International Journal of Energy and Environmental Engineering (2018) 9:215–226

https://doi.org/10.1007/s40095-018-0265-9

ORIGINAL RESEARCH

Internal combustion engine heat release calculation using single‑zone

and CFD 3D numerical models
S. Mauro1   · R. Şener2 · M. Z. Gül2 · R. Lanzafame1 · M. Messina1 · S. Brusca3

Received: 30 October 2017 / Accepted: 12 February 2018 / Published online: 27 February 2018
© The Author(s) 2018. This article is an open access publication

Abstract
The present study deals with a comparative evaluation of a single-zone (SZ) thermodynamic model and a 3D computational
fluid dynamics (CFD) model for heat release calculation in internal combustion engines. The first law, SZ, model is based on
the first law of thermodynamics. This model is characterized by a very simplified modeling of the combustion phenomenon
allowing for a great simplicity in the mathematical formulation and very low computational time. The CFD 3D models,
instead, are able to solve the chemistry of the combustion process, the interaction between turbulence and flame propagation,
the heat exchange with walls and the dissociation and re-association of chemical species. They provide a high spatial resolu-
tion of the combustion chamber as well. Nevertheless, the computation requirements of CFD models are enormously larger
than the SZ techniques. However, the SZ model needs accurate experimental in-cylinder pressure data for initializing the
heat release calculation. Therefore, the main objective of an SZ model is to evaluate the heat release, which is very difficult
to measure in experiments, starting from the knowledge of the in-cylinder pressure data. Nevertheless, the great simplicity
of the SZ numerical formulation has a margin of uncertainty which cannot be known a priori. The objective of this paper
was, therefore, to evaluate the level of accuracy and reliability of the SZ model comparing the results with those obtained
with a CFD 3D model. The CFD model was developed and validated using cooperative fuel research (CFR) engine experi-
mental in-cylinder pressure data. The CFR engine was fueled with 2,2,4-trimethylpentane, at a rotational speed of 600 r/
min, an equivalence ratio equal to 1 and a volumetric compression ratio of 5.8. The analysis demonstrates that, considering
the simplicity and speed of the SZ model, the heat release calculation is sufficiently accurate and thus can be used for a first
investigation of the combustion process.

Keywords  Internal combustion engines · Heat release · Single zone model · CFD combustion modeling

List of symbols p Pressure

SOI Start of ignition V Volume
TDC Top dead center Qw Heat exchanged with wall
IVC Intake valve closing Us Internal sensible energy
Qhr Gross heat release W Work due to piston motion
k Specific heat ratio m Mass trapped
T Temperature cv Specific heat at constant volume
cp Specific heat at constant pressure
Nu Nusselt number
* S. Mauro Re Reynolds number
[email protected]
b Reynolds exponent for thermal exchange
1
Department of Civil Engineering and Architecture, correlation
University of Catania, Viale A. Doria, 6, 95125 Catania, n Engine rotational speed
Italy C1, C2 Calibration constants
2
Mechanical Engineering Department, Faculty w Characteristic charge velocity
of Engineering, Marmara University, Kadikoy, up Average piston velocity
34722 Istanbul, Turkey
pm Pressure of the motored cycle
3
Department of Engineering, University of Messina, Contrada p0, V0, T0 Reference pressure, temperature and volume
Di Dio, 98166 Messina, Italy

13
Vol.:(0123456789)

216 International Journal of Energy and Environmental Engineering (2018) 9:215–226

ϕ Equivalence ratio the heat release evaluation. The first simple models needed
B Bore only in-cylinder pressure data but presented a great disadvan-
y+ Non-dimensional distance from wall tage: the assumption of a constant value for the polytrophic
mb Mass burned exponent [5]. Gatowski et al. developed a simple and quite
mu Mass unburned accurate SZ model [6] which was further optimized for a
kb, ku Burned and unburned specific heat ratios charge with high swirl motion by Cheung and Heywood [7].
θ Crank angle The thermodynamics model, developed in a previous
ρ Density work by the authors [10], is a SZ model which takes into
account the variability of the specific heats [k = k(T)] and
the heat exchange between gas and cylinder walls. In this
Introduction way, both gross and net heat release can easily be calculated.
The fluid dynamic models, also known as computational
The complex task of improving internal combustion engines fluid dynamics (CFD) models, are inherently unsteady,
(ICEs), which have reached a higher degree of sophistica- tridimensional models and are based on the conservation
tion, can be achieved with a combination of experiments of mass, chemical species, momentum, and energy at any
and numerical models [1]. Essentially, two main distinct location within the engine cylinder domain. Thus, the CFD
categories of numerical models have been developed for models solve the Navier–Stokes equations, and the gen-
ICE studies. These are thermodynamic and fluid dynamic eral transport equations for each physical quantity. As is
models. In the thermodynamic models, the conservation of widely known, CFD models are based on numerical itera-
mass and energy is used for evaluating the closed cylinder tive techniques which lead to a set of equations filtered in
system using the first law of thermodynamics. In these mod- time, named RANS equations, or in space, named LES
els, the thermodynamic system can be considered either as equations. This is done in order to take into account the
a single zone (SZ) or as a multi-zone. When the system is viscous stresses in a discretized computational domain
considered multi-zone, the first law of thermodynamics is that covers the whole cylinder volume [8]. Both time and
applied to each of the zones while, in SZ models, the entire spatial coordinates are considered independent variables,
cylinder (Fig. 1) is the unique domain where the first law is so a full spatial and temporal resolution of the properties
solved. The mathematical equations, in general, form a set of of the gas inside the cylinder is possible [2]. In this way,
ordinary differential equations with an independent variable, the physics of the combustion process and, specifically,
which is the time or the crank angle [2]. the flame propagation and its interaction with turbulence,
The heat transfer through the walls plays an important is modeled. The heat release and the rate of heat release
role in engine combustion, performance and emission char- are, therefore, easily obtainable. Furthermore, the heat
acteristics [3, 4]. This is due to the fact that the wall temper- exchange with walls is taken into account using the real
atures are considerably lower than the maximum tempera- heat transfer coefficients.
ture of the burned gases inside the cylinder. For this reason, The cooperative fuel research (CFR) engine was used for
the heat transfer must be taken into account for an accurate the calibration and validation of both the thermodynamic
modeling of the engine operative conditions [2]. and the CFD models. The CFR engine was developed by
Several thermodynamics models have been developed the Waukesha Motor Company, specifically for testing the
during the last few years, because of the great importance of knocking characteristics of fuels. This engine has an adjust-
able compression ratio (CR), an adjustable ignition timing,
and the capability to test fuels in sequence [8, 9]. The engine
specifications and operating conditions used in this study are
listed in Table 1.
spark plug The innovative idea presented in this paper is thus the
̇ development of a numerical methodology which is based
on the joint use of SZ models and CFD models, in order
̇w to support ICE design and optimization and, specifically,
the combustion modeling. Indeed, a direct experimental
validation of the heat release calculation is very difficult to
carry out and is usually missing in the scientific literature.
.
W Therefore, having a reliable CFD model of the combus-
tion process would be a good reference for the evaluation
Fig. 1  Control volume of the CFR engine combustion chamber in a of the 0D model results. As the CFD models are certainly
single-zone model more physically accurate, the comparison between SZ and

