Fuel Vol. 77, No. 12, pp.

1339-1347, 1998
0 1998 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved
Printed in Great Britain
PII: SOOl6-2361(98)0@048-9 0016-2361/98 $19.00+0.00

on in a lean

Dehong Zhang and Steven Ii. Frankel*

Thermal Science and Propulsion Center, School of Mechanical Engineering, Purdue University,
West Lafayette, IN 47907-7003, USA
(Received 15 July 1997; revised 22 January 19981

Results from multidimensional numerical simulations and cycle simulations are presented in an effort to optimize
the performance of a fuel-lean-burn, homogeneous charge, natural gas spark-ignition internal combustion (IC)
engine. The multidimensional numerical simulations are performed using modified versions of the KIVA-2 and
IUVA-3 computer codes. The engine cycle simulations are performed using the WAVE code. The IUVA codes
are enhanced with a turbulent combustion submodel which employs a two-step, natural gas/air chemical kinetics
scheme with a temperature-dependent activation energy, together with a modified eddy dissipation model to treat
the effects of turbulence on the burning rate. The output from the multidimensional calculations is used, in a novel
way, as input to the WAVE cycle simulation code to predict overall engine performance. The Caterpillar G3400
and G3.500 fuel-lean-bum natural gas engines are the specific engines under study. The predictions for brake
specific fuel consumption (BSFC) are within 1% of the measured values for all cases where engine data are
available. The effects of swirl, combustion chamber geometry, and spark location on burning rate and BSFC are
investigated. Specifically, the results show that: (1) the numerical predictions are in good qualitative and
quantitative agreement with engine data; (2) there is an optimum initial swirl ratio for the central bowl, central
spark plug geometry; (3) an offset bowl results in a lower BSFC than a central bowl for the same initial swirl ratio
and spark plug location; and (4) an offset spark plug results in a lower BSFC than a central plug for the same initial
swirl ratio. 0 1998 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved

(Keywords: natural gas engines; turbulent combustion; numerical modeling)

INTRODUCTION modeling. Because of the nature of the models used and

The widespread use of natural gas as an alternative to
gasoline and diesel fuel in internal combustion (IC) engines
is motivated by dwindling fuel oil reserves and desires for
reduced pollutant emissions. Previous experimental studies
have reported that natural gas bums slower than conven-
tional fuels, such as gasoline and diesellS2. Therefore, in
order to achieve fuel-lean-burn natural gas combustion, and
still maintain competitive performance levels, manu-
facturers of natural gas IC engines need to make design
modifications to achieve a faster bum while optimizing
engine performance3. These design modifications should
consider the effects of in-cylinder flow motion, e.g. swirl
and tumble, combustion chamber geometry, e.g. for a bowl-
in-piston chamber, circular versus non-circular bowl,
centered versus offset bowl, open versus deep bowl, etc.,
and spark plug location (an extensive review has been
published elsewhere4). In order to examine all possible
combinations of the aforementioned design modifications in
the test cell, expensive and time-consuming engine testing
would be required. With recent improvements in the
accuracy of multidimensional numerical engine modeling
codes and the increase in speed of computational perfor-
mance of desktop workstations, it has become feasible to
conduct engine optimization studies using numerical
*Corresponding author
the sensitivity of the results to grid resolution, it is important
to have engine data available for model calibration. This
combined numerical/experimental testing can reduce the
cost and time of the design process considerably. The
objective of this paper is to investigate the effects of swirl,
combustion chamber geometry, and spark plug location on
the burning rate and overall engine performance in the
Caterpillar G3400 and G3500 series fuel-lean-bum, homo-
geneous charge, natural gas, spark-ignited engines. The
approach combines multidimensional KIVA simulations to
predict the in-cylinder combustion process with the WAVE
cycle simulation code to predict the overall engine
performance. The rest of the paper is organized as follows.
The next section discusses the numerical models employed
in the study, including details on the governing equations,
the turbulent combustion model, the initial and boundary
conditions, numerical methods and grid-refinement effects.
This is followed by a summary of the specific engine
details. Results are presented and discussed, folIowed by
conclusions.
NUMERICAL MODEL
KIVA multidimensional model
The multidimensional numerical models used to simulate
the in-cylinder combustion process are the KIVA-2 and

