Page 1 of 16

IMPROVEMENTS OF BOUNDARY CONDITION MODELS FOR 1D ENGINE

THERMODYNAMIC AND GAS DYNAMIC SIMULATIONS

Fernando Ortenzi
ENEA - Italian National Agency for New Technologies, Energy and the Environment
Email: fernando.ortenzi@enea.it, phone +39 0630486873
Emiliana Vesco
RTZ-Soft Automotive Engineering and Software


ABSTRACT
This paper analyzes the 1D boundary calculations using the Method of Characteristics, in particular the valve outflow and the multi-
pipe junction model.
The Benson constant pressure outflow model has been modified imposing the minimum and maximum physical entropy levels during
the iterations. A sub iterative cycle has also been made when calculating the Riemann incident and reflected variables in order to
improve the convergence especially for lower valve area. Convergence has been reached for all the test also with valve area ratios of
10
-6
.
A general multi-pipe junction model has been developed; a pressure loss term has been added for ducts with flow away from the
junction. Sonic flows has been taken into account and a equivalent duct has been built in order to calculate the pressure loss terms.
Two tests have been reported in order to show the results when sonic flow has been encountered.

Keywords: Method of Characteristics; pipe boundaries modeling; Outflow; multi-pipe junction.

1. INTRODUCTION
Computer software are widely used in the design and development process of internal combustion engines: time and costs are the
advantages of using such software.
The development of thermodynamics and gas dynamics models of manifolds, together with the combustion models are the main
interest to build an accurate simulation code capable to calculate the energy and environmental impact of internal combustion engines.
Generally computer software to simulate the engines use 1D codes due to lower computation times than three-dimensional codes.:
multi-cylindrical engine with much complex intake ducting together turbo-compressor devices can be simulated requiring very low
calculation times with mono-dimensional codes.
Second order conservative schemes are widely used to calculate the 1D gas dynamics within the engine manifolds such Two Step Lax-
Wendroff or ;McCormack [1,2,3]. while for pipe boundaries the first order method of characteristics is the most used [1,3,5].
The method of characteristics, with the great contribution of Benson [1] has been used extensively during 70 and now is used mainly
to calculate the gas dynamic at pipe boundaries. Many works have been made to improve this method [5,6,7] and to add new
boundaries [8,9]: in the present work the outflow [1,10] (flow from cylinder to manifold) and the pipe junction with pressure loss [11]
Page 2 of 16

have been analyzed and modified methods have been reported in order to improve convergence (the first) and take into account for
chocked flow (the second).
In the first part of the paper the duct models used are described, a second order Two Step Lax-Wendroff scheme has been used
together with the TVD flux Limiter in order to limit the oscillations typical of the second order schemes.
In the OutFlow section the Constant Pressure model of Benson [1,10] is analyzed and the modifications done to improve the
convergence are reported. Some results are also reported in order to test the accuracy and convergence of the method.
The multi-pipe junction is then reported and the sonic flow control together with an improved datum duct are reported. Two
examples for a Y junction are reported in order to show the behavior of such method in configurations similar to those found in
exhaust systems of engines. Finally the conclusions are reported.

2. PIPE BOUNDARIES
To manage the pipe boundaries, a first order model is suggested and the method of characteristics has been used. Derivation of this
model is well reported in [1,3,4,] and here it is briefly revised.
The compatibility equations along the characteristics are (figure 1):

Figure 1 Characteristics lines on the space-time plane
( )
1 2 3
1 1
0 dp du dt
a a
+ A + A A =

; (1)
Along the characteristics
dx
u a
dt
= ;
2
1
0 dp a d dt + A = ; (2)
Along the characteristics
dx
u
dt
= .
Where the values of
3 2 1
, , A A A are the source terms:
Page 3 of 16

( ) ( )
1
1 Q u G A = + (3)
2
2
a u dA
A dx

A = (4)
3
a G A = (5)
Defining the dimensionless quantities:
ref
a
a
A = ;
ref
a
u
U = ;
ref
A
A
a
a
A = (6)
the Riemann variables can be defined as:
U A

+ =
2
1
; U A

=
2
1
| (7)
And the updated values at time step t+1 are:

d
t
L
t
+ =
+1
; | | | d
t
L
t
+ =
+1
(8)
Where d and | d take account of pipe area variation, friction heat transfer and entropy variation.
At pipe boundaries is common to name the Riemann variables as follows:
U A
in

+ =
2
1
U A
out

=
2
1
(9)
In every boundary problem, the values to calculate are
in
,
out
and the entropy level
A
A and all the thermodynamic parameters can
be then calculated.