13
International Journal of Energy and Environmental Engineering (2018) 9:215–226 217

Table 1  CFR engine specifications and measured operating condi- was specifically implemented in this work using the com-
tions (research method) mercial solver ­ANSYS® Forte. Only the closed valves condi-
Engine model and type Single cylinder, spark ignition, natu- tion was considered for simulating the heat release; there-
rally aspirated, four stroke, water fore, the crank angle interval was between 214° and 500°.
cooled The fluid properties and all the relevant boundary conditions
Bore 82.55 mm were exactly the same for both the models and are reported
Stroke 114.3 mm in Tables 1 and 2. These data were obtained during the CFR
Connecting rode length 254 mm engine experimental tests.
Compression ratio 5.8
Displacement 612 cm3 Single‑zone model
Speed 600 r/min
Spark advance 13° ca The SZ model is a 0D model which has quite a good accu-
Fuel C8H18 racy of the physics of the phenomena and a great simplicity
Equivalence ratio 1 in the mathematical formulation [10]. The equation for the
External pressure 100 kPa evaluation of the heat release rate is [6, 10, 11]:
External temperature 300 K
k(T) k(T)
Suction air temperature 326 K dQhr = pdV + Vdp + dQw . (1)
Average wall temperature 420 K k(T) − 1 k(T) − 1
In Eq. (1), both the dependence of k on temperature and
the heat exchange with wall Qw are present.
CFD heat release calculation results may be very useful The thermodynamic (pressure, temperature, composition,
for a rapid evaluation of the predictive capabilities of a etc.) and transport (viscosity, conductivity, etc.) properties
0D model. of the mixture are considered uniform in an SZ model. The
thermodynamic state is calculated by applying the first law
of thermodynamics. The application of the first law of ther-
Numerical models modynamics to the closed system in Fig. 1 requires an esti-
mation of the heat loss between the combustion chamber
In this section, the main features of the numerical models are and the walls. The relevant equation for the system in Fig. 1
presented. Both the models were developed by the authors. reads:
While the SZ model was originally developed in a previous
work and was adapted for this study [10], the CFD model dUs = dQ + dW, (2)

Table 2  Grid features, Grid Grid 1 Grid 2 Grid 3

CFD settings and boundary
conditions Number of cells ≈ 188,000 ≈ 500,000 ≈ 1,600,000
Global volume mesh size (mm) 2 1 0.5
Number of inflation layers on the walls 2 4 8
Calculation time (h) ≈ 3 ≈ 7 ≈ 24
Solver ANSYS Forte Unsteady-RANS
Time steps used 3 × 10−6 s
Solution algorithms SIMPLE, ALE method
Turbulence model RNG k–ε
Laminar flame speed model Gülder
Turbulent flame propagation model G-equation
Chemistry solver CHEMKIN Pro
Engine speed 600 rpm
Ambient pressure/temperature 100 kPa/300 K
Air pressure/temperature at IVC 170 kPa/340 K
Average wall temperature 420 K
Initial turbulent kinetic energy 26,000 cm2/s2
Initial turbulent length scale 5 mm

