Abstract

In modern Internal Combustion (IC) engines, the fuel spray atomization process is
known to play a key role in affecting mixture formation, combustion efficiency and soot
emissions. Therefore, a thorough understanding of the fuel spray characteristics and
atomization process is of great importance. Spray characteristics play a progressively important
role in the consequent processes of mixture formation, ignition, combustion and pollutant
formation in direct injection diesel engines. It is also important to develop an understanding of
the atomization qualities of alternative fuels such as Biodiesel fuels as potential substitutions
for conventional diesel fuel.
In this study, the effect of fuel Injection pressure and ambient pressure on spray
characteristics including spray penetrations and Sauter mean diameter (SMD) were
investigated in a constant volume combustion chamber. Constant volume combustion chamber
is modeled as a cylinder having 100mm*200mm with Hexahedral dominating mesh in Gambit.
Three injection pressures (100, 200, 300 MPa), two ambient pressures (1.27, 2.54 MPa), two
breakup models (WAVE and KHRT) effect on spray penetration were investigated. The effect
of nozzle diameter on spray penetration is also evaluated by simulation. Future Diesel
alternative Fuel-Biodiesel is also investigated for spray characteristics. The B-20 blend of
Jatropha is considered for simulation purpose. The result obtained will be helpful in
optimization of injection parameters for reducing emission and increasing fuel economy.

Keywords: Diesel spray, Break-up, Penetration, SMD, B-20 Biodiesel,

Contents
1

Introduction .................................................................................................... 1
1.1

Background .................................................................................................................. 1

1.1.1

Energy Demand and Emission Regulations ......................................................... 1

1.1.2

Direct Injection Engines ....................................................................................... 4

1.1.3

Fuel Spray ............................................................................................................ 5

Literature Review ........................................................................................... 6

Spray Modeling Theory ................................................................................. 8

3.1

Fuel Spray Characteristics ........................................................................................... 8

3.2

Spray Structure ............................................................................................................ 8

3.3

Spray Penetration ....................................................................................................... 10

3.4

Droplet Size ............................................................................................................... 11

3.5

Breakup Regimes ....................................................................................................... 11

3.6

Breakup Classification ............................................................................................... 11

3.7

Atomization ............................................................................................................... 13

3.8

DPM Model-CFD Approaches for Spray Simulation ............................................... 15

3.9

Spray Breakup Models .............................................................................................. 16

3.9.1

Primary Breakup Models ................................................................................... 16

3.9.2

Secondary Breakup Models ............................................................................... 17

Numerical Methodology .............................................................................. 20

4.1

Model ......................................................................................................................... 20

4.2

CFD Tool Setting ...................................................................................................... 20

Results and Discussion ................................................................................ 23

5.1

Spray Penetration ....................................................................................................... 23

5.1.1

Effect of Break-Up Model.................................................................................. 25

5.1.2

Effect of Ambient Density (Pressure) ................................................................ 26

5.1.3

Effect of Injection Pressure ................................................................................ 27

5.1.4

Effect of Nozzle Hole Diameter ......................................................................... 28

5.1.5

Effect of Bio-Diesel ........................................................................................... 29

5.2

Sauter Mean Diameter (SMD) ................................................................................... 29

5.2.1

Effect of Ambient Pressure ................................................................................ 31

5.2.2

Effect of Injection Pressure ................................................................................ 31

ii

5.2.3

Effect of Bio-Diesel ........................................................................................... 32

Conclusion ................................................................................................... 33

References .................................................................................................... 34

iii

Table of Figures
Figure 1-1 World energy demand forecast ................................................................................ 1
Figure 1-2 World Energy Demand ............................................................................................. 2
Figure 1-4 An image of the air pollution in Cities ..................................................................... 3
Figure 3-1 Schematic of full-cone spray structure .................................................................... 8
Figure 3-2 Spray Structure ......................................................................................................... 8
Figure 3-3 The classification of breakup regime .................................................................... 12
Figure 3-4 Schematic of the four types of breakup ................................................................. 12
Figure 3-5 Schematic of the aerodynamically-induced breakup .............................................. 14
Figure 3-6 Schematic of the turbulence-induced breakup ....................................................... 14
Figure 3-7 Schematic of the cavitation-induced breakup......................................................... 15
Figure 3-8 Schematic of the DPM model and an example of the simulated spray .................. 16
Figure 3-9 Schematic of the Blob Method ............................................................................... 17
Figure 3-10 Schematic of the wave model ............................................................................... 17
Figure 3-11 Schematic of the TAB model .............................................................................. 18
Figure 3-12 Schematic of the RT model .................................................................................. 18
Figure 3-13 KH-RT breakup model ......................................................................................... 19
Figure 4-1 Injector Type and Injection Profile......................................................................... 22
Figure 5-1 Spray Penetration ................................................................................................... 23
Figure 5-2 Sample Result from Simulation.............................................................................. 24
Figure 5-3 Effect of Break-up Model on Spray Penetration .................................................... 25
Figure 5-4 Effect of Ambient Pressure on Spray Penetration .................................................. 26
Figure 5-5 Effect of Injection Pressure on Spray Penetration .................................................. 27
Figure 5-6 Effect of Nozzle Diameter on Spray Penetration ................................................... 28
Figure 5-7 Effect of Biodiesel on Spray Penetration ............................................................... 29
Figure 5-8 Droplet Diameter Distribution ................................................................................ 30
Figure 5-9 Sample Droplet Diameter from Simulation............................................................ 30
Figure 5-10 Effect of Ambient Pressure on Droplet Diameter ................................................ 31
Figure 5-11 Effect of Injection Pressure on Droplet Diameter ................................................ 31
Figure 5-12 Effect of Bio-diesel on Droplet Diameter ............................................................ 32

iv

List of Tables
Table 1 European emission regulations for passenger cars ....................................................... 3
Table 2 CFD input parameters ................................................................................................. 21
Table 3 Fuel Properties ............................................................................................................ 22

1 Introduction
1.1 Background
Internal Combustion (IC) Engines, as the greatest invention of the 19th century, are the most
popular thermal engines and widely used in industry, agriculture etcetera since the 1860s. Precisely
because of its excellent performance, the IC engine has always been in a leading position in the
field of power production and plays an important role in the rapid developments of the world
economy, state-building, and people's livelihood. With the increasing demand for energy
conservation and environmental protection, further improvements in fuel efficiency and emission
reduction in internal combustion engines are urgently required; due to the limited energy reserves,
the rising price of crude oil and climate change. Although the electric vehicle exhibits a promising
future in recent years due to its environmentally friendly features, some inevitable issues such as
the high costs, the limited battery range, and the lagging behind of charging technology have greatly
hindered its further development. Thus it is predictable that the IC engine will still be the most used
power engine in the 21st century.