Fuel 1998 Volume 77 Number 12 1339

A numerical study of natural gas combustion: D. Zhang and S. H. Frankel

KIVA-3 computer program?‘. The main difference predictions of engine heat release and pressure can often
between the two codes is related to grid generation. For be achieved with a simpler chemical scheme. Therefore. a
the rest of this paper, we will simply refer to KIVA global, two-step chemical kinetics scheme’s with a
simulations in general. The KIVA code integrates the temperature-dependent activation energy is used in con-
transient, conservation of mass, momentum, energy and junction with a modified eddy dissipation model”. The
species equations governing the ensemble averaged temperature-dependent activation energy was found to be
behavior of chemically reacting turbulent flows. The necessary in order to predict the entire combustion process,
standard two-equation K--E turbulence model, with some from ignition through to the power stroke. In order to
added terms to account for compressibility effects, is used to address the closure problem, the KIVA code was modified
characterize the eddy viscosity. The mathematical form of to include a turbulent combustion submodel in order to
the governing equations is provided in detail in the KIVA account for the effects of turbulence on the mean reaction
users manual and is not repeated here5. In the original code, rate. The model was developed by Zhangi” and was initially
combustion is modeled using either finite-rate laminar calibrated against data from swirling premixed natural gas/
chemistry or chemical equilibrium. In the version used in air, constant volume combustion experiments16. In the
the present study, the combustion model has been modified present study, the model treats natural gas as methane. The
to account for the important effects of turbulence on the chemical kinetics scheme and the eddy dissipation model
mean reaction rate. The details of this model are described are used to compute characteristic chemistry and turbulent
in the next section. KIVA integrates finite-difference mixing time scales. The turbulent combustion rate is
approximations to the governing equations. Temporal and predicted based on the limiting process.
spatial differencing is achieved using a semi-implicit, quasi- The two-step chemistry scheme involves methane oxida-
second-order up-winding approach together with the tion to form carbon monoxide and water via an initial step:
arbitrary Lagrangian Eulerian (ALE) technique to treat
CH4 + ;02 - CO + 2H20 (1)
grid movement associated with the piston motion. More
details can be found in the marma?. which is followed by carbon monoxide oxidation to form
In-cylinder calculations are performed after intake valve carbon dioxide:
closing and therefore initial conditions are required for all
flow variables at all points within the cylinder and on the co + 40, - co* (2)
walls. In addition, boundary conditions must be enforced to The consumption rate of methane is given by”:
obtain a unique solution. The initial in-cylinder velocity
field is chosen in order to mimic any swirl which would k, KI-U”[~,lb (3)
have been generated during the intake process. In KIVA,
and the consumption rate of carbon monoxide is given by17:
this is achieved by specifying a non-zero initial swirl
number which is defined as the ratio of the swirling air speed W~lcP,ldkb~l’ (4)
to the crankshaft speed, together with a Bessel function
where k, and k2 are the reaction rate coefficients for the first
velocity profile. More details can be found in the manuals.
Turbulent law-of-the-wall velocity conditions with fixed and second chemistry steps, respectively, and a, b, c, d, and
e are empirical coefficients and are specified in Table 1. The
temperature walls are employed. Both two-dimensional,
reaction rate coefficient for the ith step has the following
axisymmetric and three-dimensional configurations are
simulated. In configurations where symmetry planes exist, Arrhenius form:
the computational domain is restricted to a pie-shaped
sector of the physical domain, with periodic boundary
conditions enforced at the azimuthal ends of the domain.
where Ai, Ei, R,, and T are the pre-exponential factor, the
Turbulent combustion model activation energy, the universal gas constant, and the tem-
Two major obstacles to including hydrocarbon finite-rate perature, respectively. The values for Ai are specified in
chemistry into multidimensional engine simulations are: (a) Table 2. The activation energy is a constant for elemental
uncertainties and the large computational expense asso- chemical reactions, but in global empirical chemistry
ciated with implementing detailed reaction mechanisms in modeling treating the activation energy as a constant can
turbulent flame simulations; and (b) closure of the filtered lead to problems, especially in transient situations where
chemical production term in the averaged thermochemical ignition phenomena are importa@. In IC engine simu-
conservation equations. Detailed7 and reduced8 chemical lations our numerical tests have shown that it is not possible
kinetics models for methane exist, but the application of to predict both the early burning and main burning rates
these mechanisms to turbulent reacting flows is still in its with a constant activation energy. Therefore, in this study
early stages’. The computational expense associated with
finite-rate chemistry is related to integration of additional Table 1 Concentration coefficients in chemical kinetics scheme
species transport equations, which increase storage and
CPU time considerably”. Due to the wide range of time a b c d e

