Athens Journal of Technology and Engineering December 2017

CFD Modeling of Spray Formation in Diesel Engines

By Mohamed Maher
Ahmed Abu-Elhamyel†
Omar Hassan‡
Alaa El-Din Ramadan
Aya Diab
Mostafa Abdelkhalek
Adham Mohamed
Mohamed Abdel-Hay
Growing concern regarding energy resources and the environment has increased
interest in developing Diesel engines for better fuel economy and lower emissions. A
three dimensional CFD simulation of a 4-stroke engine is developed for a Ruggerini
RD 270 engine using internal combustion engine module in ANSYS-FLUENT. A cold
flow simulation is performed first to visualize the air motion inside the cylinder and to
detect the changes of air properties through the different strokes of the engine. This
simulation is validated against a compression test performed on the engine at the
“Green Energy Lab” at Faculty of Engineering, Ain Shams University. To test the spray
formation model before applying it in the engine model, a simulation of Diesel spray
in a constant volume chamber is performed and validated against the experimental
data by Park et al. (2010). Integration of engine model and spray model is then
performed. A comparison of variation of penetration length for different injection
pressures and diameters is made.

Keywords: Breakup model, Cold flow simulation, Hydrodynamic instability, IC-engine,

Injection nozzle, Penetration length, Spray formation.

Introduction

The design of internal combustion (IC) engines is under significant pressure

for improvement. The next generation of engines needs to be light, compact,
powerful, and flexible, yet produce less pollution and use less fuel. To meet these
competing requirements, innovative engine designs will be needed. The ability


Ain Shams University, Egypt.
†
Ain Shams University, Egypt.
‡
Ain Shams University, Egypt.

Ain Shams University, Egypt.

Ain Shams University, Egypt.

Ain Shams University, Egypt

Ain Shams University, Egypt.

Ain Shams University, Egypt.

271
Vol. 4, No. 4 Maher et al.: CFD Modeling of Spray Formation in Diesel Engines

to analyze the performance of multiple engine designs accurately and rapidly is

also becoming critical.
One of the recent developments is the use of biodiesel engines which are
engines fueled with petrol Diesel fuel blended with biofuels. Usage of biofuels
in IC engines is opening the door to a new era in engines development since they
can be considered as renewable sources of energy that can stand against oil
depletion problem. Many researches are conducted to study biodiesel engines
performance alongside with their environmental impact.
Although biodiesel is non-toxic, produced from renewable resources, can
be used in existing Diesel engines, and produces less greenhouse gas emissions, it
was found to have some drawbacks. One of its main drawbacks is the presence
of water and residual alcohol in biodiesel which may generate an unwanted
reaction, producing free fatty acids that can lead to metallic corrosion especially
with aluminum which comprises most of engine parts in recent times (Munoz
et al., 2012). So the challenge is to introduce a biodiesel with the highest blending
ratio but at the same time can run the engine without modification for existing
engines or usage of more expensive materials for manufacturing the new engines.
A computational fluid dynamics (CFD) modeling of the spray formation
process in a Diesel engine is developed in ANSYS-FLUENT using its discrete
phase modeling (DPM) capability and its IC-engine module.

Engine Model

The engine under consideration is a Ruggerini RD 270 engine with the

specifications shown in Table 1 (Ruggerini, 2003):

Table 1. Ruggerini RD 270 Specifications

Number of cylinders 2
Cooling Air cooled
Bore 95 mm
Stroke 85 mm
Swept volume 1205 cc
Compression ratio 18:1
Clearance 4.7 mm
Connecting rod 187 mm
Crank radius 42.5 mm
Injector hole diameter 0.28 mm
Rated power 20 kw ( 27.2 Hp ) @ 3000 rpm

The performance of an IC engine depends upon the complex interactions

between fluid dynamics of turbulent reacting flows and the engine moving parts
e.g. the intake and exhaust valves and the piston over a particularly short period of
time scale which adds to the complexity.
As a starting point, a cold flow investigation is undertaken to study the air
motion inside the engine's combustion chamber as well as the spray formation
without combustion.

