DISSERTATION

Internal Flow and Valve Dynamics in a Reciprocating Compressor

ausgefhrt zum Zwecke der Erlangung des akademischen Grades eines Doktors der u technischen Wissenschaften unter der Leitung von

Ao.Univ.Prof. Dipl.-Ing. Dr. techn. Herbert Steinrck u am Institut fr Strmungsmechanik und Wrmebertragung (E 322) u o a u

eingereicht an der Technischen Universitt Wien a Fakultt fr Maschinenwesen und Betriebswissenschaften a u

von

Dipl.-Ing. Roland Aigner Matrikelnummer 9625691 1230 Wien, Triester Strae 221/3/9

Wien, im Juni 2007

Kurzfassung Die Strmung in einem Koblenkompressor wird durch die Bewegung des Kolbens und o durch das Onen und Schlieen der Ventile hervorgerufen. Vorallem die Wechselwirkung von Druckwellen mit der Ventilbewegung bestimmt die auftretenden Strmungsformen. o Die vorliegende Dissertation liefert ein genaues aber einfaches numerisches Verfahren um die Innenstrmung und die Ventildynamik zu berechnen. Dabei erstreckt sich das o betrachtete Rechengebiet von den Ventilen der Saugseite bis zur Druckkammer des Kompressors auf der Auslassseite. Fr die mathematische Beschreibung des Strmungsfeldes u o werden quasi eindimensionale Eulergleichungen verwendet. Bei Kompressoren mit mehr als zwei Ventilen wird hingegen ein zweidimensionales Modell eingefhrt um den Einu uss mehrerer Ventiltaschen zu bercksichtigen. Obwohl die Energiegleichungen bei den u Eulergleichungen durch die Isentropenbeziehung ersetzt wird, werden Druckverluste an Sprngen des Strmungsquerschnittes mit Hilfe von Verlustkoezienten eingerechnet. Veru o schiedene Randbedingungen vervollstndigen das mathematische Strmungsmodell. Fr a o u die Ventilbewegung wird das Modell von Costagliola dahingehend modiziert, dass auch Druckwellen im Zylinder bercksichtigt werden knnen. u o Die resultierenden Gleichungssysteme werden mit Hilfe niter Volumenverfahren von Le Veque, Mac-Cormack, Lax, Wendro und Friedrichs gelst. Ein besonderes Augenmerk o wird dabei auf die Vor- und Nachteile der einzelnen Verfahren gerichtet. Schlielich wurden Messungen an einem Testkompressor mit zwei Ventilen von Burckhardt Compression (Schweiz) durchgefhrt. Vergleiche mit den numerischen Lsungen u o zeigen, dass die wichtigsten physikalischen Eekte genau beschrieben werden und daher sowohl die Strmungsform als auch die Ventilbewegung gut bestimmbar sind. Zustzlich o a wurden die Messergebnisse eines Kompressors mit acht Ventilen von Ariel (USA) mit der Lsung des zweidimensionalen Modells verglichen. Hier werden die von der Simulation o vorhergesagten komplizierten Wellensystem von der Messung besttigt. a

Abstract The gas ow inside a reciprocating compressor is the result of the oscillating piston motion and the opening and closing of the valves. Above all, the interaction of pressure waves with the valve motion determines the present ow patterns. This thesis provides an accurate but simple numerical model capable of calculating internal ows and valve dynamics in a reciprocating compressor. The considered computational domain extends from the valves of the suction side to the pressure chamber of the discharge side. Quasi one-dimensional Euler equations are employed to describe the gas ow. However, in case of cylinders with more than two valves two-dimensional models are introduced to account for the eects of multiple valve pockets. Although the energy equation is replaced by the isentropic condition, pressure losses at sudden changes of ow cross-section are taken into account by means of loss coecients. Dierent kinds of boundary conditions complete the mathematical model of the gas ow. The valve dynamics are described by a modied Costagliola-model which takes pressure waves in the cylinder into account. In order to solve the governing systems of equations nite volume methods from LeVeque, Mac-Cormack, Lax, Wendro and Friedrich are employed and their advantages highlighted. Finally measurements have been carried out on a test compressor with two valves from Burckhardt Compression (Switzerland). Comparisons with the results of the quasione-dimensional model show that main physical eects are described accurately and thus both, gas ow in the compressor and valve motion can be predicted well. In addition the measurement results of a compressor from Ariel (USA) with eight valves are compared to the solution of the quasi two-dimensional model. Here the complicated two-dimensional wave pattern inside the cylinder and valve motion agrees well with the the measurement data.

Acknowledgement / Danksagung
Herrn Ao. Prof. Dr. Herbert Steinrck sei an dieser Stelle mein besonderer Dank ausgeu sprochen. Nur durch seine Untersttzung, Betreuung, und Hilfe wurde diese Dissertation u mglich. o Ich bedanke mich sehr herzlich bei Prof. Gotthard Will fr die Ubernahme des Koreferats. u Herrn Dr. Peter Steinrck, Herrn Dr. Georg Samland und Herrn Dr. Gunther Machu u danke ich sehr herzlich fr die zahlreichen fachlichen Diskussionen. u I am very grateful to Fred Newman who provided me with valuable suggestions and measurement data from Ariel Corporation. Dank gebhrt auch Dr. Daniel Sauter fr die reibungslos verlaufenden Messungen bei u u Burckhardt Compression AG. Herzlich bedanken mchte ich mich bei meiner Freundin Ins, meinen Freunden und meiner o e Familie. Des Weiteren mchte ich mich bei den Mitarbeitern des Instituts bedanken. Vor allem o Richard, Uli, Guido und Thomas haben den Arbeitsalltag erleichtert und in so manchen unproduktiven Stunden fr Ausgleich gesorgt. Besonders dankbar bin ich Herrn Prof. Wilu helm Schneider fr die zahlreichen wissenschaftlichen und fcherbergreifenden Ratschlge. u a u a

I acknowledge the European Forum for Reciprocating Compressors that has nanced this work.

Contents
Content . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . III List of Figures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . IV List of Tables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . VII List of Symbols . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . IX 1 Introduction 2 Modelling of the Reciprocating Compressor 2.1 Geometry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.1.1 2.1.2 2.1.3 2.2 Simulation domain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . One-dimensional model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Two-dimensional model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 5 5 5 5 7 8 8 9 9

Characteristic Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2.1 2.2.2 2.2.3 Gas Flow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Heat Transfer and Dissipation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Classication of Compressors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

2.3 2.4

Piston Motion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Gas Flow inside the Compressor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 2.4.1 2.4.2 2.4.3 2.4.4 2.4.5 2.4.6 Quasi one-dimensional Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Quasi two-dimensional Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Boundary Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

T-piece . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 Interface Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Pressure Losses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

2.5

Valve Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 2.5.1 2.5.2 Valve Dynamic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Flow through the valve . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

2.5.3

Asymmetric Flow in Valve Pockets, Valve Masking and Slotted Valve Pockets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 22

3 Numerical Method 3.1

Finite Volume Schemes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 3.1.1 3.1.2 One-dimensional Finite Volume Schemes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 Two-dimensional Finite Volume Schemes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

3.2

Numerical Boundary Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 3.2.1 3.2.2 3.2.3 3.2.4 3.2.5 3.2.6 3.2.7 3.2.8 Walls one-dimensional . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 Mass-ow through the Boundary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 Pressure Outlet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 Boundary Problem at Sudden Changes of Cross-section . . . . . . . 37 Boundary Conditions at the Valve . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 Boundary Conditions at the T-piece . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 Wall two-dimensional . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 Interface Condition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40

3.3

Equation of motion for the valve plate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 44

4 Measurements 4.1

Compressor with two valves . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 4.1.1 4.1.2 Test Cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 Results of Measurement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46

4.2

Compressor with eight valves . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56 59

5 Comparison of Measurement and Numerical data 5.1

One-dimensional Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 5.1.1 5.1.2 5.1.3 5.1.4 5.1.5 5.1.6 Comparison with Measurement Results of the Burckhardt test compressor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 Super elevation of the pressure due to initial sticking . . . . . . . . . 63 Pressure loss at sudden changes of cross section . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 Dierent locations of outow boundary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 Impact velocity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65 Valve losses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65

5.2

Two-dimensional model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65 5.2.1 5.2.2 Comparison with measurement results of the Ariel test compressor . 65 Variation of discharge pressure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69

II

5.2.3 5.2.4 5.2.5 5.2.6

Pressure distribution inside the cylinder . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 Moment onto the piston . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71 Valve Opening . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71 Valve Masking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74 75

6 Remarks on Numerical Schemes 6.1

Comparison of full three-dimensional, quasi one-dimensional and quasi twodimensional numerical methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75 6.1.1 6.1.2 Pressure waves . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76 Computational Time . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77

6.2

Limitations of the Numerical Schemes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78 6.2.1 6.2.2 Limitations of the one-dimensional model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78 Limitations of the quasi two-dimensional model . . . . . . . . . . . . 79 80 82

7 Summary A Tables

A.1 Sensors of Burckhardt Test Compressor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83 A.2 Pressure loss coecients for the T-piece . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83 Reference Curriculum Vitae 85 87

III

List of Figures
1.1 1.2 Double-acting compressor of barrel-design. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Results of a full three-dimensional simulation: pressure distribution at the cylinder head and in the symmetry plane [22]. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Flow geometry inside the compressor. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Schema of the one-dimensional model. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Cross-section areas of the one-dimensional model. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Model of discharge system VR1: Pressure chamber is modelled at the end of the valve retainer. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Model of discharge system VR2: Pressure chamber is connected to the valve retainer by a T-piece. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Model with discharge pipe and damper. Crank end working chamber is optional (dashed lines). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Schema of the two-dimensional model. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Schema of the two-dimensional model with eight valves. . . . . . . . . . . . 1 2 6 6 6 7 7 8 9 9

2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7 2.8 2.9

Right boundary of computational domain: Characteristics variables entering and leaving at the right end of the computational domain. . . . . . . . . 14

2.10 T-piece consisting of tube 1, tube 2 and tube 3: The shaded square displays the junction area. Its appropriate in-going and out-going characteristics w1,i and w2,i are indexed by the adjacent tube i = 1, 2, 3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 2.11 Interface between one-dimensional and two-dimensional domain. . . . . . . 16 2.12 Modelling pressure losses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

2.13 Sudden expansion of cross-section . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 2.14 Pressure losses at the T-piece . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 2.15 Schema of a plate valve. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 2.16 Pressure distribution and velocity vectors in the symmetry plane during discharge (full three-dimensional simulation). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 2.17 Valve Masking. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 2.18 Slotted Valve Pockets. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

IV

3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 3.9

Subdivision of the computational domain into grid cells Ci . . . . . . . . . . 23 Riemann problems at each cell boundary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 Riemann problem at the left boundary xi 1 of the ith cell . . . . . . . . . . 26
2

Riemann problem of a non-autonomous system at the left boundary xi 1 2 of the i-th cell. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 Riemann problem of a non-autonomous system at the left boundary xi 1 2 of the i-th cell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 Block-structured grid. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 Typical control volume in a non-orthogonal grid. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 Ghost cell Ck+1 at the boundary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 Mass ow through the boundary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35

3.10 Numerical treatment of sudden changes in ow cross-sections: Computational domain is separated and pressure loss pv is introduced . . . . . . . . 37 3.11 Valve region and the adjacent nite volume cells: Ghost cells Ck+1,1 and C0,2 are introduced for the numerical boundary conditions. . . . . . . . . . . 38 3.12 Finite Cells at the T-piece. Junction area is shaded . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 3.13 Boundary cell in the two-dimensional domain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 3.14 Interface between two-dimensional and one-dimensional domain. . . . . . . 41 3.15 Mass correction: Mass inside the artical cells and mass uxes during one time step . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 Shema of the Burckhardt experimental compressor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 Location of the sensors inside the cylinder 1, the suction and the discharge valve retainer. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 Comparison of relative pressure at pc5 and valve lift at dierent times ta , tb and tc . Case: pout = 3 bar, cs =48N/mm , xv,max =1.35 mm. . . . . . . . 47 Comparison of relative pressure at pc5 and valve lift with 2 cylinders, 1 cylinder and 1 chamber working. Case: pout = 3 bar, cs =48 N/mm, xv,max =1.35 mm. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 Comparison of relative pressure in the valve retainer: 2 cylinders, 1 cylinder and 1 working chamber. Case: pout = 4 bar, cs =48 N/mm, xv,max =1.35 mm. 48 Relative Pressure at pressure sensors pc5, pc6 and pout and valve lift. Case: pout = 4 bar, cs =48 N/mm, xv,max =1.35 mm. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 Pressure dierence pc5-pc1. Case: pout = 4 bar, cs =48 N/mm, xv,max =1.35 mm. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 Relative Pressure at pressure sensors pc1, pc3, pc4, pc5 and pc6. Case: pout = 4 bar, cs =48 N/mm, xv,max =1.35 mm. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51

4.5 4.6 4.7 4.8

4.9

Relative pressure in front (pc5) and behind pressure valve (pout) . Cases: 1 chamber, pout = 4 bar, cs =48 N/mm, xv,max = 1.35 mm and 1 chamber, pout = 1 bar, cs =48 N/mm, xvmax =1.35 mm. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51

4.10 Dierence pressure pc5-pout over valve lift for dierent discharge pressures . Cases: 1 chamber, pout = 1/2/3/4 bar, cs = 48 N/mm, xv,max = 1.35 mm. 52 4.11 Comparison of valve plate motion at sensor VP1, VP2 and VP3. Case: 1 chamber, pout = 4 bar, cs =48 N/mm, xv,max =1.35 mm. . . . . . . . . . . . 53 4.12 Measurements of valve plate motion with sensor VP1 and VP2. . . . . . . . 54 4.13 Askew valve plate: Dierent contributions. Case: 1 chamber, pout = 4 bar, cs =48 N/mm, xv,max =1.35 mm. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 4.14 Comparison of relative pressure at pc5 and valve lift. Cases: pout = 4 bar, cs =48 N/mm and cs =80 N/mm, xv,max =1.35 mm. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55 4.15 Comparison of relative pressure at pc5 and valve lift. Cases: pout = 4 bar, cs =48 N/mm, xv,max = 1.05 / 1.35 / 1.65 mm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56 4.16 Location of sensors inside cylinder . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 4.17 Measurement data of absolute pressure at dierent sensors. . . . . . . . . . 58 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 5.6 5.7 5.8 5.9 Burckhardt test compressor: Comparison of absolute pressure at pc5 and valve lift. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60 Burckhardt test compressor: Comparison of absolute pressure at pc6 and valve lift. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60 Burckhardt test compressor: Comparison of absolute pressure at pout. . . . 61 Burckhardt test compressor: Comparison of dierence pressure pc5-pc1. . . 61 Initiation of waves: Pressure distribution inside the cylinder and in the valve retainer at the beginning of the discharge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 Delay of valve opening due to viscosity in valve gap . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 Eect of pressure loss at sudden change of cross-section . . . . . . . . . . . 64 Comparison of absolute pressure at pout for dierent models of the pressure chamber. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65 Comparison of absolute pressure at pc5 and valve lift for dierent models of the pressure chamber. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66

5.10 Valve Losses at discharge valve . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66 5.11 Impact velocity of discharge valve depending on discharge pressure . . . . . 66 5.12 Ariel test compressor: Comparison of pressure distribution at pc2 and pout 67

5.13 Ariel test compressor: Comparison of pressure distribution at pc4 and pin . 68 5.14 Ariel test compressor: Comparison of dierence pressure pc2-pc4. . . . . . . 68 5.15 Variation of discharge pressure: pout = 640000 / 610000 Pa . . . . . . . . . 70 5.16 Ariel test compressor: Pressure distribution in the cylinder at various times. 72

VI

5.17 Ariel test compressor: Velocity magnitudes in the cylinder at various times.

73

5.18 Moment onto Piston . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73 5.19 Calculating the moment onto the piston: Pressure distribution inside cylinder 73 5.20 Valve motion for dierent discharge valves . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74 5.21 Mass ux through dierent discharge valves . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74 5.22 Eect of Valve Masking: Comaparison of pressure at suction side pc2 6.1 6.2 6.3 . . . 74

Comparison of dierent nite volume schemes: Pressure pc5 inside the cylinder and valve motion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76 Comparison of dierent nite volume schemes: Pressure dierence pc6-pc5. 77

Comparison of absolute pressure at pc5 and valve lift with discharge pressure of 2 bar. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79

VII

List of Tables
3.1 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 5.1 6.1 Dierent one-dimensional nite volume schemes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 Main Specications of the Burckhardt test compressor. . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 Specications of the valves. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 Pressure dierence at closed valve (valve starts to open) for dierent discharge pressures. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 Impact velocities for dierent maximum valve plate lifts. . . . . . . . . . . . 55 Main Specications of the Ariel test compressor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56 Specications of the test case . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 Calculation Time . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77

A.1 Sensors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83 A.2 Pressure loss coecients for the T-piece [14] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84 A.3 Values for fbr [14] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84

VIII

List of Symbols

A Av c cF cm1 cp cv cs C d fe1mm F FLF FR f Fadh Fv F g h h ht i j J K l l1 m m

area force area of the valve speed of sound force coecient valve masking constant specic heat capacity at constant pressure specic heat capacity at constant volume spring constant area of two-dimensional cell diameter of cylinder valve ow area when xv = 1mm numerical ux vector Lax-Friedrichs numerical ux vector Richtmyer numerical ux vector ux vector in x-direction valve plate force due to adhesion eects total valve plate force second order correction of F-wave ux vector in y-direction specic enthalpy tensor total specic enthalpy unit vector in x-direction unit vector in y-direction Jacobian matrix pressure loss coecient length of piston rod initial deection of valve spring mass mass ux IX

mv M n n p pin pout pt p0 Q r r R Re s S T Ty T t t t u U u v vv V Vch w ws W x xm0 xm1 xv xv,min xv,max y z Z

mass of valve plate mass per area speed of the crankshaft unit normal vector pressure suction pressure discharge pressure total pressure reference pressure heat ux length of the cranklever eigenvector of the Jacobian matrix mass per length Reynolds number source vector surface temperature moment onto piston matrix of right eigenvectors of the Jacobian matrix time dimonsionless time composed with wave speed and diameter of cylinder dimonsionless time composed with piston motion state vector averaged state vector velocity in x-direction velocity in y-direction valve plate velocity volume volume of cylinder head recess characteristic variable width of valve pocket opening shock-wave discontinuities coordinate in lateral direction, coordinate in plane parallel to cylinder head characteristic length of valve masking characteristic length of valve masking distance between valve plate and valve seating minimum distance between valve plate and valve seating maximum distance between valve plate and valve seating coordinate in plane parallel to cylinder head coordinate in direction of cylinder axis distance between cylinder head and piston X

Z0 Z

cylinder clearance, Z at dead centner F-wave, numerical ux increments

Greek symbols
num v num v t x y pmax 0 coecient for the wave decomposition numerical viscosity in x-direction valve constant describing eective cross-section coecient for the F-wave decomposition numerical viscosity in y-direction valve constant describing eective cross-section ratio of specic heats time step width of cell in x-direction width of cell in y-direction maximum pressure dierence inside cylinder compressor classication number quotient of pressure gradients eigenvalue of the Jacobian matrix dynamic viscosity ux limiter density reference density eigenvalue of the Jacobian matrix eective ow area of the valve angle of the crankshaft

XI

Chapter 1

Introduction
The task of a reciprocating compressor is to increase the pressure of a gas. The main parts are a cylinder, a driven piston and passive unidirectional restrictor valves (gure 1.1). During expansion the piston movement increases the volume of the compression chamber. When the pressure inside the cylinder drops below the suction pressure gas enters the cylinder via the suction valves. The piston reaches the lower dead centre, reverses its movement and therefore starts to compress the fresh gas. Now the suction valves close and the gas undergoes an almost adiabatic compression. When the piston approaches the top dead centre the pressure inside the compression chamber forces the discharge valves to open and the gas is delivered to the discharge pipe. Finally, the piston reaches the top dead centre, discharge valves close and the cycle starts again. Smaller reciprocating compressors can be found in everyday life applications such as refrigerators and trucks whereas this thesis addresses rather large barrel design compressors used in the gas industry, steel industry, chemical industry, oil reneries and low density polyethylene productions. In a barrel design compressor the valves are located alongside the cylinder (gure 1.1).

