Atomization and Sprays, vol . 4, pp .

351-367, 1994

DISCHARGE COEFFICIENT AND SPRAY ANGL E

MEASUREMENTS FOR SMAL L
PRESSURE-SWIRL NOZZLE S
Javier Ballester
Laboratorio de Investigacin en Tecnologas de la Combusti n
(LITEC) -CSICIDGA, 50015-Zaragoza, Spai n

Csar Dopazo
Fluid Mechanics Group, School of Mechanical Engineering, Zaragoza, Spai n

An experimental study of the influence of atomizer dimensions and injection conditions o n

discharge coefficient and spray angle is presented . Simplex pressure-swirl nozzles atomizing heavy oil have been examined . Twenty nozzles of different geometries have been
investigated, including orifice diameters down to 0 .45 mm . Inviscid theory results or
published correlations valid for larger atomizers do not seem to apply for those of smaller
dimensions, for which viscous effects are thought to play a major role . This role is
analyzed, and new correlations are proposed for discharge coefficient and spray con e
angle .

INTRODUCTIO N
Pressure-swirl nozzles are commonplace in numerous engineering applications i n
which a liquid must be broken down into droplets, such as in combustion, drying, o r
agriculture. Their practical importance explains the considerable number of studies on thi s
type of atomizer that can be found in the scientific literature since the 1940s . Most of the m
analyze experimentally the performance of the atomizers . Droplet size is often the main
subject of the experimental investigations . Discharge coefficient, spray angle, liquid fil m
thickness, or velocity coefficient are also parameters of interest .
Most of the current knowledge on the behavior of pressure-swirl nozzles is of a n
empirical nature . The complexity of the processes taking place from liquid injection to
spray formation hampers the development of satisfactory predictive methodologies .
Drop size predictions would require the modeling of the liquid sheet breakup process, which remains to a large extent a poorly understood phenomenon . Pressure-swirl
nozzles pose the additional difficulty of the the internal flow prediction . No attempt a t
complete modeling of this flow has been published . The most comprehensive work on th e
subject is that by Dumouchel et al . [1,2], who nevertheless neglect the modeling of th e
air core .
The most common approach uses inviscid theory analysis of the flow [3,4] . Under
certain simplifying hypotheses, flow parameters at the exit orifice can be expressed as a
function of atomizer geometry and, more specifically, of the atomizer constant K . Therefore, parameters such as discharge coefficient, spray angle, or liquid film thickness can
be calculated .
Copyright C 1994 by Begell House, Inc .

351

352

J . BALLESTER AND C . DOPAZ O

NOMENCLATUR E
A;
A0

total inlet slots are a

exit orifice are a

Discharge coefficien t

LS

OP
Q

[A o(2 OP p i)

Do
D,

exit orifice diameter

swirl chamber diameter

Tfo

V
20
111

atornizer constant

Lo

exit orifice length

(t)
D0 D5

Pr
ar

swirl chamber length

injection pressure
fuel oil flow rat e
fuel oil temperature
mean discharge velocit y
Maximum spray cone angl e
Liquid viscosity
Liquid density
Surface tension

However, the flow inside a pressure-swirl nozzle is characterized by high velocitie s

