Downloaded from SAE International by Columbia Univ, Monday, August 20, 2018

SAE TECHNICAL
PAPER SERIES 970639

Advanced Computational Methods for

Predicting Flow Losses in Intake Regions of
Diesel Engines

William Taylor III, James H. Leylek, and Le T. Tran

Clemson Univ.

Ronald D. Shinogle and Sunil K. Jain

Caterpillar Inc.

Reprinted from: Engine Modeling

(SP-1255)

The Engineering Society

For Advancing Mobility International Congress & Exposition
Land Sea Air and Space® Detroit, Michigan
INTERNATIONAL February 24-27, 1997

400 Commonwealth Drive, Warrendale, PA 15096-0001 U.S.A. Tel: (412)776-4841 Fax:(412)776-5760

 Downloaded from SAE International by Columbia Univ, Monday, August 20, 2018

The appearance of the 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 Sections
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.

GLOBAL MOBILITY DATABASE

All SAE papers, standards, and selected
books are abstracted and indexed in the
SAE Global Mobility Database.

No part of this publication may by reproduced in any form, in an electronic retrieval

system or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the publisher.

ISSN0148-7191
Copyright 1997 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 Columbia Univ, Monday, August 20, 2018
Advanced Computational Methods for Predicting
Flow Losses in Intake Regions of Diesel Engines
William Taylor III, James H. Leylek, and Le T. Tran
Copyright 1997 Society of Automotive Engineers, Inc.
Abstract
A computational methodology has been developed
for loss prediction in intake regions of internal
combustion engines. The methodology consists of a
hierarchy of four major tasks: (1) proper
computational modeling of flow physics; (2) exact
geometry and high quality and generation; (3)
discretization schemes for low numerical viscosity;
and (4) higher order turbulence modeling. Only when
these four tasks are dealt with properly will a
computational simulation yield consistently accurate
results. This methodology, which is has been
successfully tested and validated against benchmark
quality data for a wide variety of complex 2-D and 3-D
laminar and turbulent flow situations, is applied here
to a loss prediction problem from industry. Total
pressure losses in the intake region (inlet duct,
manifold, plenum, ports, valves, and cylinder) of a
Caterpillar diesel engine are predicted
computationally and compared to experimental data.
Detailed documentation is provided for the location of
loss pockets, mechanisms responsible for losses, and
the relative magnitude of different loss sources. Large
scale, 3-D, viscous, turbulent flow simulations were
carried out for low, medium, and high valve lift cases
using up to 840,000 unstructured/adaptive tetrahedral
grid cells and the complete form of the time-averaged
Navier-Stokes equations. Good agreement was found
between predicted and measured results.
Introduction
Prompted by both federal emissions standards and
competition in an increasingly global marketplace,
diesel engine designers are turning more and more
towards computational modeling of internal
combustion engine flow physics to understand and
predict complex flow phenomena. Computational fluid
dynamics based design methodologies have the
potential to become truly predictive design tools
capable of assessing important parameters,
239
970639
Clemson Univ.
Ronald D. Shinogle and Sunil K. Jain
Caterpillar Inc.
such as total pressure losses in engine intake regions,
before a prototype is built. Such a predictive capability
would be a cost-effective step away from the current
"build and-bust" design approach. By significantly
lowering the need for costly and time-consuming
tests, reductions in the overall engine design cycle
time can be realized.
The ability to predict flow in the intake region is
important in engine design. A "clean" intake system
will reduce flow resistance and allow the engine to
"breathe" better. Consequently, more air can be
packed into the combustion chamber, resulting, in
increased power output and improved power-to
weight ratio. Additionally, key parameters controlling
emissions levels include turbulence intensity, swirl
and tumble in the combustion cylinder. These
parameters are influenced by events in the intake
region directly upstream of the combustion chamber.
Clearly, it is in the intake region that the flow
conditioning is accomplished. Therefore, it is of critical
importance for internal combustion engine designers
to have more advanced, validated methodologies to
predict complex flows in intake regions.
In order for a computational fluid dynamics (CFD)
simulation to provide consistently accurate results,
several tasks must be properly completed. Four
critical issues: computational modeling, geometry and
grid generation, discretization schemes, and
turbulence modeling, make up the computational
methodology used here. This carefully validated
methodology is a reliable tool for the proper
computational investigation of any flow. The details of
the methodology, as applied to the specific problem of
flow in the intake regions of diesel engines, are
presented here for the first time.
The current study examines steady-state intake
region flow for low, medium, and high valve lift cases,
with the intent of investigating total pressure losses.
The computational models used are exact replicas of
the configurations in steady-state pressure drop
experiments using prototype models of the engine
intake region. Computationally predicted loss pockets
are identified and
 Downloaded from SAE International by Columbia Univ, Monday, August 20, 2018
presented thoroughly for the high valve lift case,
