Downloaded from https://iranpaper.

ir
https://www.tarjomano.com https://www.tarjomano.com

Journal of Energy Storage 48 (2022) 104021

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Energy Storage

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/est

Atomization mass transfer in two-phase nozzle flow employing numerical

and experimental analyses for a solar energy storage system
Zhiqi Wang a, Meimei Han a, Zhengfei Zhu b, Yu Jiang c, e, *, Lin Jiang d
a
Institute of Mechanical Engineering, Xiangtan University, Xiangtan 411105, China
b
School of Mechanical Engineering, Xi’an Jiaotong University, Xi’an 710000, China
c
School of Mechanical and Automative Engineering, Qingdao University of Technology, Qingdao 266520, China
d
Longyan Tobacco Industry Co. LTD, Longyan 364021, China
e
Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Opole University of Technology, 45-758 Opole, Poland

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

Keywords: Clean energy provides great benefits for manufacturing 4.0. When applying a phase-change material (PCM)-
Phase-change material based solar energy storage system to tobacco flavoring machines for the purpose of energy saving and emission
Eco-machine design reduction, it is crucial to investigate the nozzle atomization mass transfer inside the machines to properly design
Atomization mass transfer
the energy storage parameters. However, it is always difficult/impossible to directly measure the atomization
Two-phase flow
mass flow due to limited confined space inside the machines. The simulation technology can visualize the nozzle
atomization; but most existing simulation researches on the nozzle atomization characteristics ignore the effect
of the nozzle velocity at outlet and the atomization cone angle. In order to address this issue, in this work the
Fluent computation technique is used to simulate the atomization mass in the two-phase flow of the nozzle, and
the atomization characteristics of the nozzle is analyzed under different injection pressures allowed by the
flavoring machine. Then, contour experiment is carried out to verify the simulation model. The verification
results show that when the compressed air pressure is less than 0.5 bar, the atomization cone angle is larger; and
the cone angle decreases when the pressure is above 0.7 bar By comparing the simulation and experiment results,
the atomization cone angle can be modified to determine the atomization boundary conditions, which will
provide the theoretical basis for the PCM-energy storage system design.

1. Introduction
Clean energy, including solar energy, wind energy, geothermal en­
ergy, and hydrogen energy, have been introduced into manufacturing
sector to increase energy efficiency and reduce environment pollution
during manufacturing processes [1–4]. One of the most exciting appli­
cations of clean energy is to adopt the solar energy storage for tobacco
production lines. Currently, in constructing the next-generation tobacco
production line, the solar energy has been adopted to design and pro­
duce the tobacco machines. The phase-change material (PCM)-based
solar energy storage system is used to provide thermal power for the
tobacco flavoring machines. One the one hand, the solar thermal energy
comes from sun light; the natural solar heat is very suitable to remove
harmful germs and stink smell in the tobacco leaves, which often per­
forms better than traditional electric heat. One the other hand, the solar
thermal energy can generate electric to compensate the power
consumption of the tobacco production lines [5,6]. However, the PCM
energy storage volume must match the energy consumption requirement
of the flavoring machines to ensure energy utilizing efficiency, and the
PCM parameters are mainly determined by the nozzle atomization
characteristics. Therefore, it is crucial to investigate the nozzle atomi­
zation mass transfer inside the flavoring machines to properly design the
PCM parameters.
Up to today, many scholars have investigated the nozzle atomization
characteristics. The structure of the atomizing nozzle, such as the
roughness of nozzle hole wall [7], the control valve [8], the internal
structure of the mixed-flow nozzle [9], the structure optimization [10],
and the mass and heat transport [11–18], significantly influences the
atomization characteristics. In order to investigate the atomization
characteristics, the simulation methods [19–23], experimental methods
[24–27] and hybrid methods [27–29] are commonly used technologies.
In terms of simulation, Yu et al. [30] used the multi-scale method to

* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: wangzhiqi@xtu.edu.cn (Z. Wang), zhengfeizhu@stu.xjtu.edu.cn (Z. Zhu), jiangyu@cumt.edu.cn (Y. Jiang), jl22876@fjtic.cn (L. Jiang).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.est.2022.104021
Received 25 October 2021; Received in revised form 5 January 2022; Accepted 9 January 2022
Available online 22 January 2022
2352-152X/© 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 Downloaded from https://iranpaper.ir
Z. Wang et al.
Fig. 1. Schematic diagram of flavoring process.
Fig. 2. Calculation model of the nozzle.
simulate the atomization process of a pressure swirling nozzle, and ob­
tained the distribution rules of the droplet velocity, average diameter
and concentration. The analysis results showed that the relative error
between the experimental and simulated average droplet diameter was
less than 21.4%. Zhang et al. [31] studied the atomization characteris­
tics of a coaxial blast atomizer through numerical simulation and
analyzed the influence of the pressure rise on the atomization. Wang
et al. [32] established a multi-objective optimization model for a
self-oscillating atomizing nozzle based on computational fluid dynamics
(CFD). The NSGA-II and gray theory were, respectively used to optimize
the spray parameters, and the volume fraction of the turbulent kinetic
energy at the nozzle outlet increased by 28.26% and 5.56%. In terms of
experiment, Mohammadi et al. [33] simulated the atomization charac­
teristics, and designed a two-phase test platform to study the influence of
the operating parameters such as gas phase pressure and liquid flow rate
on atomization characteristics. The experimental results were in good
agreement with the simulation results. Nihasigaye et al. [34] used Fluent
to simulate the injection process of the FT (Fischer-Tropsch) fuel in a
pressure cyclone atomizer, and verified the simulation results by
measuring the spray characteristics of the FT fuel in an experimental
device. Yu et al. [35] studied the internal flow patterns and spray
characteristics of a single-hole elliptical sprayer under different back
pressures by combining numerical simulation and spray experiment.
The results showed that the dovetail spray structure occurred in the
long-axis view plane. Zhang et al. [36] analyzed the spray characteristics
of the biodiesel in a swirling atomizing nozzle through simulation and
experiment tests, and found that the particle size of the droplet first
decreased and then increased with the droplet movement. Wang [37]
built a two-fluid nozzle atomization system to study the influence of
different parameters on the particle size and droplet distribution. A
prediction model of the atomized particle size was established and the
values calculated by the model fitted well with the actual values. Zhang
[38] studied the atomization characteristics of a typical centrifugal
nozzle and the influence of different parameters on the atomization cone
2
https://www.tarjomano.com https://www.tarjomano.com
Journal of Energy Storage 48 (2022) 104021
angle through a combination of numerical simulation, experimental test
and theoretical analysis, and the results showed that the atomization
cone angle first increased and then decreased with the increase of
pressure. In terms of hybrid methods, Miao et al. [39] simulated the
two-phase flow in the nozzle and designed a two-dimensional trans­
parent slit nozzle to study the spray characteristics of the aviation
kerosene under conditions of supercooling and superheating. The results
showed that the bubble burst occurred at the edge of the jet, which
narrowed the liquid core of the fuel jet, widened the spray distribution
and enhanced the atomization. Zhang et al. [40] set up an experimental
platform in a constant volume room, and obtained atomization distri­
bution maps of the liquid and gas phases of six-component fuel under the
subcritical, trans- and supercritical conditions through backlighting and
schlieren imaging technology. Cui et al. [41] designed a micropore
measurement system based on double fiber Bragg grating (FBG) probe to
measure the internal flow of the transparent nozzle, and the results
showed that small differences in geometric structure would also affect
the cavitation flow. Wu et al. [42] designed a two-dimensional trans­
parent slit nozzle to study the flow in the nozzle under different over­
