Downloaded from SAE International by Wuhan Univ of Technology, Sunday, January 07, 2018

SAE TECHNICAL
PAPER SERIES 2000-01-0660

Code Coupling, a New Approach to Enhance CFD

Analysis of Engines
Rory Sinclair, Tim Strauss and Peter Schindler
Volkswagen AG

Reprinted From: Multi-Dimensional Engine Modeling

(SP–1512)

SAE 2000 World Congress

Detroit, Michigan
March 6–9, 2000

400 Commonwealth Drive, Warrendale, PA 15096-0001 U.S.A. Tel: (724) 776-4841 Fax: (724) 776-5760
 Downloaded from SAE International by Wuhan Univ of Technology, Sunday, January 07, 2018

The appearance of this ISSN code at the bottom of this page indicates SAE’s consent that copies of the
paper may be made for personal or internal use of specific clients. This consent is given on the condition,
however, that the copier pay a $7.00 per article copy fee through the Copyright Clearance Center, Inc.
Operations Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923 for copying beyond that permitted by Sec-
tions 107 or 108 of the U.S. Copyright Law. This consent does not extend to other kinds of copying such as
copying for general distribution, for advertising or promotional purposes, for creating new collective works,
or for resale.

SAE routinely stocks printed papers for a period of three years following date of publication. Direct your
orders to SAE Customer Sales and Satisfaction Department.

Quantity reprint rates can be obtained from the Customer Sales and Satisfaction Department.

To request permission to reprint a technical paper or permission to use copyrighted SAE publications in
other works, contact the SAE Publications Group.

All SAE papers, standards, and selected

books are abstracted and indexed in the
Global Mobility Database

No part of this publication may be reproduced in any form, in an electronic retrieval system or otherwise, without the prior written
permission of the publisher.

ISSN 0148-7191
Copyright © 2000 Society of Automotive Engineers, Inc.

Positions and opinions advanced in this paper are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of SAE. The author is solely
responsible for the content of the paper. A process is available by which discussions will be printed with the paper if it is published in
SAE Transactions. For permission to publish this paper in full or in part, contact the SAE Publications Group.

Persons wishing to submit papers to be considered for presentation or publication through SAE should send the manuscript or a 300
word abstract of a proposed manuscript to: Secretary, Engineering Meetings Board, SAE.

Printed in USA
 Downloaded from SAE International by Wuhan Univ of Technology, Sunday, January 07, 2018

2000-01-0660

Code Coupling, a New Approach to Enhance CFD

Analysis of Engines
Rory Sinclair, Tim Strauss and Peter Schindler
Volkswagen AG

Copyright © 2000 Society of Automotive Engineers, Inc.

ABSTRACT for additional engineering tools in the development of

automobile engines.
A new method for the analysis of the gas flow in an
One dimensional (1D) gas dynamic codes, specifically for
internal combustion engine has been developed. It is
engines, have been steadily improving over the last
based on the interactive coupling between commercially
twenty years [4,5,6]. From this type of calculation
available three (STAR-CD) and one dimensional
transient results for the engine gas dynamics can be
(PROMO) fluid dynamics codes. With this method the
gained in computation times of a few minutes. The results
detailed transient flow distribution for any engine
of a 1D calculation allow, for example, fairly accurate
component of interest can be calculated taking into
adjustments of the valve lift timing and curves, the
account the overall gas dynamic interaction with other
fundamental length and diameter scales of pipes, ports
engine components.
and manifolds in the predevelopment stage of any engine
The underlying physics and numerics are outlined. A development. On the other hand the procedure is, due to
description of the coupling procedure ensuring proper the limitation of all processes (even those in the manifold
communication between the two computer codes is or combustion chamber) to one dimension, inherently
given. Also addressed is the averaging procedure inaccurate. This is especially the case when it comes to
adopted at the 3D boundaries, including the influence of predicting absolute values for a new engine design in
the 1D/3D interface placement. which there is no measurement data base available to
allow adjustments of the loss coefficients in the model.
A first application of this new method is presented, in
which the gas flow in a turbo-charged DI-diesel-engine is
simulated. The intake manifold and ports are treated as a
single 3D-model in this study, while the rest of the engine
is represented by a system of 1D-components.
Comparisons to experimental data obtained from
pressure measurements are presented. Future steps
towards a more precise gas dynamics representation of
the overall engine are discussed.
The work presented is part of an ongoing PhD-project
(Mr. R. Sinclair) at VW.