Differences in flow physics between the three valve lift
cases are then presented, as are the variations in the
strength of loss pockets for the various valve lifts.
Mass-weighted total pressure loss is charted for various
sub-regions within the engine intake flow path for each
valve lift case.
Literature Review
Computational studies found in the open literature on
intake regions of diesel engines have focused on the
discharge coefficient of the inlet valve assembly and the
effects of inlet geometry on in-cylinder swirl and tumble.
Several early investigations (1,2) focus on the physical
basis for changes in discharge coefficients at various
valve lifts. The postulation of several flow regimes,
classified by the occurrence of flow separation at the
valve face and/or the valve seat has led to attempts to
verify these flow regimes experimentally and
computationally.
Bicen et al. (3) used laser-Doppler anemometry to
study the velocity at the valve seat of an axisymmetric
engine cylinder. On the correspondence between
steady flow tests and unsteady tests, the authors
concluded "the close correspondence between the
steady and three unsteady configurations examined
here indicated that the mean flow pattern at the valve
exit was insensitive to flow unsteadiness, piston
confinement, and valve operation, and thus could be
predicted with reasonable accuracy from steady flow
tests." The authors did note that in-cylinder flow patterns
were more severely affected by the unsteadiness of the
flow. Separation at the valve seat was identified as the
cause of large drop-offs in discharge coefficient at
higher valve lifts. This separation was a main focus of
Gosman and Ahmed (4), who investigated an
axisymmetric port-valve geometry experimentally and
computationally. The computations in this case were not
effective at reproducing the separation at the valve and
seat. Turbulence modeling limitations were blamed for
the inability to predict separation. Naser and Gosman
(5) used several variations of the standard k-ε model in
computations on a similar 2-D axisymmetric port valve
assembly with the aim of finding the best turbulence
model for valve clearance flow. Specifically, the limits of
the k-ε closure model in the cases of sharp streamline
curvature and adverse pressure gradients were
addressed.
As the price and availability of computing power has
decreased, three dimensional port-valve-cylinder
investigations have become more common. Several
authors have performed such simulations, often with the
purpose of determining discharge coefficients and in-
cylinder swirl characteristics (6-10). Three dimensional
models have the advantages of predicting variations in
valve clearance region velocity profiles at various
locations around the valve periphery. Still larger models
have been able to predict variations in mass flow rate
between two asymmetric ports in a two intake valves per
cylinder design (11). Still, little is available in the open
literature concerning the extension of the computational
models further upstream and in to the intake manifold/
plenum. Brandstatter (12) and others have
240
computationally investigated a much-simplified 2 D
intake manifold. The simplifications inherent in the 2-D
model are noted by the author, who states that "There
is no doubt that only a three-dimensional model would
give the desired information about pressure drop .... in
real geometries."
The limited availability of computing resources on
CFD researchers is apparent in the open literature.
With such limits, decisions concerning the overall
extent of the computation domain, grid density,
discretization scheme, etc. must be made with
computational scale in mind. For example, many
authors make use of computational domains which
include no plenum or intake manifold, so that the inlet
plane is defined at some arbitrary cross-sectional plane
inside the port(s). Coarse computational meshes are
also common, most likely also due to computer cpu
power limitations. Discrepancies between predicted
and measured results are often blamed on turbulence
modeling limitations when in fact some other aspect of
a given simulation may be deficient.
Present Contribution
Currently there is no complete computational
methodology in the open literature which is designed to
yield consistently accurate predictions of total pressure
losses in the entire intake region of an internal
combustion engine. A computational methodology
comprised of the proper practices in modeling of flow
physics, exact geometry and high quality grid
generation, higher order discretization schemes, and
turbulence modeling for predicting total pressure losses
in complete intake regions is presented here.
The application of this methodology to the problem
of intake region pressure losses includes:
• The use of complete computational domains,
including an inlet duct, manifold, plenum, ports,
partially included adjacent ports, valves, and
cylinder;
• exact intake region geometries obtained through
the use of industry CAD data;
• High density, high quality grids of up to 850,000
cells;
• Fully implicit, pressure-correction based solver
with multigrid accelerator for unstructured/
adaptive grid meshes;
• Second order discretization scheme to reduce
numerical viscosity;
This methodology is applied to the specific problem
of predicting total pressure losses in intake region of an
actual diesel engine. Loss mechanisms will be
identified throughout the intake system. The relative
magnitudes of loss sources for each sub-region are
quantified and compared for low, medium, and high
valve lift cases.
 Downloaded from SAE International by Columbia Univ, Monday, August 20, 2018