Figure 1.1: Double-acting compressor of barrel-design. Reciprocating compressors are often crucial and expensive systems in this elds of application and reliability is very important. Since most of the machines are custom 1

designed or produced in small batches designing by means of prototypes can not be used. Therefore accurate design tools play an important role. Not only power consumption and overall ow rate are important design criteria but also valve motion and moments on the piston, which inuence the life-cycle of the the machines considerably, must be determined accurately. Full three-dimensional simulations of reciprocating compressors with present commercial CFD-programs are the state of the art. They produce accurate and reliable results regarding valve motion, gas ow and heat transfer [22]. However, they cannot meet the demands of engineers for usability and short computation times [22]. Common simplied approaches with short computation times are based on the works done by Costagliola [5]. In this model the change of state inside the cylinder is assumed to be quasi static and isentropic. Thus the thermodynamic state (pressure, temperature, density) is taken to be uniform within the cylinder. The valve motion is determined by the pressure dierence across the valve. Since the valve is responsible for most of the breakdowns during a lifecylce of a compressor [25] special attention has to be paid to the valve motion. Moreover valve manufacturers have identied the impact velocity of the valve plate onto the catcher as one of the most important design criteria. Due to the fact that wave phenomena within the cylinder are neglected the predicted valve motion deviates considerably from the measured one and thus these simplied models fail to be a suitable base of a design tool. In addition, moments on the piston which are caused by the pressure waves inside the cylinder cannot be determined. Therefore critical excitations of the piston rod cannot be predicted. Calculating the gas ow in a compressor taking waves into account seems to be a complicated task and a full three-dimensional simulation unavoidable. However, the results of [22] for the cylinder show that plane waves in lateral direction dominate (gure 1.2). Near the centre line the curvatures of the pressure surfaces are small. It turns out that a quasi one-dimensional model of the gas ow in the compressor, coupled to a simple valve model is sucient to describe the main eects in a compressor with two valves. Namely the interaction of the plane waves with the valve dynamics. Compressors with more than two valves require a quasi two-dimensional approach in order to account for the multiple valve pockets, where the gas enters and leaves the cylinder.

Figure 1.2: Results of a full three-dimensional simulation: pressure distribution at the cylinder head and in the symmetry plane [22]. Studies of E. Machu [19] give a rst insight of the eect of waves and unsteady ow 2

inside the cylinder. He calculates simple waves by using the method of characteristics. In his paper it is shown that calculated impact speed is considerably reduced, compared to Costagliola models, by taking the waves into account. However, only the initial stages of the outow phase can be captured well. Moreover this model does not account for geometrical eects. Later G. Machu [20], [21] introduced a model based on the one dimensional Euler equations, which is capable of describing laterally running waves in the compressor and their interaction with the valve dynamics. This model provides the basis for the present work. In Chapter 2 dierent models for the interaction of the gas ow and the valve dynamics are described. Depending on the description of the geometry three-, two- and one-dimensional models are considered. It will be discussed how a complicated threedimensional geometry is mapped onto a quasi one- or two-dimensional geometry. Special care is taken selecting the computational domain and appropriate boundary conditions. The main advantage of quasi one- and two- dimensional models is that the computational domains can be kept constant although the ow domain inside the cylinder changes due to the piston motion. Furthermore we derive the governing equations for the gas ow from the Euler equations by integrating over a cross-section or cell. The resulting system of hyperbolic equations with source terms can be written in the form u f (u, x, y) g(u, x, y) + + = s(u, x, y) . t x y (1.1)

where u stands for the state vector. The ux vector f and g and the source vector s depend not only on u, but also on the space coordinates x and y. In case of onedimensional models the dependencies on y and the source terms s can be eliminated. The system of equations (1.1) is supplemented by adequate boundary conditions at the valves, the walls, the inlets and the outlets. T-pieces and interfaces between one-dimensional and two-dimensional computational domains are treated as special boundaries with additional equations. Finally the description of the valve dynamics and the ow through the valves complete the mathematical model. In Chapter 3 we address the numerical solution of the governing equations. The focus lies on the discussion of nite volume schemes for the one-dimensional and two-dimensional gas ow equations. Here diculties arise from the space varying ux vectors and due to the fact that in (1.1) the source terms s become innite in case of jumps in cross-sections or cell heights. Dierent approaches for this problem and their advantages and disadvantages are discussed. In addition the boundary conditions as well as the T-piece and interface conditions are implemented into the numerical scheme. Finally the numerical treatment of the motion equation for the valve plate is presented. Chapter 4 is concerned with the measurements of two test compressors at Burckhardt Compression AG, Switzerland and Ariel Corporation, USA. Both compressors are doubleacting barrel design compressors. However, the Burckhardt compressor has two valves and is about three times smaller than the compressor from Ariel with eight valves. The results of these measurements give good hints about the interaction of pressure waves and valve motion in a reciprocating compressor. In Chapter 5 the quasi one-dimensional and two-dimensional simulations are compared to selected test cases of the measurements. It will be shown that the models are capable of capturing the most important physical eects. Moreover they predict accurately not only gas ow and pressure distribution inside the cylinder but also important design criteria of 3

the valves such as impact velocity of the valve plate and valve losses. Chapter 6 is concerned with comparison of dierent numerical schemes and their solution. Computational time, limitations and accuracy of the dierent approaches are discussed.

Chapter 2

Modelling of the Reciprocating Compressor

In this chapter the mathematical model of a reciprocating compressor is discussed. Starting from a complicated three-dimensional geometry of a compressor the one-dimensional model is derived. In order to include the eects of multiple discharge and suction valves the gas ow inside the cylinder is also modelled quasi two-dimensionally. Integrated Euler equations form the governing equations for the gas ow and dierent boundary conditions complete the mathematical model. A major part of this chapter is dedicated to the valve description which follows and extends the ideas of Costagliola [5]. In addition piston motion and heat transfer are addressed.

2.1
2.1.1

Geometry
Simulation domain

The simulation domain covers not only the working chamber (consitsting of the cylinder, the valve pockets and the cylinder head recesses), but also the valve retainers and pressure chambers (gure 2.1). Since measurements show that the pressure variations in the suction valve retainers are negligible small and thus pressure and temperature are constant, the inlet boundary of the simulation domain is set right before the suction valve. However, at the discharge side the conditions are much more complicated. Due to high mass outow rates during discharge, pressure waves with high amplitudes are running back and forth through the valve retainer, the pressure chamber and the discharge pipes and thus inuence the valve motion. Therefore the outlet boundary must be set at a sucient distance to the valve retainer, where the pressure is almost constant. This distance depends strongly on the geometry of the pressure chamber and the discharge pipe.

2.1.2

One-dimensional model

In the quasi one-dimensional model the wave propagation along the diameter (x-axis) of the cylinder from the suction to the pressure side is considered (gure 2.2). The Euler equations are integrated over a cross section A(x, t) perpendicular to the x-axis. The

Valve Pocket

Cylinder Head Recess

Boundary Outlet

Boundary Inlet y Cylinder Piston Suction Valve z x

Valve Retainer

Discharge Valve

Pressure Chamber

Figure 2.1: Flow geometry inside the compressor. eective cross sections of the quasi one-dimensional model are displayed schematically in gure 2.2. Starting from left we have the suction valve followed by suction valve pocket, cylinder, discharge valve pocket, discharge valve and valve retainer. In the case of compressors with more than two valves the suction valves and discharge valves are replaced by one adequate suction and discharge valve, respectively. Due to the piston motion the cross-section A(x, t) inside the cylinder varies with time. Figure 2.3 shows the appropriate area functions depending on x at dierent times t1 and t2 . At t2 the piston masks the valve pocket in a way that the eective cross section area A(x, t) is discontinuous there. A(x, t) cylinder valve pocket valve retainer Z t1

A(x, t)

t2
0

x
cylinder discharge valve valve retainer

suction valve

discharge valve

suction valve

Figure 2.2: Schema of the one-dimensional model.

Figure 2.3: Cross-section areas of the onedimensional model.

Several approaches are used to model the discharge side of the compressor.

 The rst model has been used by Machu [20] (gure 2.4). Here, the pressure chamber is added to the subdomain of the valve retainer and the outlet boundary is set at the end of the valve retainer. A pressure loss at the outlet is specied to simulate the hindered ow of the valve retainer to the pressure chamber. Moreover, a reduced outow area causes reections of the pressure waves at the end of the valve retainer. In the second approach the complicated geometry of the pressure chamber is replaced by a cylinder connected to the valve retainer using a T-piece (gure 2.5). Again the pressure is assumed to be constant at the end of the pressure chamber. The third approach is used when eects of the discharge pipe and damper are taken into account. Here the outlet boundary is located at the end of the damper (gure 2.6). In case of double-acting compressors the pressure chamber links the valve retainer of the crank end (CE) to the one of the head end (HE). Again we use a T-piece to connect the discharge pipe to the pressure chamber. It must be pointed out that reducing the pressure chamber to a simple cylinder may be an oversimplication in some cases. Valve Pocket Valve Valve Pocket Outlet Boundary T-piece Cylinder Cylinder Piston Piston Valve Retainer Pressure Chamber Figure 2.4: Model of discharge system VR1: Pressure chamber is modelled at the end of the valve retainer. Outlet Boundary Valve Valve Retainer

Figure 2.5: Model of discharge system VR2: Pressure chamber is connected to the valve retainer by a T-piece.

2.1.3

Two-dimensional model

The two-dimensional model takes the wave propagation in a plane parallel to the cylinder head (x,y-plane) into account. The equations of motion (Euler equations) are integrated over the height z(x, y, t) of the cylinder. In terms of the compressor the height is the distance between the piston and the cylinder head. The two-dimensional computational domain is displayed schematically in gure 2.7. In order to keep the model as simple as possible and hence least time consuming (in terms of computational time) a one-dimensional approach is used for the valve pockets and valve retainers. The coupling between the quasi one-dimensional computational subdomain and the quasi two-dimensional one is described by the interface conditions, see 7

Valve Pocket

Valve Valve Retainer T-piece

Cylinder head end Pressure Chamber Piston T-piece Discharge Pipe Damper Outlet Boundary

Cylinder crank end T-piece

Figure 2.6: Model with discharge pipe and damper. Crank end working chamber is optional (dashed lines).

section 2.4.5. A typical arrangement for a compressor with eight valves is shown in gure 2.8.

2.2

Characteristic Data

In this section the basic assumptions about the gas ow and heat transfer in a compressor are stated. They are based on measurements, full three-dimensional CFD-simulations and experiences of compressor manufacturers.

2.2.1

Gas Flow

For each phase of the compression cycle a Reynolds number characterises the gas ow. During discharge and intake the maximum gas velocity, the actual distance between cylinder head and piston and the actual viscosity are used as the reference values. According to full three-dimensional CFD-simulations [3], [22] the Reynolds numbers range from 104 to 105 . During compression and expansion the mean piston velocity, the diameter of the cylinder and the actual viscosity yields a Reynolds number in the order of magnitude of 104 . Comparisons with critical Reynolds numbers leads to the assumption that in the cylinder turbulent ow occurs during the whole cycle. Furthermore the high Reynolds numbers allow the use of inviscid gas ow models. Although these results are true for the test cases calculated (see tables 4.1 and 4.5, the assumptions can be extended to most of the gases compressed.

valve pocket one-dimensional cell Cylinder valve pocket Valve retainer Z y x

Valve Interface

Suction Valve Figure 2.7: Schema dimensional model. of

Discharge Valve the two-

Cylinder two-dimensional

Figure 2.8: Schema of the twodimensional model with eight valves.

2.2.2

Heat Transfer and Dissipation

In turbulent ow the heat transfer from the gas to the surrounding structure is determined by local ow properties only [4], [9]. However, if we assume inviscid ow and Prandtl numbers in the order of 1 then an almost adiabatic change of condition can be expected. In other words, the gas ow is not inuenced by the heat transfer from and to the surrounding material. In addition for small Eckert numbers compared to the Reynolds number (EC Re) the dissipation can be neglected [4]. During compression and expansion the mean piston velocity, the specic heat capacity for constant pressure and the temperature dierence between suction pipe and discharge pipe yields a Eckert number in the order of magnitude of 10 4. During discharge and intake the maximum gas velocity, the specic heat capacity for constant pressure and the temperature dierence across the cylinder are used as the reference values. According to full three-dimensional CFD-simulations [3], [22] the Eckert numbers of the test compressors are in the order of magnitude of 1. Hence, heat transfer and dissipation are neglected. In fact the essential part of temperature changes of the gas are due to compression and expansion. When the dissipation and heat transfer are very small, the Euler equations [9] can be used. However, at sudden changes of ow cross-sections pressure losses occur and this problem is addressed in section 2.4.6.

2.2.3

Classication of Compressors

The sudden opening of the discharge valves excites a rarefaction wave. Considering dierent time scales allows to estimate the response to this excitation. Moreover, this allows a classication of compressors whether or not pressure waves play an important role. During discharge two dierent characteristic time scales can be identied. On one hand we have the time t a wave needs to travel through the cylinder, dened by the diameter of the cylinder D and the wave speed at reference state c0 . On the other hand we have the time t specied by the parameters of the piston motion, more precisely the distance of the

 piston to the cylinder head Z0 and the acceleration of the piston Z0 in dead centre. t t= D ,
c0

t=

t
Z0 Z0

(2.1)

Now for the non-dimensional characteristic parameter (classication number) = t/t/ we can distinguish three dierent orders of magnitude. If 1 then the speed of the waves is much faster than the piston motion and an incompressible outow of the compressor occurs. However, of typical compressors are of order 1. Therefore compressibility eects must be taken into account. 1 holds true in the case of heavy gases and very fast running compressors.

2.3

Piston Motion

The distance between the piston and the cylinder head Z depending on time t can be determined using the properties of the crank mechanism. We use the length of the cranklever r, the length of the piston rod l, the smallest distance between piston and cylinder top Z0 and the present angle of the crankshaft to obtain Z(t) = r + l + Z0 r cos (t) l 1 r l
2

sin2 (t) ,

(2.2)

where (t) = 2nt. Here, n denotes the speed of the crankshaft. As a rst approximation for r 1 (2.2) reduces to l Z(t) = r + Z0 r cos (t) . (2.3)

2.4
2.4.1

Gas Flow inside the Compressor

Quasi one-dimensional Model

The governing equations for the gas ow depending on time t and the space coordinate x are obtained by taking the mass, momentum and energy balance over a cross section. The system of equations is written as [A] + [uA] = 0 , t x A [uA] + , u2 A + pA = p t x x u2 + uA cv T + + uAp = 0 , x 2 (2.4) (2.5) (2.6)

u2 A cv T + t 2

where the variables p, , T and u have their usual meaning, pressure, density, temperature and velocity in x-direction, respectively. The specic heat capacity for constant volume and for constant pressure are denoted by cv and cp respectively. In case of smooth solutions the energy equations (2.6) can be replaced by (s) + (us) = 0 , t x 10 (2.7)

thus allowing isentropic solutions (s = const.). Assuming isentropic solutions we can express the pressure p in terms of the density and entropy p = p(, s) . In case of constant heat capacities following relation is obtained p = const. , (2.9) (2.8)

with = cp /cv . Smooth solutions are the case if no shocks or ow separations occur. Measurements show that the rst condition is satised. However the second one is violated at sudden changes of cross-sections, sharp turns of the ow direction, and T-pieces. At this point we accept this violation and assume that the associtated entropy productions are suciently small. In section 2.4.6 we present a correction of this problem. With an adequate reference state, an associated reference pressure p0 and reference density 0 , (2.9) can be rewritten as p = p0 0 . (2.10)

We observe that (2.5) is not a homogenous conservation law [28]. The right hand side of (2.5) constitutes a momentum source of the ow due to a variation of the cross section. Since the cross section A may vary rapidly at the transition from the cylinder to the valve pocket, the derivative dA/dx may become large causing numerical problems. For smooth solutions these problems can be avoided by transforming the momentum equation (2.5) to u + t x u2 2 + 1 p =0. x (2.11)

Furthermore, using the denition (2.8) and assuming constant entropy yields u + t x u2 2 + 1 p =0. x ( p )s we obtain c2 (, s0 ) d = 0 . (2.13) (2.12)

With the denition of the speed of sound c = u u2 + + t x 2 u + t x

In case of constant specic heat capacities equation (2.13) reduces to p 1 2 u + 2 1 =0. (2.14)

From now on we will consider constant specic heat capacities only, since the extension to the general case with heat capacities depending on the temperature of the gas causes no diculties. Finally the system of governing equations can be written in conservative form: u f (u, x) + =0. t x 11 (2.15)

Here the state vector u and the ux function f (u) can be given by u= R u , f (u) = Ru
u2 2 p0 0 R 1 A

(2.16)

where R = A. Note that 2.16 does not correspond to a physical conservation law since u is no conservation variable. Local Properties of the system equations In case of constant cross-sections A the ux vector in (2.15) depends on the state vector only and the system of equations reduces to u f (u) + =0. (2.17) t x Furthermore, the linearisation around an arbitrary xed state u0 yields u u + J(u0 ) =0, t x where J(u0 ) is the Jacobian matrix of the ux function f (u) and given by J(u) = u
c2 R

(2.18)

R u

(2.19)

Here, c denotes the speed of sound. The eigenvalues 1 , 2 of J are 1 = u c , 2 = u + c . (2.20)

The matrix T of right eigenvectors of the Jacobian J is T = (r1 , r2 ) = R c 1

R c

(2.21)

We introduce the characteristic variables w = (w1 (u(x, t)), w2 (u(x, t)))T dened by w := T1 u, 0 Here w1 and w2 are given by 1 (u c) , (2.23) 2 1 w2 = (u + c) . (2.24) 2 Finally 2.18 can be transformed to a decoupled system of linear partial dierential equations in terms of the characteristic variables w1 w1 + 1 (u0 ) =0, (2.25) t x w2 w2 + 2 (u0 ) =0. (2.26) t x In section 3.2 we will use these results, especially the characteristic variables and their corresponding partial dierential equations, in order to derive the numerical formulations of dierent boundary conditions. Moreover the wave propagation structure described by the characteristics will be incorporated in the nite volume scheme F-wave (see section 3.1.1). w1 = 12 T1 = T1 (u0 ) . 0 (2.22)