scales associated with chemical kinetics, systems of stiff - 0.3 1.3 1.o 0.65 0.5
differential equations also result. Recent work in developing
computationally efficient techniques for implementing
combustion chemistry in turbulent flame analyses appear
promising, but have not yet been tested in multidimensional Table 2 Combustion model parameters
engine simulations ’’. In engine simulations, interest in Reaction step AI EiO ni *, B,
predicting kinetically-controlled phenomenon such as igni-
1 2.51 X IO5 1.82 X lo4 7.26 0.95 0.53
tion, knock or pollutant emissionsrfenerally requires a fairly 2 6.40 X lo9 1.07 X 10’ 1.55 0.95 0.015
sophisticated chemistry model . Reasonably accurate __ ._

1340 Fuel 1998 Volume 77 Number 12

 A numerical study of natural gas combustion: D. Zhang and S. H. Frankel

a temperature-dependent activation energy for each reaction Table 3 Engine details

is formulated in the form: Engine Bore Stroke Speed (r/s) Compression
ratio
Ei = Eio + niTm’ (6)
3400 137 152 25 -12.5:1
where Eio is the constant part of the activation energy, 3500 170 190 25 12:l
which makes up about three-quarters of the total activation
energy, and ni and mi are two constants, for each reaction
step. The values for these quantities are also specified in
fuel and combustion products are also accounted for in the
Table 2.
model. The energy equation involves the first law of
The effect of turbulence on the mean reaction rate is
thermodynamics and accounts for internal energy changes
accounted for by using a modified version of the eddy
of the in-cylinder gases due to enthalpy fluxes, heat transfer
dissipation modeli4. In this model, premixed turbulent
and piston work. More details can be found in the manua119.
combustion is treated as a mixture of unburned and burned
The WAVE code is used here to predict the engine brake
gas turbulent eddies with chemical reaction presumed to
specific fuel consumption (BSFC). As input to the model,
occur at the interface between these eddies. The chemical
the cumulative heat release and wall heat flux are input as a
production rate per unit volume is assumed to depend upon
function of crank angle from results obtained from the
either a chemical kinetics rate or the turbulent mixing rate of
multidimensional KIVA simulations.
these eddies. The rate of turbulent mixing of these eddies is
assumed to be proportional to the rate of decay of the
turbulent kinetic energy. ENGINE AND COMPUTATIONAL DETAILS
The implementation of this model involves the calcula-
The two engines under investigation in this study are the
tion of two characteristic time scales. The first is based on
Caterpillar G3400 and G3500 series fuel-lean-burn natural
the chemical kinetics and the second is based on turbulent
gas engines. The main difference between the two engines is
mixing. They are computed based on the following
their size. The G3400 engine is smaller than the G3500
expressions:
engine as indicated by the geometric details for each engine
summarized in Table 3.
Data are available from these engines for different aspects
of the numerical study in the form of combustion chamber
pressure and cumulative heat release versus crank angle.
for the chemical time scale, and The cumulative heat release is defined as the ratio of the
amount of heat released from the actual combustion process
k
7ti = Bi - at the present crank angle to that after complete combustion.
E Heat release data are collected by measuring time resolved
for the turbulent time scale, where Bi is a constant which, cylinder pressure. A crank angle encoder and cylinder
along with the other parameters in the model, is calibrated to pickup are used to collect cylinder pressure data. Proprietary
match experimental data. Values for Bi used in this study are software (heat transfer model) is used by Caterpillar to
summarized in Table 2. These two time scales are compared determine rate of heat release and cumulative heat release
in order to determine which is larger. The chemical produc- curves for methane-based fuels. Caterpillar has been using
tion rate is determined based upon which process, finite-rate heat release rates and cumulative heat release information to
chemistry or turbulent mixing, is slower or limiting. In order monitor combustion improvements for the past decade”.
to provide a smooth transition between the chemical Fuel consumption is measured with a positive displacement
kinetics-limited regime and the turbulent mixing-limited meter where the time required for usage of a specified
regime, a buffer regime is incorporated into the formula- volume of fuel is measured and corrected for gas
tion18. Thus, the combustion process is divided into three temperature, pressure and lower heating value. The fuel
regimes: (1) a chemical kinetics limited regime when lower heating value is constantly monitored with an on-line
T,i/7ti > 10, and the chemical production rate is computed gas chromatograph. Fuel is supplied by the local gas utility.
from ki = l/rci; (2) a turbulent mixing-limited regime when Calculations are started just after intake valve closing
r,Jrti < 0.1, and the chemical production rate is computed with initial conditions specified as discussed above, and
from ki = l/rti; and (3) a combined chemical kinetics and estimated from engine measurements. The fuel-to-air
turbulent mixing regime when 10 > 7,i/7ti > 0.1, and the equivalence ratio is fixed at 0.7 in all cases. The mixture
chemical production rate is computed from is ignited along the cylinder axis, unless otherwise
ki = ll[Dr,i + (1 - D)rJ, where D = 7cil(7ci + Eli). The Cut- indicated, close to the cylinder head by internal energy
offs at 10 and 0.1 are arbitrarily chosen, but are found to be deposition as described in the KIVA manual. The
sufficient. computational grid size for each case is specified below,
but the average grid spacing is 1.9 mm and the typical
WAVE engine code average flame thickness is 10 mm, based on the average
The WAVE cycle simulation program is a code which is temperature profile15. All results have been checked for grid
often used by engine manufactures for design calcula- and time step sensitivity and the trends are observed to be
tions”. This package is used here in a novel way by consistent in all cases.
providing input from the multidimensional KIVA simula-
tions. WAVE involves a time-dependent simulation of the
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
in-cylinder processes using the equations of mass and
energy conservation. The mass equation accounts for In the next three subsections, results, in the form of
changes in in-cylinder mass due to flow through valves combustion chamber pressure, cumulative heat release, wall
and due to fuel injection. Fluxes of air, vaporized fuel, liquid heat flux, and turbulence kinetic energy versus crank angle,