13

218 International Journal of Energy and Environmental Engineering (2018) 9:215–226

where: Since k depends on temperature and on charge composi-

tion, and the mass fraction burned (MFB) is not dependent
dW = −pdV, (3) on the value chosen for the constant k [10], it is possible to
dUs = mcv (T)dT, (4) write the function k(T) as:
k(T) = kb (T)xb (T) + [1 − xb (T)]ku (T), (11)
dT = d(pV)∕mR, (5)
where xb(T) is the MFB which can be evaluated from the
R cumulative gross heat release with k = cost, starting from
= k(T) − 1 (6)
cv (T) the Eq. (12):
with the assumption that gas constant R does not change |
Qgross |
during the combustion process. mb |max (12)
xb (𝜗) = = ,
Substituting Eqs. (3)–(6) in the first law (2) and rearrang- mu + mb Qgross (𝜗)
ing the terms, it is possible to obtain the Eq. (1) for the heat
release rate. where:
The heat exchange between the gas and cylinder walls
∑
𝜗
is taken into account using the Woschni model [12]. In this Qgross (𝜗) = ΔQhr . (13)
model, the heat exchange coefficient is: SOI

hc = 3.26C1 Bb−1 pb T 0.75−1.62b wb [W∕(m2 K)]. (7) Further details about the SZ model can be found in [10].
In Eq. (7) b is set to 0.8 (from the thermal exchange cor- Figure 2 shows a flow chart with the relevant steps for the
relation: Nu = C Reb) and b is expressed in (m), p in (kPa), SZ model calculation.
v in (m/s) and T in (K). The expression for w is:
VT0 Computational fluid dynamics model
w = 2.28up + 3.24 × 10−3 C2 (p − pm ), (8)
p0 V0
The unsteady CFD 3D model was developed using the com-
where p0, V0, and T0 are referred to the start of ignition mercial CFD software A ­ NSYS® Forte. This software allows
(SOI). for the simulation of combustion processes in ICEs. It does
A polytrophic equation is used for the evaluation of pm so using an efficient coupling of detailed chemical kinet-
[7, 10], where the exponent n is set to 1.3: ­ NSYS®
ics, liquid fuel spray and turbulent gas dynamics. A
Forte can solve both the full unsteady RANS equations and
( )n
V0 the LES equations, thus providing accurate flame propaga-
pm = p0 . (9) tion models with specific turbulent flame interactions. The
V
following transport equation for the conservation of mass,
In the heat transfer model, C1 and C2 constants are not momentum, energy and turbulence properties is solved:
physical quantities and may differ from engine to engine.
𝜕(𝜌𝜙)
Changing these constants allows the model to be easily + ∇ ⋅ (𝜌̃u𝜙) = ∇ ⋅ (𝛤𝜙 ∇(𝜙)) + S𝜙 , (14)
𝜕t
adjusted [7, 10]. Owing to these changes, these constants
are calibrated with actual engine data. To comprise the heat where ϕ is the generic transported variable, Γϕ is the convec-
release results, the SZ model is initialized using CFD cal- tion term, and Sϕ is the source term.
culated pressure data of the CFR engine. The CFD pressure The conservation equation for the chemical species k is:
data, in turn, were validated using experimental data of the [ ( )]
𝜕𝜌k 𝜌 c s
CFR engine, as reported in Fig. 4. This was done in order ̄ T∇ k
+ ∇ ⋅ (𝜌k ũ ) = ∇ 𝜌D + 𝜌̇k + 𝜌̇k (k = 1, … , K),
𝜕t 𝜌̄
to have the possibility to compare the heat release calcula-
(15)
tions using identical pressure data thus allowing for a more
meaningful comparison. where ρ is the density, subscript k is the species index, K is
The specific heat ratio k has great influence on the heat the total number of species and u is the flow velocity vec-
release peak and on the shape of the heat release curve [10, tor. The application of Fick’s law of diffusion results in a
c
13, 14]. In this paper, a five-order logarithmic polynomial mixture-averaged turbulent diffusion coefficient DT. 𝜌̇k and
s
function (10) is used to provide the dependence of k on tem- 𝜌̇k are source terms due to chemical reactions and spray
perature [10]. evaporation, respectively.
{ } The unsteady-RANS re-normalized group (RNG) k–ε
k(T) = f a0 + a1 ln(T) + a2 ln(T)2 + ⋯ + a5 ln(T)5 . (10) model was used for turbulence modeling [15]. The RNG the-
ory for turbulence calculations considers velocity dilatation

13
International Journal of Energy and Environmental Engineering (2018) 9:215–226 219

( ) [ ]
𝜕 𝜌̄𝜀̃ 2 (𝜈 + 𝜈k )
+ ∇(𝜌̃ ̃ = − c𝜀1 − c𝜀3 𝜌̄𝜀∇
̄u𝜀) ̃ ⋅ ũ + ∇ ⋅ ∇𝜀̃
Inialize with 𝜕t 3 Pr𝜀
in-cylinder 𝜀̃
pressure data + (c𝜀1 (𝜎̄ − 𝛤 ) ∶ ∇̃u − c𝜀2 𝜌̄𝜀̃ + cs Ẇ s ).
k̃
(17)
In (16) and (17), cε are model constants, W is the nega-
̇ s

