ライブラリ登録: Guest
Begell Digital Portal Begellデジタルライブラリー 電子書籍 ジャーナル 参考文献と会報 リサーチ集
Atomization and Sprays
インパクトファクター: 1.737 5年インパクトファクター: 1.518 SJR: 0.814 SNIP: 1.18 CiteScore™: 2.2

ISSN 印刷: 1044-5110
ISSN オンライン: 1936-2684

巻:
巻 30, 2020 巻 29, 2019 巻 28, 2018 巻 27, 2017 巻 26, 2016 巻 25, 2015 巻 24, 2014 巻 23, 2013 巻 22, 2012 巻 21, 2011 巻 20, 2010 巻 19, 2009 巻 18, 2008 巻 17, 2007 巻 16, 2006 巻 15, 2005 巻 14, 2004 巻 13, 2003 巻 12, 2002 巻 11, 2001 巻 10, 2000 巻 9, 1999 巻 8, 1998 巻 7, 1997 巻 6, 1996 巻 5, 1995 巻 4, 1994 巻 3, 1993 巻 2, 1992 巻 1, 1991

Atomization and Sprays

DOI: 10.1615/AtomizSpr.v15.i6.20
pages 629-660

ELECTROSTATIC EFFECTS ON AGRICULTURAL AIR-ATOMIZED SPRAYS AND DEPOSITION. PART II: A COMPUTATIONAL STUDY

M. R. Jahannama
Atomization and Sprays Research Group, Mechanical, Aeronautical and Manufacturing Engineering Department, UMIST, Manchester M60 1QD, UK
A. Paul Watkins
Energy and Multiphysics Research Group, School of Mechanical, Aerospace, and Civil Engineer- ing, University of Manchester, United Kingdom

要約

This article reports on a computational investigation of inductively charged sprays used in crop spraying. The charged sprays are produced using an air-atomizing induction-charging nozzle. In complementary research, the spray structures are experimentally characterized based on drop size and velocity data obtained using laser-based techniques, both in the free spray and in the near-target vicinity. The experimental deposition study used spectrophotometry analysis to quantify the drop residue on a grounded target. The study reported on here comprises the computational simulation of free spray and deposition aspects of charged and uncharged sprays, and uses the data obtained in the parallel investigation to determine the ability of the computational model to accurately predict such sprays. Experimental test results demonstrate the dominance of hydrodynamic effects within the charged free sprays, whereas, in the vicinity of a grounded target, the sprays are influenced by the attractive electrostatic force fields created, leading to greater drop depositions on the target than for an uncharged spray. These trends are confirmed by the computational results. However, there are differences of detail. The model generally underpredicts the effects of the electric fields on the spray motion near the target. This is probably due to an incorrect mass flux profile at the injector, leading to too little mass and, hence, charge being predicted in the target vicinity.


Articles with similar content:

ELECTROSTATIC EFFECTS ON AGRICULTURAL AIR-ATOMIZED SPRAYS AND DEPOSITION. PART I: AN EXPERIMENTAL STUDY
Atomization and Sprays, Vol.15, 2005, issue 6
M. R. Jahannama, Andrew J. Yule, A. Paul Watkins
THE EFFECT OF NOZZLE ELECTRIFICATION ON SPRAY FORMATION FROM AN AIRBLAST ATOMIZER
4th Thermal and Fluids Engineering Conference, Vol.32, 2019, issue
Theodore (Ted) Heindel, Timothy B. Morgan, Nathanaël Machicoane, Danyu Li, Alan L. Kastengren, Julie K. Bothell, Katarzyna E. Matusik, Thomas J. Burtnett, Alberto Aliseda
EQUILIBRIUM EVAPORATION SPRAY MODELING FOR APPLICATION IN COOL FLAMES
International Journal of Energy for a Clean Environment, Vol.6, 2005, issue 4
M. A. Founti, D. I. Kolaitis
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
X-RAY IMAGING TECHNIQUES TO QUANTIFY SPRAY CHARACTERISTICS IN THE NEAR FIELD
Atomization and Sprays, Vol.28, 2018, issue 11
Theodore (Ted) Heindel