Original article

Textile Research Journal

2015, Vol. 85(15) 1590–1601

Numerical simulation of the internal flow ! The Author(s) 2015

Reprints and permissions:
sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
field of a new main nozzle in an air-jet DOI: 10.1177/0040517515569522
trj.sagepub.com
loom based on Fluent

Liang Chen, Zhi-hua Feng, Teng-zhong Dong, Wei-hua Wang

and Shuai Liu

Abstract
In order to decrease the turbulence influence and the backflow during weft insertion in an air-jet loom, a new main
nozzle composed of two nozzle needles connected in series is designed. The internal flow fields of the commonly used
nozzle and the new nozzle are numerically studied by means of a three-dimensional model implemented by the com-
putational fluid dynamics technique. It is observed that the turbulence strength is effectively controlled with different air
supply pressures and the backflow phenomenon at the upstream passage generated by high supply pressures can be
eliminated when the supply pressure is reasonably distributed into two inlets of the new nozzle. The drag force exerted
on the weft yarn is calculated when the velocity distribution of the internal airflow is obtained, and results show that the
drag force can be improved. Also, the numerical simulation can give some guidelines for future prototyping and
experiments.

Keywords
air-jet loom, main nozzle, flow field, Fluent

The main nozzle is a key component in the weft inser-
tion system of an air-jet loom; it works as an ejector,
sucking the weft yarn and driving it through the warp
shed. It is the first step for the weft yarn to be sucked
into the main nozzle. Therefore, the performance of the
internal airflow, especially the centerline airflow, will
directly influence the efficiency of an air-jet loom and
the quality of the fabric. The airflow varies under dif-
ferent air supply pressures, which may cause a stronger
turbulence area and generate backflow phenomenon.
Studies on the research and optimization of the main
nozzle have been intermittently dealt with over the past
few decades. Xue et al.1 and Liang et al.2 studied the
internal flow field of the main nozzle by use of compu-
tational fluid dynamics (CFD) softwares; they obtained
the velocity distribution of the airflow along the axial
and radial direction, and observed the turbulence and
backflow phenomena. Belforte et al.3 also carried out a
numerical simulation to determine which physical
model could predict a better behavior of the main
nozzle, and they also discussed the influence on the
drag force arising from the acceleration tube length,
the shape, and the size. Zhu and Zhou4 analyzed the
structure, the velocity, and the static pressure charac-
teristics of the airflow inside the main nozzle. Mohamed
and Salam5 and Salama et al.6 researched nozzles with
various geometries and the corresponding weft inser-
tion behaviors through the tubes both in experiment
and theory. They also dispose the influence of air
supply pressure and the presence of a yarn tube on
the performance of the main nozzle. Recently, more
attention has been paid to the flow field analysis and
structural optimization of the weft insertion system by
our research group at Soochow University. Concretely,
Yuan7 built up a two-dimensional flow field model, and
simulated the flow field of weft insertion by the change
School of Mechanical and Electric Engineering, Soochow University, China
Corresponding author:
Zhi-hua Feng, School of Mechanical and Electric Engineering, Soochow
University, 178 East Ganjiang Road, Suzhou, 215021, China.
Email: zhfeng@suda.edu.cn