272
Athens Journal of Technology and Engineering December 2017

Figure 1. Engine Geometry

Figure 2. Detailed View of Engine Geometry

A three-dimensional (3D) geometry of the engine is created using Inventor

CAD software as shown in Figures 1 and 2 and the geometry is imported to the
DesignModeler in the “IC Engine” module of ANSYS-FLUENT where it is
decomposed as shown in Figure 3 to facilitate the meshing process. After
decomposition, the engine is divided into three regions: valve, port and chamber
regions. Each region is subdivided into smaller parts to allow generating a fixed
or a moving (dynamic) mesh depending on the engine kinematics; for example:
the chamber region between the cylinder head and the piston needs a layering
mesh that can expand or collapse during the motion of the piston. The created
mesh is shown in Figures 4 and 5.

273
Vol. 4, No. 4 Maher et al.: CFD Modeling of Spray Formation in Diesel Engines

Figure 3. Decomposed Geometry

Figure 4. Geometry Mesh of the Engine

274
Athens Journal of Technology and Engineering December 2017

Figure 5. Mesh Around the Valve

The motion of the piston is specified as a single degree of freedom motion

close to a sinusoidal profile as a function of the engine's crank angle, crank
radius, connecting rod length and engine speed. The piston location is calculated
using

where is the piston location (0 at the top dead center (TDC) and at the
bottom dead center (BDC)), is the connecting rod length, is the piston stroke,
and is the current crank angle. The current crank angle is calculated from

where is the starting crank angle and is the crank shaft speed (ANSYS).

275
Vol. 4, No. 4 Maher et al.: CFD Modeling of Spray Formation in Diesel Engines

Figure 6. Piston Lift Profile

Piston lift
(m)

Position (CA°)

The valves lift profile is developed in accordance with measurements from

the engine. The piston and valve lift profiles are shown in Figures 6 and 7. The
simulation is started when the piston is at the top dead center towards the end
of the compression stroke.

Figure 7. Valves Lift Profile

__ exhaust
__ intake
Valve lift
(m)

Position (CA°)

These profiles govern the mesh deformation throughout the engine

simulation.
Mass, momentum and energy equations alongside with k- turbulence model
are used in the Eulerian frame of reference to model the air flow through the
engine.
The mass equation is given by

276
Athens Journal of Technology and Engineering December 2017

where is the density of the air, and are the velocity components of axes
and respectively and is the source term due to mass exchange
between the air and fuel droplets (evaporation) after the injection.
The momentum equation for axis is given by

where is the pressure, is the normal stress in direction, and are

the shear stresses parallel to and normal to and respectively and is
the momentum source term due to momentum exchange between the air and the
fuel droplets. The momentum equations for the other two axes are similar to axis
equation.
The energy equation is given by

where is the void fraction of the air, is the air internal energy, is the
flow velocity is the rate of volumetric heat addition per unit mass, is the
effective thermal conductivity, and is the energy coupling term with
the dispersed phase.
To model the air turbulence inside the chamber, the standard - model was
used. The transport equations of this model are given by

and

277
Vol. 4, No. 4 Maher et al.: CFD Modeling of Spray Formation in Diesel Engines

where is the turbulent kinetic energy, is the turbulent kinetic energy dissipation
rate, is the turbulent viscosity, is the turbulent Prandtl number, is the
turbulent Mach number and , , , and are constants (ANSYS;
Crowe et al., 1998).
The spatial discretization of the governing equations is set to second order
upwind scheme for higher accuracy. The temporal discretization is done by
setting the solution time step to be equal to the time of 0.25 degree crank angle.
At a speed of 3000 rpm, this time step is nearly equal to 1.39 × 10-5 second
which is small enough to appropriately resolve variations during the engine
simulation.
The velocity contours of the chamber for the cold flow simulation at various
crank angles were obtained as shown in Figure 8.