2.4.2

Quasi two-dimensional Model

The governing equations for the ow of gas are obtained by taking the mass and momentum balance over a cell. In addition to the one-dimensional approach v denotes the velocity in y-direction and the momentum equation is written for the x-direction and y-direction, respectively. [Z] + [Zu] + [Zv] = 0 , t x y Z [Zu] + [Zuv] = p , Zu2 + pZ + t x y x Z [Zv] + [Zvv + pZ] + [Zuv] = p , t y x y where Z denotes the distance between the piston and the cylinder head. Assuming isentropic ow conditions we replace the energy equation by the isetropic equation of state (2.9). Note that equations (2.28) and (2.29) are not of conservation form. The right hand terms constitute a momentum source of the ow due to the variation of the height inside the cylinder. However, only smooth cylinder head recesses can be considered since the gradients of Z become very large in case of sharp changes. The governing equations (2.27)-(2.29) reduce to the one-dimensional model equations by replacing the height Z with the cross-section A and setting the velocity in y-direction v to zero. For the numerical analysis it is useful to write the continuity equation (2.27) and both equations of motion (2.28) and (2.29) in the following form: u f (u) g(u) + + =s. t x y Here the the state vector u and the analytical ux vectors f and g are given by Iy Ix M x2 Ix Iy p0 M , f (u) = IM + Z 1 , g(u) = u = Ix , 2 M 0 Iy p0 M Ix Iy + Z 1 Iy M M
0

(2.27) (2.28) (2.29)

(2.30)

(2.31)

where M = Z, Ix = Zu and Iy = Zv. The source vector s can be written as 0 p Z y

When Z is constant 2.32 becomes s = (0, 0, 0)T . This is true for compressors with plane cylinder heads and pistons.

s = p Z . x

(2.32)

2.4.3

Boundary Conditions

The computational domain of the compressor is divided into the subdomains of the cylinder, the valve retainers, and the pressure chamber. In addition, if the ow cross section 13

in the cylinder changes abruptly the cylinder is divided into two further computational subdomains. On each subdomain the governing equations for the gas ow have to be supplemented with boundary conditions or interface conditions to adjacent subdomains. In general we can distinguish two types of boundary conditions needed: on the one hand impermeable walls such as closed valves, or the cylinder wall in the two-dimensional approach and on the other hand permeable boundaries where mass ows enter and leave the computational domain (ow boundaries). Walls On walls we require that the velocity and the momentum normal to the boundary is zero. Flow Boundaries In order to obtain adequate boundary conditions we must consider characteristics leaving and entering the computational domain. A necessary condition for a well posed problem is that the boundary condition in terms of physical variables do not lead to prescription of a characteristic variable associated with a characteristic leaving the computational subdomain under consideration. In other words, the number of boundary conditions should be equal to the number of characteristics pointing into the region at a boundary. Considering linearised system (2.18) and assuming subsonic ow the signs of the eigenvalues 1 , 2 dened in (2.20) remain constant. Hence the characteristic corresponding to the negative eigenvalue 1 always points to the left whereas the second one always points to the right. Figure 2.9 shows the boundary-value problem on the right side of a computational domain. Wibmer [31] has shown, that a well posed problem is obtained, if one and only one of the variables pressure, density, mass ow or velocity is prescribed (due to one entering characteristic). right boundary

w1

x
computational domain

w2

Figure 2.9: Right boundary of computational domain: Characteristics variables entering and leaving at the right end of the computational domain.

2.4.4

T-piece

In the valve retainer the mass ow coming from the cylinder is divided in the one that runs further downstream and the one that enters the pressure chamber of the compressor. This junction, or so called T-piece, can be described by a simple one-dimensional model. However at this point we have to neglect eects from dierent branching angles, pressure losses, and ow separations. These issues are subject to section 2.4.6 where pressure losses 14

for T-pieces are introduced. Furthermore, in case of double-acting cylinders this model can be applied to the T-piece in the pressure chamber, where the mass ows from the crank end side and head end side merge and enter the discharge pipe. w1,1 x1 w2,1 w1,2 w1,3 w2,3 x3 w2,2 x2

2
h1 = h2 = h3 m1 + m2 + m3 = 0

Figure 2.10: T-piece consisting of tube 1, tube 2 and tube 3: The shaded square displays the junction area. Its appropriate in-going and out-going characteristics w1,i and w2,i are indexed by the adjacent tube i = 1, 2, 3. Now the T-piece itself is reduced to a boundary condition problem for the three pipes. Similar to section 2.4.3 the number of conditions must be equal to the number of characteristics pointing into the computational domains of the pipes. Figure 2.10 shows the characteristics entering and leaving the shaded junction area. We assume that the junction itself has no volume, therefore the net mass ow m entering and leaving the junction is zero. Furthermore we require that the net enthalpy ux at the T-piece is also zero. Now using the mass balance for the T-piece and assuming that the entropy is constant in all three pipes yield that the total specic enthalpy ht on each boundary must be equal. The three analytical boundary conditions can be written as m1 + m2 + m3 = 0 , ht1 = ht2 = ht3 , where u2 . 2 The numerical treatment of the T-piece is subject of section 3.2. ht = h + (2.33) (2.34)

(2.35)

2.4.5

Interface Conditions

The connection between one-dimensional and two-dimensional areas are called interfaces (gure 2.4.5). We assume that the interface has no volume and thus the mass ux leaving the cylinder via the interface must enter the computational domain of the valve pocket and vice versa. Furthermore conservation of energy across the interface is required resulting in a parity of enthalpies on each face. Similar to a T-piece with only two branches the equations for the interfaces can be written as m1d + m2d = 0 , ht1 = ht2 , 15 (2.36) (2.37)

where m1d and m2d denotes the mass ux from cylinder and valve pocket to the interface, respectively. Interface Cylinder Governing equations (2.15) Face 2d Valve pocket Governing equations (2.30) Face 1d

Figure 2.11: Interface between one-dimensional and two-dimensional domain.

2.4.6

Pressure Losses

At sudden changes in cross-section and in T-pieces pressure losses occur. Although in the quasi one-dimensional gas ow model the energy equation is not solved and isentropic ow is assumed, the pressure losses can be taken into account by means of simplied models. However, the governing equations for the gas ow (2.15) are not valid any more. Moreover at this locations the computational domain must be split up and new conditions connecting the resulting subdomains must be chosen. Similar to section 2.4.3 the number of connecting conditions must be equal to the number of characteristics pointing into the computational subdomains. Usually pressure losses in adiabatic ows are associated with conservation of energy and an entropy production. However in the present model constant entropy is assumed. Therefore we have to drop the requirement for adiabatic ow and compensate the entropy production by an articial heat ux Q12 across the side walls. For the transition from state 1 in front of the pressure loss (p1 , 1 , u1 ) to state 2 (p2 , 2 , u2 ) we require conservation of mass and entropy (gure 2.12): m = m1 = m2 , s = m1 s 1 = m2 s 2 , (2.38) (2.39)

and thus 2.39 can be replaced by s1 = s2 . In addition the losses pv in total pressure pt are given by pt1 = pt2 + pv . (2.40) The total pressure is the pressure at the thermodynamic state that would exist if the gas was brought to zero velocity at constant entropy. For a compressible gas with constant specic heat capacities using the isentropic equation of state (2.9) we can write 1 u2 pt = p 1 + p 2 16
1

(2.41)

In case of incompressible ows losses in total pressure are described by loss coecients K, which can be written as pv K= 2 , (2.42) u /2 where u2 /2 denotes the velocity pressure. According to Miller [23] the incompressible loss coecients are suitable for compressible ows as well if the losses are related to the dynamic pressure pt p instead of the velocity pressure. For compressible ows equation (2.42) takes the form pt pt2 , (2.43) K= 1 pt1 p1

However, Miller points out that in case of separated ows the application of these coecients may not be very satisfactorily, since choked ow is neglected.

Sudden Expansions in Cross-section In consequence of a sudden expansion in of the ow cross-section A(x, t) separation zones arise (gure 2.13). In this area the velocities are rather small and the pressure is equal to p1 . Further downstream the inowing stream mixes with the surrounding gas. The incompressible pressure loss coecient for a sudden expansions is given by K = (1 A1 /A2 )2 , (2.44) where A1 is the inlet area and A2 the outlet area. In case of innite outlet areas K becomes 1 and thus (2.43) reduces to p1 = pt2 = p2 . (2.45) Pressure Loss p1 u1 1 K p2 u2 2 A1 p1 Q12 Figure 2.12: Modelling pressure losses u1 1 Dead water zones A2 p2 u2 2

Figure 2.13: Sudden expansion of crosssection

In order to implement the pressure losses at sudden expansions in cross-section a model as described above can be employed resulting in computing the quasi-stationary system of equations (2.38) and (2.40), see section 3.2.4. Pressure losses at T-pieces Starting from the loss-free T-piece (section 2.4.4) each pipe is provided with an pressure loss (gure 2.14). The thermodynamic states adjacent to the junction are marked with stars. The pressure loss coecients K1 , K2 and K3 depend on the ow direction of the single branches, the cross-section areas A and the mass uxes. They are derived from the incompressible loss coecients of Idelchik [14] and given in the

17

appendix for important cases. Even the eects of branching angles and separation zones can be easily incorporated by adjusting the loss coecients. We employ the equations of the T-piece (2.33) and (2.34) to connect each branch and the pressure loss equations (2.38) and (2.43) to obtain
3

m = 0 , i
i

Ki = ui i pi i

h1 t h2 t

= h2 , t = h3 , t

pti pi t , pti pi = u , i i = p . i i (2.46)

where i is the subscript of the branch running from 1 to 3. p1 u1 1 A1 p , u , 3 3 3 p 1 u 1 1 p 2 u 2 2 p2 u2 2 A2

K1

K2

K3

p 3 , u 3 , 3 A3 Figure 2.14: Pressure losses at the T-piece

2.5
2.5.1

Valve Model
Valve Dynamic

The discharge and the suction valves are located adjacent to the circular lateral surfaces of the valve pockets. Both valves are unidirectional restrictor valves, plate valves or ring valves are usually used. In this work we concentrate on plate valves but most of the equations can be easily adopted to any kind of restrictor valve. Figure (2.15) shows the basic function of a plate valve. The state of a valve is specied by the distance between the valve plate and the seating xv . The motion of the valve plate is determined by the forces acting on it. We consider the following three contributions to the resulting force: the pressure dierence across the valve acting on an eective force area Av of the valve 18

p2 xv

Catcher Valve Springing Valve Plate Seating sv p1

Figure 2.15: Schema of a plate valve. plate, the springing and thirdly a contribution due to viscous forces in the initial stages of valve opening. Denoting the pressure in front of the valve p1 and behind the valve p2 we obtain the equation of motion for the valve plate mv xv = (p1 p2 )Av cs (xv + l1 ) Fadh , (2.47)

Here, mv stands for the mass of the valve plate. The constants cs and l1 denote spring constant and initial deection of the spring, respectively. An initial sticking eect is modelled by the force Fadh . It is caused by the viscosity of the gas or oil in the valve gap resulting in a small time delay when the valve is opening. We follow the ideas of Reynolds lubrication theory to obtain 1 dxv Fadh = sv 3 dv 3 . (2.48) xv dt Here sv and dv stand for the length and the total depth of the valve gap. A detailed description and derivation can be found in [7] and [8]. The motion of the valve plate is limited by the seating on one side and by the catcher on the other side. Therefore the deection of the plate xv ranges from xv,min to xv,max . Because of the roughness of the seating and valve plate it is necessary that xv,min > 0 [8]. Due to the fact that the ow within the valve changes with xv , and thus the eective force area Av changes, we introduce a force coecient cF . The force area Av can be written as Av = Av,0 cF , (2.49)

where Av,0 stands for the force area at closed valve. For common plate valves the relation between the force coecient and valve lift takes the form cF = 1 0.2 xv xv,max . (2.50)

2.5.2

Flow through the valve

The ow through the valves is considered as (quasi stationary) outow of gas from a pressurised vessel through a convergent nozzle. In case of constant heat capacities it is 19

given by St.Venant and Wantzell [32] p2 pt 1

1

m = 1

2 pt 1 1 1

p2 pt 1

(2.51)

where pt 1 is the total pressure before and p2 is the pressures after the valve, respectively. The eective ow cross section of the valve is assumed to be a function of the position of the valve plate xv only. This is not true if eects of asymmetric ow conditions in the valve pocket are taken into account (section 2.5.3). For common valves the equation for the eective cross section takes the form (xv ) = (fe1mm xv )2 . v + v xv 2 (2.52)

The constant fe1mm denotes the valve ow cross-section when the valve plate is 1 mm above the valve seating. The constants v and v describe non-linear dependencies of the valve plate lift and have to be determined empirically.

2.5.3

Asymmetric Flow in Valve Pockets, Valve Masking and Slotted Valve Pockets

Valve masking occurs when the piston approaches top dead centre (the distance between cylinder head and piston becomes very small) and a part of the valve pocket is masked by the piston itself, see gure 2.17. Two eects take place. Firstly, the sudden change of cross-section areas produce pressure losses due to separation. This problem is discussed in detail in section 2.4.6. Secondly, if the distance between piston edge and valve is so small that the separation zone extends across the whole valve pocket length then the outowing gas will use only a part of the valve ow cross-section. Similar eects take place in slotted valve pocket entries where the eective ow cross-section of the valve is reduced due to the separation zones (gure 2.18). However, full three-dimensional simulations show that even in open valve pockets without valve masking asymmetric ow and separation zones can occur. In gure 2.16 the simulation results of an academic compressor are displayed [24]. In order to take above eects into account we assume that the valve ow area is not only a function of valve plate lift xv but also of the piston position Z, (xv , h) = fmask (h) (fe1mm xv )2 . v + v xv 2 (2.53)

Here fmask denotes a empirical function dependent on Z. In case of valve masking the following approximation is used: fmask (h) = 1 cm1 e
(Zxm0 ) xm1

(2.54)

where the constants cm1 , xm0 , and xm1 must be matched to measurement data.

20

5.80e+06 5.79e+06 5.78e+06 5.76e+06 5.75e+06 5.74e+06 5.72e+06 5.71e+06 5.70e+06 5.69e+06 5.68e+06 5.66e+06 5.65e+06 5.64e+06 5.62e+06 5.61e+06 5.60e+06 5.59e+06 5.58e+06 5.56e+06 5.55e+06

valve pocket

cylinder

piston
Y Z X

discharge valve

Contours of Total Pressure (pascal) (Time=7.8333e-02) Mar 14, 2007 Crank Angle=654.00(deg) FLUENT 6.2 (3d, dp, segregated, dynamesh, ske, unsteady)

Figure 2.16: Pressure distribution and velocity vectors in the symmetry plane during discharge (full three-dimensional simulation).

cylinder

valve pocket cylinder

valve pocket

piston

valve retainer piston valve separation zone

valve retainer valve separation zone Figure 2.18: Slotted Valve Pockets.

Figure 2.17: Valve Masking.

21

Chapter 3

Numerical Method
In the rst part of this chapter we present the treatment of the hyperbolic Euler equations by nite volume schemes, following [16], [17], [13], [29], [6] and [30] . Here attention has to be turned to the fact that the ux functions in the governing systems of equations (2.15) and (2.30) are not only a function of the state vector but also a function of space coordinates x and y. Therefore not every nite volume method is suitable. For the one-dimensional conservation law the nite volume methods by LeVeque [16],[17] and the approach of MacCormack [13],[17], [29] are employed. Both methods are second order accurate in time and space. However LeVeques ux splitting scheme has the advantage that boundary conditions, where calculating characteristics is required, can be easily incorporated in the scheme. The two-dimensional Euler equations in the cylinder are solved by Lax-Friedrichs [13] nite volume scheme of rst order and the second order method of Lax-Wendro [15]. In case of discontinuities the performance of the second order approach is rather poor and thus a ux limiter is employed. The boundary conditions are subject of the second part of this chapter. We distinguish between physical boundary conditions derived in section 2.4.3 and numerical boundary conditions required for computation. The physical boundary conditions almost never fully determine the set of dependent variables of the underlying system of dierential equations, whereas the numerical methods used require all dependent variables at the boundaries. In this work two dierent approaches are discussed and employed. The rst method extrapolates the interior state to an additional cell (ghost cell) outside the computational domain. The second method adds the characteristic equation (2.25) corresponding to the outgoing characteristic to the imposed physical boundary conditions. Finally, the integration of the motion equation of the valve plate (2.47) is discussed.

3.1
3.1.1

Finite Volume Schemes

One-dimensional Finite Volume Schemes

Each spatial subdomain is divided into intervals Ci (nite volumes, cells) of constant length x with midpoint xi (gure 3.1). Denote the i-th cell by Ci = xi 1 , xi+ 1
2 2

(3.1)

22

Cell C0 x0

Cell Ci1 xi1

Cell Ci xi

Cell Ci+1 xi+1

Cell Ck xk

Figure 3.1: Subdivision of the computational domain into grid cells Ci . where the cell boundary on the left side is located at xi 1 =
1 2
2

1 2

(xi + xi1 ) and on the

right side at xi+ 1 = (xi + xi+1 ). Note that in a quasi one-dimensional problem, the 2 cross-section areas and thus the physical volume of the cells can vary along x. The actual derivation of the governing equations (quasi one-dimensional Euler equations) is based on balances over control volumes. It seems natural to return to this formulation, since subdomains are divided into nite control volumes. Now the Euler equations are satised in each cell, above all the conservation of the state quantities is ensured. Moreover, the integral formulation allows discontinuous solutions (shocks), whereas the dierential formulation requires smooth solutions. Integrating the dierential form of the quasi one-dimensional Euler equation u f (u, A) + =0, t x over the cell Ci and one time step, xi 1 , xi+ 1 [tn , tn+1 ], yields the integral formulation:
2 2

xi+1/2

xi+1/2

tn+1

tn+1

u(x, tn+1 )dx

xi1/2 xi1/2

u(x, tn )dx+
tn

f (u(xi+1/2 , t), A)dt

tn

f (u(xi1/2 , t), A)dt = 0 .