heating conditions and revealed the primary crushing process of rapid
boiling spray.
Although these existing researches suggest that the numerical,
experimental and hybrid methods are effective to discover the under­
going important patterns of the nozzle atomization mass transfer, little
has addressed the issue of energy flow balance inside a PCM solar
storage based tobacco machine; more importantly, to our best knowl­
edge, the characteristics of the two-phase flow inside and outside the
nozzle in the numerical analysis (for example, CFD analysis) has not
been verified by the corresponding experimental analysis yet.
In summary, numerical simulation has been used in analyzing the
nozzle atomization mass transfer in existing literatures and the time-
consuming and labor-consuming problem that usually found in the
experimental analysis has been solved by simulation models. However,
the calculating results on the interaction of the two-phase flow inside
 Downloaded from https://iranpaper.ir
Z. Wang et al.
Fig. 3. Calculation model of the two-phase flow of nozzle.
Fig. 4. Velocity contour at outlet section under the condition of 0.225
million grids.
and outside the nozzle have not been verified by experimental results
yet. In order to address this issue, this study employs experimental test to
verify the CFD calculation on the nozzle atomization mass transfer. The
spray cone angle under different conditions of compressed air and liquid
phase volume fraction is studied based on the Fluent two-phase flow
calculation. The atomization cone angle of the CFD model is verified by
experimental result using image processing. As a result, the CFD calcu­
lation error can be significantly reduce to provide correct information
for the PCM energy storage system design.
2. Numerical solution
The schematic diagram of a 3000 kg/h flavoring process equipment
is shown in the Fig. 1. The production process is as follows: the tobacco
enters into the drum; the drum rotates and the tobacco gradually moves
towards the outlet due to gravity. Affected by the drainage plate, the
tobacco is moved by the drainage plate and separated from the drainage
plate to form a tobacco throwing surface at 1 o’clock direction (from the
3
https://www.tarjomano.com https://www.tarjomano.com
Journal of Energy Storage 48 (2022) 104021
perspective of the outlet). The axis of the nozzle intersects with the to­
bacco throwing surface at a certain angle when the tobacco moves. The
tobacco on the throwing surface absorbs the flavoring liquid particles
atomized by the nozzle. The calculation model of the nozzle is shown in
Fig. 2.
2.1. Numerical modeling
For the actual nozzle, the atomization range, particle size and ejec­
tion time are all determined by the model parameters. The flavoring
process adopts the compressed air ejection to atomize the flavoring
liquid, which is consistent with the characteristics of the air-assisted
atomization model. The liquid film is formed when the liquid passes
through the nozzle, which is impacted by the air. Because the flow field
near the nozzle outlet has an impact on the atomization, the area near
the nozzle is taken as the calculation domain. Considering the diffusion
of the atomization, the calculation domain is in the shape of trumpet.
The nozzle is placed horizontally during the two-phase flow calcu­
lation and the calculation domain of the fore-end is 500 mm, as shown in
Fig 13(a). With a total number of 3,317,767 grids, the polyhedral mesh
is adopted and refined locally. The boundary conditions are as follows:
the compressed air inlet adopts the pressure inlet, the flavoring liquid
inlet uses the velocity inlet, and the other surfaces in the calculation
domain adopt the pressure outlet. The two-phase flow calculation model
of nozzle is shown in Fig. 3.
2.2. Grid independence verification
The number and quality of the CFD model mesh should be verified.
Considering the amount of calculation, the polyhedral mesh is used in
this work. The number of grids used for verification is 0.225, 0.444,
0.795and 1.698 million, respectively. The boundary conditions of the
compressed air and flavoring liquid are, respectively 1.5 bar and 0.3 m/
s. The velocity contour with 0.225 million grids at the nozzle outlet
section perpendicular to the nozzle axis is taken as an example, as shown
 Downloaded from https://iranpaper.ir
https://www.tarjomano.com https://www.tarjomano.com

Z. Wang et al. Journal of Energy Storage 48 (2022) 104021

Fig. 5. Verification of grid independence.

2.3. Fluent simulation setting

Table 1
Simulation conditions.
The basic setting of the nozzle atomization model includes the se­
Flavoring liquid velocity (m/s) 0.34 lection of materials and the setting of atomization. The original flavoring
Compressed air pressure 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.1 1.3 1.5 liquid inlet is replaced by the air inlet and the flavoring liquid is
(bar) determined by the atomization interface setting due to the air-blast
atomizer. The flow rate and the relative velocity between the air and
the liquid film adopt boundary condition and velocity difference. The
in Fig. 4.
relative velocity is obtained by calculating the pure flow field when only
It can be seen from Fig. 4 that the velocity reaches its maximum at
compressed air passes through the nozzle. The velocity at the outlet of
the center of the velocity contour. Influenced by the wall, the velocity
the nozzle is the outflow velocity in pure flow field, and the relative
decreases as the flow extends outwards. Statistics of the maximum speed
velocity is almost equal to the outlet velocity because the flavoring
are shown in Fig. 5.
liquid is very slow at this moment (i.e., the liquid velocity is 0.3 m/s with
As can be seen from Fig. 5, the values under the conditions of 0.225,
the mass flow rate 30 kg/h). Influenced by the velocity, the atomized
0.444, 0.7 and 1.698 million grids are 351 m/s, 447 m/s, 423 m/s and
particles stick to the cylinder and move along the wall after they reach
437 m/s, respectively; and the relative error is 21.5%, 5.4% and 3.2%,
the cylinder wall.
respectively. The influence of grids number on the calculation results is
The pressure of the compressed air is expanded from 0.3 to 1.5 bar in
within permissibility when the girds are more than 1.698 million.
this study. The simulation conditions are shown in Table 1.
Therefore, the number of grids in this study selects 1.698 million.

