0
TECHNICAL PAPERS: Gas Turbines: Industrial and Cogeneration

Inlet Fogging of Gas Turbine Engines—Part II: Fog Droplet Sizing Analysis, Nozzle Types, Measurement, and Testing

[+] Author and Article Information
Mustapha Chaker, Cyrus B. Meher-Homji, Thomas Mee

Gas Turbine Division, Mee Industries, Inc., 204 West Pomona Avenue, Monrovia, CA 91016

J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power 126(3), 559-570 (Aug 11, 2004) (12 pages) doi:10.1115/1.1712982 History: Received December 01, 2001; Revised March 01, 2002; Online August 11, 2004
Copyright © 2004 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Dodge, L. G., 1992, “TESS: Tool for Spray Studies,” Tech Today.
Teske, M. E., Thistle, H. W., Hewitt, A. J., and Kirk, I. W., 2000, “Conversion Of Droplet Size Distributions From PMS Optical Array Probe To Malvern Laser Diffraction,” Eighth International Conference on Liquid Atomization And Spray Systems, Pasadena, CA, July.
Doble, S. J., Matthews, G. A., Rutherford, I., and E. S. E., Southcombe, 1985, “A System for Classifying Hydraulic Nozzles and Other Atomizers into Categories of Spray Quality,” Proceedings of the 1985 British Crop Protection Conference: Weeds, vol. 9A-5 , pp. 1125–1133.
Arnold,  A. C., 1990, “A Comparative Study of Drop Sizing Equipment for Agricultural Fan-Spray Atomizers,” Aeronaut. Sci. Technol., 12, pp. 431–445.
Young, B. W., and Bachalo, W. B., 1987, “The Direct Comparison of Three ‘In-Flight’ Droplet Sizing Techniques for Pesticide Spray Research,” International Symposium on Optical Particle Sizing: Theory and Practice, Rouen, France.
Dodge,  L. G., 1987, “Comparison of Performance of Drop-Sizing Instruments,” Appl. Opt., 27, pp. 1328–1341.
Arnold,  A. C., 1987, “The Drop Size of the Spray From Agricultural Fan Spray Atomizers as Determined by a Malvern and the Particle Measuring System (PMS) Instrument,” Atomization Spray Technol., 3, pp. 155–167.
Le Coz, J. F., 1998, “Comparison Of Different Drop Sizing Techniques On Direct Injection Gasoline Sprays,” 9th International Symposium On Application Of Laser Techniques To Fluid Mechanics, Lisbon, July 13–16.
Pilch,  M., and Erdman,  C. A., 1987, “The Use of Breakup Time Data and Velocity History Data to Predict the Maximum Size of Stable Fragments for Acceleration-Induced Breakup of Liquid Drop,” Int. J. Multiphase Flow, 13(6), pp. 741–757.
Dupouy, D., Flores, B., Lisiecki, D., and Dumouchel, C., 1994, “Behavior Of Swirl Atomizers Of Small Dimensions,” ICLASS 94, Rouen, France, July, pp. 374–381.
Obokata, T., and Long, W. Q., 1994, “LDA/PDA Characterization of Conical Spray for Diesel Engine,” ICLASS 94 Rouen, France, July, pp. 278–285.
Chaker, M., Meher-Homji, C. B., and Mee T. R., III, 2002, “Inlet Fogging of Gas Turbine Engines—Part I: Fog Droplet Thermodynamics, Heat Transfer and Practical Considerations,” 126 , pp. 545–558.
Chaker, M., Meher-Homji, C. B., and Mee T. R., III, 2002, “Inlet Fogging of Gas Turbine Engines—Part III: Fog Behavior in Inlet Ducts, CFD Analysis and Wind Tunnel Experiments,” 126 , pp. 571–580.

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
(a) Experimental setup, in still air and (b) wind tunnel section showing Malvern Spraytec measurement system for nozzle testing under airflow conditions
Grahic Jump Location
Two droplet measurement histograms showing the importance of the use of both SMD and Dv90. Data is from actual experiments done on nozzles
Grahic Jump Location
Swirl and impaction-pin nozzles
Grahic Jump Location
Visual plume shape of different makes of impaction-pin nozzles at an operating pressure of 138 barg (2000 psig). Mee nozzle (152 micron orifice, 316 stainless steel construction) in the center
Grahic Jump Location
Various impaction-pin nozzles, from 147-micron (on right) to 457-micron orifice diameter (left), operating pressure 138 barg
Grahic Jump Location
Impaction-pin nozzle showing small shading effect from impaction pin
Grahic Jump Location
Opposite view of the nozzle shown in Fig. 6
Grahic Jump Location
Impaction-pin droplet size experimental results for still air, operating pressure 2000 psig (138 barg) (a, b); impaction-pin droplet size experimental results for airflow velocity of 900 fpm (4.6 m/sec) operating pressure 2000 psig (138 barg) (c, d); swirl-jet nozzle droplet size experimental results for still air, operating pressure 2000 psig (138 barg) (e, f )
Grahic Jump Location
Spatial location for experimental testing
Grahic Jump Location
Experimental measurements showing influence of flow velocities and measurement distances on droplet sizes, operating pressure: 138 barg
Grahic Jump Location
(a, b) Experimental results of droplet size distribution in the plume for comparable swirl and impaction-pin nozzles
Grahic Jump Location
Experimental comparisons between impaction and swirl-jet nozzles at varying pressures. Measurements of both Dv90 and D32 have been taken at different locations in the plume. The graph shows that the impaction-pin nozzle provides smaller diameters regardless of where measured
Grahic Jump Location
Plume characteristics of impaction-pin (left) and swirl-jet type nozzles (right) at operating pressure of 137 barg. The smoke-like nature of the impaction-pin nozzle is evident. The straight edge of the swirl-jet nozzle is indicative of the high momentum of the larger droplets, implying a much larger droplet size at the edges as also indicated by the graphs above
Grahic Jump Location
Data check for repeatability showing consistency in diameters

Tables

Errata

Discussions

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

Related Content

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

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

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

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