1.1.1 Energy Demand and Emission Regulations

Energy Demand
With rapid economic development and continuous growth of the population, the increasing
demand for energy and the problem of environmental pollution are becoming more and more
serious. It is reported by the Energy Information Administration (EIA) in its International Energy
Outlook that world energy consumption will rise 56 percent in the next three decades, driven by
growth in the developing world.

Figure 1-1 World energy demand forecast [9]

1

Figure 1-1 illustrates the historical and the forecasted demand for energy of the world [8]. It is
shown that the fossil fuels including crude oil, natural gas, and coal will still be the energy source
and increase considerably before 2040. After 2040, the renewable sources such as biofuels,
hydroelectricity, solar and wind power and geothermal energy will be expected to fulfil the further
increasing demand. However, the roles of the fossil fuels are still irreplaceable in the foreseeable
future; especially for crude oil, which is the so-called blood of the industry and will still be an
indispensable energy source. From the view of the share of energy consumption by various

sectors, the transportation sector consumes a big part of the total energy continuously. Figure
shows the most recently published report by the EIA in terms of global primary energy
consumption by source and sector. It can be seen that 28% of the primary energy is consumed
by transportation, which is just second to the percentage (39%) that is consumed by electric
power. Furthermore, the transportation sector consumes 71% of the liquid fuel, which has no
competition from any other sector. It can be expected that vehicles will still be the main
consumer in the foreseeable future; thus, further improvement of fuel efficiency of vehicles is
of great importance in slowing down the increasing speed of the energy demand.

Figure 1-2 World Energy Demand

Emission Regulations
Apart from the increasing energy demand by vehicles, the emissions are another important
aspect which has attracted much attention in recent years. As one of the main air pollution
sources in cities, the IC engine is facing more and more stringent emission regulations all over
the world. The main harmful exhaust emissions such as carbon monoxide (CO), unburned
hydrocarbon (HC), nitrogen oxides (NOx), and soot/ particle matters (PM) have a strong
pungent smell and will seriously poison and pollute the air in cities [13]. Figure 1-3 shows an
image of the air pollution in Beijing. At the same time, large amounts of carbon dioxide (CO2)
2

exhausted by IC engines will lead to the greenhouse effect and then result in climate change
and global warming

Figure 1-3 An image of the air pollution in Cities

Many countries have made stringent vehicle emission regulations to limit the exhaust emissions of
vehicles. The first emission regulation Euro 1 was released by the Europe Union (EU) in 1992.
During the past 20 years, the EU emission regulations have been updated several times and have
become more and more stringent. The detailed EU emission regulations for passenger cars from
the Euro 1 stage to the Euro 6 stage are listed in Table 1. It can be seen that from the year 1992
to 2005, the CO emissions for diesel engines and gasoline engines were forced to be reduced by
82% and 63%, respectively. From the year 2000 to 2014, the HC emissions for gasoline engines
have been reduced by 50%; the NOx emissions for diesel engines and gasoline engines have been

reduced by 84% and 60%, respectively.

Table 1 European emission regulations for passenger cars [9]

The PM emissions for diesel engines have been reduced by 96%. Similar emission regulations
also have been made in China, the United States (US), India etc. In terms of the CO2 emission
legislations, different regulations have been made for the near future. Figure 1-4 illustrates the
CO2 emission regulations for passenger cars in several countries. It is shown that, compared to
CO2 emissions from the year 2000, the US and the EU will reduce them by over 58% and 44%,
respectively, by the year 2025. China and India will also make their efforts in decreasing the
CO2 emissions and a 50% reduction will be expected in China. Obviously, both the energy
demand and the emission regulations are the main factors in promoting further improvements
in fuel efficiency and a further reduction of the exhaust emissions of the IC engine.

1.1.2 Direct Injection Engines

The design and optimization of the IC engine will greatly rely on the fuel injection system since
an advanced fuel injection system can greatly improve the fuel efficiency and combustion
quality of vehicles and help to meet the demand for energy saving and the stringent emission
regulations, Therefore the optimization of fuel injection technology has attracted more and more
attention in recent years. Direct injection technology, which delivers the fuel into the cylinder
chamber directly, is proved to be the most effective means in improving fuel efficiency and
reducing the emissions for both compression ignition (CI).
There are several advantages of direct injection technology: Improving the fuel
efficiency: one of the most important objectives during the development of the modern IC
engine is to decrease the fuel consumption to meet the requirement of energy saving. Direct
injection technology can greatly improve the efficiency of the fuel-air mixing and enhance the
atomization quality; and in turn it improves the fuel efficiency.
Improving the accuracy of the fuel injection: a main feature of the direct injection system
is the accurate injection control by the Electronic Control Unit (ECU). It can adjust the injection
timing, injection duration and the injection pressure according to the working conditions of the
engine; thus it can optimize the accuracy of the fuel injection for different conditions. Enhancing
engine power: the better air-fuel mixing performance of direct injection technology will lead to
a more complete combustion of the fuel; thus it results in a higher efficiency of the power
conversion of the fuel, which will directly enhance the power output of the engine. Reducing
the exhaust emissions: again, the better fuel-air mixing of direct injection technology will result
in a more complete combustion of the fuel, so that the CO and HC emissions can be significantly
reduced. However, some problems and drawbacks of the direct injection engine such as the PM

emissions at medium or low load, NOx emissions due to the higher compression ratio and higher
heat release rate and other emissions during the cold-start still exist and need further studies.
1.1.3 Fuel Spray
The fuel spray atomization process is known to play a key role in affecting mixture formation,
combustion efficiency, power output, fuel economy and exhausted emissions in direct injection
engines. The spray process is an extremely complicated physical course consisting of fuel spray
atomization, droplet breakup, evaporation, collision, coalescence and energy exchange processes.
Among them, spray atomization and droplet breakup are the most important physical processes
which have attracted a lot of attention in the area of engine research.
The fuel pressured by the fuel supply system and ejected from the injector nozzle will
experience primary atomization and secondary breakup processes. The primary atomization process
will disintegrate the continuous fuel liquid into numerous droplets with various diameters and
velocities. The secondary breakup process will further reduce the droplet size and produce a great
number of smaller droplets. In this way, the fuel can be mixed with the air inside the cylinder
directly. A better atomization of the fuel spray will increase the fuel-air contact area and then
enhance the mixture formation of the engine, which in turn increases the fuel efficiency and reduces
the fuel consumption. Furthermore, better atomization quality will result in smaller droplet size,
which can effectively reduce soot, as well as other emissions [8].

Thus, a detailed study of the fuel atomization process is of great importance for
optimizing the performance of the IC engine. The methodology of combining the experimental
investigation and the numerical study can help to achieve a better understanding of the fuel
spray, not only in theory, but also in a practical approach.