Computational Methodology
In CFD simulations, consistently accurate results
can be obtained only by applying a complete
computational methodology to the problem at hand.
The computational methodology applied here consists
of a four-step hierarchy, as shown in Figure 1. The four
tasks, involving 1) computational modeling, 2)
geometry and grid generation, 3) discretization of the
governing fluid flow equations, and 4) turbulence
modeling, are accomplished using the techniques
described below.

COMPUTATIONAL MODELING - The most

important task in any CFD simulation is computational
modeling of flow physics. Unfortunately, it is this tasks
that most often overlooked in the CFD literature. A
proper model will have a chance to capture the
essential physics in a given flow situation. Choices
concerning computational domain extents, boundary
conditions, dimensionality, and time dependence are
part of the modeling task.

Figure 2: Computational Domain

The computational domain of the current model

Figure 1: Four-step Computational Hierarchy
Computational Domain Extents - In order to
conserve Computational resources, the extent of the
computational domain in many CFD simulations is
limited. A proper balance between computational
resource limitations and the need to include a complete
domain must be found, especially in the case of 3-D
flows. Until now, intake region loss prediction models
were limited in their scope. Usually only the intake ports
valves, and a cylinder were used in the computational
domain, due to computing power limitations and the
fact that most of the flow losses occur in the valve
clearance region. Loss mechanisms upstream of the
intake valves could not be captured by such models.
shown in Figure 2 includes the inlet duct, plenum, ports,
partially included adjacent ports, valves. and cylinder.
This domain represents the intake regions of three
cylinders in a Caterpillar diesel engine. This model
replicates the situation in the actual engine where the
intake manifold is divided into two halves, each
supplying air to two banks of three cylinders. In typical
steady-state tests, the intake valves are closed to all
except one of the cylinders. Using this complete
domain, the loss mechanisms of the entire intake
region may be quantified. Further, the upstream effects
on the flow entering the ports are accurately captured
leading to realistic in-port flow structure prediction.
Steady-State Assumption - Several authors (3,8)
have commented on the validity of extending
steady-state testing and simulation results to the design
of an actual engine where the flow process is inherently
transient in nature. Although care must be taken to
properly interpret steady-state results, it has been
demonstrated that such results can accurately
characterize the loss mechanisms in the intake region
upstream of the combustion chambers. It is, however,
agreed that in-cylinder flow structures (especially
tumble) are predicted less accurately by steady-state
experiments and computations because the moving
piston head influences flow in this region.
The CFD simulations were performed under steady
state conditions for three different cases corresponding
to low, medium,

