0
Research Papers: Multiphase Flows

Smoothed Particle Hydrodynamics Simulation of an Air-Assisted Atomizer Operating at High Pressure: Influence of Non-Newtonian Effects

[+] Author and Article Information
G. Chaussonnet

Institut für Thermische Strömungsmaschinen,
Karlsruher Institut für Technologie (KIT),
Kaiserstr. 12,
Karlsruhe 76131, Germany
e-mail: geoffroy.chaussonnet@kit.edu

R. Koch, H.-J. Bauer

Institut für Thermische Strömungsmaschinen,
Karlsruher Institut für Technologie (KIT),
Kaiserstr. 12,
Karlsruhe 76131, Germany

A. Sänger, T. Jakobs, T. Kolb

Institut für Technische Chemie,
Karlsruher Institut für Technologie (KIT),
P.O. Box 3640,
Karlsruhe 76021, Germany

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Fluids Engineering Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF FLUIDS ENGINEERING. Manuscript received August 7, 2017; final manuscript received November 9, 2017; published online January 30, 2018. Assoc. Editor: Arindam Banerjee.

J. Fluids Eng 140(6), 061301 (Jan 30, 2018) (13 pages) Paper No: FE-17-1483; doi: 10.1115/1.4038753 History: Received August 07, 2017; Revised November 09, 2017

A twin-fluid atomizer configuration is predicted by means of the two-dimensional (2D) weakly compressible smooth particle hydrodynamics (SPH) method and compared to experiments. The setup consists of an axial liquid jet surrounded by a high-speed air stream (Ug ≈ 60 m/s) in a pressurized reactor, which is operated at up to 11 bar. Two types of liquid are investigated: a viscous Newtonian liquid (μl = 200 mPa·s) consisting of glycerol/water mixture and a viscous non-Newtonian liquid (μ1,apparent. ≈ 150 mPa·s), which is a carboxymethyl cellulose solution. Three-dimensional (3D) effects are taken into account in the 2D code by introducing: (i) a surface tension term, (ii) a cylindrical viscosity operator, and (iii) a modified velocity accounting for the divergence of the volume in the radial direction. The numerical results at high pressure show a good qualitative agreement with experiment, i.e., a correct transition of the different atomization regimes with regard to pressure, and similar dynamics and length scales of the generated ligaments. The propagation velocity of the Kelvin–Helmholtz (KH) instability is well predicted, but its frequency needs a correction factor to be globally well recovered for the Newtonian liquid. The Sauter mean diameter (SMD), calculated from the spray size distribution, shows similar trends of the reactor pressure dependency. The simulation of the non-Newtonian liquid at high pressure shows the same breakup regime with finer droplets compared to Newtonian liquids, and the simulation at atmospheric pressure shows an apparent viscosity similar to the experiment.