Fig. 6. The pressure distribution in different compressed air conditions.

Fig. 7. The velocity distribution under different compressed air pressure.

4
 Downloaded from https://iranpaper.ir
https://www.tarjomano.com https://www.tarjomano.com

Z. Wang et al. Journal of Energy Storage 48 (2022) 104021

Fig. 8. Calculation result when the maximum concentration volume fraction is 0.0001.

Fig. 9. Calculation result when the maximum concentration volume fraction is 0.005.

Fig. 10. Calculation result when the maximum concentration volume fraction is 0.01.

Fig. 11. Schematic diagram the experimental platform.
3. Results and analysis
3.1. Numerical analysis results
The pressure distribution results under different compressed air
conditions are shown in Fig. 6 (i.e., taking 0.5, 0.9 and 1.1 bar for
examples).
It can be seen from Fig. 6 that the inlet pressure is significantly
restricted by the boundary conditions. When the pressure is lower than
0.9 bar, there is an area slightly different from other regions in the
calculation domain on the axis of the nozzle. This region increases with
the increase of pressure, and disappears until the pressure is more than
1.1 bar. This is because the atomization concentration on the axis of the
nozzle is relatively high and no air exists there.
The velocity distribution results under different compressed air
conditions are shown in Fig. 7. As can be seen that, the diameter of the
flow channel becomes smaller after driven by the pushed rod inside the
nozzle, which lead to the increase of the velocity and finally reach to the
maximum velocity at the nozzle outlet. The maximum velocity under
different pressure conditions is 203.97 m/s, 262 m/s, 308.69 m/s,
329.97 m/s, 350.64 m/s, 387.8 m/s, 417.79 m/s and 450.31 m/s,
respectively. The flow field shape of the velocity in the calculation
domain is the same, but the atomization results are greatly different with
different velocities.
The calculation results of different atomization concentration under
different pressure conditions are shown in Figs. 8–10 when the
maximum concentration volume fraction of the flavoring liquid is
0.0001, 0.005 and 0.01, respectively. It can be seen from Figs. 8 to 9 that

5
 Downloaded from https://iranpaper.ir
Z. Wang et al.
Fig. 12. Flow chart of image processing technology.
the influence of different compressed air pressures on the distribution of
the perfume concentration is basically the same. Diffusion of the
flavoring atomization appears in the direction perpendicular to the
nozzle axis.
In Fig. 10, the concentration of flavoring changes significantly along
the nozzle axis. The proportion is relatively small when the maximum
flavoring concentration is 0.01 under the pressure of 0.3–0.5 bar, while
the proportion increases when the pressure is 1.1 bar. Combined with
the results of the pressure and velocity distribution, it can conclude that
the larger the inlet pressure and outlet velocity, the larger concentration
of flavoring on the nozzle axis, and subsequently, the better atomization
performance.
Fig. 13. Experimental result of atomization cone angle at 0.9 bar pressure.
6
https://www.tarjomano.com https://www.tarjomano.com
Journal of Energy Storage 48 (2022) 104021
3.2. Experimental validation
It is necessary to verify the CFD simulation results using experi­
mental test. In this study a test platform for measuring the atomization
cone angle is established, as shown in Fig. 11, in which the air
compressor is W-0.36/8 and the nozzle is SU82.
In order to quantitatively evaluate the atomization cone angle, the
experimental results under different pressures were processed by image
processing, as shown in Fig. 12. The analysis result of the test at 0.9 bar
is taken as an example, as shown in Fig. 13.
The atomization cone angle under different pressure values is shown
in Table 2, where each experimental test has been performed for three
times.
As can be seen from Table 2, the splashing phenomenon can be seen
obviously at the outlet of the nozzle under 0.3 and 0.5 bar, indicating
poor atomization performance. Large atomization particles still can be
observed at outlet of nozzle t under 0.7 and 0.8 bar. As the pressure
continues to increase, the atomization tends to be stable, and the at­
omization effect is good. It should be noted that the test results are
highly consistent with the volume fraction on the nozzle axis when the
maximum concentration of the flavoring is 0.01. In other words, the
greater the pressure, the better the continuity of the nozzle axis.
The simulation results are processed by the same image processing
method. Fig. 14 takes the result of 0.9 bar as an example. As can be seen,
the atomization cone angle of the simulation can be clearly extracted
from the calculation figures.
The atomization cone angle of the experimental and simulation re­
sults is compared in Table 3. As can be seen, the experimental average of
the atomization cone angle under different compressed air pressures is
influenced heavily by background noise because the atomization cone
angles at the same pressure condition are not consistent; this is espe­
cially obvious at 0.3 and 0.7 bar. The atomization cone angle is signif­
icantly larger than others when the pressure is 0.3 and 0.5 bar. This may
be due to the carrying effect of the jet on the nearby flow field.
It can be also seen from Table 3 that the atomization cone angles of
the CFD model are basically different under different compressed air
pressures. The CFD atomization cone angle is basically the same at 0.3
and 0.5 bar, and slightly increases with the increase of the pressure.
However, the errors between the CFD model and experimental tests are
very large at 0.3 and 0.5bar. The reason for the difference between the
numerical and experimental results is that the simulation has put
 Downloaded from https://iranpaper.ir
https://www.tarjomano.com https://www.tarjomano.com

