Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-vfjqv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-28T14:17:24.413Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

On shock induced aerobreakup of a wall-attached droplet

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 September 2023

Jianfeng Guo ,
Peng Kang ,
Kai Mu Open the ORCID record for Kai Mu [Opens in a new window] ,
Jianling Li  and
Ting Si Open the ORCID record for Ting Si [Opens in a new window]
Jianfeng Guo
Affiliation:
Department of Modern Mechanics, University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, PR China
Peng Kang
Affiliation:
Department of Modern Mechanics, University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, PR China
Kai Mu*
Affiliation:
Department of Modern Mechanics, University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, PR China
Jianling Li
Affiliation:
School of Power and Energy, Northwestern Polytechnical University, Xi'an 710072, PR China
Ting Si*
Affiliation:
Department of Modern Mechanics, University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, PR China
*
†Email addresses for correspondence: mukai@ustc.edu.cn, tsi@ustc.edu.cn
†Email addresses for correspondence: mukai@ustc.edu.cn, tsi@ustc.edu.cn
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An experimental study on the aerobreakup of a wall-attached droplet induced by a shock wave is carried out in this work. The shock wave and the post-wave air stream are generated by a shock tube facility, and the dynamics of droplet breakup are captured through high-speed imaging from the side, the oblique front and the back views, respectively. The wall-attached droplets with different wettabilities are considered, including the hydrophobic, hemispherical and hydrophilic ones. For the convenience of analysis, droplets with different wettabilities are unified with the same equivalent radius and, thus, the same Weber number and Reynolds number. Different from the evolution of a free spherical droplet, it is observed that the hydrophobic droplet can develop ‘peak’ structures on the windward and leeward sides, respectively; while the hemispherical and hydrophilic droplets leave a liquid film on the wall. The occurrence of ‘peak’ structures is caused by the local standing vortex on the droplet windward and leeward sides, and the residual of a liquid film on a solid wall is related to the boundary layer near the wall. Through comparing the height, width and advancing distance of droplet deformation between the spherical droplet and the wall-attached droplets with different wettabilities, it is found that the wall will inhibit the deformation and fragmentation of droplets on the flow direction. The ‘peak’ and film structures are responsible for the deviation of the dimensionless width between spherical and wall-attached droplets. The ‘lip’ structure is related to the recirculation flow at the rear of the droplet, which causes the reverse of velocity on the surface. The radius of the ‘lip’ decreases with the decrease of contact angle. The Rayleigh–Taylor (R–T) and Kelvin–Helmholtz (K–H) instabilities of wall-attached and spherical droplets are also studied by experiments and theoretical analysis. With the decrease of contact angle, the development of the K–H instability hardly changes, while the R–T instability results in a smaller wavelength of perturbation on the windward side. This study is expected to give some guidance for regulating the aerodynamic fragmentation of droplets in engineering applications.

JFM classification

Drops and Bubbles: Breakup/coalescence Aerodynamics: High-speed flow Compressible Flows: Shock waves
Type
JFM Papers
Information
Journal of Fluid Mechanics , Volume 971 , 25 September 2023 , A31
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ade, S.S., Chandrala, L.D. & Sahu, K.C. 2023 a Size distribution of a drop undergoing breakup at moderate Weber numbers. J. Fluid Mech. 959, A38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ade, S.S., Kirar, P.K., Chandrala, L.D. & Sahu, K.C. 2023 b Droplet size distribution in a swirl airstream using in-line holography technique. J. Fluid Mech. 954, A39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baumgarten, C. 2006 Mixture Formation in Internal Combustion Engines. Springer Science & Business Media.Google Scholar
Dorschner, B., Biasiori-Poulanges, L., Schmidmayer, K., El-Rabii, H. & Colonius, T. 2020 On the formation and recurrent shedding of ligaments in droplet aerobreakup. J. Fluid Mech. 904, A20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eggers, J. & Villermaux, E. 2008 Physics of liquid jets. Rep. Prog. Phys. 71 (3), 036601.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gelfand, B.E. 1996 Droplet breakup phenomena in flows with velocity lag. Prog. Energy Combust. Sci. 22 (3), 201–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guildenbecher, D.R., López-Rivera, C. & Sojka, P.E. 2009 Secondary atomization. Exp. Fluids 46 (3), 371–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harper, E.Y., Grube, G.W. & Chang, I. 1972 On the breakup of accelerating liquid drops. J. Fluid Mech. 52 (3), 565–591.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hinze, J. 1955 Fundamentals of the hydrodynamic mechanism of splitting in dispersion processes. AIChE J. 1 (3), 289–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hooshanginejad, A. & Lee, S. 2017 Droplet depinning in a wake. Phys. Rev. Fluids 2 (3), 031601.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hooshanginejad, A. & Lee, S. 2022 Dynamics of a partially wetting droplet under wind and gravity. Phys. Rev. Fluids 7 (3), 033601.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hsiang, L.P. & Faeth, G.M. 1992 Near-limit drop deformation and secondary breakup. Intl J. Multiphase Flow 18 (5), 635–652.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ibrahim, E.A., Yang, H.Q. & Przekwas, A.J. 1993 Modeling of spray droplets deformation and breakup. J. Propul. Power 9 (4), 651–654.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jackiw, I.M. & Ashgriz, N. 2021 On aerodynamic droplet breakup. J. Fluid Mech. 913, A33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jackiw, I.M. & Ashgriz, N. 2022 Prediction of the droplet size distribution in aerodynamic droplet breakup. J. Fluid Mech. 940, A17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jalaal, M. & Mehravaran, K. 2014 Transient growth of droplet instabilities in a stream. Phys. Fluids 26 (1), 012101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Joseph, D.D., Beavers, G.S. & Funada, T. 2002 Rayleigh–Taylor instability of viscoelastic drops at high Weber numbers. J. Fluid Mech. 453, 109–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Joseph, D.D., Belanger, J. & Beavers, G.S. 1999 Breakup of a liquid drop suddenly exposed to a high-speed airstream. Intl J. Multiphase Flow 25 (6–7), 1263–1303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirar, P.K., Soni, S.K., Kolhe, P.S. & Sahu, K.C. 2022 An experimental investigation of droplet morphology in swirl flow. J. Fluid Mech. 938, A6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kulkarni, V. & Sojka, P.E. 2014 Bag breakup of low viscosity drops in the presence of a continuous air jet. Phys. Fluids 26 (7), 072103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lefebvre, A.H. & McDonell, V.G. 2017 Atomization and Sprays. CRC Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liu, Z. & Reitz, R.D. 1997 An analysis of the distortion and breakup mechanisms of high speed liquid drops. Intl J. Multiphase Flow 23 (4), 631–650.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Luc, B. & Hazem, E. 2019 High-magnification shadowgraphy for the study of drop breakup in a high-speed gas flow. Opt. Lett. 44 (23), 5884–5887.Google Scholar
