1992
DOI: 10.1016/0017-9310(92)90186-v
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Numerical analysis of convecting, vaporizing fuel droplet with variable properties

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

7
75
0

Year Published

1994
1994
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
3
2

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 189 publications
(82 citation statements)
references
References 11 publications
7
75
0
Order By: Relevance
“…[18][19][20] In these studies, however, the main interest was the change of the drag force due to the Marangoni effect in the presence of a strong convective flow. Furthermore, many simplifying assumptions employed in these studies, such as quasi-steadiness, 18 quiescent liquid, 19 or vorticity-stream function formulation, 19,20 along with the existence of strong forced convective flow limit the understanding of thermo-capillary flow effect and the mechanism of vapor jet ejection. Considering the difficulties in detailed experimental measurements, high-fidelity computational modeling is well suited to investigate the physical mechanism for these phenomena.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[18][19][20] In these studies, however, the main interest was the change of the drag force due to the Marangoni effect in the presence of a strong convective flow. Furthermore, many simplifying assumptions employed in these studies, such as quasi-steadiness, 18 quiescent liquid, 19 or vorticity-stream function formulation, 19,20 along with the existence of strong forced convective flow limit the understanding of thermo-capillary flow effect and the mechanism of vapor jet ejection. Considering the difficulties in detailed experimental measurements, high-fidelity computational modeling is well suited to investigate the physical mechanism for these phenomena.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For the specific types of droplet flows to be considered in this research, the Lagrangian appears to be better suited for the three following reasons: 1) it avoids the numerical cell diffusion associated with Eulerian treatments, 2) it conveniently allows multiple droplet size and velocity distributions, and 3) it allows for use of a stochastic eddy dispersion treatment (Solomon, et al, 1985). A drag 4-9 coefficient formulation can be implemented to handle the entire slip Reynolds number regime and possibly take into account the slip boundary condition (Faeth, 1987;Chiang, et al 1989). Droplet evaporation, gravitational acceleration, Magnus effects, and Saffman lift can be readily included in such a formulation.…”
Section: Proposed Computer Methodologymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The unit cell length is 1.25 μm in this domain. The ratios of the unit cell length and the droplet initial diameters are less than the value of the grid independent solution in [15].Therefore, the effect of grid number on numerical results can be ignored. The time step is Δ t=0.5 μs which is less than the droplet characteristic time .…”
Section: Modeling Processmentioning
confidence: 99%