(3.2) Note that the cross-section area A, and thus the analytical ux f , are a function of time t and coordinate x. The rst two terms in (3.2) correspond to the total change of the state quantities inside the cell during the time step t = tn+1 tn . The third and fourth integral represent the total uxes of the state quantities across the boundaries xi+ 1 and 2 xi 1 . Therefore the system of equations (3.2) simply states that every gain or loss of 2 state quantities inside the cell is due to the uxes across the boundaries only. Moreover the conservation of the state quantities within the whole computational subdomain will be ensured [16]. Let Un denote the cell average of the state quantities over the ith cell at time tn : i
xi+1/2

Un i

1 x

u(x, tn )dx .
xi1/2

(3.3)

23

The ux integral of (3.2) at the boundary xi 1 is approximated by the numerical ux 2 Fn 1 : i

2

Fn 1 (Uiq1 ..Ui+q2 , A) i 2

1 t

tn+1

f (u(xi1/2 , A, t))dt .
tn

(3.4)

The numerical ux depends on the cell averages of the state quantities Uiq1 ..Ui+q2 and the cross-section area A. Whereas the actual number of involved cell averages given by q1 and q2 is determined by the numerical scheme used. Finally, when employing the above approximations the system of equations for Un+1 of cell Ci at the time tn+1 can be written i as: t Fn 1 Fn 1 (3.5) Un+1 = Un i i i+ 2 i 2 x A numerical scheme which has the form (3.5) is called conservative since it mimics the properties of (3.2). Generally we require that a numerical scheme is convergent which means that the numerical solution converges to the true solution of the dierential equations as the grid is rened. According to Leveque [16] this is true if following two conditions are satised: Firstly the method must be stable, meaning that small errors made in each time step do not grow too fast in later time steps. Secondly the method must be consistent, meaning that the numerical ux approximates the analytical ux well. More precisely, for constant state quantities U = U = const. and constant cross-sections A = A the numerical ux must be equal to the analytical ux: F(U, .., U, A) = f (U, A) . (3.6)

A detailed description and mathematical formulation of these conditions can be found in [16], [13], [29], [6] and [30]. Later we will state the conditions under which the numerical schemes used in this work are convergent. Now we introduce dierent numerical ux functions of (3.4) resulting in dierent nite volume methods. Godunov method First we consider autonomous systems, where the ux vector f is a function of the state vector u only. In case of quasi onedimensional Euler equations this means that the cross-sections are constant through the entire computational domain (A = A(t)). The resulting system of equations can be written as u f (u) + =0. (3.7) t x Following the ideas of Godunov [16] we decompose the original initial value problem into a set of Riemann problems, by replacing the initial data by the cell average on every cell. Thus the resulting initial data has discontinuities at every cell boundary and we have to solve a Riemann problem for every cell boundary. In particular the Riemann problem at the left boundary xi 1 of the i-th cell consists of the conservation law (3.7) and the 2 piecewise constant initial data at the time tn u(x, tn ) = Un i1 Un i 24 : x < xi 1 : x > xi 1
2 2

(3.8)

with the similarity solution u(x, t) = Ui 1

2

x xi 1 t

(3.9)

We note that u(x, t) = U(0) is independent of the time t. Hence the numerical ux at the left cell boundary takes the form Fn 1 = f Un 1 (0) i i
2 2

(3.10)

and the balance over the control volumes 3.5 can be written as t f Un 1 f Un 1 . (3.11) Un+1 = Un i i i+ 2 i 2 x Thus we only have to determine for every Riemann problem the value of the solution along the line xi 1 . If we choose the time step t sucient small, so that the propagating 2 discontinuities of the neighbouring Riemann problems do not reach the cell edge xi 1 2 (gure 3.2) the intermediate state U 1 is constant along the cell edge x 1 in the time step. Note that the intermediate state Ui 1 and thus the numerical ux Fi 1 depends
2 2

i 2

i 2

tn+1

Un i1 tn xi 3
2

Un i
2

Un i+1 xi+ 1
2

xi 1

xi+ 3
2

Figure 3.2: Riemann problems at each cell boundary. on the state quantities Ui and Ui1 only. Finally the solution for the state quantities Un+1 at time tn+1 is obtained by piecing together the Riemann problems of each cell interface. However, this method involves the solution of nonlinear problems and can be very time consuming. Therefore the Riemann problems will be replaced by appropriate linear Riemann problems in the following method. Roe method At every cell boundary xi 1 the associated Riemann problem is replaced 2 by a linear Riemann problem U n U + Ai 1 =0, (3.12) t 2 x where the locally dened ux matrix (so called Roe matrix) Ai 1 (Ui1 , Ui ) of the cell 2 edge xi 1 must satisfy following conditions in order to obtain a conservative, consistent 2 nite volume method: Ai 1
2 2

is diagonalisable with real eigenvalues ,

(3.13) (3.14) (3.15)

Ai 1 (Ui1 Ui ) = f (Ui1 ) f (Ui ) , Ai 1 (U, U) = J(U) .

2

25

Here J(U) is the Jacobian matrix of the ux function f (U) of (3.7). Autonomous systems (3.7) have been studied extensively and a variety of Roe-type linearisations have been developed. For an overview we refer to [16], [10].
1 Wi 1

t Ui 1

2 Wi 1
2 2

Ui1 xi 1
2

Ui x

Figure 3.3: Riemann problem at the left boundary xi 1 of the ith cell
2

k k with speed i 1 (gure 3.3). The discontinuities Wi 1 separate three distinct regions. On

For a linear system consisting of two equations (conservation of mass and equation of motion) the discontinuous initial condition at time tn decomposes in two shock discontik nuities (so called waves) of size Wi 1 for k = 1, 2, propagating along the characteristics
2 2 2

the one hand two undisturbed zones, where the uniform initial conditions Un and Un i i1 are present, and on the other hand an intermediate region, where a constant state Un 1 i can be found. Now the discontinuities can be expressed in terms of the state quantities:
1 Wi 1 = Un 1 Un , i1 i
2 2 2

2 Wi 1 = Un Un 1 , i i
2 2

(3.16)

and the sum of the equations (3.16) yields

1 2 Un Un = Wi 1 + Wi 1 . i i1
2 2 2

(3.17)

The two discontinuities are proportional to the eigenvectors k 1 of Ai 1 and propagate ri

k with speeds i 1 = k 1 given by the eigenvalues of the Roe-matrix. More precisely the i
2

solution is obtained by solving the linear system

2

Ui Ui1 =
2

r k 1 k 1 i i
k=1
2 2

(3.18)

for the coecients k 1 and then setting for the left- and rightgoing discontinuities i
1 Wi 1 = 1 1 1 1 , r i i
2 2 2

2 Wi 1 = 2 1 2 1 . r i i
2 2 2 2

(3.19)
2

Using (3.16) yields the intermediate state vector Ui 1 at the cell boundary interface xi 1 : Ui 1 = Ui1 +
2

1 1 1 1 r i 2 i 2

= Ui

2 1 2 1 r i 2 i 2

(3.20)
2

Furthermore employing (3.10) we can write for the numerical ux at the cell edge xi 1 r r Fi 1 = f (Ui1 ) + 1 1 1 1 1 1 = f (Ui ) 2 1 2 1 2 1 . i i i i i i
2 2 2 2 2 2 2

(3.21)

26

1 Wi 1

2 Wi 1
2

Ul 1 i

Ur 1 i

Ui1 xi 1
2

Ui x

Figure 3.4: Riemann problem of a non-autonomous system at the left boundary xi 1 of 2 the i-th cell. F-wave algorithm Our aim is to solve quasi one-dimensional Euler equations which are non-autonomous conservation laws since the ux function f depends not only on the state vector u but also on the space-varying cross-section A(x, t). Here we extend the ideas of the approximated Riemann solvers. First the space dependent ux function f (u, x) is discretised to yield a ux function fi (u) that holds throughout the i-th cell. This approach is called cell-centred ux function and in case of quasi one-dimensional Euler equations it simply means that the cross section areas are constant in each cell. We denote the crosssection area of the i-th cell at time tn by An . The resulting Riemann problem is much i more complicated since the intermediate state Ui 1 is split up into the intermediate state Ur 1 at the right side of the cell boundary and the one on the left side Ul 1 (gure 3.4). i i Note that attempting to solve this Riemann problem by a decomposition of the form (3.17) would fail in this case, since the jump in U at xi 1 would have been neglected. However 2 taking this jump into account and computing the two intermediate states require solving a nonlinear system of equations in each time step. Moreover a Roe-type linearisation described above cannot be found in this case. Therefore the F-wave algorithm developed by Leveque [17] is employed. In order to avoid these diculties this scheme does not attempt to perform a classical decomposition of the jump in U. Instead it uses a uxbased wave decomposition, in which the ux dierence fi (Ui ) fi1 (Ui1 ) is decomposed.
1 Zi 1
2 2 2 2

t Fi 1

2 Zi 1
2 2

fi1 (Ui1 , Ai1 ) xi 1

2

fi (Ui , Ai ) x

Figure 3.5: Riemann problem of a non-autonomous system at the left boundary xi 1 of 2 the i-th cell Again we consider the the Riemann problem at the cell edge xi 1 (gure 3.5). Here,
2

27

linearisation of the ux vector about the state vector Ui1 on the left side of the cell edge yields fi1 (U) = fi1 (Ui1 , Ai1 ) + Ji1 (U Ui1 ) . (3.22) Similar, on the right side of the cell edge we obtain fi (U) = fi (Ui , Ai ) + Ji (U Ui ) . (3.23)

The Jacobians Ji1 and Ji of the ux function are evaluated with the quantities of the left side Ui1 , Ai1 and the quantities of the right side Ui , Ai , respectively. The appropriate k eigenvectors rk 1 and eigenvalues i 1 are given by i
2 2

1 i 1 = 1 (Un , An ) i1 i1
2

2 i 1 = 2 (Un , An ) i i
2

(3.24)

and r1 1 = r1 (Un , An ) i1 i1 i
2

r2 1 = r2 (Un , An ) . i i i
2

(3.25)

In order to ensure a conservative nite volume method the uxes at the cell edge xi 1 2 must be constant. So we set Fi 1 = fi1 (Ui1 , Ai1 ) + Ji1 UL 1 Ui1 = fi (Ui , Ai ) + Ji UR 1 Ui i i
2 2 2 2

, (3.26)

where the resulting intermediate ux is denoted by Fi 1 . Similar to the decomposition

k (3.16) two ux discontinuities of size Zi 1 for k = 1, 2, propagate along the characteristics k with speed i 1 (gure 3.5):
2 2

1 n Zi 1 = Fn 1 fi1 , i
2 2

2 Zi 1 = fin Fn 1 , i
2 2

(3.27)

and the sum of the equations (3.27) yields

2 n 1 fin fi1 = Zi 1 + Zi 1 .
2 2

(3.28)

Here Z is called F-wave which bears analogy to waves W of (3.19) but carries ux increments instead of increments in U. Now instead of solving the system (3.18), we solve
2 1 fi (Ui , Ai ) fi1 (Ui1 , Ai1 ) = i 1 r1 1 + i 1 r2 1 i i
2 2 2

(3.29)

k for the coecients i 1 and then set

2

k k Zi 1 = i 1 rk 1 . i
2 2 2

(3.30)

k Note that we can recover the waves Wi 1 by setting

2

k Wi 1 =
2

1
k i 1 2

k Zi 1 .
2

(3.31)

Finally we can write for the numerical ux at the cell interface xi 1

2

1 2 Fi 1 = f (Ui1 , Ai1 ) + Zi 1 = f (Ui , Ai ) Zi 1

2 2 2

(3.32)

28

The nite volume scheme for Un+1 of cell Ci at the time tn+1 is given by: i Un+1 = Un j j t 1 2 Zi+ 1 + Zi 1 x 2 2 (3.33)

It can be easily extended to second order for smooth solutions by adding a correction term t t 1 n 2 n Zi+ 1 + Zi 1 Fi+ 1 Fi 1 (3.34) Un+1 = Un j j x 2 2 x 2 2 where 2 1 t p p n Fi 1 = | 1 | Zi 1 | p | 1 (3.35) 1 2 2 p=1 2 x 2 2 Mac Cormack Scheme It is worth noting that there are nite volume methods which do not require the computation of the wave structure. One of the most popular is the Mac Cormack scheme [16], [29], [13], which is based on Lax-Wendro methods. Here we employ the two-step approach which can handle the problems arising from the spacevarying ux functions. The numerical ux Fi 1 at the cell boundary xi 1 for the quasi 2 2 one-dimensional Euler equations is given by Fn 1 = i
2

1 f (Un , An ) + f (U , A ) , i+1 i+1 i i 2

(3.36)

t f (Un , An ) f (Un , An ) . i+1 i+1 i i x This nite volume method is also second order accurate. U = Un i i

where

(3.37)

Stability conditions of the nite volume schemes The time step t of the numerical integration has to be chosen in a way that the stability conditions of the numerical schemes are satised. For all nite volume methods mentioned above the CFL condition provides a necessary and sucient condition [13], [16], [29]. It simply states that the analytical domain of inuence lies within the numerical domain of inuence. In case of quasi one-dimensional Euler equations the CFL-condition can be written as t x . c + |u| (3.38)

Comparison of schemes Both nite volume schemes for non-autonomous systems are listed in table 3.1. The advantage of the Mac Cormack approach is that it is very easy to implement since it does not require the computation of the wave structure of the system of dierential equations. On the other side employing the F-wave algorithm makes the implementation of boundary conditions, where the characteristics are calculated, easier.

29

MacCormack:

Un+1 = j

1 2

U = Un i i f-wave : Un+1 = j Un j
t x

Un + U j i
t x

t 2x

f (Un , An ) f (Un , An ) i+1 i+1 i i

2

f (U , A ) f (U , A ) with i i i1 i1

2 1 Zi+ 1 + Zi 1
2

t x

n n Fi+ 1 Fi 1
2 2

Table 3.1: Dierent one-dimensional nite volume schemes

3.1.2

Two-dimensional Finite Volume Schemes

N nw W Ci,j Ci1,j sw C
i,j1

Ci,j+1 P se

ne E Ci+1,j

y, j

n S

x, i Figure 3.6: Block-structured grid. Figure 3.7: Typical control volume in a non-orthogonal grid.

The domain of the cylinder is divided into a nite number of small control volumes (areas). To simplify matters we only employ non-orthogonal, block-structured grids (gure (3.6). A nite volume Ci,j is dened by its corners sw, se, nw and ne (see gure 3.7). The computational node and therefore all dependent variables are assigned to the centre P of the control volume. At this point we assume that the distance between piston and cylinder head is only a function of time t and later on we will discuss the eects of space-varying heights Z(x, y, t). A detailed derivation of the nite volume methods for two-dimensional grids can be found in [29]. Similar to the one-dimensional methods we transform the governing dierential equations into integral formulation. Integrating u f (u) g(u) + + =0 t x y over the cell Ci,j gives
V

(3.39)

u f (u) g(u) + + t x y

dV = 0 .

(3.40)

30

Using Greens theorem , this equation becomes t

V

udV +
S

h ndS = 0.

(3.41)

Here, n denotes the unit vector normal to the surface S of the nite volume and the tensor h can be expressed in Cartesian coordinates as h = f (u)i + g(u)j , where i and j denotes the unit vector in x and y direction, respectively. In case of twodimensional non-orthogonal grids one obtains h n dS = (f (u)dy g(u)dx) , which can be substituted in 3.41 to yield t
V

(3.42)

u dx dy +
S

(f (u)dy g(u)dx) = 0.

(3.43)

The surface S consists of the four sections nw sw, sw se, se ne and ne nw. Now integrating over one time step tn+1 tn = t one obtains
tn+1

u(x, y, tn+1 ) dx dy
V V

u(x, y, tn ) dx dy +
tn S

(f (u)dy g(u)dx) dt = 0.

(3.44)

Again, the rst two terms in (3.44) correspond to the total change of the state quantities inside the cell during the time step t = tn+1 tn . The third integral represent the total uxes of the state quantities across the cell boundaries. Let Un denote the cell average i,j of the state quantities over the cell (i, j) at time tn : Un i,j 1 |Ci,j | u(x, y, tn ) dx dy .
V

(3.45)

where the cell area |Ci,j | can be written as |Ci,j | = 1 |(ne sw) (nw se)| , 2 (3.46)

The ux integral of (3.44) at the section sw se is approximated by the numerical uxes Fn 1 and Gn 1 : i,j i,j
2 2

Fn 1 i,j 2 Gn 1 i,j
2

1 t 1 t

tn+1

f (u)dy ,
tn tn+1 S

(3.47)

g(u)dy .
tn S

(3.48)

31

Finally, when employing the above approximations the system of equations for Un+1 of i,j cell Ci,j at the time tn+1 can be written as: Un+1 = Un i,j i,j
t |Ci,j |

Fi,j 1 (yse ysw ) + Fi+ 1 ,j (yne yse ) +

2 2 2 2

Fi,j+ 1 (ynw yne ) + Fi 1 ,j (ysw ynw ) Gi,j 1 (xse xsw ) + Gi+ 1 ,j (xne xse ) +
2 2

Gi,j+ 1 (xnw xne ) + Gi 1 ,j (xsw xnw )

2 2

(3.49)

Similar to the one-dimensional nite volume schemes, a numerical method written in the form (3.49) is called conservative. The boundary problems in the two-dimensional domain (cylinder) do not require the calculation of characteristics and therefore we employ simple and robust nite volume methods, where calculating the wave structure is not necessary. Lax-Friedrichs scheme The space centred explicit Lax-Friedrichs scheme was one of the rst schemes used to solve Euler equations [13]. Due to the poor rst order accuracy the solutions must be questioned. However it can be used as intermediate step in high order schemes, as in the two-step Lax-Wendro method (Richtmyer). A detailed description of this method can be found in [13] and [29]. For the numerical ux Fi+ 1 ,j of the face 2 ne nw we can write FLF i,j+ 1 =
2

1 |Cij | + |Ci,j+1 | 1 (fi,j+1 + fi,j ) + Un Un i,j i,j+1 , 2 16 t (ynw yne ) fi,j+1 = f Un i,j+1 .

(3.50)

where (3.51) The numerical uxes for the other faces can be easily derived. The second term on the right side of equation (3.50) is used to stabilise the method. It can be interpreted as an dissipative term proportional to the second derivative of u. Therefore the discretisation scheme (3.50) is consistent with 2u 2u u f (u) g(u) + + = d 2 + d 2 , t x y x y (3.52)

which is a dissipative system of equations with the numerical viscosities num and num of order O(x). Again, the time step t of the numerical integration has to be chosen such that the stability conditions of the numerical schemes are satised. Unfortunately, a sucient stability criterion can not be given for this nite volume scheme on nonorthoganal quadrilateral grids. However, it turns out that using following conditions lead to stable methods in the tested cases: t x , 2 (c + |u|) t y . 2 (c + |v|) (3.53)

Lax-Wendro schemes, Richtmyer scheme In this work we discuss the two-step Lax-Wendro schemes introduced by Richtmyer [13], [29]. There are also one-step LaxWendro schemes but they suer from the diculty of requiring calculations of Jacobian matrices. The Richmyer scheme consits of two steps: The predictor step, in which an 32

estimated solution is calculated, and a corrector step, where the actual solution is found. The numerical uxes from the Lax-Friedrichs scheme are used as rst guess. In the second step the same uxes but without the dissipative terms and evaluated at the intermediate step are employed. As an example we approximate the analytical ux fi+ 1 ,j of the face
2

Similarly, we obtain the numerical uxes for the other faces. Thus we can calculate the 1 predictor state vectors Un+ 2 by means of equation (3.49). Second the corrector step can be written as 1 n+ 1 n+ 1 2 FR i,j+ 1 = fi,j+1 + fi,j 2 , (3.55) 2 2 where
2 fi,j+1 = f

ne/nw by the numerical ux FR i+ 1 ,j . First the predictor ux at the time n + 2 by 1 1 1 Ai,j + Ai,j+1 n+ 2 Fi,j+ 1 = (fi,j+1 + fi,j ) + un un i,j+1 . 2 16 t (ynw yne ) i,j 2

1 2

is given (3.54)

n+ 1

2 Ui,j+1

n+ 1

(3.56)

The necessary and sucient stability condition for the case of orthogonal grids where x = y was given by Richtmyer [13] and can be written as t x 2 c + u2 + v 2 . (3.57)

Although, in case of non-orthogonal grids this relation is not sucient, satisfying results have been obtained using it. Flux Limiter In the vicinity of discontinuities second order methods performs rather poor. Precisely, non-physical oscillations can occur. Now we want a method which uses an accurate second order scheme in regions of smooth solutions and non-oscillating rst order methods in all other regions. Therefore the numerical ux is computed by a linear combination of rst order and second order uxes. A detailed description can be found in [16]. Here we use the rst order Lax-Friedrichs ux FLF and the second order Richtmyer ux FR to obtain F(Un ) FLF (Un ) + (Un ) [FR (Un ) FLF (Un )] , (3.58)

where the ux limiter (Un ) describes the smoothness of the solution. The quotient of the pressure gradients in two adjacent cells represents a measure of smoothness. For instance, at the face between nw ne it takes following form: i,j+ 1 =
2

pi,j+2 pi,j+1 , pi,j+1 pi,j

(3.59)

In order to avoid biased weighting 3.59 is replaced by the following formula in every other time step: pi,j+1 pi,j i,j+ 1 = , (3.60) 2 pi,j pi,j1

Note that for smooth solutions becomes 1. A wide variety of ux limiters have been developed and we refer to [13] for an overview. In this work we employ the Minmod limiter 33

where the ux limiter as function of is 0 () = 1

given by : <0 : 0 1 : >1

(3.61)

Treatment of Source Terms Cylinder head recesses are often used in order to channel the gas ow into the valve pockets. Thus the distance between cylinder head and piston Z varies not only with time but also with the space coordinates x and y, resulting in a source vector s in the two-dimensional Euler equations U f (u, Z) g(u, Z) + + =s. t x y Here, the source vector takes the form 0 p Z y (3.62)

In order to solve this problem we employ a fractional step method in which we split the general problem (3.62) into a homogeneous conservation law and an ODE given by u =s. t (3.64)

s = p Z . x

(3.63)

Now for both subproblems standard methods can be employed. First we use one of the nite volume methods above to solve u + f (u,Z) + g(u,Z) = 0 and second (3.64) is t x y integrated by a forward Euler approach which is written as 0 h (3.65) Un+1 = U + t p x . i,j i,j i,j p h i,j y The vector U denotes the intermediate state vector derived from a nite volume scheme. i,j In case of second order two-step methods, in the predictor step and in the corrector step (3.65) applies.

