0
Research Papers: Fundamental Issues and Canonical Flows

Dynamics of Liquid Sheet Breakup in Splash Plate Atomization

[+] Author and Article Information
G. Thunivumani

Department of Aerospace Engineering,
Indian Institute of Technology Bombay,
Mumbai 400076, India
e-mail: thunivumani@gmail.com

Hrishikesh Gadgil

Department of Aerospace Engineering,
Indian Institute of Technology Bombay,
Mumbai 400076, India

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Fluids Engineering Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF FLUIDS ENGINEERING. Manuscript received April 13, 2017; final manuscript received August 3, 2017; published online September 20, 2017. Assoc. Editor: Devesh Ranjan.

J. Fluids Eng 140(1), 011205 (Sep 20, 2017) (10 pages) Paper No: FE-17-1227; doi: 10.1115/1.4037676 History: Received April 13, 2017; Revised August 03, 2017

An experimental study was conducted to investigate the breakup of a liquid sheet produced by oblique impingement of a liquid jet on a plane solid surface. Experiments are carried out over a wide range of jet Weber number (80–6300) and various jet impingement angles (30 deg, 45 deg, and 60 deg) are employed to study the sheet dynamics. The breakup of a liquid sheet takes place in three modes, closed rim, open rim, and perforated sheet, depending upon the Weber number. The transitions across the modes are also influenced by the impingement angle with the transition Weber number reducing with increase in impingement angle. A modified regime map is proposed to illustrate the role of impingement angle in breakup transitions. A theoretical model based on force balance at the sheet edge is developed to predict the sheet parameters by taking the shear interaction between the sheet and the solid surface into account. The sheet shape predicted by the model fairly matches with the experimentally measured sheet shape. The breakup length and width of the sheet are measured and comparisons with the model predictions show good agreement in closed rim mode of breakup.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2018 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

A generalized experimental facility for spray diagnostics

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Injector mounting arrangements: (a) splash plate impingement and (b) two-jet impingement

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Evolution of liquid sheet structure with increasing jet Weber number at θ = 45 deg: (a) We = 800 (closed rim structure), (b) We = 4050 (open rim), and (c) We = 6300 (perforated sheet)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Effect of impingement angle on the modes of sheet breakup at various jet Weber numbers. Rows correspond to constant impingement angle and columns to constant Weber number. (The scale bar shown in the first plate of last row corresponds to 10 mm.)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Dependence of transition Weber number on impingement angle

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

A modified breakup regime map with introduction of impingement angle effect. Various breakup regimes corresponding to each impingement angle are well segregated.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Comparison of qualitatively equivalent liquid sheets formed in impinging jets and splash plate atomization for θ = 45 deg. (Top row: impinging jets, bottom row: splash plate impingement).

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Schematic of jet impingement and sheet formation process: (a) sheet geometry, (b) force balance on the small portion of the sheet, and (c) schematic representation of contact between the sheet and the plate

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

A binary spray image averaged over 300 instantaneous images. The outline defines the edge of the sheet and the measurements of breakup length and sheet width are shown with white arrows.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Comparison of the shape of the liquid sheet measured from sheet images and predicted from different models for θ = 45 deg: (a) We = 640 and (b) We = 720

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Comparison of predicted sheet breakup length with experimental results. Lines represent the model predictions, which show good agreement in closed rim breakup. Two distinct regimes in variation in breakup length may be clearly noticed.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Comparison of predicted sheet width with experimental results. Lines represent the model predictions.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Comparative assessment of proposed model and the data and regime-based model given by Ahmed et al. [18]. Present model shows good agreement in closed sheet regime.

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