Abonnement à la biblothèque: Guest
Portail numérique Bibliothèque numérique eBooks Revues Références et comptes rendus Collections
Atomization and Sprays
Facteur d'impact: 1.262 Facteur d'impact sur 5 ans: 1.518 SJR: 0.814 SNIP: 1.18 CiteScore™: 1.6

ISSN Imprimer: 1044-5110
ISSN En ligne: 1936-2684

Volumes:
Volume 29, 2019 Volume 28, 2018 Volume 27, 2017 Volume 26, 2016 Volume 25, 2015 Volume 24, 2014 Volume 23, 2013 Volume 22, 2012 Volume 21, 2011 Volume 20, 2010 Volume 19, 2009 Volume 18, 2008 Volume 17, 2007 Volume 16, 2006 Volume 15, 2005 Volume 14, 2004 Volume 13, 2003 Volume 12, 2002 Volume 11, 2001 Volume 10, 2000 Volume 9, 1999 Volume 8, 1998 Volume 7, 1997 Volume 6, 1996 Volume 5, 1995 Volume 4, 1994 Volume 3, 1993 Volume 2, 1992 Volume 1, 1991

Atomization and Sprays

DOI: 10.1615/AtomizSpr.2013008110
pages 697-724

COMPARISON AND CROSS-VALIDATION OF OPTICAL TECHNIQUES IN DIFFERENT SWIRL SPRAY REGIMES

Joshua Lee
University of Central Florida, Orlando, USA
Saptarshi Basu
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore, India
Ranganathan Kumar
University of Central Florida, Orlando, USA

RÉSUMÉ

This paper deals with an experimental study of pressure-swirl hydraulic injector nozzles using non-intrusive optical techniques. Experiments were conducted to study atomization characteristics using two nozzles with different orifice diameters, 0.3 mm and 0.5 mm, and injection pressures, 0.3−3.5 Mpa, which correspond to Reynolds number (Rep) = 7,000−45,000, depending on nozzle utilized. Three laser diagnostic techniques were utilized: Shadowgraph, PIV (Particle Image Velocimetry), and PDPA (Phase Doppler Particle Anemometry). Measurements made in the spray in both axial and radial directions indicate that velocity, average droplet diameter profiles, and spray dynamics are highly dependent on the nozzle characteristics and injection pressure. Limitations of these techniques in the different flow regimes, related to the primary and secondary breakups as well as coalescence, are provided. Results indicate that all three techniques provide similar results throughout the different regimes. Shadowgraph and PDPA were possible in the secondary atomization and coalescence regimes while PIV measurements could be made only at the end of secondary atomization and coalescence.


Articles with similar content:

BREAKUP DYNAMICS AND NEAR NOZZLE SPRAY FLUCTUATIONS IN A TWIN-JET CROSS-FLOW AIRBLAST ATOMIZER
Atomization and Sprays, Vol.29, 2019, issue 3
Srikrishna Sahu, Shirin Patil
CHARACTERISTICS OF TRANSIENT, SWIRL-GENERATED, HOLLOW-CONE SPRAYS
Atomization and Sprays, Vol.16, 2006, issue 5
Julian T. Kashdan, John S. Shrimpton
CHARACTERIZATION OF HIGH-INJECTION-PRESSURE DIESEL SPRAYS WITH RELATION TO PARTICULATE AND NOx EMISSIONS
Atomization and Sprays, Vol.8, 1998, issue 1
T. F. Su, Patrick V. Farrell
EXPERIMENTAL INVESTIGATION OF THE ATOMIZATION CHARACTERISTICS OF ANTICORROSION WAX
Atomization and Sprays, Vol.23, 2013, issue 7
Sanghoon Lee, Sungwook Park
EXPERIMENTAL INVESTIGATION OF THE CORRELATION BETWEEN NOZZLE FLOW AND SPRAY USING LASER DOPPLER VELOCIMETER, PHASE DOPPLER SYSTEM, HIGH-SPEED PHOTOGRAPHY, AND X-RAY RADIOGRAPHY
Atomization and Sprays, Vol.20, 2010, issue 1
Barbara Heine, Benjamin Balewski, Cameron Tropea