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.v12.i123.90
pages 163-186

A PREFERENTIAL VAPORIZATION MODEL FOR MULTICOMPONENT DROPLETS AND SPRAYS

Yangbing Zeng
Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Illinois, USA
Chia-Fon Lee
Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 140 Mechanical Engineering Building, 1206 West Green Street, Urbana, IL 61801

RÉSUMÉ

A multicomponent vaporization model for spray computations was developed to account for the temperature and concentration nonuniformity inside a droplet due to preferential vaporization and finite diffusion processes. The effect of internal circulation was also included using effective diffusivity. The model was validated through rigorous tests and the results agreed well with accurate finite-difference solutions for temperature temporal variations of nonvaporizing droplets and with the measured mole fraction temporal variations of bi-component droplets. The model was also applied to investigate the vaporization of solid-cone sprays and physical insights on preferential vaporization were revealed. Throughout the tests, comparisons with the widely used infinite diffusion model (limited accuracy, low computational cost) and the simplified vortex model(high accuracy, high cost) were also made. Overall, the accuracy of the present model is close to that of the simplified vortex model, while the computational cost is comparable to that of the infinite diffusion model.


Articles with similar content:

AN EFFICIENT NUMERICAL METHOD FOR UNCERTAINTY QUANTIFICATION IN CARDIOLOGY MODELS
International Journal for Uncertainty Quantification, Vol.9, 2019, issue 3
Zhiwen Zhang, Xindan Gao, Wenjun Ying
MONO- AND MULTI-COMPONENT DROPLET COOLING/HEATING AND EVAPORATION: COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF NUMERICAL MODELS
Atomization and Sprays, Vol.21, 2011, issue 11
Guillaume Castanet, Fabrice Lemoine, I. G. Gusev, A. E. Elwardany, Sergei S. Sazhin
SCALAR TRANSPORT IN HETEROGENEOUS MEDIA: A SIMPLIFIED GREEN ELEMENT APPROACH
Hybrid Methods in Engineering, Vol.2, 2000, issue 1
Okey Oseloka Onyejekwe
ACCURATE NUMERICAL SOLUTION OF THE SPRAY EQUATION USING PARTICLE METHODS
Atomization and Sprays, Vol.16, 2006, issue 2
Shankar Subramaniam, G. M. Pai
NUMERICAL METHODS FOR ONE-DIMENSIONAL REACTION-DIFFUSION EQUATIONS ARISING IN COMBUSTION THEORY
Annual Review of Heat Transfer, Vol.1, 1987, issue 1
Juan I. Ramos