0
Research Papers: Gas Turbines: Combustion, Fuels, and Emissions

# The Impact of Density Ratio on the Liquid Core Dynamics of a Turbulent Liquid Jet Injected Into a Crossflow

[+] Author and Article Information
Marcus Herrmann

School for Engineering of Matter, Transport and Energy, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ 85287marcus.herrmann@asu.edu

Marco Arienti, Marios Soteriou

United Technologies Research Center, Hartford, CT 06108

J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power 133(6), 061501 (Feb 15, 2011) (9 pages) doi:10.1115/1.4002273 History: Received May 30, 2010; Revised May 31, 2010; Published February 15, 2011; Online February 15, 2011

## Abstract

Atomizing liquids by injecting them into crossflows is a common approach in gas turbines and augmentors. Much of our current understanding of the processes resulting in atomization of the jets, the resulting jet penetration and spray drop size distribution have been obtained by performing laboratory experiments at ambient conditions. Yet, operating conditions under which jets in crossflows atomize can be far different from ambient. Hence, several dimensionless groups have been identified that are believed to determine jet penetration and resulting drop size distribution. These are usually the jet and crossflow Weber and Reynolds numbers and the momentum flux ratio. In this paper, we aim to answer the question of whether an additional dimensionless group, the liquid to gas density ratio must be matched. We perform detailed simulations of the primary atomization region using the refined level set grid (RLSG) method to track the motion of the liquid/gas phase interface. We employ a balanced force, interface projected curvature method to ensure high accuracy of the surface tension forces, use a multiscale approach to transfer broken off, small scale nearly spherical drops into a Lagrangian point particle description allowing for full two-way coupling and continued secondary atomization, and employ a dynamic Smagorinsky large eddy simulation (LES) approach in the single phase regions of the flow to describe turbulence. We present simulation results for a turbulent liquid jet ($q=6.6$, $We=330$, and $Re=14,000$) injected into a gaseous crossflow $(Re=740,000)$ analyzed under ambient conditions (density ratio 816) experimentally by Brown and McDonnell [2006, “Near Field Behavior of a Liquid Jet in a Crossflow,” Proceedings of the ILASS Americas, 19th Annual Conference on Liquid Atomization and Spray Systems]. We compare simulation results obtained using a liquid to gas density ratio of 10 and 100. The results show that the increase in density ratio causes a noticeable increase in liquid core penetration with reduced bending and spreading in the transverse directions. The post-primary atomization spray penetrates further in both the jet and transverse direction. Results further show that the penetration correlations for the windward side trajectory commonly reported in the literature strongly depend on the value of threshold probability used to identify the leading edge. Correlations based on penetration of the jet’s liquid core center of mass, on the other hand, can provide a less ambiguous measure of jet penetration. Finally, the increase in density ratio results in a decrease in wavelength of the most dominant feature associated with a traveling wave along the jet as determined by proper orthogonal decomposition.

<>

## Figures

Figure 1

Computational domain and boundary conditions (left) and mesh detail near the injector (right)

Figure 2

Evolution of tracked liquid volume: R=10 (left) and R=100 (right)

Figure 3

Side view snapshots of jet in crossflow atomization at t=10, 15, 20, 25, and 30 time units (top to bottom), R=10 (left), and R=100 (right)

Figure 4

Front view snapshots of jet in crossflow atomization at t=10, 15, 20, 25, and 30 time units (top to bottom), R=10 (left), and R=100 (right)

Figure 5

Top view snapshots of jet in crossflow atomization at t=10, 15, 20, 25, and 30 time units (top to bottom), R=10 (left), and R=100 (right)

Figure 6

Averaged side view of the liquid jet, R=10 (left) and R=100 (right). Jet penetration is compared with liquid jet penetration correlations due to Wu (12) (upper curve) and Stenzler (30) (lower curve).

Figure 7

Impact of density ratio on liquid probability threshold, 10% (top) and 50% (bottom) for R=10 (left) and R=100 (right)

Figure 8

Impact of density ratio on center of mass (black) and windward and lee side 50% probability isoline in the injector midplane. Symbols are power law fits. R=10 (left) and R=100 (right)

Figure 9

Impact of probability isovalue on windward edge trajectory, isoline (gray line), and fit (dashed). R=10 (left) and R=100 (right)

Figure 10

50% probability surface for R=10 (left) and R=100 (right)

Figure 11

20% probability surface for R=10 (left) and R=100 (right)

Figure 12

Proper orthogonal decomposition for R=10. Shown on the left from top left to bottom right are modes 5, 6, 9, 10, 12, 13, 21, and 23.

Figure 13

Proper orthogonal decomposition for R=10 (bottom) and R=100 (top). Shown on the right are frequency f and phase ϕ.

## 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 Proceedings Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections