湍流多分散喷雾流的大涡流模拟:亚网格尺度模型与液滴喷射模型的比较研究

Teng Zhang, Jinghua Li, Yingwen Yan, Yuxin Fan
{"title":"湍流多分散喷雾流的大涡流模拟:亚网格尺度模型与液滴喷射模型的比较研究","authors":"Teng Zhang, Jinghua Li, Yingwen Yan, Yuxin Fan","doi":"10.1115/1.4064760","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n This study performs an investigation of the effects of the subgrid-scale and droplet injection models in the large eddy simulation (LES) of turbulent two-phase spray flows. Three LES subgrid-scale (SGS) models (Smagorinsky, wall-adapting local eddy viscosity, and dynamic Smagorinsky) and two droplet injection models (cone nozzle injection and conditional droplet injection) are validated to the experimental measurements. For both gaseous and liquid phases, all SGS models provide comparable results, indicating that the current two-phase flow field does not exhibit a pronounced sensitivity to the LES SGS model. As for different droplet injection models and spray dispersion angles, minimal differences are observed in the prediction of the gaseous mean and RMS velocity profiles. However, for the result of liquid phase, CDIM (conditional droplet injection model) predictions of the droplet mean diameter and velocity are in better agreement with experiments, and less sensitive to spray dispersion angle settings. While the CNIM (cone nozzle injection model) prediction of droplet diameter is less accurate when increasing the dispersion angle. The study suggests that turbulent two-phase spray flows are more influenced by the spray boundary conditions rather than the LES SGS models.","PeriodicalId":504378,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Fluids Engineering","volume":"147 ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Large Eddy Simulation of a Turbulent Polydisperse Spray Flow: a Comparative Study of Subgrid Scale Models and Droplet Injection Models\",\"authors\":\"Teng Zhang, Jinghua Li, Yingwen Yan, Yuxin Fan\",\"doi\":\"10.1115/1.4064760\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n This study performs an investigation of the effects of the subgrid-scale and droplet injection models in the large eddy simulation (LES) of turbulent two-phase spray flows. Three LES subgrid-scale (SGS) models (Smagorinsky, wall-adapting local eddy viscosity, and dynamic Smagorinsky) and two droplet injection models (cone nozzle injection and conditional droplet injection) are validated to the experimental measurements. For both gaseous and liquid phases, all SGS models provide comparable results, indicating that the current two-phase flow field does not exhibit a pronounced sensitivity to the LES SGS model. As for different droplet injection models and spray dispersion angles, minimal differences are observed in the prediction of the gaseous mean and RMS velocity profiles. However, for the result of liquid phase, CDIM (conditional droplet injection model) predictions of the droplet mean diameter and velocity are in better agreement with experiments, and less sensitive to spray dispersion angle settings. While the CNIM (cone nozzle injection model) prediction of droplet diameter is less accurate when increasing the dispersion angle. The study suggests that turbulent two-phase spray flows are more influenced by the spray boundary conditions rather than the LES SGS models.\",\"PeriodicalId\":504378,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Fluids Engineering\",\"volume\":\"147 \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Fluids Engineering\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4064760\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Fluids Engineering","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4064760","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究调查了子网格尺度模型和液滴喷射模型在湍流两相喷雾流大涡模拟(LES)中的影响。三种 LES 子网格尺度(SGS)模型(斯马戈林斯基模型、壁面适应局部涡流粘度模型和动态斯马戈林斯基模型)和两种液滴喷射模型(锥形喷嘴喷射模型和条件液滴喷射模型)根据实验测量结果进行了验证。对于气相和液相,所有 SGS 模型都提供了可比较的结果,表明当前的两相流场对 LES SGS 模型并不表现出明显的敏感性。对于不同的液滴喷射模型和喷射分散角,气相平均速度和均方根速度曲线的预测结果差异很小。然而,对于液相的结果,CDIM(条件液滴喷射模型)对液滴平均直径和速度的预测与实验的吻合度较高,对喷雾分散角设置的敏感度较低。而 CNIM(锥形喷嘴喷射模型)对液滴直径的预测在增大分散角时准确性较低。研究表明,湍流两相喷雾流受喷雾边界条件的影响比 LES SGS 模型更大。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Large Eddy Simulation of a Turbulent Polydisperse Spray Flow: a Comparative Study of Subgrid Scale Models and Droplet Injection Models
This study performs an investigation of the effects of the subgrid-scale and droplet injection models in the large eddy simulation (LES) of turbulent two-phase spray flows. Three LES subgrid-scale (SGS) models (Smagorinsky, wall-adapting local eddy viscosity, and dynamic Smagorinsky) and two droplet injection models (cone nozzle injection and conditional droplet injection) are validated to the experimental measurements. For both gaseous and liquid phases, all SGS models provide comparable results, indicating that the current two-phase flow field does not exhibit a pronounced sensitivity to the LES SGS model. As for different droplet injection models and spray dispersion angles, minimal differences are observed in the prediction of the gaseous mean and RMS velocity profiles. However, for the result of liquid phase, CDIM (conditional droplet injection model) predictions of the droplet mean diameter and velocity are in better agreement with experiments, and less sensitive to spray dispersion angle settings. While the CNIM (cone nozzle injection model) prediction of droplet diameter is less accurate when increasing the dispersion angle. The study suggests that turbulent two-phase spray flows are more influenced by the spray boundary conditions rather than the LES SGS models.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信