Copyright © 2018 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Dahmen, N. , Dinjus, E. , Kolb, T. , Arnold, U. , Leibold, H. , and Stahl, R. , 2012, “State of the Art of the Bioliq Process for Synthetic Biofuels Production,” Environ. Prog. Sustain. Energy, 31(2), pp. 176–181. [CrossRef]
Dahmen, N. , Dinjus, E. , and Henrich, E. , 2007, “Synthesis Gas From Biomass-Problems and Solutions En Route to Technical Realization,” Oil Gas Eur. Mag., 33(1), p. 31. http://www.bioliq.de/downloads/Oil_Gas_eng__2007.pdf
Higman, C. , and Van der Burgt, M. , 2011, Gasification, Gulf Professional Publishing, Burlington, MA. [PubMed] [PubMed]
Sänger, A. , Jakobs, T. , Djordjevic, N. , and Kolb, T. , 2014, “Effect of Primary Instability of a High Viscous Liquid Jet on the Spray Quality Generated by a Twin-Fluid Atomizer,” European Conference for Liquid Atomization and Spray System (ILASS), Bremen, Germany, Sept. 8–10, Paper No. ABS-255. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/278030369_Effect_of_primary_instability_of_a_high_viscous_liquid_jet_on_the_spray_quality_generated_by_a_twin-fluid_atomizer
Jakobs, T. , Djordjevic, N. , Fleck, S. , Mancini, M. , Weber, R. , and Kolb, T. , 2012, “Gasification of High Viscous Slurry R&D on Atomization and Numerical Simulation,” Appl. Energy, 93, pp. 449–456. [CrossRef]
Sänger, A. , Jakobs, T. , Djordjevic, N. , and Kolb, T. , 2015, “Experimental Investigation on the Influence of Ambient Pressure on Twin-Fluid Atomization of liquids With Various Viscosities,” International Conference for Liquid Atomization and Spray System (ICLASS), Tainan, Taiwan, Aug. 23–27, Paper No. A-2-1-124.
Sänger, A. , Jakobs, T. , and Kolb, T. , 2016, “Using Primary Instability Analysis for Determination of Apparent Liquid Viscosity at Jeet Breakup Atomizing Non-Newtonian Fluids,” European Conference for Liquid Atomization and Spray System (ILASS), Brighton, UK, Sept. 4–7, Paper No. AA-12.
Gingold, R. , and Monaghan, J. J. , 1977, “Smoothed Particle Hydrodynamics: Theory and Application to Non-Spherical Stars,” Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc., 181(3), pp. 375–389. [CrossRef]
Monaghan, J. J. , and Kocharyan, A. , 1995, “SPH Simulation of Multi-Phase Flow,” Comput. Phys. Commun., 87(1–2), pp. 225–235. [CrossRef]
Höfler, C. , Braun, S. , Koch, R. , and Bauer, H.-J. , 2011, “Towards the Numerical Prediction of Primary Atomization Using Smoothed Particle Hydrodynamics,” European Conference for Liquid Atomization and Spray System (ILASS), Estoril, Portugal, Sept. 5–7, Paper No. 1014.
Takashima, T. , Ito, T. , Shigeta, M. , Izawa, S. , and Fukunishi, Y. , 2012, “Simulation of Liquid Jet Breakup Process by Three-Dimensional Incompressible SPH Method,” Seventh International Conference on Computational Fluid Dynamics (ICCFD7), Big Island, HI, July 9–13, pp. 9–13. http://www.iccfd.org/iccfd7/assets/pdf/papers/ICCFD7-2901_paper.pdf
Braun, S. , Höfler, C. , Koch, R. , and Bauer, H.-J. , 2013, “Modeling Fuel Injection in Gas Turbines Using the Meshless Smoothed Particle Hydrodynamics Method,” ASME Paper No. GT2013-94027.
Braun, S. , Wieth, L. , Koch, R. , and Bauer, H.-J. , 2015, “Influence of Trailing Edge Height on Primary Atomization: Numerical Studies Applying the Smoothed Particle Hydrodynamics (SPH) Method,” International Conference for Liquid Atomization and Spray System (ICLASS), Tainan, Taiwan, Aug. 24–27, Paper No. D1-2-087.