Marmottant, P. & Villermaux, E. 2004 On spray formation. J. Fluid Mech. 498, 73–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meng, J.C. & Colonius, T. 2015 Numerical simulations of the early stages of high-speed droplet breakup. Shock Waves 25 (4), 399–414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meng, J.C. & Colonius, T. 2018 Numerical simulation of the aerobreakup of a water droplet. J. Fluid Mech. 835, 1108–1135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nicholls, J.A. & Ranger, A.A. 1969 Aerodynamic shattering of liquid drops. AIAA J. 7 (2), 285–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nykteri, G. & Gavaises, M. 2021 Droplet aerobreakup under the shear-induced entrainment regime using a multiscale two-fluid approach. Phys. Rev. Fluids 6 (8), 084304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O'Rourke, P.J. & Amsden, A.A. 1987 The tab method for numerical calculation of spray droplet breakup. Tech. Rep. SAE Technical Paper.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pilch, M. & Erdman, C.A. 1987 Use of breakup time data and velocity history data to predict the maximum size of stable fragments for acceleration-induced breakup of a liquid drop. Intl J. Multiphase Flow 13 (6), 741–757.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Poplavski, S.V., Minakov, A.V., Shebeleva, A.A. & Boyko, V.M. 2020 On the interaction of water droplet with a shock wave: experiment and numerical simulation. Intl J. Multiphase Flow 127, 103273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reitz, R. 1987 Modeling atomization processes in high-pressure vaporizing sprays. Atom. Spray Technol. 3 (4), 309–337.Google Scholar
Roisman, I.V., Criscione, A., Tropea, C., Mandal, D.K. & Amirfazli, A. 2015 Dislodging a sessile drop by a high-Reynolds-number shear flow at subfreezing temperatures. Phys. Rev. E 92 (2), 023007.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schmucker, J.A., Osterhout, J.C. & White, E.B. 2012 Speckle technique for dynamic drop profile measurement on rough surfaces. Exp. Fluids 52 (1), 123–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shen, S., Li, J.L., Liu, J.H., Si, T., Liu, C., Tang, C.L. & Fan, W. 2019 The effect of the Weber number on the droplet deformation and breakup process before a standing wall. Atomiz. Sprays 29 (11), 1005–1025.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simpkins, P.G. & Bales, E.L. 1972 Water-drop response to sudden accelerations. J. Fluid Mech. 55 (4), 629–639.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Soni, S.K., Kirar, P.K., Kolhe, P. & Sahu, K.C. 2020 Deformation and breakup of droplets in an oblique continuous air stream. Intl J. Multiphase Flow 122, 103141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Theofanous, T.G. 2011 Aerobreakup of Newtonian and viscoelastic liquids. Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 43, 661–690.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Theofanous, T.G. & Li, G.J. 2008 On the physics of aerobreakup. Phys. Fluids 20 (5), 052103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Theofanous, T.G., Li, G.J., Dinh, T. & Chang, C.H. 2007 Aerobreakup in disturbed subsonic and supersonic flow fields. J. Fluid Mech. 593, 131–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Theofanous, T.G., Mitkin, V.V., Ng, C.L., Chang, C.H., Deng, X. & Sushchikh, S. 2012 The physics of aerobreakup. II. Viscous liquids. Phys. Fluids 24 (2), 022104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Villermaux, E. 1998 Mixing and spray formation in coaxial jets. J. Propul. Power 14 (5), 807–817.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Villermaux, E. & Bossa, B. 2009 Single-drop fragmentation determines size distribution of raindrops. Nat. Phys. 5 (9), 697–702.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, Z.G., Hopfes, T., Giglmaier, M. & Adams, N.A. 2021 Experimental investigation of shock-induced tandem droplet breakup. Phys. Fluids 33 (1), 012113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
White, E.B. & Schmucker, J.A. 2021 Wind- and gravity-forced drop depinning. Phys. Rev. Fluids 6 (2), 023601.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wierzba, A. 1990 Deformation and breakup of liquid drops in a gas stream at nearly critical Weber numbers. Exp. Fluids 9 (1–2), 59–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Xu, Z.K., Wang, T.Y. & Che, Z.Z. 2020 Droplet deformation and breakup in shear flow of air. Phys. Fluids 32 (5), 052109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhao, H., Liu, H.F., Li, W.F. & Xu, J.L. 2010 Morphological classification of low viscosity drop bag breakup in a continuous air jet stream. Phys. Fluids 22 (11), 114103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Guo et al. Supplementary Movie 1

Movie 1: Deformation process of a hydrophobic droplet captured from three views.

Download Guo et al. Supplementary Movie 1(Video)
Video 3.3 MB

Guo et al. Supplementary Movie 2

Movie 2: Deformation process of a hemispherical droplet captured from three views.

Download Guo et al. Supplementary Movie 2(Video)
Video 2.7 MB

Guo et al. Supplementary Movie 3

Movie 3: Deformation process of a hydrophilic droplet captured from three views.

Download Guo et al. Supplementary Movie 3(Video)
Video 2.3 MB