Computational simulations of unsteady flow field and spray impingement on a simplified automotive geometry

Kabanovs, Anton; Garmory, Andrew; Passmore, Martin A.; Gaylard, Adrian

doi:10.1016/j.jweia.2017.09.015

Cited by 16 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Kabanovs et al [14] and [12], demonstrate broadly good correlation between experiments and CFD for base contamination, however the numerical results showed a narrow area of high soiling stretching along the edge of the base, not present in the experimental data. This was proposed to be due to a large fraction of small, low-inertia particles in the numerical spray.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 88%

“…The Navier-Stokes equations were solved using the incompressible Pressure Implicit with Splitting of Operators (PISO) algorithm. A constant computational time step (∆ = 4 × 10 −5 sec) was used throughout the simulation, which was around two times larger than that used in the previous work [12]. This choice was made to offset the significant computational cost of the coalescence model.…”

Section: Modelling Of the Continuous Phasementioning

confidence: 99%

“…The dispersed phase was modelled concurrently with the continuous phase using the Lagrangian approach [25] as recommended for accurate simulations in Kabanovs et al [12]. The Lagrangian multiphase capability in OpenFOAM was used with in-house modifications made to include evaporation, coalescence and breakup.…”

Section: Modelling the Motion Of The Dispersed Phasementioning

confidence: 99%

“…To reduce computational cost, the parcels were removed from the domain when 0.8 m downstream from the base. As the length of flow recirculation at the rear of this SUV configuration had been identified to be around 0.3 m [12], this distance was deemed to be sufficient not to influence the results. Particle drag, gravity and shear lift are considered in the equation of motion, modelled as reported in Kabanovs et al [12].…”

Section: Modelling the Motion Of The Dispersed Phasementioning

confidence: 99%

“…In both studies, particles were emitted from the rotating wheels using the technique proposed by Kuthada and Cyr [11], and the size of particles was a constant diameter of 0.2mm. The work of 7/20/2015 Kabanovs et al [12] gave a further insight into the role of flow unsteadiness in vehicle soiling. It showed that large scale flow unsteadiness plays a crucial role as it affects particle entrainment into as well as dispersion within the wake.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Modelling the Effect of Spray Breakup, Coalescence, and Evaporation on Vehicle Surface Contamination Dynamics

Kabanovs¹,

Garmory²,

Passmore³

et al. 2018

SAE Int. J. Passeng. Cars - Mech. Syst.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Vehicle surface contamination is an important design consideration as it affects drivers' vision and the performance of on board camera and sensor systems. Previous work has shown that eddy resolving methods are able to accurately capture the flow field and particle transport, leading to good agreement for vehicle soiling with experiments. What is less clear is whether the secondary break-up, coalescence and evaporation of liquid particles play an important role in spray dynamics. The work reported here attempts to answer this and also give an idea of the computational cost associated with these extra physics models. A quarter scale generic SUV model is used as a test case in which the continuous phase is solved using the Spalart-Allmaras IDDES model. The dispersed phase is computed concurrently with the continuous phase using the Lagrangian approach. The TAB secondary break-up and the stochastic O'Rourke coalescence models are used. The spray's rate of evaporation is calculated based on the relative humidity encountered on a typical October day in Britain. The secondary break-up model is found to be redundant, possibly due to the properties of spray. The coalescence model predicts high coalescence of particles close to the source and improves agreement with experiment, although at a high computational cost. Including evaporation removes small particles from the simulation and reduces overall contamination. When used along the coalescence model, evaporation is found to be negligible as it does not influence large particles to the same extent as it affects small particles. This suggests that droplet physics models need to be considered together as they can have a strong effect on each other as well as vehicle soiling. Here, we show that coalescence can be accounted for by using the time-averaged spray, obtained outside the region of high coalescence. This gives a very good agreement with experiment.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 88%

Section: Modelling Of the Continuous Phasementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Modelling the Motion Of The Dispersed Phasementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Modelling the Motion Of The Dispersed Phasementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations