Part 5: Atomization, Drop Breakup/Coalescence

Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines

Prof. Rolf D. Reitz

Engine Research Center
University of Wisconsin-Madison
2014 Princeton-CEFRC
Summer School on Combustion
Course Length: 15 hrs
(Mon.- Fri., June 23 – 27, 2014)

Copyright ©2014 by Rolf D. Reitz.

This material is not to be sold, reproduced or distributed without
prior written permission of the owner, Rolf D. Reitz.
1 CEFRC3-5, 2014
 Part 5: Atomization, Drop Breakup/Coalescence

Short course outine:

Engine fundamentals and performance metrics, computer modeling supported
by in-depth understanding of fundamental engine processes and detailed
experiments in engine design optimization.
Day 1 (Engine fundamentals)
Part 1: IC Engine Review, 0, 1 and 3-D modeling
Part 2: Turbochargers, Engine Performance Metrics
Day 2 (Combustion Modeling)
Part 3: Chemical Kinetics, HCCI & SI Combustion
Part 4: Heat transfer, NOx and Soot Emissions
Day 3 (Spray Modeling)
Part 5: Atomization, Drop Breakup/Coalescence
Part 6: Drop Drag/Wall Impinge/Vaporization/Sprays
Day 4 (Engine Optimization)
Part 7: Diesel combustion and SI knock modeling
Part 8: Optimization and Low Temperature Combustion
Day 5 (Applications and the Future)
Part 9: Fuels, After-treatment and Controls
Part 10: Vehicle Applications, Future of IC Engines

2 CEFRC3-5, 2014
 Part 5: Atomization, Drop Breakup/Coalescence

Resolution – predictive models

10 cm
Finite
difference
mesh 1-D 104 grid points
3-D 1012 grid points

10 mm

Models will not be entirely predictive for decades

Accurate submodels will be needed for detailed spray processes
(e.g., drop drag, drop turbulence interaction, vaporization, atomization,
drop breakup, collision and coalescence, and spray/wall interaction)

3 CEFRC3-5, 2014
 Part 5: Atomization, Drop Breakup/Coalescence Amsden,1997

Governing Equations

Gas phase
f = f (x, v, r, Td; t)
x, v, r, Td
Liquid phase
Gas void fraction and drop number density
Turbulence
4 3
Lagrangian Drop,
Eulerian Fluid (LDEF) models
q  1  (
Vol
3
 r f drdv dTd )dVol / Vol
Current LDEF spray
Two-Phase Flow Regimes models:
– drops
Computational cell occupy no
volume q >0.9

Drop parcels

Intact Churning Thick Thin Very thin

4 CEFRC3-5, 2014
 Part 5: Atomization, Drop Breakup/Coalescence Dukowicz, 1980

LDEF Spray Modeling

• Concept of using “drop parcels”

For typical heavy-duty diesel, injected fuel per cycle (75% load): 0.160 g
One spray plume: mfuel=0.160/6=0.0267 g
If average SMD=10 mm  mdrop =3.8x10-10 g
# of drops in the domain=0.0267g/mdrop=7.1x107
Impractical to track individual fuel drops – group identical drops into ‘parcels’

What you see in graphs:

drop
nozzle

Grid size

parcel

5 CEFRC3-5, 2014
 Part 5: Atomization, Drop Breakup/Coalescence Amsden,1997

Eulerian Gas Phase

Mass conservation (species)


  (u)   l 4r R f drdv dTd
2

t

R = dr/dt - Vapor source

Momentum conservation
u
  (uu)  p  ( 3 k)    F  g
2 s

t
Turbulent and viscous stress

Rate of momentum gain due to spray – drop drag

6 CEFRC3-5, 2014
 Part 5: Atomization, Drop Breakup/Coalescence Amsden,1989

Gas Phase (2)

Combustion
Internal energy conservation
heat release

I
+   uI = -Pu - J +  + Qc + Qs
t
Turbulence Energy due to
dissipation Spray - vaporization
Heat flux
J   T  Dhm(m / )
m