INTRODUCTION

An increase in the efficiency and power output has been

the goal of automotive engineers since the very early
days of internal combustion engines. With the gas
exchange of the engine being of primary importance
regarding those issues the tightening of the packaging in
the engine compartments due to additional auxiliary and
safety components has strongly constrained further Figure 1. CFD mesh for steady state analysis of the
improvements in recent years. Computational methods VW-1.9L-TDI-Diesel engine manifold.
for the calculation of the gas dynamics within the engine
are becoming of growing importance during the search

1
 Downloaded from SAE International by Wuhan Univ of Technology, Sunday, January 07, 2018

To compensate for this weakness three dimensional (3D)
computational fluid dynamic (CFD) methods were
introduced. These methods are currently employed to
calculate the locally resolved steady or transient flows in
components of primary importance on the load
exchange.
Figure 2. Velocity distribution through a valve plane (m/s).
Transient calculations based on boundary conditions
from a pre-calculated 1D simulation are used to get
detailed insight into the flow processes in the manifold
and combustion chamber. (However, due to their
extensive computing requirements, 3D fluid models are
currently restricted in geometric complexity.) The
deficiency of the latter is that there is no direct
improvement (feedback) to the accuracy of the overall 1D
model. Without this feedback to and from the 1D code
there is no real coupling taking place, and the overall
calculation remains inaccurate in itself.
To increase the accuracy of the gas dynamic calculation
for the full engine an alternative procedure making use of
an interactive coupling between 1D and 3D methods
seems to be the promising approach. Such a coupling
would enable direct feedback between the codes, which
would allow 3D fluid flow effects to be fed back into the
1D system.
Commercial CFD-packages offering the coupling of 1D
and 3D methods (all based on the finite volume
approach) are available on the market. To the knowledge
of the authors neither the methodology used for the
coupling nor comparisons against measurements have
been published. First work at Volkswagen with such a
commercial package indicated the requirement for more
detailed research into the matter.
In this paper the coupling procedure is presented for the
1D-finite differencing-code PROMO [4] and the 3D-finite
volume-code STAR-CD [1]. The coupling was applied to a
simple test case and to an engine application. For the
latter a comparison with pressure measurements from
the test bench will be presented.

SOME BASICS OF THE FLUID DYNAMICS

CODES

The fundamentals of computational fluid (and gas)

dynamics are well established [2, 3, 7]. Thus at this point
only some basics are outlined to facilitate the
understanding of the coupling of the two codes.

THREE DIMENSIONAL COMPUTATIONAL FLUID

DYNAMIC CODE – For general incompressible and
Figure 3. Velocity distribution near the surface of the 3D compressible fluid, the flow is described using the (in
model (m/s). Cartesian form) continuity, Navier Stokes and energy
equations:
Steady state calculations are used as an addition (or
substitution) to flow rig measurements in order to improve 1 ∂ ∂
( gρ) + (ρ~
u j ) = sm
the loss coefficients used in the 1D-model. They are also g ∂t ∂x j
(1)
used as a stand alone method, for example to optimise
1 ∂ ∂ ∂p
flow losses, swirl and tumble generated by the inlet ports. ( g ρu i ) + ( ρu~ j u i − τ ij ) = − + si
g ∂t ∂x j ∂xi
Figure 1 shows an example of a computational mesh for (2)
a steady state analysis of the flow within a port-manifold 1 ∂ ∂ 1 ∂ ∂p ∂u
assembly of the VW-1.9L-TDI-Diesel engine. Figures 2 ( g ρh ) + ( ρ~
u jh − Fh , j ) = ( g p) + ~
uj + τ ij i + s h
g ∂t ∂x j g ∂t ∂x j ∂x j
and 3 present the velocity contours on a cutting plane
(3)
through the inlet valve and near the surface of the
geometry.