3. OUTFLOW
In the present work the Benson Constant Pressure [1] is revised in order to improve the convergence. This method is reported and
discussed in [1] and their limits have been also discussed in [10].
The outflow is quite common and the cylinder exhaust flow is an example (figure 2): when the exhaust valve get opened, the cylinder
pressure is much higher than the manifold pressure so the flow if from cylinder to manifold.
Page 4 of 16


Figure 2 example of Outflow (flow from cylinder to manifold)

The governing equations of such boundary conditions are:
- Conservation of energy between cylinder and throttle:;
- Conservation of energy between cylinder and manifold;
- Isentropic expansion between cylinder and throttle;
- Continuity equation;
- Constant pressure (No pressure recovery and then no momentum equation) from throttle to manifold;
- A Characteristic equation;
the unknown are 6: 3 for the throttle and 3 for the manifold; Benson in [1] solved the equations in terms of Riemann variables.
In the present work some improvements have been made in order to improve the stability of the method: the extreme values of the
entropy levels have set up before the iterative cycle, and a sub cycle has been added in order to improve the calculation of
c in
and
out
.
The minimum and maximum allowable values of the entropy level
c
A
a
are when there is no flow or the flow is sonic at the port.
When there is no flow the entropy level is the entropy level of the cylinder:

|
|
.
|

\
|
= =
2
1
a
min
a
c
ref
c
is c c
P
P
A A A (10)
For sonic flow the critical sound speed ratio is defined:
1
2
cr
+
=

c
A A
(11)
And then the following relation is valid:
( ) 1 2

=
+
=

c in out out c in
cr cr
U A

Page 5 of 16

From [1] the pressure ration between Port and cylinder is :
1
1
2

|
|
.
|

\
|
+
=

|
c
port
P
P

The entropy level is defined by

|
|
.
|

\
|

+
=
2
1
a
2

A
port
ref out c in
c
P
P
so the maximum entropy level value is:

|
|
|
|
|
|
.
|

\
|
|
|
.
|

\
|
+

=
2
1
1
max
a
1
2
1
c
ref
cr c
P
P
A A (12)
The maximum and minimum allowable values of
est c a
A are then estimated; the following initial values for the unknown
est c a
A are
assumed:
min c a
est c a
A A = (13)
( )
2
min max c a c a
c a
A A
A

= A (14)
And the iteration process can start.
The
c in
and
out
values can be calculated:

A
A

A
2
a
a
a n est c a
n est c a
out
n est c a
est c a
n in c in
A
A
A
A
+

+
+
= (15)
( ) ( )
c
2 2 2
c in
1 2 1
1
2

1
3
in c out
A

+
+
+
+

= (16)
c in
is function of
out
and
c
A
a
, but also and
out
is function of
c in
and
est c a
A . If an sub-iterative cycle is made for the
equations (15) and (16), the two values are now only function of
c
A
a
, that is the only unknown of the main iterative cycle. The sub
iteration ends when two consecutive values of
out
are within allowable value: 1/1000 of the of the main iterative cycle (10
-6
) and
then 10
-9
.
With the calculated
c in
and
out
, the following dimensionless speed value can be evaluated:
( )
c
c in out
A
U


=
1

(17)
Then the coefficient:
Page 6 of 16

( )
( )
2
2
2
2
1
- 1
2
1
|
.
|

\
|

=
U
U
C

(18)
If the squared value of the area ratio is
1
4
2
2

|
C
(19)
then the flow at the throat is sonic and the pressure ratio between port and cylinder is defined by:
( )
( )
(
(
(

|
.
|

\
|

|
|
.
|

\
|
+

|
|
.
|

\
|
+
=

+

2
1 2
1
1
2
1
1
1
2
;
1
2
max U
U P
P
c
port

(20)
In which the term

1
1
2

|
|
.
|

\
|
+

| calculate the value for sonic flow also at the port.

