CFD analysis of the effect of nozzle stand-off distance on turbulent impinging jets

Shademan, Mehrdad; Balachandar, Ram; BarronRonald, M

doi:10.1139/cjce-2012-0199

Cited by 15 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The commercial CFD code discretizes Equations 4 and 5 using a finite volume method, where a second order convection scheme was selected in the segregatedflow solver. Two turbulence models were selected for comparison, namely the realizable k-e turbulence model (ReaKEps) and the shear stress transport k-x turbulence model (SST), following a previous study on incompressible impinging air jets (Shademan, Balachandar, and Barron 2013).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This means that the ratio between inertia and viscous forces (Reynolds number) is similar, and therefore previous work may be used for validation and calibration purposes. Poreh, Tsuei, and Cermak (1967) 8 -24 1.11 Â 10 6 -5.00 Â 10 6 Floating element (air) Orifice Kataoka & Mizushina (1974) 3.86-8.24 9.60 Â 10 3 -3.62 Â 10 4 Electro-chemical (water) Convergent Beltaos & Rajaratnam (1974) 21.2-65.7 3.89 Â 10 4 -8.04 Â 10 4 Preston tube (air) Convergent Giralt, Chia, and Trass (1977) 3.0-25.0 3 Â 10 4 -8 Â 10 4 Not determined (air) Convergent Hanson, Robinson, and Temple (1990) 16.5 2.3 Â 10 4 -8.4 Â 10 4 Hot-film sensor (water) Convergent Alekseenko & Markovich (1994) 2 -8 4.16 Â 10 4 Electrochemical (water) Convergent Phares, Smedley, and Flagan (2000) 3 -20 3.7 Â 10 3 -1.15 Â 10 4 Particle resuspension (air) Short pipe Shademan, Balachandar, and Barron (2013) 2 -18.5 1 Â 10 5 RANS Uniform inlet Ghaneeizad, Atkinson, and Bennett (2015) 24.7 2.3 Â 10 4 -3.4 Â 10 4 PIV (water) JET nozzle Shademan et al (2016) 20 2.8 Â 10 4 LES, PIV (water) Convergent RANS, Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes; LES, large eddy simulation; PIV, particle image velocimetry; JET, jet erosion test. Depending on the working fluid, usually air or water, different experimental techniques have been used in the past for determining the tangential component of wall surface forces, ie the wall shear stress (Table 1).…”

Section: Review On Round Immersed Impinging Jetsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Towards an absolute scale for adhesion strength of ship hull microfouling

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In-water ships' hull cleaning enables significant fuel savings through removal of marine fouling from surfaces. However, cleaning may also shorten the lifetime of hull coatings, with a subsequent increase in the colonization and growth rate of fouling organisms. Deleterious effects of cleaning would be minimized by matching cleaning forces to the adhesion strength of the early stages of fouling, or microfouling. Calibrated waterjets are routinely used to compare different coatings in terms of the adhesion strength of microfouling. However, an absolute scale is lacking for translating such results into cleaning forces, which are of interest for the design and operation of hull cleaning devices. This paper discusses how such forces can be determined using computational fluid dynamics. Semi-empirical formulae are derived for forces under immersed waterjets, where the normal and tangential components of wall forces are given as functions of different flow parameters. Nozzle translation speed is identified as a parameter for future research, as this may affect cleaning efficacy.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Review On Round Immersed Impinging Jetsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Towards an absolute scale for adhesion strength of ship hull microfouling

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…1 from Shademan et al 2013). For H/D < 6 it has been found that the core of the jet is still developing on reaching the plate surface (Nishino et al 1996;Hadziabdic and Hanjalic 2008).…”

mentioning

confidence: 98%

“…For H/D < 6 it has been found that the core of the jet is still developing on reaching the plate surface (Nishino et al 1996;Hadziabdic and Hanjalic 2008). For larger impingement heights (H/D > 8), Rajaratnam (1974, 1977) Shademan et al 2013). As a result, each region has specific characteristics and the objective of the study was to best capture the features in all the regions with a single turbulence model.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Reply to Discussion by Duarte et al. of “CFD analysis of the effect of nozzle stand-off distance on turbulent impinging jets”

2014

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The authors would like to thank the discussants for their interesting suggestions. The discussants have carried out experiments on impinging jets and have compared their results with the CFD results presented in the paper. In addition, discussants have also presented a solution for the differences observed between the CFD and experimental results in the core portion of the jet.The discussants' experiment includes measurements on impinging water jets with a 72 mm diameter (D) circular nozzle and a stand-off distance of H/D = 9.58. Issuance velocities ranged from 5 to 22 m/s. The discussants have also questioned the use of Reynolds Stress Model (RSM) for modeling the turbulence in the paper. Herein, the reasons for choosing this turbulence model in our simulations are explained.Based on the H/D ratio, different regimes occur in the flow field of impinging jets ( Fig. 1 from Shademan et al. 2013). For H/D < 6 it has been found that the core of the jet is still developing on reaching the plate surface (Nishino et al. 1996;Hadziabdic and Hanjalic 2008). For larger impingement heights (H/D > 8), Rajaratnam (1974, 1977) The purpose of the paper was also to identify some of the issues and difficulties associated with previously used turbulence models in solving turbulent flow in impinging jets.Numerical simulation of a circular impinging jet using RANS simulations has been of interest to many researchers. As a result, these simulations formed part of the 2nd ERCOFTAC-IAHR Workshop on Refined Flow Modelling in 1993. Later, Craft et al. (1993) published their research on impinging jets using different turbulence models. They reported that due to the weakness associated with the eddy viscosity stress-strain relationship in the turbulence models, the results were not in good agreement with the available experimental data. Similar issues were reported by Cooper et al. (1993), who reported that the k-model over-predicts the turbulent kinetic energy near the stagnation point.To sort out the issues reported by previous researchers in modeling impinging jets, different turbulence models were implemented in the current study. Models that take into account the low-Re effects in the flow were selected. In addition, the selected models take into consideration the anisotropic nature of the turbulent viscosity, which is ignored during Reynolds averaging. The Realizable k-model (Shih et al. 1995), the k-SST (Shear Stress Transport) model (Menter 1994), and the Reynolds Stress Model (RSM) (Launder et al. 1975) were implemented in the simulations.Each of the commonly used turbulence models has some advantages and disadvantages. Considering that RSM is a fully anisotropic turbulence model, which solves the transport equations for all three fluctuating velocity components, the issues resulting from applying the Boussinesq approximation is removed. Basically, the strength of this model compared to the Boussinesq based turbulence models is its capability in producing the fluctuating velocity components in the results. The other reason fo...

show abstract