2 Literature Review

1. Wang, X et al. [1] performed the light scattering technique was employed to measure nonevaporating spray of diesel and two biodiesels under ultra-high injection pressures up to 300
MPa. The effect of various injection pressure and ambient pressure on spray penetration was
investigated in this paper. They compared the spray characteristics of biodiesel and diesel
under ultra-high injection pressure conditions. They found that biodiesel presented longer
spray tip penetration, smaller spray angle, projected area and volume than diesel spray, but
larger Sauter mean diameter (SMD) due to its higher viscosity and surface tension.
2. Som, S., Aggarwal, S.K. [2] examined the effects of primary breakup modeling on the spray
and combustion characteristics under diesel engine conditions. They investigated effect of
various breakup model on penetration and SMD. The effect of ambient pressure on the
macroscopic spray characteristics was investigated by Agarwal et al. [17]. The results
showed that with an increase in ambient pressure, spray tip penetration decreased, while
cone angle and spray area increased. The spray tip penetration, cone angle and spray area
increased with the increase in mixing ratio of biodiesels because of fuel density differences.
3. Zhang, J. and Fang, T. [3] paper investigates the combustion of biodiesel and diesel in an
optical accessible constant volume chamber that can simulate the conditions in compression
ignition engines. The effects of different ambient temperature and oxygen concentration on
the combustion were studied for ULSD and biodiesel.
4. R. Morgan and J.Wray et al. [4] The influences of injector nozzle geometry, injection
pressure and ambient air conditions on a diesel fuel spray were examined using back-lighting
techniques. The higher penetration observed in case of VCO nozzle and higher injection
pressure.
5. Battistoni et al. [5] investigated spray simulation results, indicating that among the
properties affecting the spray characteristics, density and viscosity played the most
important roles. Diesel fuel provided a significantly higher penetration and lower cone-angle
compared with biodiesel in a convergent conical nozzle.
6. Ghasemi Abbas[6] et al. conducted atomization experiments with diesel and biodiesel,
resulting in longer spray tip penetration and larger droplets for biodiesel compared with
diesel, which were believed to be caused by the relatively higher viscosity and surface
tension of biodiesel.

7. Daliang Jing [8] evaluated the effects of injection pressure, ambient pressure and different
fuels including gasoline, diesel, and their blends dieseline, on the spray characteristics,
have been experimentally investigated. It is shown that for all the test fuels, higher injection
pressure and higher ambient pressure will enhance the spray atomization ii process due to
significant cavitation phenomenon, stronger turbulence effects and greater aerodynamic
force. Compared to pure diesel, the recently developed dieseline fuel shows many
advantages in terms of enhancing the spray atomization process. Better atomization
performances can be achieved by increasing the proportion of gasoline in the dieseline fuel;
due to its stronger cavitation phenomenon, higher volatility, lower surface tension and lower
viscosity.
8. Bianchi, G. M., Pelloni et al.[10] compared experimental and simulated spray characteristics
results, including the macroscopic and microscopic spray properties of three different
biodiesels and blends. The authors concluded that with increasing concentration of biodiesel
in the fuel, spray penetration and spray speed increased, while the spray cone angle
decreased. Simulation results presented similar macroscopic spray characteristics as the
experimental results for biodiesel. The blend fuels showed a larger SMD than diesel due to
the higher viscosity and surface tension of the biodiesel.
Many studies have been conducted to evaluate the effects of a single or two factors such as
injection pressure or ambient pressure on the spray characteristics of biodiesel and diesel, while
a systematic investigation of the spray characteristics of different mixing ratios of biodiesel and
diesel under various injection pressures and ambient pressure are not fully clarified. Therefore,
the aim of this work was to simulate the macroscopic spray characteristics of biodiesel and its
blends with diesel under various injection pressures and ambient pressure conditions.

3 Spray Modeling Theory

This chapter reviews the fundamentals of fuel spray; including spray characteristics, breakup
regimes, spray CFD modelling approaches and spray breakup sub-models. The macroscopic
characteristics such as spray structure, tip penetration, spray angle and the microscopic
characteristics including droplet size and droplet velocity are introduced at first. Then the
breakup regimes and their influence factors are analyzed. Finally, the CFD modelling
technologies and relevant physical-numerical models are presented.

3.1 Fuel Spray Characteristics

When the liquid fuel is injected into the chamber, a multi-component flow a containing liquid
core, liquid droplets, fuel vapour, and air will be formed; this is the so-called spray field. In
modern Direct Injection (DI) engines, a multi-hole injector is the most commonly used injector
and it provides a desirable atomization performance in the mixture formation process. A widely
used means to study the fuel spray characteristics is to focus on one jet of the multi-hole spray
or the single hole spray.

3.2 Spray Structure

In the past, it was supposed that the atomization process would be completed and numerous
droplets would be formed once the liquid fuel left the nozzle. However, with the rapid
development of optical diagnostic technology, lots of experimental observations indicate that
the atomization process will last for a certain distance and a liquid core exists near the injector
nozzle, which is the so-called intact liquid core. For the convenience of study, the spray can be
divided into several zones. According to the coupling conditions of the gas phase and liquid
phase, Bracco and ORourke classify the spray field into four zones by the distance from the
nozzle: the churning zone, dense zone, dilute zone and very thin zone. Figure 3-2 shows the
schematic of a typical full-cone spray.

Figure 3-2 Spray Structure [8]

8

Liquid Core
A large number of experiments show that the atomization process is incomplete and a liquid
core does exist near the nozzle exit. The distance of this intact liquid core is proportional to the
nozzle hole diameter. The flow characteristic of this region is similar to the single phase jet flow
and can be seen as a continuous phase.
Churning Zone
This zone refers to the spray region very close to/around the liquid core, where the continuous
liquid starts to breakup into dense droplets or ligaments. However, due to the volume fraction
of the liquid phase being equivalent to or even higher than the gas phase, the fuel in this zone is
not in the form of discrete droplets. The churning flow is the product of the first step of
atomization and it is also the intermediate status between the liquid core and the droplets. The
studies of the churning flow are of great importance in revealing the primary breakup
mechanisms of the spray.
Dense Zone
The volume fraction of the liquid phase in this zone is still high but relatively lower than the
churning flow. The liquid phase is in the form of discrete droplets which disperse in the
continuous gas phase. The aerodynamic force induced by the high relative velocity between the
droplet and its surrounding air will act on the droplet surface and lead to further breakup, which
is known as the secondary breakup. The interaction between droplets cannot be ignored since
the space between them is small. Collisions of droplets can lead to droplet deformation,
coalescence and breakup; this then can affect the droplet size distribution. ORourke carried out
a detailed numerical study of the dense spray zone by employing a statistical method which
considered collision dynamics, collision probability, collision efficiency etc. A transition
function was used to determine the result of coalescence or breakup. On the other hand, the
droplet can also affect the dynamic properties of its surrounding air and the air motion will
disturb other droplets at the same time; therefore, this zone is quite complex and difficult to
measure and model.
Dilute Zone
In this zone, the liquid volume fraction is smaller than that of the dense zone. The space between
droplets is much bigger than the droplet size, so the interaction between droplets can be ignored.
However, the indirect influence of droplet-air-droplet always exists, which means the dropletinduced aerodynamic force will still affect other droplets.

