Advanced models of fuel droplet heating and evaporation

By Sergei S. Sazhin. 2006

851 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Recent developments in modelling the heating and evaporation of fuel droplets are reviewed, and unsolved problems are identified. It is noted that modelling transient droplet heating using steady-state correlations for the convective heat transfer coefficient can be misleading. At the initial stage of heating stationary droplets, the well known steady-state result Nu=2 leads to under prediction of the rate of heating, while at the final stage the same result leads to over prediction. The numerical analysis of droplet heating using the effective thermal conductivity model can be based on the analytical solution of the heat conduction equation inside the droplet. This approach was shown to have clear advantages compared with the approach based on the numerical solution of the same equation both from the point of view of accuracy and computer efficiency. When highly accurate calculations are not required, but CPU time economy is essential then the effect of finite thermal conductivity and re-circulation in droplets can be taken into account using the so called parabolic model. For practical applications in computation fluid dynamics (CFD) codes the simplified model for radiative heating, describing the average droplet absorption efficiency factor, appears to be the most useful both from the point of view of accuracy and CPU efficiency. Models describing the effects of multi-component droplets need to be considered when modelling realistic fuel droplet heating and evaporation. However, most of these models are still rather complicated, which limits their wide application in CFD codes. The Distillation Curve Model for multi-component droplets seems to be a reasonable compromise between accuracy and CPU efficiency. The systems of equations describing droplet heating and evaporation and autoignition of fuel vapour/air mixture in individual computational cells are stiff. Establishing hierarchy between these equations, and separate analysis of the equations for fast and slow variables may be a constructive way forward in analysing these systems.

Subfields: Biomedical Engineering, Computational Mechanics, Fluid Flow and Transfer Processes

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/642a1740d7606201c3dafa3e6d8aad9b3ce80412

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Biomedical Engineering

In Computational Mechanics

In Fluid Flow and Transfer Processes

Citations in the corpus

Multi-component droplet heating and evaporation: Numerical simulation versus experimental data (2011, neutral): “The approach which we use is consistent with widely used practice in Computational Fluid Dynamics (CDF) codes [1,24].”
A simplified model for bi-component droplet heating and evaporation (2010, methodology): “The effects described by this model were shown to be particularly important for modelling fuel spray autoignition processes [4,5].”
Models for fuel droplet heating and evaporation: Comparative analysis (2006, methodology): “The importance of the development of accurate and computer efficient models, describing fuel droplet heating and evaporation in engineering and environmental applications, is widely recognised [1–11].”