Search Results

A full understanding and characterization of the near-field of diesel sprays is daunting because the dense spray region inhibits most diagnostics. While x-ray diagnostics permit quantification of fuel mass along a line of sight, most laboratories necessarily use simple lighting to characterize the spray spreading angle, using it as an input for CFD modeling, for example. Questions arise as to what is meant by the “boundary” of the spray since liquid fuel concentration is not easily quantified in optical imaging. In this study we seek to establish a relationship between spray boundary obtained via optical diffused backlighting and the fuel concentration derived from tomographic reconstruction of x-ray radiography. Measurements are repeated in different facilities at the same specified operating conditions on the “Spray A” fuel injector of the Engine Combustion Network, which has a nozzle diameter of 90 μm.

A numerical study has been carried out to assess the effects of needle movement and internal nozzle flow on spray formation for a multi-hole Gasoline Direct Injection system. The coupling of nozzle flow and spray formation is dynamic in nature and simulations with pragmatic choice of spatial and temporal resolutions are needed to analyze the sprays in a GDI system. The dynamic coupling of nozzle flow and spray formation will be performed using an Eulerian-Lagrangian Spray Atomization (ELSA) approach. In this approach, the liquid fuel will remain in the Eulerian framework while exiting the nozzle, while, depending on local instantaneous liquid concentration in a given cell and amount of liquid in the neighboring cells, part of the liquid mass will be transferred to the Lagrangian framework in the form of Lagrangian parcels.

Reduced-order models typically assume that the flow through the injector orifice is quasi-steady. The current study investigates to what extent this assumption is true and what factors may induce large-scale variations. Experimental data were collected from a single-hole metal injector with a smoothly converging hole and from a transparent facsimile. Gas, likely indicating cavitation, was observed in the nozzles. Surface roughness was a potential cause for the cavitation. Computations were employed using two engineering-level Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) codes that considered the possibility of cavitation. Neither computational model included these small surface features, and so did not predict internal cavitation. At steady state, it was found that initial conditions were of little consequence, even if they included bubbles within the sac. They however did modify the initial rate of injection by a few microseconds.