Very Thin Zone

This is the outermost part of the spray field. The liquid volume fraction in this zone is rather
low since most of the small droplets have been evaporated during the transportation and the
minority of the remaining droplets is distributed in a relatively wide space. The interaction
between droplets such as deformation, breakup, collision, coalescence and oscillation becomes
weak and can be neglected. The velocity of these droplets is quite low and the transportation is
dominated by the turbulent diffusion.

3.3 Spray Penetration

Spray penetration and cone angle are the macroscopic characteristics which have been
investigated by many studies over the years. Spray penetration is defined as the distance between
the leading edge of the spray and the nozzle exit; while the cone angle is always defined as the
angle between the two tangent lines of the side edge of the spray, as is shown in Figure in the
previous section. Many empirical equations have been developed in terms of the study of spray
penetration. Hiroyasu and Arai experimentally studied the temporal evolution of the tip
penetration and they found that the spray can be divided into two stages. At the first stage, the
penetration length S is proportional to time t and it wont be affected by the ambient density a.
However, the second stage shows a different situation in which the penetration length S is
proportional to the square root of time t. By considering the liquid surface properties such as
wave fluctuation and breakup; and ambient gas dynamics such as the relative velocity, ambient
pressure and density, a more accurate empirical equation can be found; the expression is as
below:

where S1 and S2 are spray penetration length for stage 1 and stage 2, respectively; t is the time
after the start of injection (ASOI); tb is the time before breakup; Pinj is the injection pressure; Pa
is back pressure; l is fuel density; a is ambient gas density; and D is the nozzle diameter.

10

3.4 Droplet Size

Droplet size are two important microscopic characteristics of the fuel spray. In the field of
internal combustion engines, the most commonly used parameter to evaluate the fuel spray
droplet size is the Sauter Mean Diameter (SMD), which is defined as the diameter of a sphere
that has the same volume/surface area ratio as a particle of interest. To estimate the value of the
SMD, the calculation method is expressed as follows:

where D32 is the SMD; Di is the droplet size of parcel i and Ni is the droplet number in parcel i.
It indicates that the SMD can also be understood as the ratio of the sum of volume to the sum
of surface area.

3.5 Breakup Regimes

The fuel spray atomization and breakup processes are the key links which affect the mixture
formation of the internal combustion engine and then influence the combustion efficiency and
emissions. For a long time, many researchers carried out a large number of studies on the spray
field and macroscopic characteristics; however, due to the lack of detailed fluid theories and the
limits of the advanced testing technologies, most of these studies emphasized their works on the
geometrical characteristics such as spray penetration, cone angle, droplet size, and droplet
spatial distributions and very few of them worked on the atomization and breakup regimes.
From the 1970s, with the development of advanced experimental instruments, some researchers
started to change their focus on the breakup regimes. Since the atomization process is closely
related to the linear and non-linear stability theories of fluid dynamics, so the analysis of
breakup regimes does not only have important implications in directing internal combustion
engine development, but also has great relevance in the field of fluid dynamics. With the further
development of the research on breakup regimes, many physical models have been developed
during the past few decades.

3.6

Breakup Classification

When the liquid is injected into another media, the aerodynamic force, inertia force, viscosity
and surface tension will act on the continuous liquid core and force it into separate liquid blocks,
ligaments, or droplets. Different injection flows can lead to various breakup regimes due to
different injection velocities. In general, the breakup of the round liquid core can be divided into

11

four different regimes according to the velocity gradient: the Rayleigh breakup regime, the first
wind-induced breakup regime, the second wind-induced breakup regime, and the atomization
regime; as is shown in Figure. Figure 3-4 shows the schematic of the four types of breakup.

Figure 3-3 The classification of breakup regime [11]

Figure 3-4 Schematic of the four types of breakup [11]

Figure 3-4 describes the Rayleigh breakup regime. The liquid core breakups at low jet velocity
due to axisymmetric oscillations initiated by liquid inertia and surface tension forces. The size
of the produced droplets is greater than the nozzle diameter and the breakup always occurs at a
distance far away from the nozzle.
First Wind-induced Breakup Regime

12

With the increase of the injection velocity, the aerodynamic force induced by the relative
velocity becomes significant. Liquid inertia and surface tension forces are amplified by
aerodynamic forces and then these forces will lead to the changes of surface curvature and the
uneven static pressure distribution. All of these factors enhance the breakup of the liquid core.
The breakup occurs at a distance (shorter than that of the Rayleigh regime) downstream of the
nozzle and the produced droplets size is equivalent to the nozzle diameter.
Second Wind-induced Breakup Regime
The flow inside the nozzle becomes turbulent with a further increase of the injection velocity.
The unstable growth of the short wavelength surface waves initiated by the turbulence is
amplified by aerodynamic forces. The combined result of the turbulence and aerodynamic forces
is the main cause of the breakup. The breakup happens at a short distance away from the nozzle
and the produced droplets size is much smaller than the nozzle diameter.
Atomization Regime
The liquid starts to breakup once it leaves the nozzle. A large number of fine-sized liquid
droplets are formed and the droplet size is much smaller than the nozzle size. An intact liquid
core exists though the breakup occurs at the nozzle exit.

3.7 Atomization
Atomization is the typical primary breakup mechanism for the sprays of modern direct injection
engines. A series of studies have been carried out to investigate the breakup mechanisms of the
atomization process so far and five possible descriptions can be concluded as: aerodynamicallyinduced breakup, turbulence-induced breakup, cavitation-induced breakup, pressure oscillation
induced breakup and breakup due to the relaxation of velocity profile.

Aerodynamically-induced Breakup
Aerodynamically-induced breakup is the most developed mechanism of the spray atomization
process. Figure 3-5 shows the schematic of the aerodynamically-induced breakup. This breakup
mechanism was initially proposed by Castleman in 1932 and now it has become the most studied
and popular description of the fuel spray atomization process. Castleman found that the growth of
instable waves on the liquid surface is induced by the aerodynamic interference around the liquid
jet. With the increase of the injection velocity, the wavelength of the instable wave continuously
decreases until it reaches nanoscale and then the liquid core breakups into ligaments or droplets. By
introducing linear perturbation theory into the analysis of the instable surface wave and ignoring the
gas viscosity, the wave growth rate and the wavelength can be calculated and the fast growth wave
dominates the breakup and the produced droplet size is assumed to be proportional to the wavelength

13

of the fast growth wave. Based on these analyses, Reitz and Bracco preliminarily modelled the

atomization process in the KIVA code.[9]

Figure 3-5 Schematic of the aerodynamically-induced breakup [8]

Turbulence-induced Breakup
DeJuhasz studied the atomization process also happening inside the nozzle due to the turbulence
of the liquid itself. Schweitze proposed that the radial component of turbulence velocity will
lead to the instability at the nozzle exit which could result in the breakup. Grant and Phinney
observed that the flow instability and breakup will be greatly affected by the turbulence at the
nozzle exit as well as inside the nozzle hole. found that the turbulence will affect the breakup
characteristics when the density ratio of liquid/gas is greater than 500; while the aerodynamic
force will dominate the breakup when the ratio is lower than 500.

