Journal of Electrostatics 105 (2020) 103446

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Electrostatics
journal homepage: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/elstat

Analysis of electrohydrodynamic air flow induced by DC corona field in

wire-to-plane electrode system
Povilas Mar�ciulionis
Kaunas University of Technology, Department of Electric Power Systems, Kaunas, LT, 51367, Lithuania

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Method of the electrohydrodynamic (EHD) air flow induced by DC corona field calculation is proposed.
Electrohydrodynamic air flow Computation based upon the finite-element method is performed using Comsol Multiphysics commercial pro­
Spatial force gram. EHD air flow velocities field distribution in inter-electrode space is presented. Two-dimensional numerical
Corona discharge
model for computation of the air flow induced by corona field in wire-to-plane electrode system is presented.
Numerical simulation
Electric field
Results have been obtained using mathematical model and compared with experimental ones. Results analyses
Finite element method consist of EHD flow distribution in inter electrode space and integrated total flow dependence from corona
electrode voltage. Comparison of corona discharge electric and air flow mechanic powers is presented.

1. Introduction complicated geometry [17–19].

Direct current corona discharge causes ion movement from one
electrode to another and ions collides to neutral air molecules produces
electrohydrodynamic air flow movement. Charged particles mainly
moves along electric field lines, but neutral particles moves together
with air flow. Corona discharge is used in many technology applications
to control movement of particles and it is vitally to know not only
electric field or charge but also air flow velocity distributions in inter
electrode space. The main applications of such technology are electro­
static precipitators [1], gas pump [2,3], drying and evaporation of ma­
terials [4].
The most popular electrode systems in research papers of corona
discharge electric field and electrohydrodynamic air flow are wire to
plane [1,5,6], needle-ring [7,8], needle to plane [9].
The given electrohydrodynamic air flow results from the papers are
varied from established approximated dependences [7], flow patterns or
streamlines [10,11], setting approximated values [12], experimental
and numerical comparisons of ion wind velocities from corona current
or power [2,3,13], numerical visualization of air flow [14] to experi­
mental visualization by using smoke [15]. Approximated analytical
calculations or commercial programs based on finite element method
are used most of the authors to calculate electrohydrodynamic air flow
and only few of them are made by finite difference method [16]. The
more detailed analyses are made with three-dimensional (3D) compu­
tational models. In these cases, 3D helps to evaluate turbulent gas flow,
moving objects in corona field or to compute air flow distribution in
Literature review has revealed that it is lack of full electro­
hydrodynamic air flow distribution analysis in inter electrode space. It is
needed to analyze how air flow character changes with growing voltage
of the corona. This paper is devoted to fulfill it. A simple mathematical
model is presented in this article that does not require large computing
resources and can be performed with conventional computers. This
model consists with fewer equations in compare with more complicated
models [13,20], because the charge is not divided into electrons and
ions. There are given several unrelated evidence on the accuracy of the
model. The article focuses on analyses the main properties of the corona
discharge electrohydrodynamic air flow in compare with other articles
with a focus on analyzing the impact of EHD on other phenomena such
as heat transfer coefficient or other [13,20].
In addition, the approximate analytical calculations showed that
only 1.4% of electric field energy goes into directed gas motion and
more than 95% goes to gas heating [21]. Analytical model consists of
averaged sizes and underestimates viscosity, friction and other effects
and therefore is inaccurate. This paper fills numerical proof of which
part of electric energy goes to air flow mechanic energy and provides a
more accurate assessment.
2. Forces acting on fluid
The first step of the EHD analysis is DC corona electric field
computation and it was described in the paper [22]. This step is essential
because it determines distribution of electric field strength and space

E-mail addresses: povilas.marciulionis@ktu.lt, ovilas.marciulionis@ktu.lt.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.elstat.2020.103446
Received 11 September 2019; Received in revised form 27 January 2020; Accepted 25 February 2020
Available online 4 April 2020
0304-3886/© 2020 Published by Elsevier B.V.
P. Mar�ciulionis Journal of Electrostatics 105 (2020) 103446

charge density which product is the Coulomb force that leads to the
occurrence of the electrohydrodynamic flow near the corona discharge
electrodes.
Electrohydrodynamic air flow analysis is for stationary regime in this
paper. The fluid is incompressible and air density is equal in all space so
there gravity force is not involved. EHD fluid flow is isothermal and
isobaric process and has uniform temperature and pressure. Coulomb
force is only one active force which acts on fluid molecules in corona
discharge electric field. It is equal to the current density divided by
mobility of ions:
!
! J
F¼ : (1)
μ

Where J is current density, μ – mobility of ions. Current density consists

of convection, drift and diffusion current densities and dependency is
obtained regarding:
! ! Fig. 1. Wire-to-plane electrode system configuration.
J ¼ ρðμ E þ !
wÞ Drρ; (2) Where ρair is air density, p – pressure, υ – viscosity and T – temperature.

where ρ is space charge density, E – electric field strength, w – air flow

velocity, D is diffusion coefficient:
κB T μ
D¼ ; (3)
e0

where κB is the Boltzmann constant, T is the absolute temperature and e0

– electron charge.
The current density equation takes form:
! !
J ¼ ρðμ E þ !
wÞ Drρ (4)
All currents densities values are calculated with electric and EHD
fluid flow coupled equations and analysis showed that convection cur­
rent is greater than drift current about 105 times near the surface of wire
to 102 times in the rest of space. Convection current density is greater
about 104 times near the surface of wire to 105 times in all space than
diffusion current density. The difference of Coulomb force modules are
the same according the 1 equation.
Electric field strength is a potential gradient and Coulomb force
projections to x and y axes are equal to: Fig. 2. Volume force distribution in wire-to-plane electrode system at 10
kV voltage.
ρwx ∂V κB T ∂ρ
Fx ¼ ρ (5)
μ ∂x e0 ∂x
Although small amount of power remains in all inter electrode space
ρwy ∂V κB T ∂ρ but it has negligible influence to electrohydrodynamic air flow distri­
Fy ¼ ρ (6) bution or velocity magnitude.
μ ∂y e0 ∂y
Coulomb force is slightly depended from the ambient temperature 3. Computational mesh
from 2 to 3 equations. Calculations are performed at normal air tem­
perature T ¼ 293 K with neglected Joule heating effect. It must be Wire to plane electrode system computational mesh is shown in
noticed that diffusion current force is negligible compare with drift Fig. 3. Maximum mesh size in all space is 10 3 m. The finer mesh is near
current force. It has slightly influence only near corona electrode – wire, the wire and near the flat electrode. It is essential to have finer mesh
where the greatest gradient of space charge density is. Wire to plane where electric field, space charge density, Coulomb force and air flow
electrode system configuration is shown in Fig. 1. Where h is wire height velocity have large variation of values. Maximum mesh size near the
above the plane equal to 0.012 m, r0 the wire radius 0.00005 m, l is wire is 10 6 m and near the flat electrode is 10 4 m.
computational area length 0.1 m. Electric field, Coulomb force and air flow velocity in all space
The Coulomb force calculation model is taken from article [22]. changes slightly and to avoid computational errors here computational
Iteration process is not used. Computed space charge density values at mesh was chosen large-scale in comparison with mesh size near the
corona electrode surface are taken. All calculations are done only with electrodes.
Comsol Multiphysics program. The difference between these boundaries was made because of
Computed DC corona electric field Coulomb force distribution in electric force distribution is very uneven, shown in Fig. 2. The Coulomb
space at 10 kV voltage is shown in Fig. 2. Red vectors show force force has the highest values near the wire and decreasing very rapidly in
magnitude and direction, colouring represent force magnitude. From small space. Therefore it is essential to have small grid around the wire
Fig. 2 it is clear that corona field force is acting in small space between to have accurate results. The force is negligible and uniform near the
electrodes, approximately in h � h square. Distribution of the force is outward boundaries and there is no need to have small grid except
very heterogeneous. The greatest value achieves in point A (Fig. 1) at the boundary near the plane electrode, where EHD flow velocity changes
lowest point of the wire. Coulomb force in A and B points acts in sharply. The air flow velocity has large variation near the wire and the
different directions. plane electrode surfaces.