Figure 8. Velocity Contours (0° is the Start of Expansion Stroke)

Crank angle 4° Crank angle 44°

Crank angle 88° Crank angle 132°

278
Athens Journal of Technology and Engineering December 2017

Crank angle 176° Crank angle 220°

Crank angle 264° Crank angle 308°

Crank angle 348° Crank angle 392°

Crank angle 452° Crank angle 512°

279
Vol. 4, No. 4 Maher et al.: CFD Modeling of Spray Formation in Diesel Engines

Crank angle 548° Crank angle 596°

Crank angle 636° Crank angle 704°

The maximum air velocity at the intake stroke or exhaust stroke well exceeds
100 m/s, which implies that high turbulence levels are achieved inside the
chamber. It is also obvious that the piston configuration enhances the air
turbulence which leads to the formation of a vortex inside the chamber as found by
the tumble ratio graph detected from the simulation shown in Figure 9 (Sushma
and Jagadeesha, 2013).

Figure 9. Tumble Ratio

280
Athens Journal of Technology and Engineering December 2017

It is worth noting that the calculation was run for 3 engine cycles (3×4
strokes) passing through the initial transients to achieve periodicity of the solution.
To validate the data obtained from the simulation, the pressure variation
predicted by the model shown in Figure 10 reached a maximum of 23.5 bar which
deviates by only 6.8 % from that measured during the compression test (22 bar)
(Amr et al., 2016). This deviation may be attributed to leakage which is hard to
simulate in the model given the small clearance gap which would have required
finer mesh that could lead to a significant increase in the computational time for
minor improvement.

Figure 10. Cylinder Pressure vs. Crank Angles

Spray Model

In any engine, the fuel atomization and spray formation facilitate liquid
dispersion in a gaseous phase significantly increasing the interface between the
two fluids which is favorable for mass and heat transfer. In Diesel engines the
combustion process basically depends on the spray structure of the fuel and its
interaction with the air within the combustion chamber.
For validation purposes, a simplified model of the spray injected in a constant
volume chamber is developed and its predictions for comparison against
experimental data published in the open literature (Nawi et al., 2015; Wang et al.,
2016; Fattah et al., 2015; Turner et al., 2012). Specifically, experimental data by
Park et al. (2010) was used for validation since the test conditions were quite close
to those of the current engine conditions with a pressure of 20 bars at the end of
the compression stroke as listed in Table 2.

Table 2. Park et al. (2009) Experimental Conditions

Injection pressure 1200 bar
Ambient pressure 20 bar
Ambient temperature 400K
Injection temperature 290K

281
Vol. 4, No. 4 Maher et al.: CFD Modeling of Spray Formation in Diesel Engines

Diesel fuel of 830 kg/m3 density was injected from a six-hole injector with
a hole diameter of 0.126 mm and length of 0.8 mm. The simulation in the current
work was done for only one hole given its injection flow rate profile shown in
Figure 11.

Figure 11. Injection Flow Rate Profile

The constant volume chamber was modeled by a two-dimensional (2D)

axi-symmetric rectangle using a structured grid of mesh size 1 mm × 1 mm shown
in Figure 12. The calculation domain had a length of 25 cm and a radius of 7.5
cm to prevent impingement of the spray onto the wall.