tive of the rate at which the turbulent eddies are doing

Calculate Gross heat
work in dispersing the spray droplets and c s was sug-
release with k constant gested by Amsden based on the postulate of length scale
conservation in spray/turbulence interactions. All these
parameters are reported in [15].
The RNG k–ε model uses a standard wall function for
Calculate MFB with the near-wall treatment. Therefore, the y+ was always kept
k constant between 30 and 300 in the present work.
The use of advanced LES turbulence modeling was
evaluated. However, the CFR engine was designed specifi-
cally with very low turbulence levels inside the combus-
Interpolate real cp(T)
tion chamber. The absence of significant swirl and tumble
with VoLP
motions, due to the particular position of the intake and
exhaust valves (Fig. 1), greatly simplifies the flow field
inside the cylinder. Moreover, only the closed valves phase
Evaluate k(T) from MFB was modeled. For these reasons, the RNG k–ε model
and Gross heat release proved to be sufficiently accurate as widely demonstrated
in the scientific literature [15, 16]. The numerical–experi-
mental in-cylinder pressure data comparison presented in
Fig. 4 further supports this assumption. An LES simula-
Calculate MFB
tion would require a noticeable computation time incre-
with k(T)
ment without considerable advantages in the simulation
accuracy.
The initial turbulent boundary conditions were esti-
Calculate Gross and Net mated based on Heywood suggestions [17], according to
heat release with k(T) the following formulas:
[ ]
1 2 ⋅ stroke ⋅ n 2
kt = , (18)
2 60

END
3∕2
𝜀 = C𝜇 kt L, (19)

where kt is the initial turbulent kinetic energy, n is the engine

rotational speed, Cμ is a model constant equal to 0.0845 [15],
Fig. 2  Flow chart of the SZ model
ε is the dissipation rate and L is the turbulent length scale.
The values are reported in Table 2.
in the ε-equation and spray-induced source terms for both k The complex chemical reactions, which occur dur-
and ε equations: ing the combustion process, are described by chemical
kinetic mechanisms. These mechanisms define the reac-
𝜕 𝜌̄k̃ tion pathways and the associated reaction rates, thus
+ ∇(𝜌̃ ̃ = − 2 𝜌̄k∇
̄uk) ̃ ⋅ ũ + (𝜎̄ − 𝛤 ) ∶ ∇̃u leading to the change in species concentrations. The
𝜕t 3 [ ]
(𝜇 + 𝜇k ) ANSYS Forte solver, coupled with the advanced chem-
+∇⋅ ∇k̃ − 𝜌̄𝜀̃ + Ẇ s , (16) istry solver CHEMKIN-PRO, allows for the modeling
Prk
of the chemical kinetics of all the K species related to
the combustion process. Specifically, in this work, a

13

220 International Journal of Energy and Environmental Engineering (2018) 9:215–226

reduced mechanism chemistry set of 59 species (defined Kolmogorov eddies can penetrate into the chemically inert
as Gasoline_1comp_59sp, which represents gasoline with preheated zone of the reactive–diffusive flame structure,
the single-component iso-octane as the fuel surrogate) was but cannot enter the inner layer where the chemical reac-
used. The mechanism captures the pathways necessary for tions occur. For application of the G-equation model to
only the high temperature reactions and focuses only on ICEs, this theory was further developed and validated by
capturing emissions from combustion. This mechanism Tan and Reitz [19] and by Liang et al. [23, 24].
was reduced from a larger kinetics mechanism consisting For the turbulent flame speed within the G-equation
of ~ 4000 species, which has been thoroughly validated model, the following formula was used:
against fundamental experimental data for the operating
conditions of interest in engines, under the “Model Fuels ⎧ � �2 1∕2 ⎫
ST0 2 ⎡ 2 � ⎤
⎪ a4 b3 II ⎢ a4 b3 II u I ⎪
Consortium” [18]. The mechanism was originally reduced = 1 + IP ⎨− + + a4 b23 0 I ⎥ ⎬,
⎪ 2b1 IF ⎢⎣ 2b1 IF SL IF ⎥ ⎪
0
from this comprehensive “master” using the Reaction SL
⎩ ⎦ ⎭
Workbench software. Iso-octane ­( C 8H 18) was used as a
(21)
primary reference fuel in both the numerical and experi-
mental analysis. The iso-octane properties were provided where IP is a progress variable, II and IF are the turbulence
in the CFD code using the original CHEMKIN-PRO fuel integral length scale and the laminar flame thickness, b1,
database. b3 and a4 are generic for any turbulent flame and were cali-
For the flame propagation modeling, the solver tracks the brated by Peters [22] by fitting experimental data.
growth of the ignition kernel using the discrete particle igni- The governing equations are discretized with respect to
tion kernel flame model by Tan and Reitz [19]. Taking on the spatial coordinates of the system on the computational
the shape of a spherical kernel, the flame front position is grid, based on a control volume approach. In addition,
marked by Lagrangian particles, and the flame surface den- in order to provide time-accurate solutions, the equa-
sity is obtained from the density concentration of these par- tions are further discretized with respect to time, follow-
ticles in each computational cell. The chemistry processes ing the operator-splitting method. To integrate the equa-
in the kernel-growth stage are treated in the same way as tions in time, a temporal differencing of the equations is
in the G-equation combustion model. A power-law correla- performed. During time integrations, the solver employs
tion of laminar flame speed to pressure, temperature and three stages of solution for each time step. The time step-
equivalence ratio was chosen. This was the Gülder laminar ping employs the operator-splitting method to separate
flame speed formulation [20]. The Gülder reference formu- the chemistry and spray source terms and the flow trans-
lation was developed and validated against numerous ICE port. The flow transport solution is based on the arbitrary-
experimental flame propagation data [21]. The equation for Lagrangian–Eulerian (ALE) method. Moreover, the solver
the laminar speed reads: uses a modified version of the SIMPLE implicit method,
which is a two-step iterative procedure used to solve for
2 the flow field variables. The SIMPLE method extrapolates
= 𝜔𝜑𝜂 e−𝜉(𝜑−𝜎) , (20)
0
SL,ref
the pressure, iteratively solves for velocities, then tempera-
where the constants ω, η, ξ, σ are experimental data-fitting ture, and finally the pressure. Convection terms are instead
coefficients determined in [20, 21]. solved using the quasi-second-order upwind method.
Once the laminar flame begins to develop within the The chemistry solver employs an advanced operator-
cylinder domain near the spark plug, the flame–turbulence splitting method to solve the conservation of the species
interaction is solved, based on the RNG k–ε transport and energy conservation equations for time-accurate tran-
equations. This results in a turbulent flame development. sient simulations. This method splits the transport equa-
The turbulent flame speed can be controlled through a tion into two sub-equations and solves the sub-equations
series of parameters. The local turbulent flame develop- with overlapping time steps.
ment is modeled by means of the G-equation, which pro- The first step for the generation of the CFD model of
vides a strict correlation to the laminar flame speed which, the CFR engine was to reproduce the domain. In this case,
in turn, is a chemical property of the gas mixture. The the geometry was simply a cylinder with the dimensions
G-equation combustion model is based on the turbulent reported in Table 1, which represented the combustion
premixed combustion flamelet theory of Peters [22]. This chamber, at that specific CR, when the piston was at the
theory addresses two regimes of practical interest. The top dead center (TDC). Valves, intake and exhaust ducts,
first is corrugated flamelet regime where the entire reac- spark plug and crevices were neglected due to the fact that
tive–diffusive flame structure is assumed to be embedded only the closed valves phase is essential for heat release
within eddies of the size of the Kolmogorov length scale calculations. However, this can only be done if the appro-
η. The second is the thin reaction zone regime where the priate boundary conditions are known. The boundary

