Comparison and correction of the drop breakup models for stochastic dilute spray flow

被引:30
作者
Lee, Min Wool [1 ]
Park, Jung Jae [1 ]
Farid, Massoud Massoudi [2 ]
Yoon, Sam S. [1 ]
机构
[1] Korea Univ, Dept Mech Engn, Seoul, South Korea
[2] Yonsei Univ, Dept Mech Engn, Seoul 120749, South Korea
基金
新加坡国家研究基金会;
关键词
Drop; Aerodynamic drag; Breakup model; Secondary atomization; DEFORMATION; SIMULATION;
D O I
10.1016/j.apm.2012.02.015
中图分类号
T [工业技术];
学科分类号
08 ;
摘要
Spray-gas interaction is common in many industrial applications that use a liquid jet injection system. Numerous liquid drops interact with the surrounding gas as they travel through the air. During such a travel, aerodynamic interaction between a drop and the surrounding gas flattens the drop and ultimately, breaks up the drop. The TAB (Taylor Analogy Breakup) model was proposed by O'Rourke and Amsden (1987) [6] for the KIVA spray code, but the use of this model has been controversial because the original paper that proposed this model has typographical errors. Another well-known drop breakup model, such as the DDB (Drop Deformation Breakup) model of Ibrahim et al. (1993) [8], has been widely used. However, although numerical solutions of the DDB model ostensibly make it appear superior to those of other previous breakup models, they contain errors that need to be amended. This paper aims to clarify the error controversies of both models: the typographical errors and the erroneous numerical solutions. The complete mathematical derivation of the TAB model is presented, and its correct numerical solutions are compared against the experimental data. We found that the TAB model was superior to other breakup models, such as Clark (1988) [7] and DDB. (C) 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:4512 / 4520
页数:9
相关论文
共 21 条
[1]   Experimental and numerical analysis of high pressure diesel spray-wall interaction [J].
Andreassi, L. ;
Ubertini, S. ;
Allocca, L. .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MULTIPHASE FLOW, 2007, 33 (07) :742-765
[2]  
Bauman S., SPRAY MODEL ADAPTIVE
[3]   DROP BREAKUP IN A TURBULENT-FLOW .1. CONCEPTUAL AND MODELING CONSIDERATIONS [J].
CLARK, MM .
CHEMICAL ENGINEERING SCIENCE, 1988, 43 (03) :671-679
[4]   What is important in the simulation of spray dryer performance and how do current CFD models perform? [J].
Fletcher, D. F. ;
Guo, B. ;
Harvie, D. J. E. ;
Langrish, T. A. G. ;
Nijdam, J. J. ;
Williams, J. .
APPLIED MATHEMATICAL MODELLING, 2006, 30 (11) :1281-1292
[5]  
Gibbs BF, 1999, INT J FOOD SCI NUTR, V50, P213, DOI 10.1080/096374899101256
[6]   SPREADING AND BREAK-UP OF A DROP IN A GAS-STREAM [J].
GONOR, AL ;
ZOLOTOVA, NV .
ACTA ASTRONAUTICA, 1984, 11 (02) :137-142
[7]   Secondary atomization [J].
Guildenbecher, D. R. ;
Lopez-Rivera, C. ;
Sojka, P. E. .
EXPERIMENTS IN FLUIDS, 2009, 46 (03) :371-402
[8]   MODELING OF SPRAY DROPLETS DEFORMATION AND BREAKUP [J].
IBRAHIM, EA ;
YANG, HQ ;
PRZEKWAS, AJ .
JOURNAL OF PROPULSION AND POWER, 1993, 9 (04) :651-654
[9]   Experimental and numerical modeling study for irrigation gun water jet [J].
Kadem, N. ;
Tchiftchibachian, A. ;
Borghi, R. .
ATOMIZATION AND SPRAYS, 2008, 18 (04) :315-341
[10]   Experiments and modeling on droplet motion and atomization of diesel and bio-diesel fuels in a cross-flowed air stream [J].
Kim, Sayop ;
Hwang, Jin Woo ;
Lee, Chang Sik .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HEAT AND FLUID FLOW, 2010, 31 (04) :667-679