SAE TECHNICAL 2014-36-0122

PAPER SERIES E

NUMERICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL EVALUATION OF SLOSHING

IN AUTOMOTIVE FUEL TANKS
FELIPE MORETTI LEILA
MARCIO EDUARDO SILVEIRA
BRUNO CESAR POCKSZEVNICKI
PAULO CEZAR MONTEIRO LAMIM FILHO
JORGE NEI BRITO
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in
any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior written
permission of SAE.

ISSN 0148-7191
Copyright ‹2014SAE International

Positions and opinions advanced in this paper are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of SAE. The
authors solely responsible for the content of the paper.
 2014-36-0122

Numerical and Experimental Evaluation of Sloshing in

Automotive Fuel Tanks

Felipe L. Moretti, Márcio E. Silveira, Paulo C. M. F. Lamin, Jorge N. Brito

Universidade Federal de São João de Rei -UFSJ

Bruno C. Pockszevnicki
Vision Graphic Design

Copyright © 2014 SAE International

Abstract the oscillations of the free surface of a fluid inside of a

container partially filled. These oscillations typically occurs
during the acceleration or braking of the vehicle, where the
The research of the sloshing (defined as being the oscillations
inertia make the fluid to move abruptly inside of the tank,
of the free surface of a fluid inside of a container) has many
generating undesirable noises to the passengers.
applications in the automotive, naval and aerospace industry.
In the automotive industry, the sloshing behavior in fuel tanks
is part of an overall NVH research to design cars that run The sloshing behavior in fuel tanks is part of an overall NVH
smoother and quieter. Sloshing in fuel tanks typically occurs (Noise, Vibration and Harshness) research to design cars that
during the acceleration or braking of the vehicle, where the run smoother and quieter. [2] and [3] demonstrated that the
inertia make the fluid to move abruptly inside of the tank, types of noises generated by the movement of sloshing
generating undesirable noises to the passengers. The sloshing (“Splash”, “Hit” and “Clonk”) are audible to human ears,
research allows knowing the fuel motion inside the tank, proving cause acoustic discomfort to the passengers of the
becoming possible to reduce the level of noise generated from vehicle.
the interaction of the fluid with the tank, by an optimized project
of the tank geometric, fuel bomb localization, and the The “splash” noise is the sloshing of fluid waves into each
introduction of baffles. The use of numerical simulation in the other. “Hit” is generated by wave fronts hitting the tank wall.
study of sloshing can become the validation process of the “Clonk” is generated, when sloshing liquid compresses air
product less onerous, reducing the costs of "try out" volumes abruptly. Figure 1 shows the noise generated by the
procedures and increasing the trustworthiness. This work had sloshing.
as objective to simulate by Finite Elements Methods the
sloshing in an automotive fuel tank, using formulation ALE
(Arbitrary Lagrangian-Eulerian) by the Radioss software. The
numerical results had been compared with the results obtained
by the experimental test, resulting in a satisfactory correlation.
This work represents an important step inside a general target,
which is the evaluation of the acoustics emission caused by (a) Splash (b) Hit (c) Clonk
the fuel tanks sloshing. Figure 1. Schematic figure of the main types of noise generated by
sloshing [2].
Introduction
To minimize noise caused by sloshing, automotive industries
use acoustic insulation blankets on the outside of the tank,
In a competitive automotive market and fast advancement of
which often do not have good insulation. Another study
technology, car manufacturers aim to ensure increased
considers the addition of baffles within the fuel tank. In this
comfort in their products. One of the major discomforts occurs
case, the geometry of the baffles and their position are
due to undesirable internal noises. The sound quality has a
evaluated by the method of "trial and error". The use of
significant influence on the customer's decision to buy a
numerical simulation in the study of sloshing can become the
vehicle, as vehicles become quieter the customer's acoustical
validation process of the product less onerous, reducing the
comfort increases [1].
costs of "try out" procedures and increasing the
trustworthiness.
The sloshing of the fuel within the tank causes one of the
relevant sounds in some vehicles. The sloshing is defined as

