head (left) and piston (right).
225
Fig. 13. InGAS injector: poppet-valve needle (left) and needle-cartridge assembly (right).
The optimization of the template for the Es-ICE mesh has been a
critical task (Figs. 15 and 16), since the peripheral position of the
intake valve could have determined the appearance of a large number of skewed cells. Specic mesh-parameter settings were thus
selected carefully to optimize the process. The average size of the
cells in the Es-ICE mesh was set to 0.5 mm and it could reach values of up to 1.2 mm in the deforming layer areas that are necessary
to simulate the piston motion. The nal model was obtained by
connecting the two meshes (see Fig. 16, in which the Prostar mesh
for the injector seat is highlighted). The intake and exhaust
domains are deactivated at valve closure timings, in order to save
computational time.
3.2. Numerical schemes and boundary conditions
Fig. 14. Computational mesh of the injector seat. Colors denote the source cells for
the virtual injector model implementation. (For interpretation of the references to
color in this gure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)
The Star-CD code has been used to solve the mass, momentum
and total energy conservation equations with the nite volume
method. The diffusive terms were discretized using a centered
scheme, while the convective uxes were treated using the
rst-order upwind scheme. This choice was mainly due to the possibility of adopting larger time steps and saving computational
time. The second-order MARS scheme, which was successfully
employed in the two-dimensional test case, here required a large
decrease in the time step size in order to obtain a stable numerical
solution, and this resulted in excessive computational costs. The
PISO algorithm was used to couple pressure and velocity.
Given the adoption of the Upwind differencing scheme, as well
as the hexahedral cell structure that was purposely designed
within the supersonic region, the model stability limits imposed
nearly the same limitations as the 2-D jet model on the Courant
number, whose maximum value ranged between 2 and 5 during
the injection. The time step was hence adjusted case by case in
order to meet these requirements. The values of the time step
adopted in the different tests are reported in Table 4. Three different meshes are reported in the table, as will be discussed in Section
3.3. As a result, the injection simulation on an eight Intel Xeon CPU
X5472 3.00 GHz processor workstation required 420 days,
depending on the injection duration and the in-cylinder pressure
at SOI.
As far as the boundary conditions are concerned, the experimental pressure proles and temperature mean values were
imposed at the inlet and outlet sections of the domain (intake
and exhaust manifold), on the basis of the SCE measurements.
The simulation of the gas exchange started at the end of the
exhaust phase, 30CA before inlet valve opening. The initial
226
Prostar mesh
Fig. 16. Final computational grid. Cell size distribution refers to Mesh 2 (see Section 3.3).
Table 4
Computational time steps adopted in the different test-cases.
First half of induction stroke
Late induction stroke till IVC
Compression stroke
Injection
Table 5
Main characteristics of the considered computational grids.
0.02 CA deg
0.05 CA deg
0.10 CA deg
2000x3 EOI 50 (Mesh 1)
2000x3 EOI 50 (Mesh 2)
2000x3 EOI 50 (Mesh 3)
2000x3 EOI 220 (Mesh 2)
1500 WOT (Mesh 2)
300 ns
150 ns
30 ns
60 ns
200 ns
pressure and temperature in the cylinder, exhaust and intake manifold were also set on the basis of experimental measurements. As
an example, Fig. 17 shows the intake-valve mass-ow rate prole
related to a case at 2000 rpm, partial load and stratied mixture.
The virtual injector model [5] was used to simulate the injection of methane into the combustion chamber. On the basis of this
approach, source cells were set at the critical section (denoted in
color in Fig. 14), and the computational domain upstream from this
section was eliminated. For a complete description of the virtual
injector model, the reader can refer to Baratta et al. [5].
3.3. Inuence of grid resolution
The main features of the numerical grids adopted for the
calculation are reported in Table 5. The three grids basically differ
0.025
0.02
0.015
0.01
0.005
0
-0.005
-0.01
300
360
420
480
540
600
CA [deg]
Fig. 17. Intake mass ow rate (2000 rpm, imep = 3 bar, RAFR = 1.8, stratied
mixture).
Mesh 1
Mesh 2
Mesh 3
1,180,000
8
1,350,000
16
2,095,000
32
227
Mesh 1
Mesh 3
Mesh 2
Mach [-]
Fig. 18. Inuence of the grid resolution on the computed jet Mach number in the supersonic under-expanded region close to the injector exit. Section through the combustion
chamber symmetry plane. From left to right, Mesh 1, Mesh 2 and Mesh 3.
mesh 1
Mach [-]
2.5
mesh 2
mesh 3
1.5
ff
1
0.5
0
10
15
20
x / hneedle [-]
Fig. 19. Inuence of the grid resolution on the computed Mach number. Data
collected along the mean jet path starting from the injector exit.