2
 Downloaded from SAE International by Wuhan Univ of Technology, Sunday, January 07, 2018

STAR-CD [1] applies the finite volume method (FVM) for

the discretization of the conservation equations. To do so
the solution domain is subdivided into a finite number of
control volumes (called cells) for which the balance
equations are applied, thereby, ensuring conservation
throughout the entire model. Using a non-staggered grid 3D-Part
approach all independent variables are stored at the
centroids of the computational cells.
A fully implicit temporal discretisation technique is used
to solve the terms in the computational domain.

ONE DIMENSIONAL GAS DYNAMICS CODE – The 1D

PROMO code simulates the gas dynamics in complex
systems. The numerical model of such a complex system
consists of a network of pipes connected by transfer
conditions. PROMO is an explicit code. In PROMO the
non–linear propagation of pressure waves in a
compressible fluid is calculated using a system of
hyperbolic conservation equations for mass, momentum
and energy [3]:

∂ρ ∂ d ln A
+ ( ρ ⋅ u ) = −u ⋅ ρ Figure 4. Schematic of an 1D engine model with a
∂t ∂x dx (4) coupled 3D manifold.
∂ ∂ d ln A
( ρ ⋅ u) + ( ρ ⋅ u 2 + p) = − ρ ⋅ u 2 − kR ⋅ ρ
∂t ∂u dx (5) INTERFACE FOR THE COUPLING – In 3D fluid flow
∂ 2
u p ∂ u κ 2
u κ 2
d ln A
problems the boundary regions are usually 2D surface
(ρ + )+ u(ρ + p) = − u ( ρ + p) +q elements for which the physical boundary conditions
∂t 2 κ − 1 ∂x 2 κ −1 2 κ −1 dx (6) have to be specified. Currently two types of boundary
The 1D code uses a two step Lax–Wendorff [8,9] conditions can be used for these regions in the coupling,
differencing technique to solve the non–linear system of those of prescribed mass flow or pressure. For both of
conservation equations for the pipe system. The transfer these boundary conditions the same value over the entire
conditions (cylinder, junction, orifice, plenum, pipe ends boundary region is defined. Thus velocities at the 3D
to ambient, turbo charger) are treated with a quasi- boundaries are assigned as block profiles. It is also
steady approach. To account for throttling losses desirable that the velocities should be as perpendicular to
empirical discharge coefficients are used [4,5,6]. the boundary element as possible. In the coupling of
STAR-CD and PROMO the boundary values are defined
COUPLING METHODOLOGY via FORTRAN user-coding in both codes.
In the 1D code the setting of a closed model is different to
APPROACH – The general idea of coupling the two that adopted in the 3D code. As opposed to defining fluid
codes is visualised with an example in figure 4. The parameters directly on the surface of the model, so called
schematic diagram shows a 1D engine model, in which ‘pipe ends’ are introduced. The boundary conditions
the manifold is disconnected to indicate that it would be applied at these ‘pipe ends’ normally represent values,
simulated as a 3D plug in which is then interfaced which are present in the environment in the direct vicinity
interactively into the 1D calculation. All other components outside the 1D model inlets and outlets. For the
of the model are treated as pipes and transfer conditions. application within the coupling a special ‘pipe end’-
Energy losses and flow resistances can be assigned to subroutine was developed, which allows correct physical
all 1D parts. communication with the 3D code. It is the information at
To guarantee that a coupled system (such as that these ‘pipe ends’ that is handed over to the 3D code.
described above) has proper operating conditions, the Similarly the conditions received from the 3D code is
following three questions need to be answered: assigned to the ‘pipe ends’.

1. What are the criteria for the correct positioning of the At the interface between a 3D model and a 1D pipe the
coupling interface? boundary conditions of the two codes have to be made
2. What information has to be communicated? compatible. From parametric studies of the interface
placement it was found that its positioning plays a
3. What is a suitable algorithm for the interaction of the significant role in the stability and in the results of a
two codes? coupling calculation. Generally it is advisable to have 1D/
3D interfaces positioned in locations where the flow field

