View
25
Download
1
Category
Tags:
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
Franco-British INTERREG European Programme Les Sprays. Diesel fuel spray penetration, heating, evaporation and ignition: modelling versus experimentation. S Sazhin, S Martynov, C Crua, E Sazhina School of Engineering, Faculty of Science and Engineering, University of Brighton, UK. Introduction. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
11 June 2007
Franco-British INTERREG European Programme
Les Sprays
2Diesel fuel spray penetration, heating, evaporation and ignition: modelling versus experimentation
Diesel fuel spray penetration, heating, evaporation and ignition: modelling versus experimentation
S Sazhin, S Martynov, C Crua, E SazhinaSchool of Engineering, Faculty of Science and Engineering,
University of Brighton, UK
3Diesel fuel spray penetration, heating, evaporation and ignition: modelling versus experimentation
Introduction
Overview of the results of numerical and theoretical studies of processes in sprays.
The main focus is made on sprays found in technology of high-pressure atomisation in direct injection Diesel engine.
4Diesel fuel spray penetration, heating, evaporation and ignition: modelling versus experimentation
Structure of presentation
• Objectives
• Methods
• Results of numerical studies:– Penetration of “cold” sprays – Autoignition in Diesel sprays
• Conclusions
5Diesel fuel spray penetration, heating, evaporation and ignition: modelling versus experimentation
Objectives
• Development of advanced analytical and numerical models for in-cylinder processes in internal combustion (IC) engine
• Implementation of the models in KIVA II spray code
• Validation of the models against in-house measurements
6Diesel fuel spray penetration, heating, evaporation and ignition: modelling versus experimentation
Stages of research
Studies of dynamics of “cold” sprays (with a view of automotive, environmental, biomedical, etc applications). Modelling of processes of liquid injection, atomisation into droplets, gas-droplet momentum exchange, droplet collisions, dispersion, etc.
Studies of processes in “hot” sprays (Diesel engine). Modelling of gas-droplet heat and mass transfer, and fuel autoignition.
7Diesel fuel spray penetration, heating, evaporation and ignition: modelling versus experimentation
KIVA II - Methodology
• Eulerian (gas)/ Lagrangian (liquid) code for computation of flows with sprays and chemical reactions
• Liquid phase is represented by droplet parcels, characterising droplets of a given size, velocity and temperature
• Stochastic sampling technique is applied to describe droplet injection, collisions, breakup and turbulent dispersion
8Diesel fuel spray penetration, heating, evaporation and ignition: modelling versus experimentation
KIVA II customised version
• Advanced models of spray breakup (Patterson and Reitz, 1998; Gorokhovski and Saveliev, 2003)
• Effects of cavitation (Sarre and Kong, 1998)
• Advanced models for droplet heating and evaporation (Sazhin, 2006)
• Shell autoignition model (Halstead, 1977)
9Diesel fuel spray penetration, heating, evaporation and ignition: modelling versus experimentation
Stage 1 – Studies of “cold” sprays
• In-house measurements
• Results of studies:– Conventional spray breakup models– A new phenomenological breakup model
• Conclusions
10Diesel fuel spray penetration, heating, evaporation and ignition: modelling versus experimentation
Experimental data. Validation test case
Time (ms)
Tip
pene
trat
ion
(mm
)
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 10
20
40
Time (ms)
Vel
ocity
(m/s
)
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1-100
0
100
200
U_injU_tip
Measurements:
•Spray tip penetration (video
recordings)
•Instantaneous rate of fuel injection
(LUCAS rate tube)
Test case:
•7-hole Diesel injector
•Nozzle diameter 0.135 mm
•Injection pressure 1600 bar
•In-cylinder pressure 20 bar
11Diesel fuel spray penetration, heating, evaporation and ignition: modelling versus experimentation
Conventional models of breakup
All these models assume quasi-steady-state nature of breakup. The breakup time can be defined as:
g
lbu U
RB
1 )100..3( 1 B
• Taylor Analogy Breakup model (O’Rourke and Amsden, 1987)
• Wave breakup model (Reitz, 1987)• Stochastic breakup model (Gorokhovski
and Saveliev, 2003)
12Diesel fuel spray penetration, heating, evaporation and ignition: modelling versus experimentation
Results of computations
Time (ms)
Tip
pene
trat
ion
(mm
)
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 10
10
20
30
40
50
experimentTABStochasticWAVE ( = 1.73)B
1
13Diesel fuel spray penetration, heating, evaporation and ignition: modelling versus experimentation
Effects of cavitation
Effects of cavitation are described using the dimesionless criterion – “cavitation number” CN.