241
 Downloaded from SAE International by Columbia Univ, Monday, August 20, 2018
and high valve lifts. Companion steady-state
experiments were performed at Caterpillar Inc. for
comparison with the computational solutions. Boundary
conditions were obtained directly from these
experiments, so that the CFD results could be properly
compared to the measured data. Velocity inlet
boundary conditions for the three valve lift cases are
implemented to arrive at the mass flow rates shown in
Figure 3. No turbulence data at the inlet was available;
the CFD studies were carried out assuming 5% inlet
turbulence using a length scale of the inlet diameter
divided by 10.
BOUNDARY High Medium Low
CONDITIONS: Lift Lift Lift
Valve Lift (mm) 13.59 7.62 3.81
Mass Flow Rate (normalized
100% 77.9% 42.1%
by high lift mass flow rate)
Exit Pressure (absolute kPa) 98.61 98.61 98.61
Figure3:BoundaryConditionDatafromMeasurements
GEOMETRY AND GRID GENERATION - Once the
computational modeling task is complete, the geometry
and grid must be generated. Especially in an industrial
setting, CAD data are increasingly used for geometry
generation tasks. Once the geometry of the domain has
been constructed, a high quality and sufficiently dense
mesh must be generated in the domain. Since the
mesh quality and density directly effect numerical error,
convergence rate, and overall accuracy, mesh
generation cannot be overlooked as an integral and
important part of any CFD study.
Geometry Generation - The geometry used in this
study is the exact geometry of the intake regions in a
Caterpillar diesel engine. The CAD data was imported
from Uni-Graphics and Pro-Engineer software to I
DEAS through the International Graphics Exchange
Specification (IGES) format. The model consists of
around 700 surfaces. All of the geometric data
contained in the original model files were preserved in
the final I-DEAS model.
Mesh Generation - When dealing with a complex
three-dimensional domain, structured hexahedral grid
cells are often not fit to fill the domain without severe
distortion problems. In light of the geometric complexity
of engine intake regions, unstructured tetrahedral mesh
is a more suitable choice to reduce severe grid
stretching. Also, unstructured/adaptive grid CFD
solvers allow for solution-based dynamic grid
refinement in high gradient regions as the solution
progresses. Grid distortion (change in shape from a
perfect equilateral tetrahedron) and grid density are
both important to the quality of a CFD solution.
An unstructured tetrahedral finite-element type solid
mesh was generated using the I-DEAS system. This
mesh generation package, originally developed as a
solid mechanics mesh generation package, generates
a consistent high-quality grid. Grid density and quality
were tightly controlled through the use of
242
multipartitioned volumes, local element sizing, and
visual previewing of the surface mesh (on which the
solid mesh is based.) The original meshes contained
between 660,000 and 710,000 cells, varying slightly
between the low, medium, and high valve lift cases.
Approximately half of the cells were placed in areas
around the critical valve clearance region in anticipation
of the high velocity and pressure gradients there. Grid
quality of a typical case, as indicated by a cell
skewness histogram, is shown in Figure 4. Cell
skewness is a measure of the shape deviation of a an
actual cell from a perfect equilateral tetrahedron. A
perfect cell has a skewness of 0, while a zero-volume
(degenerate) cell has a skewness approaching 1.
Figure 4: Cell Skewness Histogram Showing Grid
Quality
Grid Sensitivity - In order to investigate grid
insensitivity, several progressively denser grids were
used. In addition to the primary ~670,000 cell grid level,
simulations were run using 350,000 cells and 850,000
cells on the same geometry. The change from the
primary (670k) grid to the refined (850k) grid produced
no significant difference in the total pressure loss
results. For example, total pressure loss for the highest
density grid was within 1.8% of the total pressure loss
for the original 650,000 cell grid. While the total
pressure loss results of primary interest are grid
insensitive at the 650,000 - 700,00 cell level, a truly grid
independent solution could not be obtained in this case
due to the large complex domain and the k-ε turbulence
model.
DISCRETIZATION SCHEMES - The choice of
discretization scheme will affect the convergence rate
and accuracy of the final computational solution. Lower
order schemes tend to be more stable but introduce
numerical viscosity into the solution, while higher order
schemes are more accurate but require more computer
time to solve and are less stable. The diffusive
tendencies of lower order schemes require a finer grid
to achieve grid independence, while a higher order
scheme may reach grid independence with less grid
refinement.
 Downloaded from SAE International by Columbia Univ, Monday, August 20, 2018

This study makes use of both first and second order

accurate discretization schemes. A first order scheme
is used for several hundred iterations, in order to
stabilize the flow field. A second order scheme is then
used to converge the solution. The particular second
order discretization scheme used here is an upwind
linear-reconstructive scheme.

