Article citation info:

SOCHACZEWSKI, R., CZYŻ, Z., SIADKOWSKA, K. Modeling fuel injector two-stroke diesel engine. Combustion Engines. 2017,
170(3), 147-153. DOI: 10.19206/CE-2017-325

Rafał SOCHACZEWSKI CE-2017-325

Zbigniew CZYŻ
Ksenia SIADKOWSKA

Modeling a fuel injector for a two-stroke diesel engine

This paper discusses the modeling of a fuel injector to be applied in a two-stroke diesel engine. A one-dimensional model of a diesel
injector was modeled in the AVL Hydsim. The research assumption is that the combustion chamber will be supplied with one or two
spray injectors with a defined number of nozzle holes. The diameter of the nozzle holes was calculated for the defined options to provide
a correct fuel amount for idling and the maximum load. There was examined the fuel mass per injection and efficient flow area. The
studies enabled us to optimize the injector nozzle, given the option of fuel injection into the combustion chamber to be followed.
Key words: diesel engine, two-stroke, fuel injector, modeling

1. Introduction mathematically from the correlation of mass flow rate.

The targeted measures to decrease fuel efficiency, Another method is the simulation to specify more
emissions and improve power-to-density ratio are important parameters that have an impact on injector mass flow rate.
not only in internal combustion engines in automotive The so obtained research results, e.g. mass flow rate of fuel
applications but also engines in aviation applications. So, injected can be used as an input for the next stage of
research is continued to introduce innovative technologies combustion research.
or upgrade the so far known ones that due to their materials One of the tools to model injection systems is AVL
or unconventional solutions could not be applied before. software of BOOST-HYDSIM. This is a program dedicated
One of them is the opposed-piston two-stroke diesel engine to the dynamic analysis of hydraulic and hydro-mechanical
[10, 13, 18]. When compared with standard engines, it and control systems [3, 4, 6, 19]. It is based on the theory of
shows many advantages, including: fluid dynamics and vibration of multi-body systems. The
– its combustion chamber is the space limited by two main application area of BOOST Hydsim is the simulation
pistons reciprocating in a single cylinder line, which of fuel injection.
means no need to use heads and reduces heat loss, This research combines a mathematical analysis and
– no valve mechanism and no loss due to its driving, modeling to correctly select an injector nozzle for an
– reciprocating cylinders favor engine balance. opposed-piston two-stroke diesel engine. The research
Its disadvantages are: enables us to specify a diameter and number of nozzle holes
– a gearbox connecting two crankshafts or a complex to inject enough fuel at idling and the maximum load.
crank system with a single shaft,
– a fuel injector inside a liner is perpendicular to the axis
2. Principles of the model
The minimum and maximum amounts of fuel were de-
of the cylinder – a nozzle is selected for a given
termined from the AVL Boost calculations for an engine
combustion chamber.
cooperating with a given propeller (third-degree curve) that
A special combustion chamber requires a new design of
can load of 100 kW at 4000 rpm. As a result, there was
a fuel nozzle. Defining an injector nozzle is expensive and
created fuel vs. power characteristics (Fig. 1) and the char-
long-term. To speed up optimization and reduce the number
acteristics of compression pressure, maximum pressure and
of experiments, a technique of numerical modeling is
mean cylinder pressure (Fig. 2) vs. crankshaft speed. The
applied. The literature describes many models of operation
research results are given in Table 1.
of injectors in a commona rail system: identifying
capabilities of multiple injection to reduce the emissions of
particulates and nitrogen oxides [1], macro- and
microscopic behavior of the dynamics of multiple injection
[5, 7], modeling a control valve to describe the impact of
cavitation on losses in flow [2, 9, 17]. There are also
strength tests of injector’s elements to specify stresses and
deformations in the injector due to injection-generated
external loads [11], [15]. Both individual elements [1, 5, 7,
9] and the entire fuel injection systems [12, 17, 20, 21] are
modeled.
When a fuel injector for a given combustion chamber is
designed, previously specified nozzle parameters should be
optimized by simulation. For given operating conditions
(fuel pressure, amount of fuel injected, injection time, etc.), Fig. 1. Fuel amount and engine power vs. crankshaft speed
the number and diameter of nozzle holes should be
determined first. These parametrs can be determined