Dauch, T. , Braun, S. , Wieth, L. , Chaussonnet, G. , Keller, M. , Koch, R. , and Bauer, H.-J. , 2016, “Computation of Liquid Fuel Atomization and Mixing by Means of the SPH Method: Application to a Jet Engine Fuel Nozzle,” ASME Paper No. GT2016-56023.
Chaussonnet, G. , Braun, S. , Wieth, L. , Koch, R. , Bauer, H.-J. , Sänger, A. , Jakobs, T. , Dordjevic, N. , and Kolb, T. , 2015, “SPH Simulation of a Twin-Fluid Atomizer Operating With a High Viscosity Liquid,” International Conference for Liquid Atomization and Spray System (ICLASS), Tainan, Taiwan, Aug. 24–27, Paper No. D1-1-109. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/281457458_SPH_Simulation_of_a_Twin-Fluid_Atomizer_Operating_with_a_High_Viscosity_Liquid
Shao, S. , and Lo, E. Y. , 2003, “Incompressible SPH Method for Simulating Newtonian and Non-Newtonian Flows With a Free Surface,” Adv. Water Resour., 26(7), pp. 787–800. [CrossRef]
Fourtakas, G. , and Rogers, B. , 2016, “Modelling Multi-Phase Liquid-Sediment Scour and Resuspension Induced by Rapid Flows Using Smoothed Particle Hydrodynamics (SPH) Accelerated With a Graphics Processing Unit (GPU),” Adv. Water Resour., 92(Suppl. C), pp. 186–199. [CrossRef]
Rodriguez-Paz, M. , and Bonet, J. , 2004, “A Corrected Smooth Particle Hydrodynamics Method for the Simulation of Debris Flows,” Num. Meth. Part. Diff. Equations, 20(1), pp. 140–163. [CrossRef]
Laigle, D. , Lachamp, P. , and Naaim, M. , 2007, “SPH-Based Numerical Investigation of Mudflow and Other Complex Fluid Flow Interactions With Structures,” Comput. Geosci., 11(4), pp. 297–306. [CrossRef]
Hosseini, S. , Manzari, M. , and Hannani, S. , 2007, “A Fully Explicit Three-Step SPH Algorithm for Simulation of Non-Newtonian Fluid Flow,” Int. J. Numer. Methods Heat Fluid Flow, 17(7), pp. 715–735. [CrossRef]
Shamsoddini, R. , Sefid, M. , and Fatehi, R. , 2016, “Incompressible Sph Modeling and Analysis of Non-Newtonian Power-Law Fluids, Mixing in a Microchannel With an Oscillating Stirrer,” J. Mech. Sci. Technol., 30(1), pp. 307–316. [CrossRef]
Qiang, H. , Han, Y. , Wang, G. , and Liu, H. , 2013, “Numerical Analysis of Atomization Process of Liquid With Power Law Model Based on SPH Method,” J. Propul. Technol., 34(2), pp. 240–247. http://en.cnki.com.cn/Article_en/CJFDTotal-TJJS201302017.htm
Shadloo, M. , Oger, G. , and Le Touzé, D. , 2016, “Smoothed Particle Hydrodynamics Method for Fluid Flows, Towards Industrial Applications: Motivations, Current State, and Challenges,” Comput. Fluids, 136, pp. 11–34. [CrossRef]
Cross, M. M. , 1965, “Rheology of Non-Newtonian Fluids: A New Flow Equation for Pseudoplastic Systems,” J. Colloid Sci., 20(5), pp. 417–437. [CrossRef]
Tsai, S. C. , and Viers, B. , 1992, “Airblast Atomization of Viscous Newtonian Liquids Using Twin-Fluid Jet Atomizers of Various Designs,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 114(1), pp. 113–118. [CrossRef]
Monaghan, J. J. , 2005, “Smoothed Particle Hydrodynamics,” Rep. Prog. Phys., 68(8), pp. 1703–1759. [CrossRef]
Cleary, P. , and Monaghan, J. J. , 1999, “Conduction Modelling Using Smoothed Particle Hydrodynamics,” J. Comput. Phys., 148(1), pp. 227–264. [CrossRef]
Maciá, F. , Antuono, M. , González, L. M. , and Colagrossi, A. , 2011, “Theoretical Analysis of the No-Slip Boundary Condition Enforcement in SPH Methods,” Prog. Theor. Phys., 125(6), pp. 1091–1121. [CrossRef]
Sefid, M. , Fatehi, R. , and Shamsoddini, R. , 2014, “A Modified Smoothed Particle Hydrodynamics Scheme to Model the Stationary and Moving Boundary Problems for Newtonian Fluid Flows,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 137(3), p. 031201. [CrossRef]