TURBULENCE MODELING - The final step in the

computational methodology is turbulence modeling.
Currently there is no model of turbulence which can
perfectly capture all important aspects of a turbulent
flow in a complex geometry. Still, several turbulence
models are available, which provide excellent
engineering design solutions when used properly.
Direct numerical simulation, whereby the discretization
of the equations in both time and space is fine enough
to capture all turbulent eddies without the use of
turbulence models, is not appropriate for large scale
complex problems due to the intensive computer power
required. Reynolds stress models, which use additional
transport equations to solve for the Reynolds stresses,
are also computationally intensive for 3-D complex
flows. On the other hand, algebraic and one equation
models, although relatively simple and economical,
cannot account for some important features of the
types of flows presented here.
Currently the most advanced turbulence model
which can be used in a practical setting is the two
equation k-ε model. This model employes two
additional transport equations: one for turbulence
kinetic energy (tke or k) and another one for the
dissipation rate of tke (ε). Near wall treatment is
handled through generalized wall functions. Although it
is not perfect, the standard k-ε model is the most robust
and reliable model available for complex turbulent flows
and is used widely in industry CFD studies. It is used in
all the simulations presented in the present paper.
METHODOLOGY VALIDATION - The
computational methodology described above has been
used effectively and validated against high quality
experimental data for a wide variety of flows. The case
of flow over a cylinder is often used as a benchmark
test case because such flows exhibit complex
phenomena including separation and realignment, and
because of the availability of code validation quality
experimental data. Newman (14) performed a 2-D
validation simulation of flow over a cylinder using the
methodology described above and obtained excellent
agreement with well known experimental results. Some
of the computational results published in this study are
shown in Figure 5.
Figure 5: Computational Predictions for Flow over a
Cylinder Showing Excellent Agreement with
Experimental Data (From Newman (14))
This methodology has also been used by Waiters
and Leylek (15) and by Waiters et al. (16) in the study of
jet-crossflow interaction. Again in these studies,
excellent agreement with experimental results was
obtained. The work described here is the first
application of this methodology to the study of diesel
engine intake region flows. The effectiveness of the
methodology will be judged based on the agreement of
the computations with experimental total pressure drop
measurements, overall physical realism, and by the
ability of the computations to resolve expected and
previously verified flow phenomena such as separation
at the valve seat face.
CONVERGENCE- Fluent/UNS was used as the
CFD solver. Fluent/UNS incorporates both a parallel
architecture solver and multi-grid convergence
accelerators, both of which greatly reduce required run
time. The simulations were run on a Sun SparcServer
1000 with 4 central processing units and 1.024 GBytes
of RAM. Each case required approximately 100 hours
of run time to converge. Post-Processing was done on
an SGI Indigo 2 workstation with SOLID IMPACT 3-D
color graphics system, using the Fluent/UNS post
processor.
Each case required approximately 2,000 iterations
to converge. Several criteria were met before
convergence was declared. Convergence for each
case was met when:
• the continuity residual normalized by mass flow
rate was below 0.05%;
• momentum residuals normalized by inlet
momentum were below 0.1% for the x-, v-, and
z-direction momentum equations;

243
 Downloaded from SAE International by Columbia Univ, Monday, August 20, 2018

• turbulence kinetic energy and dissipation rate
residuals has dropped at least three orders of
magnitude from their starting values;
• total pressure loss and peak velocities did not
change upon further iteration.
Experimental Procedure
Experiments performed at Caterpillar will be used
for comparison with the computational solutions.
Whenever any such comparison is made, there must
be a close match between the computational model
and the experimental conditions. To this end, every
effort has been made to design the computations and
experiments to represent the exact same flow
conditions. Experimental results for mass flow rates at
a known pressure drop, temperature, and ambient
pressure, are used as boundary conditions in the
computational solution. A short explanation of the
testing facility is presented below.
EXPERIMENTAL CONFIGURATION - An inlet duct
runs from a pressurized line to the inlet of a flow box.
The flow box contains the exact flow path from the
actual engine cylinder head is used in the construction
of the computational domain. The walls are
hydrodynamically smooth. As in an actual engine,
valves control the air exit from the cylinder head into the
cylinders. In the tests of interest here, the intake valves
on the cylinders 1 and 3 are closed while the valves to
the target cylinder (cylinder 2) are opened to allow air to
enter. Cylinder 2 is open to ambient air at the bottom,
allowing the air to exit at steady state.
middle of the domain from the inlet through the plenum
and upper ports. The ports will be labeled "port 1" for
the straight port and "port 2’ for the curved port as
shown in Figure 6. In the lower part of the ports, the
valve clearance region, and in the cylinder, cutting
planes through the cylinder will be used. These planes
are also shown in Figure 6.
At the valve clearance region and in the cylinder, a
cutting plane through the centerline of both valves will
be used. This plane is shown in Figure 7. Also shown is
a plane cutting vertically through port 1, which will be
used for viewing in-port flow structures. Notice the
asymmetric layout of the ports with respect to the
cylinder centerline in Figure 7. Both valves are very
close to the cylinder wall.
Total pressure contours are presented on various
cross-sectional planes. The percentages given are total
gage pressure normalized by total gage pressure at the
inlet plane of the computation domain. Thus a value of
100% indicates total pressure equal to the inlet total
pressure (or no loss), a value of 0% indicates total
pressure equal to the exit (ambient) static pressure,
and a negative total pressure indicates total pressure
lower than the ambient static pressure.

EXPERIMENTAL TESTING - Constant pressure is

applied at the inlet to the experimental flowpath. Mass
flow rate is measured upstream of the experimental test
section using an orifice meter. Total pressure
measurements are made using Pitot tubes near the
entrance to the inlet duct. For various valve lifts, inlet
total pressure is kept constant. Mass flow rate, then, is
used as the performance parameter while pressure
drop is kept constant.