COMBUSTION ENGINES, 2017, 170(3) 147

Modeling fuel injector two-stroke diesel engine

Fig. 2. Maximum motored pressure, maximum combustion pressure and

average maximum pressure vs. crankshaft speed

Table 1. Research results of the propeller-loaded engine

Fuel
Max. Max. Average
Rotational mass
Power motored combustion max.
speed per
pressure pressure pressure
cylinder
[rpm] [kW] [mg] [MPa] [MPa] [MPa]
500 0.2 2.8 4.9 4.9 4.90
1000 1.6 3.2 5.2 5.4 5.30
1500 5.3 5.2 5.6 6.1 5.85
2000 12.5 8.0 6.1 7.0 6.55
2500 24.4 11.7 6.6 8.2 7.40
3000 42.2 16.6 7.3 10.0 8.65
3600 72.9 23.4 8.6 12.4 10.50
3800 85.7 26.0 9.1 13.3 11.20
4000 100.0 29.0 9.3 14.0 11.65

The results enable us to specify the boundary amounts

of fuel to be injected: at idling at a crankshaft speed of
1000 rpm and for a maximum power at a crankshaft speed
of 4000 rpm. Also, the boundary conditions for a cylinder,
i.e. air pressure in the cylinder, into which fuel is injected
were specified as mean compression pressure and the max-
Fig. 3. Model of the injector in the Boost Hidsim
imum pressure. The research data are given in Table 2.

Table 2. Simulation parameters We modeled a valve closes orifice nozzle of a real ge-
Rotational Mean cylin-
ometry in which its efficient flow field is calculated from
Type of Power Fuel mass the height of the nozzle needle. The coefficient of through-
speed der pressure
operation
[rpm] [kW] [mg/cylinder] [MPa] the-injector-hole-flow loss is as 0.83, given that a correla-
idle 1000 1.6 3.2 5.30 tion of an edge rounding and a hole diameter as r/d = 0.2
max. load 4000 100 29 11.65 [8]. A control valve was modelled as a throttle in which the
flow field is a function of time. In cooperating elements like
To achieve a favorable air-fuel mixture, i.e. the largest a needle with a nozzle body and a control piston with a
possible contact surface of fuel injected with air, the fuel is cylinder, there is assumed a loss due to fuel leaks. The
assumed to be injected with one or two injectors of the model of fuel leaks is based on the Hagen-Poiseuille law,
number of nozzle holes as in Table 3. given a laminar flow through Annular Gap which changes
according to fuel pressure [3].
Table 3. Options of the number of nozzle holes
A given amount of fuel is injected by estimating the
Number of injectors per Number of nozzle holes minimum flow field for assumed parameters of injection
combustion chamber 2 3 4 6 and properties of the fuel. This is possible using sophisti-
1 ● ● cated hydraulic models [14]. Approximate dependence was
2 ● ● ●
used in the studies [13]:
m c ⋅ A ⋅ 2 ⋅ ρ ⋅ Δp (1)
3. Model of an injector
Our research uses a Common Rail system injector de- where m fuel mass flow rate [mg/cycle], cd – outflow
sign controlled with a solenoid valve because of the overall coefficient, An – minimal flow field [mm2], ρf – fuel density
dimensions of the injector that define its weight and the [kg/m3], Δp = (p2 – p1) – pressure difference [MPa], p1 –
ease of installation and arrangement of injectors on the combustion chamber air pressure, p2 – injected fuel pressure.
engine. Fig. 3 depicts a model of the injector created in the The relationship was transformed to the following formula
Boost Hidsim. for the minimum injection field of a single nozzle hole:

148 COMBUSTION ENGINES, 2017, 170(3)

 Modeling fuel injector two-stroke diesel engine
⋅ ⋅
A (2)
!"⋅#$ ⋅ ⋅ % ⋅ &⋅'( ⋅!)

