Investigation of combustion instabilities in gas turbine combustors require the knowledge of flame transfer functions. Those can be obtained by experimental measurement or by Large Eddy Simulations (LES). Because calculations are usually limited to a portion of the whole combustor, boundary conditions are of crucial importance. It is common practice to inject acoustic perturbations for the flame transfer function measurement in form of velocity perturbations (uЈ(t)). We present an alternative method based on a characteristic treatment of the Euler Equations. It consists of injecting sound waves traveling into the computational inlet while letting outgoing waves leave the domain without reflection. This method has several advantages concerning the study of flame transfer functions compared to injecting velocity perturbations. Both techniques are compared for cases where analytical solutions may be derived (a duct without flame and a planar laminar flame) and for one case where a CFD code is necessary (a laminar Bunsen-type flame).

No abstract

No abstract

Due to increasing sales figures, the energy consumption of battery-electric vehicles is moving further into focus. In addition to efficient driving, it is also important that the energy losses during AC charging are as low as possible for a sustainable operation. In many situations it is not possible or necessary to charge the vehicle with the maximum charging power e.g., in apartment buildings. The influence of the charging mode (number of phases used, in-cable-control-box or used wallbox, charging current) on the charging efficiency is often unknown. In this work, the energy consumption of two electric vehicles in the Worldwide Harmonized Light-Duty Vehicles Test Cycle is presented. In-house developed measurement technology and vehicle CAN data are used. A detailed breakdown of charging losses, drivetrain efficiency, and overall energy consumption for one of the vehicles is provided. Finally, the results are discussed with reference to avoidable CO2 emissions. The charging losses of the tested vehicles range from 12.79 to 20.42%. Maximum charging power with three phases and 16 A charging current delivers the best efficiencies. Single-phase charging was considered down to 10 A, where the losses are greatest. The drivetrain efficiency while driving is 63.88% on average for the WLTC, 77.12% in the “extra high” section and 23.12% in the “low” section. The resulting energy consumption for both vehicles is higher than the OEM data given (21.6 to 44.9%). Possible origins for the surplus on energy consumption are detailed. Over 100,000 km, unfavorable charging results in additional CO2 emissions of 1.24 t. The emissions for an assumed annual mileage of 20,000 km are three times larger than for a class A+ refrigerator. A classification of charging modes and chargers thus appears to make sense. In the following work, efficiency improvements in the charger as well as DC charging will be proposed.

Since battery electric vehicle (BEV) sales are increasing, the calculation of necessary electric power supply, and energy consumption data, and vehicle range is important. The Worldwide harmonized Light vehicles Test Procedure (WLTP) currently in use can deliver data to collect comparable energy consumption data for different vehicles on defined chassis dynamometer test cycles. Nevertheless, the energy consumption and so the range of BEVs are also dependent on the individual trajectory of the user. Therefore, five velocity profiles are developed in this work. The maximum speeds are based on typical velocities in German city traffic and extra-urban traffic. The energy required to finish a single velocity profile is assumed to be constant despite varying maximum velocities. With this kind of driving profiles it is possible to create an individual and more precise statement on the energy consumption and the range of a BEV. In this work, the profiles are driven on a chassis dynamometer with an VW e-Up. The vehicle charging efficiency is tested with two different AC charging modes and is also taken into account. The drive efficiencies of the tested vehicle are presented in dependence of the velocity profile driven. Finally the results are compared with a real-driving velocity profile and the energy consumption data obtained by the board computer of the vehicle.