Fuel 1998 Volume 77 Number 12 1341

A numerical study of natural gas combustion: D. Zhang and S. H. Frankel

are presented. Comparisons are made to engine data where

available. Contour plots of temperature are also presented to
examine mean flame shapes. Cumulative heat release and
wall heat flux information are then provided as input to the
WAVE engine cycle simulation code in order to predict
overall BSFC. These results will be presented and compared
for different cases in the last section.
Figure 1 Computational grid for axisymmetric computations of
Effect of swirl
G3500 central bowl-in-piston combustion chamber
In order to confidently examine the effect of swirl on the
burning rate, it is important to first calibrate the model
against available engine data. The computational grid for
the calculations presented in this section is shown at TDC
(4 (top dead center) in Figure I for the G3500 central bowl-in-
A Qhp ~-0
piston geometry. There are 23 grid points in the axial
direction, i.e. along the cylinder axis, and 44 grid points in
100 the radial direction. In Figure 2, plots of cumulative heat
release versus crank angle are presented comparing KIVA
90 numerical predictions to engine data for initial swirl ratios
T
@ of (a) 0.0 and (b) 2.0. Reasonable agreement between the
80
numerical predictions and the engine data can be observed.
% The model predicts a slower initial bum rate in comparison
(II 70
P to the engine data which may be due to lower initial in-
$! 60 cylinder turbulence levels, the lack of an ignition model, or
t the effect of cycle-to-cycle variations not captured in the
aI 50
c simulations. With the parameters in the combustion model
g 40 tuned to this data set, the initial swirl level is now further
._ varied, while keeping all model parameters fixed, to
3 30 examine its effect on the overall burning rate.
Figure 3 shows cumulative heat release plotted versus
i 20
crank angle for four different initial swirl ratios 0.0, 1 S, 2.0,
and 3.3. The results show that as the initial swirl ratio is
increased from 0.0 to 2.0 the burn rate increases
continuously. When the initial swirl ratio is set at 3.3, the
numerical model predicts a slower burning rate than even
the case with zero initial swirl. There is no engine data at