Downloaded from trj.sagepub.com at WESTERN OREGON UNIVERSITY on June 6, 2015

Chen et al.
of parameters, such as the diameters, throat sectional
areas, acceleration tube lengths of the main nozzle, and
air supply pressures. Guo8 modeled a three-dimen-
sional flow field, and investigated the main nozzles
with different numbers of slots, diameters of the holes
for weft insertion, distances between the outlet of the
needle and the slots and the air supply pressures. The
advantage of different parameter combinations for the
structure of the main nozzle and the air supply pres-
sures was also analyzed. Lu9 provided a method to
control the velocity and pressure of the outlet of the
main nozzle by changing the throat area of the main
nozzle. Xu et al.10 combined the numerical simulation
of the airflow velocity and the density with the experi-
mental test of the drag force to obtain the friction coef-
ficients of different weft yarns. Dong et al.11 arrived at
the conclusion that the numerical simulation results for
the flow field obtained by Fluent software are in good
agreement with those obtained experimentally.
In this paper, a new main nozzle composed of two
nozzle needles connected in series is designed to address
the need to control the turbulence strength and to elim-
inate the backflow phenomenon. The three-dimensional
Figure 1. Configuration of the structure of the commonly used main nozzle.
Figure 2. Internal flow passage of the commonly used main nozzle.
Downloaded from trj.sagepub.com at WESTERN OREGON UNIVERSITY on June 6, 2015
1591
models of the internal flow fields of the commonly used
nozzle and the new nozzle are built up by use of the
three-dimensional software named Unigraphics NX
8.5. Then the models are meshed by the professional
meshing software named ICEM CFD. Finally, the
numerical simulation is carried out using Fluent. In
order to evaluate the internal airflow performance,
the drag force exerted on the weft is calculated. It is
observed that the performance of the internal airflow of
the new nozzle is optimized compared with that of the
commonly used nozzle. Naturally, these numerical
simulation results can give some guidelines for future
prototyping and experiments.
Structures and flow field models
of the main nozzles
The commonly used main nozzle
Structure of the commonly used main nozzle. Figure 1
shows the structure of a commonly used nozzle. The
nozzle is composed of a body (1), a needle (2), a cylin-
der (3) and an acceleration tube (4). Figure 2 shows the
1592
Figure 3. Three-dimensional model and boundary condition of the flow field of the commonly used main nozzle.
Figure 4. Finite element model of the flow field of the
commonly used main nozzle.
internal flow passage of the commonly used nozzle. The
compressed air flows from air supply inlet (A) into the
chamber (B) of the body. The air is rectified and accel-
erated when it flows through the polar array of slots (C)
on the nozzle needle and the cone-shaped interior pas-
sage (D) of the cylinder; the velocity reaches its max-
imum at the needle tip (E), which generates a negative
pressure area to cause the yarn to be sucked into the
interior flow passage (F) of the needle. When the air
passes away from the needle tip, a strong flow expan-
sion occurs, and the air flow is accelerated in the inter-
ior passage (G) of the acceleration tube.
Flow field model of the commonly used main nozzle. Figure 3
shows the three-dimensional model and the boundary
condition of the flow field of the nozzle. The external
flow fields were added to the inlet and outlet of the
nozzle. The ejection flow of the outlet is cone-shaped,
in order to mesh the model more easily and decrease the
number of the elements; the model of the ejection flow
field of the outlet is cylinder-shaped in steps, including
the actual ejection flow. Figure 4 shows the finite elem-
ent model of the flow field of the nozzle. There
are about 1,134,149 elements and 972,828 nodes.
Downloaded from trj.sagepub.com at WESTERN OREGON UNIVERSITY on June 6, 2015
Textile Research Journal 85(15)
Figure 5, obtained by the use of Fluent, shows the
velocity distribution of the centerline of internal airflow
under different air supply pressures of the commonly
used main nozzle. Figure 6, obtained by the use of
Fluent, shows the velocity contour under 0.2 MPa air
supply pressure of the symmetric surface of the internal
flow field of the commonly used nozzle.
A new main nozzle
Structure of the new main nozzle. In Figure 5, one can find
that there is a strong turbulence area at point ‘‘S2’’, and
when the air supply pressure is 0.3 MPa or more, back-
flow exists in the internal upstream passage of the
commonly used nozzle. Obviously, such phenomena
are harmful for the weft yarn insertion. In order to
overcome such shortcomings, a new main nozzle is
designed and is shown in Figure 7. This nozzle consists
of a body1 (1), a needle1 (2), two cylinders (3), a body2
(4), a needle2 (5) and an acceleration tube (6). The
length of the two needles and the acceleration tube is
the same as that of the commonly used nozzle. Figure 8
shows the internal flow passage of the new nozzle. The
compressed air flows from inlet2 (G) into the chamber2
(H). The air gets rectified and accelerated, and then
rises to the maximum velocity when the air flows
through slots (I), the cone-shaped interior passage (J)
and gets to the needle tip2 (K) in the new nozzle. When
the air passes away from the needle tip2, there is a
negative pressure area and a strong turbulence area;
thus, a strong flow expansion occurs. The compressed
air flows from inlet1 (B) into the chamber1 (C). Just like
the airflow described above, the air gets rectified and
accelerated, and then arrives at the maximum velocity
when the air flows through slots (D), the cone-shaped
interior passage (E) and gets to the needle tip1 (F) in
Chen et al. 1593

Figure 5. Velocity distribution of the centerline of internal airflow under different air supply pressures of the commonly used main
nozzle.