where m – fuel mass [mg/cylinder], n – rotational speed

[r/s], Ani – minimum flow field of a single nozzle hole
[mm2]; A A ∙ i ∙ i ; i – number of injectors per cylin-
der, ii – number of nozzle holes, ΔΘ – injection time [°CA].
The diameters were determined, given that the flow
through each of the injection nozzles is quasi static, incom-
pressible and one-dimensional. The reduced diameter range
was used to perform Boost Hydsim calculations. So, these Fig. 5. Flow area (4-hole nozzle, t1 = 0.4 ms; d4 = 0.14 mm) at injection
were the conditions (Table 4) to investigate the injector’s times of a main fuel dose t2 = 0.5; 0.6; 0.7 ms
mass flow rate. It was assumed that there are two doses of
fuel (t1 – pilot and t2 – main) to be injected at idling and
injection pressure to be as 30 MPa. If the maximum load,
there is one dose of the fuel injected at a pressure range of
100–180 MPa.

Table 4. Injection times and pressures

Number Nozzle hole Injection
Injection time
of nozzle diameter pressure
[ms]
holes [mm] [MPa]
One injector
Fig. 6. Fuel mass (4-hole nozzle, t1 = 0.4 ms; d4 = 0.16 mm) at injection
0.14 b.j times of a main fuel dose t2 = 0.5; 0.6; 0.7 ms
4 d4 =,
0.16 t3 0.30 0.40
2
30 – idle;
t& 0.40 0.70
0.12
100 – 180 –
6 d6 =,
0.14
max. load
max. load t2 = 1.00
Two injectors
2 like for d4 b.j
t3 0.30 0.40 30 – idle;
3 like for d6 2
t& 0.40 0.70 100 – 180 –
4 d42 = 0.10 max. load
max. load t2 = 1.00

4. Research results
Fig. 7. Flow area (4-hole nozzle, t1 = 0.4 ms; d4 = 0.16 mm) at injection
4.1. Idle times of a main fuel dose t2 = 0.5; 0.6; 0.7 ms
One injector
Given the values of the parameters and the calculated Table 5. Simulation for a 4-hole nozzle
hole diameters, the minimal injection time when the injec- Injection
Hole Required
tor completely opens was calculated. An outflow is limited diameter
times of Minimum Calculated
fuel
Calculated
main fuel flow area flow area fuel mass
by a field of injector hole but not the gap between the nee- d4
dose t2
mass
dle and the seat in the nozzle. The injector will not operate [mm] [ms] [mm2] [mm2] [mg] [mg]
within a range of ballistic amounts of fuel. There are the 0.50 0.02584 2.44
research results of the injector operating in idling condi- 0.14 0.60 0. 01485 0.03157 3.20 3.35
0.70 0.03562 4.35
tions. The maximum efficient flow field was compared
0.50 0.02926 2.71
(Fig. 5 and Fig. 7) to the flow field due to the injector hole 0.16 0.60 0. 02186 0.03643 3.20 3.73
diameter and the fuel mass per injection (Fig. 4 and Fig. 6). 0.70 0.04173 4.87
Table 5 and 6-hole nozzles.
4 holes Given the diameters as d4 = 0.14 and 0.16 mm and in-
jection times of main fuel doses as t2, the flow field is min-
imal in the assumed range. This means that the main doses
are injected within a non-ballistic range. At the same time,
if injecting the pilot dose t1 = 0.40 ms and the main dose
t2 ≈ 0.60 ms, the required dose at idle is achieved.
6 holes
Given the diameters d6 = 0.12 and 0.14 mm and inject-
ing the main fuel doses of t2, the flow field is minimal in
the assumed range. This means that the main doses are
injected within a non-ballistic range. At the same time, if
Fig. 4. Fuel mass (4-hole nozzle, t1 = 0.4 ms; d4 = 0.14 mm) at injection injecting the pilot dose t1 = 0.40 ms and the main dose
times of a main fuel dose t2 = 0.5; 0.6; 0.7 ms t2 ≈ 0.5–0.60 ms, the required dose at idle is achieved.

