Swirl Ratio

In this work computational and experimental approaches are
combined to characterize in-cylinder flow structures and local flow field properties during operation of the Sandia 1.9L light-duty optical Diesel engine. A full computational model of the single-cylinder research engine was used that considers the complete intake and exhaust runners and plenums, as well as the adjustable throttling devices used in the experiments to obtain different swirl ratios. The in-cylinder flow predictions were validated against an extensive set of planar PIV measurements at different vertical locations in the combustion chamber for different swirl ratio configurations.
Principal Component Analysis was used to characterize  recession, tilting and eccentricity, and regional averages of the in-cylinder turbulence properties in the squish region and the piston bowl. Complete sweeps of the port throttle configurations were run to study their effects on the flow structure, together with their correlation with the swirl ratio. Significant deviations between the flows in the piston bowl and squish regions were observed. Piston bowl design, more
than the swirl ratio, was identified to foster flow homogeneity
between these two regions. Also, analysis of the port-induced flow showed that port geometry, more than different intake port mass flow ratios, can improve turbulence levels in-cylinder.

This paper describes an experimental investigation aimed at comparing the swirl effect induced by unbalancing the mass flow through the two intake ports of a multivalve engine head using two different methods: the first one reduced the curtain area of one of the intake valves [different lifts (DL) method]; the second one adopted a sluice-gate-shaped valve, installed upstream of the intake valves [swirl control valve (SCV) method] in order to cause a pressure drop. A steady-flow test rig (equipped with instrumentation for the discharge coefficient and swirl intensity measurement) was realized in order to compare and evaluate the results of both methods and determine their respective
validity and limitations; the procedures used for both experimental methods are duscussed in detail. The flow characteristics were analysed through changes of lift difference or SCV position; it was found that both DL and SCV methods are effective in swirl induction but the DL mechanism, acting on the valve curtain area, is more effective in flow unbalancing between intake ports, since the flowrate depends linearly on the curtain area. The SCV method, instead, controls the port flowrate, inducing a localized pressure drop, whose intensity depends on the flow velocity in a non-linear manner. For this reason the SCV method can achieve strong swirl intensity only with high obstruction levels, in a
narrow regulation window close to full-obstruction conditions.