Z. Wang et al. Journal of Energy Storage 48 (2022) 104021

Table 2
The results of atomization cone angle and profile under different pressure.
The compressed air pressure The first experiment The second experiment The third experiment

0.3 bar

0.5 bar

0.7 bar

0.8 bar

0.9 bar

1.1 bar

1.3 bar

1.5 bar

Fig. 14. Atomization angle of simulation results at 0.9 bar.

7
 Downloaded from https://iranpaper.ir
https://www.tarjomano.com https://www.tarjomano.com

Z. Wang et al. Journal of Energy Storage 48 (2022) 104021

Table 3 CRediT authorship contribution statement

Atomization cone angle of experimental test results.
Compressed air Maximum volume fraction Experimental CFD Zhiqi Wang: Formal analysis, Writing – original draft. Meimei Han:
pressure 0.0001 0.005 0.01 average simulation Investigation, Methodology, Software. Zhengfei Zhu: Data curation,
0.3 bar 46.15 35.29 40.93 40.79 19.51 Investigation, Formal analysis. Yu Jiang: Conceptualization, Supervi­
0.5 bar 39.78 40.48 40.88 40.38 19.02 sion, Writing – review & editing. Lin Jiang: Resources, Software,
0.7 bar 36.09 28.94 24.2 29.74 21.87 Writing – review & editing, Funding acquisition.
0.8 bar 26.47 31.92 29.45 29.28 22.82
0.9 bar 32.26 35.44 25.07 30.92 24.23
1.1 bar 34.46 30.24 26.69 30.46 24.22
Declaration of Competing Interest
1.3 bar 30.23 26.99 27.25 28.16 25.65
1.5 bar 27.82 29.65 34.02 30.50 26.60 The authors declare no conflict of interest.