Hu, X. , and Adams, N. , 2006, “A Multi-Phase SPH Method for Macroscopic and Mesoscopic Flows,” J. Comput. Phys., 213(2), pp. 844–861. [CrossRef]
Szewc, K. , Pozorski, J. , and Minier, J.-P. , 2012, “Analysis of the Incompressibility Constraint in the Smoothed Particle Hydrodynamics Method,” Int. J. Numer. Methods Eng., 92(4), pp. 343–369. [CrossRef]
Brackbill, J. , Kothe, D. , and Zemach, C. , 1992, “A Continuum Method for Modeling Surface Tension,” J. Comput. Phys., 100(2), pp. 335–354. [CrossRef]
Adami, S. , Hu, X. , and Adams, N. , 2010, “A New Surface-Tension Formulation for Multi-Phase SPH Using a Reproducing Divergence Approximation,” J. Comput. Phys., 229(13), pp. 5011–5021. [CrossRef]
Monaghan, J. J. , 1994, “Simulating Free Surface Flows With SPH,” J. Comput. Phys., 110(2), pp. 399–406. [CrossRef]
Chaussonnet, G. , Braun, S. , Wieth, L. , Koch, R. , and Bauer, H.-J. , 2015, “Influence of Particle Disorder and Smoothing Length on SPH Operator Accuracy,” Tenth International SPHERIC Workshop, Parma, Italy, June 16–18, pp. 31–38. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/282317546_Influence_of_particle_disorder_and_smoothing_length_on_SPH_operator_accuracy
Lasheras, J. , Villermaux, E. , and Hopfinger, E. J. , 1998, “Break-Up and Atomization of a Round Water Jet by a High-Speed Annular Air Jet,” J. Fluid Mech., 357, pp. 351–379. [CrossRef]
Takeda, H. , Miyama, S. , and Sekiya, M. , 1994, “Numerical Simulation of Viscous Flow by Smoothed Particle Hydrodynamics,” Prog. Theor. Phys., 92(5), pp. 939–960. [CrossRef]
Braun, S. , L, W. , Koch, R. , and Bauer, H.-J. , 2015, “A Framework for Permeable Boundary Conditions in Sph: Inlet, Outlet, Periodicity,” Tenth International SPHERIC Workshop, Parma, Italy, June 16–18, pp. 308–315.
Quinlan, N. J. , Basa, M. , and Lastiwka, M. , 2006, “Truncation Error in Mesh-Free Particle Methods,” Int. J. Numer. Methods Eng., 66(13), pp. 2064–2085. [CrossRef]
Falcone, A. M. , and Cataldo, J. C. , 2003, “Entrainment Velocity in an Axisymmetric Turbulent Jet,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 125(4), pp. 620–627. [CrossRef]
Farago, Z. , and Chigier, N. , 1992, “Morphological Classification of Disintegration of Round Liquid Jets in a Coaxial Air Stream,” Atomization Sprays, 2(2), pp. 137–153. [CrossRef]
Sivadas, V. , Heitor, M. , and Fernandes, R. , 2007, “A Functional Correlation for the Primary Breakup Processes of Liquid Sheets Emerging From Air-Assist Atomizers,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 129(2), pp. 188–193. [CrossRef]
Dimotakis, P. E. , 1986, “Two-Dimensional Shear-Layer Entrainment,” AIAA J., 24(11), pp. 1791–1796. [CrossRef]
Raynal, L. , Villermaux, E. , Lasheras, J. , and Hopfinger, E. , 1997, “Primary Instability in Liquid-Gas Shear Layers,” 11th Symposium on Turbulent Shear Flows, Grenoble, France, Sept. 8–19.
Marmottant, P. , and Villermaux, E. , 2004, “On Spray Formation,” J. Fluid Mech., 498, pp. 73–111. [CrossRef]
Monkewitz, P. A. , 1988, “A Note on Vortex Shedding From Axisymmetric Bluff Bodies,” J. Fluid Mech., 192, pp. 561–575. [CrossRef]
Mao, C.-P. , Oechsle, V. , and Chigier, N. , 1987, “Drop Size Distribution and Air Velocity Measurements in Air Assist Swirl Atomizer Sprays,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 109(1), pp. 64–69. [CrossRef]
Dravid, V. , Loke, P. B. , Corvalan, C. M. , and Sojka, P. E. , 2008, “Drop Formation in Non-Newtonian Jets at Low Reynolds Numbers,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 130(8), p. 081504. [CrossRef]