10
228
Mesh1
Mesh2
5 CA ASoI
Mesh3
8 CA ASoI
7
6
5
4
13 CA ASoI
3
2
1
0
Fig. 20. Fuelair equivalence ratio contours: inuence of the grid resolution (section through the combustion chamber symmetry plane).
1.7
1.4
Mesh1
Mesh3
Mesh2
700deg CA
1.0
720deg CA
0.6
0.3
Fig. 21. Fuelair equivalence ratio contours: inuence of the grid resolution (section through the combustion chamber symmetry plane).
Table 6
Quantitative indicators of mixing degree for different meshes.
r/
CA (deg)
Mesh 1
Mesh 2
Mesh 3
710
720
710
720
0.600
0.608
0.480
0.487
0.619
0.660
0.475
0.490
0.616
0.670
0.474
0.491
229
the available literature, the choice of the turbulence model and its
tuning do not inuence the jet penetration or the overall evolution
throughout the cylinder to a great extent [18]. The effect of the turbulent closure is reported to become evident at the end of the
injection process [37]. According to [37], the standard ke model
seems to provide the best agreement with experimental data. This
is conrmed in [21] in which the simulation results obtained with
three variant of the ke model have been validated against experimental data. The standard model provided the most accurate
results in terms of jet width and mixing with the surrounding
air. The RNG version signicantly under-predicts the jet width
while Realizable ke model represented a good compromise
between penetration and mixing, in agreement with the ndings
from a previous study of the same authors [19]. The results
obtained with the Standard and the Realizable ke formulations
have been compared in Figs. 22 and 23, in terms of fuel concentration evolution versus time, for the same test case as Figs. 1821.
Fig. 22 compares the jet shape at three instants during the injection
process, whereas Fig. 23 shows the mixture stratication around
spark timing (left column) and at ring TDC (right column). Both
gures conrm the limited inuence of the turbulence model on
the overall jet characteristics, although the obtained jet details
appear slightly different from one another, particularly during
the jet impingement on the piston surface and the subsequent
recirculation. A slightly higher homogeneity degree is obtained
with the Realizable ke model (Fig. 23).
The standard formulation of the two equation ke model has
been adopted in the present work. This is also in agreement with
the choice made by Kim et al. [6,8].
Scorr
SB
UB
11
Standard k-
5 CA ASoI
8 CA ASoI
13 CA ASoI
7
6
5
4
Realizable k-
3
2
1
0
Fig. 22. Fuelair equivalence ratio contours during the injection event: comparison between Standard and Realizable ke models (section through the combustion chamber
symmetry plane).
230
Standard k-
700CA
720 CA
Realizable k-
Fig. 23. Fuelair equivalence ratio contours at the end of compression stroke: comparison between Standard and Realizable ke models (section through the combustion
chamber symmetry plane).
one is the ensemble-averaged / eld extracted from the experimental pictures, while the third one is the raw black and white
ensemble picture. The latter is not reported in Fig. 27. Both the
numerical and the experimental contours have been plotted on
the laser sheet plane represented in Fig. 25. Fig. 28 compares some
experimental and numerical trends of the ammable fuel mass
fraction (ff, rst row) and of the jet penetration (L, second row),
for the tests in Figs. 26 and 27 as well as for a test at 1500 rpm
and full load [24].
Experimental values of ff were determined considering the
measured / values on the PLIF plane. The axial penetration was con-
sidered for the jet penetration of jets like those in Fig. 25, whereas
the radial penetration (jet width) was plotted for the case of Fig. 27.
As previously mentioned, the accuracy target for the numerical
simulations was established so that the differences between the
simulated and experimental contours are within 30%. The accuracy
of the model is on average rather good, as can be appreciated from
the jet and the mixture pictures in Figs. 26 and 27. The evolution of
the jet shape versus time is sufciently well captured by the model,
over a wide range of in-cylinder thermo-dynamic conditions and
engine operation modes. However, the model tends to overpredict
the fuel concentration inside the plume, and in particular in second
part of the injection period (see Fig. 26, h = 50CA BTDC), and to
slightly underpredict the homogenization process after the end
of injection (EOI). This effect is due to the residual numerical viscosity, which had been minimized, but not fully eliminated, by
the mesh-optimization process. The consequently lower velocity
makes the ow patterns to collapse towards the axis after a shorter
path with respect to the experiments. As discussed above, a compromise has to be made between model accuracy and the required
CPU time, thus the minimum cell size has been limited and, in turn,
the total number of volumes in the model. A satisfactory agreement is also obtained for homogeneous operation at partial load
(Fig. 27). The simulated jet is slightly narrower than the experimental one at h = 225CA BTDC, due to the damping effect of the
residual numerical viscosity on the maximum jet velocity. In the
subsequent instants, the differences tend to vanish, thus indicating
that the accuracy of the model increases after the end of injection.
