Research Papers: Internal Combustion Engines

Simulating Area Conservation and the Gas-Wall Interface for One-Dimensional Based Diesel Particulate Filter Models

[+] Author and Article Information
Christopher Depcik1

Department of Mechanical Engineering, The University of Kansas, 3120 Learned Hall, 1530 West 15th Street, Lawrence, KS 66045-7609depcik@ku.edu

Dennis Assanis

Department of Mechanical Engineering, The University of Michigan, 2045 W.E. Lay Automotive Laboratory, 1231 Beal Avenue, Ann Arbor, MI 48109


Corresponding author.

J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power 130(6), 062807 (Aug 22, 2008) (18 pages) doi:10.1115/1.2939002 History: Received April 20, 2007; Revised April 23, 2008; Published August 22, 2008

Researchers have been using one-dimensional based models of diesel particulate filters (DPFs) for over two decades with good success in comparison to measured experimental data. Recent efforts in literature have expanded the classical model to account for the effects of varying soot layer thickness on the flow area of the gases. However, some discrepancies exist with respect to this formulation and the physical phenomena modeled in the channel equations. In addition, there is still some discussion regarding the calculation of the gas temperature within the soot and wall layers. As a result, this paper presents a model to discuss these different phenomena to remove or validate previous assumptions. In specific, formulation of the flow equations in area-conserved format (or quasi-one-dimensional) allows the model to account for the changes in the gaseous area as a function of soot loading. In addition, imposing thermodynamic equilibrium at the interface of the channels and wall layers allows the model to capture the thermal entrance lengths. These tasks were undertaken to illustrate whether or not the results justify the effort is worthwhile and this additional complexity needs to be incorporated within the model. By utilizing linear density interpolation in the wall to increase the computational efficiency of the code, it was determined that the classical model assumptions of neglecting soot thickness and gas temperature in the wall are valid within the range of typical DPF applications.

Copyright © 2008 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.



Grahic Jump Location
Figure 13

Model versus experimental results for (a) warm-up of loaded SiC DPF containing only inert N2 and (b) cooldown and oxidation test with 18% O2

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 14

Reaction enthalpy calculations of soot oxidation by O2 at different partial oxidation factors

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

Flow schematic of a DPF

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

Square channel schematic illustrating the important geometric and soot parameters

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

Fully developed Nusselt number correlations based on suction and injection values of the wall Reynolds number for (a) circular tube and (b) square channel

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

(a) Packed bed and staggered cylinder correlations as a function of Reynolds and Prandtl numbers and (b) 2D illustration of particles and voids used in adapting packed-bed heat transfer correlation

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

Variable differentiation utilized in soot and wall layer energy equations

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

Comparison between the classical flow model and area-conserved model of the authors for gas (a) pressure and (b) velocity during isothermal run

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

Density comparison between the classical flow model and area-conserved model at halfway point in the axial direction during isothermal run

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

(a). Comparison of heat transfer correlations during artificial step change numerical experiment and (b) effect of Peclet number on the heat transfer

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 9

Contour plots of different heat transfer correlations during temperature step change numerical experiment

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 10

(a) Pressure drop as a function of soot loading versus experimental data (77) and previous literature (74) results and (b) the percent error in approximating the flow through the wall using an average velocity

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 11

Velocity and pressure contour plots in the soot and wall layers as a function of soot loading

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 12

Comparison of three different soot loading events with respect to (a) pressure and (b) particulate layer thickness

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 15

Exit mass flow rate difference from omitting the gain in mass due to soot oxidation reactions in Eq. 4

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 16

Instantaneous Nusselt number in the inlet and outlet channels for the oxidation experiment



Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In