2
P. Mar�ciulionis Journal of Electrostatics 105 (2020) 103446

Fig. 4. Coulomb force (N/m3) and EHD air flow (m/s) maximum values versus
applied voltage.

capacity or processor capability when solving 2D CFD module. Com­

puter properties are 3.1 GHz dual core processor and 4 GB RAM. To have
more memory for finer grid it is used out of core memory possibility.
Boundary conditions for electric field and space charge density cal­
Fig. 3. Wire-to-plane electrode system computational mesh. culations are widely described in article [22]. The force acting on fluid
in every calculation point is Coulomb force. Boundary conditions for
Analysis of EHD air flow velocity was made with wire to plane computation of EHD air flow are: surfaces of wire and plane electrode
electrode system 0.06 � 0.06 m computational area length. After anal­ are non-slip surfaces – wx ¼ 0 and wy ¼ 0, flow does not cross the
ysis with different computational area length it was noticed that when symmetry line – wx ¼ 0. Dashed line in Fig. 1 designates open boundary
length was 0.1 m differences between maximum air flow velocity results condition which means that on this boundary aren’t acting forces or
is about 1%. Analysis of mesh size showed that with two times larger pressure. Initial air flow values are equal to zero. Computational fluid –
grid results difference between maximum air flow velocity values is few air is taken as incompressible, uniform standard room temperature (T ¼
percent, with 25% finer grid difference less than one percent. The 293 K), homogeneous density (ρ¼1.204 kg/m3) and homogeneous ki­
greater difference of air flow velocities is obtained near the plane elec­ nematic viscosity (υ ¼ 1.506⋅10 6 m2/s).
trode at the large grid. Electrohydrodynamic air flow and Coulomb force maximum values
taken from calculation area are shown in Fig. 4. Coulomb force reaches
4. Electrohydrodynamic air flow maximum in point A (Fig. 1), EHD flow reaches maximum a little bit
below the wire (Fig. 5). Both sizes gain maximum values when they are
Electrohydrodynamic air flow distribution is calculated using oriented mainly in the -y axis (Fig. 1). It could be noticed from Figs. 2
Navier-Stokes and fluid continuity equations. Expression of these and 5. Normalized arrow field is presented in Figs. 5 and 6 for better
equations when the fluid temperature, pressure and density are constant visualization of air flow velocities distribution, due to very heteroge­
[23]: neous values in the computed area.
The Coulomb force grows exponential with the growing voltage.
∂wx ∂wx ∂wx EHD flow grow character is different. The change of air flow velocity is
þ wx þ wy ¼ Fx þ υr2 wx ; (7)
∂t ∂x ∂y less because of increased air friction between fluid molecules. Electro­
hydrodynamic air flow distribution between electrodes when different
∂wy ∂wy ∂wy
þ wy þ wy ¼ Fy þ υr2 wy ; (8) values of voltage are applied is shown in Fig. 5.
∂t ∂y ∂x
It could be noticed from Fig. 5 that air flow distribution character is
∂wx ∂wy the same but with rising velocity air flow circulation circle is expanding
þ ¼ 0: (9) compared to low-voltage cases. Maximum values in y direction reaches
∂x ∂y
below the wire and maximum values to x direction reaches above the
Where Fx and Fy are Coulomb force spatial projections, wx and wy – air plane approximately in distance h from the symmetry line.
flow velocity to x and y directions, υ – kinematic viscosity coefficient.
Coulomb force is calculated with Comsol Multiphysics program [24]. 5. Drift current estimation
Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) module of the same program is
chosen to ensure compatibility to calculate EHD flow. Solution is made To evaluate drift current the charge conservation equation used in
by single phase laminar flow regime despite that EHD flow is turbulent corona discharge field calculation takes form:
in nature. To ensure stability of solution because of Coulomb force has ! !
r ⋅ J ¼ r ⋅ ðρðμ E þ !
wÞ DrρÞ ¼ 0 (10)
strongly heterogeneous distribution in space is selected isotropic diffu­
sion tuning parameter δid to 0.95, also pseudo time stepping is used. Assessing the divergence and Poisson’s equation, equation (10) ac­
Pseudo time stepping local CFL number (Courant–Friedrichs–Lewy quires the following form:
number which is used for pseudo time stepping) is changed from default !
value to have smoother solution without fluctuations. Maximum num­ w ρ D ρ2
rρrV rρ r⋅!
w þ r2 ρ ¼ (11)
ber of iterations is changed to 100 to obtain convergence of the solution. μ μ μ εr ε0
The number of CFL can be changed with different mesh or voltage values This equation for computations in two-dimensional space takes the
to find a suitable to solve the problem. following form:
Comsol Multiphysics program does not require huge memory

