Доступ предоставлен для: Guest
Портал Begell Электронная Бибилиотека e-Книги Журналы Справочники и Сборники статей Коллекции
Atomization and Sprays
Импакт фактор: 1.262 5-летний Импакт фактор: 1.518 SJR: 0.814 SNIP: 1.18 CiteScore™: 1.6

ISSN Печать: 1044-5110
ISSN Онлайн: 1936-2684

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

Atomization and Sprays

DOI: 10.1615/AtomizSpr.v20.i8.30
pages 697-720

VISCOELASTIC AIR-BLAST SPRAYS IN A CROSS-FLOW. PART 1: PENETRATION AND DISPERSION

Larry Li
Sheldon I. Green
Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of British Columbia, 3321−2260 West Mall, Vancouver, British Columbia, V6T1Z4, Canada
Martin H. Davy
Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of British Columbia, 2054-6250 Applied Science Lane, Vancouver, British Columbia, V6T1Z4, Canada
Donald T. Eadie
Kelsan Technologies Corporation, 1140 West 15th Street, North Vancouver, British Columbia, V7P 1M9, Canada

Краткое описание

Viscoelastic liquids, such as paints and coatings, are widely known to be more difficult to atomize than typical Newtonian liquids. What is not known, however, is how such a difference affects spray coating in field conditions. To address this, we have examined the effect of a cross-flow on two different air-blast sprays, one comprising water and the other an industrial coating. Using particle image velocimetry and raw Mie scattering, we measured the penetration and dispersion of both sprays over a wide range of spray:cross-flow momentum-flux ratios: 134 ≤ qab ≤ 1382. For both sprays, increasing the relative momentum-flux of the cross-flow led to reduced penetration but enhanced dispersion. The leeward boundary, meanwhile, consistently outspread the windward boundary, creating a bias for which we have proposed several plausible mechanisms. As for differences between the two sprays, the coating droplets outpenetrated the water droplets because they had lower drag-momentum ratios, due to their larger size. In response to this finding, we have proposed a new regression model for predicting the penetration of sprays differing in mean droplet size. The coating spray also spread later and more abruptly than did the water spray, particularly at low qab. To explain this behavior, we have suggested a physical mechanism based on the delayed breakup of the coating ligaments.

Ключевые слова: atomization, non-Newtonian, cross-wind, coating

Articles with similar content:

VISCOELASTIC AIR-BLAST SPRAYS IN A CROSS-FLOW. PART 2: DROPLET VELOCITIES
Atomization and Sprays, Vol.20, 2010, issue 8
Martin H. Davy, Larry Li, Donald T. Eadie, Sheldon I. Green
PENETRATION OF AERATED SUSPENSION SPRAY IN A GASEOUS CROSSFLOW
Atomization and Sprays, Vol.28, 2018, issue 2
Amr Saleh, Ali Dolatabadi, Ghobad Amini
EVAPORATION CALCULATIONS FOR POLYDISPERSE WATER SPRAYS USING SPECTRAL SCALING
Atomization and Sprays, Vol.25, 2015, issue 9
Lanming Zhao, Yongming Zhang, Wen Jiang, Hengze Zhao
IMPACT OF PARTICLE-LADEN DROPS: SPLASHING CRITERION
Atomization and Sprays, Vol.27, 2017, issue 5
Alidad Amirfazli, Frank Dubois, Viktor Grishaev, Carlo Saverio Iorio
EXPERIMENTAL INVESTIGATION OF SPRAY CHARACTERISTICS OF DIESEL-METHANOL-WATER EMULSION
Atomization and Sprays, Vol.25, 2015, issue 8
Wuqiang Wang, Shenteng Cao, Dongyin Wu, Junjie Yan, Zhenzhou Pang