Results and Discussion

The three cases (low, medium, and high valve lift)
each contain many of the same flow physics. In order to
clarify the presentation of results, the high valve lift flow
field will be thoroughly presented first, followed by
explanations of the variations in the medium and low
valve lift flow fields. After the flow itself has been
investigated, total pressure loss in various regions of
the domain will be presented and compared for the
three cases.
Several reference cutting planes must be defined for Figure 6: Lateral Midplane and Other Post-
post-processing purposes. In the inlet duct, plenum,
and upper ports, the lateral midplane shown in Figure 6 processing Plane Locations
will be used. This plane cuts laterally through the

244
 Downloaded from SAE International by Columbia Univ, Monday, August 20, 2018

Figure 8: Velocity Vectors on Lateral Midplane at Dif-

fusing Section (top view)

Figure 7: Top View of Cylinder Showing Post-

processing Planes

FLOW FIELD DESCRIPTION

Flow in the Diffusing Section - Flow enters the inlet
duct at a relatively low velocity for all three cases. The
first significant loss-producing phenomenon is at the
diffusion section, where flow separates from the back
manifold wall and recirculates. This recirculation is
shown in Figure 8. Turbulence is produced by the free
shear layer which drives this recirculation as well as by
the velocity gradients at the reattachment point. The
losses in this recirculation region are shown in the total
pressure contours in Figure 9. The separation and
reattachment at the diffusing section exit increases the Figure 9: Total Pressure Contours on Lateral
average velocity of the mainstream flow into the
plenum. The direction of the flow is also altered by the Midplane at Diffusing Section (top view)
large recirculation region, which will lead to
misalignment at the port entrances (as will be
discussed later).

Flow in the Plenum - Path lines in the plenum are

shown in Figure 10. The separation bubble at the
diffusing section exit can be seen clearly at the upper
right. Other than this recirculation region, the flow
travels relatively cleanly into the port entrances, with
several smaller recirculation regions in dead areas of
the plenum. The major loss mechanism in the plenum is
skin friction. Thus the losses in this region should be
highest for the high valve lift case, which uses a higher
mass flow rate and thus incorporates higher velocities
in the plenum.

245
 Downloaded from SAE International by Columbia Univ, Monday, August 20, 2018

Flow at Port Entrances - Velocity vectors showing

Figure 10: Path Lines in the Plenum
flow in the plenum and ports are displayed in Figure
11a. A close-up view of these velocity vectors on the
lateral midplane at the entrance to port 1 is shown in
Figure 11b. Note the alignment of the flow at this
location: the velocity vectors are not aligned with the
port entrance but instead are aligned left-to-right. This
is due to the location of the inlet duct (to the left of the
active ports) and to the recirculation of the diffusing
section which deflects the mainstream flow away from
the port entrances due to the blockage at the inlet of the
plenum.
Flow impinges not at the deepest point in the
division between the ports but slightly downstream in
the closed port. A recirculation region is formed in the
partially included closed port. In the active port, a jetting
region is formed as flow navigates around the small
radius separating port 1 from the adjacent partially
included port. This jetting region carries into the port,
resulting in an uneven velocity profile at the port
entrance as can be seen in Figure 11b. The boundary
layer at the left side port wall in Figure 11b is much
thicker than the corresponding boundary layer at the
right side port wall. As can be seen in the total pressure
contour plot in Figure 11c, the total pressure loss in the
port 1 entrance region is significant.

Figure 11a: Velocity Vectors in the Plenum (top view)

246
 Downloaded from SAE International by Columbia Univ, Monday, August 20, 2018

Figure 11c: Total Pressure Contours at Port 1

entrance Showing Loss Region along Left Side Port
Wall (top view)
Figure 11b: Velocity Contours (m/s) at Port 1
Entrance Showing Jetting Region and Uneven
Velocity Profile at Entrance to Port 1 (top view)

Velocity vectors shown in Figure 11a are aligned

with the port entrance at port 2. Flow accelerates
around the large radius wall causing a non-uniform
velocity profile at the entrance to the port. This velocity
profile, however, is far more uniform than flow entering
port 1. Total pressure loss at the second port entrance
is significantly less than at the first port entrance.
Flow in the Ports- In-port flow is characterized by
higher velocities than were seen in the plenum, higher
turbulence levels, and thinner boundary layers.
Turbulent skin friction is a major loss mechanism here.
Secondary flow is also present, especially in port 2
where the flow enters the port after navigating the Figure 12: Static pressure Contours Normalized by
large-radius curve between the two active ports. Inlet Static Pressure on a Vertical Cross Plane
Another important aspect of the flow in the ports is Through Port 1 (side view)
the down-ward turn at the end of the ports near the
valve. The static pressure gradient at the lower port wall
shown in Figure 12 has a tendency to force separation
at the lower edge of the port at the rum towards the
cylinder. The radius in this case is sufficiently large to
keep the flow separation from occurring at high valve
lift. The downturn towards the cylinder will be an
important factor in determining the velocity profile
around the valve clearance region, as will be discussed
later.

Finally, there is a loss producing mechanism around

the valve stem, as flow separates and recirculates
behind the valve stem. Normalized total pressure
contours on the lateral midplane at the end of port 1
(around the valve stem) are shown in Figure 13.
Figure 13: Total Pressure Contours on the Lateral
Midplane at Port 1 Valve Stem (top view)

247
 Downloaded from SAE International by Columbia Univ, Monday, August 20, 2018

Valve Clearance Region Flow - As experience and

many previous studies have indicated, the highest
losses in intake region flow occur in the valve clearance
region. Velocity vectors on a plane through both valve
centerlines are shown in Figure 14a. As has been
predicted by earlier 2-D studies, the flow at the valve
seat is separated, while it remains attached at the valve
face. This is true at all locations around the valve and
seat faces in he high valve lift case. The small vortices
created by this separation region are also present at all
locations around the valves for the high lift case. These
vortices, as shown in the closeup in Figure 14b, serve
to dissipate kinetic energy in a high velocity region and
to reduce the effective flow area. The large total
pressure losses at the valve clearance region can be
seen in Figure 15.

