0
Research Papers: Techniques and Procedures

Effect of Surface Roughness on Single Cryogen Droplet Spreading

[+] Author and Article Information
Jie Liu

Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of California, Riverside, CA 92521liuj@engr.ucr.edu

Walfre Franco

Beckman Laser Institute and Medical Clinic, University of California, Irvine, 1002 Health Sciences Road East, Irvine, CA 92612wfranco@uci.edu

Guillermo Aguilar

Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of California, Riverside, CA 92521gaguilar@engr.ucr.edu

J. Fluids Eng 130(4), 041402 (Apr 11, 2008) (9 pages) doi:10.1115/1.2903810 History: Received April 18, 2006; Revised October 08, 2007; Published April 11, 2008

Cryogen spray cooling is an auxiliary procedure to dermatologic laser surgery, which consists of precooling the superficial skin layer (epidermis) during laser irradiation of subsurface targets to avoid nonspecific epidermal thermal damage. While previous studies have investigated the interaction of cryogen sprays with microscopically smooth human skin models, it is important to recognize that real human skin surface is far from smooth. With the objective to provide physical insight into the interaction between cryogen sprays and human skin, we study the effect of surface roughness on the impact dynamics of single cryogen droplets falling on skin models of various roughnesses (0.570μm). We first develop a theoretical model to predict the maximum spread diameter (Dm) following droplet impingement based on a similarity approximation to the solution of a viscous boundary layer that incorporates friction as the major source of viscous dissipation on a rough surface. Then, we measure the droplet diameter, impact velocity, and Dm of cryogen droplets falling by gravity onto skin models. Experimental data prove that the proposed model predicts Dm with good accuracy, suggesting that the effects of surface roughness and friction on Dm are properly taken into account for the range of surface roughness studied herein.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2008 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

Sketch of shape and energy of droplet before impact and at maximum spread diameter Dm

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

Experimental facilities for experiments of cryogen droplet impact dynamics without evaporation. 1, pressure gauge; 2, cryogen tank; 3, nozzle; 4, clear PVC tower; 5, temperature sensor; 6, pressured gas; 7, illumination; 8, impact surface; 9, high speed camera; 10, pressure relieve valve; 11, pressure gauge; 12, needle valve; 13, ball valve.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

Droplet with D=1.41mm and V=0.9m∕s and Re=9200 and We=258 impact onto three surfaces with Ra=0.5μm (left), Ra=30μm (middle), and Ra=70μm (right) for various times in the range of 0–20ms

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

Spread diameter versus spread time for surface roughnesses of Ra=0.5μm, 4.2μm, 8.2μm, 30μm, 50μm, and 70μm, with droplet with D=1.41mm and V=0.9m∕s

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

Spread velocity versus spread time for surface roughnesses of Ra=0.5μm, 4.2μm, 8.2μm, 30μm, 50μm, and 70μm, with droplet with D=1.41mm and V=0.9m∕s

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

Prediction of β with undetermined coefficient C in Eq. 27: Case 1: D=1.41mm and V=0.9m∕s; Re=9200 and We=258. Case 2: D=1.41mm and V=2.38m∕s; Re=20,000 and We=1210. Case 3: D=1.91mm and V=2.38m∕s; Re=26,500 and We=1670.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

Flowchart of algorithm to determine the coefficients c, K1, and K2 for experiment results

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

Experimental and model predicted results of β for three cases: Case 1: D=1.41mm and V=0.9m∕s; Re=9200 and We=258. Case 2: D=1.41mm and V=2.38m∕s; Re=20,000 and We=1210. Case 3: D=1.91mm and V=2.38m∕s; Re=26,500 and We=1670.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 9

Comparison of our experimental results with previous models (15,17,19) for the same three cases described in Table 2 with Ra=0.5μm

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 10

Comparison of the β using the present model with experimental data from current and previous works (20,22-24)

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In