COMBUSTION ENGINES, 2017, 170(3) 149

Modeling fuel injector two-stroke diesel engine
Table 6. Simulation for a 6-hole nozzle Given the diameter d3 = 0.12 mm and injecting the main
Hole Injection
Minimum Calculated Required Calculated
fuel doses t2 > 0.40 ms, the flow field is minimal. At the
diameter times of main same time, if injecting the pilot dose of t1 = 0.40 ms and the
flow area flow area fuel mass fuel mass
d6 fuel dose t2
main dose of t2 ≈ 0.5 ms, the required dose at idle is
[mm] [ms] [mm2] [mm2] [mg] [mg]
0.50 0.03152 3.00 achieved.
0.12 0.60 0.01221 0.03815 3.20 4.11
4 holes
0.70 0.04258 5.36
0.40 0.02358 2.29 Analogue calculations as for a 1-nozzle injector were
0.14 0.50 0.01457 0.03647 3.20 3.36 performed for a 4-hole injector. A hole diameter for a 4-
0.60 0.04533 4.65 hole nozzle was calculated as d4 = 0.10 mm and calcula-
tions for idling were performed. The main dose injection
Then, the injection of a dose at the maximum load for times were as t2 = 0.40; 0.45; 0.50 ms. The research results
the given variations should be investigated. are depicted Fig. 8, Fig. 9 and Table 9.
a) Two injectors
2 and 3 holes
Given the number of nozzle holes as 2, 3 and 4, the noz-
zle hole diameter to inject a fuel dose at idle as 1,6
mg/injector was calculated. By changing the correlation
between the number of injectors and the number of nozzle
holes, identical nozzle hole diameters were achieved. This
fact refers to a 2- and 3-hole nozzle. The difference may be
due to the fact that for a less number of nozzle holes, the
minimum flow field can be achieved at a less elevated noz-
zle needle so shorter injection times. Accordingly, there Fig. 8. Fuel mass (4-hole nozzle, t1 = 0.4 ms; d4 = 0.10 mm) at injection
times of a main fuel dose t2 = 0.40; 0.45; 0.50 ms
was verification calculation for the given hole diameter of
2- and 3-hole nozzles, injection times, idling pressure and
maximum load. The research results are given in Table 7
and Table 8.

Table 7. Simulation for a 2-hole nozzle

Injection times
Hole Minimum Calculated Required Calculated
of main fuel
diameter flow area flow area fuel mass fuel mass
dose t2
[mm] [ms] [mm2] [mm2] [mg] [mg]
0.50 0.01382 1.35
0.14 0.55 0. 01485 0.01533 1.60 1.57
0.60 0.01647 1.82 Fig. 9. Flow area (4-hole nozzle, t1 = 0.4 ms; d4 = 0.10 mm) at injection
0.50 0.01585 1.51 times of a main fuel dose t2 = 0.40; 0.45; 0.50 ms
0.16 0.55 0.02186 0.01775 1.60 1.77
0.60 0.01930 2.05 Table 9. Simulation for a 4-hole nozzle
Injection
The minimum flow field is achieved for both hole di- Hole times of Minimum Calculated Required Calculated
diameter main fuel flow area flow area fuel mass fuel mass
ameters when injecting the main dose t2 > 0.55 ms, whereas dose t2
an idling dose is achieved by injecting the pilot dose [mm] [ms] [mm2] [mm2] [mg] [mg]
t1 = 0.40 ms and the main dose t2 ≈ 0.55–0.6 ms. 0.40 0.01300 1.27
The calculations for a 6-hole nozzle show that it is pos- 0.10 0.45 0.00796 0.01583 1.60 1.57
sible to inject an idling dose if nozzle diameters are d6 = 0.50 0.01794 1.85
0.12 and 0.14 mm. However, for a dose at the maximum
load for the diameter of d6 = 0.14 mm, injection pressure Given the diameter d4 = 0.10 mm and injecting the pilot
and injection time of the main dose t2 should be significant- dose at t1 = 0.40 ms and the main dose at t2 > 0.40 ms, the
ly increased (Fig. 13, Table 11). Accordingly, one type of a minimal flow field and the required dose at idle are
hole diameter, i.e. d3 = 0.12 mm only was assumed for a 3- achieved.
hole nozzle. The injection time of the main dose was also 4.2. Maximum load
reduced. The research results are given in Table 8. a) One injector
4 holes
Table 8. Simulation for a 3-hole nozzle
Given the nozzle hole diameters calculated at idling, the
Injection times mass flow rate of an injector at the maximum load was
Hole Minimum Calculated Required Calculated
of main fuel
diameter flow area flow area fuel mass fuel mass calculated. The amount of fuel under such conditions is
dose t2
[mm] [ms] [mm2] [mm2] [mg] [mg] about 29 mg/cylinder injected as a single dose. The calcula-
0.40 0.01203 1.17 tion principles are as follows: fuel injection is as injecting
0.12 0.45 0. 01138 0.01480 1.60 1.42 the main dose, main dose injection time is t2 = 1.0 ms, fuel
0.50 0.01702 1.69
injection pressure is p = 120–180 MPa.