forward many idealized assumptions. For example, at the low pressure
of at 0.3 and 0.5 bar, the friction and energy loss insight the nozzle will
significantly influence the angle of the fluid flow. Because without
enough flow power, the angle of the fluid flow trends to be very large in
the experimental test; on the contra, the simulation model does not
consider these factors and will produce the theoretical values of the
atomization cone angles. Consequently, the error between the experi­
mental tests and simulation calculation are very large at 0.3 and 0.5bar.
However, with the increase of air pressure, the error gradually
decreases.
Furthermore, when comparing the results of the atomization cone
angle with 0.01 maximum volume fraction of the flavoring liquid, the
experimental and numerical values are basically consistent. As a result,
the atomization cone angle of the CFD model can be modified by the
experimental test with 0.01 maximum volume fraction. Subsequently,
the CFD model will calculate more accurate characteristics of the at­
omization mass transfer, and the energy consumption of the nozzle can
be estimated more precise. As a result, proper PCM storage parameters
can be obtained to ensure the energy balance of the solar thermal
powered tobacco machine.
4. Conclusions
Solar energy is promising for tobacco machine modification by
improving the energy consumption and reducing emission. When apply
the PCM solar thermal storage technique to build the next-generation
eco-machines for tobacco production, it is vital to figure out the atom­
ization mass transfer of the nozzle during the flavoring process. The
combination of experiment and CFD simulation has been proposed to
study the flow field of the nozzle atomization. The main conclusions are
drawn as follows.
(1) The atomization characteristics of the nozzle is affected by the
inlet compressed air. The atomization effect is poor when the
pressure is between 0.3 and 0.5 bar because the average angle of
the atomization cone in the experimental tests can reach to a very
large value of 40.79.
(2) Experimental result demonstrates that the atomization cone
angle decreases with the increase of compressed air pressure. The
error of the atomization cone angle between the simulation and
experimental results exceeds 50% when the compressed air
pressure is less than 0.5 bar. The reason is because the simulation
model does not consider real world operating conditions of the
nozzle.
(3) By comparing the numerical and experimental analysis results,
the atomization cone angle in the experimental test at the 0.01
maximum volume fraction can be used to correct the simulation
model. The future plan will investigate the optimal design of the
PCM storage parameters based on the atomization characteristics
of the nozzle.
Acknowledgment
Great thanks to Longyan Tobacco Industry Co LTD for providing the
experiment data.
References
[1] S. Bansal, S. Dey, M. Khanra, Energy storage sizing in plug-in Electric Vehicles:
driving cycle uncertainty effect analysis and machine learning based sizing
framework, J. Energy Storage 41 (2021), 102864, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
est.2021.102864.
[2] C.D. Botha, M.J. Kamper, Design optimisation and cost analysis of linear vernier
electric machine-based gravity energy storage systems, J. Energy Storage 44
(2021), 103397, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.est.2021.103397.
[3] M. Huang, W. He, A. Incecik, A. Cichon, G. Królczyk, Z. Li, Renewable energy
storage and sustainable design of hybrid energy powered ships: a case study,
J. Energy Storage 43 (2021), 103266, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.est.2021.103266.
[4] J.P. Rouse, S.D. Garvey, B. Cárdenas, A. Hoskin, L. Swinfen-Styles, W. Xu, A case
study investigation into the risk of fatigue in synchronous flywheel energy stores
and ramifications for the design of inertia replacement systems, J. Energy Storage
39 (2021), 102651, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.est.2021.102651.
[5] M.S. Zarbil, A. Vahedi, H.A. Moghaddam, M. Saeidi, Design and implementation of
flywheel energy storage system control with the ability to withstand measurement
error, J. Energy Storage 33 (2021), 102047, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
est.2020.102047.
[6] M. Huang, W. He, A. Incecik, M.K. Gupta, G. Królczyk, Z. Li, Phase change material
heat storage performance in the solar thermal storage structure employing
experimental evaluation, J. Energy Storage (2021), 103638, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.est.2021.103638.
[7] D. Hua, D. Zongfang, L. Yanwei, Simulation and experimental research on the
injection characteristics of the laser processing injection hole, J. Braz. Soc. Mech.
Sci. Eng. 43 (4) (2021) 1–11, https://doi.org/10.1007/s40430-021-02916-7.
[8] H. Ma, T. Zhang, Q. An, Y. Tao, Y. Xu, Visualization experiment and numerical
analysis of cavitation flow characteristics in diesel fuel injector control valve with
different structure design, J. Therm. Sci. 30 (1) (2021) 76–87, https://doi.org/
10.1007/s11630-020-1301-7.
[9] J. Zhao, Z. Ning, M. Lv, Experimental and numerical simulation of flow pattern
evolution in a flow mixing nozzle under a moderate inlet flow rate, ACS Omega 5
(35) (2020) 22335–22347, https://doi.org/10.1021/acsomega.0c02702.
[10] Y. Shan, Analysis and Experimental Research On Atomization Characteristics of
Cigarette Feeding Nozzle. Master Thesis, Kunming University of Science and
Technology, Kunming, China, 2016.
[11] S. Nazari, R. Ellahi, M.M. Sarafraz, M.R. Safaei, A. Asgari, O.A. Akbari, Numerical
study on mixed convection of a non-Newtonian nanofluid with porous media in a
two lid-driven square cavity, J. Therm. Anal. Calorim. 140 (3) (2020) 1121–1145,
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10973-019-08841-1.
[12] S.A. Bagherzadeh, E. Jalali, M.M. Sarafraz, O.A. Akbari, A. Karimipour,
M. Goodarzi, Q.V. Bach, Effects of magnetic field on micro cross jet injection of
dispersed nanoparticles in a microchannel, Int. J. Numer. Methods Heat Fluid Flow
30 (5) (2020) 2683–2704, https://doi.org/10.1108/HFF-02-2019-0150.
[13] H. Goodarzi, O.A. Akbari, M.M. Sarafraz, M.M. Karchegani, M.R. Safaei, G.
A. Sheikh Shabani, Numerical simulation of natural convection heat transfer of
nanofluid with Cu, MWCNT, and Al2O3 nanoparticles in a cavity with different
aspect ratios, J. Therm. Sci. Eng. Appl. 11 (6) (2019), 061020, https://doi.org/
10.1115/1.4043809.
[14] S. Yousefzadeh, H. Rajabi, N. Ghajari, M.M. Sarafraz, O.A. Akbari, M. Goodarzi,
Numerical investigation of mixed convection heat transfer behavior of nanofluid in
a cavity with different heat transfer areas, J. Therm. Anal. Calorim. 140 (6) (2020)
2779–2803, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10973-019-09018-6.
[15] M.M. Sarafraz, F.C. Christo, Thermal and flow characteristics of liquid flow in a 3D-
printed micro-reactor: a numerical and experimental study, Appl. Therm. Eng. 199
(2021), 117531, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2021.117531.
[16] R. Ellahi, F. Hussain, S. Asad Abbas, M.M. Sarafraz, M. Goodarzi, M.S. Shadloo,
Study of two-phase Newtonian nanofluid flow hybrid with Hafnium particles under
the effects of slip, Inventions 5 (1) (2020) 6, https://doi.org/10.3390/
inventions5010006.