If the flow is subsonic then the pressure ratio is:

( )
2 2
4
2
1
| | | +

= C
C P
P
c
port
(21)
The new value of the corrected entropy level can be calculated:

|
|
.
|

\
|

+
=
2
1
a
2

port
c
c
ref out c in
new c
P
P
P
P
A (22)
If the absolute difference c >
est c a
new c
A
a
A a new
est c a
A have to be calculated:

A = >
A + = <
c a
est c a
est c a
est c a
new c
c a
est c a
est c a
est c a
new c
A A A A
A A A A
a
a
A
A
(23)
2
c a
c a
A
A
A
= A (24)
Equations from (10) to (14) calculate the initial values for the iterative cycle, while those from (15) to (24) are the main iterative cycle
with
c a
A as unknown.
An example to test the accuracy and the convergence of the outflow model has been done and reported in this section.
A 1 meter duct, with a discretization step of 10 mm has on the right boundary a close end while at left different area ratios have been
tested with an external pressure of 500000 Pa and the results are showed after a time of 0.001 seconds. The duct model used in this
test is the Two Step Lax-Wendroff with TVD. The thermodynamic initials conditions are: pressure 101325 Pa and temperature 293.15
Page 7 of 16

K. The area ratios tested vary from 1 to 10
-6
and convergence has been obtained when the difference between two consecutive values
of
c a
A were below 10
-6
.

Figure 3 Pressure behavior within the duct after 1000 s (left) and number of iterations to convergence at left boundary (right) for
different area ratios.
In figure 3, at left the pressure along the duct is depicted and at right the average iterations needed to reach convergence for each area
ratio during the calculations. Decreasing the area ratios the pressure at the left end of the manifold decreases and for the lowest values,
the pressure does not vary considerably in respect of the initial conditions. The convergence is always obtained and the number of
iterations increase decreasing the area ratio and in the figure 3 on the right they vary from 2 for area ratio near 1 to 42 for a value of
area ratio of 10
-6
.

4. MULTI-PIPE JUNCTION
The multi-pipe junction is quite common in internal combustion engines and many works to model such boundary have been made
during the years. The first Constant Pressure model has been reported by Benson in [1] where the hypothesis that all the pipes
connected with the junctions have the same pressure [1]; a new method which uses a different calculation of the entropy level has been
developed by Corberan in [7] while the general model that takes account for the pressure drop for flows away from the junction
(separating flows) is well reported by Bassett et all. in [11].
In this section the sonic case has been added and a equivalent datum manifold has been defined with the following characteristics:
- with the equivalent flow as the sum of all the flows (joining flows),
- with an equivalent stagnation enthalpy, density and speed that are averaged and weighted with the incoming flow-ratio;
- an equivalent area that is the ratio between the datum flow and the product of datum density and speed.
For a junction with n ducts, the unknowns are 3n: the unknown are 3 for every duct: the corrected incident lambda
c in
*
, the reflected
*
out
and the entropy level
Ac
A .
For all the pipes with flow towards the junction, the incident lambda
n in c in
* *
= and also
An Ac
A A =

so only an unknown has to be
calculated, while for pipes with flows away from the junction (separating flows) the unknowns are 3.
The method to calculate the boundary conditions at the ends of the pipes connected with a junction is well reported in [1] where a
constant pressure for all the pipes model has been used by Benson and [11] where a pressure loss term has been defined for flows
away from the junction (separating flows). The method is iterative using a predictor-corrector strategy.
Page 8 of 16