Equations of state

p  RT m / Wm
m
Specific heat, enthalpy from JANAF data

7 CEFRC3-5, 2014
 Part 5: Atomization, Drop Breakup/Coalescence Amsden, 1997

Liquid Phase

Spray drop number conservation

.
f = f (x, v, r, T , y, y; t)
d

f   .   . . .
+ x  fv + v  fF + (fR) + fTd + fy + fy = f coll + f bu
t r Td y y

F=dv/dt R = dr/dt Drop Drop breakup,

drop drag Vaporization and distortion coalescence
heating

Spray exchange functions

Fs = - fd 4/3 r3F ' + 4r2Rv dv dr dTd dy dy

Qs = - fd 4r2 R I l +1 v-u 2 + 4/3 r3 cl Td + F '  v-u-u' dv dr dTd dy dy

2

s
Work done by drop drag forces W =- fd 4/3 r3 F 'u' dv dr dTd dy dy

8 CEFRC3-5, 2014
 Part 5: Atomization, Drop Breakup/Coalescence Amsden, 1997

Lagrangian drop - liquid phase

Discrete Drop Model

u'
drop position u

dx
v
dt
drop velocity l

dv
F v
dt
drop size
dr
R
dt Spray submodels provide:
F - Drag, R – Vaporize
    . .
v + v  fF + (fR)
Turbulence +
model fTd + fy + fy = f coll + f bu - breakup/collide
r
provides: l, u’
Td y t y
t+dt
Initial data:
v, r, Td – Atomization model

9 CEFRC3-5, 2014
 Part 5: Atomization, Drop Breakup/Coalescence Amsden, 1997

Turbulence Model (RANS)

Kinetic energy Dissipation

k .  m 
   (uk)   3  k  u    u    (
2
)k     WÝs
t  Prk 
Production due Rate of work to
to mean flow disperse drops
Dissipation rate
 m
+   u = - 2C
1 - C3  u +  
t 3 Pr
+  C1  :u - C2   + Cs W
s
k
Turbulence diffusivity Eddy size Turbulence intensity
D  Cm k / 
2
3/2
l = C k / u’2= (2 k/3)

10 CEFRC3-5, 2014
 UW-ERC Multidimensional CFD models
Submodel Los Alamos UW-Updated References

intake flow assumed initial flow compute intake flow SAE 951200
heat transfer law-of-the-wall compressible, unsteady SAE 960633
turbulence standard k- RNG k- /LES CST 106, 1995
nozzle flow none cavitation modeling SAE 1999-01-0912
atomization Taylor Analogy surface-wave-growth SAE 960633
Kelvin Hemholtz SAE 980131
Rayleigh Taylor CST 171, 1998
drop breakup Taylor Analogy Rayleigh Taylor Atom. Sprays 1996
drop drag rigid sphere drop distortion SAE 960861
wall impinge none rebound-slide model SAE 880107
wall film/splash SAE 982584
collision/coalesce O’Rourke shattering collisions Atom. Sprays 1999
vaporization single component multicomponent fuels SAE 2000-01-0269
low pressure high pressure SAE 2001-01-0998
ignition Arrhenius reduced chemistry SAE 2004-01-0558
combustion Arrhenius CTC/GAMUT SAE 2004-01-0102
reduced kinetics SAE 2003-01-1087
NOx Zeldo’vich Extended Zeldo’vich SAE 940523
soot none Hiroyasu & Surovkin SAE 960633
Nagle Strickland oxidation SAE 980549
11 11 ERC RCCI Research
CEFRC3-5, 2014
 Part 5: Atomization, Drop Breakup/Coalescence Reitz, 1982

Atomization models (Single hole nozzle)

Four main jet breakup regimes:
Rayleigh, first wind-induced, second wind-induced and atomization

a.) Rayleigh breakup

Drop diameters > jet diameter.
Breakup far downstream nozzle
b.) First wind-induced regime
Drop diameter ~ jet diameter.
Breakup far downstream of nozzle
c.) Second wind-induced regime
Drop sizes < jet diameter.
Breakup starts close to nozzle exit
d.) Atomization regime
Drop sizes << jet diameter.
Breakup at nozzle exit.
Growth of small disturbances • Jet breakup known to depend on nozzle
initiates liquid breakup design details.
• Need to start by considering
flow in the injector nozzle passage
12 CEFRC3-5, 2014
 Part 5: Atomization, Drop Breakup/Coalescence Sarre, 1999

Cavitation inception
Cavitation Initial
Account for effects of r/d region D
nozzle geometry