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

The Bioliq® process

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Schematics of external mixing twin fluid atomizer, side view (left) and front view (right)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Effective viscosity versus the shear rate

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Primary instability: (a) pulsating (μl = 200 mPa⋅s), (b) flapping (μl = 300 mPa·s), from Ref.[4]. Breakup regime: (c) membrane type (p = 1 bar), and (d) fiber type (p = 7 bar). Adapted from Ref. [6].

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Top part: Surface of a 2D kernel. Bottom part: Particle distribution superimposed with the kernel color map and illustration of the sphere of influence.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Buffer (gray) and regular (white) particles separated by markers (squares). Adapted from Ref. [38].

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Schematics of a 2D Poiseuille flow

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Left: velocity profile of the Newtonian 2D Poiseuille flow superimposed with the analytical profile. Right: convergence of the method.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Left: velocity profile of the non-Newtonian 2D Poiseuille flow superimposed with the FV solution. Right: convergence of the method.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Sketch of the numerical domains. Left: global view. Right: close-up view of the nozzle exit superimposed with all probes location (gray), the black symbols indicate the probes investigated in the following.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Magnitude of the mean velocity, superimposed with streamlines

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Comparison of experiment/simulation on pressurized atomization test rig test-case at 1, 7, and 11 bar: (a) case A, p = 1 bar, (b) case B, p = 7 bar, and (c) case C, p = 11 bar

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Time signal of the presence of liquid (top) recorded at probes P10 and P25 and the CSD (bottom) between different probes, for case A

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Time signal of the presence of liquid (top) recorded at probes P0 and P15, and the CSD (bottom) between different probes, for case B

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Time signal of the presence of liquid (top) recorded at probes P6 and P21, and the cross-spectrum magnitude (bottom) between different probes, for case C. The vertical lines represent the fundamental mode and its first harmonic.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Velocity of KH wave versus the reactor pressure with liquid L1 for cases A–C

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 17

Frequency of the KH instability versus the reactor pressure with liquid L1 for cases A–C

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 18

Definition of sphericity. The circle of equivalent area is centered at the center of gravity of the liquid blob.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 19

Volume PDF (numerical data) of the generated spray, between x = 35 and 40 mm. Vertical dashed lines depict the Sauter mean diameter.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 20

Sauter mean diameter of the generated spray, between x = 35 and 40 mm versus the reactor pressure. Symbols: data extracted from simulation and experiment. Lines: fitting trends.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 21

Comparison of experiment/simulation at 1 bar with liquid L2

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 22

Close-up view of the nozzle exit. Left: shear rate. Right: viscosity.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 23

Fourier transform of the signal of the presence of liquid for L2 at 1 bar

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 24

Snapshot of case C for Δx = 20 mm (left), case E for Δx = 20 mm (middle) and case E for Δx = 10 mm (right)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 25

Fourier transform of the signal of the presence of liquid for L2 at 11 bar with Δx = 10 μm

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 26

Fourier transform of the signal of the presence of liquid for L2 at 11 bar with Δx = 20 μm

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 27

Volume PDF of the generated spray, between x = 35 and 40 mm

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 28

Time and radially averaged viscosity versus the axial coordinate

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 29

Time series (Δt = 100 μs) of the breakup phenomenon zoomed in the nozzle exit region for case E (Δx = 10μm)

Tables

Errata

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