In the present paper the pressure loss model [11] have been improved using a equivalent datum duct in case of more than one pipes
have the flow towards the junction and taking into account of choked flow if occurred in any of the pipes of the junction.
The first equation, the continuity equation, is used to calculate the sound speed
*
j
A (after the calculation of the pressure loss terms),
then the entropy levels
*
Ac
A are calculated. And finally the corrected lambda values
c in
*
can be calculated. The above calculation can
be iterated until two following values of
*
j
A are within a little error (10
-6
).
4.1. ENTROPY LEVEL
The entropy levels are calculated in the same mode as [11] and [7].
For joining flows there is not correction so:
j An j Ac
A A = (25)
Where for separating flows, to calculate the corrected entropy level the energy equation is applied.
First the starred dimensionless speed value is calculated:
( )
* * *
1
2
j j j
A U

(26)
Then the stagnation enthalpy is defined:

=
=
-
=
=
-
=
=
-
=
=
-

|
.
|

\
|

=
Nj i
i
i
Nj i
i
i i
ref
i
Nj i
i
i
Nj i
i
i
i
datum
m
U A
a
m
m
h m
h
1
1
2
*
2
*
2
1
1
0
0
2
1
1

(27)
The entropy levels are then:
|
.
|

\
|

=
2
*
2
*
2
0
2
1
1
j j
ref
datum
j Ac
U A
a
h
A

(28).
4.2. RIEMANN VARIABLES
The values of corrected
*
cj
variables are:
|
|
.
|

\
|
+ =
j
j j
Ac
An
j
Acj
n
cj
A
A
A
A
1
* *

(29)
Page 9 of 16

The equations from 25, that is function of
*
cj
, calculated in equation (29) can also be iterated in way to improve the convergence of
the model. This iteration from equation (25) to (29) can be terminated when two following values of
*
cj
have a relative difference
less than 10
-6
.
The calculation is concluded with the equations (29) and (30) with the
j in
and
j out
together with
j Ac
A calculated within the
iteration process.
j Ac c j in
A
j
=
*
(30)
* *
2
j
c j Ac j j out
A A = (31)
4.3. PRESSURE LOSS TERMS
The calculation of the pressure loss terms starts with finding the direction of the flow. This can be calculated using the flow rate
equation:
j j
ref
ref
A
j
j F U
a
P
A
A
m
j

=

-
*
*
1
2

(32)
The datum duct properties can be now evaluated:
- the datum incoming flow:

>
=
=
- -
=
0
1
m
N i
i
i datum m m

(33);
- The equivalent datum duct density and speed:
datum
N i
i
i
i
datum
m
m
m
-
=
=
-

>

=
0
1

datum
N i
i
i
i
datum
m
U m
U
m
-
=
=
-

>

=
0
1

(34);
- and the equivalent datum duct area
datum
F is:
datum datum
datum
datum
U
m
F

=
-

(35)
Depending on the flow direction, the calculation of
*
j
A has a different approach.
Case
0 >
-
m

When 0 >
-
m the flow is towards the junction; a (sonic) critical value of
*
j
A can be calculated and it has the following value:
2
1
3
* *
*
c
j
c
j
cr
j
A

+
= (36)
If
* *
j
cr datum
A A > the flow in the
th
j pipe is subsonic and the
*
j
A is null, else the
*
j
A value is the one that give a value of
j cr j
A A
* *
=
as follow:
Page 10 of 16

>
<
= A
0
* *
* * * *
*
j
j j
cr datum
cr dat cr datum
j
A A
A A A A
(37)
or
( ) 0 , min
* * *
j
cr datum j
A A = A (38)
In this way the pressure loss terms take into account of sonic flow condition and does not allow supersonic flow in the ducts with flow
towards the junction.
Case
0 <
-
m

The pressure loss terms are calculated in the equation (39) as an averaged value between all the joining flows:
( )
datum
Nj i
i
i
j
m
j i C m
C
-
=
=
-

=
1
,
(39)
Where the index i is referred to the
th
i duct with flow towards the junction and with the index j the
th
j duct to calculate the
*
j
A
value.
- Two pressure loss coefficients used in this work are [11]:
( ) ( ) ( )
(