Figure 12. Chamber Mesh

The spray formation process was modeled in ANSYS-FLUENT using the

dispersed phase model (DPM) that solves the continuous phase with the Eulerian
approach and tracks the spray particles with the Lagrangian approach. Two way
coupling between the spray and the continuous phase is considered in the current
model given the level of their mutual interaction with momentum, energy and

282
Athens Journal of Technology and Engineering December 2017

mass exchanges. This coupling is achieved via mass, momentum and energy
source terms. The mass source term is given by

where is the rate of mass transfer (evaporation) from particle into the
volume of interest , is Sherwood number, is the particle diameter, is
the average density between liquid density at the droplet surface and the
freestream density, is the diffusion coefficient and and are the
mass fraction of species A at the droplet surface and in the free stream
respectively.
The momentum source term along axis is given by

where is the particle velocity in direction. The first term represents the
momentum flux via mass transfer and the second term represents the dynamic
forces on the particle. Again the momentum source terms of and axes are
similar to that of axis.
The energy source term is given by

where is the heat transfer rate to the particle, is the emissivity, is the
Stephan-Boltzmann constant, is Nusselt number, is the particle temperature
and is the continuous phase temperature (ANSYS).
The initial high momentum of the spray into a chamber of high pressure leads
to the breakup of the droplets by higher drag forces mainly. Kelvin-Helmholtz
Rayleigh-Taylor (KH-RT) model is recommended for spray formation modeling
since simulates the spray breakup effectively (Afshar, 2014; Chryssakis and
Kaiktsis, 2008; Reitz and Beale, 1999). This model combines the effects of
Kelvin-Helmholtz waves driven by aerodynamic forces with Rayleigh-Taylor

283
Vol. 4, No. 4 Maher et al.: CFD Modeling of Spray Formation in Diesel Engines

instabilities due to acceleration of shed drops ejected into freestream conditions.

Both mechanisms model droplet breakup by tracking wave growth on the surface
of the droplet, with breakup occurring due to the fastest growing instability based
on local conditions.
Droplet velocities are maximum at the spray axis and decrease in the radial
direction due to interaction with the entrained gas. In the dense spray, the
probability of droplet collisions is high. These collisions can result in a change
of droplet velocity and size. Droplets can break up into smaller ones, but they
can also coalesce to form larger drops. The collision and coalescence models
used in the current work are based on O‟Rourke‟s algorithm (ANSYS; Hamdani et
al., 2015). Figure 13 shows the progression of droplets breakup, dispersal and
penetration in the domain.

Figure 13. Spray Growth through the Domain with Time

1 ms

2 ms

3 ms

The spray-air interaction is a two-way coupled phenomenon as the velocity

of the air in the domain increases from zero to about 45 m/s at the core of the
spray and so does the particles velocities averaged over each cell (DPM velocity)
decreases from about 55 m/s to zero at the edges of the spray as shown in
Figure 14. This concept is also present in the temperature as we can see in
Figure 15 that the temperature of the domain decreased from 400 K to about
370 K at the core of the spray while the DPM temperature increased from 290
K to about 375 K inside the spray cloud.

284
Athens Journal of Technology and Engineering December 2017

Figure 14. Contours of Domain and DPM Velocities

285
Vol. 4, No. 4 Maher et al.: CFD Modeling of Spray Formation in Diesel Engines

Figure 15. Contours of Domain and DPM Temperatures

The model prediction of the progression of the spray penetration length in

time is compared with experimental data measured by Park et al. (2010) under
similar conditions as shown in Figure 16. The comparison indicates that the model
has not only captured the qualitative behavior of the spray but also achieved
reasonable quantitative agreement.

286
Athens Journal of Technology and Engineering December 2017

Figure 16. Penetration Length Curves for Real Spray and Modeled Spray

Now that the engine model has been validated against experimental data, it
was interesting to explore how the model predicts the spray behavior under
different operating and/or design conditions. It is important to note here that the
injection in current engine is mechanical with lower injection pressures than
that used in the validation process but it is assumed that the breakup and atomizer
models hold for the pressure range under investigation.

Engine Cold Flow Simulation with Diesel Injection

Different cases were studied to gain better understanding of the dependence

of spray characteristics on different operational and geometric parameters, for
example: the attendant pressures as well as injector nozzle diameter. Ruggerini
RD 270 engine uses a 4-hole traditional mechanical injection system with its
design details summarized in Table 3.

Table 3. Ruggerini RD 270 Injector Specifications

Nozzle diameter 0.00028 m
Nozzle length 0.00056 m
Case 1
Injection pressure 350 bar
Injection mass flow rate 0.008738 kg/s

The average injection mass flow rate can be determined by the following
equation:

287
Vol. 4, No. 4 Maher et al.: CFD Modeling of Spray Formation in Diesel Engines

where is the average injection mass flow rate per hole per cylinder pet cycle,
is the flow coefficient through the orifice, is the orifice cross sectional
area, is the fuel density and is the pressure difference between the injection
pressure and the chamber pressure.
The predicted spray penetration length under these conditions, referred to
as Case 1, is shown in Figure 17. It should be noted that angle zero is taken at
the start of the injection process.

Figure 17. Case 1 Penetration Curve

Though Case 1 simulates the engine conditions using an injection pressure

of 350 bar, higher injection pressures (500 and 650 bar) were tested and compared
to Case 1. As expected, with higher injection pressures, higher flow rates are
encountered with the same injector diameter and injection period. Predictions
of these two cases (Cases 2 and 3) are given in Table 4.

Table 4. Higher Injection Pressures Cases

Case 2 Case 3
Nozzle diameter (m) 0.00028 0.00028
Nozzle length (m) 0.00056 0.00056
Injection pressure (bar) 500 650
Injection mass flow rate (kg/s) 0.010558 0.012108

Cases 1, 2, and 3 are compared in Figure 18, clearly increasing the injection
pressure imparts more momentum to the spray and hence increases its penetration
length.

288
Athens Journal of Technology and Engineering December 2017

Figure 18. Penetration Curves for Cases 1, 2 and 3

Now the effect of changing injector hole diameter while keeping the injection
pressure, injection period as well as the nozzle's length-to-diameter ratio constant
is investigated. The model predictions under these two conditions (Cases 4 and 5)
are given in Table 5.

Table 5. Larger Injection Diameters Cases

Case 4 Case 5
Nozzle diameter (m) 0.00035 0.0004
Nozzle length (m) 0.0007 0.0008
Injection pressure (bar) 350 350
Injection mass flow rate (kg/s) 0.013675 0.017861

Cases 1, 4, and 5 are compared in Figure 19. To highlight the impact of

nozzle diameter on the penetration length. Increasing the nozzle diameter for
the same injection pressure increases the penetration length as more fuel is
injected and hence higher momentum is imparted to the spray hence achieving a
longer penetration length.

Figure 19. Penetration Curves for Cases 1, 4 and 5

289
Vol. 4, No. 4 Maher et al.: CFD Modeling of Spray Formation in Diesel Engines

The previous cases focused on the impact of injection pressures and diameters
on the spray behavior without taking into consideration the stoichiometric
condition inside the combustion chamber. Usually, Diesel engines operate air-
to-fuel ratios of about 15:1, i.e. with lean and definitely not rich or stoichiometric
mixtures at all load conditions. This is necessary to ensure proper mixing between
the fuel vapor and the air before the end of combustion. The stoichiometric
reaction for the combustion of Diesel fuel with air is represented by

The air-to-fuel ( ) ratio in the previous reaction equals 14.98. Air mass
in the chamber before the injection was calculated in the simulation and found
to be 0.000697 kg. The injection period for all the cases in the simulation was
20° crank angle with the engine running at 3000 rpm so the injected fuel mass
through the 4 holes of the injector for each case could be calculated. Table 6
shows the ratios for all the cases and the excess air factor for each one
which is defined as the ratio between the actual ratio to the stoichiometric one.

Table 6. Air-to-fuel Ratio and Excess Air Factor for Cases 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5
Case
1 17.95 1.198
2 14.85 0.991
3 12.95 0.864
4 11.47 0.766
5 8.78 0.586

It seems that the mixtures of Cases 2, 3, 4 and 5 are all rich and hence
unrealistic since it will be difficult to burn all of the fuel particles thus leading
to soot formation. Therefore, another simulation was performed to study the
spray behavior if the injection pressures and diameters were changed while
keeping the fuel mass flow rate constant and hence a constant ratio. In this
study the injection pressures used ranged from 350 bar to 1200 bar like those
used in modern common rail injection systems. The injection mass flow rate
was kept at 0.008738 kg/s like Case 1. Table 7 shows the data of the new three
cases.

Table 7. Constant Injection Flow Rate Cases

Case 6 Case 7 Case 8
Nozzle diameter (m) 0.00024 0.00022 0.0002
Nozzle length (m) 0.00048 0.00044 0.0004
Injection pressure (bar) 600 900 1200
Injection mass flow rate (kg/s) 0.008738 0.008738 0.008738

The resultant penetration curves for these cases are shown in Figure 20.
Initially, particles issuing from larger holes will penetrate further than those

290
Athens Journal of Technology and Engineering December 2017

issuing from their smaller counterparts since the momentum of the former is
much higher due to their larger mass. However, this behavior doesn‟t last too
long as the effect of higher injection velocity due to the higher pressure difference
dominates as such the fuel particles reach the walls of the chamber before those
injected with lower pressures.

Figure 20. Penetration Curves for Cases 1, 6, 7 and 8

Conclusions

A CFD model of a Ruggerini RD 270 was implemented and validated

against experimental data by Park et al. and a compression test performed in
house; both showed a good agreement. The validated spray model was integrated
into the engine simulation to gain better understanding of the spray characteristics
inside the engine under different operational as well as geometrical parameters.
Specifically, the effect of injection pressure at constant injection diameter was
studied and the model showed that a 30% increase in the injection pressure had
little effect on the penetration length. Additionally, the effect of increasing the
injection diameter at constant injection pressure was also studied and was
shown to have a significant effect on the penetration length. This is attributed
to the fact that increasing the particles with larger nozzle diameters increases
their momentum which allows them to move faster into the domain before they
breakup into smaller droplets. Finally, both the injection pressure, as well as
the injection nozzle diameter, were changed while keeping the injection mass
flow rate constant and hence, the overall air-to-fuel ratio constant. For this
latter simulation, the injection pressure range used was in the range of that used
in common rail systems. Consequently, particles penetrated further in the
computational domain just after the start of injection irrespective of their size,
due to the large momentum imparted to them. However, this may be problematic

291
Vol. 4, No. 4 Maher et al.: CFD Modeling of Spray Formation in Diesel Engines

since fuel particles may reach the engine walls before they fully evaporate,
which implies the need for optimization.
Future Work

Though the cold flow simulation is an important milestone in the current

research program, however, we'd like to extend the work to include both
combustion and emissions models. Additionally, it is planned to compare the
engine performance using different blends of biodiesel fuel to petrol diesel under
different operating and/or design parameters.

Acknowledgments

This research was made possible by the financial support of Ain Shams
University 2014/2015 Research Grant. The authors wish to express their deep
gratitude.

Nomenclature

Piston location
TDC Top dead center
BDC Bottom dead center
Connecting rod length
Piston stroke
Current crank angle
Starting crank angle
Crank shaft speed
Time
Density of the air
Velocity components of axis
Velocity components of axis
Velocity components of axis
Pressure
Flow velocity
Normal stress in direction
Shear stresses parallel to and normal to
Shear stresses parallel to and normal to
Void fraction of the air
Air internal energy
Rate of volumetric heat addition per unit mass
Effective thermal conductivity
Mass source term
Momentum source term