3.2

Numerical Boundary Conditions

In terms of numerical treatment of the boundary conditions, we have to distinguish between the physical boundary conditions that follow from Section 2.4.3, 2.4.5, 2.4.6 and 2.4.4 and the numerical boundary values required for computation. The numerical algorithms require the information of all state quantities at the boundaries. The physical boundary conditions only provide the boundary value corresponding to the incoming characteristic. In this section we discuss the various possibilities to determine the missing conditions for dierent boundary problems.

34

3.2.1

Walls one-dimensional

The mass ux m through the wall is equal to zero and thus the velocity u at the boundary xk+ 1 is also equal to zero. This boundary problem can be modelled by simply using a 2 ghost cell (boundary cell) Ck+1 as mirror element of Ck (gure 3.8. The state quantities Uk+1 of the ghost cell are set to the ones in the adjacent cell, except that the sign of velocity is changed.

Wall Cell Ck1 xk1 Cell Ck xk Cell Ck+1 xk+1 Cell Ck1 xk1

Boundary

Cell m Ck xk

Cell Ck+1 xk+1

Figure 3.8: Ghost cell Ck+1 at the boundary

Figure 3.9: Mass ow through the boundary

3.2.2

Mass-ow through the Boundary

Again, the ghost cell Ck+1 outside the subdomain is added (gure 3.9). The mass ux m through the boundary provides the necessary rst equation for the two state quantities of the ghost cell Ck+1 . Now a wide variety of methods for the missing condition have been found and we refer to [13] for an overview. Here we introduce three dierent approaches: Leaving characteristic The additional relationship for the missing state quantity is given by the linear partial dierential equations (2.25) for the characteristic leaving the subdomain and entering the ghost cell. These linear PDEs are discretised by a simple upwind scheme and the outgoing characteristic can be calculated at the desired boundary at the new time. According to (2.25) the equation for the leaving characteristic on the right boundary takes the form: w2 w2 + 2 =0. t x (3.66)

We assume, that the ow situation at time tn is known. Then rst order upwinding of 3.66 yields t n n n+1 wn w2,k+1 (3.67) w2,k+1 = w2,k+1 + 2 (Un , An ) k+1 k+1 x 2,k Together with the denition of the characteristic variables (2.23) we are able to calculate the full boundary data of Ck+1 to apply to the numerical scheme. Equation (3.67) and the prescription of m form a system of equations which is solved by means of a well-known numerical Newton-Raphson iteration [26]. Similarly, solutions for this boundary problem 35

at the left side of the subdomain can be found. Let C0 denote the ghost cell on the left side. Here the equation for the leaving characteristic takes the form
n+1 n w1,0 = w1,0 + 1 (Un , An ) 0 0

t n wn w1,1 . x 1,0

(3.68)

Note that the ideas of this approach can be used for all kind of boundary problems (e.g. pressure, mass ow, velocity, density). Extrapolation The second method to determine the missing equation is extrapolation. Instead of considering characteristics leaving the state quantities for the ghost cell Ck+1 are extrapolated from the interior points. According to Hirsch [13] the extrapolation used can be one order lower than the nite volume scheme without altering the accuracy and stability of the interior numerical method. For this boundary problem one possible assumption is, that the mass per unit length of the boundary cell Rk+1 can be extrapolated from the adjacent ones. It is given by Rk+1 = 2Rk Rk1 . (3.69)

Together with the given mass ux m one is able to determine both state quantities. The state vector for the ghost cell Ck+1 takes following form Uk+1 = Rk+1 uk+1 = 2Rk Rk1
m Rk+1

(3.70)

Source Term The third approach also models this boundary problem without considering the leaving characteristics. As in the case of walls the ghost cell is used as a mirror element. The loss or gain of mass and impulse inside the computational domain due to mass ux m through the valve are included by a source term in the cells adjacent to the mirror element. The state vector Uk of cell Ck at the time tn+1 is given by: Un+1 = Un + k k where 1 S= x t Fn 1 ) Fn 1 ) tS , k+ 2 k 2 x m2 m, 2R1 dn 2 k
T

(3.71)

(3.72)

3.2.3

Pressure Outlet

At the end of the valve retainer or at the end of the pressure chamber a pressure outlet is dened. Either the characteristic method or the extrapolation method, both described in section 3.2.2, can be employed. However, instead of the mass ux the pressure pout is prescribed at the boundary. In addition, the pressure losses due to sudden changes pv , which have been derived in section 2.4.6, can be easily incorporated. Using the extrapolation method the state vector Uk+1 of the ghost cell Ck+1 is given by 1 Ak+1 pres 01 R1dk+1 p0 , (3.73) = Uk+1 = uk+1 2un un
k k1

36

where the resulting pressure pres is written as pres = pout + pv . Note that pv and thus pres depend on the state quantities Uk at time tn . (3.74)

3.2.4

Boundary Problem at Sudden Changes of Cross-section

Cell Ck2 xk2

Cell Ck1 xk1

Cell Ck

Cell Ck+1

xk

xk+1

Separation

Cell Ck2 xk2

Cell Ck1 xk1

pv

Cell Ck

Cell Ck+1

xk

xk+1

Figure 3.10: Numerical treatment of sudden changes in ow cross-sections: Computational domain is separated and pressure loss pv is introduced At the location of sudden changes in ow cross-section the computational domain is split up (gure 3.10. Then the reconnection of the resulting subdomains is considered as as a boundary problem for the two cells Ck and Ck1 adjacent to the splitting. As mentioned above the nite volume methods used require the full set of state quantities at these cells. First we make use of the equations of the pressure losses (2.40),(2.38) derived in section 2.4.6. Second, the characteristics pointing into the cells Ck and Ck1 provide the equations for the missing conditions. Similar to the mass ux boundary conditions we obtain equations for the characteristic variables by solving the partial dierential equations for the characteristic variables (2.25) with and Upwind scheme. Finally the system of equations for the state quantities of the cells Ck and Ck1 are given by mn+1 = mn+1 k1 k pt n+1 = pt n+1 + pv k1 k
n+1 n w2,k1 = w2,k1 + 2 (un ) k1 n+1 n w1,k = w1,k + 1 (un ) k

t n wn w2,k1 x 2,k2

(3.75)

t n wn w1,k+1 . x 1,k

37

A drawback of this method is that it imposes unwanted mass sinks or mass sources on the location of the separation. However, this problem can be easily solved using following procedure. First the state vectors of the boundary cells un+1 and un+1 are calculated k k1 without the pressure losses by means of nite volume methods. Then the system of equations (3.75) is solved by means of Newton-Raphson iterations. Finally the lost mass m is added to the cells Ck and Ck1 according to their volumes. We obtain
n+1 n+1 n+1 m = Rk 1n+1 |WL +Rk |WL (Rk1 + Rk )

(3.76)

and
n+1 n+1 Rk1 = Rk1 |WL n+1 n+1 = Rk |WL Rk

An+1 m k1 x An+1 + An+1 k k1 An+1 m k , x An+1 + An+1 k k1

(3.77) (3.78)

where |WL denotes solutions of (3.75).

3.2.5

Boundary Conditions at the Valve

Cylinder 1 Cell Ck1,1 xk1 Cell Ck,1 xk,1 Valve Chamber 2 Cell C1,2 x1,2 Cell C2,2 x2,2 analytical numerical Cell Ck1,1 xk1 Cell Ck,1 xk,1 Cell Ck+1,1 xk+1,1 Cell C0,2 x0,2 Cell C1,2 x1,2 Cell C2,2 x2,2

Figure 3.11: Valve region and the adjacent nite volume cells: Ghost cells Ck+1,1 and C0,2 are introduced for the numerical boundary conditions. A valve separates the computational subdomain of the cylinder from the adjacent valve retainer subdomain. Figure 3.11 shows the valve region and its adjacent boundary cells. Again we introduce two ghost cells Ck+1,1 and C0,2 and dene the boundary conditions for these cells in a way that the equation of the valve connecting this subdomains is satised. Now we distinguish two dierent states of the valve: 38

 Closed Valve (xv = xv,min ): Here the mass ux m through the valve is equal to zero. Therefore the method for the one-dimensional wall (section 3.2.1) can be applied to the ghost cells Ck+1,1 and C0,2 . Open Valve (xv,min < xv xv,max ): The mass ux m through the valve is given by (2.51). Thus the methods for the mass-ow boundary in section 3.2.2 can be applied to the ghost cells Ck+1,1 and C0,2 .

3.2.6

Boundary Conditions at the T-piece

Following the solution of the boundary problem at sudden changes of cross-section we expand the method of characteristics to model the T-piece. Now there are three computational domains with their appropriate boundary elements Ck,1 , Ck,2 and C1,3 . Again the ghost cells Ck+1,1 , Ck+1,2 and C0,3 were added. Figure 3.12 shows the T-piece region and adjacent cells. Ck1,1 Ck,1 Ck+1,1 C0,3 C1,3 C2,3 junction area Ck+1,2 Ck,2 Ck1,2

Figure 3.12: Finite Cells at the T-piece. Junction area is shaded The equations for the leaving characteristics and the equations for the T-piece (2.33), (2.34) form a system of equations for the required state quantities in the boundary cells: mn+1 + mn+1 = mn+1 k+1,1 k+1,2 0,3 htot n+1 = htot n+1 = htot n+1 0,3 k+1,1 k+1,2 t n wn w2,k+1 |1 x 2,k t n+1 n n w2,k+1 = w2,k+1 + 2 (un ) wn w2,k+1 |2 k+1 x 2,k t n+1 n n wn w1,1 |3 . w1,0 = w1,0 + 1 (un ) 0 x 1,0
n+1 n w2,k+1 = w2,k+1 + 2 (un ) k+1

(3.79) (3.80) (3.81) (3.82) (3.83)

Again, a numerical Newton-Raphson iteration [26] is employed to solve this system. If the pressure losses in the T-piece are taken into account the above system of equations is extended by the six pressure loss equations (2.47).

39

3.2.7

Wall two-dimensional

At walls we require that the velocity normal to the boundary vn vanishes (gure 3.13). Therefore we introduce a ghost cell C and set its computational variables to the ones of the adjacent cell C except for the velocity v . Simple vector analysis yields v = v 2 |nb v| nb , where nb is the normal vector to the boundary. (3.84)

ghost cell C v vn nb v wall vt C

Figure 3.13: Boundary cell in the two-dimensional domain

3.2.8

Interface Condition

The interface connects the two-dimensional computational domain representing the cylinder with the one-dimensional domain representing the valve pockets (gure 3.14). Since we are linking quantities of dierent dimensions we have to reduce the two-dimensional ones to suitable one-dimensional information by introducing articial cells C0,2d and C1,2d . These cells are two-dimensional cells but extend across the whole cross-section. Similarly, at the side of the one-dimensional domain two artical cells, C0,1d and C1,1d , are introduced. The volume of each articial cell is the sum of all volumes of the cells inside the cylinder adjacent to the interface under consideration. Moreover we require, that the articial cells C0,2d and C1,2d are identied with C0,1d and C1,1d , respectively. Without loosing generality we assume that the valve pocket is parallel to the x-axis. Now we employ the following calculation procedure in each timestep: First a twodimensional nite volume scheme is applied to determine the state vector U0,2d at the time tn+1 . In doing so the velocity normal to the valve pocket axis (x-axis) is set to zero and thus impulse Iy 0,2d is zero. Similarly, the state quantities Un+1 of cell C1,1d are calculated 1,1d using one-dimensional nite volume methods. However we still have to determine the boundary cells C0,1d and C1,2d . Here we follow a dierent approach compared to the previous boundary condition problems. The state quantities of the cell C0,1d are obtained by projecting the state vector Un+1 of the two-dimensional computational domain on 0,2d 40

Cylinder

Interface C0,2d C1,2d ws

Articial Cells

Extension Projection

Two-dimensional One-dimensional

C0,1d C1,1d C2,1d Articial Cells

Valve pocket Interface

Figure 3.14: Interface between two-dimensional and one-dimensional domain.

n+1 the state vector U0,1d of the one-dimensional domain. Furthermore, we extend the state vector Un+1 of C1,1d in order to derive the state vector Un+1 . So we can write 1,1d 1,2d

U1,2d

M1,2d = Ix1,2d Iy 1,2d R0,1d u0,1d

Ext. :=

U0,1d =

Here ws denotes the width of the interface.

Proj. :=

R1,1d ws u1,1d R1,1d , ws 0 M0,2d ws Ix0,2d . M0,2d 0

(3.85)

(3.86)

The drawback of this procedure is that the requirement for conservation of state quantities can not be satised, which is seen from following considerations (gure 3.15). Let mn and mn denote the mass inside the articial cells C0,2d , C0,1d and C1,2d , C1,1d , respec1 0 tively. In addition, mc and mv stand for the mass uxes through the interface at the cylinder and valve pocket side during one time step. The mass uxes between the artical cells in the one-dimensional and two-dimensional domain are denoted by m1 and m2 , respectively. All these mass uxes can be easily derived from the numerical uxes of the nite volume methods used. Now the masses mn+1 and mn+1 inside the cells C0,2d and 0 1

41

C1,1d at time tn+1 are given by

mn+1 1

mn+1 = mn + mc m2 , 0 0 = mn 1

(3.87) (3.88) (3.89)

+ m1 mv .

Then the projection and extension described above assigns the new masses to the appropriate cells in the other computational domain. Finally the mass inside the artical cells in the one-dimensional domain and two-dimensional domain at the time tn+1 is given by: (mn+1 +mn+1 )1d = (mn+1 +mn+1 )2d = (mn +mn )+(mc mv )+(m1 m2 ) . (3.90) 0 1 0 1 0 1 If the last term of (3.90) is zero the method used would be conservative, since every gain or loss of mass inside the artical cells is due to the uxes across the interfaces. However, the numerical uxes and thus the mass uxes of the one-dimensional scheme dier from the uxes of the two-dimensional scheme, leading to unwanted mass sources and sinks. Since we can quantify the mass gains produced by the procedure described above the errors made can be easily corrected. In detail, the gained mass m1 m2 is subtracted from the artical cells Ci,1d and Ci,2d for i = 0, 1. We obtain
n+1 n+1 Ri,1d = Ri,1d |B

m1 m2 m1 m2 n+1 n+1 , Mi,2d = Mi,2d |B , 2x 2xws

(3.91)

where |B denotes the state quantities before the correction. C0,2d m0 Projection C1,2d m1 Extension Interface to Valve pocket mv

mc Interface to Cylinder

m2

C0,1d m0

m1

C1,1d m1

Figure 3.15: Mass correction: Mass inside the artical cells and mass uxes during one time step

3.3

Equation of motion for the valve plate

The second order ODE of the valve motion (2.47) can be solved analytically if a constant valve force Fv is assumed during the time step t. The solution for the valve lift xv and the valve plate velocity vv at the time tn+1 takes the form 42

vv n+1 = vv n cos xv n+1 = where

1 cs t (3.92) Fv cs (l1 + xv n ) sin mv cs mv Fv Fv cs mv n cs l1 + l1 + xv n t + vv sin t , (3.93) cos cs cs mv cs mv Fv = (p1 p2 )Av Fadh . (3.94)

cs t + mv

43

Chapter 4

Measurements
In this chapter measurements for two test compressors from Burckhardt Compression, Switzerland and Ariel, USA are discussed. Both compressors are double-acting barrel design compressors. However, Burckhardts compressor has two valves and is about three times smaller than Ariels compressor with eight valves.

4.1

Compressor with two valves

A double-acting, 2 cylinder, barrel design reciprocating compressor was tested. The experiment was carried out by Daniel Sauter, Markus Lehmann and Roland Aigner in November 2004 at Burckhardt Compression, Switzerland. The main specications of the compressor can be found in table 4.1. Various sensors were used to measure the pressure inside the cylinder and inside the suction and discharge chamber, temperature inside the cylinder and in the pipes, valve motion of the discharge valve, volume ow, speed of the crankshaft. Figure 4.1 shows the experimental compressor and its main components. Figure 4.2 shows the location of each sensor in cylinder 1. A detailed description of the sensors used can be found in the appendix A.1.

4.1.1

Test Cases

In order to get a wide variety of test cases the valve conguration (see table 4.2) of the pressure valve of the rst cylinder and the discharge pressure have been varied. In addition, the inuence of the number of working cylinders has been examined. For the comparison of the measurements with numerical simulations three of four working chambers have been sealed o during measurements by covering the valve pockets of these chambers. All test congurations were mesasured at 4 dierent relative discharge pressures: 1, 2, 3 and 4 bar. The ambient pressure at the days of measurement was 0.97 bar. Therefore in this section 44

Type of compressor: Diameter of cylinder: Stroke: Speed of crankshaft: Suction pressure: Maximum pressure ratio: Clearance: Gas: Length of connecting rod: Type of valves: Classication :

Burckhardt compression 2K90-1A 2 cylinders, double-acting, barrel design 0.22 m 0.09 m 980-990 rpm ambient pressure 1/5 1.6-2 mm Air 0.25 m 110K12 0.22

Table 4.1: Main Specications of the Burckhardt test compressor.

pressure and temperature sensors gure 4.2 discharge pipe suction pipe

cylinder 2

cylinder 1 engine

1111111111 0000000000 1111111111 0000000000 1111111111 0000000000 damper

outlet orice

restriction valve heat exchanger ywheel with trigger

111111 000000 111111 000000 111111 000000 111111 000000 111111 000000 111111 000000 111111 000000 111111 000000 111111 000000

Figure 4.1: Shema of the Burckhardt experimental compressor

45

pressure is displayed relative to this ambient pressure. Six dierent valve congurations have been tested. First, the maximum valve lift has been set to 1.05, 1.35 and 1.65 mm. Second, a total spring constant of the valve of 48 and 80 N/mm has been used. The signals of the sensors were recorded with a sampling rate of 10000 Hz. For every test case three independent measurements were taken for a complete compressor cycle at three dierent times ta , tb and tc , which were approximately one minute apart. Discharge valve Measurement valve mass of valve plate number of springs spring deection spring constant cs maximum valve lift xv,max valve force area parameter of valve v /v parameter of valve fe1mm number of springs spring deection spring constant cs maximum valve lift xvmax number of springs spring deection spring constant cs maximum valve lift xv,max 0.076 kg 8 0.0009 m 48/80 N/mm 1.05/1.35/1.65 mm 0.0056 m2 2.042 [1]/ 80000 1/m2 1.86 m2 /m 12 0.9 mm 48 N/mm 1.35 mm 12 0.594 mm 21.3 N/mm 1.35 mm

Discharge valve

Suction valve

Table 4.2: Specications of the valves.