Figure 6. Velocity contour under 0.2 MPa air supply pressure of the symmetric surface of the internal flow field of the commonly
used nozzle.

the new nozzle; when the air passes away from the needle
tip1, there is also a negative pressure area and a strong
turbulence area, and a flow expansion also occurs. After
the air flows into the nozzle needle2, the interior flow
passage (L) works as an acceleration area. After the air
from inlet1 and inlet2 meets, the mixed air will be accel-
erated in the interior passage (M) of the acceleration
tube, and the weft yarn is sucked into interior flow
passage (A) of the needle1. Since the air supply pressures
in inlet1 and inlet2 are adjustable, different airflow can
be obtained. Thus, different pressure distribution can be
chosen to obtain a suitable airflow to meet the different
needs of the manufacturing process.
Flow field model of the new main nozzle. Figure 9 shows the
three-dimensional model and the boundary condition

Downloaded from trj.sagepub.com at WESTERN OREGON UNIVERSITY on June 6, 2015

1594 Textile Research Journal 85(15)

Figure 7. Configuration of the structure of the new main nozzle.

Figure 8. Internal flow passage of the new main nozzle.

Figure 9. Three-dimensional model and boundary condition of the flow field of the new main nozzle.

of the flow field of the new nozzle. The flow field of the Numerical simulation of two main nozzles
new nozzle is disposed like that of the commonly used
Simulation setting
nozzle. Figure 10 shows the finite element model of the
flow field of the new nozzle. There are about 754,895 To implement the simulation, some assumptions are
elements and 546,606 nodes. made as given below:

Downloaded from trj.sagepub.com at WESTERN OREGON UNIVERSITY on June 6, 2015

Chen et al.
Figure 10. Finite element model of the flow field of the new
main nozzle.
Table 1. Air velocity at the inlet under different air supply
pressures
Air supply pressure (MPa) 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
Air velocity (m/s) 47.52 71.20 97.37 124.10 150.80
1. the air is assumed to comply with ideal gas law;
2. the air viscosity is calculated as a function of abso-
lute temperature T, that is,  ¼ 0  ðT=T0 Þ2=3 , where
l0 and T0 are air viscosity and temperature under
standard conditions respectively;
3. the outlet static pressure is specified as atmosphere
pressure.
The k-e model is a semi-empirical model developed
for high-Reynolds-number flow; there are three vari-
ants (standard, RNG and Realizable). The RNG k-e
model can deal with the flow with high strain rate
and higher curvature degree.
Due to the variation of the airflow at the wall, turbu-
lent stress almost has no effect on the airflow, especially
at the viscous sublayer. Fluent provides three different
wall treatments: standard wall function; non-equili-
brium wall function; and enhanced wall treatment.
Standard wall function is employed to deal with the
airflow at the wall.
The airflow flux under different air supply pressures
can be obtained by use of the flow sensor. Therefore,
the air velocity at the inlet under different air supply
pressures can be calculated as shown in Table 1. Thus,
some parameters, such as static pressure Ps, turbulence
kinetic energy k, and turbulent dissipation rate e, can
also be obtained. Air supply pressures in the table are
relative pressures.
Simulation profile
The airflow is different due to the air supply pressure
distributions of inlet1 and inlet2 in the new main
nozzle. Air supply pressures are summarized in
Downloaded from trj.sagepub.com at WESTERN OREGON UNIVERSITY on June 6, 2015
1595
Table 2. Air supply pressures for the commonly used main
nozzle
Simulation type Air supply pressure (MPa)
A-1 0.1
A-2 0.2
A-3 0.3
A-4 0.4
A-5 0.5
Tables 2 and 3 for the commonly used main nozzle
and the new main nozzle, respectively.
Simulation results
The numerical simulation is classified according to the
total supply pressure into groups, as shown in Table 4.
Figure 11 shows the comparison among different
conditions under 0.1 MPa total supply pressure.
From the figure, one can find that type ‘‘I-1’’ possesses
a better performance, the turbulence strength in the
downstream area at point ‘‘S2’’ in all types of the new
main nozzle is controlled better than that of the com-
monly used main nozzle, and the maximum backflow
velocity caused by the strong turbulence area in the
downstream area at point ‘‘S2’’ of the commonly used
main nozzle and the new main nozzle is about 108 and
46 m/s, respectively, which implies that the new nozzle
is suitable for the weft insertion. The velocity increases
at the internal flow passage before point ‘‘S1’’ because
of the cone-shaped internal passage. There is not a
stronger turbulence area in the types ‘‘B-1’’ and
‘‘C-1’’, in which the fact of velocity drop is due to the
increase of the cross-section area of the airflow passage.
However, there is also a velocity drop area in the down-
stream area at point ‘‘S3’’ in the new main nozzle; for
types ‘‘B-1’’ and ‘‘C-1’’, it is due to the strong turbu-
lence area, whereas for other types it is due to the
increase of the cross-section area of the airflow passage.
In addition, the fact that inlet2 is free to the atmosphere
in type ‘‘H-1’’ also contributes to the velocity drop in
such a degree. Generally speaking, the airflow in the
types where an inlet is closed plays better than that of
the types where an inlet is free, because when an inlet is
free, the internal airflow is obviously influenced by the
atmosphere through the inlet.
Figure 12 shows the comparison among different
types under 0.2 MPa total supply pressure. As with
the types under 0.1 MPa total supply pressure, the vel-
ocity increases in the upstream area at point ‘‘S1’’, and
also drops down in the downstream areas at points
‘‘S2’’ and ‘‘S3’’. The airflow in types ‘‘C-2’’ and ‘‘I-2’’
plays better than that of other types. The maximum
backflow velocity caused by the strong turbulence
1596 Textile Research Journal 85(15)

Table 3. Air supply pressures for the new main nozzle Table 4. Simulation classification

Air supply pressure (MPa) Total supply pressure (MPa) Simulation type

Simulation type Inlet 1 Inlet 2 0.1 A-1

0.1 B-1
B-1 Free 0.1
0.1 C-1
B-2 Free 0.2
0.1 H-1
B-3 Free 0.3
0.1 I-1
B-4 Free 0.4
0.2 A-2
B-5 Free 0.5
0.2 B-2
C-1 Closed 0.1
0.2 C-2
C-2 Closed 0.2
0.2 D-1
C-3 Closed 0.3
0.2 H-2
C-4 Closed 0.4
0.2 I-2
C-5 Closed 0.5
0.3 A-3
D-1 0.1 0.1
0.3 B-3
D-2 0.1 0.2
0.3 C-3
D-3 0.1 0.3
0.3 D-2
D-4 0.1 0.4
0.3 E-1
E-1 0.2 0.1
0.3 H-3
E-2 0.2 0.2
0.3 I-3
E-3 0.2 0.3
0.4 A-4
F-1 0.3 0.1
0.4 B-4
F-2 0.3 0.2
0.4 C-4
G-1 0.4 0.1
0.4 D-3
H-1 0.1 Free
0.4 E-2
H-2 0.2 Free
0.4 F-1
H-3 0.3 Free
0.4 H-4
H-4 0.4 Free
0.4 I-4
H-5 0.5 Free
0.5 A-5
I-1 0.1 Closed
0.5 B-5
I-2 0.2 Closed
0.5 C-5
I-3 0.3 Closed
0.5 D-4
I-4 0.4 Closed
0.5 E-3
I-5 0.5 Closed
0.5 F-2
Note: Free indicates that the inlet is exposed to the atmosphere, and 0.5 G-1
Closed indicates that the inlet is treated as wall.
0.5 H-5
area in the downstream area at point ‘‘S2’’ of the com- 0.5 I-5
monly used main nozzle and the new main nozzle is
about 173 and 97 m/s, respectively. However, because
the air is distributed into two inlets in type ‘‘D-1’’, the
influence of the strong turbulence area is lower than as the types with 0.1 and 0.2 MPa total supply pres-
other ones; the backflow velocity in the downstream sures, the air velocity increases in the upstream area at
area at point ‘‘S2’’ is only about 52 m/s, and drops in point ‘‘S1’’. However, there still exists a backflow phe-
the downstream areas at points ‘‘S2’’ and ‘‘S3’’ due to nomenon in the whole upstream area at point ‘‘S2’’ in
the combination result of the increase of cross-section the commonly used main nozzle. However, there is not
area and strong turbulence area. The difference between a similar phenomenon in types ‘‘E-1’’, ‘‘H-3’’, and
type ‘‘D-1’’ and other types in the new main nozzle ‘‘I-3’’. The maximum backflow velocity caused by the
shows that the air distribution may improve the inter- strong turbulence area in the downstream area at point
nal air performance at the strong turbulence area. ‘‘S2’’ of the commonly used main nozzle and the new
Figure 13 shows the comparison among different main nozzle is about 282 and 133 m/s, respectively.
conditions under 0.3 MPa total supply pressure. Just There are two air distribution methods (Types ‘‘E-1’’

