Simulation study of fuel spray dynamics in a constant volume combustion chamber

References

• Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Designation E799-92, ASTM, Philadelphia, PA, vol. 14.02, pp. 444–448, 1993.
   Google Scholar
• ANSYS Fluent Theory Guide, ANSYS, Inc. Release 15.0, Southpointe November 2013, 275 Technology Drive, Canonsburg, PA 15317
   Google Scholar
• Archambault, M., Stochastic Spray Flow Models: A Review, ILASS-Americas 22nd Annual Conference on Liquid Atomization and Spray Systems, Cincinnati, OH, May 2010.
   Google Scholar
• Batchelor, G. K. 1967. An Introduction to Fluid Dynamics. England: Cambridge University Press. Cambridge.
   Google Scholar
• Cavicchi, A., L. Postrioti, N. Giovannoni, S. Fontanesi, G. Bonandrini, and R. Di Gioia. 2017. “Numerical and Experimental Analysis of the Spray Momentum Flux Measuring on a GDI Injector.” Fuel 206: 614–627. doi:10.1016/j.fuel.2017.06.054.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chase, M. W. 1963. NIST-JANAF Thermochemical Tables. Fourth. Monograph 9 (Part I and Part II). Vol. 1998. USA: National Institute Standards and Technology.
   Google Scholar
• Date, Anil W. Introduction to Computational Fluid Dynamics. USA: Cambridge University Press; 1st. (August 8, 2005), 398, ISBN-13:978-0521853262.
   Google Scholar
• Grover, R.O., D.N. Assanis, A.M. Lippert, S.H. El Tahry, M.C. Drake, T.D. Fansler, and D.L. Harrington, A Critical Analysis of Splash Criteria for GDI Spray Impingement, ILASS Americas,15th Annual Conference on Liquid Atomization and Spray Systems, Madison, WI, May 2002.
   Google Scholar
• Ishii, E., M. Ishikawa, Y. Sukegawa, and H. Yamada. 2011. “Secondary-Drop-Breakup Simulation Integrated with Fuel-Breakup Simulation Near Injector Outlet.” Journal of Fluids Engineering 133 (8): 081302. doi:10.1115/1.4004764.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jasak, H., and A. D. Gosman. “Automatic Resolution Control for the Finite Volume Method. Part 1: A-Posteriori Error Estimates.” Numerical Heat Transfer, Part B: Fundamentals 38(3): 237–256. doi:10.1080/10407790050192753.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jasak, H., and A.D. Gosman. 2001. “Residual Error Estimate for the Finite Volume Method, Int.” Journal of Numerical Methods and Fluids 39 (1): 1–19. doi:10.1080/104077901460650.
   Google Scholar
• Launder, B. E., and D. B. Spalding. 1972. Lectures in Mathematical Models of Turbulence. London, England: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lin, S. P., and R. D. Reitz. 1998. “Drop and Spray Formation from a Liquid Jet.” Annual Review of Fluid Mechanics 30 (1, January): 85–105. doi:10.1146/annurev.fluid.30.1.85.
   Google Scholar
• Nguyen, M. T., M. T. Phung, H. P. Ho, and V. Đ. Nguyen. 2022. “Optimizing a Design of Constant Volume Combustion Chamber for Outwardly Propagating Spherical Flame.” Advances in Asian Mechanism and Machine Science 113. Springer, Cham. doi:10.1007/978-3-030-91892-7_88.
   Google Scholar
• O’Rourke, P. J., and A. A. Amsden, The TAB method for numerical calculation of spray droplet breakup, SAE Technical Paper (No. 872089), 1987.
   Google Scholar
• Pai, G. M., and S. Subramaniam. 2006. “Accurate Numerical Solution of the Spray Equation Using Particle Methods.” Atomization and Sprays 16 (2): 159–194. doi:10.1615/AtomizSpr.v16.i2.30.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pilch, M., and C. A. Erdman. 1987. “Use of Breakup Time Data and Velocity History Data to Predict the Maximum Size of Stable Fragments for Acceleration-Induced Breakup of a Liquid Drop.” International Journal of Multiphase Flow 13 (6): 741–757. doi:10.1016/0301-9322(87)90063-2.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reitz, R. D. 1987. “Mechanisms of Atomization Processes in High-Pressure Vaporizing Sprays.” Atomization and Spray Technology 3: 309–337.
   Google Scholar
• Rotondi, R., J. Hélie, C. Leger, M. Mojtabi, and G. Wigley, Multihole Gasoline Direct Injection Spray Plumes. In 23rd Annual Conference on Liquid Atomization and Spray Systems, Brno, Czech Republic, 2010.
   Google Scholar
• Sarkar, S. and L. Balakrishnan, Application of a Reynolds-Stress Turbulence Model to the Compressible Shear Layer, ICASE Report 90-18NASA CR 182002. 1990.
   Google Scholar
• Som, S., and S. K. Aggarwal. 2010. “Effects of Primary Breakup Modeling on Spray and Combustion Characteristics of Compression Ignition Engines.” Combustion and Flame 157 (6): 1179–1193. doi:10.1016/j.combustflame.2010.02.018.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stiesch, G. 2003. Modeling Engine Spray and Combustion Processes. New York, USA: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Suttle, Aaron E., Brian T. Fisher, Dennis R. Parnell Jr., Joshua A. Bittle. Demonstrating a Direct-Injection Constant-Volume Combustion Chamber as a Validation Tool for Chemical Kinetic Modeling of Liquid Fuels, ASME 2018 Internal Combustion Engine Division Fall Technical Conference, November 4–7, 2018, San Diego, California, USA
   Google Scholar
• Tan, J Y., H K. Ng, Suyin Gan, and Fabrizio Bonatesta. 2017. “Numerical Simulations of Constant-Volume Spray Combustion of N-Heptane with Chemical Kinetics.” Indian Journal of Science and Technology 10 (7, February): 1–5. doi:10.17485/ijst/2017/v10i7/111458.
   Google Scholar
• Weller, H. G., G. Tabor, H. Jasak, and C. Fureby. 1998. “A Tensorial Approach to Computational Continuum Mechanics Using Object Orientated Techniques.” Computers in Physics 12 (6): 620–631. doi:10.1063/1.168744.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yu, S., B. Yin, H. Jia, and J. Yu. 2017. “Numerical Research on Micro Diesel Spray Characteristics Under Ultra-High Injection Pressure by Large Eddy Simulation (LES).” International Journal of Heat and Fluid Flow 64: 129–136. doi:10.1016/j.ijheatfluidflow.2017.03.003.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar