CFD Assessment of Orifice Aspect Ratio and Mass Flow Ratio on Jet Mixing in Rectangular Ducts
Isothermal CFD analysis was performed on axially opposed rows of jets mixing with cross flow in a rectangular duct. Laterally, the jets' centerlines were aligned with each other on the top and bottom walls. The focus of this study was to characterize the effects of orifice aspect ratio and jet-...
Gespeichert in:
Hauptverfasser: | , , |
---|---|
Format: | Tagungsbericht |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext bestellen |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Isothermal CFD analysis was performed on axially opposed rows of jets mixing with cross flow in a rectangular duct. Laterally, the jets' centerlines were aligned with each other on the top and bottom walls. The focus of this study was to characterize the effects of orifice aspect ratio and jet-to-mainstream mass flow ratio on jet penetration and mixing. Orifice aspect ratios (L/W) of 4-to-1, 2-to-1, and 1-to-1, along with circular holes, were parametrically analyzed. Likewise, jet-to-mainstream mass flow ratios (MR) of 2.0, 0.5, and 0.25 were systematically investigated. The jet-to-mainstream momentum-flux ratio (J) was maintained at 36 for all cases, and the orifice spacing-to-duct height (S/H) was varied until optimum mixing was attained for each configuration. The numerical results showed that orifice aspect ratio (and likewise orifice blockage) had little effect on jet penetration and mixing. Based on mixing characteristics alone, the 4-to-1 slot was comparable to the circular orifice. The 4-to-1 slot has a smaller jet wake which may be advantageous for reducing emissions. However, the axial length of a 4-to-1 slot may be prohibitively long for practical application, especially for MR of 2.0. The jet-to-mainstream mass flow ratio had a more significant effect on jet penetration and mixing. For a 4-to-1 aspect ratio orifice, the design correlating parameter for optimum mixing (C = (S/H)(sq. root J)) varied from 2.25 for a mass flow ratio of 2.0 to 1.5 for a mass flow ratio of 0.25. |
---|