150 COMBUSTION ENGINES, 2017, 170(3)

 Modeling fuel injector two-stroke diesel engine

The simulation results are given in Fig. 10, Fig. 11 and Due to the large mass flow rates (d6 = 0.12 mm) for the
Table 10. diameter nozzle d6 = 0.14 mm, injection pressure was re-
duced to 120–140 MPa.

Fig. 10. Fuel mass (4-hole nozzle, t2 = 1.0 ms; d4 = 0.14 mm) at injection
pressures as p = 140, 160, 180 MPa Fig. 13. Fuel mass (6-hole nozzle, t2 = 1.0 ms; d6 = 0.14 mm) at injection
pressures as p = 140, 160, 180 MPa

Table 11. Simulation for a 6-hole nozzle

Hole Required fuel Calculated fuel
Fuel pressure
diameter mass mass
[mm] [MPa] [mg] [mg]
140 33.62
0.12 160 36.50
180 39.33
29.00
120 39.61
0.14 130 41.60
140 43.53
Fig. 11. Fuel mass (4-hole nozzle, t2 = 1.0 ms; d4 = 0.16 mm) at injection
pressures as p = 140, 160, 180 MPa For the maximum load, it is better to use a nozzle hole
diameter in a 6-hole nozzle as d6 = 0.12 mm. For a diameter
Table 10. Simulation for a 4-hole nozzle
nozzle as d4 = 0.16 mm, fuel injection pressure or main
Hole diame- Required fuel Calculated fuel
ter
Fuel pressure
mass mass
dose injection time should be reduced.
[mm] [MPa] [mg] [mg] b) Two injectors
140 29.23
0.14 160 31.75
2 and 3 holes
180 34.22 Given nozzle hole diameters in a 2-hole injector calcu-
29.00
140 36.42 lated for idling as d4 = 0.14 and 0.,16 mm, mass flow rates
0.16 160 39.56 at the maximum load were calculated. The amount of fuel
180 42.66 per injector injected under these conditions is about 14.5
mg as a single dose. The principles behind the calculations
For the maximum load, it is better to use the hole diameter are identical as in those for a single injector.
in a 4-hole nozzle as d4 = 0.14 mm. Due to the large mass flow Fig. 14 and Fig. 15 show the fuel mass for the hole di-
rate for a diameter nozzle as d4 = 0.16 mm, fuel injection pres- ameters d4 varied due to injection pressure. The research
sure or main dose injection time should be reduced. results are given in Table 12.
6 holes
The hole diameters in a 6-hole injector are d6 = 0.12 and
0.14 mm. The mass flow rates for this type of injector at the
maximum load were calculated at injection pressures of 120 to
180 MPa according to the nozzle hole diameters. Fig. 12 and
Fig. 13 show the mass of injected fuel for the different injec-
tion pressures. The research results are given in Table 11.

Fig. 14. Fuel mass (2-hole nozzle, t2 = 1.0 ms; d2 = 0.14 mm) at injection
pressures as p = 120, 140, 160 MPa

A nozzle with the hole diameter of 0.16 mm, despite its

low injection pressure as 100 MPa, shows a larger than
required mass flow rate. Accordingly, the hole diameter of
d4 = 0.14 mm should be used in the two types of injectors
Fig. 12. Fuel mass (6-hole nozzle, t2 = 1.0 ms; d6 = 0.12 mm) at injection with a 2-hole nozzle.
pressures as p = 140, 160, 180 MPa