(b) / A P/exp -21 j_/__()_-- 1.5

-2 -----3.31

100

/,/*
100
90
1 90
T
b
- a0

f 70
Q,
z 60

.E
tii 50

$ 40
._
z 30
3
E 20
_T

Figure 2 Cumulative heat release versus crankangle for G3500

central bowl with initial swirl ratio of (a) 0 and (b) 2.0 Figure 3 Cumulative heat release versus crankangle for G3500
(experimental data as symbols, numerical predictions as lines) central bowl for initial swirl ratios of 0, 1.5, 2.0, and 3

1342 Fuel 1998 Volume 77 Number 12

 A numerical study of natural gas combustion: D. Zhang and S. H. Frankel

I-*_- 0 --- 1.5 -2 ______3.31

sr = 0
x = 14.4
(a)
O”~ .-._.--
..-
_-.-.._ .- . .
*-.. ._..._. .’
_*
.I-*. :

‘*

sr = 2.0
x= I$.4
@I
ol
CA [ATDC]
Figure 5 Total turbulent kinetic energy versus crankangle for
G3500 central bowl for initial swirl ratios of 0, 1.5, 2.0 and 3

sr = 3.3
x = 13.0 _._- 0 --- 1.5 -2 _____.3.3/
(Cl

Figure 4 Temperature contour plots for G3500 central bowl at 10

ATDC for three different initial swirl ratios (indicated by sr value)
along with corresponding cumulative heat release value (indicated
by x value (%))

this high initial swirl ratio. Contour plots of mean

temperature are compared for initial swirl ratios of 0.0,
2.0, and 3.3 at 10” ATDC (after TDC) in Figure 4, in order
to examine the effect of swirl on the flame shape and explain
the adverse effect of high swirl on the burning rate as
predicted by the simulations. The corresponding cumulative
heat release value is also shown for reference. The zero
swirl case shows a hemispherical flame shape, the
intermediate swirl case shows a conical flame shape, and
the high swirl case reveals a barrel flame shape. It appears
that the effect of swirl is to suppress flame propagation in
the radial direction, allowing the flame to propagate faster in
the axial direction. This so called ‘flame pencilling effect’
can be attributed to the centrifugal force that is created by
the swirling motion and the density difference between the
burned and unburned gases. Similar behavior has been Figure 6 Wall heat flux versus crankangle for G3500 central
bowl with initial swirl ratios of 0, 1.5, 2.0 and 3.3
observed experimentally in swirling, premixed natural gas/
air constant volume bomb combustion’6, lending some
credence to the numerical predictions. Figure 5 shows the
total turbulence kinetic energy versus crank angle for the turbulence levels lead to higher wall heat fluxes as can be
different swirl cases. Increasing the initial swirl ratio seen in Figure 6, which shows wall heat flux versus crank
increases the turbulence levels in the cylinder. angle for the different initial swirl ratios considered. This
The main result from this part of the study is that for a increase in wall heat flux with increase in swirl levels will, in
central bowl-in-piston geometry, with central spark ignition, general, affect the overall engine BSFC. This issue will be
there exists an optimum swirl ratio for fast burning. Higher investigated in the section on overall engine performance.
swirl does generate more turbulence, which, in general,
should increase the burning rate. However, the flow pattern Effect of combustion chamber geometry
which is generating the turbulence, in this configuration, is In order to overcome the flame pencilling effect observed
not conducive to rapid flame propagation. Also, higher at high swirl levels with the central bowl in the previous

Fuel 1998 Volume 77 Number 12 1343

A numerical study of natural gas combustion: D. Zhang and S. H. Frankel

..

Figure 7 Computational grid for three-dimensional computa-

tions of G3500 offset bowl-in-piston combustion chamber
2 60.