13
International Journal of Energy and Environmental Engineering (2018) 9:215–226 221

conditions like pressure, temperature and composition at solution of the thermal gradients. Three grid refinements,
intake valve closing (IVC) were obtained from the CFR which were obtained by modifying the global volume
engine experiments and are reported in Table 2. mesh size and the number of inflation layers on the wall
The spatial discretization is of utmost importance surfaces, were tested [25–27]. Details of the grids along
because of the necessity to find the best balance between with a summarization of the CFD settings are reported in
accurate spatial resolution and reasonable calculation time. Table 2.
In light of this, a grid independence study was carried The grid independent solution was evaluated by com-
out. Structured hexahedral cells are generated by means paring the in-cylinder pressure trends. When pressure
of a dynamic mesh layering which is related to the piston trends did not significantly change with grid refinements,
motion within the crank angle interval (214°–500°). The the solution was considered independent from the grid.
layer dimension, and thus the minimum cell dimension, This was obtained with the second refinement level (Grid
can be controlled by the user through the global volume 2), as reported in Fig. 3. In Fig. 2 a detail of the discre-
mesh size control. Moreover, a prescribed number of infla- tized computational domain with the piston at the TDC
tion layers on the wall surfaces was used to improve the is shown.
The CFD solver allows for the specification of the
spark plug characteristics. The spark starts 13 crank angle
Head - Wall, T = 420 K degrees before the TDC and the duration is 7°. The energy
release rate for the specific spark plug was 50 J/s with an
initial kernel radius of 0.5 mm.
The boundary condition for the head, the liner and the
piston was a wall boundary condition with a prescribed wall
motion for the piston surface which is determined by the
Liner - Wall, rotational speed, the stroke, the connecting rod length and
T = 420 K the crank angle interval. In doing so, the piston moves and
generates the dynamic mesh layers at the same time (Fig. 3).
The initial premixed composition was provided using
Piston head - dynamic wall, the specific composition calculation utility. The fuel was
T = 420 K
pure iso-octane with an equivalence ratio equal to 1. The
calculation utility automatically defined the mass trapped
Fig. 3  Detail of the discretized computational domain at TDC and and its composition from the knowledge of the fuel, the
boundary conditions equivalence ratio and the boundary conditions at IVC.