Figure 3-6 Schematic of the turbulence-induced breakup [8]

Figure 3-6 presents a schematic of the turbulence-induced breakup. Compared to the
aerodynamically-induced breakup, which has already been well developed, this breakup mechanism
is not fully studied due to the lack of detailed turbulence theory. Thus, many assumptions should be
made in practical applications. The most popular turbulence model is Huh and Gosmans primary
breakup model which will be introduced later in this chapter.

14

Cavitation-induced Breakup
Bergwerk found that the turbulence is insufficient to cause the atomization phenomenon at certain
Reynolds numbers and the main factor is believed to be the cavitation effect inside the nozzle. At
high injection pressure, the sharp corner inside the nozzle hole will promote the formation of the
cavitation. Hiroyasu also indicated that the main difference between the fully developed spray and
the incompletely developed spray is caused by the cavitation effect inside the nozzle. Byung
experimentally studied the influence of the fuel temperature on the saturated vapour pressure and
cavitation phenomenon; the results in turn provided the evidence that the cavitation inside the

nozzle will enhance the atomization process. The breakup induced by the cavitation
phenomenon can be seen in Figure 3-7.

Figure 3-7 Schematic of the cavitation-induced breakup [8]

3.8 DPM Model-CFD Approaches for Spray Simulation

Based on the Monte-Carlo method, droplets with the same properties can be simulated as a
parcel and then all the droplets in the flow can be represented by a number of parcels. The DPM
approach then deals with these representative parcels and traces these parcels in a Lagrangian
manner. The following assumptions are made in the DPM approach: Ignore the real atomization
process and assume that the continuous liquid jet will breakup into droplets/parcels once it
leaves the injector nozzle. All the droplets in the flow can be represented by a number of parcels
and droplets in each parcel have the same properties. Ignore the influence between droplets and
the behavior of gas/liquid phases is coupled by momentum (droplet velocity is reduced, gas
velocity is increased), energy (heat exchange) and mass (evaporated mass passes over to the gas
phase) exchanges.
The calculation can be significantly simplified by these assumptions and the result can still meet
the engineering requirement, though some details are missing in the DPM approach. Figure 3-8
is the schematic of the DPM method.

15

Figure 3-8 Schematic of the DPM model and an example of the simulated spray [8]

3.9

Spray Breakup Models

The DPM approach is a commonly used method in most of the engine simulation CFD codes.
In this approach, physical-numerical models are required to describe the breakup of the liquid
droplet in the parcels during their transportation.
3.9.1 Primary Breakup Models
In the DPM approach, the primary atomization process determines the initial conditions for the
calculation of the subsequent droplet breakup process and mixture formation. For the liquid
phase, the Lagrangian description requires the existence of liquid drops and the calculation of
spray atomization always begins with liquid drops starting to penetrate into the combustion
chamber. The primary breakup model is used to predict the initial conditions of these liquid
drops, including the initial droplet size and velocity.
Blob Method
Reitz and Diwakar developed a simplified approach to define the initial conditions of the first
droplets at the nozzle exit of solid-cone sprays, which is known as the Blob Method. The Blob
Method is based on the assumption that atomization and droplet breakup within the dense spray
near the nozzle are indistinguishable processes and that a detailed calculation can be simplified
by the injection of big spherical droplets with uniform size, which are then subject to
aerodynamic-induced breakup.
The diameter of these blobs equals the nozzle hydraulic diameter D and the number of drops
injected per unit time is calculated from the mass flow rate. The spray angle should be given as
an input parameter. Figure 3-9 shows the schematic of the Blob Method. It is of importance to
notice that this method is a great simplification of the primary breakup process.

16

Figure 3-9 Schematic of the Blob Method

Wave Model
Based on the Blob-Method, the KH breakup model proposed by Reitz introduces the KH
instability into the breakup model which mainly considers the aerodynamically-induced breakup
mechanism. The KH breakup model assumes that the growth of Kelvin-Helmholtz instabilities
induces the shearing-off of droplets from the liquid surface. Figure 3-10 shows the schematic of
the wave model.

Figure 3-10 Schematic of the wave model [8]

3.9.2 Secondary Breakup Models

Taylor Analogy Breakup (TAB) Model
Based on the Blob injection, the TAB model proposed by ORourke and Amsden compares an
oscillating-distorting droplet to a spring-mass system; where the liquid surface tension, the
liquid viscosity and the aerodynamic force on the droplet are analogous to the restoring force,
the damping force and external force acting on a mass respectively. Figure 3-11 presents the
schematic of the TAB model.

17

Figure 3-11 Schematic of the TAB model [6]

Rayleigh-Taylor (RT) Breakup Model
The RT model is based on the theoretical work of Taylor; who investigated the instability of the
interface between two fluids with various densities in the case of an acceleration or deceleration
normal to this interface, as is shown in Figure 3-12. This model is always used in combination
with the KH model to improve predictions of the secondary breakup process, which is known
as the KH-RT model.

Figure 3-12 Schematic of the RT model [6]

Kelvin-Helmholtz-Rayleigh-Taylor (KH-RT) Breakup Model
Based on the wave model, the Rayleigh-Taylor (RT) component has been added to the wave
breakup model by Patterson to improve predictions of the secondary breakup process. As is
shown in Figure 3-13, the RT model is applied to spray breakup beyond a certain distance from
the nozzle; since its fast breakup rate and a competition between the KH and RT models will be
carried out, while within the distance Lb , KH (Wave) model will dominate the breakup process.
This model is the most widely used model in most of the engine simulation codes and it has
been proved to be an effective spray model.

18

Figure 3-13 KH-RT breakup model [6]

2.5 Summary
In this chapter, three aspects of the spray study including the fundamentals of spray structure
and breakup regimes; the CFD methodology for spray simulation; and the application of the
spray atomization and breakup models are reviewed. In the literature, the aerodynamicallyinduced breakup mechanism has been thoroughly investigated by many researchers. However,
the effects of turbulence and cavitation phenomena on a spray atomization process still need to
be further studied.

19

4 Numerical Methodology
4.1 Model

Constant volume combustion chamber model to simulate. Fig. presents the geometry which is
employed in this work has a cylindrical shape with 100 mm diameter and 200 mm length, so the
volume of chamber is 785000mm3. And only one orifice for focusing on spray characteristics
which locates on the center of cylinder top. The length of nozzle in the chamber is 1.2 mm. The
model is meshed with hexahedral dominant meshing method so as to obtain better and mesh
independent results.

4.2 CFD Tool Setting

Simulations have been carried out using ANSYS FLUENT 15 by modeling a constant
volume chamber as shown above. A Lagrangian-Eulerian multiphase formulation has been
utilized in order to simulate the interaction of the discrete and continuous phases. The NavierStokes equations are solved for the continuous gas phase using turbulence model. At each time
step (1*10-06), the Eulerian approach defines the flow parameters such as velocity components,
pressure, density and temperature as a function of position (x,y,z) for the entire three dimensional
flow domain. In a Lagrangian description, the droplets are assumed as single mass particles, the
velocity of which is decelerated by aerodynamic interaction of the gas and droplet, the mass of
which is decreased by evaporation, etc. The two phases continuously exchange momentum,
energy and mass. These exchanges are accounted for by applying source terms in the
conservation equations of the gas phase in each grid cell. On the other hand, the gas phase affects
20

the dispersed liquid by employing the local values of temperature, gas velocity, etc., in the grid
cell through which the droplet is passing at each time step as a boundary condition. In EulerianLagrangian method it is assumed that the volume fraction of the discrete phase is small
compared to the continuous phase.
A single hole diameter nozzle with a nozzle hole length-to-diameter ratio of 7.5 was
used to inject the fuels with 100, 200 and 300 MPa injection pressures into the 295K quiescent
ambient air of density (corresponding to 1.27 and 2.54 MPa).
Table 2 CFD input parameters
Combustion Chamber

100200 mm

Nozzle Type

Single Hole

Nozzle Diameter

160m

Length to Diameter ratio

7.5

Injection Pressure

100/200/300 Mpa

Injection Type

Plain Orifice type

Mass flow rate

14/12/8 g/sec

Fuel Temperature

300k

Chamber pressure

1.27MPa(15kg/m3)/2.54MPa(30kg/m3)

Injection Duration

2/1.4/1.3 ms

Viscous Model

K-, Realizable, Standard

Secondary Break-up

KHRT

Drag Law

Dynamic

Turbulence

Discrete random walk model

21

Table 3 Fuel Properties [5]

Property

Diesel

B20

Density(kg/m3)

830

889

Viscosity(mm2/s)

3.36

35

Surface Tension(mN/m)

25.5

27.2

Cetane number

55

54

Heating Value (MJ/Kg)

43.1

37.2

The Plain Orifice Atomizer model is used for simulation purpose. The injection pressure is
varied by using injection profile at different injection pressure as shown in fig. K- turbulence
model used which is most popular and widely used. The species transport model is used for fuel
injection purpose. The unsteady Discrete Phase Model (DPM) is used for particle tracking.
Stream of 1000 particle is injected through 0.16mm diameter nozzle having length 1.2mm.

Figure 4-1 Injector Type and Injection Profile [6]

For solution purpose the SIMPLE scheme is used for pressure velocity coupling. Gradient is
solved with least square based method. Pressure, Momentum, Turbulent kinetic energy,
Turbulent Dissipation rate is set to SECOND ORDER UPWIND. The results are extracted using
particle summary data in particle track reporting option.

22

5 Results and Discussion

5.1 Spray Penetration
Penetration length is the distance between the nozzle and the droplets that have
travelled farthest downstream of the nozzle exit. This parameter is one of the most
important in regard of spray characterization within a combustion chamber. The
penetration length must neither be too short, nor too long. Adequate penetration
is necessary in order for the fuel to mix with air inside the combustion chamber.
When the air is sufficiently utilized the correct air to fuel ratio, , can be achieved
more efficiently. This allows for cleaner and faster combustion within the cylinder.
If the fuel over-penetrates it will hit the combustion bowl wall or/and the piston
crown

and

create

undesired

wall

interactions.

Such

over-penetration

is

called

wall impinging and is associated with enhancement of soot formation and fuel
wastage.

Figure 5-1 Spray Penetration

23

3.50E-02

Spray Penetration (m)

3.00E-02
2.50E-02
2.00E-02
1.50E-02
1.00E-02
5.00E-03
0.00E+00
0.00E+00 1.00E-04 2.00E-04 3.00E-04 4.00E-04 5.00E-04 6.00E-04
Time (sec)

Figure 5-2 Sample Result from Simulation

Fig 5-1 and Fig 5-2 shows the particle traces and Penetration rate at 100Mpa injection pressure
and 1.27Mpa ambient pressure respectively. Rate of spray penetration is very high at initial
stages but it decreases rapidly after some time. The behaviour of break-up can be explained as
at low jet velocity, in the Rayleigh regime, breakup is due to thel unstable growth of surface
waves caused by surface tension and results in larger than the jet diameter. As jet velocity is
increased, forces due to the relative motion of the jet and the surrounding air augment the surface
tension force, and lead to drop sizes of the order of the jet diameter. This is called the first windinduced breakup regime. A further increase in jet velocity results in breakup characterized by
divergence of the jet spray after an intact or undisturbed length downstream of the nozzle. In
this second wind-induced breakup regime, the unstable growth of short-wavelength waves
induced by the relative motion between the liquid and surrounding air produces droplets whose
average size is much less than the jet diameter. Further increases in jet velocity lead to breakup
in the atomization regime, where the breakup of the outer surface of the jet occurs at, or before,
the nozzle exit plane and results in droplets whose average diameter is much smaller than the
nozzle diameter. Aerodynamic interactions at the liquid/gas interface appear to be one major
component of the atomization mechanism in this regime.

24

5.1.1 Effect of Break-Up Model

100Mpa
60

Spray Penetration (mm)

50
40
EXP

30

KHRT

20

WAVE

10
0
0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.2

Time (ms)

Figure 5-3 Effect of Break-up Model on Spray Penetration

Fig 4-3 shows comparison of Spray Penetration with experimental value from literature and the
values obtained from simulation using two different break-up models. It can be seen that KHRT
model gives more close results towards experimental values than WAVE model. The WAVE
model is basically the Kelvin-Helmholtz wave model which considers aerodynamically induced
drag on liquid core. The radius of droplet is proportional to wavelength of vibrational wave.
KHRT model which combines the wave breakup model with Rayleigh-Taylor instabilities . The
KHRT method models droplet breakup by considering breakup to occur as a result of the fastest
growing instability. The KHRT approach is suitable for high Weber numbers and assumes the
presence of liquid core in the near nozzle region Outside the liquid core, both KH and RT effects
are calculated and both are considered for breakup. Typically, the RT instability grows faster
when droplet acceleration is high and this effect dominates for high Weber number sprays.
Hence the KHRT model gives better results than WAVE model.