COMBUSTION ENGINES, 2017, 170(3) 151

Modeling fuel injector two-stroke diesel engine

Fig. 15. Fuel mass (2-hole nozzle, t2 = 1.0 ms; d4 = 0.16 mm) at injection Fig. 17. Fuel mass (4-hole nozzle, t2 = 1.0 ms; d42 = 0.10 mm) at injection
pressures as p = 120, 140, 160 MPa pressures as p = 120, 140, 160 MPa

Table 12. Simulation for a 2-hole nozzle Table 14. Simulation for a 4-hole nozzle
Hole Required fuel Calculated fuel Hole Required fuel Calculated fuel
Fuel pressure Fuel pressure
diameter mass mass diameter mass mass
[mm] [MPa] [mg] [mg] [mm] [MPa] [mg] [mg]
120 13.39 120 14.91
0.14 140 14.72 0.10 140 14.50 16.35
160 15.99 160 17.71
14.50
100 14.97
0.16 120 16.73 Summary
140 18.40 Two options of injection were investigated while mod-
eling an injector. For an input parameter, i.e. the fuel mass
A mass of injected fuel for the 3-hole nozzle of a hole required at idling and the maximum load, the assumption is
diameter of d3 = 0.12 mm and injection pressures as p = that the fuel is injected into the cylinder with one or two
120, 140, 160 MPa (Fig. 16) was calculated At the maxi- injectors. Depending on the option, the number of nozzle
mum load, the required dose is achieved at the injection holes was assumed to be from 2 to 6 so the number and
pressure of 120 MPa. For higher pressures, main dose injec- diameter of hole nozzles for the options were determined as
tion time should be reduced (Table 13). follows:
a) one injector
− a 4-hole injector of a hole diameter as d4 = 0.14 mm
or optionally d4 = 0.16 mm at reduced injection
pressure or time,
− a 6-hole injector of a hole diameter as d6 = 0.12 mm

b) two injectors
− 2-hole injectors of a hole diameter as d2 = 0.14 mm,
− 3-hole injectors of a hole diameter as d3 = 0.12 mm,
− 4-hole injectors of a hole diameter as d4 = 0.10 mm.
Fig. 16. Fuel mass (3-hole nozzle, t2 = 1.0 ms; d3= 0.12 mm) at injection The research results will be used to create the geometry
pressures as p = 120, 140, 160 MPa to develop nozzles for a given fuel injector to perform
bench tests. Such research will enable us to determine the
Table 13. Simulation for a 3-hole nozzle
mass flow rate and characteristics of the injectors. The mass
Hole Required fuel Calculated fuel flow rated calculated will be entered into the AVL Fire to
Fuel pressure
diameter mass mass
[mm] [MPa] [mg] [mg] optimize the combustion process.
120 15.40
Acknowledgement
0.12 140 14.50 16.92
160 18.36 This work has been realized in the cooperation with The
Construction Office of WSK "PZL-KALISZ" S.A." and is
4 holes part of Grant Agreement No. POIR.01.02.00-00-0002/15
It was calculated a mass of injected fuel for the 4-hole financed by the Polish Nation-al Centre for Research and
nozzle of the hole diameter of d42 = 0.10 mm and injection Development.
pressures as p = 120, 140, 160 MPa (Fig. 16). At the maxi-
mum load, the required dose is achieved at the injection
pressure of 120 MPa. For higher pressures, main dose injec-
tion time should be reduced (Table 13).

152 COMBUSTION ENGINES, 2017, 170(3)

 Modeling fuel injector two-stroke diesel engine

Bibliography [13] HEYWOOD, J.B. Internal combustion engine fundamentals.