3
P. Mar�ciulionis Journal of Electrostatics 105 (2020) 103446

Fig. 5. Air flow (m/s) distribution between electrodes at different voltage values with normalized arrow field.

Fig. 6. Air flow (m/s) distribution between electrodes with and without drift current estimated with normalized arrow field.

� � � �
∂ρ ∂V ∂ρ ∂V ∂ρ wx ∂ρ wy ∂wx ∂wy ρ D ∂2 ρ ∂2 ρ ρ2 corona electrode calculated with iterative mechanism in MATLAB
þ
∂x ∂x ∂y ∂y ∂x μ ∂y μ ∂x
þ
∂y
þ
μ μ ∂x ∂y
2
þ 2 ¼
εr ε0 without drift current are taken. Comparison of influence was made at 10
(12) kV because of all physical sizes acquires the maximum values. It should
be emphasized that when electric field and EHD equations are calculated
eq. (12) and Poisson’s equation are used to calculate electric field with evaluated drift current it is hard to find a right combination of CFL
strength and space charge distribution in inter electrode space. The number to achieve a solution convergence. Air flow distribution is
boundary conditions remain unchanged. The space charge values at the shown in Fig. 6. Space charge density distribution between electrodes is

4
P. Mar�ciulionis Journal of Electrostatics 105 (2020) 103446

Fig. 7. Electric charge density (C/m3) distribution between electrodes with and without drift current estimated.

shown in Fig. 7.
Differences between electric field strength at the corona electrode
with and without estimated drift currents are 0.5%, maximum velocity
values – 1.59%. Coulomb force component – convection force has the
most influence to the EHD distribution.
The drift current has very little influence to air flow velocity values
and distribution. It only has influence to the smallest value of space
charge density in computational area.

6. Model verification and analysis

The mechanical and electrical corona discharge energies can be

compared and amount of power passed from electric to mechanic
valued. Fluid flow energy stored in volume is equal to:

mw2
E ¼ mgh þ (13)
2
Fig. 8. Negative corona electric field and air flow powers versus
where E – fluid energy, m – fluid mass, h – fluid height above the ground, applied voltage.
g – gravity of the Earth, w is fluid velocity. The first component of the
equation is potential, second is kinetic energy. Because of small space of
the computational area we can neglect potential energy looses. Fluid
movement comes from energy of DC corona electric field. It is accepted
that fluid thermal energy is constant.
Fluid mass that crosses the established surface can be expressed as
Z Z
m ¼ ρ⋅V ¼ ρ⋅t wdS ¼ ρ⋅t⋅l wdx; (14)