Figure 14a: Velocity Vectors on a Plane Through

Velocity contours on a plane cutting 15mm above Both Valve Centerlines
the top of the cylinder in Figure 16a show local velocity
maximums at locations nearest the back of the port (i.e.
nearest the plenum). This is due to the acceleration of
the flow at the sharpest radius of curvature as the port
turns downward into the cylinder. Sightly further
downstream, at a cutting plane 5mm above the top of
the cylinder shown in Figure 16b, the velocity maximum
has shifted away from the plenum and toward the front
of the ports. The momentum of the high speed flow in
figure 16a is aligned in the positive z direction (toward
the front of the ports). The z-component of this
momentum carries the flow across the valve producing
the local maximums at the front of the ports at the port
exits as shown in figure 16b. These local velocity
maximums increase the loss in the ports by increasing
local shear stress at the areas of highest velocity. Also
contributing to the uneven velocity distribution at the
valve periphery is the close proximity of the cylinder
wall to the port exits, causing the low velocity regions
Figure 14b: Closeup View of Recirculation Under the
shown in figure 16c. Valve Seats on a Plane Through Both Valve
Centerlines

Figure 15: Total Pressure contours on a Plane

Through Both Valve Centerlines

248
 Downloaded from SAE International by Columbia Univ, Monday, August 20, 2018

Figure 16a: Velocity Contours (m/s) in Port

Cross-Sections 20mm Above the Top of the
Cylinder

Figure 16b: Velocity Contours (m/s) in Port Cross

sections 5mm above the top of the Cylinder

Figure 17: Swirl Profiles at 20mm, 40mm, and 60mm

Figure 16c: Velocity Contours on a Cylinder Cross Below the Top of the Cylinder
Section 10mm Below the Top of the Cylinder

249
 Downloaded from SAE International by Columbia Univ, Monday, August 20, 2018
In-Cylinder Flow - As was mentioned earlier, the
application of steady-state methods to a transient flow
situation is less valid for in-cylinder flows than for flow in
the intake regions. Tumbling flows especially are
difficult to predict using steady state models with no
piston head. Therefore swirl results will be focused
upon, and in-cylinder tumble will not be presented here.
Swirl profiles for the high valve lift case at various
cylinder cross-section locations are shown in figures
17a-c. Obviously the swirl patterns are complex and
would not be well characterized by a single swirl meter
measurement. As expected, the vortices shown in
figure 17a-c weaken as the flow settles downstream of
the valve heads. The two impinging jets coming off the
intake valves are not of equal strength. Consequently,
the flow from port 2 pushes the flow from port 1, and the
strongest axial and radial velocities move towards the
lower left quadrant of the cylinder cross-section.
Generally speaking, the vortices at the bottom of figure
18a are pushed and fueled by the jet from port 2,
moving the high-swirl area downstream to the lower left
as shown in figure 17c.
In-cylinder turbulence levels are also of interest due
to their effect on combustion and in-cylinder fuel mixing.
The highest levels of turbulence are at the high-velocity
jetting regions coming off the valve heads (refer to
figures 16b and 16c). There is also a high turbulence
region at the line of jet impingement between the two
valves. In-cylinder turbulence predictions are especially
limited in their usefulness by the lack of a transient
piston head, and by the limits of the k-ε model in cases
of sharp streamline curvature and pressure gradients.
VARIATIONS AT LOWER VALVE LIFTS - As
mentioned earlier, many of the same loss pockets
which are present in the high lift results also are evident
in the medium and low lift results. Significant
differences between the loss mechanisms of the three
valve lifts are presented below.
Figure 18: Single Velocity Contour (v=45m/s) on a Cutting Plane Through the Valve Heads Showing
Uniform Velocity Profile for Low Valve Lift Case and Non-Uniform Profile for High Valve Lift Case (top view)
250
Lower Velocities Upstream of the Valves - Recall
from figure 3 that mass flow rates between cases are
not constant. Therefore the velocity fields away from
the valve clearance region are expected to be slower
for the medium and low lift cases than for the high lift
case. Table 1 shows the variations in velocities at
certain points in the plenum and ports. The lower
velocities decrease turbulence production and skin
friction in the regions upstream of the valve clearance
region. Although these lower velocities serve to
diminish the prominence of the upstream loss regions,
essentially the same flow structures presented above
are retained for all lifts, including:
• separation at the diffusing section exit
• misalignment at the port entrances
• total pressure loss at the valve stem impingement
• flow acceleration at the port downturn toward the
cylinder
In regions closer to the valve clearance region there are
more fundamental differences between the low and
high lift cases.
Table 1: Maximum Velocities in Various Locations
at Various Valve Lifts
Velocity Plenum Port 1 Port 2 Valve
maximum (m/s) Clearance
High Lift 34.0 64.5 52.5 91.7
Medium Lift 24.6 50.6 40.2 88.8
LOW Lift 13.4 27.5 21.5 79.1
Uniform Velocity at Valve Clearance Region - Recall
the velocity profile in the high lift case was non uniform
around the valve circumference. In the low valve lift
case, the smaller exit area leads to a more pressurized
port, which in turn pushes a more even velocity profile
out of the valve clearance. Figure 18 shows a single
level velocity contour at a plane through the bottom of
 Downloaded from SAE International by Columbia Univ, Monday, August 20, 2018
the valve head. The high valve lift case (Figure 18a)
has an uneven velocity distribution, whereas the
velocity of the low lift case (Figure 18b) is distributed
more evenly around the valve periphery.
Separation at Valve Seat - Flow in the valve
clearance region in high valve lift case was shown, in
Figure 14b, to separate from the valve seat face. Figure
19a shows that the flow is attached to the valve seat for
the low valve lift case. Another interesting results is that
for the medium valve lift case flow is not separated from
the valve scat around the entire radius of each valve,
but is instead attached to the seat face only at certain
regions, including near the cylinder wall. This "partial
separation" would not be captured in a 2-D
axisymmetric model.
Loss Concentration at Valve Clearance Region - In
general, the strength of loss regions upstream of the
valve clearance region are greatly decreased in the low
valve lift case as compared to the medium and high
valve lifts. The reason for this concentration of loss at
the valve clearance for the low lift case comes from the
selection of boundary conditions. Recall that the
boundary conditions (summarized in figure 3) make use
of experimental mass flow rates, which are in turn
reliant upon experimental pressure drops. The pressure
drop across the experimental apparatus was constant,
however, mass flow rate does not increase linearly with
increases in valve lift. Instead, the mass flow rate
increases faster at low mass flow rates, then levels off
for higher flow rates. In general then, the flow rate
normalized by valve lift is highest for the low lift case.
Thus the velocities at the valve clearance region are
highest on average for the low lift case. These higher
velocities at the valve clearance are responsible for the
loss increases there in the low lift case.
Figure 19: Velocity Vectors at the Valve Clearance
for Low and High Valve Lifts
251
TOTAL PRESSURE LOSS RESULTS
For loss analysis purposes, the domain is divided as
shown in Figure 20. Using mass-averaged total
pressure values at the cross sectional planes shown,
the loss in each region may be quantified. The regions
are created based on the physics of the flow at the
various locations. The regions and their important flow
characteristics are listed below:
• inlet duct - boundary layer formation at the walls,
flow acceleration at converging throat
• diffusing section - separation at right-side wall
• plenum - skin friction, recirculation in dead regions
• port entrances - flow impingement in inactive port
at port 1, turbulence generation
• ports - skin friction, secondary flow, increased
velocities
• valve clearance region - separation at seat face,
highest velocities, turbulence generation
• cylinder - mixing, turbulence generated at valve
clearance region
The location of the cutting planes which divide these
regions remain the same in all valve lift cases except in
the case of the plane dividing the valve clearance
region from the cylinder. This plane is located at 5mm
below the bottom of the valve head. Recall that the
experimental total pressure is measured at the
beginning of the diffusing section, after the inlet duct, so
the inlet duct pressure loss is not included in the
comparison to the experimental results.
 Downloaded from SAE International by Columbia Univ, Monday, August 20, 2018