Downloaded from trj.sagepub.com at WESTERN OREGON UNIVERSITY on June 6, 2015

Chen et al. 1597

Figure 11. Comparison among different conditions under 0.1 MPa total supply pressure.

Figure 12. Comparison among different conditions under 0.2 MPa total supply pressure.

Downloaded from trj.sagepub.com at WESTERN OREGON UNIVERSITY on June 6, 2015

1598
Figure 13. Comparison among different conditions under 0.3 MPa total supply pressure.
and ‘‘D-2’’), and the airflow in type ‘‘E-1’’ plays better
than that in type ‘‘D-2’’ because the internal flow pas-
sage in needle2 works as an acceleration area, and the
accelerated airflow can decrease the turbulence strength
in the downstream area at point ‘‘S3’’. Thus, this shows
that the preferred airflow may be obtained only in a
proper air distribution method.
Figure 14 shows the comparison among different
conditions under 0.4 MPa total supply pressure. As
the air supply pressure increases, the backflow phenom-
enon is more serious, which does not happen in types
‘‘C-4’’, ‘‘H-4’’, and ‘‘I-4’’. There are three air distribu-
tion methods (Types ‘‘D-3’’, ‘‘E-2’’, and ‘‘F-1’’): the
airflow in type ‘‘F-1’’ plays better than that in type
‘‘E-2’’ and the airflow in type ‘‘E-2’’ plays better than
that in type ‘‘D-3’’. This is similar to the types under 0.3
MPa total supply pressure. As the air supply pressure
of inlet1 is much higher than that of inlet2, the airflow
may play much better, because the compressed air with
0.4 MPa supply pressure distributed to inlet1 does not
generate a stronger turbulence area to obviously influ-
ence the airflow in the whole upstream area at point
‘‘S2’’, and to seriously influence the airflow in the down-
stream area at point ‘‘S2’’. The maximum backflow vel-
ocity caused by the strong turbulence area in the
downstream area at point ‘‘S2’’ of the commonly used
nozzle and the new nozzle are about 409 and 245 m/s,
respectively. However, the maximum backflow velocity
in some types of the new nozzle is about 151 m/s, except
type ‘‘D-3’’.
Downloaded from trj.sagepub.com at WESTERN OREGON UNIVERSITY on June 6, 2015
Textile Research Journal 85(15)
Figure 15 shows the comparison among different con-
ditions under 0.5 MPa total supply pressure. The max-
imum backflow velocity caused by the strong turbulence
area in the downstream area at point ‘‘S2’’ of the com-
monly used nozzle and the new nozzle are about 400
and 370 m/s, respectively, whereas the maximum back-
flow velocity in some types of the new nozzle is about
185 m/s, except types ‘‘B-5’’, ‘‘D-4’’, and ‘‘E-3’’.
Furthermore, there is no backflow phenomenon in the
upstream area at point ‘‘S1’’ in types ‘‘H-5’’ and ‘‘I-5’’.
The airflow in type ‘‘F-2’’ plays better than that in type
‘‘E-3’’, and the airflow in type ‘‘E-3’’ plays better than
that in type ‘‘D-4’’, which is similar to that in the types
with 0.4 MPa air supply pressure. However, the airflow in
type ‘‘G-1’’ is not better than that in type ‘‘F-2’’, because
the air supply pressure distributed to inlet1 has already
generated a stronger turbulence area, which influences the
airflow in the downstream area at point ‘‘S2’’.
Drag force evaluation
In order to evaluate the internal airflow performance,
the drag force exerted on the weft is calculated. The
drag force Fdl exerted on one element of the weft
yarn is defined as
1
Fdl ¼ Cf  dðv  uÞ2 dl ð1Þ
2
Chen et al. 1599

Figure 14. Comparison among different conditions under 0.4 MPa total supply pressure.