Fig. 4  Calculated CFD—experimental in-cylinder pressure comparison at CR = 5.8

13

222 International Journal of Energy and Environmental Engineering (2018) 9:215–226

The simulations were carried out on an HP Z820 work- The comparison between the CFD prediction of the in-
station with 24 available threads for parallel calculation and cylinder pressure and the experimental measurements, pro-
128 Gb of RAM memory. posed in Fig. 4, showed a good compatibility. Only slight
The convergence criteria were automatically checked by differences are evident after the SOI, near 350 crank angle
the ANSYS Forte solver in such a way as to ensure that all degrees and at the pressure peak. However, considering the
the residuals within each temporal step were below ­10−6. general good accordance along the entire crank angle inter-
val, the CFD model demonstrates quite a good predictive
capability and can be considered experimentally validated
for this specific condition.
Results and comparisons Two operating conditions of the CFR engine were ana-
lyzed (CR = 5.8 and 7). The results for other CRs were
The main objective of this paper was to provide a numerical quite similar and, therefore, are not presented. In Fig. 5, the
procedure in order to carry out a reliable evaluation of the calculated CFD in-cylinder pressure and temperature trend
heat release in ICE. The joint use of SZ 0D models and CFD for the operating condition with CR = 7 is shown. These
3D models leads to the possibility of an accurate calcula- data were used for the initialization of the SZ model whose
tion of the heat release for numerous operative conditions, results are presented in the following figures.
without the need for further experimental data. The idea was Specifically, in Fig. 6 the calculated MFB for the two dif-
to validate the CFD 3D model by comparing the numeri- ferent compression ratios (CR = 5.8, 7), as a function of the
cal–experimental in-cylinder pressure data. The calculated crank angle position, is presented. The trend is very similar
CFD pressure data were subsequently used for initializing for both the operating condition and the differences between
the SZ model in order to have a precise and direct com- the numerical approaches are rather negligible. Considering
parison between the 0D and 3D heat release calculation. the great simplicity and rapidness of the SZ model, the MFB
In doing so, it was possible to check 0D model accuracy appears to be well predicted.
and, eventually, understand how to modify and improve the In Fig. 7, the net heat release comparison is shown. The
SZ model. Moreover, the CFD model may provide different trend is quite similar for both the CRs. The SZ model shows
in-cylinder pressure data in such a way as to have the pos- an over-estimation which is probably due to the lack of the
sibility to run different operative conditions with both the real chemical dissociation and re-association phenomena in
models without the necessity of further experiments. Once the modeling. Indeed these phenomena are not taken into
the accuracy of the 0D model is checked, a fast and reliable account in the SZ model. The chemistry solver within the
heat release calculation can be obtained for a wide range of CFD model, instead, is able to calculate the heat absorbed
engine operative conditions. and released during the dissociation and re-association

Fig. 5  Calculated CFD in-cylinder pressure and temperature for CR 7

13
International Journal of Energy and Environmental Engineering (2018) 9:215–226 223

reactions related to chemical species like N ­ Ox and CO. modeling between the models. This comparison will thus
Indeed, the differences between the models are drastically be very helpful in the improvement of the Woschni heat
reduced after 400 crank angle degrees. This happened due exchange model.
to the fact that a part of the heat absorbed during the dis- The above is confirmed by the heat release rate compari-
sociation is given back with the chemical re-association son proposed in Fig. 8 and the gross heat release comparison
[17]. Since the net heat release takes into account the heat shown in Fig. 9. Indeed, in Fig. 8, both models predict a sim-
exchange with walls, the discrepancies evidenced at 450 ilar ROHR trend in the initial combustion phase. The ROHR
CA are certainly due to the differences in the heat transfer peak, instead, is higher in the CFD results but the subsequent

Fig. 6  Calculated mass fraction burned for CR 5.8 (left) and CR 7 (right)

Fig. 7  Calculated cumulative net heat release for CR 5.8 (left) and CR 7 (right)

Fig. 8  Calculated rate of heat release for CR 5.8 (left) and CR 7 (right)

13

224 International Journal of Energy and Environmental Engineering (2018) 9:215–226

Fig. 9  Calculated gross heat release for CR 5.8 (left) and CR 7 (right)

Fig. 10  Pollutant formation and net heat release for CR 5.8 (left) and CR 7 (right)

Fig. 11  NO2 formation and in-cylinder temperature comparison

decrease is faster. This denotes a different dynamic of the In Fig. 9, the gross heat release calculation results are
combustion prediction between the numerical models. More- presented. Nevertheless, in the CFD model the flame is
over, after 375 crank angle degrees the CFD model predicts quenched at near 370 crank angle degrees (Fig. 6), then a
a small amount of heat release due to chemical dissociation small amount of heat is gradually released from 370 to 440
and re-association phenomena (Figs. 10, 11). However, the crank angle degrees. In fact, the gross heat release is actu-
global trend of the ROHR is quite similar for both the mod- ally the heat release due to a combination of all the chemi-
els and the operating conditions, therefore, demonstrating cal reactions (combustion, dissociation, re-association).
an acceptable reliability of the SZ model. Therefore, the different trend between the models in Fig. 9