231
3
2
1
0
= 30 CA BTDC
Fig. 26. Numerical model validation under stratied operation at partial load simulated (left) versus elaborated (center) equivalence-ratio contours, and average raw
luminosity distributions, at the indicated crank angles (laser-sheet plane, nominal EOI = 50, actual EOI = 37 CA BTDC).
= 205 CA BTDC
= 190 CA BTDC
Fig. 27. Numerical model validation under homogeneous operation at partial load Simulated (rst and third columns) versus elaborated (second and forth columns)
equivalence-ratio contours, at the indicated crank angles (Laser-sheet plane, nominal EOI = 220, actual EOI = 207 CA BTDC).
This observation also holds for the test case of Fig. 26. It is worth
underlining that the apparently lower penetration, in the axial
direction, that appears in Fig. 27 when the piston is far from
TDC, can actually be attributed to a lack of luminosity in the lower
portion of the combustion chamber. In all the considered test
cases, the pictures of the most delayed crank angle show a comparable degree of stratication in the simulations and experiments,
as the rich mixture portions are located in almost the same position. Thus, the accuracy of the model can be expected to increase
even more as the spark-timing (ST) angle is approached.
232
experimental
simulated
ff [-]
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
-180
-150
-120
-90
-60
-30
-90
[deg CA]
-60
-30
-240
-180
[deg CA]
-120
-60
[deg CA]
100
L [mm]
75
50
Axial penetration
Radial penetration
Axial penetration
25
0
-180
-165
-150
-135
-120
-75
-60
[deg CA]
-45
[deg CA]
-30
-240
-225
-210
-195
-180
[deg CA]
Fig. 28. Comparison between the experimental and computed values of the fuel mass fraction (rst row) and jet penetration (second row).
dened as the distance between the injector tip and the point at
which the fuel mass concentration is equal to 0.05. Two distinct
penetrations are considered: the axial penetration is selected for
the rst two columns, where the injector produces an annular jet
in the cylinder (cloud-like jet [14,24]), whereas, in the right column, the ow issuing from the injector is attracted to the upper
wall (umbrella-like jet), thus the radial penetration is more significant than the axial one. Fig. 28 shows that the jet penetration
time-history is captured by the model within the accuracy limits
of the available experimental data. The discrepancy between the
axial penetration values that are detected in the rst case after
the end of injection is due to the scarce intensity of the laser light
in the lower combustion chamber region, as already mentioned,
whereas the last experimental penetration value in the second column does not have any physical meaning, since the jet has entered
the piston bowl and cannot be detected correctly by the camera.
The above discussion highlights that the model is accurate
enough to allow different mixture formation strategies to be
assessed in a direct injection engine. In fact, it is able to reproduce
the fuel mass fraction time-history with an accuracy comparable to
that of the experimental PLIF data, and also to capture the spatial
distribution of fuel, at least in a relative sense, when two different
combustion chamber layouts or injection strategies are compared.
The developed numerical models have provided useful information for the investigation and characterization of the mixture formation process in the InGAS direct injection CNG engine. A survey of
the results and a combined numericalexperimental investigation
have been presented in [24], whereas the results of a more detailed
numerical investigation of the process will be fully documented in
two companion papers, which are currently being prepared.
4. Conclusion
A numerical model for the simulation of direct gas injection in a
combustion chamber of an internal combustion engine has been
developed and validated in this paper. In the rst part of the paper,
the case of two-dimensional compressible ow, which is well
known from the literature, has been examined, and the main
guidelines for the development of an effective numerical model
for direct CNG injection simulation have been established, with
specic reference to IC engines. The second part of the paper has
been devoted to the description of the numerical model of the
engine that has been developed and validated by the authors.
The main conclusions are summarized as follows.
A resolution of 40 cells in the nozzle height should be adopted
in order to describe the complex gas-dynamic structure that
characterizes an underexpanded free jet, which originates from
the expansion fan departing from the nozzle edge and features
several shock-cell elements in which the gas is alternately
expanded and compressed. Should the resolution be of 20 cells
per nozzle height, the difference in the maximum Mach number
would be of about 3%, but the overall jet structure would be correctly reproduced.