Cc
Cavitation if P < Pv Umean 1 vena 2

Yes No
l/d
P2 / P1 

Non-cavitating flow
Cavitating flow 1 1.0
Cc

2(Cc Cc2 ) 0.9

sharp inlet

cc
Contraction coefficient (Nurick (1976) 0.8 nozzle

0.7
1 2
Cc  [( . r / d ]1/ 2
)  114
0.62 0.6
0.00 0.04 0.08 0.12 0.16

r/d
13 CEFRC3-5, 2014
 Part 5: Atomization, Drop Breakup/Coalescence Sarre, 1999
ERC Nozzle Flow Model
Cavitating flow Non-cavitating flow
Yes No
P2 / P1 

 
Nozzle discharge coefficient Nozzle discharge coefficient
Lichtarowicz (1965)
p1  p v
Cd  Cc Cd  0.827  0.0085 l d
p1  p 2

Effective injection velocity Effective injection velocity

2( P1  P2 )
2Cc P1  P2  (1  2Cc ) Pv ueff  Cd
ueff  
Cc 2  ( P1  Pv )

Effective nozzle area Effective nozzle area

2Cc2 ( P1  Pv ) Aeff  A
Aeff  A
2Cc P1  P2  (1  2Cc ) Pv

14 CEFRC3-5, 2014
 Part 5: Atomization, Drop Breakup/Coalescence Lee, 2010
Nozzle flow - cavitation
Homogeneous Equilibrium Model
- single phase mixture of vapor and liquid
- considers variable compressibility of mixture.

Sonic Velocity (m/sec)

(1) Sonic Speed of mixture
: function of void fraction
l   α=0 for pure liquid Theory (γ)

l  v α=1 for pure vapor 1.4 (Adiabatic)
1.0 (Isothermal)
  1 
 v  (1   )  l  
1
 2
a2 
 v v
a
2
 l l 
a

(Wallis, 1967)
(2) Equation of State of mixture
pure Void fraction, α pure
: by integrating dP  a 2 d (Schmidt, 1997) liquid vapor
  v av 2  l    v   l   Sonic velocity in bubbly air/water
P  Pl  Pvl log 
  
sat
2 
 
 l v v
a
2
   a
v v
2
  a
l l 
mixture at atmospheric pressure
Brennen (1995)
 v av 2  l al 2  v   l    v 2 av 2 
Pvl  Pl
sat
 Pv
sat
 Pvl log  2 2 
 v 2 av 2   l 2 al 2   l al 

15 CEFRC3-5, 2014
 Part 5: Atomization, Drop Breakup/Coalescence Lee, 2010
Nozzle flow - cavitation

max velocity at exit, cm/s min. density at exit, g/cm3

Max V Max ρ

(sec) (sec)

density and
streamline and exit velocity
iso-surface
(ρ=0.35g/cm3)

16 CEFRC3-5, 2014
 Part 5: Atomization, Drop Breakup/Coalescence Wang,, 2014

Eulerian flow models

Nozzle diameter Spray Angle
Bubbles

Liquid Core

Nozzle Walls
Nozzle Length Droplets
Inlet rounding
Breakup Length

Develop a CFD Model that:

1) Simulates internal nozzle flow and external sprays simultaneously;
2) Models the thermodynamic states of the compressible liquid and gas;
3) Is able to simulate flows with large pressure and density ratios (1000:1);
4) Predicts phase change based on the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics;
5) Offers the capability of Eulerian-Lagrangian transition for dispersed sprays;
(Eulerian-Lagrangian Spray and Atomization (ELSA) Model)
6) Models the sub-grid liquid-gas interface area density for the ELSA Model.

17 CEFRC3-5, 2014
 Part 5: Atomization, Drop Breakup/Coalescence Wang,, 2014

7-Equation model - Eulerian Fluid Solver

Relaxation terms

Gas

Liquid

Liquid-Vapor-Air
(7)
3-phase mixture
Stiffened Gas Equation of State: A
L V

18 CEFRC3-5, 2014
Part 5: Atomization, Drop Breakup/Coalescence Wang,, 2014

Equations solved with hybrid Rusanov HLLC scheme

19 CEFRC3-5, 2014
 Part 5: Atomization, Drop Breakup/Coalescence Wang,, 2014
Submerged Liquid Jet
Chamber water

density vapor mass fraction

pressure velocity

Water injected into water:

Cavitation is generated over entire length of nozzle walls.
Enginefluid
Large region of cavitated Research
(bubbleCenter
cloud) – University
appears of Wisconsin
in chamber. 5
20 CEFRC3-5, 2014
 Part 5: Atomization, Drop Breakup/Coalescence
Chamber water
Submerged Liquid Jet

Water injected into water:

Cavitation generated over portions of nozzle passage.
Large region of cavitated fluid (bubble cloud) appears in chamber.
21 CEFRC3-5, 2014
 Part 5: Atomization, Drop Breakup/Coalescence Wang,, 2014
Cavitating Liquid Jet Non-condensible air
density vapor mass fraction

pressure velocity

Air mass fraction

Low pressure
(vapor pressure)
regions seen
within entire nozzle

6
22 CEFRC3-5, 2014
 Part 5: Atomization, Drop Breakup/Coalescence Wang,, 2014
Cavitating Liquid Jet Non-condensible air

23 CEFRC3-5, 2014
 Part 5: Atomization, Drop Breakup/Coalescence Reitz, 1982

Atomization - “Wave” breakup model

Taylor & Hoyt, 1983

High speed photograph of water jet close to nozzle exit

(at top) in the second wind-induced breakup regime
showing surface wave instability growth and breakup

Kelvin-Helmholtz Jet Breakup Model


h
h = R h 0 e ikz +wt
Linear Stability Theory:
Cylindrical liquid jet issuing from a circular orifice into a stationary,
incompressible gas.
Relate growth rate, w, of perturbation to wavelength 2/k

24 CEFRC3-5, 2014
 Part 5: Atomization, Drop Breakup/Coalescence Reitz, 1982

hhe t 2B 0
 Linearized analysis

r
U = Jet velocity
2a
Surface waves breakup on jet or "blob"
Z
2 1
h = R h 0 e ikz +wt
U(r)
Equation of liquid surface: r = a+h,
Axisymmetric fluctuating pressure, axial velocity, and radial velocity for both liquid
and gas phases.
 ui 1 
Fluctuations described by continuity equation  ( rvi )  0
 z r r
plus linearized equations of motion for the liquid and the gas,
Axial: u u dU 1 p m  2 u 1    u 
i  U (r ) i v i  i  i i  r i
t i
z i
dr  z  
  z
2 
r  r   r 
i i
25 CEFRC3-5, 2014
 Part 5: Atomization, Drop Breakup/Coalescence Reitz, 1982

Analysis (Cont.)

 vi vi 1  pi m i  2 vi  1  rvi 

Radial:  U i (r )    2 
t z i  r i  z  r r  r 

Gas is assumed to be inviscid U(r) = U - slip

With h <<a, the gas equations give the pressure at the interface r = a
w K (ka )
p2   2 (U  i )2 kh 0
k K1 (ka )
Boundary conditions-
Kinematic, tangential and normal stress at the interface:
h u1 v
v1  w  ,  1
t r z
 v1 s 2  h
2
 p1  2n1 1  2 (h  a )  p2  0
r a z 2

26 CEFRC3-5, 2014
 Part 5: Atomization, Drop Breakup/Coalescence Reitz, 1988

Dispersion relationship

2 I 1' ka 2 kl I 1 ka I 1' la 2
= s k 1 - k 2a 2 l - k
2 I 1 ka
w2 + 2v 1 k w -
I 0 ka k 2 + l 2 I 0 ka I 0 la  1a 2 l 2 + k 2 I 0 ka

2 2 2 I ka K0 ka
+ U - i w /k 2 k 2 l2 - k 2 1
1 l + k I 0 ka K1 ka
Weber Ohnesorge

Maximum wave growth rate

characterizes fastest growing
waves which are responsible
for breakup
(as a function of Weber
and Ohnesorge numbers)

Maximum wave growth rate

and length scale:  and 

27 CEFRC3-5, 2014
 Part 5: Atomization, Drop Breakup/Coalescence Reitz, 1988

Curvefits of dispersion equation

0.5 1 + 0.4 0.7 0.5 1.5

 = 9.02 1 + 0.45 Z T 1a 3 0.34 + 0.38 We 2
a 0.6  s =
1 + 0.87 We21.67 1 + Z 1 + 1.4T 0.6

We 0.5  U2a  2
2U a
where Z= 1 ; T=ZWe 2 ; We 1= s ; We 2= s ; Re1=Ua
0.5 1
v1
Re1