= j i
q
j i C
j j
,
4
3
cos
1
1 , u t

(40)
Where:
datum
j
j
m
m
q
-
-
= is the mass flow ratio and
j
datum
j
F
F
= is the area ratio.
A second correlation from [12] can be also used:
( )
( )
( )
( )

>
<
=
0 167 ,
167
,
6 . 1 6 . 1 167 ,
,
j i
j i
j i
j i C
u
u
u
(41)
Where u is the angle between the ducts.
The
-
A
j 0
, before any check to avoid unreal values is:
Page 11 of 16

( )
( )

(
(
(
(

|
|
|
|
.
|

\
|

+ = A

- -
1
1
2
1
2
1
2
*
* *
0

j
j j
j j j
A
A
C A
c
(42).
There are some checks to do in this equation in order to avoid unreal values:
The first control is that the value
( )
0
1
2
1
2
*
* *
>
|
|
|
|
.
|

\
|

+
j
j j
j
A
A
C

so
j
C must be greater than:
( )
2
*
* *
1
2
1
|
|
|
|
.
|

\
|

>
j
j j
j
A
A
C

(43)
The second condition is that the flow must not be supersonic so the
*
j
cr
A value is defined
2
3
1
* *
*
j j
cr
j
A

+
+
= (44)
And the condition is
* * *
j
cr j datum
A A <= A
The third condition is the flow cannot become toward the junction (invert the direction):
c
j j datum
A
* * *
> A
The last two conditions can be expressed in the following form:
( ) ( )
*
0
* * * * *
, min , max
j
c
j datum cr datum j
A A A
j
A = A (45).
4.4. CONTINUITY EQUATION
In the iterative method the first equation to solve is the continuity equation [11]:
( ) 0
1
* * *
1
2
=
(
(

=
=

N j
j
c A
j
j
c
j j
A
F
A A

(46)
Page 12 of 16

A datum value is defined as a unique duct with the following characteristics:
- With a flow rate as the sum of all the flow rates entering the duct;
- With an equivalent Area;
- With an equivalent stagnation Enthalpy
If a datum value is defined ,the starred dimensionless sound speed of each duct can be expressed in the form:
* * *
j datum j
A A A = (47)
Where
*
j
A is the pressure loss term between the datum duct and the j
th
duct.
The continuity equation has then the following form:
( ) ( ) ( ) 0
1
* * * * *
1
2
=
(
(

A A

=
=

N j
j
c A
j
j datum
c
j j datum
A
F
A A

(48)
that can be solved in a iterative way with
*
datum
A as unknown having as input the pressure losses
*
j
A , the corrected lambda values
c
j
*

and the entropy levels

Ac
A in addition to the pipe area
j
F and the specific heat ratio . In the following section the pressure loss terms
are explained.
4.5. SOLVING METHOD
To solve the multi-pipe junction model a predictor corrector solver has been used. The unknown of the iterative cycle is the vector of
*
j
A and the initial values of the cycle can be for example those from Benson Constant Pressure method and the steps to solve the
model are:
1. With equations from (25) to (28) the corrected values of the entropy levels are calculated;
2. with equation (29) the values of
c
j
*
are calculated;
3. equations from (32) to (45) to calculate the pressure loss terms
*
j
A ;
4. solve the continuity equation (48) for the unknown
New datum
A
*
;
5. calculate the sound speeds
*
j
A using equation (47);
6. the steps 1 to 5 are repeated until c <
* *
datum New datum
A A
.
;
7. calculate
j in
and
j out
from equation (30) and (31).
4.6. EXAMPLES
Below are reported two cases with sonic flows in the joining ducts (the first) and in the separating flows (the second): the results have
been compared with those obtained without taking account for sonic flow in way to appreciate the differences.
Example 1
A three pipe Y junction have been simulated in the example 1 an example with sonic flow in the joining duct is reported. The pipes
and junction details are reported in figure 4.
Page 13 of 16