Figure 15. Comparison among different conditions under 0.5 MPa total supply pressure.

Downloaded from trj.sagepub.com at WESTERN OREGON UNIVERSITY on June 6, 2015

1600 Textile Research Journal 85(15)

Table 5. Drag force of the new nozzle and commonly used

nozzle under different total air supply pressures

Drag force
per meter
Figure 16. A model of an element connected by two points. (N/m)
Simulation Air supply
type pressure (Mpa) U¼0 U ¼ 80
where Cf is the friction coefficient between air and the A-1 0.1 14,010 3261
weft yarn element, d is the diameter of the weft yarn, 
H-1 0.1 17,183 4840
is air density, v is air velocity, u is weft yarn velocity,
I-1 0.1 21,989 7189
and dl is the length of the element.
Physical parameters on a series of points, such as  A-2 0.2 25,481 8768
and v, can be obtained from numerical simulation. C-2 0.2 33,440 13,077
Figure 16 shows a model of an element connected by H-2 0.2 32,334 13,177
two points. I-2 0.2 42,160 18,495
p is a constant, and d is a constant for a kind of weft A-3 0.3 32,923 10,085
in theory. Although Cf varies with the relative velocity C-3 0.3 40,483 15,611
between the air velocity and the weft yarn velocity, it E-1 0.3 38,178 16,017
only has a small influence on the final drag force H-3 0.3 43,408 19,021
according to Guo and Chen.12 Therefore, Cf is treated I-3 0.3 56,876 25,728
as a constant. In order to simplify the evaluation, it is A-4 0.4 37,208 6234
reasonable to treat Cf, p and d as 1, and the drag force
C-4 0.4 40,649 16,930
exerted on an element is defined as
E-2 0.4 40,463 15,772
0 1 F-1 0.4 47,548 19,110
Fdl ¼ ðv  uÞ2 dl ð2Þ H-4 0.4 30,583 11,447
2
I-4 0.4 41,458 17,510
Physical parameters of the element, such as  and v, A-5 0.5 42,060 4918
are disposed as C-5 0.5 46,036 18,927
E-3 0.5 36,118 8283
 ¼ 12 ða þ b Þ, v ¼ 12 ðva þ vb Þ ð3Þ F-2 0.5 51,662 19,571
G-1 0.5 33,019 10,674
In order to compare the air performance of the new H-5 0.5 32,508 10,685
nozzle with that of the commonly used nozzle fully, two I-5 0.5 47,583 20,053
kinds of flying status of weft yarn are taken into
consideration:
to compare with those of the commonly used nozzle
1. u ¼ 0, which means one side of the weft yarn is fixed; in Table 5. Considering Equation (1), it is observed
and that the air density  and the air velocity v are the
2. u ¼ 80 m/s, which means the weft yarn maintains key factors increasing the drag force, whereas the air
normal flying status. velocity v plays a more important role. As a conse-
quence, when the air supply pressure is less than 0.3
A series of drag forces exerted on the weft elements MPa, the air velocity grows faster and so does the
can be obtained, considering that the length of the new drag force; however, when the air supply pressure is
nozzle is longer than that of the commonly used nozzle; more than 0.3 MPa, the air velocity varies towards a
therefore, total drag force can be defined as gentle gradient, and the air density grows faster, which
X results in the drag force increasing more gently. When
0
F¼ Fdl =l ð4Þ the drag forces in different types under different air
supply pressures are compared with each other, it is
where l is the total length of the main nozzle. Drag observed that a stronger turbulence area, which
force F of the new main nozzle and commonly used causes generation of the backflow phenomenon in the
nozzle under different total supply pressure is shown upstream area at point ‘‘S2’’, is generated under high air
in Table 5. supply pressure; it obviously influences the increase of
In order to describe the advantages of the new the total drag force. It also indicates that when the air is
nozzle, some better and special situations are chosen distributed reasonably into two inlets of the new nozzle,