Figure 20: Defining Planes for Regional Tracking of Total Pressure Loss

Figure 21: Region-by-Region Computed Loss Normalized by Experimental Total Loss

Using these regions to divide the total pressure
losses, the breakdown of the total loss is as shown in
Figures 21 and 22. Note that in the low and medium lift
cases, the losses shift from upstream locations to the
valve clearance regions. Lower velocities
upstream reduce the losses from recirculation and skin
friction in the lower valve lift cases. Conversely, the
higher velocities in the ports and plenum in the high
valve lift case increases

252
 Downloaded from SAE International by Columbia Univ, Monday, August 20, 2018
Figure 22: Region-by-Region Predicted Loss Normalized
by Computed Total Loss
the importance of the losses upstream of the valve
clearance region.
The differences between the computed and
experimental total pressure loss is as shown in table 2.
The percent difference between the computed total loss
and the experimental total loss is 12.4% for the low lift
case, 13.8% for the medium lift case, and 17.5% for the
high valve lift case.
Table 2: Comparison of computational loss
predictions to experimental measurements
High Medium
Low Lift
Lift Lift
Total computed loss
normalized by .824 .862 .876
experimental loss
Difference between
predictions and 17.5% 13.8% 12.4%
measurements
Several factors may limit the accuracy of the
computations and experiments. The underprediction of
shear stress in the standard k-ε equation for flows with
sharp streamline curvature and adverse pressure
gradients has been documented and must be a factor in
the current underprediction of loss. Although several
remedies were proposed by Naser and Gosman to
reduce known inaccuracies in the standard k-ε model at
the valve clearance, these changes become difficult to
apply in such a complex flow-field. A two layer model,
for instance, would help resolve the important near-wall
characteristics in the valve clearance region as well as
at the small forward facing step just above the valve
seat. Considering the additional computational
requirements of a two-layer model, such a study would
be rigorous at best for a simulation at this grid level.
253
The wall functions incorporated in the standard k-ε
model also limit computational accuracy since the y+
limitations cannot be met for every cell without knowing
the entire velocity field before gridding. Experimental
errors such as probe misalignment or transient effects
may also be present.
Conclusions
An effective computational methodology has been
developed and validated for large scale simulation of
flow in the entire intake system of internal combustion
engines. Several loss-producing flow phenomena in
diesel engine intake regions have been identified and
quantified. Some of the important conclusions
regarding the computational modeling and specific flow
characteristics of the engine intake regions are as
follows:
• Multi-region modeling of the entire air intake
system, including the inlet duct, manifold, plenum,
ports, valves, and cylinder, is the key for the
successful simulation of the physical mechanisms
influencing total pressure loss;
• Flow in regions upstream of the valve clearance
region is extremely complex. Significant losses,
accounting for up to 30% of total loss, may occur
in these upstream regions.
• Several new loss-producing flow phenomena have
been predicted, including adverse flow alignment
effects at the port entrances and separation at the
plenum entrance. These flow features in turn
influence downstream loss mechanisms;
• The highest losses are in the valve clearance
region. Flow separation at the seat face at high
lifts is critical,
 Downloaded from SAE International by Columbia Univ, Monday, August 20, 2018
and further, the occurrence of separation only at
certain radial locations around the valve seat for
medium lifts is important in loss assessment;
• Flow in the various components of the intake
region are fully coupled. Isolated port or valve
clearance region flow simulations would have
incomplete inlet boundary conditions.
• Qualitative trends and quantitative loss prediction
matched corresponding experimental data well,
and displayed excellent internal consistency
within computational results. Attention to detail in
every major computational task, including
modeling, geometry, grid, discretization, and
turbulence, has been shown to make a difference
in the generation of reliable design data;
• A thoroughly validated computational methodology
of the type described here when used in
conjunction with selective measurements
provides a powerful design tool for loss
prediction.
The results presented above make a strong case for
the use of the four-step computational hierarchy used in
this study. The use of 1) proper computational models,
2) high quality geometry and grid generation
techniques, 3) higher order discretization schemes, and
4) the best available turbulence models, is necessary
for the consistently accurate prediction of loss in diesel
engine intake regions.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank Caterpillar’s
Mossville Engine Center for funding this research study.
The genuine interest in and enthusiastic support of this
project by Jack Wellauer, 3100 Technical Manager, is
deeply appreciated. We also would like to acknowledge
the constant support received from Mr. Paul W.
Reisdorf and technical assistance of Mr. Michael P.
Harmon of Caterpillar Inc. Special thanks are due to Dr.
Christian E.G. Przirembel, Associate Dean for
Research and Graduate Studies at Clemson University,
who alone, with Mr. Wellauer and Mr. Reisdorf played a
key role in starting collaborative research between
Caterpillar and Clemson. This computationally intensive
effort could not have been completed without the
superb support from Mr. Richard Baldwin and Mr. Gary
Berger of Computer and Network Systems at Clemson
University. The authors thank the Caterpillar Inc. for
permission to publish this paper.
254
References
1. Tanaka, K., 1929 "Air Flow Through a Suction
Valve of Conical Seat," Aeronautical Research institute
Report, Tokyo Imperial University, Part 1, page 260,
1929.
2. Kastner, L.J., William, T.J., and White "Poppet
Inlet Valve Characteristics and Their Influence on the
Induction Process" Proceedings of the Institute of
Mechanical Engineers, Volume 178 page 968, 1964.
3. Bicen, A.F., Vafidis C., Whitelaw, J.H., "Steady
and Unsteady Airflow through the Intake Valve of a
Reciprocating Engine", ASME Journal of Fluids
Engineering, Volume 107, page 413, 1981.
4. Gosman, A.D., and Ahmed, A.M.Y.,
"Measurement and Multidimensional Prediction of Flow
in an Axisymmetric Port/Valve Assembly", SAE Paper
870592, 1987.
5. Naser, J.A. and Gosman, A.D. "Flow prediction in
an Axisymmetric Inlet Valve/Port Assembly Using
Variants of k-ε", Proceedings of the Institute of
Mechanical Engineers, Volume 209, page 57, 1994.
6. Aita, Tabbal, A., Munck, G, Fujiwara, K., Hongoh,
H., Tamura, E, and Obana, S., "Numerical Simulation of
Port-Valve-Cylinder Flow in Reciprocating Engines",
SAE paper 900820, 1990.
7. Dent, J.C. and Chen, A., "Investigation of Steady
Flow through a Curved Inlet Port." SAE Paper 940522,
1994.
8. Chen, A.C., Lee, K., Yianeskis, M., Ganti, G.,
"Velocity Characteristics of Steady Flow Through a
Straight Generic Inlet Port", International Journal for
Numerical Methods in Fluids, Volume 21, page 571,
1995.
9. Godrie, P. and Zellat, M., "Simulation of Flow
Field Generated by Intake Port-Valve-Cylinder
Configurations - Comparisons with Measurements and
Applications", SAE Paper 940521, 1994.
10. Khalighi, B., "Multidimensional In-Cylinder Flow
Visualization in a Motored Engine", ASME Journal of
Fluids Engineering, Volume 117, page 282, 1995.
11. Rutland, C.J., Eckhuase, J., Hampson, G.,
Hessel, R., Kong, S., Patterson, M., Pierpont, D.,
Sweetland, P., Tow, T., and Reitz, R.D., "Toward
Predictive Modeling of Diesel Engine Intake Flow,
Combustion, and Emissions", SAE Paper 941897,
1994.
12. Brandstatter, W., "The Increasing Impact of
Multidimensional Modelling on the Design and
Development of High speed DI Diesel Engines", SAE
Paper 881207, 1988.
 Downloaded from SAE International by Columbia Univ, Monday, August 20, 2018

13. Fluent/UNS Release 4.0 User’s Manual, 1996

14. Newman, O., "The Development of an Effective

Computational Methodology for Complex Flows,"
Clemson University Undergraduate Honors Thesis,
1995.

15. Walters, D. K., and Leylek, J.H., "A Systematic

Computational Methodology Applied to A Three
Dimensional Film-Cooling Flowfield", ASME Paper 96
GT-351, presented at the International Gas Turbine
Congress and Exposition, Birmingham, UK, 1996.

16. Walters, D.K., McGovern, K.T., Butkewicz, J.J.,

and Leylek, J.H., "A Systematic Computational
Methodology Applied to a Jet-in-Crossflow; Part 2:
Unstructured/Adaptive Grid Approach", Presented at
the ASME Winter Annual Meeting, San Francisco,
1995.

255