Page 1 of 6
This work had as objective to simulate by Finite Elements
Methods the sloshing in a simplified automotive fuel tank, using
formulation ALE (Arbitrary Lagrangian-Eulerian) by the
Radioss software. The numerical results had been compared
with the results obtained by the experimental test, showing a
good correlation.
(a)
Experimental Test
Due to the complexity of the sloshing study, an experimental
analysis in order to validate the numerical analyzes were
performed. To obtain good correlation were considered the
same parameters for both analyzes. (b)

For the experiment was made a simplified prototype of a fuel

Figure 3. Tank-base system and Track; (a) Initial position, (b) Final
tank. The tank was made with transparent acrylic plates 1.7 position.
mm thick with dimension 405 x 285 x 185mm. As structural
reinforcement, aluminum brackets with 1mm thick were added
For safety reasons water with blue dye was used instead of
in the edges of the tank.
fuel. With a total volume of 21,4 L, three levels were analyzed
in the tank, 12,8 L, 15L, and 17,3, representing 60%, 70% and
80% of the total volume.

A parameter used for correlation between the numerical and

experimental analyzes was the acceleration point in the vertical
direction. The accelerations values was obtained through the
accelerometer SKF model CMSS 2200 (Figure 4) with
sensitivity 100mV/g sensitivity and accuracy ± 10% at 25 ° C.

Figure 2. Schematic fuel tank prototype.

In real cases, the sloshing in the tanks occurs whenever there

is a sudden braking of the car at low speeds, usually in
maneuvers. Thus, the prototype received a wooden base with
wheels and then it was placed on a track with a 3.88° tilt.
Through gravitational force, the tank-base system covered a
distance of 450mm being stopped at the end of the route in
order to simulate the braking of a vehicle, Figure 3.
Figure 4. Accelerometer SKF - CMSS 2200.

From the initial position, using the equation: The accelerometer was affixed on the top front of the tank.
Four points of acceleration analysis were considered, Point 1,
ܸ ଶ ൌ ܸ‫ ݋‬ଶ ൅ ʹǤ ܽǤ οܵ (1) 2 and 3 to 45mm, 85mm and 125mm respectively from the top
edge and Point 4 to 125mm right of point 1, Figure 5. The
Being, ܽ ൌ ݃Ǥ •‹ ͵ǡͺͺι analysis showed insignificant variation between the points,
thereby only Point 1 was used for evaluation.
Where,

V = final speed
Vo = initial speed
a = acceleration
g = acceleration of gravity
∆S = displacement variation

It has final speed V = 0,773 m/s. The resulting of the friction

loss of wheel base and roughness along the route was roughly
10%. Thus, the final velocity of the tank was 0,7 m/s.

Figure 5. Analysis point of acceleration.