25

5.1.2 Effect of Ambient Density (Pressure)

80

Spray Penetration (mm)

70
60
50
40

1.27Mpa

30

2.57MPa

20
10
0
0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.2

Time (ms)

Figure 5-4 Effect of Ambient Pressure on Spray Penetration

Figure 5-4 presents the effect of ambient pressure on penetrations of diesel spray. The increase
of ambient pressure has little effect on penetration length at the initial stage where the spray is
dense; this may be due to the much higher injection pressure, compared to the ambient pressure,
dominating the fluid behavior at the dense spray region. Therefore, the effect of the ambient
pressure can be neglected at this region. So the initial penetration is determined by the initial
liquid velocity, instead of the ambient conditions. After this time, the spray becomes thin and
the effect of aerodynamic force gradually increases, which means the fluid properties will be
affected by the ambient conditions increasingly beyond this time. This can be explained by the
droplet velocity being slowed down by the drag force, since there is a higher contact probability
for droplets and the surrounding gas in the diluted spray region. There is no doubt that higher
ambient pressure will result in higher ambient density and which will in turn lead to greater drag
force. Higher ambient pressure decreases the penetration length significantly after the initial
stage. Diesel spray will not only experience the drag force, but also will lose kinetic energy due
to further breakup. The air density in the constant volume chamber increased with the raising
ambient pressure, resulting in higher shear resistance to the droplet velocity near the tip of the
spray, which led to the reduction of spray tip penetration.

26

5.1.3 Effect of Injection Pressure

30 kg /m 3
80

Spray Penetration (mm)

70
60
50
40

100Mpa

30

200Mpa

20

300Mpa

10
0
0

0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9

Time (ms)

Figure 5-5 Effect of Injection Pressure on Spray Penetration

The application of the high-pressure injection system increases the amount of fuel injected per
crankshaft angle, causing the liquid spray velocity to increase. With the high liquid spray
velocity, the momentum interaction between the fuel droplets and the ambient gas is enhanced,
causing the total entrained gas mass flow rate to increase significantly. The higher velocity
induces higher level of dispersion, and consequently better atomization and air/fuel mixing.
Under the same injection pressure, longer penetration length indicates that the fuel can reach a
far distance and have more contact opportunities with fresh air; however, an unavoidable
problem along with the longer penetration is the wall impingement. Therefore, this is of great
importance and should be considered when determining the injection pressure during the engine
development.

27

5.1.4 Effect of Nozzle Hole Diameter

Nozzle diameter
45

Spray Penetration (mm)

40
35
30
25

0.2mm

20

0.16mm

15

0.14mm

10
5
0
0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

Time (ms)

Figure 5-6 Effect of Nozzle Diameter on Spray Penetration

Fig 6 shows penetration length according to nozzle diameters. Obviously, in a period of time
after starting injection, penetration length shows a linear growth and leads to maximum value,
then experiencing a little decrease and keep a relatively stability value. The result can be
explained that each time of injecting fuel, penetration has a maximum value under the certain
pressure. When putting pressure suddenly, penetration length will increase and get maximum.
It can also be observed that the larger diameter has larger length at the same energizing time.
The length receives maximum at same time after injection. At the larger nozzle diameter, it is
poor to make droplet break, flow distance keeping higher droplet density increases. At the other
hand, spray kinetic energy and penetration length enlarge when SMD of droplets increase at the
beginning of injection.

28

5.1.5 Effect of Bio-Diesel

160

Spray Penetration (mm)

140
120
100
80

Diesel

60

B20

40
20
0
0

0.1

0.2

0.3

Time (ms)

Figure 5-7 Effect of Biodiesel on Spray Penetration

It can be seen that spray penetration increased for biodiesel fuel than diesel. This is mainly
because of high viscosity of fuel which prevents the breaking of the spray jet, resulting in an
increase in the size of the spray droplets. The larger the size of the spray droplets, higher the
momentum and smaller the resistance preventing forward movement. Higher viscosity causes
lower atomization (larger sized droplets) and higher penetration of the spray jet. Spray pattern
is also affected since dense and viscous fuels tend to induce a longer spray penetration. Spray
tip penetration increases with increase for biodiesel as a fuel, because the increase in fuel
viscosity prevented the breaking of spray jet, resulting in an increase in the size of the spray
droplets. As the spray continued droplets around the border become smaller.

5.2 Sauter Mean Diameter (SMD)

The Sauter mean diameter (SMD) is used to characterize the average droplet size in a
spray. The SMD is the diameter of a droplet that has the same ratio of volume to surface area as
the entire spray. The entire spray in this context is regarded as the ratio of the sum of all droplet
volumes to the sum of all droplet surfaces. The relation between the diameter of a sphere and
its surface area is the diameter raised to the power of two. Thus, will a smaller SMD produce
more surface area per volume unit. The droplet surface area of a spray with many small droplets
will be greater than if a spray consisted of fewer, but larger droplets. The SMD is therefore
extensively used to characterize the success of a spray break-up. The more surface area, the
faster will the fuel evaporate, mix with air and ignite. Qualities that provide for more efficient
combustion.
29

Figure 5-8 Droplet Diameter Distribution

300Mpa_30kg/m3
1.20E-05
1.00E-05

SMD (m)

8.00E-06
6.00E-06
4.00E-06
2.00E-06
0.00E+00
0.00E+00

2.00E-04

4.00E-04

6.00E-04

8.00E-04

Time (s)

Figure 5-9 Sample Droplet Diameter from Simulation

Fig 5-8 and 5-9 shows the spray droplet break-up behavior in terms of droplet diameter with
respect to time. As the time passes after injection the droplet size leaving the nozzle is almost
equal to nozzle diameter. The effect of aerodynamic drag, turbulence and viscous forces leads
to breakup of jet. The SMD decreases with time after injection. There are still some large droplet
remains but in less quantity due to coalescence of fuel droplets.

30

5.2.1 Effect of Ambient Pressure

180
160

SMD (microns)

140
120
100
80

2.54Mpa

60

1.27Mpa

40
20
0
0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

Time (ms)

Figure 5-10 Effect of Ambient Pressure on Droplet Diameter

Fig 5-10 Shows effect of ambient pressure on droplet size distribution. As ambient pressure
increases the rate of decrease in SMD is more. This can be explained as the ambient pressure
increases the density of ambient gas increases which affects the spray break-up significantly.
The increase in gas density increases the aerodynamic forces and turbulence effect is also
considerable giving rise to early and greater break-up of droplets. Higher ambient pressure
combined with high injection pressure give significant decrease in SMD and better atomization
of fuel.
5.2.2 Effect of Injection Pressure

30kg/m3
180
160

SMD (microns)

140
120
100

100Mpa

80

200Mpa

60

300Mpa

40
20
0
0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

Time (ms)

Figure 5-11 Effect of Injection Pressure on Droplet Diameter

31

The effects of injection pressure on Sauter Mean Diameter are shown in Figure 5-11 and with
the increase of injection pressure, the mean diameter decreases significantly at the very
beginning and then experiences a slow decline beyond this pressure. The increase of injection
pressure narrows the range of the droplet diameters, which means the droplet size distribution
is forced towards to a uniform distribution and the portions of the largest and smallest droplets
are reduced. At low injection pressure, the mean diameter can be affected by the individual large
droplet easily; while at high injection pressure, the droplet size distribution becomes more
uniform and the mean diameter experiences less impact from the large droplets. Thus the droplet
mean diameter is more sensitive to the injection pressure at the lower pressure range. While the
SMD represents the volume/surface ratio and will not be affected by the individual large,
therefore it is a more representative parameter to evaluate the spray atomization performance.
5.2.3 Effect of Bio-Diesel