Maximum growth rate increases and wavelength decreases with We

Increased viscosity reduces growth rate and increases wave length

Wavelength
Ohnesorge
number, Z

growth rate
Weber number, We2 Weber number, We2

28 CEFRC3-5, 2014
 Part 5: Atomization, Drop Breakup/Coalescence Reitz, 1988

“Wave” atomization model

Drop size: r  B
Breakup time:  ~ 1 v ~ 

q U

Spray angle prediction:

v 1 
Tan q   4( 2g ) 1 / 2 f ( T )
U A 
1l

f(T)=
Breakup length of the core (Taylor, 1940):

 T=
L  C a 1 / f (T ) where f T  
3
1  exp  10T 
2 6

29 CEFRC3-5, 2014
 Part 5: Atomization, Drop Breakup/Coalescence Gao, 2010

X-ray Phase-contrast imaging of high-pressure sprays

ANL Synchrotron-Based Ultrafast (150 ps) Single-Shot images
Surface instability waves produce ligaments
Breakup sensitive to injection pressure, fuel properties

(Hydroground nozzle, biodiesel, 1 ms injection duration in quasi-steady state)

30 CEFRC3-5, 2014
 Part 5: Atomization, Drop Breakup/Coalescence Beale, 1999
Rutland, 2011
ERC spray modeling Deshpande, 2013

LDEF - RANS Approach LDEF – LES Approach Pure Eulerian DNS

- Reitz - Rutland Approach - Trujillo

Track
liquid-gas
interface
with VOF
method

31 CEFRC3-5, 2014
 Part 5: Atomization, Drop Breakup/Coalescence Wang, 2013

ELSA model Modeling liquid-gas surface area density [1-5]

•  : Liquid-Air surface area per unit mass:
 Y 
2 /15
s l
3/ 5 2 / 5
req  C t

m    k 3/ 5
 11/15
 
    u      t      a  1 
L

 eq 
t l  v  req
2
 Sc   
Weeq   C O 1
s

Liquid-Gas
Surface Area
Density [5]:
Comparing
Modeling
and DNS

32 CEFRC3-5, 2014
 Part 5: Atomization, Drop Breakup/Coalescence Wang, 2013

ELSA model - Modeling liquid-gas surface area density [1-5]

• Eulerian-Lagrangian transition in the dispersed spray region

Control Volumes
Droplet size: based on the
local surface area density
transition
Droplet number: based on
droplet size, as well as the
liquid mass inside the cell

Eulerian Liquid Mass Parcel Droplet

• Advantages:
Naturally works with RANS and does not require expensive mesh resolution.

• Criterion for transition:

(A) Liquid volume fraction is less than a threshold value;
(B) Liquid mass in the cell is larger than a threshold value

33 CEFRC3-5, 2014
 Part 5: Atomization, Drop Breakup/Coalescence Wang, 2013

ELSA model Modeling liquid-gas surface area density [1-5]

• Axi-Symmetric Round Nozzle
• L=1.025 mm, D = 139 μm
• Injection Pressure: 400 bar, Chamber Pressure: 20 bar
• Sharp corner at inlet, rounded corner at inlet with r/R=1

34 CEFRC3-5, 2014
 Part 5: Atomization, Drop Breakup/Coalescence Liu, 1997

Drop breakup
Mechanisms of drop breakup at high velocities
poorly understood - Conflicting theories
Bag, 'Shear' and 'Catastrophic' breakup regimes

Breakup due to capillary

surface waves
Hinze Chem Eng (1955) and
Engel Nat. Bureau Stds (1958)
Boundary Layer Stripping
due to Shear at the interface
Ranger and Nicolls AIAA J. (1969)
Reinecke and Waldman AVCO Rep (1970)
d(x)
Delplanque & Sirignano Atom Sprays (1994)

Stretching and thinning – drop

distortion - Liu and Reitz IJMF (1997)
35 CEFRC3-5, 2014
 Part 5: Atomization, Drop Breakup/Coalescence Liu, 1993

Low velocity drop breakup Gas

Liquid
injection
orifice
1.27

Nozzle
Liquid drop

Fig. 2 Schematic diagram of liquid drop breakup

with the transverse gas jet

36 CEFRC3-5, 2014
 Part 5: Atomization, Drop Breakup/Coalescence Hwang, 1996

High speed drop breakup mechanism

Double pulse images
Air jet

RT
waves Drops
RT


KH
waves Rayleigh Taylor
KH
 Breakup

 RT 
2  g 
t l  g  3
2

Product l   g
3 s
drops
gt = acceleration  g t l   g 
RT 
3s

37 CEFRC3-5, 2014
 Part 5: Atomization, Drop Breakup/Coalescence Lee, 2001
Drop breakup regimes
Breakup Deformation or
Breakup process Weber number References
stages breakup regimes

