ライブラリ登録: Guest
Begell Digital Portal Begellデジタルライブラリー 電子書籍 ジャーナル 参考文献と会報 リサーチ集
Atomization and Sprays
インパクトファクター: 1.262 5年インパクトファクター: 1.518 SJR: 0.814 SNIP: 1.18 CiteScore™: 1.6

ISSN 印刷: 1044-5110
ISSN オンライン: 1936-2684

巻:
巻 29, 2019 巻 28, 2018 巻 27, 2017 巻 26, 2016 巻 25, 2015 巻 24, 2014 巻 23, 2013 巻 22, 2012 巻 21, 2011 巻 20, 2010 巻 19, 2009 巻 18, 2008 巻 17, 2007 巻 16, 2006 巻 15, 2005 巻 14, 2004 巻 13, 2003 巻 12, 2002 巻 11, 2001 巻 10, 2000 巻 9, 1999 巻 8, 1998 巻 7, 1997 巻 6, 1996 巻 5, 1995 巻 4, 1994 巻 3, 1993 巻 2, 1992 巻 1, 1991

Atomization and Sprays

DOI: 10.1615/AtomizSpr.2015011556
pages 1063-1080

NUMERICAL MODELS FOR SIMULATION OF CAVITATION IN DIESEL INJECTOR NOZZLES

Baris Bicer
Graduate School of Maritime Sciences, Kobe University, 5-1-1, Fukaeminami, Higashinada, 658-0022 Kobe, Hyogo, Japan
Akira Sou
Graduate School of Maritime Sciences, Kobe University, Japan

要約

This paper examines the applicability of the following three different combinations of cavitation models to simulate cavitating flows in a nozzle of liquid fuel injector for diesel engines. The first model in a house code consists of the Lagrangian bubble tracking method (BTM), the Rayleigh-Plesset (RP) equation, and large eddy simulation (LES). The second model is the combination of the homogeneous equilibrium model (HEM), a barotropic (Baro) equation, and the RANS turbulence model (k-ω SST). The last one utilizes HEM, RANS (k-ε, k-ω SST), and the mass transfer model (MTM), in which bubble dynamics is calculated by the simplified RP equation. OpenFOAM is used for the simulations with the second and third models. Unsteady cavitation in a rectangular injector nozzle is captured by a high-speed camera and the turbulent velocity in the nozzle is measured by laser Doppler velocimetry (LDV); they are compared with the numerical results. As a result, the following conclusions are obtained. The BTM/RP/LES model gives a good prediction for the cavitation length and thickness, as well as cavitation cloud shedding. However, it requires a fine grid and a long CPU time, and is applicable only to incipient cavitation. The HEM/Baro/RANS approach results in a wrong prediction for cavitation length and thickness, and underestimation of the turbulence velocity. It cannot reproduce unsteady cavitation behavior. The combination of HEM/MTM/RANS gives good prediction for the cavitation length and thickness with a relatively coarse grid, and therefore with a short CPU time.


Articles with similar content:

NUMERICAL SIMULATIONS OF LIQUID JET DEFORMATION BASED ON HYBRID COMBINATION OF INTERFACE TRACKING AND BUBBLE TRACKING METHODS
Multiphase Science and Technology, Vol.17, 2005, issue 1-2
Akio Tomiyama, Akira Sou
Developing numerical wall function for large eddy simulation using eddy − viscosity models in the embedded RANS domain
ICHMT DIGITAL LIBRARY ONLINE, Vol.0, 2018, issue
Brendan Ehimen Omozopia Iyamabo, I. Afgan, Alistair Revell, D. Laurance
MULTIDIMENSIONAL SIMULATION OF CAVITATING FLOWS IN DIESEL INJECTORS BY A HOMOGENEOUS MIXTURE MODELING APPROACH
Atomization and Sprays, Vol.18, 2008, issue 2
Olivier Simonin, Chawki Habchi, Nicolas Dumont
CFD Simulation and Grid Study of a Cavitating Orifice Flow
International Journal of Fluid Mechanics Research, Vol.39, 2012, issue 2
Winfried Waidmann, M. Fuchs, Martin Macdonald
An experimental study on the propagation of a turbulent front generated by an oscillating grid
ICHMT DIGITAL LIBRARY ONLINE, Vol.10, 2006, issue
Michele Guala, K. Hoyer, Wolfgang Kinzelbach, Alexander Liberzon, Arkady Tsinober, Markus Holzner