A resolution of 10 cells can give acceptable results in terms of
jet penetration but is not able do describe the Mach reection
that occurs for highly underexpanded jets when coupled to
the rst-order upwind scheme.
The second-order MARS scheme allows more accurate results to
be obtained for a given mesh size, but the required computational effort could be not acceptable for ne grids.
As far as the simulation of the jet penetration time-history and
its mixing with the surrounding air are concerned, sufciently
accurate results can also be obtained can be simulated with
acceptable accuracy also by using a 20 cell per nozzle diameter
and a rst-order upwind scheme.
Slightly higher shock intensity and penetration are usually
obtained with the Realizable ke model with respect to the
Standard one, but the differences are lower than those related
to the mesh size and discretization scheme.
Acknowledgements
The present research activity has been carried out as part of the
InGAS Collaborative Project of the European Community, VII FP.
The authors would like to thank Dr. Alois Fuerhapter and Harald
Philipp, of AVL List GmbH, for providing the experimental database
used in this paper, Dr. K. Roessler, of Daimler AG, for providing the
SCE geometrical data for the numerical model set up, Dr. Matthias
Gerlich and Wolfgang Zoels, of Siemens AG Corporate Technology,
for providing the geometrical and performance data of the injector,
as well as Dr. H. Schuele, of Continental Automotive GmbH, for
supplying the ECU calibration data.
References
[1] Kato K et al. Development of engine for natural gas vehicle. SAE tech. paper
1999-01-0574; 1999.
[2] Cho HM, He BQ. Spark ignition natural gas engines a review. Energy Convers
Manage 2007;48:60818.
[3] Korakianitis T, Namasivayam AM, Crookes RJ. Natural-gas fueled sparkignition (SI) and compression-ignition (CI) engine performance and
emissions. Prog Energy Combust Sci 2011;37:89112.
[4] Zeng K et al. Combustion characteristics of a direct-injection natural gas engine
under various fuel injection timings. Appl Therm Eng 2006;26:80613.
[5] Baratta M, Catania AE, Pesce FC. Multidimensional modeling of natural gas jet
and mixture formation in direct injection spark ignition engines development
and validation of a virtual injector model. J Fluids Eng 2011;133:0413041041304-14.
[6] Kim GH, Kirkpatrick A, Mitchell C. Supersonic virtual valve design for
numerical simulation of a large-bore natural gas engine. J Eng Gas Turbine
Power 2007;129:106571.
[7] Abraham J. What is Adequate resolution in the numerical computations of
transient jets? SAE tech paper 970051; 1997.
[8] Kim GH, Kirkpatrick A, Mitchell C. Computational modeling of natural gas
injection in a large bore engine. J Eng Gas Turbine Power 2004;126:65664.
[9] Ra Y et al. Multidimensional modeling of transient gas jet injection using
coarse computational grids. SAE tech paper 2005-01-0208; 2005.
[10] Chiodi M, Berner HJ, Bargende M. Investigation on different injection strategies in
a direct-injected turbocharged CNG engine. SAE tech paper 2006-01-3000; 2006.
[11] Hessel RP et al. gaseous fuel injection modeling using a gaseous sphere
injection methodology. SAE tech paper 2006-01-3265; 2006.
233
[12] Baratta M et al. Multi-dimensional modeling of direct natural gas injection and
mixture formation in a stratied-charge SI engine with centrally mounted
injector. SAE Int J Engines 2009;1:60726.
[13] Andreassi L, Facci AL, Ubertini S. Numerical simulation of gaseous fuel
injection: a new methodology for multi-dimensional modeling. Int J Numer
Method Fluids 2010;64:60926.
[14] Baratta M, Catania AE, Pesce FC. Computational and experimental analysis of
direct CNG injection and mixture formation in a spark ignition research
engine. ASME paper ICEF2010-35103, 2010 fall technical conference of the
ASME internal combustion engine division, September 1215, 2010, San
Antonio, TX, USA; 2010.
[15] Scarcelli R et al. CFD and optical investigation of uid dynamics and mixture
formation in a DI-H2 ICE. ASME paper ICEF2010-35084, 2010 fall technical
conference of the ASME Internal combustion engine division, September 12
15, 2010, San Antonio, TX, USA; 2010.
[16] Sukumaran S, Kong SC. Numerical study on mixture formation characteristics in
a direct-injection hydrogen engine. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2010;35:79918007.