Downloaded from trj.sagepub.com at WESTERN OREGON UNIVERSITY on June 6, 2015

Chen et al.
a better airflow performance can be obtained; different
performance can be obtained due to different air
distribution.
Conclusions
In this paper, a new main nozzle composed of two nee-
dles connected in series is designed, and the internal
airflow field is simulated. Compared with that of the
commonly used nozzle, one can conclude the following.
1. When the air supply pressure is more than 0.3 MPa,
there exists a backflow phenomenon in the upstream
area at point ‘‘S1’’, both in the commonly used main
nozzle and the new main nozzle. However, when the
air is distributed reasonably, the turbulence strength
can be effectively controlled under different air
supply pressures, and the backflow phenomenon
generated by high air supply pressure can be elimi-
nated. Thus, when the air is distributed reasonably, a
preferred airflow performance can be obtained.
2. Although the air supply pressure increases, the back-
flow in the upstream area at point ‘‘S2’’ can influence
the increase of the total drag force.
3. In the new main nozzle, the internal flow passage of
the needle2 works as an acceleration area, and it
plays an important role in the internal airflow per-
formance. Thus, the higher the air supply pressure of
inlet1 compared with that of inlet2 is, the better the
internal airflow plays when the air supply pressure of
inlet1 is less than 0.4 MPa. However, the strong tur-
bulence area generated by high air supply pressure
may also influence the airflow performance in the
downstream area at point ‘‘S2’’.
4. Although there exists the backflow phenomenon in
the upstream area at point ‘‘S2’’, a better airflow
performance may also be obtained when the back-
flow is too weak to influence the airflow
performance.
Funding
This work was supported by the Priority Academic Program
Development of Jiangsu Higher Education Institutions.
Downloaded from trj.sagepub.com at WESTERN OREGON UNIVERSITY on June 6, 2015
1601
References
1. Xue W-L, Wei M-Y, Chen G, et al. Numerical simulation
of flow field in main nozzle of air-jet loom (in Chinese).
J Text Res China 2010; 31: 124–127.
2. Liang H-S, Wang G-C, Shen D-F, et al. Analysis of flow
field inside of main nozzle in air-jet loom. J Xi’an
Polytech Univ China 2009; 23: 188–195.
3. Belforate G, Mattiazzo G, Viktorov V, et al. Numerical
model of an air-jet loom main nozzle for drag forces
evaluation. Text Res J 2009; 79: 1664–1669.
4. Zhu Z-C and Zhou Y-C. Characteristics of air flow in
internal passage of main nozzle of ZA air-jet loom (in
Chinese). Cotton Text Technol China 1993; 21: 157–160.
5. Mohamed MH and Salama M. Mechanics of a single
nozzle air-jet filling insertion system part I: nozzle
design and performance. Text Res J 1986; 56: 683–690.
6. Salama M, Adanur S and Mohamed MH. Mechanics of a
single nozzle air-jet filling insertion system part III: Yarn
Insertion through Tubes. Text Res J 1987; 57: 44–54.
7. Yuan D-X. Analysis on the flow field of main nozzle of air-
jet looms for weft insertion (in Chinese). China: Soochow
University, 2007Master’s Thesis.
8. Guo J. 3-D simulation and analysis of weft insertion flow
of main nozzle in an air-jet loom (in Chinese). China:
Soochow University, 2009Master’s Thesis.
9. Lu X-F. Optimization of local structure and analysis of
jetting performance of main nozzle in an air-jet loom (in
Chinese). China: Soochow University, 2011Master’s
Thesis.
10. Xu C-Q, Feng Z-H, Dong T-Z, et al. Relationship
between friction coefficients of weft yarns and velocity
of air-flow in main nozzle during weft insertion (in
Chinese). J Text Res China 2013; 34: 147–152.
11. Dong T-Z, Feng Z-H, Wang W-H, et al. Numerical simu-
lation and experimental verification of weft insertion flow
field of main nozzle in an air-jet loom (in Chinese). J Text
Res China 2014; 35: 126–131.
12. Guo X-F and Chen Q-H. The calculation and analysis for
main nozzle’s drafting force on air jet loom (in Chinese).
J Text Res China 2001; 24: 156–158.