McGraw-Hill International Editions. 1988.
[1] AMOIA, V., FICARELLA, A., LAFORGIA, D., DE MAT- [14] HIROYASU, H. Diesel engine combustion and its model-
THAEIS, S. A theoretical code to simulate the behavior of ing. In Diagnostics and Modeling of Combustion in Recip-
an electro-injector for diesel engines and parametric analy- rocating Engines. 53-75, COMODIA 85, Preceedings of
sis. SAE Transaction. 1997, 970349. Symposium. Tokyo 1985.
[2] ARCOUMANIS, C., GAVAISES, M., ABDUL-WAHAB, [15] KNEFEL, T., GANCARCZYK, T. Dynamic and strength
E., MOSER, V. Modeling of advanced high pressure sys- analysis of injector of common rail injection system. Com-
tems for passenger car diesel engines. SAE Technical Paper. bustion Engines. 2013, 154(3), 953-959.
1999, 1999-01-0910. [16] LINO, P., MAIONE, B., PIZZO, A. Nonlinear modelling
[3] AVL BOOST Hydsim Primer, Version 1.2013. and control of a common rail injection system for diesel en-
[4] AVL BOOST Hydsim User Guide. gines. Applied Mathematical Modelling. 2007, 31, 1770-
[5] BIANCHI, G., PELLONI, P., CORCIONE, F., LUPPINO, 1784.
F. Numerical analysis of passenger car HSDI diesel engines [17] PAYRI, R., CLIMENT, H., SALVADOR, F., FAVENNEC,
with the 2nd generation of common rail injection systems: A. Diesel injection system modelling. Methodology and ap-
the effect of multiple injections on emissions. SAE Tech- plication for a first-generation common rail system. Pro-
nical Paper. 2001, 2001-01-1068. ceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineering. 2004,
[6] CAIKA, V., SAMPL, P. Nozzle flow and cavitation model- 218, Part D.
ing with coupled 1D-3D AVL software tools. SAE Technical [18] PIRAULT, J.-P., FLINT, M. Opposed piston engines: evolu-
Paper. 2011, 2011-24-0006. tion, use, and future applications. SAE International. War-
[7] CATALANO, L., TONDOLO, V., DADONE, A. Dynamic rendale. 2009, doi:10.4271/R-378.
rise of pressure in the common-rail fuel injection system. [19] PIROOZ, A. Effects of injector nozzle geometry on spray
SAE Technical Paper. 2002, 2002-01-0210. characteristics, an analysis. Indian J.Sci.Res. 2014, 5(1),
[8] DONGIOVANNI, C., COPPO, M. Accurate modelling of an 354-361.
injector for common rail systems. doi: 10.5772/9728, 2010. [20] SEYKENS, X.L.J., SOMERS, L.M.T., BAER, R.S.G. De-
[9] FICARELLA, A., LAFORGIA, D., LANDRISCINA, V. tailed modeling of common rail fuel injection process. Jour-
Evaluation of instability phenomena in a common rail injec- nal of Middle European Construction and Design of Cars.
tion system for high speed diesel engines. SAE Technical 2005, III, 30-39.
Paper. 1999, 1999-01-0192. [21] SEYKENS, X.L.J., SOMERS, L.M.T., BAER, R.S.G. Mod-
[10] FRANKE, M., HUANG, H., LIU, J.P. et al. Opposed piston elling of common rail fuel injection system and influence of
opposed cylinder (opoc™) 450 hp engine: performance de- fluid properties on injection process. Proceedings of VAF-
velopment by CAE simulations and testing [C]. SAE Tech- SEP. Dublin, 2004.
nical Paper. 2006, 2006-01-0277. [22] ZHANG, Z., ZHAO, C., XIE, Z. et al. Study on the effect of
[11] GANCARCZYK, T., KNEFEL, T. Modelowe analizy pom- the nozzle diameter and swirl ratio on the combustion pro-
py wysokiego ciśnienia układu Common Rail. Mechanik. cess for an opposed-piston two-stroke diesel engine. Energy
2013, 2. Procedia. 2014, 61, 542-546.
[12] GAUTIER, C., SENAME, O., DUGARD, L., MEIS-
SONNIER, G. Modelling of a diesel engine common rail in-
jection system. IFAC 16th Word Congress. Prague, 2005.

Rafał Sochaczewski, DEng. – Faculty of Mechanical Zbigniew Czyż, MEng. – Faculty of Mechanical
Engineering at the Lublin University of Technology. Engineering at the Lublin University of Technology.
e-mail: R.Sochaczewski@pollub.pl e-mail: Z.Czyz@Pollub.Pl

Ksenia Siadkowska, MEng. – Faculty of Mechanical

Engineering at the Lublin University of Technology.
e-mail: K.Siadkowska@pollub.pl

COMBUSTION ENGINES, 2017, 170(3) 153