Figure 4 Overview of the 3 pipe junction of the example 1
Three ducts with equal diameter of 0.05 m and length of 0.5 m are connected with a an angle of 135 degrees for the duct 1 with ducts
2 and 3 and 90 degrees between 2 and 3. At the left end of the duct 1 there is a pressure of 500000 Pa and 593.15 K of temperature and
the right boundary of ducts 2 and 3 the pressure is 100000 Pa and 293.15 K while within the ducts the initial conditions are 100000 Pa
and 293.15 K of pressure and temperature respectively. The duct model used in this test is the Two Step Lax-Wendroff with TVD and
the discretization step is 0.005 m.
The results are showed after 1200 s. In this case there is only one incoming and two outcoming flows and the datum manifold is
exactly the duct 1. There is symmetry for ducts 2 and 3 so they show the same behavior.

Figure 5 Pressure and Mach number for example 1 without sonic boundary equations
In figure 5 the values of pressure and Mach number along the ducts are showed the case in which the sonic flow is not taken into
account. After 0.5 m, where the junction is located, a supersonic flow can be observed in the duct. the compression wave arriving to
the junction is reflected and a expansion wave is produced, in a similar way of the sudden area enlargement. In figure 5 a supersonic
flow can be observed and the pressure behavior is reported.
Higher pressures at the boundary of duct 1 have been tested and increasing such value the Mach number grows and for pressure
greater than 700000 Pa the calculation crashes. These conditions are possible in the exhaust system of an internal combustion engine.
9
0

1
3
5

1
3
5

P=500000
D=0.05
D
=
0
.
0
5
P=100000
P=100000
D
=
0
.
0
5
1
3
2
Page 14 of 16


Figure 6 Pressure and Mach number along the ducts with the improvements of the present work.
In figure 6 the sonic boundary has been added during calculations and as result, the gas speed is limited to be not greater than the
sound speed (figure 6 at left) so the duct 1 show a different behaviour than figure 5:the Mach number at junction is limited to 1 and the
pressure value is higher than the previous figure. Ducts 2 and 3 are not much influenced by the modifications.
Increasing the Pressure at the left boundary of duct 1 does not reach to a crash during calculations and the method is much efficient in
calculating the solution for multi-pipe boundary.
Example 2
In the example 2 a sonic flow in the separating duct is reproduced. The pipes and junction details are reported in figure 7.

Figure 7 Overview of the 3 pipe junction of the example 2
The Y junction is similar to that of the previous example, but rotated and the duct 3 has a diameter of 0.025 instead of 0.05. the
initial conditions (temperature and pressure) are the same (100000 Pa and 293.15 K), but the boundary temperature for duct 1 and 2
are 500000 Pa and 593.15 K and the results are showed after 1200 s.
In this case there are 2 incoming and only one outcoming flows. The datum manifold has a total flow as the sum of the flows of duct
1 and 2 and a datum area is the sum of the two ducts area.
With these initial conditions the duct1 and 2 see the junction like a sudden contraction and a compression wave is reflected. A higher
value of pressure is found in these duct and a supersonic flow is observed for duct 3 as shown in figure 8.
9
0

1
3
5

1
3
5

P=100000 D=0.025
D
=
0
.
0
5
P=500000
P=500000
D
=
0
.
0
5
1
3
2
Page 15 of 16


Figure 8 Pressure and Mach number for example 2 without boundary equations
At the distance of 0.5 m, where the junction is located, the pressure and Mach number discontinuity are found. The pressure in the
duct 1 and 2 grows from about 3.5 bar to 8.5 near the junction; in the duct 3 the pressure grows from 100000 up to 6 bar. In ducts 1
and 2 the Mach number decreases from the left boundary to the junction from 0.75 to 0.1 and in the duct 3 from 1.1-1.2 to 0.