8
 Downloaded from https://iranpaper.ir
Z. Wang et al.
[17] M.M. Sarafraz, F.C. Christo, Phase change heat transfer induced by plasmon heat
generation in liquid micro-layer inside a micro-reactor, J. Energy Storage 42
(2021), 103033, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.est.2021.103033.
[18] M.M. Sarafraz, M.R. Safaei, A.S. Leon, I. Tlili, T.A. Alkanhal, Z. Tian, M. Arjomandi,
Experimental investigation on thermal performance of a PV/T-PCM (photovoltaic/
thermal) system cooling with a PCM and nanofluid, Energies 12 (13) (2019) 2572,
https://doi.org/10.3390/en12132572.
[19] Y. Jiang, N.H. Abu-Hamdeh, R.A. Bantan, R. Moradi, Mixing efficiency of hydrogen
and air co-flow jets via wedge shock generator in dual-combustor ramjet, Aerosp.
Sci. Technol. 116 (2021), 106846, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ast.2021.106846.
[20] B. Jakkula, G.R. Mandela, Ch.S.N. Murthy, Maintenance management of load haul
dumper using reliability analysis, J. Qual. Maint. Eng. 26 (2019) 290–310, https://
doi.org/10.1108/JQME-10-2018-0083.
[21] Y. Jiang, R. Moradi, A.M. Abusorrah, M.R. Hajizadeh, Z. Li, Effect of downstream
sinusoidal wall on mixing performance of hydrogen multi-jets at supersonic flow:
numerical study, Aerosp. Sci. Technol. 109 (2021), 106410, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.ast.2020.106410.
[22] A. Alkaff, M.N. Qomarudin, E. Purwantini, S.E. Wiratno, Dynamic reliability
modeling for general standby systems, Comput. Ind. Eng. 161 (2021), 107615,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2021.107615.
[23] M. Sheikholeslami, M. Jafaryar, M. Hedayat, A. Shafee, Z. Li, T.K. Nguyen,
M. Bakouri, Heat transfer and turbulent simulation of nanomaterial due to
compound turbulator including irreversibility analysis, Int. J. Heat Mass Transf.
137 (2019) 1290–1300, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
ijheatmasstransfer.2019.04.030.
[24] Y. Jiang, M. Hajivand, H. Sadeghi, M.B. Gerdroodbary, Z. Li, Influence of
trapezoidal lobe strut on fuel mixing and combustion in supersonic combustion
chamber, Aerosp. Sci. Technol. 116 (2021), 106841, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
ast.2021.106841.
[25] Z. Li, T.D. Manh, M.B. Gerdroodbary, N.D. Nam, R. Moradi, H. Babazadeh, The
influence of the wedge shock generator on the vortex structure within the
trapezoidal cavity at supersonic flow, Aerosp. Sci. Technol. 98 (2020), 105695,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ast.2020.105695.
[26] M. Sheikholeslami, Z. Li, A. Shafee, Lorentz forces effect on NEPCM heat transfer
during solidification in a porous energy storage system, Int. J. Heat Mass Transf.
127 (2018) 665–674, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2018.06.087.
[27] H. Wu, C. Ye, Y. Zhang, J. Nie, Y. Kuang, Z. Li, Remaining Useful Life Prediction of
an IGBT Module in Electric Vehicles Statistical, Anal. Symmetry 12 (2020) 1325,
https://doi.org/10.3390/sym12081325.
[28] Z. Li, T.D. Manh, M.B. Gerdroodbary, N.D. Nam, R. Moradi, H. Babazadeh, The
effect of sinusoidal wall on hydrogen jet mixing rate considering supersonic flow,
Energy 193 (2020), 116801, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2019.116801.
[29] M. Sheikholeslami, M.B. Gerdroodbary, R. Moradi, A. Shafee, Z. Li, Application of
Neural Network for estimation of heat transfer treatment of Al2O3-H2O nanofluid
https://www.tarjomano.com https://www.tarjomano.com
Journal of Energy Storage 48 (2022) 104021
through a channel, Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 344 (2019) 1–12, https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.cma.2018.09.025.
[30] H. Yu, Y.C. Jin, W. Cheng, X. Yang, X. Peng, Y. Xie, Multiscale simulation of
atomization process and droplet particles diffusion of pressure-swirl nozzle,
Powder Technol. 379 (2021) 127–143, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
powtec.2020.10.053.
[31] F. Zhang, Z. Thorsten, M. Thomas, W. Simon, J. Tobias, H. Peter, K. Thomas, Effect
of elevated pressure on air-assisted primary atomization of coaxial liquid jets: basic
research for entrained flow gasification, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 134 (2020),
110411, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2020.110411.
[32] Z. Wang, X. Sun, S. Chen, Multi-objective parameters optimization design of self-
excited oscillation pulsed atomizing nozzle, J. Braz. Soc. Mech. Sci. Eng. 41 (11)
(2019) 1–12, https://doi.org/10.1007/s40430-019-1975-5.
[33] A. Mohammadi, F. Ommi, Z. Saboohi, Experimental and numerical study of a twin-
fluid two-phase internal-mixing atomizer, J. Therm. Anal. Calorim. (2021) 1–15,
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10973-021-10795-2.
[34] P.B. Nihasigaye, G. Zhou, X. Yang, Modelling spray performance of alternative
aviation fuel, Energy 224 (2021), 120086, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
energy.2021.120086.
[35] S. Yu, B. Yin, Q. Bi, C. Chen, H. Jia, Experimental and numerical investigation on
inner flow and spray characteristics of elliptical GDI injectors with large aspect
ratio, Energy 224 (2021), 120119, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
energy.2021.120119.
[36] Y. Zhang, F. Li, S. Wang, B. Wang, S. Jiang, M. Sui, Swirling atomization
characteristics of waste oil biodiesel, Energy Sources Part A (2020) 1–19, https://
doi.org/10.1080/15567036.2020.1814454.
[37] Yu Wang, Study On Atomized Particle Size of Double Fluid Nozzles in Tobacco
Feeding Process. Master Thesis, Zhengzhou University of Light Industry,
Zhengzhou, China, 2018.
[38] Y. Zhang, Experimental and Numerical studies On the Atomization of Pressure
atomizer. Master Thesis, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing,
China, 2013.
[39] J. Miao, Y. Fan, W. Wu, Characteristics of flash boiling spray of aviation kerosene
in the twin-orifice nozzle, Fuel 297 (2021), 120771, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
fuel.2021.120771.
[40] Q. Zhang, J. Xia, Z. He, J. Wang, R. Liu, L. Zheng, X. Lu, Experimental study on
spray characteristics of six-component diesel surrogate fuel under sub/trans/
supercritical conditions with different injection pressures, Energy 218 (2021),
119474, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2020.119474.
[41] J. Cui, H. Lai, K. Feng, Y. Ma, Quantitative analysis of the minor deviations in
nozzle internal geometry effect on the cavitating flow, Exp. Therm Fluid Sci. 94
(2018) 89–98, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.expthermflusci.2018.02.002.
[42] S. Wu, M. Xu, D.L. Hung, H. Pan, Effects of nozzle configuration on internal flow
and primary jet breakup of flash boiling fuel sprays, Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 110
(2017) 730–738, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2017.03.073.