CFD Simulations of Hydrogen Tank Fuelling: Sensitivity to Turbulence Model and Grid Resolution

Hydrogen Pub Date : 2023-12-06 DOI:10.3390/hydrogen4040058
Hanguang Xie, D. Makarov, S. Kashkarov, V. Molkov
{"title":"CFD Simulations of Hydrogen Tank Fuelling: Sensitivity to Turbulence Model and Grid Resolution","authors":"Hanguang Xie, D. Makarov, S. Kashkarov, V. Molkov","doi":"10.3390/hydrogen4040058","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"CFD modelling of compressed hydrogen fuelling provides information on the hydrogen and tank structure temperature dynamics required for onboard storage tank design and fuelling protocol development. This study compares five turbulence models to develop a strategy for cost-effective CFD simulations of hydrogen fuelling while maintaining a simulation accuracy acceptable for engineering analysis: RANS models k-ε and RSM; hybrid models SAS and DES; and LES model. Simulations were validated against the fuelling experiment of a Type IV 29 L tank available in the literature. For RANS with wall functions and blended models with near-wall treatment, the simulated average hydrogen temperatures deviated from the experiment by 1–3% with CFL ≈ 1–3 and dimensionless wall distance y+ ≈ 50–500 in the tank. To provide a similar simulation accuracy, the LES modelling approach with near-wall treatment requires mesh with wall distance y+ ≈ 2–10 and demonstrates the best-resolved flow field with larger velocity and temperature gradients. LES simulation on this mesh, however, implies a ca. 60 times longer CPU time compared to the RANS modelling approach and 9 times longer compared to the hybrid models due to the time step limit enforced by the CFL ≈ 1.0 criteria. In all cases, the simulated pressure histories and inlet mass flow rates have a difference within 1% while the average heat fluxes and maximum hydrogen temperature show a difference within 10%. Compared to LES, the k-ε model tends to underestimate and DES tends to overestimate the temperature gradient inside the tank. The results of RSM and SAS are close to those of LES albeit of 8–9 times faster simulations.","PeriodicalId":13230,"journal":{"name":"Hydrogen","volume":"54 18","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Hydrogen","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/hydrogen4040058","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

CFD modelling of compressed hydrogen fuelling provides information on the hydrogen and tank structure temperature dynamics required for onboard storage tank design and fuelling protocol development. This study compares five turbulence models to develop a strategy for cost-effective CFD simulations of hydrogen fuelling while maintaining a simulation accuracy acceptable for engineering analysis: RANS models k-ε and RSM; hybrid models SAS and DES; and LES model. Simulations were validated against the fuelling experiment of a Type IV 29 L tank available in the literature. For RANS with wall functions and blended models with near-wall treatment, the simulated average hydrogen temperatures deviated from the experiment by 1–3% with CFL ≈ 1–3 and dimensionless wall distance y+ ≈ 50–500 in the tank. To provide a similar simulation accuracy, the LES modelling approach with near-wall treatment requires mesh with wall distance y+ ≈ 2–10 and demonstrates the best-resolved flow field with larger velocity and temperature gradients. LES simulation on this mesh, however, implies a ca. 60 times longer CPU time compared to the RANS modelling approach and 9 times longer compared to the hybrid models due to the time step limit enforced by the CFL ≈ 1.0 criteria. In all cases, the simulated pressure histories and inlet mass flow rates have a difference within 1% while the average heat fluxes and maximum hydrogen temperature show a difference within 10%. Compared to LES, the k-ε model tends to underestimate and DES tends to overestimate the temperature gradient inside the tank. The results of RSM and SAS are close to those of LES albeit of 8–9 times faster simulations.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
氢气罐加注的 CFD 模拟:湍流模型和网格分辨率的敏感性
压缩氢燃料的CFD建模为机载储罐设计和燃料方案开发提供了所需的氢和储罐结构温度动力学信息。本研究比较了五种湍流模型,以制定一种具有成本效益的CFD氢燃料模拟策略,同时保持工程分析可接受的模拟精度:RANS模型k-ε和RSM;SAS和DES混合模型;和LES模型。以文献中已有的4型29升油箱加注实验为对照,进行了仿真验证。对于具有壁面函数的RANS和采用近壁处理的混合模型,模拟的平均氢气温度与实验值相差1-3%,CFL≈1-3,罐内无因次壁距y+≈50-500。为了提供类似的模拟精度,采用近壁处理的LES建模方法需要壁面距离为y+≈2-10的网格,并展示了具有较大速度和温度梯度的最佳解析流场。然而,由于CFL≈1.0标准强制执行的时间步长限制,在该网格上的LES模拟意味着与RANS建模方法相比,CPU时间要长约60倍,与混合模型相比要长9倍。在所有情况下,模拟压力历史和进口质量流量的差异在1%以内,平均热通量和最高氢温度的差异在10%以内。与LES模型相比,k-ε模型倾向于低估罐内温度梯度,而DES模型倾向于高估罐内温度梯度。虽然RSM和SAS的模拟速度提高了8-9倍,但结果与LES接近。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Comparison of the Temperature, Radiation, and Heat Flux Distribution of a Hydrogen and a Methane Flame in a Crucible Furnace Using Numerical Simulation Opportunities and Challenges of Hydrogen Ports: An Empirical Study in Australia and Japan The Characteristics of a Ni/Cr/Ru Catalyst for a Biogas Dry Reforming Membrane Reactor Using a Pd/Cu Membrane and a Comparison of It with a Ni/Cr Catalyst PdS-ZnS-Doped Electrospun Polymer Nanofibers as Effective Photocatalyst for Hydrogen Evolution Instances of Safety-Related Advances in Hydrogen as Regards Its Gaseous Transport and Buffer Storage and Its Solid-State Storage
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1