Advertisement

The influence of geometrical and operational parameters on Y-jet atomizers performance

  • Antonio L. Pacifico
  • Jurandir I. YanagiharaEmail author
Technical Paper

Abstract

The effects of operational and geometrical parameters on pressure distribution and flow pattern in Y-jet atomizers were studied using an experimental apparatus working with air and water. The results show that the mixing point pressure is very dependent on the diameter ratio of the mixing duct and the air port and the water supply pressure ratio. A correlation to predict the mixing point pressure was developed and showed good agreement with the experimental data. With this correlation, it is possible to predict the occurrence of the critical condition for the air flow at the exit of its port. In a second group of results, the influence of geometrical and operational parameters on the pressure distribution inside the mixing duct was analyzed. The main result found was that for air liquid ratio between 0.1 and 0.2, this pressure distribution can be taken as linear. This information about air liquid ratio and the correlation to predict the occurrence of chocked flow at the exit of the air port may give useful guidelines for atomizer designers. Finally, using a two-phase map, the flow pattern inside Y-jet atomizers was found to be a transition between the annular flow and the wispy-annular flow.

Keywords

Y-jet atomizers Twin-fluid atomizers Two-phase flow patterns Experimental correlations 

List of symbols

ALR

Air liquid ratio

d

Diameter [m]

G

Fluid mass velocity [kg/m² s]

j

Superficial velocity [m/s]

l

Length [m]

p

Pressure [Pa]

SR

Slope ratio

T

Temperature [K]

\( \dot{m} \)

Mass flow rate [kg/s]

z

Position [m]

Non-dimensional groups

We

Weber number

Greek symbols

γ

Ratio of specific heats

Δp

Pressure drop [Pa]

θ

Angle between air and water ports [rad]

ρ

Density [kg/m³]

φ

Momentum ratio

Subscripts

1

Middle point pressure measurement in mixing duct

2

End point pressure measurement in mixing duct

a

Air

w

Water

ha

Air at upstream position of the tape orifice plate

M

Mixing point

m

Mixing duct

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to express their appreciation to FAPESP (The State of São Paulo Research Foundation) for its financial support.

References

  1. 1.
    Andreussi P, Tognotti L, de Michele G, Graziadio M (1992) Design and characterization of twin-fluid Y-Jet atomizers. Atomization Sprays 2:45–59Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Barreras F, Lozano A, Barroso J, Lincheta E (2006) Experimental characterization of industrial twin-fluid atomizers. Atomization Sprays 16:127–145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    BS 1042 (1989) Measurement of fluid flow in closed conduits, Part 1: Pressure differential devices, Sections 1.1 and 1.2. British Standard Institution, LondonGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Collier JG, Thome JR (1996) Convective boiling and condensation, 3th edn. Oxford University, LondonGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ferreira G, García JA, Barreras F, Lozano A, Lincheta E (2009) Design optimization of twin-fluid atomizers with an internal mixing chamber for heavy fuel oils. Fuel Process Technol 90:270–278CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ferreira G, Barreras F, Lozano A, García JA, Lincheta E (2009) Effect of the inner two-phase flow on the performance of an industrial twin-fluid nozzle with na internal mixing chamber. Atomization Sprays 19:873–884CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Graziadio M, Andreussi P, Tognotti L, Zanelli S (1987) Atomization of coal–water fuels by pneumatic internal mixing nozzle. Atomization Spray Technol 3:187–208Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Griffith P, Wallis GB (1961) Two-phase slug flow. J Heat Transf 83(3):307–320CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hewitt GF, Roberts DN (1969) Studies of two-phase flow patterns by simultaneous X-ray and flash photography, AERE-M 2159, HMSOGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hewitt GF, Hall-Taylor NS (1970) Annular two-phase flow. Pergamon Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    JCGM (2008) Guide to the expression of uncertainty in measurement, 2008, Joint Committee for Guides in Metrology. JCGM 100:2008. Evaluation of measurement dataGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Jedelsky J, Jicha M (2008) Unsteadiness in effervescent sprays: a new evaluation method and the influence of operational conditions. Atomization Sprays 18:49–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lefebvre AH (1980) Airblast atomization. Prog Energy Combust Sci 6:233–261CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Mullinger PJ, Chigier NA (1974) The design and performance of internal mixing multijet twin fluid atomizers. J Inst Fuel 47:251–261Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Oshinowo T, Charles ME (1974) Vertical two-phase flow. Can J Chem Eng 52(1):25–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Song SH, Lee SY (1996) Study of atomization mechanism of gas/liquid mixtures flowing through Y-Jet atomizers. Atomization Sprays 6:193–209Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Song Y, Zhang M (2004) Mathematical modeling and experimental verification of interior gas-liquid flows and outflow atomization process for Y-Jet nozzles. Atomization Sprays 14:437–458CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Wallis GB (1969) One-dimensional two-phase flow. McGraw-Hill Book Company, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Zhou Y, Zhang M, Yu J, Zhu X, Peng J (2010) Experimental investigation and model improvement on the atomization performance of single-hole Y-Jet nozzle with high liquid flow rate. Powder Technol 199:248–255CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Brazilian Society of Mechanical Sciences and Engineering 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Mechanical EngineeringPolytechnic School, University of São PauloSão PauloBrazil

Personalised recommendations