/-_-- 1.5 -2 - - - - 3.3 A 2lexp

100

90

5
T 80

3g 70
g 60
z offset bowl with initial swirl ratio of 1.8 (experimental data as
a 50
c symbols, numerical predictions as lines)
$ 40
‘G
2 30
zz 20
10
v ”
7
cl
z LFi 8 s
CA [ATDC]
Figure 8 Cumulative heat release versus crankangle for G3500
offset bowl with initial swirl ratios of 1.5, 2.0, and 3.3
(experimental data as symbols, numerical predictions as lines)
subsection, the bowl is offset by 8 mm in an attempt to
disturb the alignment between the flame center and the swirl
center. The offset bowl will also generate a stronger squish
jet and hence more turbulence, which should help overcome
the swirl-induced pencilling effect. The three-dimensional
computational mesh for the offset bowl, shown in Figure 7,
shows 44 X 18 X 23 grid points at TDC in the radial,
azimuthal and axial directions, respectively. The effect of
bowl offset on the in-cylinder combustion process is
represented by a plot of the cumulative heat release versus
crank angle for several different initial swirl ratios shown in
Figure 8. Data is available for the case with initial swirl
ratio of 2.0 and reasonable agreement with the numerical
prediction is observed. An increase in the initial swirl ratio,
in the offset bowl combustion chamber, results in a
continuous increase in the burn rate. This is in contrast to
the central bowl case where there was a decrease in the bum
rate at high swirl. The reason the offset bowl is able to
overcome the flame pencilling effect is due to higher
turbulence levels from the stronger squish jet and the fact
that the flame center is slightly offset from the swirl center.
Thus, in addition to a diffusive burn, a swirl-induced
convective bum is becoming important.
CA [ATDC]
Figure 9 Cumulative heat release versus crankangle for G3400
Further validation of the abilities of the combustion
model to predict the effect of the offset bowl are shown in
Figure 9 which compares predictions of cumulative heat
release versus crank angle to engine data for the G3400
offset bowl configuration for an initial swirl ratio of 1.8.
Good agreement with the engine data is observed lending
further credence to the results obtained in the G3500 study
discussed above.
In order to examine the effect of swirl and bowl offset on
the combustion process, temperature contour plots at 10”
ATDC are shown for three different swirl ratios in Figure 10
for the G3500 engine. In addition, the corresponding
cumulative heat release value (represented by the x value)
is included on the figure. For the zero initial swirl case, the
flame shape is similar to the centered bowl case. For the
intermediate swirl case, the flame shape becomes distorted
by the swirl and offset bowl effects. For the high swirl case,
the flame has already propagated to the piston crown with a
significant increase in the cumulative heat release value as
compared to the other two cases. Also comparing the offset
bowl case to the central bowl case for the intermediate swirl
level there is a significant increase in the burning rate and
hence the cumulative heat release for the offset case.
Figures 11 and 12 show plots of turbulent kinetic energy
and wall heat flux versus crank angle, respectively, for the
offset bowl cases. The results show that higher turbulence
and wall heat flux levels accompany the faster bum
associated with the offset bowl and high swirl. The net
effect of these changes on the overall engine performance
will be examined in a later section.
Effect of spark plug location
In this section, the effect of spark plug location on
burning rate in the G3400 engine is examined. Three plug
locations are studied for the central circular bowl with an
initial swirl ratio of 1.8: (1) at the center, (2) at r/2, and (3) at
r, where r is the bowl radius. Figure 13 shows the grid and

1344 Fuel 1998 Volume 77 Number 12

 A numerical study of natural gas combustion: D. Zhang and S. H. Frankel

I--- 1.5 -2 - - - - 3.3

sr = 0
x = 15.0
(4 .

-I
7
0 0
z :: z 3
CA [ATDC]

Figure 11 Total turbulent kinetic energy versus crankangle for

G?500 offset bowl with initial swirl rat& of 0, 2.0, and 3.3
sr = 2.0
x = 26.0
(b)

sr = 3.3
x = 46.5

Figure 10 Temperature contour plots for G3500 offset bowl at

10 ATDC for three different initial swirl ratios (indicated by sr
value) along with corresponding cumulative heat release value
(indicated by n value (%))

01
Table 4 Brake specific fuel consumption (BSFC) (kJ/kWh) X 8 z 0
51 8 8
104. CC, central circular bowl; GC, offset circular bowl; CR, com-
CA [ATDC]
pression ratio; swirl ratio is 1.8
G34OO/CC/CR= 12.5 G34OOKMYCR
= 12.0 Figure 12 Wall heat flux versus crankangle for G3.500 offset
bowl with initial swirl ratios of 0, 2.0, and 3.3
Experimental 0.928 0.937
Numerical 0.937 0.941

mixture. This is consistent with previous experiments

the ignition locations. Figure 14 compares cumulative heat
release plots for the three different cases. The fastest burn
occurs when the spark plug is located at r. The burning in
this case begins in the high swirl region towards the outside
of the bowl and the flame is convectively swept around the
periphery of the bowl by the swirling flow while propagat-
ing towards the center of the bowl to consume the unburned
examining the effect of spark location on combustion in a
variable swirl engine*‘. The turbulence levels are not
significantly effected by the spark location, as shown in
Figure 15, but the wall heat flux is found to be higher in the
offset plug cases, as shown in Figure 16. The overall effect
of spark plug location on engine performance will be
determined in the next section.

