A STUDY OF LIQUID IN

DISPERSIONS TOWER

A SPRAY DRYING

by

CHRISTOPHER

JOHN ASHTON

A Thesis The University for

Doctor

to submitted of Aston in Birmingham Degree

Philosophy

the
of

of

Department University

of of

Chemical Aston in

Engineering Birmingham March 1980

CONTENTS

Page SUMMARY INTRODUCTION CHAPTER 1 1.1 Spray Methods Drying of Fundamentals Atomising Liquids 5 1 2

1.2 1.3
CHAPTER 2

Spray Drying

Air of

Contact Droplets
of Atomisation

13 18

Mechanism

2.1 2.2
CHAPTER 3

Liquid Liquid

Sheet Jet

Disintegration Disintegration
by Swirl Spray

27 35

Atomisation

Nozzles
CHAPTER 4 Mathematical Model

52
85

4.1 4.2
CHAPTER 5

Statement Prediction
Experimental

of of

Simplified Drop
Work

Problem

86 100
114

Size

CHAPTER 6 CONCLUSIONS

Discussion

151 187

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER WORK

NOMENCLATURE REFERENCES APPENDIX -APPENDIX I II Drop Size Distribution of Equation Data 4.23

188 189
194 203 224

Derivation

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The author his gratitude Professor and personal Dr. C. J. to

is

indebted following Jeffreys

to

and wishes people.

to

record

the

G. V. interest Mumford

for

his this

valued work. advice. in

guidance

throughout for his her

helpful expertise

Mrs A. photographic

Mellings-for department.

the

Summary
Studies of Liquid Dispersion Tower in a Spray Drying

CHRISTOPHER

JOHN ASHTON

Ph. D.

1979

swirl

A study nozzles

has been undertaken in as encountered

from of drop formation spray drying operations.

Four swirl of different nozzles sizes and geometry have been studied in experimentally and theoretically to characterise the nozzle order and establish a model drop size as a function that could predict of throughput, drop and the physical pressure properties of the slurry. The mechanism of drop formation using was observed high speed cine and flash The drop size photography. from photographs was estimated using a Zeiss particle by a size analyser and the results were confirmed Knollenburg particle size analyser. A mathematical which is an model has been developed extension chambers of Taylor's model for conical swirl but which is more generally irrespective of applicable the geometry between the experimental and the agreement discharge velocities and drop sizes, and those predicted were very good.

Key Words Swirl nozzles Sheet Breakup Drop formation Atomisation

-1-

INTRODUCTION Spray from the drying delicate has applications in many in industries, food and outputs ores of or a

processing manufacture

conditions to the high

pharamaceutical within and such clays. fluid heavy Spray

tonnage as mineral

chemical drying either is

industries the

transformation slurry in and occurs by the

pumpable paste drying with hot into

feed,

a solution, dried product atomised

a particulate The and rapid area which feed

a single contacted due to the

process. air

is

evaporation provided is then

extensive product drying is

surface formed

spray. from

A dry the

recovered

medium.

Atomisation rotary which particle Typical varies or for pressure

is

most nozzle

commonly atomisers, being in the of for

achieved the

by either selection of

any given size values

operation

dependent final the rotary product. dried

on the

distribution of the

mean size microns

product

between

70-110 for final since

atomisers The quality on the the A

and 180-250 and nature wet heat droplet

microns of the

pressure product this rates sizes but the in

nozzles. is dependent

size,

parameter during

controls evaporation.

and mass of

transfer the droplet

knowledge is data therefore

produced spite of of

by an atomiser much published atomisation is

important

by many workers,

mechanism

-2-

still reported fluids in the

a controversial on the but food the these

subject.

Much work characteristics encountered, work

has been of Newtonian

atomisation are seldom This of were provide the

particularly to chalk object the from of

industry.

was initiated and several The main insight slurry into emitted into water.

study slurry this

atomisation

slurries selected. further

formulations work was to by which spray

mechanism a swirl droplets,

sheet nozzle compare

of

pressure to

disintegrates this with

and also

-3-

Chapter Spray Drying

Fundamentals

1.1
1.2

Methods
Spray-air

of

atomising
contact

liquids

1.3

Drying

of

droplets

-4-

1.1

Methods

of

Atomising of drop

Liquids a spray size dryer is critically of the spray, are

The performance dependent since heat upon the

distribution rates

and mass transfer on the droplet is yet size. to

and drying the ideal

times

dependent ment for

Thus

requiresprays.

an atomiser have not

produce

homogenous at

Such sprays feed rates, of

been

obtained types of spray

industrial are

although producing of

certain this type

atomiser

capable with rates.

of

when operating at low feed

liquids

specific

characteristics

Most chemical viscosity slurries great affect optimum required

of

the

atomisers were liquids. of in quality. depends

commonly designed

employed for simple

in low

engineering Newtonian or pastes

However

handling when there consequent of the is a

anamolous performance Thus on the

properties with selection specific

deterioration on product atomiser for

functions

a given there is

application. a multitude basic types of individual summarised to atomisers, in the source

Whilst most Table of fall

within

a few

(1.1),

and are employed. effective to

classified

according

energy

The most to a liquid specific the liquid is

way of that it

utilising the liquid

energy

imparted a drops.

arrange

mass has down into is to

large Thus bulk

surface function thin

before of

breaks

primary into

an atomiser sheets.

transpose

liquid

-5-

U l -

H c

C7

2
H

11

E4 4

z H
H

9 O
O U z H
N rn O H 4

im

-L

LlE0

441

z 0
H H

4 U H

Cn

I U
'41 14 W
a
E

d g

-6-

Rotary

Atomisation

In

rotary

atomisation accelerated Of the disc is several probably thick

the to

feed

liquid

is before being

centrifugally discharged. the spinning of

high types most

velocity of rotary

atomiser, used, and is at

widely or

capable high

handling rates. fed the under

slurries

suspensions

feed Liquid

gravity accelerated or liquid

or

low

pressure the or

to

the

centre across high

of

disc

is

towards vanes discharged or

edge At

a smooth peripheral

surface speeds or

through is

slots. as that

individual subsequently operating design. Smooth drying between Slippage surface release

droplets,

as ligaments into

a film

disintegrates conditions, liquid

droplets

depending and atomiser

upon

properties,

flat

vaneless due to liquid

discs the

are

rarely slippage at the

used

in

spray occurs

operations the is of feed

severe disc

which speeds. to

and the by confining attaining is lower bowl

high liquid

prevented a vane thus

the

the

maximum possible reduced of a disc

velocity. liquid

Slippage onto the plate the disc are

alternatively surface or cup.

by feeding shaped film action. rates produce is

as an inverted held Both although finer against

The liquid

surface used to

by centrifugal handle large wheel) of the rotary feed

techniques the vaned

designs

(atomiser advantage

sprays.

Another

-7/

atomiser and disc reviewed of

is

the

flexible are

operation

because Masters

feed (1) has the

rate

speed the

independent. of these upon

effects

variables drop size.

upon

type

atomisation

and effect

Pneumatic

Nozzle

Atomisation

Pneumatic liquid bulk with is

nozzle high one of over

atomisation velocity high liquid gas.

involves

impacting of high liquid

The mechanism gas creating causing These of the air air flow

atomisation frictional disintegration are high generated velocities thin nozzle. of For the feed design conditions the liquid nozzle rate

velocity surfaces

forces into

spray

droplets. expansion

conditions to on the in that liquid very

by either or liquid Liquid

by directing sheets

the formed is

unstable in the

by rotating effective

break-up size

sprays

low mean drop low is is feed not high rates, required. the are

can be formed. of the liquid within required Various

rotation

However must to

when the

liquid available air in

be pre-filmed. produce optimum In all

techniques for is

contacting pre-filmed are -

and liquid. the feed nozzle

cases

orifice.

The various 1) nozzle 2) the

designs

Internal head. External head.

mixing

air/liquid

contact

within

mixing

air/liquid

contact

outside

nozzle

-8-

3) external head.
4) the rim

Three-Fluid mixing

nozzle by using

- combined two air flows

internal within

and the nozzle

Pneumatic of a rotating

Cup atomiser nozzle

head.

air/liquid

contact

at

Internal although streams control the offered of

mixing

designs

achieve of

high both types

energy liquid afford

transfer and air greater

independent by external

control mixing

atomisation. mixing where liquids nozzle the is used with of low high able to

The combined viscosity handle liquids difficult

advantages the

being

offset

nozzle

efficiencies. The pneumatic viscosity low viscous liquids liquids. edge the cup atomiser or to obtain is very used fine of for high from at sheet the

sprays liquid liquid

The pre-filming provides air flow. pneumatic input is a uniform

rotating for

nozzle with

contact As with

other

atomisers, energy This

atomisers unit

produce

finer of the

droplets liquid air/liquid is

when the increased. mass ratio.

per

quantity

achieved of

by increasing operating studied (2) and by

The effect

variables several Nukiyama

on pneumatic workers, notably

atomisation

has been

Kim and Marshall (3).

and Tanasawa

-9-

Pressure

Atomisers

In pressure resulting direction conical

a)

a pressure through liquid of flow

atomiser, an orifice sheet

liquid and the

is

forced of

under the the

form

can be controlled the orifice.

by varying By this

towards spray
Fan

method,

and flat
of

sheets

can be produced.

Formation

Spray

Sheets

In of liquid is

the

single

orifice

fan

spray behind

nozzle, an orifice to orifices popular. drop

two

streams and a plane

are formed

made to in

impinge

sheet of the

a plane or

perpendicular rectangular

the

streams. but et sheet indicate at the the al.

Oval former (4)

may be

employed Dombrowski modes of findings controlled the of

type have

is

more

studied from extent by the

both these of the

sizes

and Their

disintegration that the

sprays. sheet is

boundary the

equilibrium and the tension. spray than angle 1000. that

between contraction Depending can vary Fan spray are often

momentum along the edges orifice

streamlines of surface the more

as a result configuration, stream narrow

on the from

a straight produce for spray

up to elliptical

nozzles suitable used in

patterns They

many coating guns

operations. nozzles. of fan the

are

and multiple of operation of the

The principle nozzle exception resembles that

impinging with jets the are

jet

that two

spray

or more

independent

caused

-10-

to of until

impinge this

in atomiser

the is

atmosphere. the outside and wide isolation the

The

principal of different

advantage liquids high

they

impinge

nozzles.

However, angles are

stream

velocities

impingement

necessary obtainable With through curved

in

order

to

approach nozzle

a spray types. liquid

quality

from deflector a circular

other

atomisers, orifice plate.

is

discharged strike a up to sprays

and is The spray Relatively at low

made to is

deflector the

deflected coarse

750 from are b)

nozzle

axis.

produced, The Formation When liquid

particularly of is Conical caused

pressures.

Sheets to flow through sheet in a narrow of radial of the For the liquid lines. sheet is

divergent produced The angle

annular where of the the

orifice liquid

a conical is flowing

cone

and the

thickness of

can be controlled surface and the this in sheets,

by the width of

divergence the is annulus.

spreading small because annulus. by swirl of

throughputs difficulties Conical

method

not

favourable an accurate

manufacturing however, are

normally

produced

spray

pressure

nozzles.

This

type

of nozzle

may be used

to produce:
(i) drops are Hollow cone sprays in the in which the of spray the cone,

concentrated

periphery

leaving
particularly

the

centre
near

of
the

the

cone virtually
orifice. In

free
low

of

spray,

nozzle

throughput

-11-

nozzles the cone into

of

capacities characteristic as the drops

less

than rapidly

50 litres merges

per to

hour, full

hollow state the (ii)

the

are

extracted

by air

induced

spray Full

cone. cone cone is sprays filled spray - in with drops. the high which the whole evenly angles volume

of

the

spray

an almost Spray finest pressures

distributed may vary generally spray

mass of between at low

(cone)

300 and 1200, capacities,

atomisation and wide

angles. The mechanics of flow through will swirl spray atomisers in

and the detail

droplet in Chapter

sizes 3.

produced

be discussed

-I2-

1.2

Spray-Air

Contact

The manner
by the drying air rate droplets

in

which
bears

sprayed
an important

droplets
relation optimum and

are

contacted
to the

evaporation time wall of

of in

the a hot

spray,

the

residence the extent the dried The of and the co-current, been hot of

atmosphere The properties to upon air flow a large the

deposit are

formation. thus influenced depends to and and the mixed

of

produce air/spray atomiser

extent.

contact relative

position ports,

inlet

counter-current developed counter spray produce given each velocity the short The flow

arrangements has

have shown that

operated. operation processes,

Experience offers better

flow drying and chamber droplet

performance wall to mode is air impingement be of dried

in

most of

decreasing coarser Whatever resulting excess direct the of sprays the spray the

enabling size. in the in However, from become is attempt droplet

per

atomisation, at a within limited to drag. air air

ejected velocities is to

greatly

chamber. distances droplets and

penetration due by by calculate data and the the

atomiser,

friction

influenced governed to path

surrounding design chamber rate of of

movement Any on

dispersed. is dependent

dimensions drying.

Droplet point of

travel with

from the

the

time

of wall

injection has been in in

to

the

contact workers. the

chamber

studied

by various air flow

From nozzle has been rotary

atomisers

non-rotary one or the air

motion

considered atomisers

either where

two dimensions,

and from

-13-

flow In

is

rotating,

three study

dimensional of droplet usually droplet

motion motion made.

is certain

considered.

a theoretical

simplifying a) forced b) droplets.

c) the

assumptions heat transfer

are between

These is

include: by

and air

convection. the spray consists of homogenous, spherical

chance

of

droplet

break-up

or

coalescence

is

disregarded. d) rotating air flow is considered as a forced

vortex.
The work dynamic mass Indeed of Lapple for and Shepherd spherical flow of (5) who solved undergoing is often disc equations (18) with were of to cited. the no

equations in

particles field

transfer Masters

a uniform (6) in

a study

rotating

atomisation of heat

applied

these

equations of

and the

and mass transfer the to for wall three

Ranz and Marshall motion However of a drop

indicate regard given gas

dimensional

impingement. fields in the

no solutions the complexity a

rotating patterns drop

because spray

of

flow

drier, which

although affected

critical extent those istics of of of

diameter

was found Their (8)

the with

wall

impingement. et al.

results

agreed the

Friedman drops

who studied speed disc

character-

produced

by low which

atomisers. variations conditions. of petroleum

A relation in trajectories Bailey

was proposed

assessed atomisation the

the

when altering et al. (9) predicted

motion

-14-

droplets hot case bution

undergoing

evaporative However, only

mass the

transfer two

in

rotating

surroundings. was considered was assumed. Droplet

dimensional distri-

and a simple

gas velocity

movement and the to For

during

deceleration path of travel

is

normally

very

small

droplet of

can be in the chambers

considered chamber. local

be that disc around

the

air in

flow large are

pattern diameter negligible. Gluckert

atomisation the atomiser

affects for

However

small air

diameter

chambers, due to the

(10) becomes

has the

shown that controlling Droplet and Gauvin three spray on both within

movement in

atomiser path. been to

factor

the

trajectory have

residence (11)

times

studied predict

by Katta the plant depended pattern

who developed motion of that device

models drops the in droplet

dimensional drier the the Chaloud

a pilot motion air flow

and showed atomising chamber. et al.

and the

(12)

obtained with with of of

velocity no spray a high

profiles and noted

in the velocity

a drying presence rising study with

chamber of

operating of air

a core the et

rotational In

through by Paris a spray,

centre al. (13)

the

tower.

a later operation flow

a counter for

current the air

a model This time In

was developed

distribution. of residence

however distribution

was achieved data, the bulk with using flow

by deconvolution an analogue was represented flow bypass,

simulation. by two stirred

their tanks

model in

parallel

a plug

-15N

which

reflected

the

rapidly

ascending zone of addition a highly intense they

central

core

surrounded reported when the was formed amount of the of

by an annular by Chaloud. tower In

turbulence also noted that

was loaded, the

turbulent

region

around "backflow"

atomiser, was observed

and a significant in the central portion

tower. Sauvin et al. (14) zone presence analysis identified in of of the such a "nozzle" spray zones dryers must times cone they be in spray and

a "free studied, considered drying

extrainment" and the in the

residence

towers. Ade-John and Jeffreys time spray (15) from flow visualisation in a counter the flow well volumes pattern

studies current of the

and residence pilot various plant drying through as completely flow a thin present zones

distributions dryer, identified The overall of

zones.

was simulated flows zones, identified the tower such plug

a combination mixed

defined tank They walls of Their other region, and a volume reactor

well-stirred zones. the

and by-pass layer

by-pass in all

around

experimental also identified at the the air

conditions. three entry

smoke pulse zones;

experiments

a well-mixed section zone zones were

section enclosing

a well-mixed plug of flow these

spray

nozzle in

connecting with respect

them. to air

The changes flow

and tower analysis.

dimensions

correlated

by a dimensional

-16-

Thus droplet in spray

from

this

type time

of

work

a better

estimate which to is

of important

residence dryer of

can be obtained It air is desirable

design. entrained

know the from and the air

influence nozzles is

on droplet between evaluating the the the

motion droplets moisture droplet droplet

as relative factor

velocity in

an important Air

evaporation velocity terminal of trajectories time in less wall at

rates. a level velocity

entrainment

maintains greater than where Thus with

significantly over time takes are for

periods place.

majority droplet

evaporation to the wall

faster

encountered

a trajectory so resulting

than

that

complete

evaporation

deposits. A model flows of developed air by Benatt for (16) predicts pressure the mass

entrained

centrifugal

nozzles.

-17-

1.3

Drying In spray the

of

Droplets the liquid forms a disperse process drops.

drying, gaseous

phase involves Because in

in

medium from

and the surfaces size to

drying of

evaporation of the variation it

the of

drop

and distribution discuss and then

a spray

dryer, with the effect

is

necessary to single

evaporation estimate

regard of

drops

mutual

interaction.

Drying

Mechanism

in

General

Evaporation simultaneous transferred (normally evaporation. transport recognition heat

of

liquid

from

a droplet Heat drying latent describe have

involves is medium heat this general and during

and mass

transfer. from the into

by convection air) and is A number mechanism; include

converted of theories which

those the

gained

diffusion, theories.

capillary

evaporation-condensation Under process or two constant

evironmental into periods. removed in

conditions rate of

the

drying

can be divided falling the drop rate is is

a conystant The bulk the at drop

and one moisture rate period. level The a boundary is assumed this by

within

constant a saturated interior. through and it occurs

The drop transport vaporised layer that

surface of liquid

maintained from is the

moisture surrounds

transported each droplet

which the

resistance

to

transport

across

-18-

layer. decreases, to and the the

As

the

moisture is

level reached

within whereby

the

droplet of saturation flow then liquid

a point drop drying surface rate

transport surface moisture

cannot falls.

maintain Internal

becomes capillarity

the

controlling being regarded

factor, as the

diffusion more

and significant

mechanisms.

Pure

Liquid

Droplets

For

a spherical from

particle

moving analysis

in

a fluid, for

it heat

can

be expected

dimensional

that

and mass transfer:

Nu = Nu (Re, Pr)

(1.1) (1.2) (Reynolds (Prandtl (Schmidt Number) Number) Number) (1.3) (1.4) (1.5) (1.6) (1.7)

Sh = Sh (Re, where

Sc)

Re = D. V. pa/a
Pr = Cp"a

Sc = a/PaDv Nu = hc. D/k Sh = Kg. D/Dv

(Nusselt
(Sherwood

Number)
Number)

Much work has been done to determine

equations. gators, drops Frossling derived (17), one of for

the form of
the earliest evaporation the

these
investifrom

an expression the

the to

by considering of the continuity

solution and heat

simultaneous

equations across

and mass balances solution was of the form: (1.8)

boundary +

layer. Re0.5

His pr0.33

Nu = 2.0

-19-

Sh = 2.0 For
drying

+t

0.5 Re velocity

Sc0.33 between the droplet

(1.9) and

zero

relative

medium,

Re =0

and

Nu = Sh = 2.0

(1.10)
been most found widely (18) are experimentally quoted where value i=0.6. in is is from influence for. controls in its that any heat and stable. for is the that

Various constant found

values , but

have the

by Ranz and Marshall The above equations evaporated internal of will and is around the

limiting

transfer that Also the

to

the

moisture structure droplet

neglected assumed its

droplet

any distortion shape rates layer

assumed heat Since the will and mass the

spherical transfer boundary evaporation tend to

undoubtedly not the

accounted droplet

rate, increase

any reduction the evaporation found to

thickness

rate. occur

Considerable droplet

evaporation deceleration

has been (19).

during

Sprays

of

Pure

Liquid

Drops

The evaporation a spray basic differ theory from applies depends

characteristics those in upon of both single cases,

of

drops

within Although of terms spray of

drops. any the

analysis in

evaporation a representative the relative

defining

spray

mean diameter velocity between and the

and size droplet droplet

distribution, and drying air, density

droplet at

trajectory, time.

population

any given

-20-

Dickinson study droplets. significant Although temperature several reduction evaporates rate. evaporate which rate slowly. change of the

and Marshall evaporation

(20) rates of of both

made a computational sprays negligible of pure and liquid

The conditions relative certain

velocities simplifications

were such

considered. as constant air flow A spray evaporation. drop were made,

and ideal

counter-current phenomena were occurs reduction size

significant in air

observed. as the in

temperature a consequent

with

Sprays

with

a wide more

drop rapidly rates.

distribution the small drops

initially at

due to

evaporate is reduced

higher large the

However

the

overall more will mean diameter of were same

since

droplets drop size increase until

evaporate distribution in the

Consequently with time,

an initial decrease spray

preceeding evaporation. found degree velocity significant drying relative greatest distribution. instantaneously evaporation deceleration. to of

an overall At travel high greater

completion the achieve of

velocities to

droplets the

distances

evaporation. on evaporation at higher

The influence rates initial At higher was found velocities initial

relative to be more

and higher velocities velocity was spray the

temperatures. error for in the

neglecting smaller drops drop

droplet sizes

in

the

Small

evaporated proportion in the

virtually of period the of overall droplet

and a large was accomplished

-21-

Bose and Pei water droplets the in

(19)

studied

the

evaporation drier.

of They

pure

a co-current of the

nozzle relative

confirmed determination errors to

importance of

velocity large velocities analysis.

in

evaporation

rates,

and the relative

which

occurred velocities (21) the

by equating in the

terminal

evaporation the emerges

Pham.. and Keey or jet zone of

investigated spray as it

transition from the

period nozzle. were within would

Temperature, simplified this occur zone. if the to

velocity enable

and concentration prediction that were of

profiles

evaporation errors into

They jet

conclude dynamics

severe not

taken

consideration.

Drops

Containing In the of

Solids of dissolved is lowered above liquid solution a pure solids the vapour

presence the of solvent the Initially gas stream

pressure temperature temperature. between

and the the wet

surface bulb exists dried, When a crust and a

drop

rises a free and the as for

interface being solvent.

the

and evaporation the forms particle Once the paths applies. present in are solution to is

proceeds concentrated the gas of

beyond and liquid

saturation, interface, solution results.

separate with crust

a core has

saturated the heat

formed, and the confirmed dried

and mass analogy ruptures Here

transport no longer and cracks the rate

different This is

Colburn by the particles.

many spray

-22-

of

drying the

is pores

probably prior does pass not

so great to

that

jets of water in the into

of the

steam

issue

from If

fragmentation the pores

particles.

the

crust will

fracture, the

vapour crust the by gas

formed diffusion stream. It rate of

through

and then

by convection

back

is

therefore

unlikely during

that the

correlations drying liquid-gas of slurries. of drops

of

the

mass transfer existence of the

based

on the would

a continuous drying of drops

interface

apply

to

Charlesworth
of single stationary

and Marshall
drops

(22)

studied

the drying
solids that spray were

containing

dissolved changes

and illustrated dried droplets

shape

and composition Different the drying point the

can undergo. whether the

phenomena air of

observed was above

depending or below

temperature the droplets. of crust

boiling initiated

Ranz and Marshall formation and Marshall mass and heat diffusion. Audu and Jeffreys of particulate suspended more in slurries and their (23).

study

work Their

was later models and mass

extended were based

by Duffie on transient

balances,

transfer

by molecular

(24)

studied

the

drying

of

droplets which

by observing in the dryer, a wind

single tunnel, in

drops thus the

were

and rotated closely

simulating of a drop

conditions and forming for from iP for that

vicinity of drops

a spray

crusts pure water

uniform

thickness. which

A value differed

was obtained

by Ranz and

-23-

Marshall This range

(18)

was found and itself

to

vary

with

air

temperature.

parameter than that

was varied

over

a much wider A further the

by previous for

workers.

correlation coefficient

was proposed p being + 0.44 slurries, was found

mass transfer, dependent: Re0'5

temperature 0. Ta29-3TP) 00 ( the to

Sh = 2.0 For drops of

ScO.

33

(1.11)

overall

mass transfer with small increase drops to in the drop crust the

coefficient size

decrease For

and drying of process, DP1.5

kc =vo CT

temperature. mass transfer expressed by:

coefficient drying

was found

control

(1.12)

where

Po = porosity CT = crust thickness 1.11 and 1.12 estimates for the for

Thus overall use

from

equations transfer of

mass the

coefficient spray drying

can be obtained equipment.

in

design

Sprays

of

Drops

Containing

Solids

Theoretical in single of drops vapour

considerations will apply to

of sprays.

heat

and mass However, depend

transfer the

extent droplet not

pressure the

lowering onset of

will crust the

on will

size

and thus simultaneously

formation spray

appear

throughout

distribution.