13
International Journal of Energy and Environmental Engineering (2018) 9:215–226 225

is ascribable to chemical reactions which initially absorb a reference for the validation and optimization of the SZ
part of the heat generated by the combustion (dissociation) model [for example the calibration of the constants of the
and then gradually release heat during the expansion phase Eq. (8)], can be inferred. The joint use of both SZ and CFD
(re-association) [17]. However, the final value of the cumula- 3D models would be an important numerical methodology
tive gross heat release is very compatible for both the operat- for the study and the optimization of ICEs, therefore, reduc-
ing conditions. Thus, the SZ model lacks the capability of ing the expensive heat release experimental analysis.
predicting the real combustion dynamics but demonstrates
accuracy in the evaluation of the cumulative heat, released
during the combustion. No strong differences are evident
between the two analyzed operating conditions. Conclusions
The presented results demonstrate that the use of powerful
CFD models would be very helpful for the validation of SZ In the present study, two different numerical models, an SZ
models. Moreover, from the comparison of the calculated heat model and a CFD model, were implemented for the simu-
release, one can easily identify the areas in which the SZ model lation of the closed part of the cycle of a CFR engine in
may be improved in order to reduce errors. Further possibilities order to obtain an accurate heat release evaluation. The CFD
are to calibrate the SZ model for the simulation of the use of model was validated using the in-cylinder pressure data for
different fuels, water injections or other combustion control the CFR engine, fueled with pure iso-octane, with a volu-
strategies. This will be done in future works. The CFD model metric CR of 5.8 in the research method test condition. The
allows for an engine virtualization which may limit the experi- CFD in-cylinder pressure data were subsequently used for
ments, thus providing an accurate and reliable reference for the the initialization of the SZ model in order to obtain a perfect
SZ model heat release calculation of any other engine at any comparison of the heat release calculation capabilities.
operative condition. Moreover, the CFD model is able to pro- Despite the strong mathematical simplicity and the
vide details about the in-cylinder flow field, the chemical reac- extreme rapidness of the SZ model, the comparison between
tions, the pollutant formation, the flame development which 0D and CFD 3D heat release calculations demonstrates that
may be of utmost importance for 0D model improvements and, the SZ model is sufficiently accurate and reliable. The CFD
in general, for ICE analysis and optimization. Clearly, the pro- model is obviously more physically accurate and allows for
posed numerical procedure must be implemented, verified and a reliable prediction of the chemical reactions and, thus, for
calibrated case by case, based on the engine type. The present the heat absorbed and released because of them. However,
work would, therefore, propose an innovative idea for a better the calculation time for the CFD model is higher by several
evaluation of the heat release calculation in ICEs. orders of magnitude.
In conclusion, in Fig. 10 the calculated CFD pollutant for- In the specific case of the CFR engine, the main differ-
mation along with the net heat release is shown. The details ences between the models were found to be due to the lack
provided by the CFD analysis support the previous hypothesis of the chemical kinetics in the SZ model and partially to
that the chemical dissociation and re-association phenomena the wall heat exchange model of Woschni which probably
influence the gross heat release evidenced in Fig. 9. Indeed, necessitates further calibrations case by case.
as expected, during the expansion phase, the chemical re- The proposed model comparison shows the perspectives
association releases a small amount of heat which has been of the joint use of both 0D and CFD 3D model for ICE
absorbed during the initial combustion phase. This explains combustion investigations. On the one hand, the CFD model
the differences highlighted in Figs. 7, 8, and 9. During the will be a powerful reference for the improvements of the SZ
first stage of the combustion, the pollutant formation absorbs model, thanks to the possibility of detecting the areas where
heat which is gradually restored in the expansion phase. Since the 0D model is not as accurate. Moreover, the CFD model
the SZ model does not take into account the dynamics of the may provide numerous in-cylinder pressure data by vary-
chemical reactions, in the first combustion phase the SZ model ing the volumetric CR, the equivalence ratio, the rotational
overestimates the heat release while in the expansion phase speed and so on. This may allow the SZ model to virtually
the error is balanced by the heat restored due to the chemi- run any kind of engine operative condition without the need
cal re-association. In Fig. 11, the ­NO2 formation is compared for further experimental data. In this way, although the heat
with the in-cylinder temperature trend, calculated through the release calculations are already obtained with the CFD anal-
ANSYS Forte simulation. Also, in this case, a strong relation ysis, the possibility to have accurate references may allow
between temperature and pollutant formation is clearly evident. the SZ model to be calibrated and improved in a wide range
Some of the numerous possibilities offered by the com- of conditions. On the other hand, having a reliable numeri-
bustion virtualization, obtained with the proposed CFD cal strategy, with the joint use of 0D and CFD 3D models,
model, are presented in the figures above. The opportunity to will be a very powerful tool for the investigation and the
have a powerful tool, which might not only be a fundamental optimization of the combustion phase in ICEs.