Parameters of injected parcels (diameter and velocity) are modified depending on CN.
Nozzle-holecavitation
Diesel fuel spray(photograph by K. Karimi,
University of Brighton)
14Diesel fuel spray penetration, heating, evaporation and ignition: modelling versus experimentation
Phenomenological model of breakup in transient sprays
Experimental facts:• At the start of injection the fuel is highly accelerated, and• spray penetration rate is close the rate of injection.Conventional models:• An adjustable breakup time constant• Do not take into account for a finite thickness of the
boundary layer (BL) in the gas phase around the jetHowever:• Flow acceleration promotes thicker BL in the gas phase• Thicker BL makes the liquid-gas inter-phase more stable
15Diesel fuel spray penetration, heating, evaporation and ignition: modelling versus experimentation
New model for the breakup time constant
Time (ms)
Vel
ocity
(m/s
)
B_1
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 10
100
200
10
20
30
U_injB1
Phenomenological equation for the breakup time constant, taking into account for an effect of injection acceleration:
Basic concept – Wave breakup model (Reitz, 1987; Patterson and Reitz, 1998)
g
lstbu U
RB
,1
21,11
cst acBB
10,1 stB
dt
dU
U
Da
inj
inj
2
Re
16Diesel fuel spray penetration, heating, evaporation and ignition: modelling versus experimentation
Results – new model: spray tip penetration and breakup length
Time (ms)
Tip
pene
trat
ion
(mm
)
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 10
10
20
30
40
50experiment
(a)(b)(c)(d)
c1 = 0.5
c2 = 0.2
Rcore/Ro = 0.5
17Diesel fuel spray penetration, heating, evaporation and ignition: modelling versus experimentation
Comparison with spray video
18Diesel fuel spray penetration, heating, evaporation and ignition: modelling versus experimentation
Comparison for the Sauter Mean Radius (SMR) of droplets
Time (ms)
SM
R(m
m)
0 1 20
0.01
0.02 Experimental dataTABWAVE (conventional)WAVE (modified)Stochastic
Z = 3 cmX = 0 cm
(a)
Time (ms)
SM
R(m
m)
0 1 20
0.01
0.02 Experimental dataTABWAVE (conventional)WAVE (modified)Stochastic
Z = 3 cmX = 0.4 cm
(b)
Measurements (Lacoste, 2005)• Single-hole Diesel injector• Nozzle diameter 0.2mm• Injection presure 1600 bar• In-cylinder pressure 40 bar
19Diesel fuel spray penetration, heating, evaporation and ignition: modelling versus experimentation
Conclusions. “Cold” sprays
• Several models of spray breakup has been implemented in KIVA code and validated against the in-house measurements of Diesel sprays
• A model for the breakup of accelerating sprays has been developed
• Further studies are needed to identify the range of application of the model
20Diesel fuel spray penetration, heating, evaporation and ignition: modelling versus experimentation
Stage 2 – “Hot” Diesel sprays
• Experimental observations
• Models of droplet heating and evaporation
• Shell model of autoignition
• Results of numerical studies
21Diesel fuel spray penetration, heating, evaporation and ignition: modelling versus experimentation
Measurements of autoignition delay time in Diesel sprays (Crua, 2002)
Total autoignition delay time comprises of the
• chemical ignition delay of the vapour fuel, and
• physical delay time, spent on liquid breakup, evaporation and mixing processes
22Diesel fuel spray penetration, heating, evaporation and ignition: modelling versus experimentation
Key processes in modelling of autoignition in Diesel sprays
• Liquid atomisation into droplets
• Droplet heating
• Droplet evaporation and vapour diffusion
• Autoignition of the air/ fuel mixture
23Diesel fuel spray penetration, heating, evaporation and ignition: modelling versus experimentation