and small dimensions . Consequently, viscous effects, which are neglected in the invisci d
theory, may play a significant role . Taylor [5] studied the boundary layers formed near th e
wall of the swirl chamber and at the air core interface . He concludes that, under certai n
conditions, most of the liquid emerges through one of the boundary layers . A recent
theoretical analysis [6] indicates that boundary-layer effects can range from dominant t o
negligible depending on the injection pressure . Therefore, the inviscid theory approac h
can lead to important errors .
Comparisons between theory and empirical correlations show the effect of viscosity . The formation of boundary layers may cause, among other things, the reduction o f
tangential momentum and, therefore, an increase in film thickness at the orifice . As a
consequence, measured discharge coefficients are usually higher than those predicte d
theoretically, with some exceptions reponed by Dombrowski and Hasson [7] . Apart from
these considerations, published experiments tend to show that differences are not ver y
important, and the predictions from the inviscid theory are usually accepted as reasonabl y
good estimates [7,8] .
The results of the present work display a significant disagreement with estimate s
from the theoretical analysis . The atomizers used were designed for an experimental stud y
of heavy oil combustion . The design was conducted in accordance with inviscid flo w
theory and published correlations . The nozzles were expected to perform within certai n
ranges of discharge coefficient, cone angle, and drop size . However, in the first tests ,
flow rates more than twice the calculated ones were measured . Therefore, the atomizers
had to be redesigned, reducing their dimensions . A systematic study of the influence o f
geometry and injection conditions on discharge coefficient CD , cone angle 20, and drop
size was conducted . An important departure of CD and 20 from the theory was observed ,
and is apparent in the results reported below .
In Section 2 the experimental facilities and measuring techniques are described .
Section 3 presents the trends of the discharge coefficient CD as a function of test variables
and compares the present measured data with available theoretical predictions and result s
from previous experimental studies, discussing possible explanations for the observed
discrepancies . Spray cone-angle measurements, comparison with existing correlations ,
and a discussion of the influence of viscosity on this variable are included in Section 4 .
Tentative conclusions are drawn in Section 5 .

MEASUREMENTS FOR SMALL PRESSURE-SWIRL NOZZLES

3 53

2. EXPERIMENTAL FACILITIE S
The test rig used in the present experiments was designed for the atomization o f
heavy oil using large-capacity pressure nozzles . A maximum injection pressure of 80 bar ,
oil temperatures up to 150C, and a flow rate up to 700 liters/h can be reached . However ,
it was easily adapted to the conditions of the present study (Q = 2060 liters/h, OP =
1220 bar.) . A detailed description of the facilities can be found in [9] .
The atomizer is vertically oriented, injecting the liquid downward . The spray is
discharged into an open quiescent environment . The cloud of droplets is collected by an
extraction system placed under the atomizer .
The atomizers are simplex pressure-swirl nozzles and consist of three interchangeable parts :
An orifice plate (Fig . 1), containing the conical swirl chamber and the exit orifice .
Inlet
ports (Fig . 2)three rectangular tangential slots drive the liquid to the swir l

chamber .
An assembly cap (Fig . 3), which holds the orifice plate and inlet ports an d
attaches them to the barrel .
Several parts with different dimensions were manufactured, covering the followin g
intervals :
= 0 .441 .09 mm
A . = 0 .67451 .0096 mm2
K = 0.110.3 9
Da

A good surface finish turned out to be essential . Even microscopic imperfections

caused deviation of the spray axis . The exact dimensions and the quality of the surface s
were checked with the aid of a microscope .
The test fluid was heavy oil customarily used in utility boilers . Its physical properties were detemined as a function of temperature (Table 1) . The oil temperatures wer e
100, 110, 120, and 135C . The pressures selected for injection were 12, 14, 17, and 2 0
bar.
A total of 133 experimental runs were performed with different combinations of th e
variables D o , A ;, PP, and Tfo , corresponding to 20 atomizer geometries .
The spray angle was measured using low-speed photography . Plates 1 and 2 were

0 18.1 5
06

2 .4

w/x#Z##n r

rM

Do
Fig . 1

Orifice plate .

0 .25 1

J . BALLESTER AND C . DOPAZ O

354

0.53

0 18 .1 5
01 3
01 0
06
2.65 0.8

18.3

0 8.66
Fig . 2 Inlet ports .

obtained for the same spray with two different exposure times . In Plate 1 the movemen t
of the spray is frozen, showing the appearance and growth of disturbances on the liqui d
sheet and its final disintegration into drops . Plate 2 is an example of the photographs wit h
exposure times of 1/60 s used to determine the spray cone angle . The exposure time i s
long enough to record the average location of the envelope of the spray . The reported
angle corresponds to the tangent to the spray at an axial distance of about 3 mm from th e
orifice (nozzle geometry made it impossible to record the first millimeters) . Nevertheless ,
angle variations are assumed to be negligible over that distance, and that value is taken a s
the maximum angle of the spray . Differences between angles measured on different day s
under the same experimental conditions do not exceed 4 .