Fuel 1998 Volume 77 Number 12 1345

A numerical study of natural gas combustion: D. Zhang and S. H. Frankel

I~--- 1.8-c - - - - - - 1 .&r/2 - 1.8-r

__ j

Figure 13 Computational grid for offset ignition computations of

G3400 central bowl-in-piston combustion chamber

-_-. 1.8-c ------1.8-r/2 - 1.8-r 1

CA [ATDC]
Figure 15 Total turbulent kinetic energy versus crankangle for
G3400 central bowl with intial swirl ratio of 1.8 and ignition offset
at 0, r/2, and r

mm-
1.8-c - - - - - - 1.8-r/2 - 1.8-r

0 0 0
7 Ei
CA [ATDC]
Figure 14 Cumulative heat release versus crankangle for
G3400 central bowl with swirl ratio of 1.8 and ignition offset at
0, r/2, and r

Table 5 Brake specific fuel consumption (BSFC) (kJ/kWh) X

104. CC, central circular bowl; OC, offset circular bowl; CR, com-
pression ratio; swirl ratio is 1.8
G35OO/CC/SR = 0 35OOlCCISR= 2.0 G35OOIOClSR= 3.3

1.011 0.978 0.924 CA [ATDC]

Figure 16 Cumulative heat release versus crankangle for G3400
central bowl with intial swirl ratio of 1.8 and ignition offset at 0, rl
2, and r
Overall engine petformance
In this section, predictions from the WAVE code for
BSFC for several different engine configurations are
presented with comparison to engine test data where higher swirl case, the faster burning, which results from the
available. In Table 4, WAVE predictions are compared to offset bowl, leads to better overall performance.
experimental data for two G3400 configurations. In both
cases, the predictions are within 1% of the test data. In
CONCLUSIONS
Table 5, the offset circular bowl with high swirl results in
the lowest BSFC for the three G3500 configurations. Thus, Results from multidimensional numerical modeling and
in spite of the higher wall heat flux associated with the thermodynamic cycle simulations have been used to