Models of droplet heating and evaporation
Models of heat and mass transfer from evaporating droplets has been reviewed (Sazhin, 2006)
• Due to high diffusivity of the gas phase thermal conductivity can be considered steady-state for the gas, and transient for the liquid
• Heat transfer in the liquid and gas phases are modelled separately
• Preliminary study have shown that in presence of breakup choice of the liquid-phase model can have significant effect on the predicted rate of fuel evaporation
This study investigates the effects of heat-mass transfer on evaporation and ignition for realistic transient 3D Diesel sprays
24Diesel fuel spray penetration, heating, evaporation and ignition: modelling versus experimentation
Liquid phase models
• Infinite thermal conductivity (ITC) model – based on the assumption that there is no temperature gradient inside droplets
• Effective thermal conductivity (ETC) model – taking into account both finite liquid thermal conductivity and the re-circulation inside droplets via the introduction of a correction factor to the liquid thermal conductivity
25Diesel fuel spray penetration, heating, evaporation and ignition: modelling versus experimentation
Gas phase models
• Conventional KIVA describes the heat and mass transfer from the droplet surface using approximations for Nusselt and Sherwood numbers:
• Abramzon and Sirignano (1998) have suggested more accurate approximations, taking into account finite thickness of thermal boundary layer around droplet, effects of variable properties, Lewis number, and the Stefan flow on heat and mass transfer between the droplet and the gas
3/12/1Re3.012 ddo ScSh
3/12/1 PrRe3.012 ddoNu
26Diesel fuel spray penetration, heating, evaporation and ignition: modelling versus experimentation
Shell model (Halstead, 1977)
• Describes the autoignition chemistry using reduced mechanism of
eight-step chain branching reactions between the fuel, O2, products
(H2O, CO, CO2), radicals (R), branching (B) and intermediate (Q)
agents
• Originally was designed for autoignition in premixed fuels
• Later adopted for computation of autoignition in Diesel sprays
(Sazhina et al, 1999). The rate of production of Q has been modified
to: Af4 = (3 – 6).10 6 The main challenge is 3D nature of spray
• Now implemented into KIVA II code (University of Rouen) and
applied to describe experimental data collected at the University of
Brighton (Crua, 2002)
27Diesel fuel spray penetration, heating, evaporation and ignition: modelling versus experimentation
Basic validation case – autoignition in premixed fuel (Halstead, 1977)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
600 650 700 750 800 850 900
T (K)
Igni
tion
dela
y (m
s)
exp 100 exp 90 exp 70
shell 70 shell 90 shell 100Test conditions:
•Research octane number fuels:
RON70, RON90, RON100
•Equivalence fuel/air ratio = 0.9
•Temperatures (TDC) = 650–850
K
•Pressures (TDC) = 17–23 bar
KIVA results:
•Mixture at TDC
•Shell autoignition model
28Diesel fuel spray penetration, heating, evaporation and ignition: modelling versus experimentation
Computational studies of autoignition process in Diesel sprays
Test cases:
•Single-hole injector of nozzle diameter 0.2 mm;
•Injection pressure 1600 bar;
•Fuel temperature at injector 350-400 K (estimated).
In-cylinder temperatures at TDC (K) 832 847 852
In-cylinder pressure at TDC (bar) 56 62 69
Autoignition delay time (ms) 2.37 2.04 1.78
29Diesel fuel spray penetration, heating, evaporation and ignition: modelling versus experimentation
Results – ignition delay time
1.6
1.7
1.8
1.9
2
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.5
5.5 6.0 6.5 7.0
In-cylinder pressure (MPa)
Aut
oign
itio
n de
lay
tim
e (m
s) .
