Validation and Assessment of a Hybrid VOF-Lagrangian Numerical Methodology for Turbulent Liquid Fuel Jets in High-Speed Crossflow
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract For gas turbine combustors using liquid fuel injectors, introducing the spray into crossflowing air to achieve superior fuel-air mixing characteristics can improve performance and reduce emissions. Robust numerical design tools are needed to accelerate the development of low-emissions technologies. CFD models are used to assess the design, performance, and emissions of novel combustion systems. Atomization modelling is often facilitated by using the Lagrangian approach with breakup models rather than the more complex and computationally expensive higher-fidelity Volume-of-Fluid (VOF) approach. However, breakup models used in state-of-the-art CFD rely on empirical constants that have not yet been fully calibrated for jets in crossflow or for representative gas turbine conditions. Coupling the Lagrangian and VOF approaches could deliver a better compromise between accuracy and computational cost. Among the few studies conducted on the VOF-Lagrangian approach for jets in crossflow, validation was often limited to the near-field spray trajectory under low Weber numbers using either non-turbulent jets or water at ambient pressure. The predictive capabilities in the far-field region were only validated using deterministic breakup models and for non-turbulent jets under low pressure conditions. This study proposes and validates a novel numerical methodology for coupling the Lagrangian and VOF approaches using a Stochastic Secondary Droplet (SSD) breakup model with Adaptive Mesh Refinements (AMR) for turbulent liquid fuel jets in high-speed crossflow at more representative conditions. The predictions within both near and far-field breakup regions were validated using experimental datasets at high pressures (1–8 bar), Weber numbers (720–1172) and momentum flux ratios (6–33). The predictive capabilities and computational cost were also compared to the Lagrangian approach used with LES and used with an unsteady RANS numerical methodology previously developed and validated by the authors. The effects of different VOF-Lagrangian transition criteria on the computational cost were also assessed and recommendations have been provided for further improvements. The overall predictive capabilities of LES were significantly improved by the novel hybrid methodology proposed by the authors. Although it tends to underpredict the spray trajectory and Sauter Mean Diameter (SMD), it better captures the SMD in the wake region of the jet and the overall droplet velocities compared to the URANS methodology.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".