CFD Simulations AC2-10: Difference between revisions

From KBwiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 80: Line 80:




{!align="center" border="0" width=650
{|align="center" border="0" width=650
|-
|-
|align="center"|<math>{\dfrac{\partial\overline{\rho}}{\partial t}+\dfrac{\partial\left(\overline{\rho} \widetilde{u}_{j}\right)}{\partial  x_{j}}=0}</math>
|align="center"|<math>{\dfrac{\partial\overline{\rho}}{\partial t}+\dfrac{\partial\left(\overline{\rho} \widetilde{u}_{j}\right)}{\partial  x_{j}}=0}</math>

Revision as of 15:30, 12 October 2018

Front Page

Description

Test Data

CFD Simulations

Evaluation

Best Practice Advice

Internal combustion engine flows for motored operation

Application Challenge AC2-10   © copyright ERCOFTAC 2024

CFD Simulations

Introduction

The TU Darmstadt engine has been investigated by three different groups using LES (Large Eddy Simulation) and hybrid URANS(unsteady Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes)/LES. These research groups are located at Technische Universit\"{a}t Bergakademie Freiberg (TUBF), Universit\"{a}t Duisburg-Essen (UDE) and Technische Universit\"{a}t Darmstadt (TUD). In the follow, the different approaches will be presented, including general information about the code and the physical modelling, computational domain and mesh treatment, initial and boundary conditions and computational requirements. Additional and detailed information can be found in the scientific papers listed in Table \ref{tab:simulations}.

Overview of simulation

Test data for the motored case is available at three different operating points. A test case considering an engine speed of 800 RPM is investigated in the numerical studies, which are summarized in Table \ref{tab:simulations}.


Table 3: Summary of simulations carried out at 800 RPM
Group Approach CFD Code / Publication
TUBF URANS / LES Ansys CFX R16.0 / Buhl et al. [9, 10]
UDE LES OpenFoam-2.3.x / Janas et al. [21]
TUD LES KIVA-4mpi / He et al. [20]

Further, simulations were carried out by Nguyen et al. \cite{Nguyen2016} and Baumann et al. \cite{Baumann2014}, which are not part of this comparison.

CFD codes

In the following, the governing equations, turbulence modelling and solver are described for the three different CFD codes.

Ansys CFX R16.0

For this compressible case, the filtered governing equations for mass, momentum and total enthalpy are solved. They are defined as:

(4.1)
(4.2)
(4.3)


with the thermal conductivity and the turbulent Prandtl number (set to 0.9 in the following). A non-density-weighted filtered variable is denoted by , while is the density-weighted filtered variable. This system is complemented by the filtered equation of state for perfect gases, defined as:


(4.4)


with the molecular weight and the universal gas constant . The eddy viscosity () is calculated based on the scale-adaptive simulation (SAS-SST) turbulence model \cite{Menter2010}. In case of insufficient spatial or temporal resolution (for a SRS), it reverts to the SST model \cite{Menter1994} and maintains a valid base of modelling. Its key element is the von K\'arm\`an length scale \cite{Rotta2010} (), introduced into the scale-determining equation. In unstable flows, adjusts the eddy viscosity to a level which allows the formation of a turbulent spectrum \cite{Menter2010,Travin2002,Schaefer2010,Lucius2010}. is defined as


(4.5)


with

(4.6)

and the von Kármán constant .

ANSYS CFX R16.0 is a node-based, conservative and time-implicit finite-volume code \cite{Raw1996,Raithby1979,VanDoormaal1984}. The mass flow is evaluated such that a pressure-velocity coupling is achieved \cite{Rhie1983}. The discrete systems of equations are solved using a coupled algebraic multi-grid method \cite{Raw1996}. To minimize numerical diffusion, a second-order scheme in space \cite{Travin2002} and a second-order backward scheme in time are used.

OpenFOAM-2.3.x

The following governing equations for mass, momentum and absolute internal energy are solved on a moving grid:


(4.7)




Contributed by: Carl Philip Ding,Rene Honza, Elias Baum, Andreas Dreizler — Fachgebiet Reaktive Strömungen und Messtechnik (RSM),Technische Universität Darmstadt, Germany


Contributed by: Brian Peterson — School of Engineering, University of Edinburgh, Scotland UK


Contributed by: Chao He , Wibke Leudesdorff, Guido Kuenne, Benjamin Böhm, Amsini Sadiki, Johannes Janicka — Fachgebiet Energie und Kraftwerkstechnik (EKT), Technische Universität Darmstadt, Germany


Contributed by: Peter Janas, Andreas Kempf — Institut für Verbrennung und Gasdynamik (IVG), Lehrstuhl für Fluiddynamik, Universität Duisburg-Essen, Germany


Contributed by: Stefan Buhl, Christian Hasse — Fachgebiet Simulation reaktiver Thermo-Fluid Systeme (STFS), Technische Universität Darmstadt, Germany; former: Professur Numerische Thermofluiddynamik (NTFD), Technische Universität Bergakademie Freiberg, Germany

Front Page

Description

Test Data

CFD Simulations

Evaluation

Best Practice Advice


© copyright ERCOFTAC 2018