Search Results

A primary goal of large eddy simulation, LES, is to capture in-cylinder cycle-to-cycle variability, CCV. This is a first step to assess the efficacy of 35 consecutive computed motored cycles to capture the kinetic energy in the TCC-III engine. This includes both the intra-cycle production and dissipation as well as the kinetic energy CCV. The approach is to sample and compare the simulated three-dimensional velocity equivalently to the available two-component two-dimensional PIV velocity measurements. The volume-averaged scale-resolved kinetic energy from the LES is sampled in three slabs, which are volumes equal to the two axial and one azimuthal PIV fields-of-view and laser sheet thickness. Prior to the comparison, the effects of sampling a cutting plane versus a slab and slabs of different thicknesses are assessed. The effects of sampling only two components and three discrete planar regions is assessed.

Results of three-dimensional steady flow calculations are compared with existing pressure and velocity-measurements of two manifold-type junctions. The junctions consist of a main duct and a side branch, both with the same rectangular cross section, with the side branch joining the main duct at an angle of either 90 or 45 degrees. Both combining and dividing flow configurations are considered for different total mass flow rates and different side-branch-to-main-duct mass flow ratios. One objective of this investigation was to assess the effects of numerical differencing scheme and mesh refinement on solution accuracy, and both parameters showed strong influences on the computed results. It is shown that calculations should be made with the highest possible level of numerical accuracy and grid resolution in regions of flow recirculation. Comparisons of computed and measured velocities, static pressures, and flow loss coefficients are presented in this paper.