-24-

Diouhy sprays step-wise evaporation computational system free that of fall the

and Gauvin

(25)

studied solids the

the

evaporation a

of

containing method time. study spray

dissolved in calculating Baltas but

and employed total (26) only spray

and Gauvin considered at terminal nozzle accurate the lack

employed

a simple in the

movement a single in

velocity dryer. prediction of They

zone of difficulties to air Duffie

indicated spray data

of

evaporation regarding shape. air

be due to flow,

representative

temperature (23)

gradients studied

and chamber the effect of

and Marshall feed of which

temperature, bulk density data

concentration spray is to dried

and feed coffee

temperature but and to

on the they

extract, Crosby

present (27)

inconclusive. relate but wet found being drop

Marshall the final

attempted particle type of

sizes

dried on the particle range

size

their spray

results dried. within a The exceed

dependent The dried limited dried that

material could

properties of

be varied

by control size wet

operating was found

parameters. to rarely

particle of the

however,

spray.

-25-

Chapter Mechanism of

Atomisation

2.1 2.2

Liquid Liquid

Sheet Jet

Disintegration

Disintegration

-26-

2.1

Liquid

Sheet

Disintegration principle in increasing of its the disintegration area until and of

The fundamental a liquid it consists unstable established

surface

becomes (28)

and disintegrates. three modes of them of

Dombrowski disintegration as "rim",

Fraser for

spray

sheets,

and classified sheet". Because

"wave"

and "perforated the rim free and edge "rim" of

surface into as it of free threads

tension, a thick breaks jets. are rapidly up In

any sheet

contracts occurs to those liquid

disintegration analogous a fan spray rim

by instabilities the case of

sheet, during of of

pulled

out

from into

the

contraction drops. liquid flow low For formed rate

which

disintegrate disc or cup,

a stream free edge

a spinning at the rim

the

can be controlled with drops whilst break With which rotational are at formed higher

by the speed. producing flowrates a string of the

liquid At very a near long of drops

together discrete spray, which size.

flowrates

mono-disperse jets of are formed

down into further extends is in

much smaller is formed of

increase from

flowrate until

a sheet a position are drop

edge

equilibrium resulting In appear They

achieved.

Threads of

formed sizes.

irregularly

a wide

spectrum sheet" as it in size to

"perforated in the sheet grow

disintegration, advances until form the into the

small

holes

atmosphere. rims varying of

rapidly holes which

thickening of

adjacent diameter

coalesce break

threads drops.

down into

-27-

Disintegration
position liquid torn tension liquid can be off of a wave

also
motion to to suffer before

occurs
on half up the or

through
sheet. full

the

superimof are of action of threads surface or

Sheets wavelengths

corresponding and but tend may

draw

under

the

action by air

disintegration a regular

turbulence formed.

network

Wave disturbances break-up centres eventually through dilational found from Above dilational the waves to and Fraser of disturbance break a; gaseous the et

are al.

the (29)

most found

likely that the

cause random orifice

of

travelling sheet.

from of

A sheet is

liquid to

moving and

atmosphere

subject Sinuous

sinuous were

wave instabilities. predominate spray the nozzle sheet (30) at for air

waves

the

laminar

sheet below

produced 2 kg/m3. and

a fan

densities rapidly At low

6 kg/m3

extent

diminishes ambient

waves disappear

predominate. and the design. drops

densities is is and cause are

mode of Where

disintegration re-circulation sheet

dependent allowed "perforated drawn out to

on nozzle exist, sheet" of the

impinge

on the

disintegration. spray zone "rim"

Where drops disintegration

propegates.

For turbulent
disintegration

flow

at high

velocities
at

wave
low velocities

predominates.

However

local

depressions

in

the

surface

perforate

the

sheet

-28-

at to

thin

regions

before

aerodynamic In

waves

have

grown sheets

a sufficient disintegrate

amplitude. through (31)

vacuum,

turbulent

always

perforations. have shown that in vacuum conical also Taylor is in the the (32) caused air core. of of water. whilst waves

Colbourn sheets from

and Heath swirl spray

nozzles

disintegrate suggested by flow that

by tears this

and perforations. mode of produced (33) disintegration by waves studied on flat

disturbances

Clark the

and Dombrowski gas

effect

surrounding 300C this

temperature waves high

sheets the sheet

Below above

sinuous temperature

disintegrate frequency are occurs of

dilational

and localised sheet,

disturbances

superimposed by both the

on the waves and

and disintegration the

perforations, nating with

contribution

latter This

predomitype of charged were

increasing mechanism present in upon

temperature. is gas. nature claimed

disintegration particles found process. to

to

be due to drop sizes

the the

Measured of the

depend

disintegrating

The analytical conditions analyse disturbance q/qo where q is qo is the for

procedure

for

determining instability of a small is

the to

aerodynamic growth

wave rate

amplitude given by

periodic

= eft the the amplitude initial of the disturbance of disturbance

(2.1)

amplitude

-29-

 is
t is

the
time

growth

rate

When $ is grow. If Weber a constant break-up). similar

real is (34) value

and positive not has of real, the

then sheet for

the is

disturbance stable. jets,

will

shown that e12, et al. of the (where (35)

liquid is the

q*/qo at a

has

q* have

amplitude it has and with surface

Fraser value for

found Briffa

sheets showed (37)

water. value to

Dombrowski tension.

(36) Squire

vary

analysed sheet

sinuous of

waves

by considering He and

a two dimensional applied obtained the the classical

inviscid

finite

thickness.

methods of the

set

out

by Lamb (38)

wavelength the

disintegrating rate equation to

disturbance yield (2.2)

by differentiating dopt for the

growth

= 47TQ/paVs2 nh < 0.25 study and when We > 1. by Hagerty of sinuous

condition

A similar (39) the

was presented the appearance normal large growth

and Shea waves on the sheet

who explained grounds that is

under

operating compared rates

conditions with are the

wavelength thickness greater

relatively their of the

and that than those

consequently forms. obtained of an

alternative applied to the of the

dilated solution

Dombrowski for a parallel

and Hooper sided sheet.

(30) sheet

practical ambient air

case

attenuating was the expression

The effect their for

density

subject to

of Squire

investigation. Xopt was obtained,

A similar differing

-30-

only higher

in

the

magnitude densities were

of

the would

constant. only to

Results correlate if

for

the

ambient

dilational

waves

assumed

predominate. viscous
(40). was found

Wave instability
been to analysed work on both was by

on alternating
Dcmbrowski and growth number which Johns rate and related

sheets
In

has

contrast to be

earlier

the

wave the

dependent An expression

wave

sheet drop

thickness. size to

derived

the only

liquid

properties favourably

and wave growth after the

rate,

but

results of a

compared

introduction

further

correlation Dombrowski

coefficient. proposed whereby a model waves for liquid on the the of sheet surface rapidly half a of the

disintegration, sheet growing wavelength unstable drops. to the until at

grow

a critical detached This which

amplitude in rapidly the form

most

wave is wide. ligament The latter

a ribbon into an

contracts

subsequently is

breaks

down into analogous itself gas a a

mechanism of further (41) liquid

considered jets. with

disintegration

The droplet the ambient of

may disintegrate medium. drop Gordon

on contact the velocity a critical were

studied a high

disintegration gas

falling

through model size

= 16Q/pa

and from drop

mathematical below which

Dcr

predicted drops
V2

diameter velocity.

all

stable

at

that

(2.3)
the disintegration time for

Gordon's the drop.

model

also

gives

-31-

Several sheets of

workers inviscid as

have liquids

studied

wave

growth by of an

on inviscid

flat

surrounded by the work

atmosphere, Hagerty and order although sheets. relations grow with and

exemplified who used (42) extended of again

Squire

and Clark

Shea

linearised the

equations. analysis to

Dombrowski terms this All and time, by

second

a method work was above

successive based

approximation, on parallel dispersion that has al. or wave not (43), waves been in a sided flat-

the

authors on this, the

produce

solve

them

assumption in fact, et

although

confirmed photographic waves on

experimentally. study thin on liquid sheet on

Crapper Kelvin-Helmholtz sheets, found and Pyott by

aerodynamic to the achieve be orifice. better

growth from to

dependent Crapper, predictions theory trough, sheet.

velocity and

distance (44) tried

Dombrowski for based and on on wave the the

growth formation

applying of of vortices a parallel

a large in

amplitude wave flat

each sided

assumption

Crapper, analysis Newtonian a complex into For with to

Dombrowski investigate

and Jepson wave growth liquids

(45)

used

a linearised of of taken

on flat by the

sheets inclusion

and non-Newtonian viscosity term.

Gas viscosity to the has

was also

account the

and considered where it

be an important is large

parameter. compared liquid of

conditions thickness

wavelength been

sheet

demonstrated

that

viscosity sinuous

has no effect waves. This

on the theory also

initial predicts

wave growth

no maximum

-32-

growth Weihs thin,

rate, (46)

in

contradiction an analysis

to

the of

inviscid the stability

theory. of an form of

presented

viscous,

attenuating for

sheets. unstable thus:

He obtained waves in the

analytical a function

solution of

parameters

Y"2

(P. h) L

1+$

(pa. rt. VS2 -crn2)\ Y2n4p. h factor of the sheet I

(2.4)

where

e is y is r1 is h is V. is

a temporal the the the the the kinematic

amplification

-l+c
viscosity for

wavenumber sheet sheet thickness velocity which velocity would was also orifice. instability e attained and found be a different a function The only is obtained of case of a its that largest for

He plotted real any positive finite

wavenumber value against there which nozzle

viscosity, instability from the

wave of

maximum distance single sheet

wave is

of maximum and 2

when the

inviscid, pa. Vs 2a

nm which is

identical when solving

to

the

result

obtained with which

by Squire. data were from of the theory.

However, this

Weih's were

solution obtained

study,

wavenumbers as those

same order

predicted

by Squires

linearized

-33-

Effect

of

Liquid

Properties and Munday and viscosity nozzles. For leads in of

on Disintegration (47) illustrate the

Mechanism effect of an stability of

Dombrowski surface from fan tension spray in for

on the Newtonian to greater

formation fluids sheet

sheets

increase whilst is

viscosity an increase

surface rim

tension

wave motion occurs. demonstrated form

inhibited For

and a form non-Newtonian visco-elastic shear, finally al. (49)

disintegration Garner (48) in

fluids, gels the

that at

for

which

are

semi-solid may

no applied without et

intermediate breaking

ligaments drops.

persist

down into the

Dombrowski series been flow their grams fall life of

studied

disintegration gels after they

of

aluminium through

soap petroleum single of the hole gels defined to At increases at 2g Gardner levels the produce low

had The by in of

sprayed

fan were

spray

nozzles.

characteristics Gardner placed through of the

characterized weight rate

consistency; on a piston the liquid.

by the a given

consistencies, with increasing are formed break

the

ligaments whilst

consistency them. shreds. sheets the of

beads

on into of that of

At much higher Courshee water of (50)

ligaments the

compared

disintegration gels, the and found proportion

and dilute the gel

aqueous reduce

effect

was to

satellite

droplets

formed.

-34-

The wetting sheet agent the The is

effect agents produced

of are

a surface added to to

active hard

agent waters,

is

complex.

If

a perforated on the is to is the also (47). wetting increased orifice.

an extent As the

depending concentration closer

concentration. perforations change in by occur

at

points

disintegration an increase in

mechanism drop size

accompanied

Dombrowski atomisation They found

and Fraser

(28) of

investigated slurries

the

characteristics that in low

and emulsions. wettable even particles if At the

concentrations,

had no effect particle higher

on disintegration exceeded using was found closer sizes to the

mechanisms, sheet

diameter concentrations,

thickness. earth slurries,

Fullers to the not they give orifice

wave disintegration of disintegration Droplet

way to

a mechanism and

by tears although with

holes.

were that

measured, increased

photographs concentration. For found to

indicated

emulsions rupture

of the

oil sheet

and water,

oil

globules a critical

were size.

when reaching

2.2

Liquid

Jet

Disintegration of of describing theoretical about 1833, jet disintegration has

The problem been the subject

and experimental commencing The first of Rayleigh of with the (52) who the

investigations work reported

since

by Savart analyses were

(51). those

theoretical

-35-

employed the

the

method of

of

small

disturbances liquid that jet

to issuing

predict at a low

collapse

an inviscid method q, the

velocity. small the

This disturbance,

assumes is imposed for

an arbitrary the surface of the of form: -

upon

liquid

jet;

equation

q being

q= where qo is 0 is n is x is a is From the lengths

qo et the the the the initial

cos

(f) disturbance. of the

(2.5)

initial time rate

amplitude of growth of

of

amplitude.

wave number axial

disturbance.

distance. radius that of jet.

assumption X, defined

disturbances

of

all

wave

by: (2.6) the same initial which up. major of amplitude grows Rayleigh most qo, it

X= act randomly that cause capillary

27ra/n with the the jet force the

follows will the

disturbance to to break be of

rapidly

considered and

importance the unstable

determined configuration

potential as:
2

energy

P. E.

=-a

(I)

(1 -

n2)

(2.7)

The kinetic velocity flow.

energy potential

was then associated equation

found with for

from

the

hydraulic symmetrical rate of

rotionally the time

The resulting

-36-

growth

of

the

disturbance

then

became:

2=a3F p. a

(n)

(2.8)

where

F(n)

is

a complex

function

of

wave number equation

y

based in

on Bessel
terms of

function.
a dimensionless

By re-writing
variable, 3 0.5

2.8

where setting zero will

y=u the

a ) (P. derivative in of Y2 with respect involving of to only the n equal n. to From

result 2.6 growing A=4.508

an equation the

equations rapidly

and 2.8

wavelength

most as: -

disturbance x 2a

was determined

(2.9)

Rayleigh's wavelength jet of into formed and is either which were

analysis which

thus depends of jet

predicts only the or upon other

a disintegration the radius of the

independent the it liquid is found that i. e.

physical

properties medium drops

the

surrounding of the

injected. from

The size a mass balance is formed

and on the disintegration

assumption wavelength D= Duffie

one drop

per

1.89x2a (23) of liquids in a study which

(2.10) breakas

and Marshall jets

of gave

varicose drop sizes

up observed

-37-

predicted
accompanied

by equation
by a satellite

2.10

although
drop.

each

drop

was

Castleman a jet air that of water

(53)

investigated shattering

the effect

atomisation of a blast

of of

by the high

by taking the

speed occurred

photographs. in two stages; the

He concluded firstly collapse the of analysis results

process of

formation those

ligaments to the with form

and secondly droplets. stage

ligaments to

The Rayleigh and predicted data. analysis well with

was applied agreeing well

second

experimental original very of

Although viscous results later of forces obtained analysis

Rayleigh's it correlates from Rayleigh jet under nature

ignored experimental In stability tension. made it increased of the a

liquids (54) the of

low viscosity. the

investigated of

a viscous

action his final the

surface equation of

The complicated of doubtful

value,

although

effect the

viscosity fastest the

was shown to growing

increase

wavelength

disturbance. as Rayleigh

Weber but the

(34). considered to solve of this his

same problem for in

was able coefficients

equation equation for

y by expanding series

and showing n<1.

them From

to

be constant of his of

conditions

where equation

an analysis the wavelength

simplified the most

Weber obtained growing f2 disturbance 0.5 (2 -We + 1)1

rapidly

as:

X=

27ra

(2.11)

-38-

Thus with form

for the for

inviscid results the break

liquids from

X=4.44

x 2a, analysis. viscous

agreeing

well

Rayleigh's of

The final jets became:

up length

Loge

(qo)

(We)095

We

(2.12)

The

Stability

Curve

If of a jet

the is

experimentally plotted to against that

determined the in average Figure

break-up exit 2.1 of from termed and is

length velocity,

a curve Point

similar B represents

shown

is

obtained.

a critical the jet

velocity changes

minor flow to

significance jet linear theory (55) flow.

where

drip the

The region is

BC sometimes well understood applies. for

laminar the

position, of plotted Rayleigh L/d

where

and Weber versus line for We0'5 which the Weber (56).

Smith

and Moss and

several

systems the

obtained origin. found the to data

a"straight The value be 13 whilst of Haenlein

passed

through loge (a/qo)

constant obtained Similar

was 12 from

a value behaviour

of

has been and

observed Middleman solutions, out that

by Tyler (58)

and Richardson on jets of

(57).

Grant

working

glycerol/water of 13.4 but pointed

reported Loge (a/qo)

an average is more

value

appropriately

represented

by the

correlation: loge (a/qo) = -2.66 in Oh + 7.68 (2.13)

-39-

BREAKUP LENGTH

JET

VEL.OGITy

--lip-

Figure

2.1.

Jet

Stability

Curve.

-40-

where Phinney

Oh = u/(p. (59)

d. e0.5 that the amplification and treated

Using

assumed

rate the
the

given

by Weber's
disturbance

theory
level

was correct
as a variable.

initial
of

data

various versus nozzle. which

workers the

he plotted number curve

values of the

of flow

loge

(a/qo) the level. linear

Reynolds each

through

For marked At

a critical in the is the exit

Re was obtained disturbance curve, (point C). the

an increase in

some point fails

stability a peak

theory (56) began

and there that at

Haenlein mechanism

observed to

C the

disintegration drop

change

from

symmetrical Weber,

break-up

to

transverse experimental describe effect predicted of jet

wave break-up. observations, stability ambient wind

guided

by these to the loading

developed taking into

relations account

the that

gaseous loading

atmosphere. tended to

The theory both

propagate

axisymmetrical in in that break-up the it latter. into

and transverse drops in the

disturbances, former of as it curve. Haenlein''s

resulting segments showed a

and wave the theory

The application in so far

was correct in the of jet

predicted

maximum agreement determined calculation that growth jet

stability theory point (60), times or with

However, ' quantitative experimentally achieved. hand, with A shows the are

the

critical by Levich disintegration

(C) was not on the

other

associated

of

symmetrical the

transverse thus

disturbances Weber's

approximately theoretical

same,

contradicting

prediction.

-41-

Grant expression the entire

and Middleman for the

modified

Weber's growth rate

characteristic to predict However, pressures Other to turbulence the

disturbance curve of the for

break-up testing

a laminar theory

jet. at

subsequent other workers in the than

modified

atmospheric attribute Another the critical

proved the factor

unsuccessful. point influences the the ambient effect

(61) jet. of

critical which is

position atmosphere. ambient considered The theory factor

point (62)

Phinney

examined

of which

density the

and a theory initial

was developed level

disturbance upon that of

as constant. the

improved a" where

Weber by including A good Wea. indicated critical for values to a certain point of on Wea correlation

"We

Wea = dV2pA/Q. X against (63) of also the

was obtained Fenn dependency the less ambient than

by plotting and Middleman of the position

atmosphere. 5.3, air pressure

However

was found

have the

no effect effect

on stability. of to shear give It associated choice tubes within relaxation of to stresses rise is to

Ambient acting the

viscosity on the

through jet

surface

was found

critical that

point. some of the discrepancies arise from the long

probable with nozzle jet

stability

studies

employed. a fully At the will

Many workers developed velocity

have

used

promote jet.

profile profile the

the

nozzle occur

exit, which

a velocity may add to

mechanism

-42-

existing Smith with

de-stabilizing and Moss, in

force a comparison (which

of

surface of their

tension. results in the results

those

of

Savart

showed that the in

no peak different the

stability could velocity velocity

curve) be ascribed profiles. laminar in fully this laminar

believed to

difference Rupe (64)

emergent that high unstable much He the fully

observed

jets

may actually violent turbulent to the This (65).

be more fashion jet. of

and break-up sooner attributed developed than

an extremely developed behaviour profile.

decay

"bursting Evidently,

break-up" jets only with weakly fully

was explained developed susceptible turbulence in with such flat

by Hooper

turbulent to profile

profiles

on exit

are

relaxation deciding the

effects, factor

though stability are laminar

may be the cases. profiles should however, give

regarding jets vacuo, In

However, and for persist

most

stable in

such

jets

varicose a gaseous

instability atmosphere eventually

indefinitely. instability instability.

varicose

should

way to

Helmholtz

Stability

of

Turbulent point

Jets stability jet, but curve, the actual Grant correlation from long turbulence break-up and for

Beyond apparently time

D on the the

stabilizes with

decreases (58) data tubes:

increasing

velocity.

Middleman break-up smooth

developed of turbulent

an empirical jets issuing

-43-

L/d Phinney turbulent disturbance inferred , for

= 8.51 (66)

(We)

' 32

(2.14) plots of X vs Re to two of which constant being level

extended

his

Reynolds level to

numbers, plateaus, in He also of the

and obtained the the lower exit

an increase jets. effects

disturbance to

turbulent the

attempted ambient using

separately and Chen work technique jets. jet Some with maximum (68). and was to for

analyse initial Davis

atmosphere the data of this of

disturbance and others. the the

levels The main of point

outcome

establish detecting

advantages break-up of the

an electrical of turbulent curve is

The shape velocity workers increasing in the is

stability indefinitely L/d

as the uncertain.

increased that

postulate V (67). stability (66) from

continually of

increases another upon

The possibility curve has that been

commented of motion the

Phinney layer ambient process shape of

suggests jet

stripping relative dominate thereby

the

surface the

the

due to might

with

atmosphere, at high exit

break-up the

speeds, curve.

influencing

the

break-up

Atomisation Early from jet

of work

Liquid

Jets (69) suggested, into the

by Lee and Spencer photographic process, that

an extensive disintegration

investigation jet stream

turbulence

-44-

was of energy; process. whereby jet,

little though

importance its

in

providing would

disintegration the

presence

accelerate

An atomisation ligaments of liquid

mechanism are

was proposed out from the into is

drawn

become

detached The action

and subsequently of the ambient

disperse atmosphere

droplets. generally

accepted

as the

main

influence criterion

on atomisation. for (70), inertial, forces, The of on but classifying who

The most jet disintegration the

commonly is relative surface the analysis could type

quoted due to

Ohnesorge of

determined gravitational, did result jet not

importance tension of

and viscous employed. that into the three

specify of the

nozzle

suggested

method

break-up of

be classified number are versus

regions number

a graph (Figure (a) (Rayleigh (b) wide size (c) action

Ohnesorge

Reynolds

2.2). The jet type The jet

The areas breaks break up).

where: large uniform drops

up into

breaks

up into of drops.

waves

producing

distribution Secondary

atomisation forces

occurs, are the

in

which

the

of. aerodynamic Miesse (71) to the

involved. boundary between line regions in

translated right his

II

and III 2.2)

(indicated data 2.2 jets fell

by dotted into the

Figure areas. McCarthy

so that Figure reported

appropriate

Whilst (72)

may be used which

as a guideline, the complete

exhibited

-45-

I. 0

0.1

s
0.01 VARICOSE BREAKUP

11

N f

SIL SECONDARY
ATOMISATION ff

'INUOUS
BREAKUP

10

l0 2

03 Re

104

105

leb

Figure

2.2.

The Ohnesorge

Chart.

-46-

spectrum represented Sakai the spray were which

of

disintegration by the et al.

mechanisms

though

all graph.

were

same point (73)

on Ohnesorge's

investigated from

experimentally a wavy jet to a

transitional jet

conditions

disintegration in

mechanism.

Their

results form to the noted

expressed related

an empirical

dimensionless numbers They were formed

Reynolds

and Weber of orifices.

discharge that

coefficients coarse

also

relatively

droplets whilst to the

from droplets were

ligament formed

disintegration on transition Thus to from

finer much spray

disintegration empirical formula for

mechanism. they spray hoped

their jet

proposed nozzle coarse

clarify

design or fine

procedures particles. into jet

operations The major

requiring theoretical been provided

investigations by Rayleigh assumed to

stability who from amplitude compared predict forces

have

and Weber, that the small theories

a linearised of with that the the a jet break per jet curve. the

analysis

disturbance jet diameter.

be relatively These linear

subjected up into

to

capillary sized

and inertial drops, with of

would

uniform

one drop the

formed

disturbance is

wavelength. assumed to jet to the is are

The form

disturbed

surface

be an amplifying practical not sinusoidal, between

sinusoidal case, and in the

When compared shape of the

however, addition, drops;

satellite not

droplets

present theory.

major

predicted

by linear

-47-

Linear fastest

theory

predicts

that is in

the 4.51d,

wavelength whilst

of

the

growing

disturbance is only

experimental Generally to be rather in

work

approximate for the

agreement. coefficient prediction. jet disintegration tend

experimental higher

values than the

linearised of most

Wang (74) showed that

a non-linear the to wavelength be a function which in

analysis of the of

unstable of the the

disturbance initial reported

the

magnitude to

disturbance, variations

explains

some extent

wavelength. oscillations growth rate with the to on a jet, be constant linearised shape jet

From imposed Donnelly and in theory, deviates (75)

acoustic the

showed

satisfactory even from at the

agreement point

Rayleigh's surface that

where This

sinusoidal. is not

suggests affected

disintegration effects.

markedly

by non-linear

The non-uniformity suggested the neck (76) between to

of

droplet of

sizes secondary

has been waves on

be a result adjacent

wave crests by Rutland drop

and have (77).

been

observed also only were

experimentally that if the

Rutland would droplet practically between 0.35

showed occur of

a mono size main droplet This of

distribution

and satellite was achieved wave number

equal

volume. disturbances

by imposing and O. S.

This

technique

of

imposed

oscillations

is

thus

-48-

means for Roth

controlling

drop (78).

sizes

and is

illustrated

by

and Porterfield

Non-Newtonian

Jets

Goldin laminar linearised those rate fluids of jets

et of

al.

