SJT | Scientific Journal of Technology
← Back to Volume 8, Issue 3

Numerical Simulation Study of Droplet Atomization Behavior in Tubular Atomizer Elements

Zhenqiang Kang, Liang Zhang, Xin Chen
Vol. 8, No. 3, pp. 390-398, 2026 DOI: 10.54691/35xrjt69 March 21, 2026
Download PDF
Abstract.Atomizing a liquid solvent into micron-sized droplets can significantly increase the specific contact area between the gas phase and the liquid phase. This paper employs CFD methods to investigate the atomization performance of a tubular natural gas atomizer and analyzes the effects of four different gas flow velocities (18 m/s–23 m/s) on the atomization efficiency. The results indicate that the use of a Venturi channel structure, where peak gas velocities in the throat region exceed 90–110 m/s, effectively breaks the liquid into small droplets. In the high-frequency pulsation transition zone at 18 m/s and 23 m/s, irregular turbulent diffusion enhances interphase mixing, rapidly entraining fragmented microdroplets of triethylene glycol into every corner of the gas phase, thereby significantly reducing concentration polarization within the flow field. The wake effect generated by the hollow channel results in a higher DPM concentration in the region around the central axis. A comparative analysis of the four velocities revealed that 18 m/s is more suitable for droplet atomization.
Keywords. Liquid Jet; Droplet Breakup; Droplet Size.
APA Citation Zhenqiang Kang, Liang Zhang, Xin Chen (2026). Numerical Simulation Study of Droplet Atomization Behavior in Tubular Atomizer Elements. Scientific Journal of Technology, 8(3), 390-398. https://doi.org/10.54691/35xrjt69

References

  1. F. Ahmadvand, M.R. Talaie, CFD modeling of droplet dispersion in a Venturi scrubber,Chem. Eng. J. 160 (2) (2010) 423–431 210.
  2. S.W. Lee, H.C. No, Droplet size prediction model based on the upper limit log-normal distribution function in venturi scrubber, Nucl. Eng. Technol. 51 (5) (2019)1261–1271.
  3. M. Ochowiak, L. Broniarz-Press, The flow resistance and aeration in modified spray tower, Chem. Eng. Process. 50 (3) (2011) 345–350.
  4. G. Yincheng, N. Zhenqi, L. Wenyi, Comparison of removal efficiencies of carbon dioxide between aqueous ammonia and NaOH solution in a fine spray column, Energy Procedia 4 (2011) 512–518.
  5. T. Inamura, N. Nagai, Spray characteristics of liquid jet traversing subsonic air-streams, J. Propuls. Power 13 (2) (1997) 250–256.
  6. P.-K. Wu, K.A. Kirkendall, R.P. Fuller, A.S. Nejad, Breakup processes of liquid jets in subsonic crossflows, J. Propuls. Power 13 (1) (1997) 64–73.
  7. T. Oda, H. Hiroyasu, M. Arai, K. Nishida, Characterization of liquid jet atomization across a high-speed airstream, JSME Int. J., Ser. B 37 (4) (1994) 937–944.
  8. M. Broumand, M. Birouk, Liquid jet in a subsonic gaseous crossflow: recent progress and remaining challenges, Prog. Energy Combust. Sci. 57 (2016) 1–29.
  9. M. Behzad, N. Ashgriz, B.W. Karney, Surface breakup of a non-turbulent liquid jet injected into a high pressure gaseous crossflow, Int. J. Multiphase Flow 80 (2016)100–117.
  10. E. Lubarsky, J.R. Reichel, B.T. Zinn, R. McAmis, Spray in crossflow: dependence on weber number, J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power 132 (2) (2010).