where V is volume, S – established surface, t – time, l – distance equal to

1 m, x – coordinate.
Power depends on energy: P ¼ E=t. After evaluating all the as­ Fig. 9. Experimental setup for measure EHD air flow velocity in wire-to-plane
sumptions discussed earlier, the EHD flow power can be expressed as: electrode system.
Z
ρ⋅l
P¼ w3 dx (15) S surface of the wire. The results of electric power are taken from
2
computations of DC corona field in paper [20].
EHD air flow power computation is defined air flow wy integration The results of negative corona and EHD air flow powers at different
that crosses through line C (Fig. 1) and is perpendicular to that line. The voltage values are given in Fig. 8. Although character of the curves is the
line length is set such that involves all air flow which goes down. It could same, we can see that from total electric field power less than 0.09%
be noticed in Fig. 5. It is one of the ways to take all amount of circulating turns into EHD air flow power.
air. To calculate all EHD power value must be multiplied by two because Model experimental verification is made with measurement of EHD
of we were computed only one half of the space and computed power for air flow velocities with hot wire anemometer (HWA). Experimental
1 m of wire length is equal to: setup is shown in Fig. 9. Hot wire anemometer sensor situated 60 mm
Z form axis of symmetry to avoid as much as possible its influence to
P ¼ ρ w3y dx (16) corona electric field and to air flow distribution.Where 1 – corona
electrode – wire, 2 – grounded plate, 3 – hot wire anemometer. 4 – HWA
Corona electric field power for 1 m of wire length is equal to: sensor hole is shown in right of Fig. 9.
Z Experimental and numerical results are given in Fig. 10. There is
P ¼ UI ¼ U JdS: (17) problem to verify numerical results very precisely. HWA measures only
average air velocity, also it distorts all air flow with its sensor, because
Where U – voltage between corona electrodes, I is current of corona field sensor has limited hole. EHD air flow concentrates to flow though it from
electrode system 1 m length, J current density at the surface of the wire, the bottom, from the sides and from the top and air flow velocity get