Page 2 of 6
 The fluids was modeled using solid elements with bi-phase
materials (Figure 6), with the following properties [8]:
Numerical Simulation
Table 2. Bi-phase materials properties
Liquid Shear
Finite element method began to be introduced in the fifties as Initial
Initial density bulk kinematic
an analytical tool to aid engineering projects [4]. In the sixties, massic
(g/mm3) modulus viscosity
with the advancement of the aerospace sector, the demand for liquid
(N/mm2) (mm2/ms)
more efficient and reliable methods increased dramatically at
universities and industries. Nonlinear analysis using finite Water 10-3 2089 100% 0.001
element method also started in this period. Among the first Air 1.22x10-3 2089 0% 0.00143
articles about nonlinear analysis, one can cite: Argyries (1965)
and Marcal et al. (1967), cited in Belytschko et al. (2000) [5].
Pedro Marcal, who was a professor at Brown University,
created in 1969 a company that released the MARC, first Acrylic
software on the market with nonlinear finite element analysis, Air
which its implicit formulation is still used nowadays. A
Aluminum
milestone of the progress in the explicit finite element
formulation was the work of John Hallquist at Lawrence
Livermore Laboratory. John began his work in 1975 and the Water
first version of Dyna explicit code was released in 1976. Dyna
code evolved over time and formed the basis for several
commercial programs such as Radioss, LS-Dyna, PamCrash
and Dytran. Radioss was originally created in 1987 by the Base
French company Mecalog, aiming to address the issues of
fluid-structure interaction. Currently Radioss, that was Figure 6. Mesh of the fuel tank components.
incorporated by Altair Engineering, is recognized worldwide for
its performance on issues related to the simulation of nonlinear The boundary conditions were imposed to represent the
events. In this work, RADIOSS was used to simulate sloshing motion of the tank according to the experiment.
through the ALE formulation with bi-phasic materials.
Results
The Arbitrary Lagrangian Eulerian (ALE) approach is based on
the arbitrary movement of a reference domain, which,
The first evaluation of numerical and experimental analyzes
additionally to the common material domain and spatial
was made by visual comparison of the fluid behavior and
domain, is introduced as a third domain, [6], [7]. ALE
sloshing inside the tank. With the aid of a camera capable of
formulation is used to model the interaction between fluids and
shooting 300 frames per second was made a slow motion
solids; in particular, the fluid loading on structures. It can also
video of the experimental analysis. The software generated the
be used to model fluid like behavior, as seen in plastic
video of the simulation, which was used to compare with the
deformation of materials. ALE derives its name from a
slow motion video. Both videos were for the level 2 fluid,
combination of two different finite element modelling
representing 70% of the tank volume. It was observed a very
techniques: Lagrangian Formulation - where the observer
close similarly in the figures generated, Figure 7.
follows material points; Eulerian Formulation - where the
observer looks at fixed points in space [8]

In this case, the fluids (air and water) inside the tank were
modeled as eulerian and the walls of the tank, lagrangian. As
the tank wall is modeled as a deformable body, it was possible
to obtain the acceleration in the wall at the moment of impact.

The tank was modeled using plate elements with bi-linear

interpolation and 6 degrees of freedom per node and linear
elastic material, as show the Table 1.

Table 1. Material properties of the tank

Density Young's
Poisson
(g/cm3) Modulus (MPa)
Aluminum 2,7 70000 0,33
Acrylic 1,2 3200 0,4

Page 3 of 6

Figure 7. Visual validation of numerical and experimental analyzes.
With the accelerometer, the accelerations in Point 1 for the
different levels were measured. To ensure repeatability, three
measurements were taken for each level. In Figures 8, 9 and
10 are the graphics of Acceleration (G) vs. Time (s) measured
for the different levels.
On the level 1, 60% total volume, has an acceleration peak
with amplitude 3,44 G. This peak represents the impact of the
fluid on the top of the tank causing the noise of "Hit" followed
by "Clonk".
Figure 8 . Graphic with acceleration in level 1.
The behavior of the acceleration in the Tank Level 2, 70% total
volume, showed higher acceleration peak with an amplitude of
4,10 G.
Figure 9. Graphic whit the acceleration in level 2.
The maximum acceleration peak for Level 3, 80% of the total
volume, was 2,87 G. Despite the greater volume of fluid, and
therefore greater mass hitting the top wall of the tank, the less
space for water to move caused a lower peak vertical
acceleration.
Page 4 of 6
Figure 10. Graphic with acceleration in level 3.
The results of acceleration through the numerical simulation
did not correlate with the experimental, as shown in Figure 11
for level 1. Acceleration peaks obtained were significantly
lower. Gravity imposed initially also generated undesired
noises. The experimental test shows certain noises rolling that
were not present in the simulation, once was not simulated the
contact between the wheels and the ramp, as well as possible
irregularities. One reason for this difference is that the
formulation used (ALE) cannot simulate the effect of the impact
of the fluid in the tank wall, since the Eulerian mesh does not
"shock" with the Lagrangian mesh. When the water moving
within the tank, which occurs in the simulation is only a change
in the density of the elements. Thus, at impact, what happens
is a sudden change of the elements densities in contact with
the tank wall, producing an acceleration lower than actual.
Hit
Gravity initially imposed
Figure 11. Graphic with acceleration in level 1 by numerical simulation.
Being the sound pressure related with the noise generated by
the sloshing, was obtained graphs of pressure at Point 1 for
the different levels. The level 1 obtained a maximum pressure
of 0,68 kPa. The maximum pressure peak at Level 2 and 3
was 1,09 KPa, as show the Figures 12, 13 and 14.
Figure 12. Pressure x Time Level 1
 Conclusions
This work had as objective to simulate by Finite Elements
Methods using ALE formulation the sloshing in an automotive
fuel tank prototype by the Radioss software. The numerical
results had been compared with the results obtained by the
experimental test, resulting in a satisfactory visual validation.