4.1.2

Results of Measurement

Periodic Process After a warm-up of several minutes the process inside the compressor is periodic (gure 4.3). Then comparisons of valve motion and pressure distribution over one period at dierent times show only small deviations. Variation of number of Working Chambers The dierence between one cylinder and two cylinders working are very small. Whereas, if only one working chamber is active, pressure distribution and valve motion show slightly dierent behaviour (gure 4.4 and gure 4.5). This is due to the fact that in case of double-acting cylinders pressure waves from the crank end side and the head end side interact, since both sides are connected by the pressure chamber. Hence the outow condition for the discharge valve changes, resulting in dierent pressure distributions inside the working chamber. We observe that the pressure in the pressure chamber has one or two peaks depending on whether the compressor is double-acting or not. However, the dierences in the valve retainer during discharge (between 130 CA and 180 CA) are rather small and therefore dierences of the pressure inside the cylinder and dierences of the valve motion are small.

46

suction valve

discharge valve

2 3

1 . . . . . . pc1 2 . . . . . . pc2 3 . . . . . . pc3

4 . . . . . . pc4 5 . . . . . . pc5 6 . . . . . . pc6

7 . . . . . . pc7 8 . . . . . . pin and Tsc 9 . . . . . . pout and Tpc

Figure 4.2: Location of the sensors inside the cylinder 1, the suction and the discharge valve retainer.

400000 350000

Relative pressure at pc5 [Pa]

300000 250000 200000 150000 100000 50000 0 50000 0 50 100 150 200

pressure, time a pressure, time b pressure, time c valve lift, time a valve lift, time b valve lift, time c

0.0016 0.0014 0.0012

0.0008 0.0006 0.0004 0.0002 0 250 300 350 0.0002

Crank angle CA[ ] Figure 4.3: Comparison of relative pressure at pc5 and valve lift at dierent times ta , tb and tc . Case: pout = 3 bar, cs =48N/mm , xv,max =1.35 mm.

47

Valve lift [m]

0.001

400000 350000

Relative pressure at pc5 [Pa]

300000 250000 200000 150000 100000 50000 0 50000 0 50 100 150

pressure, 2 cylinder pressure, 1 cylinder pressure, 1 chamber valve lift, 2 cylinder valve lift, 1 cylinder valve lift, 1 chamber

0.0016 0.0014 0.0012

0.0008 0.0006 0.0004 0.0002 0 200 250 300 350 0.0002

Crank angle [ ] Figure 4.4: Comparison of relative pressure at pc5 and valve lift with 2 cylinders, 1 cylinder and 1 chamber working. Case: pout = 3 bar, cs =48 N/mm, xv,max =1.35 mm.

340000 330000 pout, 2 cylinder pout, 1 cylinder pout, 1 chamber

Relative pressure at pout [Pa]

320000 310000 300000 290000 280000 270000 260000 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350

Crank angle [ ] Figure 4.5: Comparison of relative pressure in the valve retainer: 2 cylinders, 1 cylinder and 1 working chamber. Case: pout = 4 bar, cs =48 N/mm, xv,max =1.35 mm.

48

Valve lift [m]

0.001

Initiation of Waves In gure 4.6 the pressure readings at pc5 and pc6 close to the discharge valve and the suction valve, respectively, and the position of the valve plate as a function of the crank angle CA are shown. During compression, when both valves are closed the pressure is uniform in the cylinder (CA = 140 ). When the pressure in the cylinder exceeds the pressure in the valve retainer plus the springing the valve starts to open. The pressure near the outow valve ceases to increase and reaches a maximum, while the pressure close to the suction valve still increases. The opening of the valve has initiated a wave which reaches the opposite side of the cylinder at a crank angle CA=146 , just before the valve has completely opened. Then the rarefaction wave is reected at the suction side. Thus the pressure at the suction side (pc6) attains also a maximum. But it is markedly larger than that on the discharge side (pc5). When the valve plate hits the valve seat the pressure in front of the pressure valve is large enough to keep the valve open until CA = 155 . Then the pressure has dropped and the valve begins to close again reducing the mass outow. Again this leads to an increase of the pressure inside the cylinder. Now increasing of pressure forces the valve to open and a complicated interaction of the valve motion with the pressure waves in the cylinder takes place. Shortly after the lowest volume point the valve closes. At that time a complicated system of waves travelling back and forth is left in the cylinder. In gure 4.7 the dierence of the pressure readings between suction side and cylinder centre (pc5 - pc1) is shown. We observe that during expansion the amplitudes of the waves are proportional to the mean pressure inside the cylinder and their periodic time tends to the travelling time of a wave across the cylinder 2d/c corresponding to the lowest eigen mode in lateral direction. We want to point out that at the beginning of the expansion phase a mix of modes with several eigen frequencies is present. These modes are initiated by the valve motion. As said above the zeroth eigenmode has the smallest damping and remains visible until the suction phase starts.
600000 500000 pc5 pc6 pout valve lift 0.003 0.0025 0.002 0.0015 0.001 0.0005 0 120 140 160 180 200 220 240

Relative pressure [Pa]

400000 300000 200000 100000 0 100

Crank angle

[ ]

Figure 4.6: Relative Pressure at pressure sensors pc5, pc6 and pout and valve lift. Case: pout = 4 bar, cs =48 N/mm, xv,max =1.35 mm.

49

Valve lift [m]

60000 diff. pressure pc5pc1

Pressure dierence pc5-pc1 [Pa]

40000

20000

20000

40000

60000

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

Crank angle [ ] Figure 4.7: Pressure dierence pc5-pc1. Case: pout = 4 bar, cs =48 N/mm, xv,max =1.35 mm. Plane Waves As described above, pressure waves run through the cylinder in lateral direction (x-direction). For example the opening of the valve initiates a wave. This wave runs at the speed of sound and reaches the sensor next to the discharge valve (pc5) rst (gure 4.8). Then sensors pc1, pc2, pc3, pc4 at the y-axis notice the rarefraction wave. Since the dierences between the pressure readings at these sensors are rather small, a plane wave can be assumed. Finally, the information of the opening of the valve has travelled to the sensors pc6 and pc7. Pressure dierences across the discharge valve When the discharge valve starts opening, the gas velocity is almost equal to zero and the pressure is constant inside the cylinder except from very small disturbances. Therefore the pressure dierence (pressure loss) across the valve can be determined exactly from the pressure readings at pc5 and pout (gure 4.9). Both, Figure 4.10 and table 4.1.2 show that higher pressure dierences occur at higher discharge pressures. Since pressure forces due to the valve springing are constant and ow inside the cylinder is negligible small we assume that faster increasing pressure inside the cylinder at higher discharge pressures, valve plate sticking, and the inertia of the valve plate contribute to this behaviour. Note that in case of open valves, the time, waves need to cover the distance between the valve and the sensors, must be taken into account and thus the dierence of the pressure readings at pc5 and pout do not give the exact pressure dierence across the valve. Valve Plate Motion The motion of the discharge valve plate has been recorded using three distance sensors. They were mounted on the circumference of a mean diameter of the valve each with a distance of 90 to the next one. While at the rst opening of the valve the plate keeps plane, at the end of the discharge phase the valve plate becomes slightly askew (gure 4.11). We have identied that asymmetric ow and variations in the springing 50

500000

pc1 pc5 pc6 pc4 pc3

Relative pressure [Pa]

450000

400000

350000

300000 120

130

140

150

160

170

180

190

200

Crank angle

[ ]

Figure 4.8: Relative Pressure at pressure sensors pc1, pc3, pc4, pc5 and pc6. Case: pout = 4 bar, cs =48 N/mm, xv,max =1.35 mm.

500000 450000 400000 pout, 4 bar pout, 1 bar pc5, 4 bar pc5, 1 bar

Relative pressure [Pa]

350000 300000 250000 200000 150000 100000 50000 0 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350

Crank angle

[ ]

Figure 4.9: Relative pressure in front (pc5) and behind pressure valve (pout) . Cases: 1 chamber, pout = 4 bar, cs =48 N/mm, xv,max = 1.35 mm and 1 chamber, pout = 1 bar, cs =48 N/mm, xvmax =1.35 mm.

51

120000

Dierence pressure pc5-pout [Pa]

100000

pc5pout, 4 bar pc5pout, 3 bar pc5pout, 2 bar pc5pout, 1 bar

80000

60000

40000

20000

0.0002

0.0004

0.0006

0.0008

0.001

0.0012

0.0014

Valve Lift [m] Figure 4.10: Dierence pressure pc5-pout over valve lift for dierent discharge pressures . Cases: 1 chamber, pout = 1/2/3/4 bar, cs = 48 N/mm, xv,max = 1.35 mm.

Discharge Pressure 105 [Pa] 2 3 4 5

Pressure Dierence (pc5-pout) 105 [Pa] 0.08 0.16 0.30 0.40

Pressure Gradient 105 [Pa/s] 260 480 690 842

Table 4.3: Pressure dierence at closed valve (valve starts to open) for dierent discharge pressures.

52

are responsible for this. In order to quantify the contribution of both eects, following measurement procedure has been conducted (gure 4.12). In the rst measurement the compressor was tested with a certain position of the valve plate. In detail, the sensors VP1 and VP2 were located at Position A and Position B, respectively. Then the discharge valve was rotated at 180 and again the valve motion recorded (sensor VP1 at Postion B and sensor VP2 at position A). The inuence of the asymmetric springing is represented by the line AS which is given by AS = xv,VP1, Pos. B xv,VP2, Pos. B , and the line for the inuence of the asymmetric ow AF is obtained by AF = 0.5 xv,VP1, Pos.B + xv,VP2, Pos.B xv,VP1, Pos.A + xv,VP2, Pos.A . (4.2) (4.1)

It turns out that the eect of springing dominates (gure 4.13).

0.0014 0.0012 0.001 0.0008 0.0006 0.0004 0.0002 0 100 VP1 VP2 VP3 VP average

Valve lift [m]

120

140

160

180

200

Crank angle [ ] Figure 4.11: Comparison of valve plate motion at sensor VP1, VP2 and VP3. Case: 1 chamber, pout = 4 bar, cs =48 N/mm, xv,max =1.35 mm.

Variation of springing In gure 4.14 the comparison of measurement data with different springing congurations (cs =48 N/mm and cs =80 N/mm) is shown. It turns out that stier springing leads in this case to following results: Lower impact velocity of the valve plate: In this case the impact velocity is reduced from 1.67 m/s for cs = 48 N/mm to 1.48 m/s in case of cs = 80 N/mm. This is true for most compressors. The valve closes faster The valve plate tends to open and close more often and therefore excite more often pressure waves.

53

1. Measurement discharge valve Pos. A

1

2. Measurement

Pos. B piston

1 . . . VP1 (distance sensor) 2 . . . VP2 (distance sensor) Figure 4.12: Measurements of valve plate motion with sensor VP1 and VP2.

1.5

VP1 Pos. A VP2 Pos. B VP1 Pos. B VP2 Pos. A asymetric springing asymetric flow

Valve lift [m]

0.5

0.5 120 140 160 180 200 220

Crank angle

[ ]

Figure 4.13: Askew valve plate: Dierent contributions. Case: 1 chamber, pout = 4 bar, cs =48 N/mm, xv,max =1.35 mm.

54

500000 pc5 c=48 N/mm pc5 c=80 N/mm valve lift, c=48 N/mm valve lift, c=80 N/mm

0.0025

Relative pressure at pc5 [Pa]

400000

0.002

200000

0.001

100000

0.0005

100000

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

0.0005

Crank angle [ ] Figure 4.14: Comparison of relative pressure at pc5 and valve lift. Cases: pout = 4 bar, cs =48 N/mm and cs =80 N/mm, xv,max =1.35 mm. Variation of maximum valve plate lift xv,max The variation of the valve plate lift xv,max from 1.05 mm to 1.65 mm has very little eect on the pressure distribution inside the cylinder (gure 4.15). Whereas the impact velocity of the valve plate increases markedly with higher maximum valve plate lifts xv,max since the plate is accelerated over a larger distance (see table 4.1.2). Maximum valve plate lift xv,max [m] 1.05 1.35 1.65 Impact velocity [m/s] 1.36 1.67 1.91

Table 4.4: Impact velocities for dierent maximum valve plate lifts.

55

Valve lift [m]

300000

0.0015

500000 pc5 xvmax=1.05 mm pc5 xvmax=1.35 mm pc5 xvmax=1.65 mm valve lift, 1.05 valve lift, 1.35 valve lift, 1.65

0.0025

Relative pressure at pc5 [Pa]

400000

0.002

200000

0.001

100000

0.0005

100000

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

0.0005

Crank angle [ ] Figure 4.15: Comparison of relative pressure at pc5 and valve lift. Cases: pout = 4 bar, cs =48 N/mm, xv,max = 1.05 / 1.35 / 1.65 mm

4.2

Compressor with eight valves

A double-acting, 1 cylinder, barrel design reciprocating compressor with eight valves was tested. The experiment was carried out by Ariel Compression Ltd. The main specications of the compressor can be found in table 4.5. Various sensors were used to measure pressure inside the cylinder and at the suction and discharge ange (gure 4.16). Type of compressor: Diameter of cylinder: Stroke: Speed of crankshaft: Gas: Suction pressure: Discharge pressure: Valves: Classication : Ariel Compression JGD26.5 1 cylinder, double-acting, barrel design 0.6731 m 0.1397 m 1182 rpm Nitrogen 2.2 105 Pa 6.4 105 Pa 8 0.65

Table 4.5: Main Specications of the Ariel test compressor The pressure readings of the various sensors can be found in gure 4.17. Note that the locations of the pressure sensors dier from the Burckhardt test compressor. Most of the statements made above for the Burckhardt test compressor can be applied to this compressor as well. However, since this compressor is almost three times bigger and has higher overall mass ow rates some signicant dierences compared to the Burckhardt 56

Valve lift [m]

300000

0.0015

suction valves
5

discharge valves and valve retainers 1 . . . . . . pc1 2 . . . . . . pc2 3 . . . . . . pc3 4 . . . . . . pc4 5 . . . . . . pc5 pout at discharge ange pin at suction ange

Figure 4.16: Location of sensors inside cylinder compressor can be identied. Therefore the measurements of the Ariel compressor are discussed in the following. Although the gas can leave the cylinder through four valves, the maximum measured pressure inside the cylinder exceeds the discharge pressure by more than 1.4 bar. This is due to the fact that high mass uxes through the valves increase the pressure in the valve retainers and discharge pipe markedly resulting in hindered outow of gas. In addition, the pressure dierences between suction and discharge side in the cylinder are very high since the diameter of the cylinder and thus the distance from the suction side to the discharge valves is large. Note that these dierences of the test compressors can be well described by the classication number . In case of the Ariel test compressor is 0.65, which is almost three times bigger than the of the Burckhardt test compressor. Although the pressure sensor pc1 is located in the vicinity of pc3, the pressure readings dier during discharge. We assume that the sensor pc1 in the port records total pressure whereas the sensor pc3 registers the static pressure only. Therefore the dierence corresponds to the dynamic pressure. Another dierence to the Burckhardt test compressor is that the pressure waves in the discharge pipe do not fade away. This behaviour can not be described by modelling the valve retainer and pressure chamber only. Instead the whole discharge system, consisting of discharge valve retainer, pressure chamber, discharge pipe, and damper, must be considered. However for calculating the gas ow in the cylinder it is sucient to give a good approximation of the pressure at the downstream side of the discharge valves. This issue is discussed in detail in section 5.2.

57

900000 800000 700000

pin pout

pc1 pc2 pc3 pc4

Absolute pressure [Pa]

600000 500000 400000 300000 200000 100000 0 150 100 50 0 50 ] Crank angle [ 100 150

Figure 4.17: Measurement data of absolute pressure at dierent sensors.

58

Chapter 5

Comparison of Measurement and Numerical data

In this chapter the quasi one-dimensional and two-dimensional simulation results are compared to measurement data of the test compressors. The deviations are discussed and important physical eects highlighted.

5.1
5.1.1

One-dimensional Model
Comparison with Measurement Results of the Burckhardt test compressor

The quasi-onedimensional model is employed in order to obtain the numerical results. For modelling the pressure chamber it is assumed that the pressure variations inside the discharge pipe are negligible small and thus the second approach VR2 is chosen where the pressure chamber is connected to the valve retainer by a T-piece and the outow boundary is located at the end of the pressure chamber. The specications of the test case calculated can be found in table 5.1. Note that from now on all pressure results are displayed in absolute pressure. The dead centre with the smallest cylinder volume is at 180 CA. Number of active Working Chambers 1 Discharge Pressure po ut [Pa] 5 105 Valve springing cs [N/m] 48 103 Maximum valve lift xv,max [m] 1.35 103

Table 5.1: Specications of the test case In Figure 5.1, 5.2 and 5.3 the comparisons of the measured pressures at the discharge side (pc5), the suction side (pc6) and in the valve retainer (pout) with the numerical solution of the quasi one dimensional model are given. In addition, the motion of the discharge valve obtained by numerical simulation and measurements can be found in the same gures. The pressure dierence between discharge side (pc5) and cylinder centre (pc1) is displayed in gure 5.4. In the following we will discuss the solutions in detail. 59

600000 pressure pc5, Num. pressure pc5, Exp. valve lift, Num. valve lift, Exp.

0.003

Absolute pressure at pc5 [Pa]

500000

0.0025

400000

0.002

300000

0.0015

200000

0.001

100000

0.0005

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

Crank angle [ ] Figure 5.1: Burckhardt test compressor: Comparison of absolute pressure at pc5 and valve lift.

700000 600000 pressure pc6, Num. pressure pc6, Exp. valve lift, Num. valve lift, Exp.

0.0035 0.003 0.0025 0.002 0.0015 0.001 0.0005 0

Absolute pressure at pc6 [Pa]

500000 400000 300000 200000 100000 0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

Crank angle [ ] Figure 5.2: Burckhardt test compressor: Comparison of absolute pressure at pc6 and valve lift.

60

Valve lift [m]

Valve lift [m]

540000

pout numerical pout experimental

Absolute pressure at pout [Pa]

520000

500000

480000

460000 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350

Crank angle

[ ]

Figure 5.3: Burckhardt test compressor: Comparison of absolute pressure at pout.

60000 40000 20000

diff. pressure pc5pc1, num. diff. pressure pc5pc1, meas.

Valve lift [m]

20000 40000 60000

50

100

150 200 Crank angle [ ]

250

300

350

Figure 5.4: Burckhardt test compressor: Comparison of dierence pressure pc5-pc1.

61

Compression The gas velocities in the cylinder are very small and an isentropic compression takes places. The almost uniform pressure inside the cylinder (gure 5.5) is a function of the actual cylinder volume and the initial pressure and volume at the beginning of the compression only. In other words dierences in pressure between simulation and measurement during compression can be traced back to the fact that the compression volume is not specied correctly. Discharge When the pressure in the cylinder exceeds the pressure in the valve retainer plus the springing the valve starts to open and a wave is initiated (gure 5.5). The rarefaction wave, which is initiated at CA = 142 , reaches the suction side at CA = 146 . Note that in undisturbed regions the isentropic compression still takes place. However, the following complicated interaction of the valve motion and the pressure waves is well represented by the numerical model. Most notably the vale motion is given correctly. Also the calculated pressure dierences in the cylinder, which are the cause for the moment onto the piston, matches the measured ones. Due to the outow of gas through the valve, the pressure in the valve retainer rises. Again this increase is represented well by the model. We observe that at the end of the discharge the calculated amplitudes of the pressure waves are bigger than the measured ones. Resulting in higher pressure dierences across the cylinder in the simulation. In other words, the one-dimensional model overestimates the pressure waves and thus the moment on the piston cannot be determined accurately in this stage of the discharge phase. Expansion We observe that the calculated amplitudes of the pressure waves are higher than the measured ones. Whereas the frequencies agree. Furthermore, an agreement of the decay of the amplitudes, due to the increase of volume, can be observed. The decrease of mean pressure inside the cylinder is not well represented by the numerical model. More precisely, the pressure decreases slower in the model. In order to nd the cause of the deviations full three dimensional simulations have been carried out. It turns out that the remaining gas runs through the cylinder at higher velocities as compared to the compression phase. However heat transfer from the gas to the surrounding and dissipation can still be neglected. Hence, similar to the compression phase the mean pressure is only a function of volume (for given initial pressure and volume at the beginning of the expansion), and thus the mass inside the cylinder must be higher at the time when the discharge valve closes. Two dierent causes can be identied. Firstly the minimum clearance Z0 is smaller than specied for the calculation resulting in smaller volumes at the start of the expansion. Secondly higher amplitudes of the pressure waves lead to more mass inside the cylinder. Since the calculated pressure during compression matches the measured one perfectly the second cause is most likely responsible for dierent slopes of the pressure during expansion. Suction All statements made for the discharge phase concerning pressure waves are true for the suction phase as well. However, since the overall pressure level is low compared to the discharge phase, the resulting pressure waves have very low amplitudes. Therefore problems arising from the pressure dierence across the cylinder cannot be found during the suction phase. The gas velocities inside the cylinder are rather small during the suction 62

phase. cylinder head recess valve pocket valve retainer cylinder Absolute pressure 105 [Pa]
6.5 140 CA 142 CA 144 CA 146 CA 6

5.5

0.1

0.2

0.3

x [m] Figure 5.5: Initiation of waves: Pressure distribution inside the cylinder and in the valve retainer at the beginning of the discharge

5.1.2

Super elevation of the pressure due to initial sticking

Comparing the pressure reading pc5 close to the discharge valve with the corresponding numerical solution, where the initial sticking is not taken into account, shows that the opening of the valve is predicted too early (gure 5.6). As a consequence the pressure maximum at pc5 is about 0.3 bar to small. With other words in reality the opening of the valve does not start when the pressure in the cylinder balances the pressure in the retainer and the springing. An additional delay occurs. In [8] the dynamic behaviour of a valve plate is analysed. If the initial gap is very small, say 1-5 m, viscosity hinders the gas to ow into the valve gap resulting in a local pressure drop in the valve gap. Applying Reynolds lubrication theory, an additional force Fadh holding back the valve plate can be identied. It turns out that the result depends on the initial gap width, which cannot be measured easily. In this case a initial gap width of 2 m has been chosen to t the data.

5.1.3

Pressure loss at sudden changes of cross section

The pressure at pc5 predicted by the numerical solution, wherein the pressure loss has been neglected, drops after the rst maximum at a crank angle of 144 degrees to a minimum at CA 156 (gure 5.7). This minimum is about 5 104 Pa smaller than that of the measured data. At the second minimum at a crank angle of 180 (dead centre) the dierence is even worse (8 104 Pa). An explanation for this dierence is the following. During outow the gas is compressed under the piston. There it ows through a narrow channel towards the valve pocket. At the entrance of the valve pocket the gas faces a sudden increase of the 63

Numerical without adhesion Numerical with adhesion Experiment 600000

Numerical without pressure losses Numerical with pressure losses Experiment 600000

Pressure pc5 [Pa]

500000

Pressure pc5 [Pa] Crank angle [ ]

550000

550000

500000

450000

450000

400000 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200

400000 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200

Crank angle [ ]

Figure 5.6: Delay of valve opening due to viscosity in valve gap

Figure 5.7: Eect of pressure loss at sudden change of cross-section

eective cross section of the ow channel when the piston is close to the dead centre. This sudden increase of the cross section is physically associated with a pressure loss. Although the modelling of the pressure losses at sudden changes of cross-section increases the quality of the numerical solution in the vicinity of the dead centre (180 ) markedly, the deviations of pressure at the rst minimum remain.

5.1.4

Dierent locations of outow boundary

Dierent approaches for the valve retainer and pressure chamber have been introduced in section 2.1.2. The comparison of the measured pressure in the valve retainer with the solutions of the two dierent numerical models is given in gure 5.8. In the following we will discuss the dierences in detail. First approach VR1 (gure 2.4): The pressure chamber is added to the subdomain of the valve retainer and the outlet boundary is set at the end of the valve retainer. This model describes the rst peak of the pressure in the valve retainer (pout) well, although the amplitude is too high. However, the gas leaves the valve retainer almost immediately and thus the pressure oscillates about the discharge pressure. During expansion the pressure is damped due to the pressure loss at the outow. Second approach VR2 (gure 2.5): Here the pressure chamber is replaced by a cylinder connected to the valve retainer using a T-piece. The calculated pressure in the valve retainer follows the measured one since the gas is hindered to ow out of the valve retainer. However, the small oscillations of the pressure cannot be described well by the simulation. These small variations have only a minor inuence on the pressure distribution inside the cylinder. Observing the pressure at the discharge side of the cylinder (pc5) shows that both approaches give good results and dierences are rather small (gure 5.9). Whereas the 64

valve motion shows dierent behaviour at the second opening of the valve. However in terms of pressure distribution inside the cylinder these dierences play a minor role, since during this stage of the discharge phase only a small amount of gas ows through the valve.
pout, Num., VR2 pout, Num., VR1 pout experimental

540000

Absolute pressure at pout [Pa]

520000

500000

480000

460000 0 50 100 150 200 Crank angle [ ] 250 300 350

Figure 5.8: Comparison of absolute pressure at pout for dierent models of the pressure chamber.

5.1.5

Impact velocity

The impact velocity of the valve plate onto the valve seat can be extracted from the valve motion. In gure 5.11 the calculated and measured impact velocities for dierent discharge pressures are compared. The dierence between measurement and simulation is less than 15%.

5.1.6

Valve losses

In gure 5.10 the computed mean pressure p is shown in the p,V -diagram. The shaded area corresponds to losses at the discharge valve. In the standard case dened above the valve losses amount 5.3% of the total input energy.

5.2
5.2.1

Two-dimensional model
Comparison with measurement results of the Ariel test compressor

The two-dimensional model is employed to simulate the Ariel test compressor specied in section 4.2. The pressure chamber of this compressor, where the gas ows from four valve 65

600000 pc5, Num., VR2 pc5, Num., VR1 pc5, Experimental valve lift, Num., VR2 valve lift, Num., VR1 valve lift, Exp.

0.003

Absolute pressure at pc5 [Pa]

500000

0.0025

400000

0.002

300000

0.0015

200000

0.001

100000

0.0005

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

Crank angle [ ] Figure 5.9: Comparison of absolute pressure at pc5 and valve lift for dierent models of the pressure chamber.

averaged pressure 105 [Pa]

7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

2.5

valve losses impact velocity [m/s]

2 1.5 1 0.5 0

numerical measurement 0 1 2 3 4 5

volume [dm3 ] Figure 5.10: Valve Losses at discharge valve

relative discharge pressure 105 [Pa] Figure 5.11: Impact velocity of discharge valve depending on discharge pressure

66

Valve lift [m]

retainers merge, is far too complicated to be modelled as a simple cylinder. Therefore, the rst approach VR1 for the pressure chamber is chosen. The measured pressures at dierent locations inside the cylinder are compared to simulated ones (gures 5.12 and 5.13). Furthermore the pressure dierence between suction and discharge side (pc2-pc4) is displayed in gure 5.14. Note that in the following diagrams the dead centre with the smallest volume is at 0 CA.
900000 800000 700000 600000 pressure pc4, Num. pressure pc4, Exp. pressure pin, Num. pressure pin, Exp.

Pressure [Pa]

500000 400000 300000 200000 100000 0 150 100 50 0 50 100 150

Crank angle

[ ]

Figure 5.12: Ariel test compressor: Comparison of pressure distribution at pc2 and pout In the following the four stages of the compression cycle will be discussed: Compression The computed pressure inside the cylinder increases slightly faster than the measured one. As pointed out in section 5.1.1 this can be attributed to errors in the specication of the volume. Since the calculated slope of the pressure is steeper, the clearance volume, which has been derived from drawings provided by Ariel and specied in the numerical simulation, must be smaller than the real one. Discharge The discharge valves start to open simultaneously at 73 CA (gure 5.20).

During discharge the calculated pressures inside the cylinder are about 0.7 bar higher than the measured ones. In addition we observe that this dierence varies only slightly. This issue will be discussed in detail in section 5.2.2. The pressure dierence between suction side and discharge side is well represented by the model. Not only the frequency but also the amplitudes are calculated almost correctly. However at the end of the discharge phase the calculated second peak is lower than the measured one. Moreover from this point on the calculated pressure dierence is about 8 CA ahead. The moment onto piston is derived from the pressure acting on the piston. Due to the good approximation of the pressure dierence we expect the computed moment 67

900000 800000 700000 600000 pressure pc2, Num. pressure pc2, Exp. pressure pout, Num. pressure pout, Exp.

Pressure [Pa]

500000 400000 300000 200000 100000 0 150 100 50 0 50 100 150

Crank angle

[ ]

Figure 5.13: Ariel test compressor: Comparison of pressure distribution at pc4 and pin

200000 150000 diff. pressure pc2pc4, Num. diff. pressure pc2pc4, Exp.

Pressure dierence [Pa]

100000 50000 0 50000

100000 150000 200000 150 100 50 0 crank angle [ ] 50 100 150

Figure 5.14: Ariel test compressor: Comparison of dierence pressure pc2-pc4.

68

to approximate the real one also well (section 5.2.4). Expansion The computed pressures inside the cylinder decrease faster than the measured ones. Similar to the compression phase we identify deviations in the clearance volume as cause for the dierent slopes. However in this case dierent initial pressure distribution at the beginning of the expansion phase leads to deviations in the pressure readings during expansion too. The calculated pressure dierence between discharge side and suction side matches the measured one with respect to frequency, amplitude, and damping. However, it is still 8 CA ahead. Suction During suction the small pressure variations inside the cylinder are underestimated by the simulation model. It turns out that at the end of the suction phase the measured mean pressure is slightly higher (0.1 bar) than the computed one. Again, the pressure oscillations inside the suction pipe, which are neglected in the model, are responsible for this.

5.2.2

Variation of discharge pressure

The results of the Ariel test compressor show that during discharge the calculated pressure inside the cylinder is too high compared to the measured one. This can be explained as follows. Firstly, the computed pressure inside the cylinder increases faster at the beginning of the discharge phase than the measured one resulting in an overestimation of the pressure during discharge, and secondly the actual discharge pressure is lower than the specied one. In order to determine the inuence of the rst eect simulations have been performed where the clearance volume has been adjusted in a way so that the computed pressure increase during compression ts the measured one. However, it turns out that the dierence in the pressure rise at the beginning of the discharge can be neglected. In order to evaluate the second explanation we take a closer look at the discharge system and its numerical model. From the measured pressure readings at pout we can see that in this case the amplitudes of the pressure waves inside the discharge system do not decay. Moreover the dierence between pressure maximum and minimum at the discharge ange is 1 bar. It can be assumed that the pressure variations are of the same order in the valve retainer. So if it happens that the discharge valves open during a pressure valley at the downstream side of the valves then the actual discharge pressure would be lower than the nominal one. On the other hand the numerical simulation uses a model of the discharge system, where the pressure waves are damped. Thus at the beginning of the discharge phase the numerical simulation cannot provide a good approximation of the pressure at the downstream side of the valve. However, by reducing the discharge pressure specied for the numerical simulation, the model can mimic lower pressures at the downstream side of the valves. In gure 5.15 the computed pressure for a reduced discharge pressure of 6.1 bar is compared to measurement data and numerical results where the discharge pressure is 6.4 bar. It turns out that the pressure inside the cylinder is reduced and the trend of the pressure distribution is not changed. Therefore following conclusions may be drawn: The pressure variations in the discharge system, which cannot be represented by the simplied numerical model, are responsible for the overestimation of pressure inside 69

the cylinder during discharge. The trend of the pressure distributions inside the cylinder is not inuenced by small variations of the discharge pressure. In other words the resulting pressure level in the cylinder is only shifted by the variation of the discharge pressure. The simplied one-dimensional models of the valve retainer and pressure chamber are not sucient to compute the pressure distribution inside the discharge system for the whole working period. However they are sucient to describe the pressure rise in the valve retainer during discharge. During discharge the pressure level inside the cylinder is determined by the pressure at the downstream side of the cylinder. In order to provide a good approximation of the pressure at the downstream side of the valve the whole discharge system must be modelled. Furthermore the model must be valid throughout the whole working periode. However the gas ow in the pressure chamber is too complicated to be modelled by an one-dimensional approach, at least two-dimensional approaches must be employed.
900000 800000 700000 press. pc4, Num. pout=6.4 bar press. pc4, Num. pout=6.1 bar pressure pc4, Exp.

Pressure pc4 [Pa]

600000 500000 400000 300000 200000 100000 0 100 50 0 50 100

Crank angle

[ ]

Figure 5.15: Variation of discharge pressure: pout = 640000 / 610000 Pa

5.2.3

Pressure distribution inside the cylinder

The Ariel test compressor has 8 valves located at the circumference of the cylinder. The entering and leaving of gas through the valves initiates pressure disturbances which strongly deviate from plane waves. In fact a two-dimensional gas ow in the x, y-plane of the cylinder can be observed (gure 5.16). At four selected crank angles the pressure distributions inside the cylinder are discussed in the following.

70

At -64 CA the discharge valves are already open and the pressure in the vicinity of the discharge valves decreases due to the outow of gas. On the other hand the gas in the suction side and in the centre of the cylinder still undergoes isentropic compression. In this regions the velocity is zero (gure 5.17). The pressure dierence between suction and discharge side is about 0.9 bar resulting in a turning moment onto the piston relative to the cylinder centre of 2350 Nm (gure 5.18). At -32 CA a maximum velocity of about 130 m/s occurs at the valve pocket entries leading to the discharge valves. We observe that due to these high gas velocities the pressure in the vicinity of the discharge valve pockets drop to 6.95 bar. Whereas the highest pressure can be found at the stagnation point between the two rightmost discharge valves. Although the piston has reached the dead centre and reversed its movement, the valves are still open at 3 CA. This is due to the fact that at this time the pressure peak is at the discharge side of the cylinder. Moreover the expansion of the gas has not yet resulted in a sucient pressure drop. At 26 CA the valves have already closed and the remaining pressure dierence across the cylinder of 0.8 bar drives the pressure waves back and forth in the cylinder. However the amplitudes will be damped due to the decrease of mean pressure in the cylinder.

5.2.4

Moment onto the piston

The moment onto the piston is derived from the pressure distribution inside the cylinder. The pressure dierence results in a moment onto the piston, which is given by Ty =
S

p(x, y)x dS .

(5.1)

Here S denotes the area of the piston. In gure 5.18 the y-component of the turning moment relative to the centre of the cylinder is displayed. There the trend of the moment must follow the dierence pressure. In case of special pressure distributions inside the cylinder a relationship between turning moment Ty and maximum pressure dierence pmax can be found. For example, if the pressure is constant along y and linear along x (gure 5.19), then the equation 5.1 yields Ty = 1 pmax 8 d 2
3

(5.2)

Note that all other components of the moment must vanish due to symmetry.

5.2.5

Valve Opening

Let us denote the discharge valve which is located closer to the suction side with Vp1 and one of the rightmost discharge valves with Vp2. Figures 5.20 and 5.21 show the valve motion and mass ux of Vp1 and Vp2. Since the pressure in the cylinder is almost uniform during compression, the discharge valves start to open simultaneously at 73 CA. They stay open until the piston reaches the dead centre. It turns out that the mass ux through the dierent valves dier only slightly. However, the discharge valve Vp1 located closer to the suction side closes earlier due to the pressure distribution inside the cylinder. 71

(a) Shortly after opening of discharge valves (CA = -64 )

(b) During discharge (CA = -32 )

(c) Closing of the discharge valves (CA = 3 )

(d) During expansion (CA = 26 )

Figure 5.16: Ariel test compressor: Pressure distribution in the cylinder at various times.

72

(a) Shortly after opening of discharge valves (CA = -64 )

(b) During discharge (CA = -32 )

Figure 5.17: Ariel test compressor: Velocity magnitudes in the cylinder at various times.

Moment [Nm]

2000

Dierence pressure 105 [Pa]

4000

2000 Moment onto piston Pressure difference pc2pc4 4000 60 30 0 30 60 90

pmax

Crank angle [ ] Figure 5.18: Moment onto Piston

d 2

d 2

Figure 5.19: Calculating the moment onto the piston: Pressure distribution inside cylinder

73

0.004 0.0035 0.003 Valve lift Vp1 Valve lift Vp2

6 5 mass flux through Vp1 mass flux through Vp2

mass ux m [kg/s]
0 20 40

valve lift [m]

0.0025 0.002 0.0015 0.001 0.0005 0 100 80 60 40 20

4 3 2 1 0 100 80

60

40

20

20

40

crank angle [ ] Figure 5.20: Valve motion for dierent discharge valves

crank angle [ ] Figure 5.21: Mass ux through dierent discharge valves

5.2.6

Valve Masking

Measurements at the Ariel test compressor have shown that valve masking leads to separation zones resulting in reduced eective ow cross-sections of the valve and pressure losses at the valve pocket entries. In the two-dimensional model the pressure losses are neglected. Only the valve ow area is reduced according to the distance between piston and cylinder head. We observe that taking this eect into account hinders the gas to ow out. Therefore the calculated pressure inside the cylinder is higher (gure 5.22).
900000 800000 700000 600000 pc2, Num. with valve mask. pc2, Num. without valve mask. pressure pc2, Exp.

Pressure [Pa]

500000 400000 300000 200000 100000 0 100 50 0 50 100

Crank angle

[ ]

Figure 5.22: Eect of Valve Masking: Comaparison of pressure at suction side pc2

74

Chapter 6

Remarks on Numerical Schemes

This chapter is concerned with comparison of dierent numerical schemes and their solution. Not only computational time but also accuracy of the dierent approaches are discussed. In addition the limitations of the one-dimensional and two-dimensional approach is considered.

6.1

Comparison of full three-dimensional, quasi one-dimensional and quasi two-dimensional numerical methods

In order to evaluate the simplied models the test case of section 5.1.1 has been simulated using full three-dimensional, quasi one-dimensional and quasi two-dimensional numerical methods. However to simplify matters the outow boundary has been placed at the downstream side of the discharge valve. That means that the eects of the discharge system have been neglected. For the three dimensional simulation the commercial CFD-code of Fluent Inc. is employed. Here the three-dimensional Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes equations, the continuity equation and the energy equation are solved by means of rst order methods in the ow domain of the cylinder. In addition an appropriate turbulence model must be chosen. The simple valve models presented in section 2.5 have formed the in- and outow boundaries. The piston motion and thus the variation of the computational domain with time has been modelled using dynamic meshing. A detailed description of the implementation can be found in [22]. In gure 6.1 the pressure inside the cylinder and the valve motion are compared. It turns out that the simple models are capable of capturing the most important physical eects, resulting in a very good agreement with the three dimensional model. Most notably the valve motion is predicted accurately by the simplied models although dierences can be observed at the end of the discharge phase. However the dierences of the models are discussed in the following.