First
(1) Deformation
We < 12
Air
breakup
and flattening
stage

12  We  100
(b) Bag breakup Air (including the Pilch and Erdman
Bag-and-Stamen
Bag growth Bag burst Rim burst breakup)

We < 80
Air Ranger and
(c) Shear breakup
Second Nicolls 1969
breakup
stage
(d) Stretching and
thinning Air
100  We  350 Liu and Reitz 1997
breakup

(e) Catastrophic
350  We
Air
Hwang et al. 1996
breakup
l

Flattening RT KH waves
and thinning waves

38 CEFRC3-5, 2014
 Part 5: Atomization, Drop Breakup/Coalescence O’Rourke, 1981

Drop collision modeling

Collision frequency

n12  N2 (r1  r2 ) E12|v1  v2 |/Vol

2

1 r1
v2 2

v1
Number of collisions from
Poisson process
Collision efficiency
2
p(n) = e -n1 2t n12t n/n!
 K 
E12 
K 1 / 2  ~ 1 0 < p <1 random number
2 l v1  v2 r22
K
9 m g r1
39 CEFRC3-5, 2014
 Part 5: Atomization, Drop Breakup/Coalescence Munnannur, 2007
Georjon, 1999
Drop collision and coalescence
1. Reflexive vs. surface energy
2. Kinetic energy of unaffected part vs. surface energy
3. Drops cannot expel trapped gas film (bounce apart)
4. Drops form combined mass (coalesce)

1
2
3
4

δ
ds
b
ul
B=

U
us

ρLU 2d s B
2b Δ
ds
We  , (d s  d l ) dl
σ , dl
40 CEFRC3-5, 2014
 Part 5: Atomization, Drop Breakup/Coalescence Ashgriz, 1990
Drop coalescence
Grazing-coalescence boundary

Drops fly apart if rotational energy of colliding pair exceeds

surface energy of combined pair

 
11
3 6 1
12 1  2 2
Bx 
5 W e 1    3

1


2
1  3
 3 

 0 < Bx <1
random number

41 CEFRC3-5, 2014
 Part 5: Atomization, Drop Breakup/Coalescence Ashgriz, 1990
Grazing - stretching separation

Energy and angular momentum conservation:

Grazing – drops move in same direction but at reduced velocity
Coalescence – mass average properties of colliding drops

42 CEFRC3-5, 2014
 Part 5: Atomization, Drop Breakup/Coalescence Ashgriz, 1990

Reflexive separation ²=1

0.25 ²=0.75

²=0.5
Tennison, 1998
0.2 Coalescence
2
2 We
6
h  h  3

4
 
1  2
 71    0
3 3 

 1   
1 2
3 2  0.15

x
1
2
  2 1
h1  2 1  1  2 0.1

1
h2  2         3
2 0.05
2 2 2
Reflexive separation

1 0
with   Bx 1   /2 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
2 2*We

43 CEFRC3-5, 2014
 Part 5: Atomization, Drop Breakup/Coalescence Reitz, 2014

Summary
The Lagrangian Drop/Eulerian Fluid (LDEF) Discrete Drop model is the work-
horse approach in commercial codes for simulating 2-phase flows.
Detailed models are available for use in engine CFD models to describe the
effects of injector nozzle flow, and liquid and gas properties on spray formation
and drop breakup physics.
Due to the importance of sprays in applications, research is still needed. Recent
experimental and modeling work can be accessed through ILASS and ICLASS
conference papers and the Atomization and Sprays journal.
Significant progress is being made using LES/DNS spray modeling with high
resolution experimental diagnostics to validate engine CFD spray models.

Ballistic imaging: Linne, 2009; X-Ray imaging: Liu SAE paper 2010-01-0877
LES: Villiers & Gosman, LES Primary Diesel Spray Atomization, SAE 2004-01-0100
DNS: Near field spray modeling (Trujillo - ERC)

Reitz, Pickett & Trujillo, 2014

44 CEFRC3-5, 2014