292
Athens Journal of Technology and Engineering December 2017

Energy source term

Turbulent kinetic energy
Turbulent kinetic energy dissipation rate
Turbulent viscosity
Turbulent Prandtl number
Turbulent Mach number
Rate of mass transfer from particle
Volume
Sherwood number
Particle diameter
Average density between liquid density at the droplet surface and the
freestream density
Diffusion coefficient
Mass fraction of species A at the droplet surface
Mass fraction of species A in the free stream
Velocity of particle in direction
Fluid dynamic forces on particle in direction
Heat transfer rate to particle
Emissivity
Stephan-Boltzmann constant
Nusselt number
Particle temperature
Continuous phase temperature
Average injection mass flow rate per hole per cylinder pet cycle
Flow coefficient through the orifice
Orifice cross sectional area
Fuel density
Pressure difference between the injection pressure and the chamber
pressure

References

Afshar, A. (2014) „Evaluation of liquid fuel spray models for hybrid RANS/LES and
DLES prediction of turbulent reactive flows‟, Graduate Department of Aerospace
Engineering, University of Toronto.
Amr E., Omar E., Amr K. and Hazem S. (2016) „Design and construction of variable
compression ratio modification on a 4-stroke double cylinder diesel engine‟,
Graduation Project Report, Mechanical Power Department, Ain Shams University.
ANSYS® Academic Research, Release 16, Help System, FLUENT theory guide,
ANSYS, Inc.
Chryssakis, C. and Kaiktsis, L. (2008) „Evaluation of Fuel Spray Atomization Models
for Conditions Applicable to Large Marine Diesel Engines‟, in ILASS.
Crowe, C. T., Sommerfeld, M. and Tsuji, Y. (1998) Multiphase Flows with Droplets and
Particles, CRC Press New York. doi: 10.1201/b11103-4.

293
Vol. 4, No. 4 Maher et al.: CFD Modeling of Spray Formation in Diesel Engines

Fattah, I. M. R. et al. (2015) „Macroscopic Spray Characteristics of an Evaporating

Diesel Spray‟, in Australian Combustion Symposium, pp. 1-4.
Hamdani, A. et al. (2015) „Numerical simulations on droplet coalescence in an L-shaped
duct for inlet fogging of gas turbine engines‟, International Journal of Gas Turbine,
Propulsion and Power Systems, 7(1), pp. 1-9.
Munoz, R. A. A. et al. (2012) „Biodiesel : Production, Characterization, Metallic
Corrosion and Analytical Methods for Contaminants‟, Biodiesel - Feedstocks,
Production and Applications, p. 48. doi: 10.5772/53655.
Nawi, M. A. M. et al. (2015) „Droplets Behavior and Evaporation of Diesel Spray
Affected by Ambient Density after Pilot Injection‟, in JSAE/SAE 2015 Small
Engine Technologies Conference & Exhibition.
Park, S. H., Kim, H. J. and Lee, C. S. (2010) „Comparison of experimental and
predicted atomization characteristics of high-pressure diesel spray under various
fuel and ambient temperature‟, Journal of Mechanical Science and Technology,
24(7), pp. 1491-1499.
Reitz, R. D. and Beale, J. C. (1999) „Modeling Spray Atomization With the Kelvin-
Helmholtz/Rayleigh-Taylor Hybrid Model‟, Atomization and Sprays, 9(6), pp.
623-650. doi: 10.1615/AtomizSpr.v9.i6.40.
Ruggerini Work Shop Manual (2003), RD series engines, p.no. 1-5302-620, RD 270.
Sushma, H. and Jagadeesh, K. B. (2013) „CFD modeling of the in-cylinder flow in
direct-injection Diesel engines‟, International Journal of Scientific and Research
Publications, 3(12).
Turner, M. R. et al. (2012) „A breakup model for transient Diesel fuel sprays‟, Fuel.
Elsevier Ltd, 97, pp. 288-305. doi: 10.1016/j.fuel.2012.01.076.
Wang, Z. et al. (2016) „Macroscopic and microscopic characterization of diesel spray
under room temperature and low temperature with split injection‟, Fuel Processing
Technology, 142 (February), pp. 71-85. doi: 10.1016/j.fuproc.2015.10.007.

294