A Combined Eulerian and Lagrangian Method for Prediction of Evaporating Sprays

Polydisperse sprays in complex three-dimensional flow systems are important in many technical applications. Numerical descriptions of sprays are used to achieve a fast and accurate prediction of complex two-phase flows. The Eulerian and Lagrangian methods are two essentially different approaches for the modeling of disperse two-phase flows. Both methods have been implemented into the same computational fluid dynamics package which is based on a three-dimensional body-fitted finite volume method. Considering sprays represented by a small number of droplet starting conditions, the Eulerian method is clearly superior in terms of computational efficiency. However, with respect to complex polydisperse sprays, the Lagrangian technique gives a higher accuracy. In addition, Lagrangian modeling of secondary effects such as spray-wall interaction enhances the physical description of the two-phase flow. Therefore, in the present approach the Eulerian and the Lagrangian methods have been combined in a hybrid method. The Eulerian method is used to determine a preliminary solution of the two-phase flow field. Subsequently, the Lagrangian method is employed to improve the accuracy of the first solution using detailed sets of initial conditions. Consequently, this combined approach improves the overall convergence behavior of the simulation. In the final section, the advantages of each method are discussed when predicting an evaporating spray in an intake manifold of an internal combustion engine.

[1]  C. Crowe,et al.  The Particle-Source-In Cell (PSI-CELL) Model for Gas-Droplet Flows , 1977 .

[2]  M. Ishii Thermo-fluid dynamic theory of two-phase flow , 1975 .

[3]  B. Launder,et al.  The numerical computation of turbulent flows , 1990 .

[4]  G. Klose,et al.  Comparison of state-of-the-art droplet turbulence interaction models for jet engine combustor conditions , 2001 .

[5]  R. Schmehl,et al.  CFD Analysis of Spray Propagation and Evaporation Including Wall Film Formation and Spray/Film Interactions , 1999 .

[6]  Sigmar Wittig,et al.  Evaluation of Advanced Two-Phase Flow and Combustion Models for Predicting Low Emission Combustors , 2000 .

[7]  W. K. Melville,et al.  A model of the two-phase turbulent jet , 1979 .

[8]  J. Lumley,et al.  Some measurements of particle velocity autocorrelation functions in a turbulent flow , 1971, Journal of Fluid Mechanics.

[9]  W. Sirignano Fuel droplet vaporization and spray combustion theory , 1983 .

[10]  S. Wittig,et al.  Influence of Mixture Preparation on Combustion and Emissions Inside an SI Engine by Means of Visualization, PIV and IR Thermography During Cold Operating Conditions , 1999 .

[11]  A. Gosman,et al.  Aspects of Computer Simulation of Liquid-Fueled Combustors , 1983 .

[12]  Dragoslav Milojevié Lagrangian Stochastic‐Deterministic (LSD) Predictions of Particle Dispersion in Turbulence , 1990 .

[13]  G. Faeth Evaporation and combustion of sprays , 1983 .

[14]  Sigmar Wittig,et al.  Computation of turbulent evaporating sprays: Eulerian versus Lagrangian approach , 1995 .

[15]  Suresh K. Aggarwal,et al.  A Review of Droplet Dynamics and Vaporization Modeling for Engineering Calculations , 1994 .

[16]  R. Schmehl,et al.  CFD Analysis of Fuel Atomization, Secondary Droplet Breakup and Spray Dispersion in the Premix Duct of a LPP Combustor , 2000 .

[17]  Herbert Wiegand,et al.  Die Einwirkung eines ebenen Strömungsfeldes auf frei bewegliche Tropfen und ihren Widerstandsbeiwert im Reynoldszahlbereich von 50 bis 2000 , 1988 .

[18]  Clayton T. Crowe,et al.  Review—Numerical Models for Dilute Gas-Particle Flows , 1982 .

[19]  W. Sirignano,et al.  Droplet vaporization model for spray combustion calculations , 1989 .

[20]  Sigmar Wittig,et al.  Evaluation of Advanced Two-Phase Flow and Combustion Models for Predicting Low Emission Combustors , 2000 .

[21]  R. Schmehl,et al.  Efficient Numerical Calculation of Evaporating Sprays in Combustion Chamber Flows , 1998 .