|
[Sponsors] |
![]() |
![]() |
#1 |
New Member
Zhe Li
Join Date: Jul 2021
Posts: 19
Rep Power: 5 ![]() |
Dear all,
I am wondering what is the physical definition of the contraction coefficient. I am currently modifying my simulation model for an injector and found the experimental result is much higher than the simulation in terms of SMD. The current assumption is that the injector orifice quality is much worse than expected, and I wish to tune the simulation result by modifying the coefficient Ca, however, can this be a sufficient reason to tune this coefficient? Thank you |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Senior Member
Kislaya Srivastava
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Convergent Science, Northville MI
Posts: 165
Rep Power: 9 ![]() |
Hello Zhe,
Please refer to the concept of "Vena contracta" for an understanding of contraction coefficient. If you're using the BLOB injection drop distribution model, the injected parcel/droplet effective diameters are calculated as nozzle_dia*sqrt(C_a). See image below. We would recommend you set your nozzle_dia equal to the nominal nozzle diameter of your injector nozzle if you lack actual/precise measurements. The contraction coefficient affects not only the injected parcel diameters, but also (for non-LISA injectors) injected pressure/velocity for a user-specified injected mass and duration. The Discharge coefficient model can be enabled to tune the value of C_d to match target injection pressures/velocities. The expected injection pressures/velocities can be ascertained through the Spray Rate Calculator tool in STUDIO (see STUDIO manual) without having to run the simulation which also writes out the values in spray_rate_inj<id>.out. If the SMD results don't match with correct injection pressures, we recommend you take a look at the break-up model settings and evaporation behavior (if enabled) to improve your predictions. An improvement in grid resolution along the spray plume (fixed embedding + AMR) should also be looked into. While you can always use other Injection drop distribution models like Uniform (specified SMD) to tune the results to match, this is not recommended as you have shifted to curve fitting your results rather than predicting them. Hope this helps. Sincerely, |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Senior Member
Kislaya Srivastava
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Convergent Science, Northville MI
Posts: 165
Rep Power: 9 ![]() |
Image : (removed)
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
Senior Member
Kislaya Srivastava
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Convergent Science, Northville MI
Posts: 165
Rep Power: 9 ![]() |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Tags |
atomization model, coefficients, converge, injector model |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
how to obtain mass diffusion coefficient with UDF? | Weiqiang Liu | FLUENT | 0 | May 28, 2019 12:32 |
Multiphase flow - incorrect velocity on inlet | Mike_Tom | CFX | 6 | September 29, 2016 01:27 |
Ansys CFX problem: unexpected very high temperatures in premix laminar combustion | faizan_habib7 | CFX | 4 | February 1, 2016 17:00 |
Question about heat transfer coefficient setting for CFX | Anna Tian | CFX | 1 | June 16, 2013 06:28 |
Automotive test case | vinz | OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD | 98 | October 27, 2008 08:43 |