The level with greater acceleration and pressure was what

showed higher noise during the tests, showing that the
evaluation of these parameters is an important step forward to
the evaluation of acoustic emission by sloshing, still in the
virtual phase of product development.

Figure 13. Pressure x Time Level 2 Both numerical and experimental results showed promising for
the study of the position influence of baffles inside the fuel tank
in order to reduce noise from sloshing.

For a more detailed and accurate evaluation, will be necessary

the utilization of great number of levels. Only three levels can
lead to inaccurate results. It should be emphasized that results
may vary according to the geometry of the tank once it has
been three types of noise due to sloshing ("splash", "Hit" and
"Clonk")

For future projects, it would be interesting to correlate the

results with those obtained via microphones, as well as to use
SPH (Smoothed Particle Hydrodynamics) formulation to better
correlate the impact of the fluid in the tank wall.

Figure 14. Pressure x Time Level 3 References

Table 3 shows the values of acceleration and pressure for the 1. Genuit, K. “The sound quality of vehicle interior noise: a
three levels analyzed. It may be noted that the higher peak challenge for the NVH-enginners”, Int. J. Vehicle Noise
acceleration and pressure happened in the tank with level 2, and Vibration, Vol. 1, Nos. ½, 2004.
exactly what was perceived greater volume of sound during the 2. Wachowski, C., Biermann, J.-W., Schala, R. “Approaches
test sloshing. The level 3 despite having revealed a pressure to analyse and predict slosh noise of vehicle fuel tanks”
such high as level 2, the peak acceleration was much lower, Proceedings of Isma2010 Including Usd2010, 2010.
not showing so loud during the tests. 3. Wiesche, S. A. D. “Noise due to sloshing within
automotive fuel tanks”, Forsch Ingenieurwes 70: 13–24,
Table 3. Acceleration and Pressure for the different levels 2006, doi:10.1007/s10010-005-0010-4
Acceleration Pressure 4. Szabó, B., Babuska, I. "Finite Element Analysis". John
(G) (kPa) Wiley & Sons, 1991.
Level 1 3,44 0,68 5. Belytschko, T., Liu, W. K., Moran, B. "Nonlinear Finite
Level 2 4,10 1,09 Elements for Continua and Structures". John Wiley &
Sons, 2000.
Level 3 2,87 1,09 6. Hughes, T.J.R., Liu, W.K. and Zimmerman, T.K.
“Lagrangian Eulerian finite element formulation for viscous
flows”, J. Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng., Vol 21,
pp.329-349, 1981.
7. Aquelet, N., Souli, M. "A new ALE formulation for sloshing
analysis". Structural Engineering and Mechanics, Vol. 16,
No. 4, 2003.
8. RADIOSS Theory Manual, 12.0 version – Nov, 2012.

Contact Information
Felipe L. Moretti
felipe_leila@hotmail.com

Márcio E. Silveira
msilveira@ufsj.edu.br

Page 5 of 6
Paulo C. M. F. Lamin
plamim@yahoo.com

Jorge N. Brito
brito@ufsj.edu.br

Bruno C. Pockszevnicki
bruno@visiongraphic.com.br

Page 6 of 6