MEASUREMENTS FOR SMALL PRESSURE-SWIRL NOZZLES

355

Fig. 3

Assembled nozzle .

Table 1 Physical Properties of Heavy Oi l

T/,, (C)
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
120

p r (kg/m3)

p. (Pa s)

o i (N/m )

1 .44
0 .735
0 .354
0 .222
0 .126
0 .0805
0 .0465
0 .0332
0 .0255
0 .0195

0 .033 7
0 .032 3
0 .031 6
0 .0309
0 .0302
0 .0295
0 .028 9
0 .028 5
0 .0278

983
977
979
966
959 .5
959

The discharge coefficient was calculated using the expressio n

CD

A 0 (2 LLP

.
pl) 0 5

The oil flow rate was measured with a positive displacement meter . The reading
variations were less than 0 .2 liter/h for repetitions of the same experiment, giving a
repeatability better than 1% for the reported values of CD .

356

J . BALLESTER AND C . DOPAZ O

Plate 1 Photograph of the spray with an exposure time of 0 .5 s . Atomizer A-840a + P-50a ; AP
= 12 bar; To = 120C .
Plate 2 Photograph of the spray with an exposure time of 1/60 s . Atomizer A-840a + P-50a ; AP
= 12 bar, To = 120C .

3 . DISCHARGE COEFFICIEN T
The values of CD as a function of the injection pressure are shown in Fig . 4 for
several atomizers .
The atomizers are designated as A-x + P-y, x and y indicating the total inlet port s
section and orifice diameter, respectively . For instance, part A-840 has a nominal tota l
ports section of 0 .840 mm 2 , and pate P-80 has a nominal orifice diameter of 0 .80 mm .
According to the inviscid theory, P should have no influence on the discharg e
coefficient . The curves in the graph are nearly horizontal, but they exhibit a slightl y
ascending slope . The reason for this increase could be ascribed to a reduction in relativ e
head losses as the velocity increases . As a consequence of the small dimensions of th e
nozzle and the high viscosity of the liquid, the characteristics of the interna] flow depen d
on the injection pressure in the range of the tests conducted . A higher pressure would be
required to obtain values of CD independent of OP for these atomizers .
The variation of CD with oil temperature is represented in Fig . 5 . The evolution of
CD and 26 with temperature should be attributed to variations in viscosity, which change s
over 250% within the temperature interval, and not to the density or surface tension ,
which change less than 6% . In fact, all the curves in Fig . 5 exhibit the maximum in CD
that is characteristic of pressure-swirl atomizers as the fluid viscosity decreases . At low

MEASUREMENTS FOR SMALL PRESSURE-SWIRL NOZZLES

357
Atomizer

0 .7

---e A-840a+P-110 a
---ts-- A-840a+P-60b
--A-840a+P-55b

0.6

A-840a+P-50a
-- + A-840a+P-45 c
A-630a+P-110a
-- -- A-630a+P-80a
-- A-630a+P-60 b
--e A-630a+P-55 b
-

0 .5

CD

0 .4

0.3

A-630a+P-50a
* A-630a+P-45c

0 .2
10

12

14

16

18

20

22

L*P (bar)

Fig . 4

Effect of

on Co .

Tfo = 100C .