180
160

SMD (microns)

140
120
100
80

B20

60

Diesel

40
20

0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
0.35
0.4
0.45
0.5
0.55
0.6
0.65
0.7

Time (ms)

Figure 5-12 Effect of Bio-diesel on Droplet Diameter

Effect of fuel type on SMD is shown in Fig 5-12. In comparison with diesel larger SMD
formation of the biodiesel fuels observed here. Kinematic viscosity, surface tension and density
play the major role. Surface tension force is trying to keep the droplet unbroken by opposing
the aerodynamic forces, while viscous force serves as a damper against the perturbations created
at the droplet surface leading to the postponement of the breakup. Bio-diesel with higher surface
tension and kinematic viscosity than diesel provides for larger SMD and a slower breakup rate.
Breakup velocity of biodiesel is less than diesel. This is due to higher sound velocity, density,
viscosity and bulk modulus of biodiesel. High viscosity fuel suppresses the instabilities required
for fuel jet to breakup and thus delays atomization

32

6 Conclusion
The spray formation mechanism with primary and secondary break-ups reviewed. The different
sub models use for primary atomization and secondary atomization are studied. The Effect of
various injection parameters on spray characteristics such as spray penetration and sauter mean
diameter is evaluated by simulating a constant volume chamber. Effect Variation in injection
pressure, nozzle diameter and ambient pressure on Penetration and SMD is evaluated. Change
spray characteristic due to B-20 blend of Jatropha oil is also evaluated.
1. The Spray penetration simulation using KHRT (Kelvin Helmholtz-Rayleigh Taylor)
give results which are close to experimental results. The consideration of RT break-up
regime in addition to WAVE model gives better prediction of atomization.
2. Increase in injection pressure increases the spray penetration rate. Through there is
increment in penetration, but rate of increase is of more interest because it leads to rapid
atomization better fuel-air mixing.
3. Increase in Ambient Pressure gives rise to reduction in spray penetration though the
effect is little. The decrease in penetration is due to increase in aerodynamic forces and
turbulence with increased ambient density.
4. Nozzle diameter gives somewhat complicated results with penetration. The penetration
rate is higher in case of small nozzle diameter but the penetration reduces in after some
time due to increased break-up and loss in momentum
5. Higher injection pressure gives reduction in SMD. The relative increased relative
velocity between fuel particles and gas particle increases break-up due to drag,
turbulence, surface tension and viscous forces. Hence higher injection pressure is
inevitable in case of highly viscous liquids for better atomization.
6. High ambient pressure also accelerates the break-up process giving reduction in SMD.
7. The use of Bio-diesel blends alters the spray characteristic extensively. The Spray
penetration length increases due to momentum of highly dense molecules. The high
viscosity and density also increases the SMD value. Hence high injection pressure is
necessary in case of Bio-diesel fuels.

33

7 References
1. Wang, X., Huang, Z., Kuti, O. A., Zhang, W., Nishida, Keiya, Experimental and
analytical study on biodiesel and diesel spray characteristics under ultra-high injection
pressure, International Journal of Heat and Fluid Flow, 31 659-666, 2010. doi:
10.1016/j.ijheatfluidflow.2010.03.006.
2. Som, S., Aggarwal, S.K., Effects of primary breakup modeling on spray and
combustion characteristics, Combustion and Flame 157(2010)1179-1193, 2010. doi:
10.1016/j.combustflame.2010.02.018.
3. Zhang, J. and Fang, T., Spray Combustion of Biodiesel and Diesel in a Constant
Volume Combustion Chamber, SAE Technical Paper 2011-01-1380, 2011, doi:
10.4271/2011-01-1380.
4. R. Morgan and J.Wray et al. The Influence of Injector Parameters on the Formation and
Break-Up of a Diesel Spray, SAE- 2001-01-0529.
5. N. Manikanda Prabu, Dr.S. Nallusamy and K. Thirumalai Rasu, Experimental Analysis
of Jatropha Bio-Diesel for Optimum Blend Characteristics, Bonfring International
Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management Science, Vol. 3, No. 2, June 2013
6. Ghasemi

Abbas, "NUMERICAL SIMULATION OF ULTRA-HIGH INJECTION

DIESEL AND BIODIESEL FUEL SPRAYS" (2012). Electronic Theses and

Dissertations. Paper 189.
7. Bianchi, G. M., Pelloni, P., Corcione, F. E., Allocca, L., Luppino, F., Modeling
Atomization of High-Pressure Diesel Sprays, Journal of Engineering for Gas Turbines
and Power, Vol. 123, 2001, DOI: [10.1115/1.1361110].
8. Daliang Jing, Experimental and Numerical Studies of Fuel Spray, The University of
Birmingham.
9. Alagumalai, A., Internal combustion engines: Progress and prospects. Renewable and
Sustainable Energy Reviews. Vol.38: p. 561-571, 2014.
10. Bianchi, G. M., Pelloni, P., Corcione, F. E., Allocca, L., Luppino, F., Modeling
Atomization of High-Pressure Diesel Sprays, Journal of Engineering for Gas Turbines
and Power, Vol. 123, 2001, DOI: [10.1115/1.1361110].
11. Reitz, R.D., Atomization and other breakup regimes of a liquid jet. PhD thesis, 1978.
12. Modeling Spray and Mixture Formation, in Mixture Formation in Internal Combustion
Engine. Springer Berlin Heidelberg. p. 85-210, 2006.

34

13. Desantes, J.M.; Payri, R.; Salvador, F.J.; Gil, A. Development and validation of a
theoretical model for diesel spray penetration. Fuel 2006, 85, 910917.
14. Lee, C.S.; Park, S.W. An experimental and numerical study on fuel atomization
characteristics of high-pressure diesel injection sprays. Fuel 2002, 81, 24172423.
15. Hiroyasu, H.; Arai, M. Fuel spray penetration and spray angle in diesel spray. Trans.
JSAE 1980, 21, 511.
16. Dos Santos, F.; le Moyne, L. Spray atomization models in engine applications, from
correlations to direct numerical simulations. Oil Gas Sci. Technol. 2011, 66, 801822.
Energies 2015, 8 5972
17. Roisman, I.V.; Araneo, L.; Tropea, C. Effect of ambient pressure on penetration of a
diesel spray. Int. J. Multiph. Flow 2007, 33, 904920.
18. He, C.; Ge, Y.; Tan, J.; Han, X. Spray properties of alternative fuels: A comparative
analysis of biodiesel and diesel. Int. J. Energy Res. 2008, 32, 13291338.

35