(79)

examined

the

stability

of a for

non-Newtonian analysis. no finite is

fluids It yield

by means of was shown stress, than the for shear stress that

stability with

growth

disturbances fluids Fluids lead in of fluid is to

always the

larger

Newtonian viscosity. found to

possessing having

same zero yield jet.

a finite stable is the

were

a completely theory fluid

One basic that are the

shortcoming proportion of the time the

this the

assumption nozzle

leaving

the state. stressed In

those in

in

its

equilibrium highly for. viscous take

The fluid

nozzle must

however,

and a relaxation the gel under reform.

be accounted of a highly

addition is

structure high In of shear a later capillary

liquid a finite

destroyed time the to

rates paper jets Inelastic viscosities

and will (80) of

Goldin various liquids were with

investigated viscous with found those

break-up

non-Newtonian shear similar

fluids. dependent instabilities fluid average instabilities

strongly to of exhibit

compared

a Newtonian to These to the the

possessing viscosity

a viscosity inside were found the to

corresponding capillary. be related

-49-

reformation fluids with

time strong were

of

the normal

liquid forces

structure. having

Elastic similar shear

viscosities Kroesser theory vluid. have for

found

to

be stable. (81) to that at extended a linear Weber's viscelastic jets We and Oh. The

and Middleman Newtonian jet

the

The theory shorter

predicted lengths d2)

viscoelastic constant

break-up number

elasticity where T is uo is was found samples stability to the account capillary. of

(Tuo/p.

the the to

relaxation zero shear

time. viscosity. Experimental confirmed jets. of Their normal results length with the theory data reduced failed within a length of

be a key in

parameter. tetralin

P. I. B. of for

viscoelastic the effect

stresses did

Experimental of break-up

indicate tube

certain which effect.

dependency may have been

upon a normal

associated

stress

Gordon various under

et

al. of

(82)

studied

the and of

instability Separan in

of water

solutions the influence work

Carbupol of externally related with solution of wave

controlled to the laminar

disturbances. jets air. not

The entire affected Jets pattern Separan of

however,

by interactions a 0.1% carbopol similar to that

surrounding showed

a break-up of 0.1% and outset.

water. formation

On jets

no sinusoidal

was observed from the

a ligament-droplet

configuration

formed

-50-

On the of

less

elastic

0.05%

Separan

jets

an initial was observed

region

exponential later

sinusoidal transformed In this to

wave growth into initial of In the

which

ligament-droplet region the growth fluid the to of the

configuration. rates are similar shear on jets motion stability.

those

a Newtonian addition found in part

same zero that form

viscosity. of Separan

ligaments undergo a

were

stretching unusual

which

accounted

for

their

-51-

Chapter Atomisation by Swirl

3 Spray Nozzles

-52-

Atomisation

by

Swirl

Spray

Nozzles

The principle conversion into conical to kinetic sheet from resulting or swirl helical spray high of

of

the

pressure within moving because with

nozzle the liquid the liquid

is liquid

the bulk A made swirling

pressure energy is of

energy thin

sheets. is or

produced

emerge

an orifice from its

a tangential through inside the

velocity tangential In such

path

one or more nozzle. velocity of an air is

passages nozzles the the of

rotational formation

sufficiently core throughout

to the of

cause length

the

nozzle pressure are

and the nozzle shown of in is the

internal critical schematic the spiral swirl nozzles rotary

design and the diagram, motion

the

centrifugal dimensions 3.1. the

important Figure within

The methods nozzle include

imparting

use of inserts, entry. and the 3.2. the The

grooved inserts, used in of

inserts, or simple

inclined use of

slotted tangential inserts

this the the

work nozzle conical

had swirl is

construction The form working of the stages liquid

shown in sheet

Figure

of

depends

upon

pressure as the emerges the is jet further

and its pressure

shape is

passes

through At jet.

a number low pressures increased

increased. twisted a 'tulip' the 'tulip'

as a thin opens to

With

pressure pressure form

form

and as the opens These up to

increased with curving

a hollow

cone

sides. pressure.

sides

straighten

up with

increasing

The fully

-53-

r--

1 1

St-

Sw-

}*-

Figure

3.1.

Schematic

Diagram

of

a Swirl

Nozzle.

-54-

NOZZLE

ORIFICE
SEAL

ORIFICE DING

SWIRL INSERT

END P" 77F_:

uCurD D157RIBUT22

WASHER

NOZZLE $ODY

Figure

3.2.

Construction Nozzle.

of

a Delavan

SDX Swirl

-55-

developed occur

cone

has been

shown by Tanasawa Re is defined:

(83)

to

when Re > 2800;

where

Re = VIRSp

u
The hydrodynamics nozzles (84) lines element point has been of flow through swirl spray Marshall stream-

considered a fluid dr

by many workers. in Then radius

considered a distance of

flowing apart. dA,

two concentric for of a differential curvature mass

surface

area velocity

r and

tangential and the

v0 the acceleration

elemental = vet/r. direction

= pdrdA

radial in

A force simplification

balance

a radial

yields

on

dP dr _ Equation pressure path, (3.1) gradient and the exact

p g

VO r

2
(3.1)

gives for

a general liquid variation where the

expression flowing of along

of

the

a curved with radius v8 and

pressure

can only r is

be defined These the

relationship describe

between the flow

known. within

relationships atomiser solutions but of

pattern describes two

the this

literature problem for

usually the

complete either

extremes; 1)

Free-vortex viscosity,

flow, or

which

corresponds

to

a liquid

of

zero

-56-

2) condition
atomiser.

Forced

vortex

flow, from

which

is drag

the

limiting the

resulting

viscous

within

In

practise,
extremes.

an atomiser

will

operate

somewhere

between

these

In dissipation pressure tangential for the

free

vortex of energy

flow

therefore,

there forces kinetic from in

is

no total The

by viscous

and the energy. the

energy

is convertedinto

velocity torque

can be derived

expression momentum:

a change which gives t (mver) FA. r = applied. of with free vortex,

angular

where

FA = force definition path

From the in

the torque

liquid so that

flows

a curved

no applied

dt thus In

(mver)

=0 =0 equation axis (3.3), where ve tends r=0. liquid core This to

(3.2) (3.3)

v0. r = constant order to at satisfy the

infinity cannot through

nozzle

condition

be fulfilled the nozzle

and instead cavitates have

the

flowing is the usually formed.

and an air to swirl

Many workers throughput by following free vortex

attempted of of

predict atomisers, (85),

characteristics the flow. method

Novikov

who assumed of angular

From the

conservation

-57-

he obtained momentum ver where nozzle veo Ro = v81 RI = the inlet and outlet of the (3.4)

I and o denote respectively. equation

The Bernouilli written p as

DV 2

for

the

energy

balance

was

2g

AV

AV

2g

2g

=0 to of the radius of

(3.5) the

The axial air core

velocity (rac)

was related equation

by the

continuity,

thus:

7TRI2v 8I Novikov the air used core the

(R02 - rac2) 7T hypothesis is of

VZ Ambrovitch (86)

(3.6) that

radius

constant: (3.7)

aQ
and solved (3.7) to

arac

=o
equations (3.3), (3.4), (3.5), (3.6)

and

yield
it Rot )0.5

Q=CD

(3.8)

where ratio cally (3.9)

CD = the of the

discharge liquid ideal

coefficient, throughput conditions,

defined to that

as the theoreti-

actual under

possible as

and by equation

0.5
D (1-a + a2 A2 ) 0.5 (3.9)

-58-

where

A=R0Rs RI2 rat 2

(3.10)

and

a=1R0

(3.11)

a is total

thus

the

ratio area.

of

the

available A and a are

flow

area

to

the

orifice

Both

dimensionless of the nozzle

parameters and are

which related

depend by:

on the

geometry

A=1-a

-30.5 (a2

(3.12)

Doumas and Laster from with good

(3.10) They

(87)

calculated them to

discharge be in (3.8). poor

coefficients agreement a

their values

data

and found from

obtained

equation

However equation 0.5

"

correlation
using suggested the

was obtained
dimensionless that this

by modifying
quantity (

-O-)

Rs-RI modification

experimental

is

needed the

to

allow

for

the

effect

of

frictional liquid to

drag

at

nozzle

surfaces

and between (88) a swirl vortex. with

various

layers. the

Harvey actual of

and Hermandorfer vortex within

attempted chamber They

describe

as a combination the free cone vortex

a free

and forced

defined for

angle flow

28 by analogy as 26=2 tan-'

an expression

CL) (7

(3.13)

-59-

where

M=

ratio area

of I Rot

total

inlet

to

outlet

orifice

L=

ratio
RS = R0

of

chamber

to

outlet

orifice

radius

C=a

parameter

=C

do. Ch CdI

Cdo,

Cd1 are

the

discharge

coefficients assumed coefficient.

for equal

the to

outlet Ch

and inlet is the

orifices, hollow 3.13 does theory.

and were

one.

cone discharge is based

Since flow, upon this the simple

equation method vortex

on frictionless improve

not

significantly

The discrepancies and experimental to some extent theory at the to

reported

between

theoretical were explained

discharge by Taylor the flow. of the is

coefficients (89),

who applied

boundary that retards in viscous the

layer drag

He considered swirl chamber to remain

surface which the

rotating path the set

liquid

unable pressure

a circular

against centrifugal up directed layer.

radial motion. towards

gradient

balancing is

Consequently the orifice

a current through

a surface

boundary

Taylor boundary

deduced

the

following d.

expressions

for

layer

thickness,

-60-

6
RR 0D

61
(sins}

0.5

(3.14)

and al = R0 (vsina) (3.15)

where

R. = outlet RD = r/R3, swirl

orifice

radius distance to any point from in the the

a dimensionless chamber cone. along inlet. R is to cone apex

chamber r= distance chamber The circulation but drag Taylor

from

apex

to

swirl

constant this 9 R2
UTRS I

defined for

by equation frictional

(3.3)

modified

account

and defined
R CD

as:
(3.16)

where

UT is

a velocity head
x, pL

equivalent

to

the

total

pressure

H
0.5

(3.17)

Taylor velocity the

assumed

a free in

vortex order

flow to

and a. negligible an expression rotational between flow. dl

axial for

component layer

derive

boundary

thickness

due to

He obtained RD enabling On the

a functional values basis of of

relationship 6 to these be calculated. assumptions

and

he showed

that

-61-

a large was via

proportion the boundary (90) the orifice has

of

the layer,

total even shown also

flow for that

through low part

the

orifice liquids. flow

viscosity of from the

Hodgkinson through layer

also may

be derived

a boundary

surrounding

the

air

core.

Mclrvine of boundary

(91) layer

presented thickness

a comparison predicted film

of

the

values theory in

by Taylor's obtained

and experimental a study However thickness thickness of his air

values cores

of

thickness

by high indicated

speed that

photography. the part boundary of the layer film

results comprised

a substantial high

when spraying

viscosity (92) from that

liquids. theories the based on

Dombrowski the work of

and Hasson (93)

Taylor

showed were

discharge related to

coefficient the nozzle pl

and cone parameter = As dodm

angle

directly

where

As = area

of

inlet

swirl of inlet

channel vortex in swirl

dm = mean diameter chamber do = orifice Deviation terms of from the ideal of

diameter. flow conditions length factor parameter parameter: were to corrected in

ratio

orifice

diameter, F1. This ratio factor

correlated is combined

against with to

a correction the nozzle

and the

(dm/do)'5

form

a modified

-62-

dm )

0.5

0.67

F1L(dodms)

1d between

The relationship coefficient the source

The

cone

angle, parameter

discharge are given in

and the reference.

disintegration

modified

of

the

liquid

sheet

will

be

controlled possesses stressed to

to as it the

some extent issues

by the the the

properties orifice.

the Joyce

liquid (94) length for

from of

importance (Lo/do).

ratio ratio

of

orifice

diameter, do, of the the

As this spray formed workers of at

was increased identical for a

fixed to that

resultant spray Most

had properties low have flow pressures tried patterns results to

shorter their a swirl cone of

length. theoretical chamber of

compare within

analyses with the

experimental sheet. the

using

the

angle liquid

emergent is

The point of vary angle its

velocity

any

particle and axial

resultant and will cone

tangential the sheet to

velocity,

across is

thickness. the vector

The resultant sum. of must these

related and thus this

local to

velocities represent

an expression effect. path for of

be derived

average If the

one liquid

element

is

considered geometry

the as:

expression

6 can be derived

by simple

tan

6=

VT VA

-63-

where at is of the

VT and VA are orifice. used

the

tangential

and axial or measured

velocities cone angle

The calculated as a criterion for different the in

often

comparing

the

fineness under usually

atomisation

nozzles largest drop

operating angle

identical representing

conditions; the

cone sizes.

smallest

Representation

of

Sprays

The droplet
are not uniform

sizes
but

which

are produced
of sizes.

by atomisation
Most report size

cover

a range

researchers a single usually However, the

and nozzle parameter

manufacturers

frequently of droplet D32.

as an indication surface parameter size

the

volume

mean diameter, does not

a single droplet the versus but size

adequately

define

complete

distribution. is volume not ideal via

One means of a plot percentage for with is a to represent by 3.1 lists calculating of drop

describing diameter undersize, the various

distribution cumulative method is

the this

mean diameters A more distribution distribution size distribution most

associated

distribution. the size

convenient

method

as a continuous equations. functions

function Table which

mathematical the been droplet

have

considered Rosin

frequently. (95) describe developed a range the of following powdered

and Rammler equation to

empirical coal sizes

-64-

Table

3.1.

Droplet

Size

Distribution

Functions

TVpe Normal d (N) d (D) 1_ SNV -Tr)

Equation (D-15) 2S N21 2 J

__

exp

Log-Normal

d(N) d (D)

=1 D. S) G

exp

(Log

D-Log 2SG 2

DGM2

Square-Root Normal

d(N) exp =1 d (D) 2 (2 Tr.D. SG)

(VD-DCM)2 1.2 2SG J

Upper

Limit

d (N) d D)

exp D. S) G

Log ((DMAX-D) L2J 2SG

/DGM)

where

D D

is is is is is is

droplet the

size

mean diameter of droplets standard in size increment

d(P, ) SN DAM SG

number the the the

number geometric geometric

deviation

mean size standard deviation

-65-

R= where R is

exp the b, 3.19 sizes of

(-b

Dn) greater parameters in than of terms the to size the of

(3.19) D, by weight

fraction n, is are

or volume, Equation of drop

distribution. number frequency for

expressed

by use of volume 6d

3.20,

general number

equation frequency: (3.20)

conversion

frequency (V) d (D)

N) dr DT This the

yields as

Rosin-Rammler

equation

in

terms

of

numbers

6b nD d (N) = 'T d (D) Mugele and Evans to for automatic (96) spray

(n-4)

exp

(-b

Dn)

(3.21)

studied droplets

the

application it to

of be

this

distribution unreliable certain distribution Nukiyama equation from

and found

calculating drop size to

mean diameters. analysers use data.

However, this

equation

represent (3)

and Tanasawa the drop

developed

an empirical obtained be

describing

size

distribution could

pneumatic in its

atomisers. most Dm exp results

The equation terms as:

expressed d(D)

general (-b Dn)

=a their

(3.22) 1.

and fitted

with

values

of

m=2 is

and n thus m= this a n-4.

The Rosin-Rammler special Nearly form all of this

expression general

(3.21) with

equation that

empirical

expressions

have

-66-

exponential of (3.22).

form

have

been

found found fit

to

be special that the

cases Nukiyamasize data, that

Mugele equation

and Evans gave led a good to

Tanasawa but were in

to

droplet

some cases than

certain

mean diameters experimentally.

larger

any values of using data the

observed on drop basic

The majority been of correlated

distributions statistical

have concept

a normal

(Gaussian) data

distribution. been found

However, to from skewed fit this

experimental distribution atomisers lower

has not in drop

exactly, where the size

particular sizes are

pressure towards have the

end of, the

range. to the that of to the log

Various normal normal droplet

workers distribution. distribution size

suggested Kottler for result of which

modifications (97) developed

sprays of

by assuming a large are

the small the

is the

the effects

number

impulses, size of the

proportional has been from root rotary normal (98)

drop. to

This

distribution sprays

found

applicable (1).

represent

atomisers distribution in fitting

The square by Tate drop the log D.

was developed their data on of

and Marshall produced core

sizes grooved normal

by centrifugal It in is that of similar log various

pressure in D is

nozzles form to the by

type.

distribution the

replaced

However,

accuracy

mean diameters reported. root normal

calculated Dombrowski distribution

from (99) to

this has fit

distribution also data found from the swirl

was not square spray

nozzles.

oAs,

-67-

Mugele distribution
so permitting tal limits the log data. on

and Evans to include

developed a stable
flexibility limit and

the

log

normal size
experimenpractical whereas large Nelson root and from Goering and

maximum drop
in fitting places droplet size

greater The the upper minimum distribution low

distribution maximum permits of

normal with (100) limit

extremely

droplets Stevens upper

frequency the

occurrence. square data More

compared distributions pressure

normal, using

obtained recently,

centrifugal and and Smith found of

nozzles. the

(101) it to spray

applied fit size

upper

limit

distribution from a wide

distributions Various mean

variety

nozzles.

diameters

could

also

be calculated a drop size

from

this

equation. completely to fully to analyse express or mean the

Although defining its drop

distribution is helpful convenient of an average

a spray it in

system is the

properties, spectrum

also form

diameter. depends Those in

The type upon its

of

mean diameter field been of

calculated, applications. in one

particular

common use have written

D= qp

generalised

expression,

as:
1 Q-p

(ENDq) ENDp

(3.23)
according to Table 3.2. is the quite

where

q and p have Although the the

values literature

on atomisation of drop size from

extensive,

prediction

-68-

Table

3.2

Mean Diameters,

D from

Equation

3.23

Common Name of Mean Diameter

Application

0 0 i
2 3

1 2 3
2

Linear Surface Volume

Surface Diameter

Comparisons, Absorption Flow through

evaporation

porous

beds

Adsorption Molecular diffusion

3 3 4

Volume Sauter, surface

Diameter volume

Mass transfer Combustion

De Brouckere

-69-

properties uncertain, specific to

of

the

liquid the of led

and atomiser reported conditions. to a number size to of type

is

still being

very

many of one set have

equations

The major of the drop empirical operating formation by spray waves, (30) on the blown into has from

investigations formulae variables. a flat nozzles, been Figure continue half which relating

mean drop

The complex (inviscid) subjected sheet to

process of the

formed sinuous

aerodynamic

idealized 3.3. to

by Dombrowski This grow shows that until which break of sheet h* _ the

and Hooper the crests waves are

as in sheet into

out

wavelengths in turn

rapidly

contract drops.

ligaments

up into liquid is dL IT

The volume wavelength of Xopt 24 where thus h* is

per

unit

width

in

a half

(3.24) thickness.

the

sheet (dopt

dL = 0.8

h*)'5 then assumed to with drop disintegrate Rayleigh's size is

(3.25) by theory by:

The ligaments varicose and thus

were

break-up for

in

accordance waves the 0.5

sinuous

given (3.26)

D=1.50 However waves up into for high found

(dopt

h*)

atmospheric to predominate and

air

density, and the

dilational sheet size is breaks given by:

were

whole

wavelengths

the

drop

-70-

Do
oPl:; iO DD hx
CIL

Figure

3.3.

Sheet

Breakup

after

Dombrowski.

-71-

D=2.12 A theoretical regimes sheet of

(dopt analysis

h*)0.5 was presented and from by;

5

(3.27) for the various for the

break-up, given
CD (2g

the

expression

velocity
VS = 8.4

AP)O. OL

(3.28)

an equation for is the broken

was derived practical of

which case, small

predicted i. e.

the

drop

size

normal

where

the

sheet

up by waves

wave number

when

nh < 0.25. K
D= const ) (' CD2tP

0.33
(pL) p9

0.16
(3.29)

Equation function

(3.29) of the

shows that surface function

the

drop

size

is

a direct density,

tension of the

and liquid atomising

and an inverse the air In sheets, expression with density. a study

pressure

and

of

the

break-up (40)

of

flat

viscous

liquid

Dombrowski for the

and Johns drop results. size,

derived

a theoretical well

which

correlated

experimental

D=

() L

0.33 3

fI+ dL

((P------) LvdL)'
dL is given

311

0.16

(3.30)

where

the

ligament

diameter, 2Q2 K 4)L

pU

by 47 2 0.33 J 0.2

0.16 Kop 1+2.6u 72 PL

dL = 0.96(

(3.31)

-72-

In

principle, sheets

the

analytical

methods to the

used conical

for

fan

spray

can be applied spray

sheets (99) sheet

produced re-arranged velocity,

by swirl equation Vs, to

nozzles. in

Dombrowski terms of the

(3.29)

give 0.33 p (p 9 thickness parameter given by (3.33) 0.16 (3.32)

D=

C1 (K2) VS the sheet

where

kT is kT=hr

By continuity, conical sheet Q= Hence for

the is

flowrate by:

at

any point

r along

the

given Vs sing (3.32), from 33

2irrh

(3.34) (3.33) conical (3.34)

combining drop size

and

an expression as

the

sheets

was obtained

C2 Q" Vs In of

(3.35) (sine)0"33 the drop was found correlated independent by and atomising have based of

practise the cone

however, angle analysis (equation

size were of

and results in 3.58). terms

regression pressure their which apply liquid,

throughput workers

Most

results are listed

on empirical in Table to are

correlations, 3.3. Many of of

a number the

correlations and atomising

specifically and these

one design described

nozzle

where

applicable.

-73-

The effect can be generalised most with workers increase

of

operating to a certain that

variables extent. drop sizes the

an

on droplet For are

size

instance increased

have in
nozzle

found flowrate
and

within
with

range

of
in

a
orifice

particular diameter, An size. atomising (P-0.5) viscosity increase

also

increase being held

other in

nozzle the size spray

parameters angle

constant. drop

tends with

to

reduce

Droplet

decreases and for

increasing varies in drop with liquid sizes

pressure over is

most

purposes An increase

a limited generally

range. found to

increase

and the This

relation

(p0.2)

is

a typical in that

illustration. other operating in particular

trend

may be misleading are also'affected

variables sheet

by viscosity,

velocity. Energy imparted to the fluid forces has to overcome liquids to Within the both

viscous of high

and surface surface resulting of liquids is

tension

and hence difficult

tension in

become more larger drop atomised, quite small on droplet in

atomise range

sizes.

normally usually

surface so that size

tension the are effects less

variability of surface

tension than for

changes change are

significant of Turner of 3.3,

viscosity. in than placing

The equations surface (see

and Moulton greater equations

unique

tension Table

significance 3.49,3.50),

viscosity,

which

-74-

may be misleading investigated (less

since than have

over 3cP)

the

range

of

viscosity beminimal. in terms

influence drop

would size

Some workers of a flow number

expressed

(FN) where

FN =Q p0.5

(3.36) (102), FN may also be obtained

According directly

to from

''Fraser the

relation
(3.37)

FN = 293

CD A0

where Darnell, drop 3.46

Ao is

the

orifice in

area contrast of Tate flow

in to

cm2. other workers, (see equation 3.48) axial found

however,

size in

independent Table 3.3).

number

and Marshall in terms of of

(equation of the film the liquid

predicted

nozzle

performance velocity

and tangential sheet are at the

components Thus their details

orifice. before

thickness

required

equation

can be applied, either of using by

and this experimental

information work of or

can be obtained through the work

Doumas and Laster. grooved for core the

The work nozzles organic the with term

Nelson two

and Stevens separate data. size

necessitated liquid root results in

correlations Their results in

and water normal of Tate the

support agreement

square the used

distribution,

and Marshall.

The velocity is based

defining

Re and We numbers

-75-

on the
thickness with of

average
at spray

axial
the

velocity
This was

through
quantity, obtained the

the

liquid
together

film

orifice. cone angle

the Darnell.

from data of to core

the

work and a

Wang and Tien together with

(111) used their for work own

Nelson obtain

Stevens more

results

general

correlation 3.59). This

grooved is were of

nozzles in for of the a shear and (6) were at Taylor viscosity stressable the both mean

(equation that study. (89) term shear to to in

significance selected analyses

non-Newtonian Wang and

liquids Tien

also the

extended fluids by

non-Newtonian the Navier relation the They and

replacing with fluids

Stokes for

equation power layer law

rate

estimate

boundary then

thickness values of against

orifice. Newtonian drop size,

correlated

6 for the

non-Newtonian

fluids

thus:

Y=0.671X where and where flow y= x= A is area log10 1og10 the of f

- 0.433 (d) (IIv50) the -0.436 Re orifice 0.258 We to

(3.38)

A-0.339 the total

ratio

of

area

the

grooved by the rate of

slots. apparent 2.0

Non-Newtonian viscosity of

behaviour the

was characterized fluid based velocity at a shear ratio

x 105 sec-l; VZ is the at

a value axial the orifice.

on the

VZ/h, film

where

based

on the

thickness

-76-

Dombrowski istics found and when the were

(99)

in

a study through

of

drop various of

size

characternozzles,

spraying drop

water sizes

mean simply

independent against 3.58). a range of

nozzle and a later and

design,

correlated (equation atomised were inversely

flowrate In

atomising (112), that

pressure Dombrowski

study found

oils to

drop

sizes

related

pressure

and directly generally mean drop was found viscosity (3.60) viscous velocity. is

to

viscosity findings.

in

confirmation However velocity, viscosity. shown the upon in

with

the

accepted size to

when he plotted drop Thus size the

against

ejection of

be independent of drop

dependency derived

size from

equation of sheet

essentially the

effect the

forces

within

nozzle

Dombrowski a perspex high air model

also of liquid

studied a spray

the nozzle

flow

pattern

within that the

and found most

viscosity core.

produced

the of

disturbed on

The non-dependence for to a given to sheet sheet the

drop

size

viscosity assumed breakdown disturbances chamber.

velocity

was therefore forces opposing greater swirl

be due of the

viscous offset sheet

being to the

by the from the

imparted

El-Awady results proposed of the

(113) effect

attempted of

to

resolve

the

conflicting He the

viscosity for

on drop

size.

two

hypotheses

atomisation,

whereby

-77-

droplets ligament or viscous

separate against shear. of value either of

laterally the forces

from of

liquid either was

sheet surface

or tension where the depended defined

A criterion tension X, or

proposed principles parameter

relevance upon by the

shear

a dimensionless

X_(,

)0.5 PL

tang

(3.39)

Thus

viscosity

is

only

of

significance

when

the

shear

principle Mani attempted vortex

applies (114) to strength

and X<0.25. using the data of various size workers, the chamber. data

correlate created correlation

mean drop in the

against swirl

nozzle

No empirical only gave

was presented

and the in

a linear

relationship coordinates.

when plotted The available swirl is nozzles dependent is

semilogarithmic droplet The width dimensions, Simmons fraction number of fuel of sizes of

range

of

obtained the

with

extensive.

distribution pressure data of of

on nozzle

operating (115) presented

and feed on the drop

conditions. size/volume with using a large a range

distribution such nozzles at

sprays various

observed types of

viscosities

a variety

operating

conditions. correlation mass median given median spray or

He established when the diameter, could Sauter drop

a non-dimensional size was normalised the distribution either the to of the any

so that

be predicted mean diameter.

from

mass

-78-

4J b
r-I

$4

4
m

ro t4J
P-4
ro 41

:s

it

U)a) b 0 a) 17
W

rci
0

P. 0
$4

V w

pfd N
N b

+)

rci .0
ra

il A
G4 W U) H O

++ 0
Q)
r

4J -H

N 'C

w ., 4

41

td r-4

:z U)

I. H U) 0 N

0 0 " 41

10

a
o"

(1

o "-

Iro.
H 0
"1-I 41

b
04

M " Ln ON
a o<oo..
CL v

vx
u'1

"
p un un

It 0
W

N9 93 .1
U) .%IbMN ri "ri
. -I

ca

C)
r4
64

% IN %-0
Ln r-+ 11

En 0)

o
cl
r-1

Nx
CL
C)

4 104
r.

