Library Subscription: Guest
Begell Digital Portal Begell Digital Library eBooks Journals References & Proceedings Research Collections
Atomization and Sprays
IF: 1.189 5-Year IF: 1.596 SJR: 0.814 SNIP: 1.18 CiteScore™: 1.6

ISSN Print: 1044-5110
ISSN Online: 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.v13.i4.30
pages 373-394

TRANSIENT MULTIDIMENSIONAL MODELING OF AIR-BLAST ATOMIZERS

David P. Schmidt
Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, University of Massachusetts Amherst, Amherst, Massachusetts 01003, USA
Louis M. Chiappetta
United Technologies Research Center, East Hartford, Connecticut, USA
Graham M. Goldin
Fluent Inc., Lebanon, New Hampshire, USA
Ravi K. Madabhushi
United Technologies Research Center, East Hartford, Connecticut, USA

ABSTRACT

A group of models for representing air-blast atomization were tested together and compared to experimental data. A primary atomization model, known as the linearized instability sheet atomization (LISA) model, which was designed and validated for pressure-swirl atomization, has now been extended to air-blast atomizers. That model, presented and tested by Schmidt et al. [1], has been slightly modified in light of recent discoveries. Existing models for secondary breakup, droplet collision, and turbulent dispersion were used. None of these models was adjusted for better results, but they were instead tested for their predictive ability. The calculations were validated with two gas-turbine airblast atomizers. The models were first applied to an injector typical of those used in small gas-turbine engines, for which both light-diffraction droplet-size distribution data and fuel flux distribution data were measured. Subsequently, the model was applied to simulate the flow from a fuel injector typical of those used in mid-thrust engines. In this case, laser velocimetry data were available for the gas phase, as well as drop size and mass flux data for the liquid phase. The laser velocimetry data provided a means to determine whether the underlying gas flow field was computed correctly, which is essential for modeling the spray accurately. Sensitivity to inputs and convergence criteria were also investigated. The agreement of the spray predictions with the experimental data was encouraging, which suggests that these models have general applicability for atomization. However, the results also indicate areas where the gas-phase calculation and spray models are lacking.


Articles with similar content:

SPRAYS IN COMBUSTION: CAN WE BUILD MODELS UNIFIED WITH TURBULENT COMBUSTION?
ICLASS 94
Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Liquid Atomization and Spray Systems, Vol.0, 1994, issue
R. Borghi
A UNIFIED FUEL SPRAY BREAKUP MODEL FOR INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINE APPLICATIONS
Atomization and Sprays, Vol.18, 2008, issue 5
Dennis N. Assanis, Christos Chryssakis
EULER/LAGRANGE CALCULATIONS OF TURBULENT SPRAYS: THE EFFECT OF DROPLET COLLISIONS AND COALESCENCE
Atomization and Sprays, Vol.10, 2000, issue 1
S. Hohmann, M. Ruger, Martin Sommerfeld, Gangolf Kohnen
EVALUATION OF PLAIN-JET AIR BLAST ATOMIZATION AND EVAPORATION OF ALTERNATIVE FUELS IN A SMALL GAS TURBINE ENGINE APPLICATION
Atomization and Sprays, Vol.19, 2009, issue 8
Christopher D. Bolszo, Vincent McDonell
DEVELOPMENT OF AN IMPROVED SPRAY/WALL INTERACTION MODEL FOR DIESEL-LIKE SPRAY IMPINGEMENT SIMULATIONS
Atomization and Sprays, Vol.25, 2015, issue 7
Rolf D. Reitz, Qi Jiao, Peng Deng, Zhiyu Han