3
 Downloaded from SAE International by Wuhan Univ of Technology, Sunday, January 07, 2018

changes little in the flow direction and across the
boundary.
INFORMATION TO BE COMMUNICATED – The
conservation of mass, momentum and energy must be
enforced at the 1D/3D interfaces. In the current
methodology two types of boundary conditions are used,
that of mass flow and pressure. Where a mass flow
boundary condition is present in the 3D code a pressure
boundary condition is mirrored in the 1D code, and vice
versa. At a pressure boundary the values of pressure,
temperature and velocity (for the speed of sound
calculation) are required. Whereas, at a mass flow
boundary condition the values of velocity, temperature,
and density are required.
Additional information, which is needed for the control of
the coupling and to check the accuracy of the interaction,
such as the current time, the gas constants, specific heat
and the area of the interface, needs to be communicated.
At the current state of the methodology boundary layer
effects and disturbance due to turbulence are not
communicated from the 3D to the 1D system, but are
solved for in the 3D code.
Since boundary information needs to be communicated
between a 3D boundary area and a 1D pipe end, a
problem of consistency arises, which makes a
conserving averaging technique for the 3D boundaries
essential.
For example at each 1D/3D interface the following has to
be valid 1:
! PROMO ⇒ ∑ (ρ i ⋅ w i ⋅ A i ) = ρ ⋅ w ⋅ A
! STAR = m
m
Therefore the following averaging of the 3D results (for
density, velocity, temperature, and pressure respectively)
at the interface has been applied:
ρ=
∑ (ρ A ) i i
∑A i
(7)
w=
∑(ρ w A )
i i i
the processes is exchanged by files on the operating
system level.
Since the 1D simulation is orders of magnitude faster
than the 3D calculation, it is efficient to have a stable
periodic 1D result before the coupling starts. In view of
this the 1D engine model is set up as if no coupling was
to take place. After the 1D code reaches a stable solution
for the 1D engine gas dynamics, which with PROMO
usually requires about seven to nine engine cycles, the
result is communicated to the 3D code. Furthermore the
1D model is modified (automatically) to cater for the 3D
plug in. That means a 1D volume is switched to a 3D
volume, which communicates 1D boundary information.
In the current methodology the 3D code uses the initial
boundary conditions from the 1D code to establish a
developed (but not necessarily converged) steady state
solution, which is useful to make the coupling more
stable at the start of the interaction. Once that is achieved
the coupled calculation in time begins. When one code
has completed its calculations for the current time step
the appropriate information is written to a file, which then
is read in by the other code. Furthermore the 1D code is
always leading the calculation.
The Courant number is used as the stability criterion
during the coupling. The time steps used in the 3D
simulation are variable and are calculated according to
that Courant relation and in synchronisation with the time
step used in the 1D code. This procedure maintains
convergence even for high engine speeds.
RESULTS
SINE WAVE IN A PIPE – As was indicated above a
number of simplified cases were run to analyse the effect
of the interface placement on the results and to check the
conservation of mass energy and the accuracy of the
coding. One of these cases is presented here in short to
illustrate the physical precision of the coupling procedure.
This special case served to examine the possibility of
wave reflections at the interfaces which could affect the
results.

∑(ρ A ) i i
(8) A B
T=
∑ (m! icpiTi )
∑ (m! c i pi )
(9) 1D 3D 1D
p=
∑ (p i A i )
∑A i
(10)
Figure 5. Schematic of the coupled pipe.
PROCEDURE – It was decided to have the 1D code
control the coupling, since there will be only one 1D The model consisted of a single pipe of constant
model in which a number of “3D plug ins” are allowed. diameter (37 mm diameter), this pipe was modelled as
The 1D model and each 3D component will require at three adjoining shorter pipes, a 3D pipe (0.6 m long)
least one computer process. The information between sandwiched by two 1D pipes (first 1 m, second 10 m long
as sketched in figure 5). At the inlet of the first 1D-pipe a
step with a consequent sine function for the mass flow
was assigned. The 3D-pipe had a mass flow (at the inlet,
1. Where Σ indicates the summation over all boundary faces. A) and a pressure boundary condition (at the outlet, B)