[17] Douailler B et al. Direct injection of CNG on high compression ratio spark
ignition engine: numerical and experimental investigation. SAE tech paper
2011-01-0923; 2011.
[18] Scarcelli R et al. Numerical and optical evolution of gaseous jets in direct
injection hydrogen engines. SAE tech paper 2011-01-0675; 2011.
[19] Scarcelli R et al. Mixture formation in direct injection hydrogen engines: CFD
and optical analysis of single- and multi-hole nozzles. SAE Int J Engines
2011;4:236175.
[20] Scarcelli R et al. CFD and X-ray investigation of the characteristics of underexpanded gaseous jets. In: COMODIA 2012 the eight international
conference on modeling and diagnostics for advanced engine systems, July
2326, 2012, Fukuoka, Japan; 2012. p. 36873.
[21] Scarcelli R et al. High-pressure gaseous injection: a comprehensive analysis of
gas dynamics and mixing effects. In: ASME paper ICEF 201292137, fall
technical conference of the ASME internal combustion engine division,
September 2326, 2012, Vancouver, Canada; 2012.
[22] Li G et al. Optimization study of pilot-ignited natural gas direct-injection in
diesel engines. SAE tech paper 1999-01-3556; 1999.
[23] Li Y et al. Characteristic and computational uid dynamics modeling of highpressure gas injection. J Eng Gas Turbine Power 2004;126:1927.
[24] Baratta M et al. Numerical and experimental analysis of mixture formation
and performance in a direct injection CNG engine. SAE tech paper 2012-010401; 2012.
[25] Adamson Jr TC, Nicholls JA. On the structure of jets from highly
underexpanded nozzles into still air. J Aerosp Sci 1959;26:1624.
[26] Crist S, Sherman PM, Glass DR. Study of highly underexpanded sonic jet. AIAA J
1966;4:6871.
[27] Chuech SG, Lai MC, Faeth GM. Structure of turbulent underexpanded free jets.
AIAA J 1989;27:54959.
[28] Ferziger JH, Peric M. Computational methods for uid dynamics. 3rd ed. Berlin,
Heidelberg, New York: Springer-Verlag; 2002.
[29] LeVeque RJ. Finite volume methods for hyperbolic problems. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press; 2002.
[30] Vuorinen V et al. Large-eddy simulation of highly underexpanded transient gas
jets. Phys Fluids 2013;25:016101.
[31] Rona A, Zhang X. Time accurate numerical study of turbulent supersonic jets. J
Sound Vib 2004;260:297321.
[32] Wilcox DC. Turbulence modeling for CFD. 1st ed. La Canada: DCW Industries
Inc.; 1993.
[33] Lehnasch G, Bruel P. A robust methodology for RANS simulations of highly
underexpanded jets. Int J Numer Methods Fluids 2008;56:2179205.
[34] Favre A. Equations des Gaz Turbulents Compressibles. J Mecanique
1965;4(3):36190.
[35] Birkby P, Page GJ. Numerical prediction of turbulent underexpanded sonic jets
using a pressure-based methodology. Proc Inst Mech Eng Part G
2001;215:16573.
[36] Tam CKW. The shock-cell structures and screech tone frequencies of rectangular
and non-axisymmetric supersonic jets. J Sound Vib 1988;121:13547.
[37] Eckbreth AC. Laser diagnostics for combustion temperature and species. 2nd
ed. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Gordon and Breach Publishers; 1996.
[38] Zhao H, Laddomatos N. Optical diagnostics for in-cylinder mixture formation
measurements in IC engines. Prog Energy Combust Sci 1998;24:297336.
[39] Reboux J, Puechberty D, Dionnet F. A new approach of planar laser induced
uorescence applied to fuel/air ratio measurement in the compression stroke
of an optical S.I. engine. SAE paper no. 941988; 1994.
[40] Reboux J, Puechberty D, Dionnet F. Study of mixture in-homogeneities and
combustion development in a S.I. engine using a new approach of laser
induced uorescence (FARLIF). SAE paper no. 961205; 1996.
[41] Hishinuma H et al. Development of a technique for quantifying in-cylinder A/F
ratio distribution using LIF image processing. JSAE Rev 1996;17:2559.
[42] McGee J et al. Evaluation of a direct-injected stratied charge combustion
system using tracer PLIF. SAE tech paper 2004-01-0548; 2004.
Web references
[43] www.ingas-eu.org InGas Project website (accessed 03.08.12).
[44] www.cd-adapco.com/products/star_cd CD-adapco STAR-CD
(accessed 04.07.13).
website