75

600000

Absolute pressure at pc5 [Pa]

500000 400000 300000 200000 100000 0

pressure pc5, Num. 1D pressure pc5, Num. 2D pressure pc5, Num. 3D valve lift, Num. 1D valve lift, Num. 2D valve lift, Num.3D

0.003 0.0025

0.0015 0.001 0.0005 0

150

100

50

50

100

150

Crank angle [ ] Figure 6.1: Comparison of dierent nite volume schemes: Pressure pc5 inside the cylinder and valve motion.

6.1.1

Pressure waves

During discharge the interaction of the pressure waves and the valve motion is the dominant physical eect inside the cylinder. We use the pressure dierence across the cylinder (pc6-pc5) to describe the properties of the pressure waves (gure 6.1). It turns out that both simple models are capable of describing the rst excitation of the rarefraction wave due to the opening of the discharge valve. Most notably the amplitudes and the frequencies match. However in the course of the discharge small deviations can be observed. Most notably, at the end of the discharge phase the one-dimensional and two-dimensional model dier from the three-dimensional model. This is due to the fact, that the distance between cylinder head and piston is so small, that the resulting ow in the discharge valve pocket and suction valve pocket is three-dimensional. This behaviour cannot be described by the simple models. In case of the one-dimensional model the dierences at the dead centre (0 CA) causes the discharge valve to open a third time, resulting in another wave excitation with high amplitudes. Finally, when the discharge valve stays close, the remaining pressure waves run back and forth in the cylinder. However the amplitudes of the waves decay on the one hand due to dissipation and on the other hand due to the increase of the volume, whereas the eects of the dissipation are rather small. In numerical simulations another eect takes place. The numerical dissipation of the used method leads to an articial damping. However the magnitude of the numerical dissipation decreases with decreasing cell size x. In other words with a sucient ne grid the numerical dissipation can be neglected. For a detailed description of this issue we refer to [13] and [30]. In table 6.1 the number of cells per diameter are listed for each numerical model. Since a very ne grid has been used for the one-dimensional simulation the numerical dissipation can be neglected and the decrease of the amplitudes correspond to the increase of the cylinder volume only. Although the two-dimensional mesh is ner than the three-dimensional

76

Valve lift [m]

0.002

one, the numerical dissipation is higher. Hence the amplitudes of the waves decay faster. The phase shift between the dierent models during expansion can be attributed to the dierent behaviour at the end of the discharge phase.
100000 pc6pc5, Num. 1D pc6pc5, Num. 2D diff. press., Num.3D 50000

Pressure Dierence pc6-pc5 [Pa]

50000

100000 100

50

50

100

Crank angle

[ ]

Figure 6.2: Comparison of dierent nite volume schemes: Pressure dierence pc6-pc5.

6.1.2

Computational Time

The computational time for the one-dimensional and two-dimensional simulation was measured on a Pentium 4 Mobile processor with 512 MB RAM. The simulation of one crank shaft revolution took about two minutes and about four hours for the one-dimensional and two-dimensional model, respectively. The three-dimensional calculations were performed on an Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core 4800+ processor with 2 GB RAM. Here the computational time of one crank shaft revolution was 2.5 days. In table 6.1 the calculation time and the grid size are listed for each model. Method 1D 2D 3D Total number of cells 400 6272 22035-102297 Cells per Diameter 330 104 70 Table 6.1: Calculation Time Calculation Time per periode 2 min 4 hours 2.5 days

77

6.2
6.2.1

Limitations of the Numerical Schemes

Limitations of the one-dimensional model

The quasi one-dimensional model can not be applied on all of the test cases successfully. Although, for most of the compressor specications a solution can be obtained, the results must be questioned. In the following we will discuss dierent cases where the one-dimensional model is only limited applicable. Two-dimensional ow in the x, y-plane One main assumption of the quasi onedimensional model is that the thermodynamic state in each ow cross-section is uniform. This is violated in case of compressors with more than two valves since multiple valve pockets leads to a two-dimensional ow in the x, y-plane (gure 5.16). Hence the results of the one-dimensional model are not satisfying. Also another problem arises when multiple valve pockets have to be calculated: The two equivalent valve pockets which are derived by adding up all discharge and suction valve pockets, have very large cross-sections. Especially, when the piston approaches dead centre the cross-sections of the cylinder volume are rather small compared to the valve pockets. This may lead to supersonic ow in the cylinder cross-sections and furthermore in connection with large jumps in ow areas to the breakdown of the numerical calculation. It must be pointed out that supersonic ow is not likely to occur in common compressors. For example, when employing the one-dimensional model to the Ariel test compressor with eight valves the results show supersonic ow before the simulation breaks down. Whereas the gas velocity computed by the two-dimensional model never exceeds sonic speed. Two-dimensional ow in the x, z-plane Again the thermodynamic state is not uniform in the cross-section at a time t instead it is a function of x and z. This ow can be found in compressors with low compression ratios and in cylinders, where the ow cannot follow the form of the cross-sections and separation zones are present (gure 2.16). In the rst case the discharge valve opens when the piston is far away from the dead centre and the pressure disturbance coming from the valve pocket can expand in x and z direction, resulting in a complicated wave pattern. In the second case the height Z may be small during discharge but the geometry of the cylinder head recesses or the valve pockets leads to separation zones or at least to cross-section areas where the thermodynamic state and the gas velocity is not uniform. Here a two-dimensional model in the x,z-plane must be employed. We refer to Meyer who used a commercial CFD code to modell this twodimensional problem [22]. It is worth mentioning that with above nite volume schemes a two dimensional model in the x,z plane can be easily derived. Figure 6.3 shows the comparison of the measured pressure and valve lift of the Burckhardt test compressor with simulation results. Here a discharge pressure of 2 bar is chosen and thus the compression ratio is about 2. Although the initial stage of the discharge is calculated correctly, later the calculated pressure distribution and valve motion show large deviations from the measured one. Again the one-dimensional model fails to represent the wave structure and at least two-dimensional approaches must be employed in order to calculate this case.

78

300000 pressure pc5, Num. pressure pc5, Exp. valve lift, Num. valve lift, Exp.

0.003

Absolute pressure at pc5 [Pa]

250000

0.0025

200000

0.002

150000

0.0015

100000

0.001

50000

0.0005

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

Crank angle [ ] Figure 6.3: Comparison of absolute pressure at pc5 and valve lift with discharge pressure of 2 bar. Three dimensional ow If a compressor features more than one dierent characteristic stated above the cylinder ow will be three dimensional. Therefore the thermodynamic state at a time t depends on x, y, z and thus three-dimensional models must be employed.

6.2.2

Limitations of the quasi two-dimensional model

Also the quasi two-dimensional model can not be applied to all compressor specications. In the following most problem cases will be described. Gas ow depending on z If the thermodynamic state and gas velocity depends on the z-coordinate, one main requirement for the two-dimensional model is violated and three-dimensional model must be employed in order to calculate this ow accurately. Sudden changes of height inside the cylinder Certain cylinder head recess lead to sudden changes of height inside the cylinder and following problems may occur. Firstly the thermodynamic state and the gas velocity depends on z and three-dimensional gas ows are present. Secondly, as pointed out in section 2.4.2, the source terms in the momentum equations (2.28) and (2.29) become very large, resulting in the break-down of the numerical simulation. However, in this case following simplication of the cylinder geometry can be used. The volume Vch of the cylinder head recess is included in the cylinder clearance. The resulting cylinder clearance Z0 = Z0 + Vch /(d2 /4) is only a function of t.

79

Valve lift [m]

Chapter 7

Summary
Measurements conducted on two dierent test compressors showed that special attention has to be paid for the interaction of the pressure waves and the valve motion in order to simulate the gas ow and valve motion of barrel design reciprocating compressors accurately. Most notably important design criteria such as impact velocity of the valve, the valve losses, and the moments onto the piston are governed by these interactions. In the case of compressors with two valves it turned out that considering plane waves only is sucient to capture the wave structure inside the cylinder. The resulting governing equations were solved by means of the nite volume scheme F-wave which oers two benets: Firstly this numerical scheme directly incorporates the underlying wave propagation structure and secondly the boundary conditions can be easily implemented. Finally simple quasi-static valve models complete the numerical model of a reciprocating compressor. Since the model is one-dimensional, only very short computational times are required, even with very ne grids. The comparison of the measurements with the simulation show, that the one-dimensional model is capable of capturing the most important physical eects, resulting in a very good agreement. Most notably the valve motion and the pressure distribution inside the cylinder and the valve retainer can be computed accurately. However, the amplitudes of the pressure waves at the end of the discharge phase and during the expansion are overestimated, since three-dimensional eects at the end of the discharge cannot be described by this simplied model. In the case of compressors with more than two valves a two-dimensional approach was chosen in order to account for the multiple valve pocket entries, which lead to twodimensional ows in the cylinder. The valve pockets and the valve retainers were modelled one-dimensionally. The resulting governing equations for the gas ow were solved by means of the robust and simple nite volume scheme of Richtmyer. Again the comparison of the measurements with the simulation show a good agreement in terms of gas ow and valve motion. Even the pressure dierence across the cylinder is computed accurately, resulting in an accurate solution for the moment onto the piston. However during discharge the pressure inside the cylinder is overestimated, which is attributed to the pressure variations in the valve retainers. In fact the simplied one-dimensional models of the valve retainer and pressure chamber are not sucient to compute the pressure distribution inside the discharge system throughout the whole working period. However they are sucient to describe the pressure rise in the valve retainer during discharge. In order to correct this shortcoming we suggest to calculate the gas ow in the pressure chamber

80

two-dimensionally. Due to the low computation time and accurate results the simplied models presented in this work, namely the one-dimensional and two-dimensional model, can form the basis for a engineering design tool, which predicts gas ow and valve motion in a reciprocating compressor.

81

Appendix A

Tables

82

A.1

Sensors of Burckhardt Test Compressor

The Table A.1 lists all sensors and their appropirate coordinates in the Burckhardt test compressor. The point of origin of the coordinate system is the top dead center of the rst cylinder. Identier Type of sensors Name Coordinates or Position [mm/mm/mm] TRIG VP1 VP2 VP3 Ta Tst Tsc Tpc Tpt pc1 pc2 pc3 pc4 pc5 pc6 pc7 pin pout po dpo To light distance distance distance temperature temperature temperature temperature temperature pressure pressure pressure pressure pressure pressure pressure pressure pressure pressure pressure temperature trigger valve plate clearance 1 valve plate clearance 2 valve plate clearance 3 ambient air temperature suction tube suction chamber pressure chamber pressure tube cylinder pos. 1 cylinder pos. 2 cylinder pos. 3 cylinder pos. 4 cylinder pos. 5 cylinder pos. 6 cylinder pos. 7 suction chamber pressure chamber pressure orice pressure dierence orice temperature orice Table A.1: Sensors ywheel valve plate valve plate valve plate 30 cm behind ange -265/-30/0 265/0/-30 30 cm behind ange 0/0/0 0/-33/0 0/-66/0 0/66/0 75/0/0 -75/0/0 -75/-33/0 -265/0/-20 265/-30/0 orice orice orice

A.2

Pressure loss coecients for the T-piece

83

m1 A1 m3 A3

m2 A2

K1 =

1+ fbr

A3 A1

+3

A3 A1

m1 m3

m1 m3

K2

pt3 p3 pt1 p1 = K1 but subscript 1 is to be replaced by 2

K3 = 0 fbr see table A.3

m1 A1 m3 A3 m1 A1 m3 A3

m2 A2

K1 = 0 K2 = 0.6 pt1 p1 pt2 p2

K3 = 1 0.5

m3 m3 +2 m1 m1
2

pt1 p1 pt3 p3

m2 A2

K1 = 1.55 K2 = 0 K3 =

m3 m2

m3 m2
2

pt2 p2 pt1 p1 m3 m2 fbr pt2 p2 pt3 p3

1+

m3 A2 m2 A3

2 1

fbr see table A.3 but subscript 3 is to be replaced by 2 m2 A2 m3 u1 u3

2

m1 A1

K1 = 1 + 1.5 K3 = 0

K2 = K1 but subscript 1 is to be replaced by 2

pt3 p3 pt1 p1

A3 Table A.2: Pressure loss coecients for the T-piece [14]

fbr A1 /A3 0.35 A1 /A3 > 0.35 m1 /m3 0.4 m1 /m3 > 0.4 1 0.9 (1 m1 /m3 ) 0.55

Table A.3: Values for fbr [14]

84

Bibliography
[1] Aigner, R., Steinrck, H. (2004): Waves in reciprocating compressors. PAMM Proceedings in Apu plied Mathematics and Mechanics, 4(1), 516 - 517. [2] Aigner, R.,Meyer G.,Steinrck H. (2005): Valve Dynamics and Internal Waves in a Reciprocating u Compressor. Proceedings of 4th EFRC Conference, 169 - 178. [3] Aigner, R.,Steinrck H. (2007): Modelling Fluid Dynamics, Heat Transfer and Valve Dynamics in u a Reciprocating Compressor. Proceedings of 5th EFRC Conference, 169 - 178. [4] Baehr, H. D., Stephan, K. (2004): Wrme- und Stobertragung. Springer. a u [5] Costagliola M. (1950): The Theory for Spring Loaded Valves for Reciprocating Compressors. J. Appl. Mech., 415-420. [6] Ferziger, J. H., Peri, M. (2002): Computational Methods for Fluid Dynamics. Springer Berlin c Heidelberg. [7] Flade, G., Steinrck, H. (2004): Anfangliches Onungsverhalten von Kompressorventilen. PAMM u Proceedings in Applied Mathematics and Mechanics, 4, 450-451. [8] Flade, G. (2006): Weiterentwicklung der Berechnungsmethoden fr Kobenverdichterventile auf der u Basis zweidimensionaler Strmungssimulation. Doctoral thesis, Technical University Dresden. o [9] Gersten, K., Herwig, H. (1992): Stromungsmechanik. Verlag Vieweg. [10] Godlewski, E., Raviart, P. A. (1996): Numerical Approximation of hyperbolic systems of conservation laws. Volume 118 of Applied Mathemaical Scienses, Springer. [11] Grau, U. (1996): Haftkrfte und deren Einuss auf die Kinematik selbstttiger Ventile oszilierender a a Verdrngerpumpen. Doctoral thesis, Technical University Erlangen-Nrnberg. a u [12] Habing, R. A., Peters, M. C. A. M. (2006): An experimental method for validating compressor valve vibration theory. Journal of Fluids and Structures, Vol. 22, 683-697. [13] Hirsch, C. (1992): Numerical Computation of internal and external ows. Computational methods for inviscid and viscous ows. John Wiley & Sons [14] Idelchik, I.E. (1994): Handbook of Hydraulic Resistance. CRC Press [15] Lax, P. D., Wendro, B. (1960): System of Conservation Laws. Comp. Pure and Appl. Math., 13, 217-237. [16] Leveque, R. (2004): Finite Volume Methods for Hyperbolic Problems. Cambridge University Press. [17] Leveque, R., Bale, D., Mitran, S., Rossmanith, J. (2002): A Wave Propagation Method for Conservation Laws and Balance Laws with spatially varying ux functions. SIAM J. Sci. Comput., Vol. 24, No. 3, 955-978. [18] Langseth, J. O., LeVeque, R. J. (1997): A wave propagation method for multi-dimesnional hyperbolic conservation laws. Journal of computational Physics, Vol. 131, 327-353 [19] Machu, E. (1998): Problems with modern high speed short stroke reciprocating compressors: Increased power requirement due to pocket losses, piston masking and gas inertia, eccentric gas load on the piston. Proceedings of Gas machinery conference USA. [20] Machu, G. (2004): Calculating reliable impact valve velocity by mapping instantaneous ow in a reciprocating compressor. Proceedings of gas machinery conference GMRC USA. [21] Machu, G. (2005): Pusationen im Verdichtungsraum - eine potentielle Schadensursache. Industriepunpen und Kompressoren Heft 2/2005 Vulkann Verlag Essen, Mai 2005.

85

[22] Meyer, G. (2004): Simulation der Strmung in einem Kolbenverdichter. Diploma thesis, Technical o University Vienna. [23] Miller, D. S. (1990): Internal Flow Systems. BHRA (Information Services) [24] Mllner, T. (2007): Wrmebertragung in einem Kolbenkompressor. Unpublished Report, Technical u a u University Vienna. [25] Nickol, J. (2000): 24000 Laufstunden Verfgbarkeit von Kobenkompressoren in Prozessanlagen u Utopie oder Realitt? Industriepunpen und Kompressoren Heft 2/2000 Vulkann Verlag Essen, Mai a 2000 [26] Press, W. H., Flannery, B. P., Teukolsky, S. A., Vetterling W. T. (1986): Numerical Recipes. The art of scientic computing. Cambridge University Press. [27] Roe, P.L.E. (1981): Approximate Riemann Solvers. J. Comp. Phys. 43, 357-372. [28] Serre, D. (1999): Systems of conservation laws 1. Hyperbolicity, Entropies, Shock Waves. Cambridge University Press. [29] Tannehill, J. C., Anderson, D. A., Pletcher, R. H. (1997): Computational uid mechanics and heat transfer. Taylor and Francis. [30] Toro, E. F., (1999): Riemann Solvers and Numerical Methods for Fluid Dynamics. Springer. [31] Wibmer, M. (2004): One-dimensional Simulation for Arterial Blood Flow with Applications. Doctoral thesis, Technical University Vienna. [32] Zierep, J. (1997): Grundzge der Strmungslehre. Springer Berlin Heidelberg. u o

86

Curriculum Vitae
Personal Data
Name: Nationality: Date of Birth: E-mail: Roland Aigner Austria November 13th , 1976 roland aigner@gmx.net

Education
06/2004 - present Vienna University of Technology, Austria Institut of Fluid Mechanics and Heat Transfer Doctorate in Mechanical Engineering Vienna University of Technology, Austria Department of Mechanical Engineering Diploma Thesis Formation of the strand for continuous casting of steel Graduation with honours as Master of Science (Diplomingenieur) University of Salford, Salford (Greater Manchester), UK Department of Mechanical Engineering Exchange semester Hhere Technische Bundeslehranstalt Wels, Austria o Department of Mechanical Engineering Graduation with distinction (Matura)

10/1996 - 01/2003

09/2000 - 01/2001

09/1991 - 06/1996

Professional Experience
06/2003 - 06/2007 Vienna University of Technology, Austria Institut of Fluid Dynamics and Heat Transfer Teaching, Supervisor of exercise courses: Heat Transfer Numerical Methods for Fluid Mechanics and Heat Transfer Research / Industrial Projects: Hoerbiger Valve Tec GmbH: Numerical Simulation of a pipe branching wye Berndorf AG: Heat Transfer of a rotating cylinder European Forum for Reciprocating Compressors: Heat Transfer in a Reciprocating Compressor General Motors Austria GmbH, Vienna, Austria Intern BRP-Rotax GmbH & Co. KG, Gunskirchen, Austria Intern 87

08/1999 - 09/1999 07/1995 - 08/1995