4
 Downloaded from SAE International by Wuhan Univ of Technology, Sunday, January 07, 2018
interfaced to the 1D-segments. Turbulence, wall friction
and wall heat losses were switched off in both codes,
since the two codes treat each of those phenomena in a
different manner subsequent unwanted effects would be
observed in the results.
In addition to the coupled calculation a pure 1D
calculation of the three connected pipes was also carried
out to allow objective evaluation of the coupled results.
Figure 6. Comparison between coupled and 1D results
for the pipe model.
Figure 6 shows a comparison of the pressure at the inlet
(cross section A of figure 5) and outlet (cross section B of
figure 5) of the “sandwiched” pipe. The coupling can be
seen to capture the strong gradients of the initial profile
and the subsequent sine wave. The good agreement at
location A underlines the consistency of the proposed
approach for the coupling. Disturbances caused by the
interface between the coupled codes are minimal. The
3D results at location B show a slight smearing of the
initial step profile, but still reproduces the sine wave well.
TDI-DIESEL-MANIFOLD – Model set - up – A first
engine test for the coupling was made with its application
to a modified development version2 of the well known
VW-1.9L-TDI-Diesel-engine. In this first application only
the 1D manifold volume of the PROMO engine
representation was substituted with a 3D model (figure
4). An interface was put onto each inlet and outlet port of
the manifold for the coupling with the 3D model.
2. For this reason the detailed geometry cannot be shown
here.
5
A tetrahedral mesh for the 3D model was built based on
the CAD data. The interfaces were placed in the straight
part of the duct before the manifold and in the middle of
the intake ports perpendicular to the expected flow
directions. Multiple prism-layers were generated at the
interfaces to produce a layered-mesh structure. The
resulting interface area of the 3D boundaries was
assigned to the connected pipe ends in the 1D model.
The standard k-ε turbulence model and wall functions (no
slip condition) of STAR-CD were adopted for the 3D-
calculation.
The stability criterion mentioned above used in this study
lead to a reasonably stable periodic solution after three
engine cycles. Results of the third coupled cycle for
engine speeds of 1500, 3000 and 4000 rpm are
discussed and compared with measurements. Figure 7
shows a schematic of the inlet manifold, where point A is
located at the inlet and points B and C are located at the
outlet ports upstream from the valves.
B C
Figure 7. Schematic of the intake manifold.
Comparisons – In figure 8 the comparison of the
measured and calculated pressure near the entrance
(point A in figure 7) of the manifold is presented for an
engine speed of 1500 rpm. Here it must be noted that the
coupled results are average values taken over the entire
cross sectional area of the respective inlet pipe and outlet
ports. The curves reveal a good agreement in the
phasing of the pressure histories. However a
considerable difference of 20% in the amplitudes is
found. This difference is in agreement with the
behaviours present in the two curves, while the
calculated results show an undisturbed fluctuation of a
single frequency, the measurements indicate the
existence of overlaying fluctuations, which result in the
decrease of the amplitudes.
 Downloaded from SAE International by Wuhan Univ of Technology, Sunday, January 07, 2018
Figure 8. Coupled calculation results compared with
experimental data at location A.
The same trends can be deduced from figure 9 (data
taken from point B in figure 7). Again the phasing of the
curves is in good agreement, while there is a difference in
amplitudes. Also there are more higher order fluctuations
visible in the measurements than there are in the
calculations, there is still, however, a promising similarity
in the gradients. Of particular interest is the feature at 350
CA, this peak correlates to the valve opening of the
second cylinder, where both the calculations and
measurements display similar features.
Figure 10 presents a comparison for one of the outer
ports (point C in figure 7). The quality of agreements is
less accurate than those present in figures 8 and 9.
Again the calculation reveals a clear influence of the
valve opening on the pressure behaviour (at 170 CA), but
which this time is less obvious in the measurements.
Figure 9. Coupled calculation results compared with
experimental data at location B.
6
Figure 10. Coupled calculation results compared with
experimental data at location C.
Comparisons for an engine speeds of 3000 and 4000
rpm (at the inlet of the manifold) are given in figures 11
and 12. In both figures there is good agreement of the
phasing and the maximum amplitudes between
simulation and measurement. The computational results