.dN E-1 n0
O

`-'

Lfl

OAaOOi aNV LS LS

O1 Lt

va 44
:J

N
AwAAAa O U
"

+MMa0

0 z
q0 O .H
a.7 MMMM

r """"

r4 Sr

NM cr

er

0
O p-I D

-79-

f-4
O U

r-4

r4
r-i U

r4 O
V

O U O
r-i r-4

H
f-4

H
r-4

0 V

Co
cm r-I

O
Ln
0

0 + O

co
OD

r-1

f`t
Z
0

""

I
g34 0 LM

O
r.

mi

II

"
N cn
r

O )4

"ri

y W

"

l 4 W
v N

H ""

04

0
04

tl1

dl

N a

o o b A 10 Ln 1 v
O N
C9 4

o O

cn r4 fe
a
II

O
k

o O
o

in
II
N

o
'1 4

o
N
11

a '4
v
11

v
d
J

M O 1 O
tn in
O
W 1 4

II
N

v
A

l1
cn

tn
W A A

f. 1

C7 3

,Kp M

u'1 M

W M

N M

l0
0 L!1

^
0

O
v
:n

tJ1

is Q:

r"4

r"4

t!1

-80-

U)

UN "rl W W

ri " 4

3 a) b
C) d)

U a)

4J 04 r4U) 00

D
O O

Ln H
O
" N

lw

cA O

cv " O
t11

I
a

O
d'

s'
M v

In
M
b

O
n

1 Q) d' L

U I

"r1 U U U ". 1 0) 0
G)

N r"
O + O 'a tC
co

a) A N

i G1 N 41 W to

1 I

O I Ot
Ln r-I /o

N
0) c Co (L)

O I Ol
>1 41

c) N
A'
ul M

-1 1

U ) G

r4 (d
u]

U CH (n

$4
O U O

44
0
to

+-

" H 'C7
V"

r.

10
Ln

O u

0
41 r

O
W

"r4

CD )

(z

IQ
RS

O
N 1

W O
Lt1 4 C, rI

>r N
n

N
"J

N II

'a

O 1

H 0

O o

>

O N d-i

$4

mot'

'a C) >
0 0

" ri d'
II

II fQ
M

r1 t0

r-I 1

m O

to 1

co

co N

r4 0
04

E-4 D >

11

IU

IA

104

= < a b a a

co

v
M

ON

Ln

MM

r1 cd
V1 N

0 r1
0

Z
ro --% 00

'd 00 90
r-I
%-0

rl

(v 4 E

-81-

a
0 +J 4J

a 04 04
C? -

"1 41

0
U

, -1

+J

a) r-I

En

.0 0

41 va

Id

0 u

Ln rI cv O

H "r4 0 G) u'1

(71 00

mN Ln
IM

NO

r-i

10m

co o-4

41

>1
'v

v1
Ob

O
IC
-,4

U!

A4

am0
N cV

+1
(t
r-4 p+

0
0" Cr

un
co

un 4)
yr rd

Ln
N (h

C.O
il

CDam

w on r-1 44 >a 04 u, ON
a)
4 Ln N1 U) a)

o 4 O" 10 o .ut. aW VT ov
00 c) 'r .41 IIt! of

''d
) N

11

t-" "-4 U) W

rt

cv

.-I -r4 c

1i C

u"

NONNN cl P. bA

O OxN 41 -1-4 fz4 Z

II m

0O

r-4

r4 "rl UI 14

OOM

ri t! 1 MMM

NM Lfl

It,

rn
"-i

C%
O
44-4

... ro f" C 00
b : to
Co H

44

`ri
'r 1 b

v
.Q

Cr

rd 0 E-19

-82-

10 0 01

r-1 r-4 a)
U
C)

in A
(0
r " r-I

a $4 0
0

4 W
.4 "rl

",.I 41
U

NO N

N
r-i

S-1"IJ 4J

G)

O +1 I.i "r1

r"1 O

c1+

O "

co N t0 N N
. -I

-1 Ln N"
r-I O

O3 Ln +-r
X0

9C N N" 00 nO Oco +O

a0

M M "

D RT
E
O b. Oi

M tr'1 N

M
M

Ab

DO

a 4 0" trr-4 b Cn "i"4 4) OO I O'

O co

"ri

d' OO
4 II

tT

O H

11
7+

il
>C

4
U

C!

Ln r4
1

II

.o N

a H

M tr'1

N r

0
1 1

04

04

CT
N

Ln M
0
Lf)

G1
0

"'i

I
r4

1.4
N

cV

>+

C9 3

-v

of

qw Ln M

Lei
M

W N M

n In M

Co In M

'd

0 O
+ v

S n. 0 bv
.v M

04)
N r" Q)

3 . 00 pN
w 00 Q3

zcn

-83-

'd

w "1 r "
t. r. 71

a b 0 41 0 4 a
U)
W

rr

4)
NO W0

ais O4J

p 4) 41 tu

"r4

o
O
L

c)

a
O

a
N

OD oI
.N

O " cr

"

.-1

r, Oe s ON
Itr

O f-+ O ++ rO
+ cY. O v O to

4J 0

O "r m

Co N" 00

to

r-I
N N O "rI

>b
o
tr

X to

" b
X

O I~ ,-4 "rI

is a

a
Ln ON M 11 N

II II
>4

0
'b w ri I

N
N N

al a "+0 o
U1 "rl O

0
II

23

a)
>

O O

0 d c

II

>+

C)

Cu 0

C 7

la un

aa

0a

0o L MM

%D
M

a ) G

10 a d c

bH

4 14 E+

-84-

Chapter Mathematical
This is divided into

4 Model
two parts.

chapter

4.1

Development and evaluation thickness discharging

of

the of

boundary the

layer

equations

boundary annulus orifice. sizes conical of

layer fluid

within from of

the the

4.2

Calculation disintegration

droplet of the

formed liquid

by the sheet.

-85-

4.1

Statement The swirling

of

Simplified jet swirl considered

Problem here is one in which the

liquid passes orifice is in first passing problem outside that

enters

the

chamber channel During which the

tangentially to emerge

and then through an layer

down a converging of radius at the Ro. wall

passage increases

a boundary in thickness Taylor fluid

formed

a direction considered

towards the

exit of

orifice. a swirling but

(89)

problem

down a converging by neglecting the boundary the layer. part of

core, axial His the

he simplified of velocity

the

component solution flow

indicated passed to

a substantial the boundary conditions fluid Thus

Ve = n/r

outlet

through flow that

layer. of in

The fluid a free vortex, path

was assumed which with implied

under the

moved the

a circular moved with

no torque

applied.

fluid

a velocity: (4.1)

in

circles the

around axis

the

axis, the

where circulation that

is

the

distance The form an

from above at

and n is predicts axis at

contant. core will requires spinning through

assumption orifice velocity cavitates. orifice

an air

the

since r=

equation Or and thus thus ring. the

(4.1) the passes

infinite liquid nozzle constant

The liquid as an annular from

the

The circulation relation: (4.2)

was estimated
2= Qrm AS

-86-

where

Q is As is rm is

the the the

volumetric area of the

flowrate inlet radius to at the the is swirl inlet. made to chamber

mean swirl treatment layer

In

the

following the

an attempt thickness, within it, outside

predict distribution the layer. Stokes axial

boundary of

and the taking the from account boundary the This chalk large the Navieris slurries shear apparent of

velocity

velocity Relationships

component are

developed fluids.

equations to

for

Newtonian

considered are rates viscosity amount. shear are

be justified and since within

because

the

thinning encountered under

extremely the nozzle, varies

those

conditions

by a negligible

Boundary

Layer

Equations

The full fluid, rical in terms

equations of

of

motion

for

a Newtonian are, in cylind-

velocity

gradients

c-ordinates: vravr v8 avr vzavr

ravr t at +

ar

+r

v62

GP

ae
(rvr) 9r

r+
+ 1 r2

az)
a2 yr a6 _2

- ar
ave H+ 2 a yr

+ C

a1a rC r

r2

az2] (4.3)

+ P5r

av
p _A+ at

vrv r
3r

A+

av,A+ 8
r ae

vvv rA+zAl_1
r 22 -+ +1

Dv
az )-r

aP aA yr ve +8

+a1a

Cr 8r 8r

(rve)

28

r2

22 88

-Be

az

2+

Pge

-87-

(4.4)

Buz vravz pCBz + 8r

vz ve avz + + a8 r

8vz )aZ 8P __ _ 8z

+1a

( r ar

ravZ )
ar

+12+
r2

a2V

ao2

8z2 J

PgZ (4.5)

The full +r

equation (p. r. vr) 3r

of

continuity: +r 1 28 is (Pve) + az (PvZ) in to Figure a fluid of =0 (4.6)

at

The co-ordinate In applying

system these around

shown

4.1. flowing a converging

equations the that: conditions layer thickness is inside

symmetrically nozzle, (1) (2) pressure (3) respect (4) axis axis are of it is Steady

surface

assumed state

exist thin and variation in

The boundary through For to yr axial its

may be neglected. all derivatives with

symmetry zero.

e are is

small

and derivatives than derivatives

normal parallel

to

the to the

much larger the nozzle.

The simplified written:

equations

of

motion

can now be

Vr. avr 3r

ve r r +

Vz 8vr 8z =v

a` a r2

ayr +1 r ar _

yrl 4.7)

r
ave ve r

yr

av8 + ar

yr

ve r+

vz

ave az "(

a2ve art

1 +r-2

(4.8)

-88-

ti . .-0.

-. WO, - 0.

"/ z200,
i
PohtF en cw of owndtry layer ab n

040 "0 .

_l

.-

I/

Figure

4.1

The Co-ordinate

System.

-89-

vr.

8vz 8r +

vz. avz az pzr +

l.

avz 9r +

a2Vz (4.9) ar2

and the

equation (r. vr)

of +

continuity avz az =0 (4.10)

18 r r

A complete and therefore approximate layer round sides. arbitrary which at the

solution Taylor method

of

the

above

equations applied to of solve a fluid with of the

seems unlikely the the boundary circulating straight an layer wall and

successfully of Pohlhausen the flow

equations the inside

defining of

a conical method distribution

surface consists in

Pohlhausen's velocity satisfies outside the edge

assuming boundary at the

boundary of the

conditions boundary layer.

Boundary

Layer

Momentum

Integral

To obtain are integrated to have

these through

integrals, the

the

equations layer, . of

of which

motion is (4.7)

boundary thickness mainly

assumed is

a definite it

Equation small

discarded

since (4.8)

consists

terms.

Integrating

{vr. ve}

VB. avr 8r ve. 8vz az

dr

+(

Jr

vr. ve dr

+1a 2z

(ve. Vz)

dr

-f

dr

[{} 8v6 8r

v8 {r_ }I

(4.11)

-90-

By means of
formed :

(4.10)

the

fifth

term

in

(4.11)

is

trans-

r ve. 8vz dr J 3z Thus (4.11)

Ve'avr 8r

dr

-f,

vr. sv8 dr r

becomes vr vr6 dr Z

{vr.

ve}

+2r

+J

(ve. vz)

dr

=v{ Similarly

av {

ar}

v {r}
J

(4.12)

(4.9) becomes (vz2) dr +

{v

.v}+3 rzf + V[{,

Vr'z rpJ

dr =-1f

GP dr 37
(4.13)

Z} +{ r

8v ar }+2

v r (4.12)

1 dr ,J and (4.13)

yr of

may be eliminated (4.10).

from

by means

Application It the is

of

the

Pohlhausen to assume

Method an arbitrary the form boundary for layer.

necessary of

distribution

velocity

through

Boundary

Conditions

ve =vz=0atr=R ave v6 -R'vz=W' The following expressions relations that satisfies ar are 3VZ ar the the =0atr=R- most above simple boundary power series

conditions.

-91-

vz

=W

(2n-n2

(4.14) velocity the boundary

where layer

W is

the

streaming W(z) only.

outside

and W=
ve =R

(2n-n2)

(4.15) (4.16) from 0 to 1.0 through the boundary the of z only.

where so that layer.

n=

R-r r n varies

Two variable layer at

quantities, any point,

W and S define and are functions the

boundary They

can therefore (4.12) yr

be determined and (4.13). first (4.10) r avz dr az

by using Before

momentum (4.14)

integrals and (4.15),

applying

must

be eliminated.

Integrating {r. vr}

J n

(4.17)

or

in

teams of

{(R-nd).
From (4.14)

vr}

=J

(R-n6)

avz do
az

(4.18)

avz az From _ -z+ (4.16) an

W(2-2n)

2n

dw (2n-n2) dz

(4.19)

ZSo that

_1 Z

dR

-Z

n dd

(4.20)

(4.18)

becomes:

-92-

{ (R-n)

vr}

=SJ
t dz

(R-n6)

C
j]dri

(2n-n2)

dz (4.21)

+W (2-2n)

S dz

Integration

of

(4.21)

yields

yr

at

any point

vw r-K

dR dz dS (3 Rn2-243

(2Rn-n2(R+6)+2n36) 3 Rri2-n3 + dw (34

-w

(R+d)

E dz

+ n4d

(R+2 6)

+ nod )'

2)

dz
(4.22)

Equation 1J aZ gradient developed in dr

(4.13)

contains form

the for

unknown the axial

quantity pressure (116) velocity to W in

and a suitable must be assumed.

Binnie for the

and. Hookings axial streaming this velocity

an expression nozzle the

a convergent eliminates only is

and equating need for

(4.14) since (4.13) determine after

two momentum integrals, d, and of remains. used in Equation to (4.12) yields, equation:

one variable therefore .

quantity,

discarded each the dR dz first

(4.12) the terms

Evaluating

some reduction, dd dz 1 8-6712 ( -6 l

order

differential

dR dw + 15v (R1 dz w w`T-2, of (4.23) is given in

(4.23)

A more Appendix

detailed II.

derivation

A solution means of the

to

(4.23)

is 4th

obtained order

numerically integration

by technique.

Runge-Kutta applying this

Before

method,

values

for

R, dR/dz,

-93-

w and dw/dz z, over the

are

required of the

at

each

incremental

value

of

length

nozzle.

Evaluation

of

R,

dR/dz

Consider surface surface describes surface equations: y= rl-x From the rl is of is the cut

the

section

through

the in rl,

converging Figure 4.2. it

inside The

nozzle

represented of radius

on an arc of

so that

a quarter represented,

a circle. two

Any point

on this by the

dimensionally,

sin = r1 cos

(4.24) (4.25)

relation cos2 (4.25) =1 may be combined 2=1

sin2+ (4.24) and

r1 or

+1 rl -

(r1-x)

y2 = r12

(r1-x)2

(4.26)

Re-writing Figure R= So that, radius 4.1,

(4.26)

in

terms

of

the

co-ordinate

system

of

0.5 rl at R is + R0 (2rl. z-z2) z down the To find the nozzle, rate of the (4.27)

a distance defined.

wall of R

change

-94-

Figure

4.2.

Section

Through

Nozzle.

-95-

with to z,

z equation thus z-r1 dz (2riz-z

(4.27)

is

differentiated

with

respect

2 the

0.5 ) boundary conditions

(4.28)

which

satisfies

- c dz

at

z=0,

z=0atz

=rl

Inspection that it terminated

of

the in that

actual the form

converging of of or

nozzle

showed and

an orifice the

insert

examination not complete This

showed

the at

arc z=

900 so that, value

did curvature dR/dz has a real measurement.

value.

was estimated

by direct

Evaluation

of

W and

dw/dz

Binnie discharge nozzle.

and Hookings Q, of a swirling the

derived flow radial equation.

an expression through velocity For

for

the

a converging to be negligible

They

assumed

and applied flow it hl

Bernouilli's that = H1 the

frictionless

follows +

W2+22 r2 g

(4.29) head r, and downward and Hl is the total

where

h1 and W are

pressure at radius

velocity pressure The variation of

head. h1 over the annular cross section

was shown to be:

-96-

hl

ll(4.30) (rAC2 2g r2

where

rAc

is

the

radius

of

the
and

air

core.
shows that W has a

Combination'of

(4.29)

(4.30)

constant pressure W=

value drop, 2P

over P,

the this 0.5

cross is

section. by:

In

terms

of

the

given

X22 } r`AC

(4.31)

From a mass balance Q is:

over

the

cross

section

the

discharge

0.5
Q= 7T(R2-rAC 2)

(2P-112 P2

(4.32)

rAC adjust itself aQ/ so that =0 arAC the

For

stability is

of

flow

rAC must and the

discharge yields

a maximum,

condition

n2 r2_pr AC = 8PL

(24+16R222

p)0.5 p

(4.33)

Applying at

this

relationship along the

over nozzle, from

the

annulus that

of the

the

fluid,

any point-

shows

streaming

velocity

W may be evaluated

a mass balance.

Q
Tr(R2-rAC where R is the

2)

(4.34)

distance

of

the

nozzle thus

wall

from

the as a

axis.

The streaming

velocity

W is

evaluated

function

of

the axial

co-ordinate,

z.

Since

the

fluid

-97-

is

flowing

along W is in

the

curved

wall, changing.

the

direction W must

of

flow

and hence be resolved to equation

continually the axial

therefore it

direction

before

applying

(4.23). the
required,

To evaluate
which is also

axial

velocity

gradient,
(4.33) and

dW adz
(4.34) are

equations

differentiated drAC dz equation ,

with

respect is

to

z.

On elimination

of

(4.35)

obtained.

dz

-2 (R

2R AC 22 )(P) dz `1_

2 Si4+16R2StZP -5 (4.35)

A value

for

rAC is

obtained the

using forms

(4.33) of R. dR, W and dW, dz dz over the length of the thickness at the

Having equation nozzle orifice. Although equation, boundary for its to

established is

(4.23) obtain

now integrated boundary layer

the

(4.23) solution

is

a first is not at

order

differential The value

straightforward. z=0 gives an infinite

condition

6=0

S appears in the denominator. dS since A practical dz by assuming is achieved an extremely solution small for d to initiate the Runge Kutta sized stable integration step lengths. step the

value

subroutine, Once initialised length first of

and applying the

similarly becomes

system

and the of value value.

may be greatly 5% of the

increased

after

completion The final initial

integration to

length. the

6 proved

insensitive

assumed

-98-

The values This with radius.

used were

selected

to

optimise the

computer

time.

was confirmed different step

by repeating lengths in

quadrature first 5% of

starting the

the

-99-

4-"2

Prediction Liquid is

of

Drop

Sizes from the nozzle in the form

discharged

of

a hollow

cone possessing on the magnitude the

a velocity of fluid the

and direction components from negligible the outlet when

dependant vr,

velocity

ve and vz within The radial with

emerging yr is

orifice. compared

component,

ve and vz and will of the sheet is

therefore therefore

be ignored. a resultant semi-cone of

The trajectory the components @P, is 8.. P(= where

v and vZ. now defined ve

The predicted

angle,

tan-lf

v z the mean velocity thickness calculated component at from the the

(4.36)

v denotes over the

averaged Each

sheet is

orifice. equation

component
v v1

AI+v2A2 AI + A2

(4.37)

The subscripts

1 and 2 refer

to

the

regions

inside

and

outside

of the boundary
area.

layer

respectively.
profiles area, by the Al+A2

A is
are is

the
shown to

cross-sectional in the Figure 4.3.

The velocity flow divided

The total flowrate

equal

volumetric

mean axial

velocity.
A= T

(4.38)
vz

The mean axial

velocity

within

the

boundary

layer

is

-100-

obtained and n1 i. e.
so that

by integrating

(4.14)

between

the

limits

n=0

vzl

I1 =W 0
= 2W 3

(2n-n2)

do

vzi

Similarly v1
so that vg

for 1 =R

ve St (2n-n2) do

0
= 21l Z 3R

The mean axial has already VZ2 =W The boundary Al layer been

velocity

outside i. e.

the

boundary

layer

defined;

area,

Al

is

defined

by

= Tr(2RS-52)

and

A2 = AT-A1

The velocity is that of

profile a free

of vortex

ve outside defined

the above

boundary by

layer

ve =r referring 6r is , given to Figure by V r dr 4.3, the flow, V, within the element,

dV = 21Tr r. or V=

1r0
rAC

27r

so that

V=

(ro-rAC) 21TO

-101-

'1

I-L

Figure

4.3.

The Velocity Outlet Orifice.

Configuration

at

-102-

The mean velocity tional

vet

is

thus

V divided

by the

cross-sec-

area:
V Tr(rot-rAC2) 20 ro+

or

vgl

and r0

= R0-d
(R02-rAC2)

Now AT =Q= vz

0.5 so that rAC =( Rot Q)

nVz
The mean axial by applying obtained conical the equation from sheet (4.36). describe atmosphere. the and swirling (4.37) In velocities the the are cone obtained is

and thus practise

angle of the

edges

an arc Thus

as the at

cone moves only angle angle

through

ambient

a point cone cone

a short will could have not be

distance been

downstream,

effective of the

reduced.

Measurement at the orifice be less

made directly results equation angle is will

so that than those

the

experimental by the spray

always

predicted for analysis yields

(4.36). thus

An empirical favoured.

correlation

A dimensional relative,

performed the following

on those analysis.

variables

considered

abc 8m =K rd-- tu`9P fd vZ A t 9 (4.39)

-103-

where

do is g is

the

orifice

diameter

gravity properties of the liquid are:

and the

physical density surface

viscosity

p :a :4 ;-

tension

The constants regression 0.91

in

equation

(4.39)

were

evaluated

using of

analysis.

A correlation and the final form

coefficient of the spray

was obtained is

angle

correlation =3.235

dVpdvp ) ( uZ

o27 .
QZ

-. 05
) (gl 1J

.2 ep

872

(4.40) The fit Figure velocity of 4.4. is

V

the

experimental calculated

data

is the

illustrated cone angle,

in the sheet

Having obtained

by resolving

the

mean axial

velocity: (4.41) 4.41)

c8

Sheet

Disintegration The conical sheet of liquid discharged of in grow they the mass, sheet from reduce remains surface cause (40) and the sheet the in

nozzle thickness constant. increase to that break

must,

by the the

conservation velocity waves until

since

Sinusoidal in up. most rapidly amplitude

on the finally

Dombrowski growing

and Johns wave is

postulate from the

the

detached

-104-

40

N d c. OD 00 W J C7 Z Q 1 W V) 7CWD cc0 0 ow

30
0000

0 w m D w
I

V 2O 30 20 (degrees) PREDICTED SEMI-ANGLE

40

FIGURE4.4 CORRELATION CONE SEMI-ANGLE OF MEASUREMENTS

-105-

sheet This

in

the

form

of

a ribbon into the

half

a wavelength ligament tension

wide. of and

ribbon

contracts dL, under is

an unstable of

diameter, its

action from

surface

diameter 2 7r4L

calculated

a mass balance.

= h.

(4.42)
21r

or

dL

=(

4n 10.5 j

where

n is

the

wave

number

h is A,

the

sheet

thickness of

at

the

point

of

break-up

and The

the

wavelength of

disintegrating calculated the sheet by to

disturbance. several be inviscid workers.

value Squire constant

A has been (37) assumed

and for

sheet 4TrQ 2 PaVs

thickness

obtained (4.43)

valid where

for

nh < 0.25. the ambient air density. and Hooper (30) sheet. in the is

Pa is A later

analysis the practical

by Dombrowski case of

considered A similar magnitude only valid

an attenuating differing equation in the only

equation of the

was obtained, constant. This and is

however, region where

nh > 1.5 when waves recently sheets,

dilational More thin waves

predominate. Weihs where of fluid (46) analysed the for stability unstable tension, of

viscous

relationships viscosity,

as a function

surface

-106-

sheet

velocity when

and

distance data very obtained. study are of

from from similar

the this to

nozzle study those of based

were to

obtained. model in

However, of Weihs,

applying

the

wavelengths model in were this

quoted ligament on the

Squirds diameters simple

Prediction therefore

inviseid

model 8ha 2 paVS

Squire.

d_ L

(4.44)

where

h is

the

sheet

thickness

at

the

point

of

disintegration. This of parameter flowrate, large results averaged with defined; h=Q (4.45) length. is sheet determined velocity, in from cone individual angle measurements length. sheet

and sheet of of the

Due to length, were agrees h is

fluctuations for each

measurements set proposed.

particular

conditions This finding

and a correlation that reported

by Wolfsohn

(117).

