2013
DOI: 10.1137/110845434
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Subsonic to Supersonic Nozzle Flows

Abstract: Abstract. Steady, irrotational flow of a compressible fluid through a two-dimensional planar and axisymmetric nozzle is formulated and solved numerically in the hodograph or velocity plane. The Legendre potential is used to express the governing equation which for planar flow is linear and for axisymmetric flow nonlinear. The hodograph transformation method is extended to solve the nozzle problem for supersonic flow. A rectangular numerical domain for the supersonic case results from the way the information tr… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

0
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(1 citation statement)
references
References 10 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…As the aerosol exit orifice is sharp-edged, at high mass gas flows the sonic gas velocity constraints of choke flow are not met and supersonic gas flow, i.e. Mach number >1, was evident (Kryeziu 2013) in all the nozzles used herein at both 275 kPa (40 psi) and 414 kPa (60 Psi). Using exit orifices smaller than 400 μm in diameter an axial fluid jet centered within a high velocity gas jet as depicted in Figure 3 was similar to that reported by Ganan-Calvo (2005) and Gañán-Calvo and Montanero (2009).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…As the aerosol exit orifice is sharp-edged, at high mass gas flows the sonic gas velocity constraints of choke flow are not met and supersonic gas flow, i.e. Mach number >1, was evident (Kryeziu 2013) in all the nozzles used herein at both 275 kPa (40 psi) and 414 kPa (60 Psi). Using exit orifices smaller than 400 μm in diameter an axial fluid jet centered within a high velocity gas jet as depicted in Figure 3 was similar to that reported by Ganan-Calvo (2005) and Gañán-Calvo and Montanero (2009).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 98%