13

226 International Journal of Energy and Environmental Engineering (2018) 9:215–226

Therefore, the present study intends to provide a 0D–3D 11. Brunt, M., Platts, K.: Calculation of Heat Release in Direct Injection
numerical procedure for the analysis of the heat release in Diesel Engine. SAE Technical Paper 1999-01-0187 (1999). https​://
doi.org/10.4271/1999-01-0187
ICEs which will have to be further refined and validated on 12. Woschni, G.: A Universally Applicable Equation for the Instantane-
other types of engines with different operating conditions. ous Heat Transfer Coefficient in the Internal Combustion Engine.
Both models must be implemented, refined, calibrated and SAE Technical Paper 670931 (1967). https​://doi.org/10.4271/67093​
validated specifically on the engine characteristics. 1
13. Brunt, M., Rai, H., Emtage, A.: The Calculation of Heat Release
In light of this current information, future works in this Energy from Engine Cylinder Pressure Data. SAE Technical Paper
field will regard the improvement of the SZ model for a 981052 (1998). https​://doi.org/10.4271/98105​2
wide range of engine operating conditions. Moreover, fur- 14. Pariotis, E., Kosmadakis, G., Rakopoulos, C.D.: Comparative analy-
ther studies will be made on the implementation of specific sis of three simulation models applied on a motored internal com-
bustion engine. Energy Convers. Manag. 60, 45–55 (2012). https​://
modifications, in the 0D model, for the simulation of com- doi.org/10.1016/j.encon​man.2011.11.031
bustion control strategies like water injections or for the use 15. Han, Z., Reitz, R.D.: Turbulence modeling of internal combustion
of alternative fuels. engines using RNG κ–ε models. Combust. Sci. Technol. 106(4–6),
267–295 (1995). https​://doi.org/10.1080/00102​20950​89077​82
16. Wang, B.-L., Lee, C.-W., Reitz, R.D., Miles, P.C., Han, Z.: A gener-
Compliance with ethical standards  alized renormalization group turbulence model and its application to
a light-duty diesel engine operating in a low-temperature combustion
Conflict of interests  On behalf of all the authors, the corresponding regime. 14(3), 279–292. https​://doi.org/10.1177/14680​87412​46537​
author states that there is no conflict of interest. 9
17. Heywood, J.B.: Internal Combustion Engines Fundamentals.
Open Access  This article is distributed under the terms of the Crea- McGraw-Hill. ISBN 0071004998
tive Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creat​iveco​ 18. Puduppakkam K.V., Naik, C.V., Meeks, E.: Validation Studies of
mmons​.org/licen​ses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribu- a Detailed Kinetics Mechanism for Diesel and Gasoline Surrogate
tion, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate Fuels. SAE Technical Paper Series, 2010 01-0545 (2010). https​://
credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the doi.org/10.4271/2010-01-0545
Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. 19. Tan, Z., Reitz, R.: Modeling Ignition and Combustion in Spark-
Ignition Engines Using a Level Set Method. SAE Technical Paper
2003-01-0722 (2003). https​://doi.org/10.4271/2003-01-0722
20. Gülder, Ö.: Correlations of Laminar Combustion Data for Alternative
S.I. Engine Fuels. SAE Technical Paper 841000 (1984). https​://doi.
References org/10.4271/84100​0
21. Verma, I., Bish, E., Kuntz, M., Meeks, E., et  al.: CFD Mod-
1. Lakshminarayanan, P.A., Aghav, Y.V.: Modeling Diesel Combus- eling of Spark Ignited Gasoline Engines—Part 1: Modeling
tion. Springer (2010). https​://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-3885-2. the Engine Under Motored and Premixed-Charge Combustion
ISBN 978-90-481-3885-2 Mode. SAE Technical Paper 2016-01-0591 (2016). https​://doi.
2. Medina, A., Curto-Risso, P.L., Hernández, A.C., Guzmán-Var- org/10.4271/2016-01-0591
gas, L., Angulo-Brown, F., Sen, A.K.: Quasi-dimensional Simu- 22. Peters, N.: Turbulent Combustion. Cambridge University Press
lation of Spark Ignition Engines. Springer (2014). https​://doi. (2000). ISBN 9780511612701. https​://doi.org/10.1017/CBO97​
org/10.1007/978-1-4471-5289-7. ISBN 978-1-4471-5289-7 80511​61270​1,
3. Heywood, J.B.: Internal Combustion Engines Fundamentals. 23. Liang, L., Reitz, R.: Spark Ignition Engine Combustion Modeling
McGraw-Hill (1988). ISBN 0-07-100499-8 Using a Level Set Method with Detailed Chemistry. SAE Technical
4. Neshat, E., Saray, R.: Effect of different heat transfer models on Paper 2006-01-0243 (2006). https​://doi.org/10.4271/2006-01-0243
HCCI engine simulation. Energy Convers. Manag. 88, 1–14 (2014). 24. Liang, L., Reitz, R., Iyer, C., Yi, J.: Modeling Knock in Spark-Igni-
https​://doi.org/10.1016/j.encon​man.2014.07.075 tion Engines Using a G-equation Combustion Model Incorporating
5. Rassweiler, G., Withrow, L.: Motion Pictures of Engine Flames Cor- Detailed Chemical Kinetics. SAE Technical Paper 2007-01-0165
related with Pressure Cards. SAE Technical Paper 380139 (1938). (2007). https​://doi.org/10.4271/2007-01-0165
https​://doi.org/10.4271/38013​9 25. Brusca, S., Famoso, F., Lanzafame, R., Mauro, S., Messina, M.,
6. Gatowski, J., Balles, E., Chun, K., Nelson, F. et al.: Heat Release Strano, S.: ­PM10 dispersion modeling by means of CFD 3D and
Analysis of Engine Pressure Data. SAE Technical Paper 841359 Eulerian–Lagrangian models: analysis and comparison with
(1984). https​://doi.org/10.4271/84135​9 experiments. Energy Procedia 101(1), 329–336 (2016). https​://doi.
7. Cheung, H., Heywood, J.B.: Evaluation of a One-Zone Burn-Rate org/10.1016/j.egypr​o.2016.11.042
Analysis Procedure Using Production SI Engine Pressure Data. SAE 26. Lanzafame, R., Mauro, S., Messina, M.: Numerical and experi-
Technical Paper 932749 (1993). https​://doi.org/10.4271/93274​9 mental analysis of micro HAWTs designed for wind tunnel appli-
8. Brock, C., Stanley, D.L.: The cooperative fuels research engine: cations. Int. J. Energy Environ. Eng. 7(2), 199–210 (2016). https​://
applications for education. J. Aviat. Technol. Eng. (2012). https​:// doi.org/10.1007/s4009​5-016-0202-8
doi.org/10.5703/12882​84314​865 27. Cucinotta, F., Nigrelli, V., Sfavara, F.: A preliminary method for the
9. Broekaert, S., De Cuyper, T., De Paepe, M., Verhelst, S.: Evalu- numerical prediction of the behavior of air bubbles in the design of Air
ation of empirical heat transfer models for HCCI combustion in Cavity Ships. In: Advances on Mechanics, Design Engineering and
a CFR engine. Appl. Energy 205, 1141–1150 (2017). https​://doi. Manufacturing. Lecture Notes in Mechanical Engineering. Springer,
org/10.1016/j.apene​rgy.2017.08.100 Cham. https​://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-45781​-9_51
10. Lanzafame, R., Messina, M.: ICE gross heat release strongly influ-
enced by specific heat ratio values. Int. J. Automot. Technol. 4(3), Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to
125–133 (2003). KSAE ISSN 1229-9138 urisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

13