for the higher engine speeds are strongly influenced by
higher order pressure fluctuations, which is in contrast to
the results at 1500 rpm, where it was the other way
around. Generally the 1st order slopes are captured
nicely by the simulation. In particular the plateau’s of
small pressures and the alternating slope of the peak
pressures at 4000 rpm in figure 12 are reproduced well.
Figure 11. Coupled calculation results compared with
experimental data at location A, for an engine
speed of 3000 rpm.
 Downloaded from SAE International by Wuhan Univ of Technology, Sunday, January 07, 2018
Figure 12. Coupled calculation results compared with
experimental data at location A, for an engine
speed of 4000 rpm.
The comparisons with the measured pressure data, while
indicating an encouraging agreement, have revealed
differences to the calculated results which cannot be fully
explained yet, but a few potential reasons which
contribute to the difference can be briefly outlined:
1. Simplification of the current geometry, such as the
absence of a throttle in front of the manifold and
other small entities in the 3D mesh.
2. Negligence of further 3D processes up- and
downstream of the manifold (i.e. valve flow and
incylinder processes).
3. Inaccuracies in the pipe length - It can be shown via
1D studies that the amplitudes are strongly
influenced by the pipe length at ports and manifold
inlet.
4. Neglected turbulence and boundary layer effects.
The coupling has proven its capability to capture 3D
dependencies of the transient load exchange, which
cannot be resolved by the simpler 1D studies.
Referring to the comparisons with measurements it
should not be neglected that there is an additional benefit
of the coupling, which is its capability to allow
visualisation of the flow in complex geometry’s for real
operating conditions. Using 3D post processing
capabilities at Volkswagen a problem area of the air flow
was revealed in the manifold. This result had a direct
impact on the manifold design.
SUMMARY
In this paper a new approach to handle the fluid
dynamics within an engine is presented. The
methodology introduced is based on the coupling of
commercially available 1D (PROMO) and 3D (STAR-CD)
fluid dynamics codes. The procedure of the code
7
coupling is outlined. A basic test case is presented to
underline the consistency of the coupling technique. A
second, an engine, application allows the comparison
with pressure measurements. The agreement of the
comparison is encouraging.
In future work the coupling methodology needs to be
further validated with new applications using additional
measurements to increase confidence in the coupling
predictions. This would also allow the refinement of the
coupling procedure tackling the problems which have
arisen during the course of the research. In this process
the models need to be expanded so that a more detailed
treatment of the intake, in-cylinder and exhaust
components of the engine can be made. In terms of
physics attention needs to be paid to turbulence and
boundary layer issues.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Thank you for the support with measurements and CAD
data to Dr. R. Baar and to everybody else involved.
We also like to thank Prof. B. Scott from the University of
Glasgow for his advise and the supervision of Mr.
Sinclair’s PhD.
REFERENCES
1. STAR-CD Manuals. Version 3.05, 1998
2. Fletcher, C. A. J., “Computational Techniques for
Fluid Dynamics”, 2nd Edition, Spinger Verlag, 1997
3. Anderson, J. D., “Computational Fluid Dynamics”,
McGraw-Hill, 1995
4. Stromberg, H.J., “Ein Programmsystem zur
Berechnung von Verbrennungsmotor-Kreisprozessen
mit Berücksichtigung der instationären
Strömungsvorgänge in den realen
Rohrleitungssystemen von Mehrzylinder-
Verbrennungsmotoren”, Dissertation, Ruhr-
Universität Bochum, 1977
5. Schindler, P., “Berechnungsmodelle für instationäre
Strömungsvorgänge durch Mehrfachverzweigungen
im Rohrleitungssystem von Verbrennungsmotoren”,
Dissertation, Ruhr-Universität Bochum, 1990.
6. Seifert, H., “A mathematical model for simulation of
processes in an internal combustion engine”, Acta
Astronautica, Vol.6, pp 1361-1376, 1979
7. Benson, R.S., “The Thermodynamics and Gas
Dynamics of Internal Combustion Engines”,
Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1982
8. Richtmyer, R.D., Morton, K.W., “Difference Methods
for Initial Value Problems”, J. Wiley and sons, New
York, 1967
9. Lax, P.D., Wendroff, B., Comm. Pure Appl. Math. 17,
1964
 Downloaded from SAE International by Wuhan Univ of Technology, Sunday, January 07, 2018

SYMBOLS

A: Area
g : determinate of metric tensor,
h: enthalpy,
p: piezometric pressure
sI: momentum source components,
sh: energy source,
sm: mass source,
t: time,
q: heat flux
kR: friction losses
T: temperature,
τij: stress tensor,
uI: absolute field velocity,
xj: Cartesian co-ordinate (i = 1,2,3),
κ: isentropic exponent