1346 Fuel 1998 Volume 77 Number 12

 A numerical
optimize the performance of two Caterpillar fuel-lean-bum,
spark-ignited, homogeneous charge, natural gas engines by
examining the effects of swirl, combustion chamber
geometry and spark plug location. The KlVA computer
code, modified to include a turbulent combustion submodel,
is used in the multidimensional simulations of the in-
cylinder combustion process, and the WAVE code is used in
the thermodynamic cycle simulations to determine the
engine BSFC. The key results from this study are as follows:
(1) The KIVA predictions of the in-cylinder combustion
process and the hybrid KlVA/WAVE predictions of
BSFC are in reasonable agreement with engine data
for several swirl ratios and combustion chamber
geometries.
(2) There exists an optimum swirl ratio for fast burning in a
central bowl-in-piston configuration with central
ignition. This is primarily due to centrifugal forces, gen-
erated by the swirling fuel/air motion and the combus-
tion-induced density differences, which impede radial
flame propagation resulting in a flame pencilling effect.
(3) The offset bowl results in higher turbulence levels and a
partial misalignment between the flame center and the
swirl center, both of which help to overcome the flame
pencilling effect and achieve faster burning and higher
wall heat flux than the central bowl at the same swirl
ratio.
(4) The offset ignition site, with a central bowl, results in
the fastest burning. This is achieved by taking advan-
tage of the swirl-induced convective bum and burning
from the outside in. High wall heat fluxes are observed
in this case as well.
(5) The optimum overall BSFC, as predicted by the hybrid
KlVA/WAVE approach, is achieved for the high swirl,
offset bowl G3500 engine and for the intermediate
swirl, central bowl, offset ignition G3400 engine.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors would like to acknowledge Caterpillar Inc.,
Lafayette, IN, specifically Kevin Bruch and Min Wu, for
financial support of this project, and for providing the
engine test data and many useful discussions. The WAVE
simulations were performed by Min Wu.
REFERENCES
1 Andrews, A. E. and Bradley, D., The burning velocity of
methane air mixtures. Combust. Flame, 1975,24,275-288.
2 Metghalchi, M. and Keck, J. C., Burning velocities of
mixtures of air with methanol, isooctane, and indolene at
high pressure and temperature. Combust. Flame, 1982,48,
191-210.
study of natural gas combustion: D. Zhang and S. H. Frankel
3 Bruch, K. I., Caterpillar G3500 high efficiency engine
development. Number ICE-25-3, ASME, 1995.
4 Hill, P. G. and Zhang, D., Eflects of swirl and tumble on
combustion in spark-ignition engines. Prog. Energy Com-
bust. Sci., 1994, 20, 373-429.
5 Amsden, A. A., O’Rourke, P. J. and Butler, T. D., KIVA-II:
A Computer Program for Chemically Reactive Flows with
Sprays, Los Alamos, NM, 1989.
6 Amsden, A. A., O’Rourke, P. J. and Butler, T. D., KIVA-3: A
KIVA Program with Block Structured Mesh for Complex
Geometries, Los Alamos, NM, 1993.
7 Zhou, G. and Karim, G. A., A comprehensive kinetic model
for the oxidation of methane. ASME Emerging Energy Tech-
nol., 1994, PD57, 49-57.
8 Peters, N. and Rogg, B. (eds), Reduced Kinetic Mechanisms
for Application to Combustion Systems, Vol. 15 of Lecture
Notes in Physics. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg,
1993.
9 Seshardi, K. and Williams, F. A., Reduced chemical systems
and their application in turbulent combustion. In Turbulent
Reacting Flows, ed. P. A. Libby and F. A. Williams. Com-
bustion Treatise, Academic Press, San Diego, CA, 1994.
10 Westbrook, C. K. and Dryer, F. L., Chemical kinetic model-
ing of hydrocarbon combustion. Prog. Energy Combust.
Sci., 1984, 10,l-57.
11 Yang, B. and Pope, S. B., Treating chemistry in combustion
with detailed mechanisms-in situ adaptive tabulation in
principal directions-premixed combustion. Combust.
Flame, 1997, 112, 85-121.
12 Maly, R. R., State of the art and future needs in SI engine
combustion. In Proc. 25th Symposium (bit.) on Combustion.
Combustion Institute, Pittsburg, PA, 1994, pp. 111-124.
13 Westbrook, C. and Dryer, F., Simplijed reaction mechan-
isms for the oxidation of hydrocarbon fuels in $ames. Com-
bust. Sci. Technol., 1981, 27, 3 l-43.
14 Magnussen, B. F. and Hjertager, B. H., On mathematical
modeling of turbulent combustion with special emphasis
on soot formation and combustion. In Proc. 16th Symp.
(Znt.) on Combustion. Combustion Institute, Pittsburgh,
PA, 1976, pp. 719-729.
15 Zhang, D., Turbulent swirling combustion of premixed
natural gas and air. Ph.D. thesis, University of British
Columbia, Vancouver, Canada, 1995.
16 Zhang, D. and Hill, P., Effect of swirl on combustion in a
short cylindrical chamber. Combust. Flame, 1996, 106(3),
318-332.
17 Yetter, R. A., Dolyer, F. L. and Rabitz, C., Complication of
one-step kinetics for moist CO oxidation. In Proc. 21st
Symp. (lnt.) on Combustion. Combustion Institute,
Pittsburgh, PA, 1986, pp. 749-760.
18 Ahmadi-Befrui, B., Gosman, A. D., Lockwood, F. C. and
Watkins, A. P., Multidimensional calculation of combustion
in an idealized homogeneous charge engine. Progress
Report, No. 810151, SAE, 1981.
19 WAVE Engine Manual, Technical Report, Ricardo Soft-
ware, Burr Ridge, IL, 1996.
20 Bruch, K., Private communication, 1977.
21 Witze, P. O., The effect of spark location on combustion in a
variable swirl engine. No. 820044, SAE, 1982.
Fuel 1998 Volume 77 Number 12 1347