Figure 9 Pressure and Mach number for example 2 with the improvements of the present work.
In figure 9, the sonic boundary has been added and the pressure Mach number curve are quite different from the previous figure: the
pressure peak in the ducts 1 and 2 is higher while for duct3 is lower. The Mach number at the junction in the duct 3 is limited to 1 and
consequently the ach number in duct 3 is always lower than figure 8Figure 8.
This configuration, together with that of example 1 are quite common in internal combustion engines and sonic flows are possible in
the exhaust systems of engines and a better accuracy can be achieved if a computer code is able to take into account for shocks in pipe
junctions.

5. CONCLUSIONS
In this work the pipe boundaries, the outflow and the multi-pipe boundaries have been analyzed and improved in order to increase the
accuracy of the calculation. In the Benson Constant Pressure model, better values of entropy level have been calculated and a
subcycle has been added in order to better calculate the
c in
and
out
values. In this way the convergence is obtained also for very
little area ratios (10
-6
) and in the tests reported in this paper the number of iterations to reach convergence never exceeds 50.
Page 16 of 16

In The multi-pipe junction, to calculate the pressure drop for flows away from the junction a datum duct has been defined. The
datum duct has an incoming flow as the sum of all the incoming flows and an average density, speed and area weighted with the
flowratio of the i
th
duct supplying flow to the junction. In unsteady gas flows the gas cannot go to a speed greater than the
perturbation that caused its flow: the perturbations have a speed that is equal to the sound speed so the gas cannot go to a speed greater
than sound speed. This limitation has been added in the calculation and these modifications to the multi-pipe junction model
developed by [11] have been tested and compared on two case tests. The first test analyzed the sonic flow in the incoming flows while
the second in the outcoming on a Y junction and the results have been showed and discussed.

REFERENCES
1. Rowland S. Benson; edited by J.H. Horlock and D.E. Winterbone. "The thermodynamics and gas dynamics of internal-
combustion engines", 1982 Clarendon Press
2. F. Ortenzi, "La Simulazione Dei Motori A 4 Tempi: Le Caratteristiche Di Un Apposito Software",Mototecnica, Anno 19, N2 -
Febbraio 2005
3. Ll. Gascn and J. A. Garca, "About the TVD property for the flux-corrected transport techniques", Computational Mechanics,
2002, Volume 30, Number 4, Pages 281-285
4. D. E. Winterbone, R. J. Pearson, Theory of Engine Manifold Design, Professional Engineering Pub., 2000
5. J.R. Serrano, F.J. Arnau, P. Piqueras, M.A. Reyes-Belmonte, "Assessment of a methodology to mesh the spatial domain in the
proximity of the boundary conditions for one-dimensional gas dynamic calculation", Mathematical and Computer Modelling 54
(2011) 17471752
6. T. Katrasnik, "Improved model to determine turbine and compressor boundary conditions with the method of characteristics",
International Journal of Mechanical Sciences 48 (2006) 504516
7. Corbern, J.M., "A new constant pressure junction model for N-branch junctions", 1992, Proc. I. Mech.E., Vol. 206, Part D,
pp.117-123
8. J.M. Desantes, J.R. Serrano, F.J. Arnau, P. Piqueras, "Derivation of the method of characteristics for the fluid dynamic solution of
flow advection along porous wall channels", Applied Mathematical Modelling, Volume 36, Issue 7, July 2012, Pages 31343152
9. A. Onorati, G. Ferrari and G. DErrico, "Fluid Dynamic Modeling of the Gas Flow with Chemical Specie Transport through the
Exhaust Manifold of a Four Cylinder SI Engine", SAE Paper 1999-01-0557
10. P Brejaud, P Higelin, A Charlet and Y Chamaillard, "Development and experimental validation of a new one-dimensional valve
boundary condition based on the method of characteristics", Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part D:
Journal of Automobile Engineering 2011 225: 1614
11. M. D. Bassett, R. J. Pearson, N. P. Fleming, D. E. Winterbone, "A Multi-Pipe Junction Model for One-Dimensional Gas-Dynamic
Simulations", SAE 2003-01-0370
12. G.P. Blair, Design and Simulation of Four-Stroke Engines, 1999 SAE International, R-186