5
P. Mar�ciulionis
Fig. 10. Experimental and numerical EHD flow values versus applied voltage.
considerably higher than in unperturbed field.
Numerical values of EHD flow are taken in point 60 mm from axis of
symmetry and 4 mm above the plane, at the middle point of HWA
sensor. From Fig. 10 we can see coincidence of curves character, angle
between x axis and curves is the same at all values of voltage, although
difference of the values is about 12%. With drift current evaluated the
difference of the values is 6.6% at the same voltage.
7. Conclusions
2-D numerical model to compute DC corona field EHD air flow in
wire to plane electrode system is suggested. The numerical calculations
are based on finite element method. Method to stabilize computation is
proposed for calculations air flow distribution of DC corona discharge
with Comsol Multiphysics program, because of very heterogeneous
Coulomb force field distribution is acting on fluid.
Volume force distribution in inter electrode space is introduced. The
comparison of maximum volume force acting on fluid and fluid velocity
values is given. Dependence differs because of friction force is acting on
air flow molecules.
Air flow analysis is based on comparison EHD air flow mechanic and
DC corona field electric powers. The method to perform it is proposed.
Results analysis showed that less than one percent of electric power goes
to EHD air flow mechanic power. EHD air flow mechanic power and DC
corona field electric power curves characters overlaps very well.
Analysis with drift current evaluated in corona discharge electric
field system showed that EHD flow maximum velocity value varies only
1.59% from calculated value without evaluated drift current at 10 kV
applied voltage. Air flow distribution is the same, but air flow near the
plane electrode slightly moves down toward plane electrode.
Experimental verification is made with hot wire anemometer. The
mismatch between the experimental and numerical results is about 12%,
reasons of this are given. The mismatch between results is two times
lower when the drift current is evaluated, although maximum difference
Journal of Electrostatics 105 (2020) 103446
between computed values of EHD flow is only few percent.
References
[1] K. Adamiak, Numerical models in simulating wire-plate electrostatic precipitators:
a review, J. Electrost. 71 (2013) 673–680.
[2] B. Komeili, J.S. Chang, G.D. Harvel, C.Y. Ching, D. Brocilo, Flow characteristics of
wire-rod type electrohydrodynamic gas pump under negative corona operations,
J. Electrost. 66 (2008), 342 – 253.
[3] V.T. Dau, T.X. Dinh, T.T. Biu, C.D. Tran, H.T. Phan, T. Terebessy, Corona based air-
flow using parallel discharge electrodes, Exp. Therm. Fluid Sci. 79 (2016) 52–53.
[4] E.D. Fylladitakis, M.P. Theodoridis, A.X. Moronis, Review on the history, research,
and applications of electrohydrodynamics, IEEE Trans. Plasma Sci. 42 (2) (2014)
358–372.
[5] J. Podlinski, J. Dekowski, J. Mizeraczyk, D. Brocilo, J.S. Chang,
Electrohydrodynamic gas flow in a positive polarity wire-plate electrostatic
precipitator and the related dust particle collection efficiency, J. Electrost. 64
(2006) 259–262.
[6] J.S. Chang, H. Tsubone, Y.N. Chung, A.A. Berezin, K. Urashima, Mechanism of
electrohydrodynamically induced flow in a wire-non-parallel plate electrode type
gas pump, J. Electrost. 67 (2009) 335–339.
[7] A.M. Drews, L. Cademartiri, G.M. Whitesides, K.J.M. Bishop, Electric winds driven
by time oscilating corona discharges, J. Appl. Phys. 114 (2013). P. 143302-143311
– 143302-143306.
[8] M. Rickard, D. Dunn-Rankin, F. Weinberg, F. Carleton, Characterization of ionic
wind velocity, J. Electrost. 63 (2005) 711–716.
[9] J.C. Wang, D. Zhang, N. Leoni, H. Birecki, O. Gila, M.J. Kushner, Charging of
moving surfaces by corona discharges sustained in air, J. Appl. Phys. 116 (2014). P.
043301-1 – 043301-11.
[10] M. Ghazanchaei, K. Adamiak, G.S.P. Castle, Predicted flow characteristics of a
wire-nonparallel plate type electrohydrodynamic gas pump using the Finite
Element Method, J. Electrost. 73 (2015) 103–111.
[11] L. Zhao, K. Adamiak, Numerical Simulation of the electrohydrodynamic flow in a
single wire-plate electrostatic precipitator, IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl. 44 (3) (2008)
683–691.
[12] J.E. Jones, On corona-induced gas motion and heating I: field equations, modeling
and vortex formation, J. Electrost. 66 (2008) 84–93.
[13] J.C. Mateo-Velez, P. Degond, F. Rogier, A. Seraudie, F. Thivet, Modelling wire-to-
wire corona discharge action on aerodynamics and comparison with experiment,
J. Phys. D Appl. Phys. 41 (2008) 1–11.
[14] A.A. Martins, M.J. Pinheiro, Modeling of an EHD corona flow in nitrogen gas using
an asymmetric capacitor for propulsion, J. Electrost. 69 (2011) 133–138.
[15] S. Shimamoto, S. Kanazawa, T. Ohkubo, Y. Nomoto, J. Mizeraczyk, J.S. Chang,
Flow visualization and current distributions for a corona radical shower reactor,
J. Electrost. 61 (2004) 223–230.
[16] J. Gudzinskas, P. Mar�ciulionis, S. Zebrauskas,
� Computation of electric wind
parameters in direct current corona field, Electron. Electr. Eng. Kaunas: Technol. 4
(110) (2011) 3–6.
[17] N. Farnoosh, K. Adamiak, G.S.P. Castle, 3-D numerical analysis of EHD turbulent
flow and mono-disperse charged particle transport and collection in a wire-plate
ESP, J. Electrost. 68 (2010) 513–522.
[18] N. Toljic, K. Adamiak, G.S.P. Castle, H.H. Kuo, H.T. Fan, 3D numerical model of the
electrostatic coating process with moving objects using a moving mesh,
J. Electrost. 70 (2012) 499–504.
[19] M. Tanski, M. Kocik, J. Mizeraczyk, Electrohydrodynamic gas pump with both
insulated electrodes driven by dielectric barrier discharge, IEEE Trans. Dielectr.
Electr. Insul. 18 (5) (2011) 1429–1432.
[20] A.R. Mahmoudi, F. Pourfayaz, A. Kasaeian, A simplified model for estimating heat
transfer coefficient in a chamber with electrohydrodynamic effect (corona wind),
J. Electrost. 93 (2018) 125–136.
[21] M. Goldman, A. Goldman, R.S. Sigmond, The corona discharge, its properties and
specific uses, Pure Appl. Chem. 57 (9) (1985) 1353–1362.
[22] P. Mar�ciulionis, Analysis of space charge distribution in dc corona discharge field
computed with finite element method, IEEE Trans. Plasma Sci. 45 (7) (2017)
1698–1703.
[23] H. Lomax, T.H. Pulliam, D.W. Zingg, Fundamentals of Computational Fluid
Dynamics, University of Toronto Institute for Aerospace Studies, Toronto, 1999,
p. 267p.
[24] CFD Module User’s Guide, Comsol Inc., Burlington, MA, USA, 2013.