2'TrVssin6. L the sheet

where

L is

Correlation

for

Sheet

Length

The intact
function Vs of

sheet

length,

L,

is

considered

to be a

several sheet

variable velocity diameter

quantities.

the

do - orifice 8cone

angle

(correlated)

-107-

P.
p-

- atomising
density viscosity of

pressure
fluid of fluid

a-

surface

tension

of

fluid

i. e. L=

f(VS, do, O, P, p, p, O)
analysis
doVsp a

A dimensional
L do K

yields
doVs2

__

Ce}
K, of length d0. a, 80 sets

Pbp

(-2)

8d

(4.46)

Values

for

the

constants

b,

c, of

d were data. is,

obtained The final

from

a regression form for L= the

analysis sheet

correlation

1871.35.

(Re)-0.117.

(We)-0.449.

(DG)-0.934. (4.47)

e-0.434 where Re is We is and DG is the the the Reynolds Number based on orifice

Weber Number other dimensionless 0.9 group. was obtained. 4.5. The fit

A correlation of the data is

coefficient illustrated

of in

Figure

Formation

of

Drops

from

Ligaments

Since role will of

adopting in

the the

inviscid formation Instead

model of the

of drops

Squire, from

the ligaments of

viscosity

be neglected will

here.

classical his

theory theory

Rayleigh

be employed.

Briefly,

states

-108-

3" 0

5 2.,
0
0 N oo

0 2. O V-

0
oQ

x E

o o 5$o o o 0% 0

00 gO<b

o0

cP

00 lb

W Ln

0 5

Li

1.5 0.5 1.0 2.0 PREDICTED SHEET LENGTHI m) . 102

2.5

3.0

OF FIGURE4: 5 CORRELATION SHEETBREAK-UP LENGTH MEASUREMENTS

-109-

that

the

ligament for in His

swells

and contracts formed,

symmetrically one drop are is also growing produced

so that although formed. disturbance

each wavelength practise solution was dL droplet satellite for

droplets most rapidly

the

X=4.508 and the balance of

(4.48) is from

size as, D=1.89

each

obtained

a mass

dL by flash type of

(4.49) in this

Ligament work,

collapse

captured the Rayleigh

photography break is up.

exhibited The complete

mathematical a listing

model of

incorporated is given in

in

one computer Figure 4.6.

program,

which

-110-

FIGURE Computer Program Listing

4.6 of Mathematical Model

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 230 240 250 260 270 280 290 300 310 320 330 340 350 360 370 380 390 400 410 420 430 440 450 460 470 480

DIM T(5), N(5) REM OPERATING PARAMETERS RADIUS REM R2=ORIFICE DR/DZ REM Z1=FACTOR FOR CALCULATION OF INITIAL REM A2=AREA OF INLET TO SWIRL CHAMBER REM P1=SLURRY DENSITY REM S=SLURRY VISCOSITY REM S3=SURFACE TENSION (CONSTANT) REM Q=MASS FLOWRATE REM P3=OPERATING PRESSURE REM R5=SWIRL CHAMBER RADIUS REM A=RADIUS OF CURVATURE OF NOZZLE WALL FOR K=1 TO 4 READ R2, Z1, A2 PRINT "NOZZLE DIA"2*R2 FOR J=1 TO 5 READ P1, S PRINT "SLURRY"P1 S=S/P1 FOR I=1 TO 4 READ Q, P3 P2=3.14159 A=. 002108 R5=. 0045 S3=. 0729 Q=Q/Pl P3=P3*6895 PRINT GOSUB 1290 X=XO CONSTANT REM M=CIRCULATION M=R5*Q/A2 Z=ZO IF Z>A THEN 420 REM REM CALCULATION OF DR/DZ (G1) REM S1=SQR(2*A*Z-Zt2) R=A+R2-S1 G1=(Z-A)/S1 GOTO 470 R=R2 G1=0 REM REM CALCULATION OF STREAMING VELOCITY(W) AND DW/DZ REM ) N1=SQR (M'i4+16 *RT2 *P3/P1*MT2 * (MT2+N1) N2=P]/(8*P3)

(W1)

-111-

490 500 510 520 530 540 550 560 570 580 590 600 610 620 630 640 650 660 670 680 690 700 710 720 730 740 750

W=Q/(P2*(Rt2-N2)) REM MODIFYING W TO ITS Z COMPONENT W=W*S1/A REM W1=-Q/P2*2*R*G1*(1-M'2/N1)/(RQ2-N2)T2 REM EQUATION REPRESENTING REM DIFFERENTIAL REM GROWTH OF BOUNDARY LAYER D=1/(R-X/12)*(-X*G1-X*R/W*W1+S/W*(15*R/X-7.5) GOSUB Ti OF 1350,1400,1440,1490 IF Z >= F THEN 610 GOTO 340 IS"X"M" AT ORIFICE PRINT "B/LAYER 2) Al=P2*(R2f2-(R2-X)? THEN 680 IF Al>3*Q/(2*W) GOTO 700 REM (V1) REM CALCULATION OF MEAN VELOCITY REM V1=2*W/3 GOTO 710 V1=Q*W/(Q+W/3*A1) PRINT "% FLOW THRO B/LAYER-"A1*V1/Q*100 GOSUB 1010 W=V1/COS ((T, (1) ) PRINT "SHEET VEL"W N1=2*R2*W/S

760 N2=2*R2*P1*Wi2/S3 770 N3=P3/(Pl*W1'2) 780 N4=T(l)

790 800 810 820 830 840 850 860 870 8 80 890 900 910 REM REM CORRELATION FOR SHEET LENGTH REM 117/N2t. 449/N3t. L=3743.7*R2/Nlr. 934/N4t. PRINT "PREDICTED SHEET LENGTH"L"M" GOSUB 920 NEXT I NEXT J NEXT K REM REM H1=SHEET THICKNESS AT BREAKUP POINT NUMBER REM N=INSTABILITY REM

434

920 H1=Q/ (2*P2*W*L*SIN 930 N=1.206/. 1458*Wt2

940 950 960 970 980 990

(T (1)) )

PRINT "CONE ANGLE"T(1)*180/P2 (D1) REM PREDICTION OF MEAN DROP SIZE D1=1.89*SQR(4*Hl/N) PRINT "PREDICTED DROP SIZE"Dl"MICRONS" IF K=4 AND J=4 THEN 1580 RETURN

-112-

1000 1010 1020 1030 1040 1050 1060 1070 1090 1100 1110 1120 1130 1140 1150 1160 1170

REM REM CALCULATION OF CONE ANGLE REM REM Al=AREA OF BOUNDARY LAYER REM A3=AREA OF STREAM OUTSIDE BOUNDARY LAYER REM R1=RADIUS OF AIR CORE REM V2=MEAN SWIRLING VELOCITY AT ORIFICE IF Al <= Q/V1 THEN 1120 R1=SQR(R2T2-Q/(P2*V1)) V2=M*V1/Q*(2*A1/(3*R2)+2*A3/(R2-X+R1)) GOTO 1160 V2=2/3*M/R2 REM CONE ANGLE REM T(2)=PREDICTED REM T(2)=ATN(V2/V1) N(1)=2*R2*V1/S

1080 A3=Q/V1-A1

1180 N(2)=2*R2*P1*V1%2/S3 1190 N(3)=M/9.81

1200 1210 1220 1230 1240 1250 1260 1270 1280 1290 1300 1310 1320 1330 1340 1350 1360 1370 1380 1390 1400 1410 1420 1430 1440 1450 1460 1470 1480 1490 1500 1510 1520 1530 REM CORRELATION FOR CONE ANGLE 2*T(2)?. 0271*N(3)?. 8723/N(2)1'. T(1)=3.235*N(1)T. REM RETURN SUBROUTINE REM INTEGRATION REM RUNGE KUTTA 4TH ORDER VALUE OF Z REM F=FINAL REM H=STEP LENGTH VALUE FOR B/LAYER THICKNESS REM XO=INITIAL T1=1 F=. 003175 H=. 000001 XO=. 000005 ZO=Z1 RETURN K1=H*D Z=ZO+H/2 X=XO+K1/2 T1=2 RETURN K2=H*D X=XO+K2/2 T1=3 RETURN K2=H*D X=XO+K3 Z=ZO+H T1=4 RETURN K4=H*D X=X0+1/6*(K1+2*K2+2*K3+K4) ZO=ZO+H XO=X T1=1 0502

1540 IF Z>F/20 1550 RETURN

1560 1570 1580 H=. 0001 RETURN STOP

THEN 1560

-113-

Chapter

Experimental

Work

-114-

Experimental The examine slurry. selected Delavan given in main the

Equipment objective of this research of study was to

atomising of

characteristics calcium at carbonate various

a particulate were using which are four

A range and

slurries

atomised

pressures of

SDX swirl Table 5.1.

atomisers,

details

Experimental 1.5 to rig to m diameter permit is the

observations spray tower

were constructed

made using from the

perspex

photography. in

The layout Figure 5.1.

of

experimental was transferred a Marshall drive

illustrated centrally coupled

Slurry

located to

nozzle

by means of speed -V-

mono-pump assembly.

a variable

belt

The slurry above the

make-up to

tank ease

was positioned slurry at the feeding the nozzle

directly problems.

pump inlet screen

A suitable to prevent

was positioned reaching Atomising back feed tank. gauge supply the

pump outlet thereby was valve in was to flush the the

any debris blockages. by throttling line to the

minimising controlled recycle monitored nozzle. out the

pressure needle

Line situated

pressure adjacent to

on a pressure A mains system Control water

was provided deposition

and prevent of slurry gravity

solid formulation

when shutting by

down. monitoring taken

was achieved on samples

specific the recycle

measurements

from

stream.

-115-

NOZZLE CODE

ORIFICE DIAMETER (m) x103

AREA OF INLET CHANNEL (m2 )x 106

DIAMETER OF CONVERGING. PART OF NOZZLE (m) 103 ,x

Sc SD SE SF

0.96 1.42 1.78 2.26

3.60 4.50 5.85 8.40

4.25 4.57 5.39 7.37

TABLE 5.1.

Nozzle

Dimensions

-116-

Pressure gauge

Spray 'tower

Slurry tank

bulk

mix

Filter

Stirrer

control

Slurry return pump control Mono pump

Figure

5.1.

Layout

of

Experimental

Rig

-117-

Range

of

Variables

Table were

5.1

lists at

the ejection slurry

nozzles

employed. of

Slurries

sprayed 2. 1103 kN m up to slurry

pressures formulations

583,690,896, were used (see Table 5.2)

Five

varying of each

50% w/w. were

The Rheological using

properties a concentric of apparent in Figures

determined

cylinder viscosity 5.2

viscometer. versus shear

Relationships rate are

presented

and 5.3.

Techniques

for

Drop

Size

Measurement

The method important results techniques. measuring factor

used in

to

determine

drop

sizes

is

a very

any experimental using of several always

work of

and different the accepted the work two

can be obtained

The importance technique

considering

when comparing and Mizrahi that the

experimental (118)

was shown by Hasson techniques 30% consistent by the high large

who compared

and showed

values

had approximately are complicated at in a

differences. numbers of drops

Measurements present techniques grouped

travelling revealed into several

speeds.

The available search, have and are been

literature broad

categories

discussed

below.

Droplet In collected

Collection these

Methods part or all of It the is spray usually is

methods size

and the

determined.

-118-

Solids

Concentration (% w/w)

Slurry (kgm3)

Density

23 35 40 45 50

1165 1265 1330 1380 1429

Table

5.2.

Chalk

Slurry

Formulations

-119-

1! 50

o o

1429kgm`3 3 1380 kgm

100.

M O x
n IN

GQ1

50.
til

500 SHEAR RATE(Cl)

1000

1500

2000

FIGURE 5,2 VARIATIONOF APPARENT SLURRY VISCOSITY WITH SHEARRATE

-120-

3 1330 kgm 1265 kg m3

5 kg m`3
10

O x

VI

V. ( ^

I-

Z W
cr CL a-

<0 SHEAR RATE(s7l

1000

2000

FIGURE 5,3 VARIATIONOF APPARENT SLURRY WITH SHEAR RATE VISCOSITY

-121-

necessary operation, stable. is that

to

carry is

out

the

sizing that of all

some time the of

after are

the

so it The main the

important

samples these

criticism interferes of entire

methods and is

sampling the question of the the

with

the the

spray

introduces representative

whether drop

sample

population. utilised materials oxide. produced glass such

Many of slides as soot, Droplets or

earlier coated

techniques with soap various

plates oil, which

grease, impinge or crater

and magnesium coated must after slides then applying coated

on this which

surface

an impression with the true

be correlated certain with oil Another

drop

diameter Those water

correction captured

factors.. and preserved with drops the slide to

droplets is

intact. the

disadvantage for edge small of

these follow instead cells

techniques the of

tendency around the slide.

streamlines impacting onto

the which

Collection contained the sampled for

were fluid

later which

developed

an immersion drops. sprayed dye. to

was immiscible used Stoddard

with

One system water drops of

(98) which low

solvent nigrosine the cell

contained

black

The solvent sink to the field

density of the

permitted collection ideal A tendency on impact.

droplets and the for

bottom

contrasting high

presented

conditions definite for large

magnification of this

photography. is to the

limitation or high

technique droplets

velocity

shatter

-122-

Further fine

techniques thread the the above

included or treated

the

capture

of

drops

on

wire, All

nylon require

screen. some method method cells with is of to aid

techniques drops.

sizing visually of

collected

A simpler slides or

inspect

sampling

the Various The

a microscope counting used iris

and a calibrated aids is is that have of been Zeiss, aligned record

eye piece. developed. in which the

automatic most widely

an droplet a

adjustable image

manually to

with a count

and then size

activated range.

within

particular of in analysing conjunction

An electronic thousand droplets

device

capable

several with

was developed technique images pulses at

the A light

immersion

sampling the

described narrow which size were

above. intervals sized

beam scanning electrical automatically.

generated

and counted

Droplet

Freezing

or

Cooling

In fraction Since

any of

cell the

or total

slide spray

sampling pattern within

technique

only

can be covered. the pattern entire to this spray the sampling

droplet is samples This drop

size not

varies

technique unless position. the entire

representative weighted with

of

the

are

respect

problem population

may be averted within

by collecting time be devised for

a certain

interval.

To achieve

this,

a means must

-123-

preventing achieved collected. In introduced them then of ice into

the

droplets or

from cooling

coalescing. the drops

This

can be are

by freezing

as they

one technique into solid a bath spheres. by sieve (119) of top

(103), of cold

fuel

oil

drops which particles

were froze could

alcohol

The frozen analysis. used

be sized

A later cooled

variation with dry

this for

technique collection at the

hexane drops. hexane

water of the

The particles bath to were sink through the

collected

simultaneously bath into

released

and allowed scale pan which

a submerged weight

recorded of Stokes weight Law to size

progressive increase yield range. Another of molten the

increase.

The rate to

was correlated percentage of

according particles

within

a given

method which to

(94) is cool the

utilises sprayed

a substitute while hot

liquid

wax,

and the The solid initial drops Joyce paraffin Accurate in to

particles particles and a sieve perfected

allowed thus

and solidify. same size the a study fuel oil as the drop

have

analysis this to of method

yields in

sizes. hot

where data.

wax was used measurement order greatly (120) to

represent the

wax temperature its the this viscosity degree of

was necessary which was thought

determine influence

atomisation, is widely

Tate used in

reports

that

technique

many research

programmes.

-124-

To provide at the -2000C work

instantaneous as the

freezing, collection sample nitrogen

liquid

nitrogen In

has been used of Choudbury into the Nelson frozen

medium. fluids were

(121) the

the liquid

sprayed screening cold

directly of

and the in his sieve offers by the experiments to air the a

particles

accomplished (100) modified

room.

and Stevens within

technique container advantage collecting disadvantage more difficult

by screening mounted of

an insulated This method errors it has

on a shaker. of spray. expensive

elimination whole being to

sampling However

the of

and makes with

the

control,

especially

regard

density. Gretzinger a solids In a study balance of and Marshall from the (7) droplet evolved to the a technique dried of

particles. dye the in find the

pneumatic

atomisation

an aqueous from

solution droplets. mineral the

was sprayed The resultant oil and the distribution.

and water dye

evaporated aerosol

was collected counted to of a

dry

particles

were

number

The mass distribution calculated for a liquid of dye, by using

original relationship They containing

spray

was then developed

an individual drop of

drop. diameter drop solid of DL diameter

considered C gm/ml ps.

and a dried the mass of

D. and density constant thus: during

Since

remains

drying,

a solids

balance

was written

-125-

DL3. P.

C=

DS3. PS

1 or DL = Ds (PS C

This

method

suffers of

from

the

disadvantage droplet which

of

the may shrink

unknown or

behaviour according

a liquid to the

expand

drying

mechanism.

Methods In significant.

Based this

on Intertial category It to the

or

Velocity

Differences is plates most mounted

cascade of

impactor of

consists a gas

a series carrying

perpendicular Large smaller drops of drops drops of

stream

the with

droplets. a plate whilst of

high are

momentum collide swept around which the carrier it.

The percentage on the plate and

a given

diameter from of

impact

can be calculated size in and location successive

gas velocity Varying these

the

plate. in

parameters of

stages smaller

results droplets of liquid

the at

impaction

progressively stage. is then

each

subsequent at each stage

The quantity measured.

collected

Various
numbers the of

impactors
stages into in

have been developed

six size or more,

with
classifying

reaching narrower this

thus

droplets

ranges. is that is

The major the upper limit

disadvantage of drop size in

technique

which

can be handled

about

170 microns, range

whilst up to

many atomisation

processes,

droplets

400 microns.

-126-

Another droplet Large of the

method

is

based

upon

the cone

variation spray

in (122). the outside

momentum drops were

within considered the

a hollow to

move towards drops

cone whilst of

smaller

move inwards. collection to correlate with trays the the

Thus placed volume drop

a series beneath of size liquid

concentric spray

annular were in used each

the

collected

section

distribution.

High

Speed

Photography

The major is that the

difficulty

with technique or

all

the

preceding with

methods the the true

measuring

interferes interpret is where

spray drop

and may affect size distribution. speed is

incorrectly This difficulty

overcome droplet subsequent

by high motion counting

photographic and images

techniques are

stopped or analysis.

recorded

for

The direct is complicated Air of

measurement by the velocity

of

drops

from

the in

photographs the

distribution velocity spatial

spray. drops from from

drag

creates sizes,

a relative and the

between distribution different

different

a single that

photograph

may be considerably

actually

produced. employed double to overcome this phenomena to

A technique consists determine distribution in taking

exposure

photographs spatial temporal

drop is

velocities. converted to

The apparent the true

-127-

distribution any given-size However this

by multiplying by the method stream; drop

the

number for

of

droplets size.

of

velocity the is drops

that to

assumes which

be moving in that would

in

a continuous tion. bands incorrect would their only Clark of drops

not (123)

the

case

atomisasince be

and Dombrowski are formed the

proposed it A true are

periodically drop count. drops

to weight be obtained

distribution moving at errors some could where

when the While

terminal from from

velocities. un-weighted the nozzle, the region

considerable taken results

may arise distance be obtained all droplets

distributions very of accurate

near are

disintegration moving at the

substantially

same

velocity. Other illumination field must problems in photographic of field. narrow to techniques Although permit very if blurring question is too depth precise few droplets are of

and depth be reasonably of to the the fall added field should droplets image within

determination are There outside or not liable is

magnification, the field of

narrow. of images of whether to than

difficulty of focus,

and the There

they large

be counted. over

a tendency of field

count would

a greater

depth

be covered De Corso

when counting attacked rings use of

smaller this

droplets. by observing images, together

(120)

problem the droplet light

Fresnel accented

diffraction by the

around

monochromatic

-128-

with ring the rings,

orthochromatic was correlated field the of focus.

film. with Thus

The width the position the

of of

the the

diffraction droplet of the in

from

appearance or

image

could scanning of

either

be rejected have been

counted.

Electronic which size are capable

methods

developed drop

rapidly

calculating

the

distribution.

Optical

Methods

When a beam of droplets the in former a spray it is

light

passes

through

a cloud

of

absorbed

and diffracted. the ratio to the of volume

Considering to surface of light to

mechanism,

can be related Thus

percentage

absorbed. measure into droplet to that the this

an absorption which in

photometer turn

may be used

ratio,

can be translated (a hypothetical area is has (124) size but equal

Sauter whose of the

mean droplet ratio entire used of volume spray).

diameter to surface

This

technique

recently suffers distribution

been from

by Dombrowski that

and Wolfsohn the drop

the is

disadvantage unknown. have

Recent particle the upon range the size

developments analysers, 500 microns. of

produced of

fully

automatic drops is as it in

capable

measuring device light

1 to

One such

based falls the from

scattering

monochromatic

on a particle. intensity of

A multi-element diffracted light at

detector various

translates distances

-129-

the

optical

axis

into Another

the

actual

particle

size a low through Particle powered the shadows as

distribution. laser to

device

utilises passing system. array

illuminate plane onto of

particles an imaging

objective are imaged

a photo-diode of occluded in that

and are

sized the laser

an integral system is

number restrictive the

elements, the size size of

there the

beam limits

maximum particle of laser

recorded. has recently laser been beam

The technique developed. is passed Basically through The resultant spray

holography filtered

a divergent droplet hologram spray

the

onto

a holographic the threeplate. the a negative The images

plate.

contains

dimensional Image

images is

in

a two-dimensional by focusing to in or proven although (125). produce focus.

reconstruction at different only sized those either

achieved

hologram containing are then This low to density dense

lengths, droplets manually has been sprays,

automatically. in its the analysis of

technique aerosol sprays

application A system the developed problem and

seems doubtful Incorporated requiring

by Laser of laser

Holography holography

overcame hologram

development used

image pulsing vidicon range

reconstruction. laser camera capability coupled

The new system with an ultra

a continuously sensitive The size to range

voilet

and an automatic of this machine

scanner. is claimed

-130-

from up to

0.3

to

10,000 particles drop

microns per size

and particle second.

count Unfortunately

rates

of these

10,000

sophisticated expensive

analysers

tend

to

be very

and thus

prohibitive. of the fall techniques into the evolved above for

Though most measuring a few drop

sizes other

categories, developed. generated inserted in

involving device

principles electrical

have

been

One such

measures intercepts

pulses wire

when a droplet the droplet

a charged In a similar

dispersion. impinged electrical

device,

charged

droplets resulting In this choice sheet In

on a metallic pulses a suitable speed could cone were

collector amplified in

and the and counted. with

selecting high it

system

conjunction the obvious

work, since

photography also angle provide

became

information length

regarding measurements.

velocity, the

and sheet of sheet

addition, also

mechanism

disintegration

could

be observed.

Measurement

of

Drop

Size a photographic drop size technique was

As discussed selected Droplet short camera of the to measure illumination duration shutter film, In

above, the

distributions. by a high automatically over in intensity when the exposure a darkened the

was provided triggered

flash,

was opened. photography

To prevent was performed

room.

practise

this

was achieved

by enclosing

-131-

spray
argon

tower.
jet unit

The photographic
supplied with 200 depth by Pulse

equipment

comprised

an
Ltd.

Instrumentation and thus 25 cm extension minimising was of view.

A 35 mm camera tube of by gave focus placing

mm lens of field

a short droplets.

out

Image in

magnification the field

obtained

a graticule

Droplet photographic counter. light actuated range. counted. to spatial taken This evaluated an optical experimental similar technique treated

sizes prints The droplet

were with

measured the aid

directly of a Zeiss to

from automatic a circle of

image

was matched iris

projected to Only

from

an adjustable within which

and a mechanism size were related

record those

a count droplets the

a particular were in focus

To avoid drop in size

aforementioned all

problems

distributions, of drop with drop size

photographs

were

the

region for

formation. measurement obtained from was using the same of

technique

by comparison array

re sults

spectrometer. though

Results not from

conditions,

identical, the

were

magnitude. employed with

The results in this work

photographic be

can therefore

confidence.

A typical
size size distribution distributions

flash
is

photograph
presented listed are

illustrating
in in Figure Appendix in Table 5.4. I.

the drop
The drop Volume 5.3.

are sizes

surface

mean drop

listed

-132-

NOZZLE

SC

ATOMISING PRESSURE

SLURRY DENSITY

(Kg M-3)

(KN m-2

1165

1265

1330

1380

1429

483 689 896 1103

164 146 143 131

175 152 142 128

167 156 140 139

171 161 142 138

175 158 150 143

NOZZLE

SD

ATOMISING PRESSURE

SLURRY DENSITY

(Kg m-3

(KN m-2)

1165

1265

1330

1380

1429

483 689 896

234 198 189

214 200 189

210 198 193

222 206 193

214 195 188

1103

168

177

186

175

184

TABLE

5.3

VOLUME-SURFACE

MEAN DROP SIZES

(m)

106

-133-

NOZZLE

SE

ATOMISING PRESSURE (KN m-2

SLURRY DENSITY 1165 1265 1330

(Kg M-3 ) 1429

1380

483 689 896 1103

243 207 196 175

230 221 201 183

234 218 194 183 _

270 234 200 _191

284 246 231 211

NOZZLE

SF

ATOMISING PRESSURE (KN m-2 ) 1165 1265

SLURRY DENSITY 1330

(Kg M-3) 1380 1429

483 689 896

24.8 218 211

281 219 212

262 246 227

291 245 239

291 250 236

1103

194

190

210

222

225

TABLE

5.3

(continued)

-134-

} 10 3m4

Figure

5.4.

flash Typical distribution. Nozzle density SF Slurry 45%

photograph

of

drop

size

atomising

pressure
-135-

-2 690. kNm

... I.

".

_"

--

.I.
-'

!.

taw.;:,....

Lob

Measurement

of

Sheet

Velocity

Some workers from nozzle measurement by the of

(99) the

have thrust

calculated exerted For

sheet on the

velocity spray T,

liquid

stream. M, the

a given is given

thrust by:

and mass flowrate

VS =T McosO

velocity

where

0 is

half

the

maximum angle

attained

by the

conical Another is

sheet. popular means of technique. is captured measuring sheet velocities on the exposure interval by The latter photographic the

by a photographic of the sheet

A disturbance on a double of the time

surface photograph between the

and from the two

a knowledge the

flashesand the velocity since been

distance is

travelled

disturbance,

calculated. speed for

technique technique drop above size

was selected has already distributions. that two

a high employed

determining

The equipment such argon jets

was as described were employed. generated ranging In fifty micro

except flashes

The two by a unit from

were could

separated be varied to

by a time to give

delay delays

which nano

a few

seconds time Typical Figure are

several of

minutes. around exposure

practise seconds are sheet

an optimum was used. in

delay

double 5.5. in

photographs measured

presented velocities

Experimentally Table 5.4.

listed

-136-

NOZZLE ATOMISING PRESSURE (KN M-2 ) 1165 1265

SC SLURRY DENSITY 1330 (Kg M-3) 1429

1380

483

18.2

18.0

17.6

15.7

14.2

689
896

22.9
27.6

21.6
25.0

20.1
24.6

19.3
22.9

18.6
23.3

1103

30.2

28.3

26.7

26.6

26.1

NOZZLE

SD 3)

ATOMISING P RESSURE

SLURRY DENSITY

(Kg m

(KN m-2)

1165

1265

1330

1380

1429

483 689 896 1103

18: 1 23.0 26.3 31.1

17.8 22.1 25.6 28.5

15.4 20,5 24.7 27.9

15.1 20.1 23.8 26.3

13.8 18.3 21.6 25.6

TABLE

5.4

MEASURED SHEET VELOCITIES

(ms-1)

-137-

NOZZLE

SE

ATOMISING PRESSURE (KN m2)

SLURRY DENSITY 1165 1265 1330

(Kg M-3) 1429

1380

483

18.2

17.7

17.8

16.0

15.2

689 896 1103

23.5 27.9 31.6

22.7 26.6 29.7

22.0 26.3 28.0

21.3 24.6 27.9

20.8 24.9 27.7

NOZZLE

SF 3)

ATOMISING PRESSURE

SLURRY DENSITY

(Kg m

(KN m2)

1165

1265

1330

1380

1429

483 689 896 1103

TABLE 5.4

18.8 24.7 28.2 32.3

(continued)

18.0 23.5 27.7 30.4

17.7 22.3 25.6 29.3

16.2 20.2 24.2 28.3

16.0 19.9 23.9 27.9

-138-

Figure

5.5.

Exposure Double Measurement of Nozzle top lower

Photographs Sheet Velocity. 45%

for

density SF Slurry 690 kNm 2 896 knm

-139-

Measurement In chalk each

of

Flowrate a suitable different flowmeter devices for use with considered,

selecting

slurry, presenting Rotameters

several its

were

own advantages orifices slurry

and disadvantages. are service. their readings widely In used addition for

and integral for to

but it

are is

not

recommended involved

rather

correct

density

variations. Turbine flowmeters of pulses measure which up coil. the not flowrate are by detecting by turbine blades slurries type of are

the

frequency passing

generated the

blades in direct

a pick with

Since

contact liquids

process suited

fluid, to this

and viscous meter.

are

When monitoring flowmeters developed relationship in to low

very

low

flowrates, A pressure

capillary drop is in is

may be considered. in the with capillary flowrate. number regions, tubes

which these

a linear operate

Since they that

devices not high

Reynolds settling to the

are

applicable flow

rapidly

slurries in

require

velocities In impinges proportional detected on a force or pressure

remain

suspension. the flowing liquid force is and is operates parts or

target a flat to the

flowmeter, disc. square of

upon

The impact of flow. the

flowrate device

as a measure balance taps;

This without

principle ideal for

any moving slurries

use with

-140-

suspensions.
viscosity

However
ranges.

the

device

is

limited

to

moderate

A thermal within the pipe,

flowmeter a small

incorporates heater coil

a spool and two

upstream

piece

temperature

sensing

elements

situated

and

downstream is thus

to

the

coil. of flow. for

The temperature Its slurry principal service,

differential disadvantage is that the

a measure

although device is

recommended rather

complex. flowmeter by the restricted properties. flowmeter, path which the is fluid is forced to input the fluid to detects velocity those the to fluids amount -... of

The ultrasonic deflection beam. possess In through main Its caused use is

an ultrasonic which

ultrasonic a gyroscope a circular

perpendicular at the the the

flow.

An oscillating a torque in

vibration to in

produces This meter

proportion slurries but to has handle operate states

mass flowrate. medium pressure of

can handle range

and temperature high cost

limited only

use because low mass flows. law of

and ability flowmeters

Magnetic magnetic induced magnetic to the the

on the that is

electrois a

induction, in a conductor

which

a voltage through is in

when it

moved

field. velocity fluid,

The generated at which moves. liquids of the

voltage conductor; device

proportional this case

process

This

can handle they lining are materials

slurries conductive.

and viscous

providing available

The variety

-141-

makes

this

unit

applicable This in

to

corrosive

or

high

temperature most suitable

services. for use

device work,

was considered but major its high cost with

this

was prohibitive, most of the above

was

as indeed flowmeters.

was the

drawback

Resort

therefore

made

to

manual

flow

measure-

ment. fluid obtain made to

This in

was achieved time

by collecting

a volume it

of to were slurry for

a known

interval

and weighing Several accuracy, line of repetitions

the

mass flowrate. experimental against nozzles. pressure technique proved is of to

ensure

and each pressure with 5.5. though accurate.

was calibrated individual atomising This inconvenient,

measured Variation illustrated flow

flowrate in Table

measurement,

be reasonably

Measurement

of

Sheet

Length

and

Cone

Angle

Figure a liquid which length, occur of that of with the at

5.6

demonstrates breaks formation tears closer at

the

various drops.

stages

by which at

sheet ligament although points

down into is

The position the the

visible

defines in

break-up sheet

and perforations to the orifice. of pressures

Observation indicated variations

several the the

nozzles break-up of

a range

length 20%.

was subject This finding He initially caused

to wide is in

order of

agreement thought that

that wide

Wolfson

(117). were

fluctuations

by pump pulsations

-142-

NOZZLE ATOMISING PRESSURE 2) (KN m

SC SLURRY DENSITY (Kg M-3) 1429

1165

1265

1330

1380

483 689 896 1103

7.6 9.2 10.5 11.8

8.2 9.9 11.5 12.7

8.7 10.6 12.2 13.6

9.0 11.0 12.6 14.0

9.4 11.5 13.4 14.9

NOZZLE

SD

ATOMISING PRESSURE

SLURRY DENSITY 1165 1265 1330

(Kg M-3) 1380 1429

(KN m-2)

483 689 896 1103

14.6 17.6 20.5 22.7

15.2 18.8 21.7 24.3

16.2 19.9 23.0 25.6

17.5 21.2 24.2 26.7

18.2 21.9 25.1 27.7

TABLE

5.5

MASS FLOWRATES THROUGH NOZZLE

(Kgs+l)

103

-143-

NOZZLE

SE

ATOMISING PRESSURE (KN m2)

SLURRY DENSITY 1165 1265 1330

(Kg M-3 ) 1429

1380

483

22.6

24.5

25.7

26.4

27.7

689 896 1103

27.4 32.8 36.7

30.2 35.1 38.9

31.5 36.5 40.8

32.5 37.7 42.0

33.9 39.6 44.2

NOZZLE ATOMISING PRESSURE

SF (Kg m3

SLURRY DENSITY

(KN m-2j

1165

1265

1330

1380

1429

483 689 896 1103

39.2 48.5 56.8 63.7

41.5 50.9 59.3 67.0

42.7 52.5 61.7 68.9

43.0 54.1 62.8 70.1

45.5 56.0 65.0 73.0

TABLE

5.5

(continued)

-144-

EFFECTIVE SHEET l-EN GTH

1
" """
" " "If"" ""
""" "" f

OF RECGlON I. IG AMENT" FORMATION

"

FORMATION OF DROPLETS

Figure

5.6.

Disintegration

of

a Hollow

Cone Spray.

-145-

but

on replacing this in
wide expected and several

the

pump with

a pressure
turn the sheet

vessel
inferred that cause. were were for each

eliminated wave motion

Since therefore taken

hypothesis the air core

and in to
in of be the flash were

prime length

variations a series

photographs obtained

measurements

set

of

operating in

conditions. 5.7. listed

One such The results in Table

photograph of the thus sheet

is

presented length

Figure

measurements

5.6

represent

mean values. Measurements from enlargements values over of of obtained the the the cone semi angle were used taken above,

same photographs were found to

and the consistent

be relatively range. angle The measurements

atomising for 5.7. the

pressure cone semi

experimental are listed in

results Table

-146-

NOZZLE ATOMISING PRESSURE (KN M-2 1165 1265

SC (Kg m-3) 1429

SLURRY DENSITY 1330

1380

483 689 896 1103

14.1 10.3 10.4 8.2

15.2 13.3 12.5 11.7

16.4 15.4 15.0 13.2

17.1 15.8 13.2 11.9

18.9 17.7 15.8 16.0

NOZZLE ATOMISING PRESSURE

SD

SLURRY DENSITY 1165 1265 1330

(Kg m-3 1380 1429

(KN m-2)

483 689 896 1103

TABLE 5.6

15.8 11.4 11.4 10.5

16.3 13.5 13.0 12.1

16.6 15.2 13.7 12.1

(m) 1O

17.0 15.0 13.2 11.9

18.1 16.7 15.9 16.3

MEASURED SHEET LENGTHS

-147-

NOZZLE ATOMISING PRESSURE (KN m2 1165 1265

SE SLURRY DENSITY 1330 (Kg M-3) 1429

1380

483

19.3

19.6

17.9

19.1

22.3

689 896 1103

15.7 14.0 11.5

16.9 15.0 14.2

16.5 14.8 15.0

17.1 14.6 15.5

19.7 19.4 18.8

NOZZLE

SF (Kg m-3

ATOMISING PRESSURE

SLURRY DENSITY

(KN m-2)

1165

1265

1330

1380

1429

483 689 896 1103

21.8 18.2 16.7 14.3

21.5 17.8 16.3 15.9

21.1 21.4 15.7 15.4

23.3 19.2 17.5 17.6

24.5 21.8 19.7 18.2

TABLE

5.6

(continued)

-148-

Figure

5.7.

Typical photograph measurement. Nozzle 690 SF slurry kNm-2

used density

for 45%

sheet

length

-149-

.-Jw

SLURRY DENSITY NOZZLE

(Kg m-3)

1165

1265

1330

1380

1429

Sc SD SE SF

34 35 39 40

32 34 38 39

31 33 37 38

27 31 36 37

25 28 34 36

TABLE

5.7

MEASURED CONE SEMI-ANGLES

(DEGREES)

-150-

Chapter Discussion

-151-

Discussion

Previous spray nozzles

investigations have covered of

into a wide drop

atomisation range size of

by swirl operating

conditions have been

and a variety obtained. detergents more recently. on the all are the slurry the in

correlations in most have appears slurries are work spray presents studies been to even dried a when be no

Water (111)

was sprayed and oils (112) there of which This

although studied published though

However, atomisation materials form. control

work nearly

industrially study a chalk of

this that

factors is

drop

formation spray nozzle. these

atomised model

by a swirl which

The mathematical has taken (a) the the following

describes

factors

structure: boundary sheet of layer slurry theory emitted to predict the

Fundamental of the

velocity

from

nozzle. (b) (c) (d) Prediction Prediction Formation layer of of of cone sheet droplets. were were derived applied A first (equation (6) to from to the the basic case angle. length.

The boundary Navier-Stokes of swirling

equations which

equations flow within

a nozzle. was obtained layer thickness

order 4.23) the which

differential related of the the fluid

equation boundary within

velocity

the

nozzle, of

fluid the

density nozzle.

and viscosity, Table 6.1

and the

internal

dimensions

-152-

Nozzle

SC

Slurry Density 3 kgm

(klon 2 )

1429 WC 74m

1380 `m %F 6x10

1330 %F 6x1074m %F x10

1265 'm

1165 %F x1 4m %F

483 690 896 1103

1.841 1.742 1.651 1.641

100

1.608

90 87 84 81 Nozzle

1.195 1.068 0.989 0.934 SD 1.335 1.175 1.081 1.022

SE

74 71 68 66

1.044 0.946 0.865 0.828

65 62 59 57

0.853 0.77 0.722 0.682

55 51 49 47

100 1.431 100 1.336 100 1.269

483 690 896 1103

2.372 2.156 2.009 1.93

99 95 92 89

1.689 1.516 1.421 1.364

78 75 72 69
Nozzle

62 59 56 54

1.171 1.024 0.944 0.885

54 51 48 47

0.912 0.827 0.752 0.716

44 41 39 38

483 690 896 1103

2.664 2.364 2.139 2.015

85 82 79 77

1.906 1.677 1.535 1.450

66 63 60 58
Nozzle

1.392 1.232 1.129 1.061

SF

52 49 47 45

1.192 1.048 0.957 0.910

45 42 40 39

0.976 0.838 0.772 0.725

37 34 33 31

483 690 896 1103

2.959 2.621 2.406 2.251

70 67 64 62

2.116 1.826 1.675 1.580

54 51 48 46

1.505 1.333 1.204 1.134

42 39 37 36

1.255 1.114 1.018 0.944

36 33 32 30

0.994 0.874 0.793 0.743

29 27 25 24

Table

6.1.

Values at

of

Boundary

Layer

Thickness

Orifice.

-153-

lists
the 4.23. as fluid found orifice

the
exit

values
orifice

of

the

boundary
was obtained

layer

thickness
solving also

at
equation presented of d was and the smaller flow nozzle

which of of this

when layer is of

The

area

boundary flow orifice. to both

a fraction passing to

the

total the

area

the

annulus

through

As expected, fluid proportional viscosity to for the all the

be proportional diameter pressure. operating with the and

inversely It can high be

atomising nozzles passes with the

seen

that

viscosity layer.

fluids, However, at similar through

through largest has

boundary

orifice only

diameter the flow

operating the

conditions

70% of

boundary with in

layer. (89) with of

These

trends

are

in

general layer

agreement thicknesses

Taylor a nozzle Values

who estimated straight

boundary

converging angle

sides. were calculated velocity element from

the of

semi-cone

the

resultant

the

mean axial The path is orifice of

and swirl of a fluid

components, emerging balance the sheet

v2 and ve. from the the not orifice exit

controlled so that

by a momentum the profile curved. the of

across is

that

a straight proposed with

cone but which

A correlation calculated measured various analysis by the at other

was therefore semi-cone a point angle slightly

related values and with

experimental

downstream, obtained from

parameters 4.40). compared

a dimensional predicted in

(equation model are

Cone semi-angles with measured

values

-154-

Figure 61% of
measured of had some the to

6.1. the

Cone semi-angles predicted

and liquid

varied lie within

20. not curved

from

25 to

400 and the

sides

values
92.5% sheet to been

1 10 of
Since'the

value, conical be

within are the

straight, surface, into the

a tangent so sheet that angle

approximated may have

error

introduced

measurements.

Sheet through velocities Figure 15 to 1 the 6.2. the

velocities predicted have been

were

predicted angle. with

by resolving Calculated values range within 2 m/s,

vZ sheet in

semi-cone compared velocities the data

measured were points in the lie

Measured

35 m/s of

and 61% of measured within

m/s

the

value, 3.3 fluid the

90% within m/s. thins vicinity growing

and

remainder

+ 2, sheet of in

The coherent through until cause the at the the

as it of the

passes nozzle surface of

atmosphere the break

some point sheet length with to

waves up. the

on the

The measured of breakage groups

values were

sheet

up to several

point

correlated from

dimensionless to yield

obtained which

a dimensional the sheet

analysis length by the 6.3.

an equation 4.47). compared lengths

predicted lengths values the within

(equation model are

The sheet with measured in lie 2 mm

predicted in Figure 10 to mm of 13

Measured

sheet

were

range 1

25 mm and 58% of the measured

predicted

values

values,

88% within

and 99% within

mm.

-155-

U)35o
cm b

ooo Co

w C3 O z w vi 25 0 w
400

cao oo0

00

20

25

30

35

40

45

(degrees) CALCULATED SEMI -ANGLE

6: FIGURE 1 COMPARISON CALCULATEDWITH OF VALUES OF CONESEMI-ANGLE MEASURED

-156-

0 o 300
00

25
o

6Wo o Co
0 $ o$

0
20. o %0

0 o 7

cP

00

20 25 15 10 PREDICTED SHEET VELOCITY(ms`1)

JU

6: 2 COMPARISON OF PREDICTEDWITH FIGURE MEASURED SHEET VELOCITIES

-157-

O X

E S rD
Z wi. w
r

w w
x

O W tr. D W x

20 15 10 5 PREDICTED SHEET LENGTH(m)x, 03

25

iu

WITH OF 6:3 COMPARISON PREDICTED FIGURE MEASURED SHEET BREAKUP LENGTHS

-158-

The formation
of the conical and The liquid

of

droplets
sheet has

from
been is

the

disintegration
by flash in

captured illustrated is

photography Figure visible these up 6.4. and

a typical formation the is

example of

ligaments of to The into

clearly from break-

similarly which Rayleigh to

formation similar (52).

droplets varicose were by and diameter.

ligaments, by

the

reported

ligaments droplets

therefore formation size is

assumed of

break type

up

the drop

Rayleigh function

disturbances, of ligament

thus

a simple

Ligaments detachment half the of

have

been

assumed of liquid most the

to

form

from of

the one-

fragments of

sheet, rapidly

length

wavelength

the of

growing was calculated of both

disturbance. from the

The size

ligament

a mass balance sheet thickness of the

which at the

required point of

knowledge break-up thickness

and the was

wavelength calculated wavelength, was predicted

disturbance. 4.45 of

Sheet and the more of

from in

equation the absence the

disintegrating information, 4.43).

reliable

from

model

Squire

(equation

The complete
size from the

mathematical

model predicts

drop

simplified

expression;

D=0.524

(3Q0.5 Vs L sinO

(6.1)

where

volumetric velocity length

flowrate

Vs = sheet L= 8 sheet

semi-cone

angle

-159-

Ligament formation

Drop formation by Rayleigh type `disturbances

-----

Figure

6.4.

Disintegration

of

a sheet

of

slurry.

-160-

"

"'M

-r">

Tom,,

""

"lp ".

' & 44

`"

04

4
w

"'" ". it '*

so

Values the

of

predicted volume of the

D

drop

size

have

been

compared in

with 6.5.

measured fit

surface data is

mean diameter about the

Figure line (6.2)

The best

straight

D32 = 0.875

so that of the

61% of measured

the

data

points 80% within Points

lie

within

20 microns 92.5% 6.5 lie

value,

30 microns,

within well of

40 microns. outside the

1 and 2 on Figure but of upon

measured low

value, values drop of the

examination sheet inversely a magnify example, 433 microns,

the

data

represent As the to in in

predicted are

velocity. proportional small the point error error

predicted 1.5

sizes sheet latter size. drop size

the

power of

velocity, will For of

estimation predicted

the

drop

1 represents

a predicted velocity and if of

and a predicted velocity equation

15 m/s. this drop value size

The measured is is used in by to brought 50 microns, point more

was 16 m/s 6.1, the

predicted

reduced

approximately 1' into on Figure line

10% to 6.5.

390 microns, points

corresponding are thus to

The data the

and reduces of 15% at 6.2 that thus

maximum error value. the sizes

an error

predicted modifies of drop earlier

Equation equation considered made which for

constant to

in

the This have is been

prediction justified equate the

0.459.

since

assumptions of sheets

disintegration

and jets

-161-

l0
dp

x
CS M

E
0

C w Ix D w x
300 100 200 PREDICTED DROP SIZE(m)x106 400

FIGURE 6: 5 COMPARISONOF PREDICTEDDROP SIZE WITH MEASURED VOLUME- SURFACEMEAN DIAMETER

-162-

of of by

slurry Rayleigh

to is

that still

of

an

inviscid to

liquid. hold; which

If is

the

theory supported then the

assumed

experimental of

observations Squire the must be

(see amended. of the

Figure This

6.4), is in

analysis by reducing so

achieved equation

magnitude

constant

(4.43)

that:

3.067w _ 2
pays

(6.3)

This

relation in

is

similar

to of

that

derived

by Dombrowski liquid sheets

and Hooper for the

an analysis

attenuating when dilational

conditions

nh > 1.5

waves

predominate. Referring data suggests again that to Figure 6.5, the trend analysis is more of the would accurately

a linear

regression Thus the data

be more

representative. by the straight + 76.8

represented

line:

D32 = 0.547D A correlation

(6.4)
of 0.93 was obtained which

coefficient

suggests

good fit. a
of the

81% of
measured 6.6).

the data
value

points

lie

within
30 this can be

20 microns microns type of (see

and 99% within in assuming factor case. measured is

Figure

However,

relationship in the model

no simple as in the

correlation previous fit the of

included Thus predicted

although values is

a much better obtained,

and

relationship

-163-

Cl r-

D M W D W x

PREDICTEDDROPSIZE( m) x106

OF FIGURE 6:6 COMPARISON PREDICTEDDROP SIZE WITH MEASURED VOLUME-SURFACEMEAN DIAMETER

-164-

empirical

and of

course

does

not in

pass this

through study are

the

origin. than

The mean drop those measured

sizes

measured

greater speed

by some other method of drop

workers. size

The high was

photographic compared automatic with

measurement using

the size

results analyser which

obtained (126). compare the

a Knollenburg were obtained For results:

drop

Results favourably. following

when atomising example, swirl

water, nozzle

SE gave

Pressure (kN/m2) 690 896

Drop Knollenburg 234 164

Size

(D32) Photographic 215 178

The Knollenburg for tedious drop difficulties be placed in this

drop

analyser exercises

eliminates but

the

need

counting in directly

introduces The machine spray, This was it was not to be and of proved

practical had to which rather

its in

actual the path

usage. of the

case

was inside since in firstly length,

a spray the

tower. machine

cumbersome

approximately waterproof. far its drop more

1 metre Thus the

and secondly method in its the

photographic particularly

appeared versatility

attractive, of

capability formation. To illustrate

capturing

on film

mechanism

the study

difference and those

in from

the

mean drop workers,

sizes

obtained

in

this

other

-165-

reference correlations (112) are

is

made to proposed

Figure

6.7

where (109) from

the

results

of

by Knight the Knight data are

and Dombrowski this study. 42% 26%

compared values and those

with from

Predicted smaller, smaller.

approximately approximately

from

Dombrowski

Volume velocity graphs size is for

surface each

mean diameter nozzle that of in for liquid Figures a given

is

compared 6.8 sheet to

with

sheet These drop many

6.11. velocity

demonstrate independent have to

viscosity, drop this size

whereas to

workers related agreement oils -size

arbitrarily

assumed However, (112)

be directly is in of drop

viscosity. with

finding

Dombrowski spray nozzles. at two

on the Figure

atomisation compares This effect earlier not vary of

by swirl with

6.12

flowrate would tension

sheet

velocities. the confirm did

analysis surface

normally and these that

distinguish results tension

experimentation slurry density.

surface

with extracted

The data slurries have by the actual the of

points various

were

arbitrarily

and represent

densities. the coefficient overall which that i. e. energy is

Some workers loss the in ratio a nozzle of the to

Vs V

characterised velocity sheet

velocity pressure,
0.5

to

corresponding

atomising
2P (p)

kv

where

V=

kv 0.8

in

this

study similar

was found in

to

vary to

in

the

range reported

0.6

to

and is

magnitude

values

-166-

300
00 0

250

t0 O 1' x

N 0

100o

/
150

Knight
Dombrowski

w x

50, 50 100 D32 (mi x106

200

250

300

MEAN DROP 6: FIGURE 7 COMPARISON MEASURED OF WORKERS SIZES WITH CORRELATIONS OTHER OF

-167-

to 0 qx

n 0

(ms`l SHEET VELOCITY

FIGURE 6:8 VARIATION OF MEAN DROP SIZE WITH SHEET VELOCITY AND SLURRY DENSITY (NOZZLESC)

-168-

300

0 x+ v,

200

+o
v+ 0v

100 x

3 1429 kgm 1380 kgm3 1330 kgnn`3 1265 kgrff3 1165 k gm`3

tG O X
... N M

+ 0

20 15 10 SHEET VELOCRY(ms' )

25

30

FIGURE6:9 VARIATIONOF MEAN DROPSIZE WITH SD) SHEET VELOCITYAND SLURRY DENSLTY(NOZZLE

-169-

to O r-

x
N

15 20 10 ) VELOCITY(ms71 SHEET

25

30

FIGURE 6:10 VARIATIONOF MEAN DROPSIZE WITH (NOZZLESE) SHEET VELOCITYAND SLURRYDENSITY

-170-

to O
. -

X a

E r
n

20 15 10 SHEET VELOCITY(ms'1)

25

30

FIGURE 6: 11 VARIATION OF MEAN DROP SIZE WITH SHEET VELOCITYAND SLURRY DENSITY (NOZZLE SF)

-171-

to O s-X 1N

cn

O LL

100

032 (m) x106

1000

FIGURE 6:12 COMPARISON MEAN DROP SIZE OF WITH FLOWRATE AT CONSTANT SHEET VELOCITIES

-172-

elsewhere slurry shown

(112).

Figure with with

6.13

shows

the

variation and kv with of

in

of is

viscosity to decrease

velocity viscosity shows

coefficient in the

agreement variation
and

Dombrowski.
angle (26)

Figure
with the

6.14

sheet
to

velocity angle This is sheet slurry is

coefficient found to to was

contrast velocity fact

Dombrowski coefficient. that with work each in this

increase be due

with to to in the

believed angle viscosity were

work

found whereas

decrease the previous of

increasing the other. two

parameters

found

to

be

independent

Table velocity sheet

6.2

lists

the

values in

of

sheet

angle

and In general, but Similar

coefficient angle is

measured of

this

study. pressure size. the

independent viscosity for the

atomising

dependent trends

on both found

and nozzle behaviour of

were

velocity

coefficient. Figure at constant 6.15 compares different viscosity that sizes This velocity drop is size the slurries lower

pressure slurry

and demonstrates finer drop

viscosity of for the

produces velocity of

as a result is because,

increased values

coefficient. sheet 6.1)

higher

kv the (equation velocity.

increased is inversely

and as shown earlier proportional to sheet

The discharge in terms of

through

a swirl

nozzle (Cd)

may be represented so that

a discharge

coefficient

-173-

ag

08
0-7

0.6
, Z-

xx

W
LL LL w O V

20.5

0.4 o1103kNm2 > F-0 483kNm2 x 0 w 10 05 15 (kgm-1 S71)x103 SLURRYVISCOSITY

20

25

WITH FIGURE6: 13 VARIATION OF SLURRYVISCOSITY COEFFICIENT(NOZZLE SO) VELOCITY

-174-

0.8 1103kNm'2

0.7
+"
xo

xox

ot

2 483kNm
0

Mio

0.6
IZ W

LL LL
W O
U

0.5

>-0.4 FU O J W

30 40 50 60 SHEET ANGLE (degrees)

70

80

90

FIGURE 6:14 VARIATION OF VELOCITY COEFFICIENT WITH SHEET ANGLE AT CONSTANT PRESSURE

-175-

Slurry Density (Kg m-3) 1429 1380 1330 1265 1165

2) (kNPm

Kv

Kv

Kv
SC . 65

Kv

Kv

Nozzle 483 . 55 . 59

65

63

490 896 1103

60 . 66 . 66 .

500

61 . . . 64 67

540

62 . . .
SD

620

. . .

65 66 68

640

67 . . . 70 69

680

67 66

Nozzle

483 690 896 1103

. . . .

53 59 61 65 560

. . .

57 64 66
Nozzle

. 620 .

57 660 67

. . .

64 67 68 680

. . . .

63 67 67 71 700

64 . 68 .
SE

66 .

68 .

483 690 896 1103

58 . 67 . . . 70 71 680

60 . 67 . . . 68 70
Nozzle

66 . 720 68 . . .
SF

. 740 . .

64 760 71 71

63 . . . . 68 71 73 780

69 .

72 69

483 690 896 1103

. . . .

62 64 68 71 720

. . . .

61 64 67 71 740

. . .

66 760 70 72

. . . .

65 71 74 73 780

. . .

65 72 74 $00

69 .

72 .

Table

6.2.

Table )

of

Velocity

Coefficient

(Ky)

and Cone Angle

-176-

100

tO O

x, 10
e'-

E
W F-

3 1165kgm . x 1430 kgm-3

O LL

1D0 (m) x 106 32

1000

FIGURE 6:15 COMPARISONOF MEAN DROP SIZE WITH FLOWRATE AT CONSTANT PRESSURE (1103kNm'2)

-177-

Q=

CdA

2p

0.5 )

(6.5)

where rate

Cd represents to that to obtained flow

the

ratio

of

the

actual orifice

discharge area is is

when the

total

effective to kinetic

and the without a plot pressure line,

pressure loss. of It

energy follows

converted from

energy 6.5 that of the

equation square results of

mass flowrate drop the through gradient

against the being nozzle

the

root in

a straight

a measure

CdA (2p) This line most area lower analysis independent a parameter As liquid increased velocity viscosity more than is

0.5

illustrated

in were

Figures obtained.. are

6.16

to In

6.19 swirl

when straight spray nozzles

relationships of of the the energy orifice

losses is

frictional, by the are air

the core

effectual and thus

reduced

discharge of

coefficients liquids pressure the is the

obtained.

From an found related to

inviscid of the

Cd has been drop

and has been of value the of

relating viscosity due to

dimensions the axial

atomiser. Cd is

reduced

increased However

and tangential reduction increases leads to of

components. the the air tangential axial core

on further

velocity

component which

velocity and lower is thus

component, discharge a complex

a larger Discharge nozzle

coefficients. function of the

coefficient parameter

relation.

-178-

"015

"010

3 1429 kgm 1380 kgm-3 x a 1330 kgm-3 1265 kgm-3 x + 1165kgrti3

N O1
O

700

800 //

600

900

1000

1100

1200

5( N'5m 1i A PO

FIGURE6.16 VARIATION OF SLURRYFLOWRATEWITH SQUAREROOTOF NOZZLE PRESSURE(NOZZLE SC)

-179-

0-20

0.15

1429 kgm`3 3 1380 kgm 3 1330 kgm 1265 kgm-3 v 1165 kgm'3

1 N . L

600

800 1) A PO'51NO'5m

700

900

1000

1100

1200

FIGURE 6.17 VARLATION. SLURRY FLOWRATE WITH OF SQUARE ROOT OF NOZZLE PRESSURE (NOZZLE SO)

-180-

0.0

0 o.

o1429kgm3

1330kgm-3 q
a

3 kgrn v1265 3 1165 kgm +

Z 0.0.

700 600 800 5 P0.5 IN m_) ,a

900

1000

1100

1200

FIGURE 6.1h VARIATION OF SLURRY FLOWRATEWITH (NOZZLE SE) SQUARE ROOT OF NOZZLE PRESSURE

-181-

o"

0.06

o. 05

1429 kg m3 o 1380 kgm'3 x

3 1330 kgrn

3 7 1265 kgm
rN

+ 1165 kgm`3

700 600 800 A p0.5(N0.5. ) n-1

900

1000

1100

1200

FIGURE 6: 19 VARIATION OF SLURRY FLOWRATE WITH SQUARE ROOTOF NOZZLE PRESSURE (NOZZLE SF)

-182-

Values varied constant variables. those swirl reported nozzles. within for

of

Cd calculated the range nozzle values 0.3

from to 0.4

Figures

6.16

to

6.19

and were of

fairly

each These

irrespective are et of al. similar (102)

operating magnitude to

by Fraser

for

plug

type

The main to predict

objective of

of

the

mathematical size

model

was has

values the are

mean drop drop

and no reference distribution. 6.20

been made to distributions and represents conditions. operating with

actual

size in

Typical and 6.21 of operating

presented obtained the high are the smallest

Figures

data Thus the

from

extremes

and largest density

nozzles slurries at

and low compared. data with

483 and 1103 kN/m2 made to but the correlate curves distribution. workers type of

No attempt any distribution to the square

has been law root various produce 6.22 normal the drop

indicate

a trend This found is in

normal other this further

agreement nozzles Figure

with to

who have drop size the a plot

swirl

distribution. fit of to the the

illustrates with against probability with nozzle which

square root

root of

distribution diameter or is normal found

square

cumulative paper. SC which has

volume

percentage closer a finer reported

undersize agreement spray,

However produces similarly

an observation elsewhere (99).

been

-183-

939

0
Z Q Z H N N W J
Iz

W CL W x D J O

W > Io

0 50 D(m)x106

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

(NOZZLE SC) FIGURE 6:20 DROPSIZE DISTRIBUTION

-184-

nn n 7: s=

99-

95. 90. 80. 70. 60-

0
Z 2

50. 40. 30

N N w J Z w U tt w

20 10. 5x 2" 1+P kNrn P=1103 ,o =1165kgrff3 o=1165kgm3 P=483kNm2 o /, 2 kNrti kgm'3 P =1103 'o =1429 1429kgm`3 P= 483 kN e2 2

a
w
J O

W > d J

)"1

01 0o .

100 IM) x106 C)

200

300

400

500

FIGURE6.21 DROP SIZE DISTRIBUTION(NOZZLE SF)

-185-

94

99

95 90
80
70

0
X

0
z

60. 50 40 30

w
J

20 10 5. 2 1x xx x o NOZZLE Sc ,, 0=1165kgm'3 P=1103 kNm'2 kgm"3 x NOZZLE SF =1429 P=483 kNm`2 x

Fz w v crw

CL

w I
J O

w >
d J

0.1.

01 L,o.

x 10 15 20 25

5 D 5(m'S 1103

FIGURE 6.22

SQUARE ROOT NORMAL DISTRIBUTIONS

-186-

CONCLUSIONS

1) This spraying 2) and the of

work slurries

is

an initial and appears procedure

investigation to be unique. appears technique Knollenburg to for

into

the

The experimental high speed

be sound drop apparatus

photographic by the

measurement with good

was confirmed agreement. speed

3) High drop the formation formation form

photographs that

of drops

sheet are

break-up formed

and

indicate of drops ligaments

through break

which Rayleigh flow

subsequently type through which

down to 4)

through to predict

disturbances. the nozzle is

The model of conical

an extension applies here of the final is to

Taylor's swirl to

derivation chambers.

specifically presented of shape

The model irrespective

applicable swirl in

any nozzle This has

the

chamber. terms of

necessitated co-ordinates,

expressing but the

model

Cartesian

equation

can be solved predicted about

numerically. when the viscosity tall 0.03 Nsn of the fluid layer and the the boundary sheet further drop that

5) The model of the fluid through

exceeded the

passed layer

boundary This

can be predicted. to be evaluated

enabled

velocities analysis size.

accurately estimate

and with of the

obtained

a realistic

-187-

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER WORK

1) 2) more

Higher Extend

atomising the work

pressures. to different materials exhibiting

pronounced 3)

non-Newtonian non-Newtonian

properties. behaviour into the

To embrace

modelling. 4) rates and to of In an actual spray drying operation, the this formation process. very of high drops

mass transfer no work

accompany has embraced

date

-188-

NOMENCLATURE a radius of jet

dimensionless parameter in
orifice

parameter equation

= 1(3.56)

3/2 ) a/(a = As/Ao

0.5

A0

area

of

As AT
C

area total

of

inlet

swirl area at

channel orifice
equation = CdoCh CdI

flow

parameter dimensionless

in

Rosin-Rammler parameter

CD Cdo Cd1 Ch Cp CT d D Dvso dI do dm DG DV dL F g

discharge discharge discharge discharge specific crust diameter droplet volume inlet outlet

coefficient coefficient coefficient coefficient heat capacity at at of outlet inlet hollow orifice orifice cone

thickness of jet

diameter median orifice orifice diameter diameter diameter of inlet vortex = P/(pVs2) in swirl chamber

mean diameter dimensionless molecular ligament correction gravity

group diffusivity

diameter factor

-189-

sheet

thickness

h* he
H

sheet heat
total

thickness transfer
pressure

at

break-up

coefficient
head

h' k KT KG Kc
K0

pressure thermal sheet

head conductivity

thickness

parameter coefficient coefficient

mass transfer crust

constant

mass transfer

L Lo

break-up orifice

length length

m
Nu n N OL P P0 Pr q q* qo Q r rl R R3

mass
Nusselt number (hcD/k) length droplets number in = (R-r)/S size group

dimensionless number of

Ohnesorge pressure porosity Prandtl amplitude amplitude initial flowrate distance radius distance length of of

(u/(pda)0"5)

number

(Cpp/k)

at

break-up

amplitude

curvature of nozzle of wall conical from axis r=0 chamber

side

swirl

-190-

Re rm Rs
R0 rAC

Reynolds mean swirl radius

orifice radius

number radius

(DVp/u) at inlet

swirl
radius of air

chamber

core

RI RD Sw SD SN Sh Sc SG t Ta Tp T U UT V Vs VI v yr

radius

of

inlet

channel distance chamber swirl

to

swirl

chamber

dimensionless width depth number Sherwood Schmidt geometric time air temperature of of swirl inlet

= r/R3 inlet channel

standard number number

deviation (KgD/Dv) (u/Dvpa) deviation

standard

droplet thrust relative velocity velocity sheet inlet

temperature exerted velocity equivalent to total pressure head

velocity velocity to swirl chamber

tangential radial

velocity velocity

component component

vZ
VA

axial
axial

velocity
velocity

component
at orifice =

fo

xvzrdr

ac (Ro2-rac2)

-191-

VRA VT

resultant tangential

velocity velocity

based at

on VA and VT = fo rac 2v rdr (Ro2-rac2)

orifice

W z

streaming axial

velocity

distance

Greek

Letters

Dimensionless angle of conical

parameter swirl

= (1-rac2/Ro2) chamber

y A
C

growth

rate variable thickness (As/d0dm)

factor

dimensionless boundary nozzle

temporal wavenumber

= (upa3/a)

layer parameter

amplification (2ir/a) angle

semi-cone

A Xopt u v n p Cr T

wavelength wavelength viscosity kinematic constant density surface relaxation coefficient tension time in Froessling parameter constant equation (equation 3.62) viscosity = 3.141 of disintegrating disturbance

X Si

dimensionless circulation

-192-

Subscripts
L liquid

gas solid

-193-

REFERENCES

1. 2.

Masters, Kim, (N3) , K. Y.,

K. Spray Marshall,

Drying,

Leonard

Hill

(1972). (1971), 17,

W. R. A. I. Ch. E. J.

575.
S., Tanasawa, 4, , N., (N14), Hasson, Y. 86. D., Ward, D. E. Ch. E. Sci. Trans. Soc. Mech. Engrs.

3.

Nukiyama, Japan

(1937)

4.

Dombrowski,

(1960) 5. Lapple, 32, 6.

12,35. C. E., 605. K., Brit. Chem. Eng. (1968), 13, (Ni), Shepherd, C. B. Ind. Eng. Chem. (1940),

(N5),

Masters, 88,242.

7.

Gretzinger, 7,312.

J.,

Marshall,

W. R. A. I. Ch. E. J.

(1961)

8.

Friedman, Chem. Eng.

S. J., Prog.

Gluckert, (1952),

F. A., 48,181.

Marshall,

W. R.

9.

Bailey,

G. H.,

Slater, 15,

I. W., (N7),

Eisenklam, 912.
(1962), 8,

F.

Brit.

Chem. Eng.
10. Gluckert,

(1970)
F. A.

A. I. Ch. E. J.

(N3),

460.

11. 12.

Katta, Chaloud, Prog.

S.,

Gauvin, J. H.,

W. H. A. I. Ch. E. J. J. B., Baker,

(1975),

21,143.

Martin, 53,593. Ross, P. N.,

J. S. Chem. Eng.

(1957), J. R., Eng.

13.

Paris, Ind. 157.

Dastur, Dev.

S. P., (1971),

Morris, 10,

R. L. (N2),

Chem. Proc.

Des.

14.

Gauvin, 1,793.

W. H.

Int.

J.

of

Multi-phase

Flow

(1975),

-194-

15.

Ade-John,

A. O.,

Jeffreys,

G. V.

Trans.

I. Chem. E.,

(1978), 16. Benatt, 42,309. 17.

18.

56,36. F. G. S., Eisenklam, P., J. Inst. Fuel (1969),

Frossling,
Ranz, W. E.,

N.,

Beitr.

Geophys.,
W. R., Chem.

(1938),
Eng.

52,170.
Prog (1952),

Marshall,

48,141.
19. Bose, A. K., Pei, D. C. T., Can. J. Chem. Eng. (1964),

42, 20.

(N6),

259. D. R., 14, Marshall, W. R., A. I. Ch. E. J.

Dickinson, (1960),

(N4) l 541.
Keey, R. B. Trans. I. Chem. E. (1977),

21.

Pham,

Q. T.,

55, 22.

(N2),

114. D. M., (N1) , 9.

Marshall, W. R., Chem. Eng. Prog.

Charlesworth, (1960) 1 6,

Marshall,

W. R.,

A. I. Ch. E. J.

23.

Duffle,

J. A.,

(1953),
24. Audu,

49,417
T. O. K.,

and 480.
Jeffreys, G. V., Trans. I. Chem. E.

(1975), 25. 26. Dlouhy, Baltas,

53,165. J., L., Gauvin, Gauvin, Report W. H., W. H., 518,519 A. I. Ch. E. J. Pulp (1960), RI of 6,29.

and Paper (1967).

Canada Tech.

27. Crosby,
54, 28. (N7)

E. J.,
56. l N.,

Marshall,

W. R. Chem. Eng. Prog

(1958),

Dombrowski, (1953),

Fraser, 101.

R. P.

Phil.

Trans.

R. Soc

247A,

-195-

29.

Fraser,

R. P.,

Dombrowski,

N.,

Eisenklam,

P.

Nature

(1954), 30.

173,145. N., Hooper, P. C. Chem. Eng. Sci. (1962),

Dombrowski,
17,291.

31. 32.

Colbourn, Taylor,

A. J., G. I.

Heath, R.

H. H. Soc.

NGTE Memo No. (1959) A253,259.

M86

(1950).

Proc.

33.

Clark, 64,

C. J.,

Dombrowski,

N. J.

Fluid

Mech

(1974),

(N1) , 167. C. Z. Angew Math. R. P. Eisenklam, (1962), Mech. P., 8,672. N. A. I. Ch. E. J. (1966), 12, (1931), 11,136. N., Hasson,

34. 35.

Weber, Fraser'.,

Dombrowski,

D. A. I. Ch. E. J. 36. Briffa, 708. 37. 38. Squire, Lamb, H., H. B. -F.,

Dombrowski,

Br. J.

App.

Phys. 5th

(1953), ed,

4,167. 9, Cambridge

Hydrodynamics, Press W. W., (1932). Shea, J. F.,

Chapter

University 39. Hagerty, 22,509. 40. Dombrowski, 18,203. 41. 42. Gordon, Clark, A329,467. 43. Crapper, G. A. D. J.

J.

Appl.

Mech.

(1955),

N.,

Johns,

W. R. Chem. Eng.

Sci

(1963),

G. D., C. J.,

J.

Appl.

Phys. N.

(1959), Proc.

30,1759. Soc. (1972),

Dombrowski,

Royal

G. D., Fluid

Dombrowski, Mech.

N.,

Jepson, 57,671.

W. P.,

Pyott,

(1973),

-196-

44.

Crapper, Royal Soc.

G. D.,

Dombrowski, A342,209.

N.,

Pyott,

G. A. D.

Proc.

(1975),

45.

Crapper, Royal

G. D.,

Dombrowski, A342,225.
Mech. G. Sci.,

N.,

Jepson,

W. P. Proc.

Soc.
D.,

(1975),
J. N., Fluid

46. 47.

Weihs,

(1978),

87,

(N2), and Press,

289.

Dombrowski, Biological

Munday,

Biochemical Academic

Engineering

(1968),

2,
48.

Chapter

16.
Nissan, A. H., 243A, Eisenklam, 37. P., Fraser, R. P. J. Inst. Woods, G. F., Phil. Trans.

Garner, Royal

F. H., Soc.

(1950), N.,

49.

Dombrowski, Fuel (1957),

30,399,413. R. J., Valentine, R. W. J. Agric. Eng. Res.

50.

Courshee, (1959),

4,62.

51.
52. 53.

Savart,
Rayleigh, Castleman,

F.

Ann.
Lond. R. A.

Chem.
Proc. U. S.

(1833),
Land. Bureau

53,337.
Math. Stds. Soc. J. (1878), Res. (1931), 10,4.

6,369. 54.
55.

Rayleigh,
Smith,

Lord.
S. W. J.,

Phil.
Moss,

Mag.
H. Proc.

(1892),
Royal

34,145.
Soc. A. (1916),

93,373. 56. 57. Haenlein, Tyler, 37,279. 58. Grant, R. P., Middleman, S. A. I. Ch. E. J. (1966), 12,669. E., A. NACA, Tech. Memo No. E. G. Proc. 659 Phys. (1932). Soc. (1925),

Richardson,

-197-

59. 60.

Phinney, Levich, Hall,

R. E. A. I. Ch. E. J. V., Physicochemical

(1972),

18,

(N2),

432. Prentice-

Hydrodynamics,

NJ (1962).
T. F., Davis, J. R., Proc. ASCE. Hyd. Div.

61.

Chen,

(1964), 62. 63. Phinney, Fenn, 379. 64.

90,175. R. E., Physics of Fluids (1973), 16, (1969), (N2), 15, 193.

R. W.,

Middleman,

S. A. I. Ch. E. J.

Rupee J. H. Jet Tech. Report

P.,

Prpulsion 52.207,

Lab, Jan
P. C.

Pasadena, (1962).

California

No.

65.

Eisenklam,

Hooper,

Min

of

Supply

DGGW

Report 66.
67.

EMR/58/JRL/42 R. E.,
Y.,

(1958). Fluid
S.

Phinney,
Tanasawa,

J.

Mech.
Trans.

(1973),
Jap.

60,
Soc.

(N4),
Mech.

689.

Tojoda,

Eng. 68. Ivanov, 7,19. 69. 70. 71.

72.

(1954)t V. A.

20,306. J. Appl. Mech. Tech. Phys. USSR, (1966)p.

Lee,

D. W.,

Spencer,

R. C.,

NACA Tech Mech (1955),

Chem.

Report

454 16,355.

(1933).

Ohnesorge, Miesse,
McCarthy,

W. Z. Angew Math. C. C. Ind.

M. J.,

(1936),

Eng.
Molloy,

Chem.
N. A.

47,1690.
Eng. J. (1974),

, 1.
73. Sakai, Fuel 74. Wang, T., (1976), D. P., Kito, M., Sato, M., Saito, M. J. Inst. 49,398,25. J. Fluid Mech. (1968), 34,299.

-198-

75.

Donnelly,

R. J.,

Glaberson,

W. Proc.

Royal

Soc.

A.

(1966), 76. 77. Yuen, Rutland,

46,267. 78. Roth,

290,547. M. J. Fluid Mech. (1968), G. J. J. 33, 181. (1971),

D. F.,

Jameson,

Flui d Mech.

L. O.,

Porterfield,

J. G.

Trans.

A. S. A. E.

(1970), 79. Goldin, J.

80.

13,16,779. M., Yerushalmi, (1969),

R.,

J.,

Pfeffer,

R.,

Shinnar,

R.

Fluid

Mech.
M.,

38,689.
Shinnar, R. Chem. Eng. J.

Goldin,

Pfeffer,

(1972), 81. Kroesser, 15,383. 82. Gordon, Rheology, 83. Tanasawa, Univ.
84. Marshall, NY (1954).

4,8. F. W., Middleman, S. A. I. Ch. E. J. (1969),

M.,

Yerushalmi, (1973), 17,

J., (N2), K.

Shinnar, 303. Technology

R. Trans.

Soc.

Y.,

Kobayasi, 20,27.

Rep.

Tohoku

(1955),
W. R.,

A. I. Ch. E. J.

Monograph

Series

No. 2,

85. 86.

Novikov, Ambrovitch, (1944),

I. I.

J. G. N.

Tech.

Phys.

(1948),

3,345. TSAG

Industrial

Aerodynamics

18. M., Laster, R. Chem. Eng. Prog (1953), 49,

87.

Doumas, 518.

-199-

88.

Harvey, Architects

J. F.,

Hermandorfer, Engrs. J. Mech.

H. W. Trans. (1943), and Appl.

Soc.

Naval

and Marine G. I., 3,129. T. G. Porton Quart

51,61. Math.

89.

Taylor, (1950),

90. 91.

Hodgkinson, Mclrvine, (1957).

Tech.

Rep. Univ.

No. 191 of

(1950).

J. D. Ph. D. Thesis,

Wisconsin,

92.

Dombrowski, (N4) , 604. G. I.

N.,

Hasson,

D. A. I. Ch. E. J.

(1969),

15,

93.

Taylor, (1948),

Proc.

7th

Int.

Cong.

Appl.

Mech.

2,280. J. R., P., J. Inst. E. Fuel J. (1949), Inst. 22,150. (1933), 7,

94. 95.

Joyce, Rosin, 29.

Rammler,

Fuel.

96.

Mugele, 43,1317.

R. A.,

Evans,

H. D.

Ind.

Eng.

Chem.

(1951),

97.

Kottler, 419.

E.

J.

Franklin

Inst.

(1950),

250,339,

98.

Tate,

R. W.,

Marshall,

W. R. Chem. Eng.

Prog.

(1953),

49,169,226. 99. Dombrowski, Eng. 100. Nelson, 7,80. 101. Goering, (1976), C. E., Winter Smith, Meeting. D. M. Am. Soc. Agric. Eng. (1972), P. A., N., Wolfsohn, D. L. Trans. Inst. Chem.

50,259. Stevens, W. F. A. I. Ch. E. J. (1961),

-200-

102.

Fraser, Chem.

R. P., Eng.

Eisenklam, 2,

P., (414)l

Dombrowski, and Mass. Goglia, Chem. 536. Inst.

N.

Brit.

(1957), J. P.

103. 104.

Longwell, Lewis, R. I.,

DSc Thesis, D. G., Eng.

Tech. M. H., Rice,

(1943).

H. C., Smith,

Edwards, L. W. Ind.

(1948),

40,67.

105. 106.

Straus, Weinburg,
240.

R. Ph. D. Thesis, S. Proc. Inst.

Univ. Mech.

of

London (1952),

(1949). 18,

Eng.

107.

Darnell,

W. H.

Ph. D.

Thesis,

Univ.

of

Wisconsin

(1953) 108. Turner, 49,185. 109.

. G. M., Moulton, R. W. Chem. Eng. Prog. (1953),

Radcliffe, 169,93.

A.

Proc.

Inst.

Mech. 'Engrs.

(1955),

110.

Encyclopedia 18,634.

Chem. Technol.

2nd ed.

Kirk-Othma

(1969),

111.

Wang, K.,

Tien, (N2) N.,

C. Ind. 169. , Tahir,

Eng.

Chem. Proc.

Des.

Dev.

(1972) , 11, 112. Dombrowski, 50,403,59. 113. El-Awady, 21, (N1) ,

M. A.

J.

Inst.

Fuel

(1977),

M. N. Trans. 70.

Am. Soc.

Agric.

Eng.

(1978),

114. Mani,
333. 115.

J. V. S. Indian

J.

Technol.

(1969),

7,

(N10),

Simmons, July,

H. C. J.

Eng.

Power

Trans

ASME (1977),

309.

-201-

116.

Binnie,

A. M.,

Hookings,

G. A.

Proc.

Royal

Soc.

A.

(1948) 1 194,398. 117. 118. Wolfsohn, Hasson, (1961), 119. Taylor, 46,1455.
120. Tate, R. W., Olson, E. O. Techniques for measuring

D. L. D.,

Ph. D. Thesis, J. Trans.

Univ. Inst.

of

Leeds

(1970).

Mizrahi,

Chem. Eng.

39,415. E. H., Harmon, D. B. Ind. Eng. Chem. (1954),

drop (1964) 121.

sizes .

in

sprays,

Delavan

Manuf.

Co.

Ltd.

Choudhury, Evanston 16 H.,

A. P. R. Ph. D. Thesis, (1955). Ranz, W. E. Ind. Eng.

North

Western

Univ.

122.

Binark, 701.

Chem.

(1959),

51,

123.

Clark, 4,27.

C. J.,

Dombrowski,

N.

J.

Aerosol

Sci.

(1973),

124.

Dombrowski, (1971),

N.,

Wolfsohn,

D. L.

J.

Aerosol

Sci.

2,405. C., Paper presented at High Speed Photography

125.

Davies,

Conference
126. Private Sunlight

(1977).
with Unilever Research, Port

communication (1977).

-202-

Appendix

Drop Size

Distribution

Data

-203-

SLURRY

23%

NOZZLE

SC

AP
AD

2) (kNm
Dm

483
N

690
N

896
N

1103
N

43.5 57.3 70.9 84.4 98.0 111.6 125.4 139.0 152.6 166.2 179.8 193.6 207.2 220.7
234.3 247.9

36.8 50.4 64.0 77.5 91.4 105.0 118.5 132.1 145.7 159.5 174.6 186.7 200.2 213.8
227.7 241.2

15 53 55 50 48 29 35 30 21 27 11 12 9 7
5 2

14 72 84 92 83 73 48 46 39 34 18 20 19 5
4 3

11 74 90 88 82 56 59 43 29 31 23 26 9 6
5 3

37 107 108 93 80 78 48 31 34 22 15 15 12 1
1 1

261.7 275.3 288.9 302.7 316.0 329.5 343.5 357.0

254.8 268.4 282.0 295.8 309.4 322.9 336.5 350.1

6 5 0 1 1

5 1

1 1

END3
END2

164

146

143

131

-204-

SLURRY

35%

NOZZLE

SC-

AP
AD

(kNmr2)
Dm

483
N

690
N

896
N

1103
N

43.5
57.3

36.8
50.4

21
23

22
49

20
42

14
61

70.9 84.4 98.0 111.6 125.4 139.0 152.6 166.2 179.8 193.6 207.2 220.7 234.3 247.9 261.7 275.3 288.9 302.7 316.0 329.5 343.5 357.0

64.0 77.5 91.4 105.0 118.5 132.1 145.7 159.5 174.6 186.7 200.2 213.8 227.7 241.2 254.8 268.4 282.0 295.8 309.4 322.9 336.5 350.1

33 37 37 32 27 26 20 28 19 12 10 8 12 2 6 0 2 1 0 1 1

60 51 54 48 46 32 23 16 17 14 8 7 6 5 2 0 2

62 62 71 49 34 38 30 29 17 12 7 4 4 1 1 0 0 1

65 77 107 71 67 36 35 22 10 12 4 3 1 1 1

END3 END2

175

152

142

128

-205-

SLURRY

40%

NOZZLE SC

AP
AD

(kNm-2)
Dm

483
N

690
N

896
N

1103
N

43.5 57.3 70.9 84.4 98.0 111.6 125.4 139.0 152.6 166.2 179.8 193.6 207.2 220.7 234.3 247.9 261.7 275.3 288.9 302.7 316.0 329.5 343.5 357.0

36.8 50.4 64.0 77.5 91.4 105.0 118.5 132.1 145.7 159.5 174.6 186.7 200.2 213.8 227.7 241.2 254.8 268.4 282.0 295.8 309.4 322.9 336.5 350.1

21 44 55 55 61 58 54 34 30 37 24 20 15 12 11 9 3 2 2 1 1 1

18 54 57 50 71 58 50 33 46 17 13 19 15 10 7 7 2 2 0 1

28 79 82 95 77 89 70 42 36 36 22 16 14 7 5 4

24 73 92 98 68 67 59 38 31 46 20 11 11 5 2 1 0 1 2

END3

167

156

140

139

END2

-206-

SLURRY

45%

NOZZLE

SC

AP
AD

(kNm-2)
Dm

483
N

690
N

896
N

1103
N

43.5
57.3 70.9

36.8
50.4 64.0

3
26 47

47
22 38 46 71

11
55 68

84.4 98.0 111.6 125.4 139.0 152.6 166.2 179.8 193.6 207.2 220.7 234.3 247.9
261.7

77.5 91.4 105.0 118.5 132.1 145.7 159.5 174.6 186.7 200.2 213.8 227.7 241.2
254.8

49 41 53 45 46 33 31 27 28 25 24 9 8
2

52 58 75 51 49 42 24 32 29 21 18 94 30
22

85 87 85 74 51 39 38 18 9 10 6

96 62 100 80 49 49 39 15 12 14 3 4 3
1

275.3 288.9 302.7 316.0 329.5 343.5 357.0

268.4 282.0 295.8 309.4 322.9 336.5 350.1

1 1 2 2

10 01 01 11

END3 END2

171

161

142

138

-207-

SLURRY

50%

NOZZLE

SC

AP
AD

(kNm-2)
Dm

483
N

690
N

896
N

1103
N

43.5 57.3 70.9 84.4 98.0 111.6 125.4 139.0 152.6 166.2 179.8 193.6 207.2 220.7
234.3

36.8 50.4 64.0 77.5 91.4 105.0 118.5 132.1 145.7 159.5 174.6 186.7 200.2 213.8
227.7

12 43 47 51 64 57 53 37 36 44 29 23 20 18
15

7 18 52 46 58 66 38 41 30 36 19 12 16 8
6

11 31 64 74 90 92 51 53 44 30 21 22 15 8
12

10 37 77 86 93 84 71 50 53 32 39 21 10 6
6

247.9 261.7 275.3 288.9 302.7 316.0 329.5 343.5 357.0

241.2 254.8 268.4 282.0 295.8 309.4 322.9 336.5 350.1

9 7 4 3 3 1

3 3 1 2 1

2 0 1 0 1 1

2 1

END3

175

158

150

143

ZND2

-208-

SLURRY

23% NOZZLE

SD

EP(kNm-2)
AD DM

483
N

690
N

896
N

1103
N

66.7 87.9 108.8 129.5 150.3 171.2 192.4 213.2 234.1 255.0 275.8 297.0 317.9 338.6 359.4 380.3 401.5 422.3 443.2 464.4 484.8 505.5 527.0 547.7

56.5 77.3 98.2 118.9 140.2 161.1 181.8 202.7 223.5 244.7 267.9 286.4 307.1 328.0 349.3 370.0 390.9 411.8 432.6 453.8 474.6 495.4 516.2 537.1 END3 END2

29 73 82 73 71 75 52 44 28 25 30 16 8 10 8 5 6 3 0 0 0 1

34 90 88 77 75 61 32 25 30 16 13 85 96 42 10 02 0 1

40 70 87 71 51 54 35 28 12 7 11

33 82 78 80 68 69 39 20 20 15 3 2 0 2

234

198

189

168

-209-

SLURRY

35% NOZZLE

SD

iP(kNm-2)
AD DM

483
N

690
N

896
N

1103
N

66.7 87.9 108.8 129.5 150.3 171.2 192.4 213.2 234.1 255.0 275.8 297.0 317.9 338.6
359.4

56.5 77.3 98.2 118.9 140.2 161.1 181.8 202.7 223.5 244.7 267.9 286.4 307.1 328.0
349.3

0 12 42 53 59 66 51 45 32 14 16 14 5 4
3

1 30 56 66 73 59 46 30 36 16 7 5 10 2
1

7 26 47 66 72 45 37 18 16 15 10 4 4 1

20 56 79 74 60 46 44 23 9 9 7 3 1 3

380.3 401.5
422.3 443.2

370.0 390.9
411.8 432.6

0 2

464.4 484.8 505.5 527.0 547.7

END3 END2

453.8 474.6 495.4 516.2 537.1 177

214

200

189

-210-

SLURRY 40% NOZZLE iP(kNm-2) AD DM

SD

483
N

690
N

896
N

1103
N

66.7

56.5

87.9 108.8 129.5 150.3 171.2 192.4 213.2 234.1 255.0 275.8 297.0 317.9 338.6
359.4 380.3

77.3 98.2 118.9 140.2 161.1 181.8 202.7 223.5 244.7 267.9 286.4 307.1 328.0
349.3 370.0

8 44 76 49 56 33 29 24 19 9 9 7 7
0 1

3 27 44 68 58 45 31 22 13 13 4 5 0
1

12 27 54 71 64 55 32 21 12 14 4 2 2

7 49 91 74 88 66 41 29 12 11 6 1 1

401.5 422.3
443.2

390.9 411.8
432.6

464.4 484.8 505.5 527.0 547.7

453.8 474.6 495.4 516.2 537.1 END3

END2

210

198

193

186

-211-

SLURRY 45% NOZZLE SD___

OP(kNm
AD

2)
DM

483
N

690
N

896
N

1103
N

66.7 87.9
108.8

56.5 77.3
98.2

5 32
47

3 46
57

2 31
65

3 68
96

129.5 150.3 171.2 192.4

213.2

118.9 140.2 161.1 181.8

202.7

56 61 50 51
29

66 65 50 38
27

84 84 64 33
30

104 109 67 41
32

234.1 255.0 275.8 297.0 317.9 338.6 359.4 380.3 401.5 422.3 443.2 464.4 484.8 505.5 527.0 547.7

223.5 244.7 267.9 286.4 307.1 328.0 349.3 370.0 390.9 411.8 432.6 453.8 474.6 495.4 516.2 537.1 END3 END2

19 14 17 15 5 4 4 2 1 1 1

19 19 19 4 8 1 3 0 0 1

33 14 10 7 5 1 1 1

18 18 7 3 3 1

222

206

193

175

-212-

SLURRY

50%

NOZZLE SD

AP (kNm-2)
AD Dm

483
N

690
N

896
N

1103
N

43.5 57.3 70.9 84.4 98.0 111.6 125.4 139.0 152.6 166.2 179.8 193.6 207.2 220.7 234.3 247.9 261.7 275.3 288.9 302.7
316.0

36.8 50.4 64.0 77.5 91.4 105.0 118.5 132.1 145.7 159.5 174.6 186.7 200.2 213.8 227.7 241.2 254.8 268.4 282.0 295.8
309.4

8 27 40 47 36 30 32 33 33 31 31 14 15 14 13 10 8 12 3 4
4

14 26 37 52 49 41 40 43 38 40 36 29 13 13 21 15 11 8 2 1
5

21 25 43 48 48 43 39 45 49 47 30 37 21 19 20 9 7 7 4 3
5

17 36 43 73 61 72 50 57 34 40 45 28 25 14 15 3 11 6 7 6
1

329.5 343.5 357.0 370.6 384.2 398.0 411.6 425.2 439.0 452.3 466.2
479.8

322.9 336.5 350.1 364.0 377.5 391.1 404.7 418.3 432.1 445.7 459.3
472.8

2 3 3 2 1 0 1

3 1 1 0 1

1 1

3 0 1

493.3 506.9
END3

486.4 500.2 214 195 188 184

END2

-213-

SLURRY

23% NOZZLE

SE

AP(kNm
AD

2)
DM

483
N

690
N

896
N

1103
N

66.7 87.9 108.8 129.5 150.3 171.2 192.4 213.2 234.1 255.0 275.8 297.0 317.9 338.6 359.4 380.3 401.5 422.3 443.2 464.4 484.8 505.5 527.0 547.7
END3

56.5 77.3 98.2 118.9 140.2 161.1 181.8 202.7 223.5 244.7 267.9 286.4 307.1 328.0 349.3 370.0 390.9 411.8 432.6 453.8 474.6 495.4 516.2 537.1

5 19 42 40 39 37 41 27 17 23 19 10 5 9 4 6 3 0 0 1

12 48 62 46 48 39 32 24 14 11 12 8 6 1 6

10 55 83 68 62 52 32 42 22 21 6 10 4 4 1

10 51 82 71 76 41 41 29 20 10 4 3 1 0 1

243

207

196

175

END2

-214-

SLURRY 35% NOZZLE SE iP(kNm-2) AD DM 483 N 690 N 896 N 1103 N

66.7

56.5

12

87.9 108.8 129.5 150.3 171.2 192.4 213.2 234.1 255.0 275.8 297.0 317.9 338.6 359.4 380.3 401.5 422.3 443.2 464.4 484.8 505.5 527.0 547.7
END3

77.3 98.2 118.9 140.2 161.1 181.8 202.7 223.5 244.7 267.9 286.4 307.1 328.0 349.3 370.0 390.9 411.8 432.6 453.8 474.6 495.4 516.2 537.1

37 57 54 38 30 28 29 20 10 5 5 4 3 4 1 1 2 2 1

26 42 35 48 36 25 20 27 11 9 6 6 4 3 0 0 1 0 1

69 72 75 73 55 43 27 24 14 7 7 4 1 5 1 1 0 1

87 105 91 90 63 41 32 27 12 9 6 1 0 0 1 1 1

230

221

201

183

END2

-215-

SLURRY

40% NOZZLE

SE

AP(kNm AD

2) DM

483 N

690 N

896 N

1103 N

66.7

56.5

87.9 108.8 129.5 150.3 171.2 192.4 213.2 234.1 255.0 275.8 297.0 317.9 338.6 359.4
380.3

77.3 98.2 118.9 140.2 161.1 181.8 202.7 223.5 244.7 267.9 286.4 307.1 328.0 349.3
370.0

16 33 42 34 41 38 18 21 14 13 17 11 4 2
1

19 38 41 50 32 40 29 25 14 17 12 4 2 3
2

24 37 51 43 35 25 23 16 10 2 5 4 1 1

24 36 52 48 39 38 21 15 8 2 1 2 1 1

401.5 422.3
443.2

390.9 411.8
432.6

1 2

464.4 484.8 505.5 527.0 547.7

END3 END2

453.8 474.6 495.4 516.2 537.1 234 218 194 183

-216-

45% NOZZLE SE SLURRY

AP (kfm
AD

2)
D m

483
N

690
N

896
N

1103
N

69.9 92.1 113.9 135.6 157.5 179.4 201.5 223.4 245.3 267.1 289.0 311.1 333.0 354.7 376.6 398.4 420.6 442.4 464.3 486.5 507.9

59.1 81.0 102.9 124.6 146.9 168.8 190.4 212.3 234.2 256.3 286.6 300.0 321.8 343.6 365.9 387.6 409.5 431.4 453.2 475.4 497.3 3 END END2

2 16 9 22 26 23 30 21 20 12 10 6 6 3 2 4 0 0 2 1 2 270

3 25 43 34 37 34 44 30 18 12 6 7 6 8 0 3 1 1

12 39 51 47 54 53 44 27 20 15 10 4 1 0 1 1

11 35 52 49 69 55 36 31 10 9 5 5 2 0 0 1

234

200

191

-217-

SLURRY

50%

NOZZLE SE

2) AP (kNm
AD Dm

483
N

690
N

896
N

1103
N

43.5 57.3 70.9 84.4 98.0 111.6 125.4 139.0 152.6 166.2 179.8
193.6

36.8 50.4 64.0 77.5 91.4 105.0 118.5 132.1 145.7 159.5 174.6
186.7

2 21 42 43 48 33 35 21 21 29 20
23

3 14 36 42 46 36 37 33 29 43 37
35

3 20 33 53 61 58 34 35 30 30 32
23

3 18 44 61 57 67 54 31 31 47 51
41

207.2 220.7 234.3 247.9 261.7 275.3 288.9 302.7 316.0 329.5 343.5 357.0 370.6 384.2 398.0 411.6 425.2 439.0 452.3 466.2 479.8 493.3 506.9

200.2 213.8 227.7 241.2 254.8 268.4 282.0 295.8 309.4 322.9 336.5 350.1 364.0 377.5 391.1 404.7 418.3 432.1 445.7 459.3 472.8 486.4 500.2 END3
END2

20 22 30 18 4 9 7 9 5 11 4 6

25 32 25 25 16 13 9 10 7 6 6 6 3 4 3 1

26 18 20 14 14 14 17 9 6 4 4 2 2 2 0 3

27 30 17 20 7 10 11 11 4 3 4 1 0 0 2 1
0

0
1 2 0 2

0
1 1

284

246

231

211

-218-

SLURRY 23% tP(kNm AD 2) DM

NOZZLE

SF

483
N

690
N

896
N

1103
N

66.7

56.5 77.3 98.2 118.9

140.2

10 30 33 33
23

12 36 48 36
30

19 53 49 48
36

45 86 70 35
30

87.9 108.8 129.5

150.3

171.2 192.4 213.2 234.1 255.0 275.8 297.0 317.9 338.6 359.4 380.3 401.5 422.3 443.2 464.4 484.8 505.5 527.0 547.7

161.1 181.8 202.7 223.5 244.7 267.9 286.4 307.1 328.0 349.3 370.0 390.9 411.8 432.6 453.8 474.6 495.4 516.2 537.1

15 23 21 19 18 10 7 3 3 4 4 4 2

36 33 21 17 12 6 3 9 1 4 0 0 1 0 1

25 21 18 11 9 4 7 4 3 3 2 1

29 24 25 15 16 8 5 4 3

END3 END2

248

218

211

194

-219-

SLURRY 35% NOZZLE SF

tP(kNm-2)
AD DM

483
N

690
N

896
N

1103
N

66.7 87.9
108.8

56.5 77.3
98.2

4 20
40

1 49
62

16 63
66

19 50
86

129.5
150.3

118.9
140.2

32
36

57
40

54
55

54
56

171.2 192.4 213.2 234.1 255.0 275.8 297.0 317.9 338.6 359.4 380.3 401.5 422.3
443.2

161.1 181.8 202.7 223.5 244.7 267.9 286.4 307.1 328.0 349.3 370.0 390.9 411.8
432.6

33 15 16 20 13 11 8 11 2 14 10 3 3
0

45 32 38 20 15 14 11 4 3 1 0 1 1
1

40 36 22 32 20 18 9 7 4 3 0 1

41 36 25 25 11 9 6 3 2 1

464.4 484.8 505.5 527.0 547.7

ENDS

453.8 474.6 495.4 516.2 537.1

2 1 1

0 0 1

281

219

212

190

END2

-220-

SLURRY 40% NOZZLE

SF

tP(kNm-2)
AD DM

483
N

690
N

896
N

1103
N

66.7 87.9 108.8 129.5

150.3

56.5 77.3 98.2 118.9

140.2

1 31 33 27
21

0 23 28 45
37

4 34 58 50
51

9 47 55 55
54

171.2 192.4 213.2 234.1 255.0 275.8 297.0 317.9 338.6 359.4 380.3 401.5 422.3
443.2

161.1 181.8 202.7 223.5 244.7 267.9 286.4 307.1 328.0 349.3 370.0 390.9 411.8
432.6

29 13 12 18 14 18 6 5 8 4 3 1 1
0

30 22 16 22 14 16 11 9 4 8 4 3

31 35 29 10 16 15 7 6 7 5 3 2

43 35 14 21 11 14 21 6 3 1

464.4 484.8 505.5 527.0 547.7

END3 END2

453.8 474.6 495.4 516.2 537.1

2 0 0 1

262

246

227

210

-221-

SLURRY

45% NOZZLE

SF

AP(kNm-2)
AD DM

483
N

690
N

896
N

1103
N

66.7

56.5

01

87.9
108.8

77.3
98.2

14
30

21
55

32
48

36
55

129.5
150.3

118.9
140.2

36
34

67
46

44
59

58
47

171.2 192.4 213.2 234.1 255.0 275.8 297.0 317.9 338.6

359.4

161.1 181.8 202.7 223.5 244.7 267.9 286.4 307.1 328.0

349.3

24 32 19 9 17 15 11 11 11
6

38 46 37 28 37 24 16 16 6
99

61 56 49 24 30 26 14 18 12

50 37 30 19 17 18 10 13 4
3

380.3 401.5 422.3

443.2

370.0 390.9 411.8

432.6

4 3 5
1

21 42 11
21

464.4

453.8

484.8
505.5 527.0 547.7
END3 END2

474.6
495.4 516.2 537.1

1
0 1 1

291

245

239

222

-222-

SLURRY

50%

NOZZLE SF

AP AD

(kNm-2) Dm

483 N

690 N

896 N

1103 N

43.5 57.3
70.9 84.4

36.8 50.4
64.0 77.5

3 14
25 31

4 7
26 31

13 27
49 62

2 9
20 20

98.0 111.6 125.4 139.0 152.6 166.2 179.8 193.6 207.2 220.7 234.3 247.9 261.7 275.3 288.9 302.7 316.0 329.5 343.5 357.0 370.6 384.2 398.0 411.6 425.2 439.0 452.3 466.2 479.8 493.3 506.9
END3 END2

91.4 105.0 118.5 132.1 145.7 159.5 174.6 186.7 200.2 213.8 227.7 241.2 254.8 268.4 282.0 295.8 309.4 322.9 336.5 350.1 364.0 377.5 391.1 404.7 418.3 432.1 445.7 459.3 472.8 486.4 500.2

47 38 28 33 33 22 23 22 26 20 17 19 20 21 11 10 12 15 12 9 6 5 5 4 5 3 2 2 1 2 3

30 28 24 25 14 31 15 19 18 9 20 11 11 6 7 9 3 6 1 5 5 2 1 1 1 2

45 44 43 43 36 35 41 26 24 27 27 21 27 16 10 11 9 10 3 5 4 2 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1

23 25 20 11 14 17 19 12 18 16 12 10 11 8 7 7 8 5 3 3 1 4 1 4 5 3 1 1 1

291

250

236

225

-223-

Appendix

II

Derivation

of

Equation

4.23

-224-

Evaluation

of

Equation

4.12

Equation {vr.

4.12

is rv8 dr + dr

ve}

+2J

+l

er
in terms of n 4.12 becomes dn) -+ 1a Jo az (ve. vZ) i-S dn)

1(01 {vr Vol +2J . o

Vrve(- ---

=vr

dd1v n

dn}

+ {R-n6}

00
term only 4.22 and v0 from 4.15,

Dealing substitute {vrvel1

with in

the yr

first from

equation

becomes:

j'

Sl (2n-n2)

aW } R-nS Rn2-2n3

dR -1 dz yR

(3 2Rn-n2 (R+S)+2n3S n= 2. + n4S

4J 0
i

16 _W dz

as

(R+S)+n4S
2,

+ dw

dz

Rn2-n3
3

(R+26)

Evaluating
dR dz

(4.1.2)

and simplifying:
d6 d -W(R/3-S/6) R (R-6) )+ dw d2 (2R/3-56/12) R(R--6)

W(R-d/3)l R R) J+

(4.1.3)

-225-

The second 4.22

1 -262 Rj0

term

becomes

upon

substitution

of

4.95

and

2n-n2 (R-n6)

CT 2W

dR dz

2Rn-n2(R+6)+2n36 3

d8 Rn2-2n3(R+S)+n4d -W Sdz(32}9z34

dw (Rn2-n3 +

(R+2S)

+ nod)

do J

(4.1.4)

inspection appear expanded

-dR dz

of

(4.1.4)

reveals If

that this integral

a log log

term is

will itself becomes:

upon in

integration. series

term of

form, the

(4.1.4)

16WS 15R (R-6))

dS C 13W6 + r-z 45R R-))

dW - dz

462 _ 9R (R-S)

The third 1 -S

term

of

4.1.1 do

is (4.1.6)

(v0v)

0 0Z
From 4.15,4.19, and 4.20 Z (ve. vz) becomes dw (2n-n2) +dz

? (2n-n2) R

C W(2-2n)

1 dR - n d6 Tdz Taz

+ W(2n -n

2)

2R(1-n)

R2

'dz

1 dR -nV

i dz

-(2n-n2)
(4.1.7)

dR

EI

Evaluating dR UZ 8WS 15R2

(4.1.6): -W R+ dS dz 7W 15R dw + dz -86 lR

-226-

The term

on the R: H. S.of

4.1.1

upon

evaluation

becomes:

C 2R-S RS FR--6)

(4.1.9)

collecting
the L. H. S.

the
of

coefficients
4.1.1. becomes:

of

dz

dz and

together

r dd aL

2W(R-s/ 12 ) 1+ 15R(R-8) ,J with (4.1.9) C

dR dz

2W6 15R R-d

dw [ 26 + dz 15

Combining

dz dS dz

2W(R12) 1 x/12

VCRR (R -d)) R1

- dz

C 15RaR-d] SR dw j w dz dz

(T26

or

1w_ 15v

7`

SdR dz

which

is

the

same as

(4.23).

-227-