Experimental data
Tgas
Tgas – 20K
Tgas + 20K
1.6
1.7
1.8
1.9
2
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.5
5.5 6.0 6.5 7.0
In-cylinder pressure (MPa)
Au
toig
itio
n d
elay
tim
e (m
s) .
Experimental data
Tfuel = 350 K
Tfuel = 375 K
Tfuel = 400 K
KIVA Shell model:
•Kinetic parameters - fuel RON 70
•Af4 = 3.10 6.
30Diesel fuel spray penetration, heating, evaporation and ignition: modelling versus experimentation
Results – pre-ignition spray
time(ms)
SM
R(m
m)
Pre
ssur
e(M
Pa)
0 1 20
0.05
0.1
6
6.5
7
In-cylinder pressureSMR
time(ms)
Tem
pera
ture
(K)
0 1 2
600
900
1200T
g,minTT
g,max
d,max
time(ms)
Mas
sfr
actio
ns
0 1 210-10
10-8
10-6
10-4
10-2
100
FuelORBQ
max2,min
maxmaxmax
Integral properties of an
autoigniting spray
Contribution of the spray
processes to the
ignition delay time:
• Spray breakup
• Droplet heating and
evaporation
• Autoignition
31Diesel fuel spray penetration, heating, evaporation and ignition: modelling versus experimentation
Results – pre-ignition spray
X (cm)
Z(c
m)
0 1 20
2
4
6
time = 1.01(ms)
X (cm)
Z(c
m)
0 1 20
2
4
6
time = 1.51(ms)
X (cm)
Z(c
m)
0 1 20
2
4
6
time = 1.75(ms)
X (cm)
Z(c
m)
0 1 20
2
4
6time = 1.99(ms)
600
550
500
450
400
350
300
Temperature (K)
time = 0.98 ms time = 1.49 ms time = 1.73 ms time = 1.98 ms
X (cm)
Z(c
m)
0 1 20
5
10
X (cm)
Z(c
m)
0 1 20
5
10
X (cm)
Z(c
m)
0 1 20
5
10
X (cm)
Z(c
m)
0 1 20
5
10T(K)
1000940880820760700
32Diesel fuel spray penetration, heating, evaporation and ignition: modelling versus experimentation
Conclusions. “Hot” sprays
• Stages of autoignition have been quantified• Ignition delay time has been shown to be
sensitive to the choice of liquid-phase model and predicted gas temperature (turbulence model)
• Specifics of initial stage of breakup has negligible effect on ignition for “single-pulse” sprays considered, but can be important for pilot and split injection schemes
33Diesel fuel spray penetration, heating, evaporation and ignition: modelling versus experimentation
Summary
• A modified Wave breakup model has been developed and applied to predict Diesel sprays
• Several heating and evaporation models has been implemented in KIVA code
• Shell model implemented into KIVA code has been applied to predict autoignition in Diesel sprays
• The results of studies are summarised in two papers prepared for publication
34Diesel fuel spray penetration, heating, evaporation and ignition: modelling versus experimentation
Directions for future studies
• Theoretical studies:– stability and breakup of transient jets and sprays
• Experimental studies:– breakup length in transient sprays
• Modelling and numerical analysis:– time constant for the primary atomisation in stochastic breakup model
– computation of heat-mass transfer at supercritical in-cylinder temperatures and pressures
– analysis of the limiting phases (kinetics and diffusion) of autoignition using Shell model
– fuel combustion and soot formation models in KIVA
35Diesel fuel spray penetration, heating, evaporation and ignition: modelling versus experimentation
Acknowledgements
• French colleagues M. Gorokhovsky, A. Chtab, J. Juanguy for the exchange of experience and great support with KIVA
• Colleagues from the University of Brighton: Kristyadi and Walid for cooperation on KIVA, Romain for consultancy on experimental issues, and Kourosh for the experimental data on diesel sprays
• International Relations Office staff, University of Brighton
• ERDF Franco-British INTERREG IIIa Programme (Project Ref 162/025/247) for financial support
36Diesel fuel spray penetration, heating, evaporation and ignition: modelling versus experimentation
Thank you
Recommended