0
Multiphase Flows

Optimum Configuration of an Expanding-Contracting-Nozzle for Thrust Enhancement by Bubble Injection

[+] Author and Article Information
Sowmitra Singh1

 Dynaflow, Inc.10621-J Iron Bridge Road, Jessup, MD 20794sowmitra@dynaflow-inc.com

Jin-Keun Choi, Georges Chahine

 Dynaflow, Inc.10621-J Iron Bridge Road, Jessup, MD 20794

1

Corresponding author.

J. Fluids Eng 134(1), 011302 (Feb 24, 2012) (8 pages) doi:10.1115/1.4005687 History: Received February 11, 2011; Revised December 15, 2011; Published February 23, 2012; Online February 24, 2012

This paper addresses the concept of thrust augmentation through bubble injection into an expanding-contracting nozzle. Two-phase models for bubbly flow in an expanding-contracting nozzle are developed, in parallel with laboratory experiments and used to ascertain the geometry configuration for the nozzle that would lead to maximum thrust enhancement upon bubble injection. For preliminary optimization of experimental setup’s design, a quasi 1-D approach is used. Averaged flow quantities (such as velocities, pressures, and void fractions) in a cross section are used for the analysis. The mixture continuity and momentum equations are numerically solved simultaneously along with equations for bubble dynamics, bubble motion, and an equation for conservation of the total bubble number. Various geometric parameters such as the exit and inlet areas, the area of the bubble injection section, the presence of a throat and its location, the length of the diffuser section and the length of the contraction section are varied, and their effects on thrust enhancement are studied. Investigation on the effect of the injected void fraction is also carried out. The key objective function of the optimization is the normalized thrust parameter, which is the thrust with bubble injection minus the thrust with liquid only divided by the inlet liquid momentum. An approximate analytical expression for the normalized thrust parameter was also derived starting from the mixture continuity and momentum equations. This analytical expression involved flow variables only at three locations; inlet section, injection section, and outlet section, and the expression is simple enough to produce a quick concept design of the diffuser-nozzle thruster. The numerical and analytical approaches are verified against each other and the limitations of the analytical approach are discussed.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2012 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

Expanding-contracting nozzle

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

Comparison of the total thrust obtained using different approaches [3]

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

Dimensions of the expanding-contracting nozzle

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

Normalized thrust parameter versus C (Vinlet  = 2.4 m/s). Analytical expression for ξm is compared against results from the 1-D BAP code.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

Normalized thrust parameter versus C (Vinlet =3.57 m/s). Analytical expression for ξm is compared against results from the 1-D BAP code.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

Effect of increasing the inlet velocity on the normalized thrust parameter: 1-D BAP

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

Normalized thrust parameter versus injected void fraction: C = 1

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

Normalized thrust parameter versus 1/Cinj −α0 = 0.05, C = 1.1

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 9

Normalized thrust parameter versus 1/Cinj −α0 = 0.10, C = 1.1

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 10

Geometry of the expanding-contracting nozzle

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 11

Different configurations (expanding-contracting nozzle) studied

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 12

Normalized thrust parameter versus injected void fraction (different configurations, C = 1, Vinlet = 2.4 m/s)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 13

Total thrust versus injected void fraction (different configurations, C = 1, Vinlet = 2.4 m/s)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 14

Normalized thrust parameter versus injected void fraction (different configurations, C = 1, Vinlet = 10 m/s)

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