27.02.2014 Views

INAUGURAL–DISSERTATION zur Erlangung der Doktorwürde der ...

INAUGURAL–DISSERTATION zur Erlangung der Doktorwürde der ...

INAUGURAL–DISSERTATION zur Erlangung der Doktorwürde der ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

2.1. State of the Art 13<br />

the governing equations for the gas phase include appropriate source terms to compute<br />

the effects of droplets.<br />

The other important SF method for modeling sprays is the CFM, which employs<br />

a continuum formulation of the conservation equations for both phases [81, 82]. The<br />

motion of both droplets and gas are treated as interpenetrating continua. The work of<br />

Faeth [72] gives an extensive review of all the Euler – Lagrangian models.<br />

The Euler – Lagrangian approach is so far consi<strong>der</strong>ed to be effective in many applications,<br />

which gives detailed information at the micro-level, however it has significant<br />

drawbacks as listed by Archambault [67]. For instance, inclusion of droplet–droplet<br />

interactions such as coalescence and breakup, which occur quite frequently in spray<br />

flows, increases the computational complexity. The computational cost could be very<br />

expensive due to the large number of droplets needed to reach the statistical convergence,<br />

and it may pose difficulties and numerical instabilities in coupling of Lagrangian<br />

description of dispersed phase with the Eulerian equations of the gas phase. The computational<br />

cost is also dependent on mass loading of the dispersed phase. According<br />

to Archambault [67], the vertices of the droplet trajectory and numerical grid of the<br />

gas phase never coincide, hence a sub-grid model is required in or<strong>der</strong> to compute the<br />

exchange rate between the phases [83]. Grid independent solutions are quite difficult to<br />

obtain [84], which could be because of an insufficient number of droplets in a grid cell<br />

leading to a significant error as can be observed in the regions of high droplet number<br />

density.<br />

The study of Garcia et al. [85] and Riber et al. [86] describe and analyze the<br />

comparison of computational time between Euler – Euler and Euler – Lagrangian in<br />

homogeneous and non-homogeneous flows.<br />

There is a tremendous amount of literature available on the Eulerian – Lagrangian<br />

approaches in spray flows and spray drying [76, 87–93], and references therein. As the<br />

focus of the current work is about Euler – Euler approach to spray flows, this section<br />

presents the review of available literature in this area.<br />

A numerous Eulerian models have been recently developed where the disperse phase<br />

described based on a kinetic equation and continuum phase is resolved using Navier–<br />

Stokes equations. The basic idea in kinetic equation based Eulerian methods is that<br />

instead of solving the usual Euler equations for the dispersed phase, the evolution of the<br />

moment transform of the kinetic equation is solved, which resembles Navier – Stokes -<br />

like equation, and this equation is coupled to the continuum phase with the appropriate<br />

source terms. Such a kinetic equation is first <strong>der</strong>ived by Williams [42], known as<br />

Williams’ spray equation which is analogous to Boltzmann’s equation of molecules [94,<br />

95]. The <strong>der</strong>ivation of Williams’ spray equation is given by Archambault [67] and<br />

Ramakrishna [41]. This equation describes the temporal evolution of the probable

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!