Transient heating of a semitransparent spherical body

Sazhin, Sergei; Крутицкий, П. А.; Martynov, Sergey; Mason, David; Heikal, Morgan; Sazhina, Elena

doi:10.1016/j.ijthermalsci.2006.07.007

Cited by 24 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The range of applicability of this assumption has been discussed in [51][52][53][54][55][56][57]. Since ndodecane droplets are semi-transparent we can expect that their radiative heating would take place mainly under their surfaces rather than at their surfaces (see e.g.…”

Section: Hydrodynamic Regionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaporation of droplets into a background gas: Kinetic modelling

Sazhin

Shishkova

Kryukov

et al. 2007

International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Hydrodynamic Regionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaporation of droplets into a background gas: Kinetic modelling

Sazhin

Shishkova

Kryukov

et al. 2007

International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The analysis by these authors was based on the numerical solution of the heat conduction equation inside droplets. An alternative approach was suggested and developed in [8][9][10][11][12][13]. In these papers both finite liquid thermal conductivity and recirculation inside droplets (via the effective thermal conductivity (ETC) model [14]) were taken into account by incorporating the analytical solution to the heat conduction equation inside the droplet into the numerical scheme.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Monodisperse monocomponent fuel droplet heating and evaporation

Kristyadi

Deprédurand

Castanet

et al. 2010

Fuel

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tThe results of numerical and experimental studies of heating and evaporation of monodisperse acetone, ethanol, 3-pentanone, n-heptane, n-decane and n-dodecane droplets in an ambient air of fixed temperature and atmospheric pressure are reported. The numerical model took into account the finite thermal conductivity of droplets and recirculation inside them based on the effective thermal conductivity model and the analytical solution to the heat conduction equation inside droplets. The effects of interaction between droplets are taken into account based on the experimentally determined corrections to Nusselt and Sherwood numbers. It is pointed out that the interactions between droplets lead to noticeable reduction of their heating in the case of ethanol, 3-pentanone, n-heptane, n-decane and n-dodecane droplets, and reduction of their cooling in the case of acetone. Although the trends of experimentally observed droplet temperatures and radii are the same as predicted by the model taking into account the interaction between droplets, the actual values of the predicted droplet temperatures can differ from the observed ones by up to about 8 K, and the actual values of the predicted droplet radii can differ from the observed ones by up to about 2%. It is concluded that the effective thermal conductivity model, based on the analytical solution to the heat conduction equation inside droplets, can predict the observed average temperature of droplets with possible errors not exceeding several K, and observed droplet radii with possible errors not exceeding 2% in most cases. These results allow us to recommend the implementation of this model into CFD codes and to use it for multidimensional modelling of spray heating and evaporation based on these codes.

show abstract

“…The values ofq d at the beginning of each time step are equal to the values oḟ q d at the end of the previous time step or the start of the heating process. Hence, without loss of generality we can assume that t = 0 in Expression (13). The values ofq d predicted by Expression (13) were shown to coincide within the accuracy of plotting with those predicted by Expression (12) using the numerical differentiation of the temperature predicted by Expression (9).…”

Section: Modelmentioning

confidence: 55%

“…One of the reasons for the differences between the predicted results might lie in the fact that both approaches to the calculation of the evaporation rate are based on the quasi-steady-state approximation. The limitations of this approximation for the case of non-evaporating droplet heating were discussed in [13,14].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Two approaches to modelling the heating of evaporating droplets

Sazhin

Qubeissi

Xie

2014

International Communications in Heat and Mass Transfer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Two approaches to modelling the heating of evaporated droplets have been widely used in engineering applications. In the first approach the heat rate supplied to the droplets to raise their temperatures,q d , is derived from the requirement that droplet evaporation rates, inferred from steady-state equations for mass and heat balance, should be the same. The second approach is based on the direct calculation of the distribution of temperature inside droplets assuming that their thermal conductivity is not infinitely large. The implications of these two approaches are compared for the case of stationary droplets in conditions relevant to Diesel engines. It is pointed out that although the trends of time evolution ofq d predicted by both approaches are similar, actual values ofq d predicted by these approaches can be visibly different. This difference can lead to noticeable differences in predicted droplet surface temperatures, radii and evaporation times. Possible reasons for these differences are discussed.

show abstract

Transient heating of a semitransparent spherical body

Cited by 24 publications

References 31 publications

Evaporation of droplets into a background gas: Kinetic modelling

Evaporation of droplets into a background gas: Kinetic modelling

Monodisperse monocomponent fuel droplet heating and evaporation

Two approaches to modelling the heating of evaporating droplets

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About