0.6 3
0 .6 2
---eAP = 12 bar
---aAP = 14 "

0 .6 1
CD

$ .P = 1 7

0.6

+AP=20 "
a

0.5 9
0.58
9n

100

Tfo

Fig. 5

120

110

130

14 o

(r)

Effect of Tfo on CD. Atomizer A-630b + P-55b .

temperatures, the viscous friction prevents the formation of a central air core and th e
liquid exits as a full jet . The flow rate is a monotonically increasing function of temperature . As temperature increases, the tangential velocity of the liquid inside the swir l
chamber causes the appearance of the air core, and the liquid emerges as an annular empt y
jet. The consequence is the reduction of the effective exit area for higher temperatures .
Therefore, CD follows a decreasing trend with viscosity, as can be seen on the right-han d
side of the curves in Fig . 5 .
The changes in discharge coefficient with A ; and Do are shown in Figs . 6 and 7 . All
the measurements of CD are displayed as a function of the atornizer constant in Fig . 8 . The
graph also contains the inviscid theory estimates for the lame experimental conditions, a s
well as data points generated from the following published correlations:

358

*BALLESTER AND C ' DOPAZO

0.7

0. 6

--e--&l" =12Ibear
--**P=l4 "

0.5

CD

--*s--P =l7 ~
_-**--AP =3O "

0 .4

0 .3

0 .2 LO .4

0 .5

0 .6

Fig . 6

0 .8

0 .7

0.9

1 .1

ymm _}
m '

Effect o[Do on

Co . Inlet purtsA-63Ou T~ = 100C .

0 .7
0 .6 8

o AP =1%baar
--*--R=l4 ^
=l 7
__*--A p =20

0 .6 2
0 .6

0 .5 8
0 .65

i
0 .7

0 .75

0 .85

0 .8

A /.A

0 .9

0 .95

1 .0 5

(="2 /

Jones [8l :
Dop, V\

CD = 0 .45 ( --*-* l

- 0 .02 (

-0 .03

0 .05

0 .52

O-~
B

D" /

Rizk and Lefebvre [10] :

0 . 25

0 .23
(` 1 )'

MEASUREMENTS FOR SMALL PRESSURE-SWIRL NOZZLES

359

0.
0.6
0 .5

o Measurement s
Jones [8]
+ Rizk et al [10]
e Tanasawa et al [11 ]
Inviscid theory

0.4

CD
0 .3
0 .2
0.1
0 .1

0.2

0 .3

0.4

0.5

K
Fig . 8 Comparison among present measurements of C D, inviscid theory predictions, and available correlations .

Tanasawa and Kobayasi [11] (quoted by Dombrowski and Munday [12]) :

2
CD = 1 ardan 2 .13 [

(4/ rr)K + 1 .2
(417r)K + 1 ] 2

e - o. f 2*D

a;)

(3)

Despite the wide variety of experimental conditions, the results lie in a narrow band .
This is an indication of the influence of K on the flow characteristics, as predicted by the
theory . However, dicharge coefficients measured in this work are much greater than thos e
estimated from previous correlations and from the theory .
Published experimental results for CD are usually larger than the theoretical estimates . The difference is traditionally explained by the reduction in tangential momentu m
caused by the viscous forces . The consequence is an increase of the liquid film thicknes s
t the orifice and, therefore, of the effective exit cross section .
However, Fig . 8 indicates that departures from the theoretical conditions are muc h
more important for the experiments reported in this work . When compared with the
published correlations estimates, good agreement is observed only for the atomizers wit h
the largest orifice diameters (CD < 0 .32 in Fig. 8) . Larger differences appear as the orific e
diameter becomes smaller . This change in behavior with variations in the scale of th e
atomizer is discussed next .
The application of multiple regression techniques to all the data points yields the
following correlation:
CD = 1 .323 x

10-3K0

.29D0-0 .82 p0 .03

(4 )

The variables are expressed in SI units . The quality of the fit is shown in Fig . 9 .
As indicated previously, the trends of CD were observed to depend on the range of
Do considered . For this reason, Eq . (4) does not represent the CD dependence accurately .

J . BALLESTER AND C . DOPAZO

360
0. 8

0.7

0 .3

O .%

.2

0 .3

0 .4

0. 5

0 .6

0 .7

0 .8

Esrimates
Fig . 9

Scatter of measurement data points of C D with respect to Eq . (4) .

Should only the data points for orifice diameters smaller than 0 .8 mm be included, th e
following correlation is obtained :
CD = 1 .335 x

10-2K03D0-0

.41

Po .o7

(5)

While the remaining terms are almost identical in both expressions, Eqs . (4) and
(5), the exponent of Da is significantly different . The scatter of the data with respect t o
Eq. (5) is shown in Fig . 10. This graph also includes the data for atomizers with Do > 0. 8
mm, which did not contribute to the calculation of the fit . For Do > 0.8 mm, Eq. (5)
significantly overestimates the values of CD, with larger deviations for the smaller value s
of CD , i .e., the larger orifices .
Published correlations for orifice diameters ranging from around 1 mm [10] to 5 m m
[8] show similar exponents, hence suggesting that all the atomizers in that scale interva l
display similar trends . However, the results reported here prove that this is not the cas e
for smaller orifices . It seems logical to conclude, therefore, that the flow inside th e
atomizer exhibits different behavior depending on its size . The reason for these discrepancies is thought to be the dominant influence of viscous effects in the flow inside
atomizers with smaller dimensions .
Viscosity, however, does not appear in the calculated correlations because CD
displays a maximum in the temperature interval investigated (see Fig . 5) . Includin g
viscosity as an additional variable in the correlations would therefore be meaningless .
Cone angle correlations, on the other hand, will demonstrate the large influence o f
viscosity on the flow inside the atomizers .
4. SPRAY CONE ANGL E
Available studies do not allow one to establish a general trend of the influence o f
the injection pressure on the cone angle . Dodge and Biaglow [13] did not find an y
noticeable effect . De Corso and Kemeny [14] concluded that increases in .P cause spra y

MEASUREMENTS FOR SMALL PRESSURE-SWIRL NOZZLES

36 1

0.8
0.7

0. 6

o Do<0 .8mm
e Do>0 .8mm

0.5
0.4
0 .3

0 0 .2

0 .3

0 .4

0.5

0 .6

0 .7

0.8

Estimares
Fig . 10 Scatter of measurement data points of Co with respect to Eq . (5) .

contraction as a result of air entrainment, but have no influence on the angle at the exi t
of the atomizer . The measurements of Rizk and Lefebvre [15] and of Chen et al . [16]
show a clear increase of the angle with AP . The review work by Lefebvre [17] include s
some plots of measurements of cone angle as a function of injection pressure showing a
maximum . This diversity of trends suggests that the effect of [PP is not always the same ,
but might depend on some other parameters, such as the atomizer exact geometry o r
dimensions .
Some examples of the variation of cone angle with injection pressure are shown in
Fig. 11 . An increase of 20 with AP is apparent, although the magnitude of this incremen t
is not the same for all the cases .
A rice in the oil temperature results in an important increase in cone angle (Fig . 12) .
This trend is in agreement with previous studies [7,8,15] . However, the influence o f
viscosity is remarkably higher in the present work, as discussed in what follows .
As for CD , a comparison is presented between measurements and predictions fro m
the inviscid theory and from published expressions :
Tanasawa and Kobayasi [11] (quoted in [12]) :
4
20, = 180 2 arctan

K (1 .37 + 26.9e -11 .1(1/D,))

(6)

Rizk and Lefebvre [15] :

20 0 = 6K- .15

'LPD2 op t

o .1 t

( 7)

The results for cone angle are much more scattered than those for C D due to the
influence of injection pressure and, particularly, of the viscosity . Therefore, in order to

36 2

J . BALLESTER AND C . DOPAZO

Atomizer
--e A-630a+P-60 b
--e A-630a+P-55b
8 A-525a+P-80a

A-525a+P-60b

--t A-525a+P-55b
1.

12

14

16

18

20

A-525a+P-50a

22

AP (bar)
Fig.11

Effect of OP on spray cone angle . Tfo = 100C .

Jnlet Ponis. P
e A-840a, 12 bar
---s-- " , 14
---e-- " , 1 7
--e " , 20
--tA-630b, 12 bar
" ,14
"
17
" , 20

Tfo ( ce')
Fig . 12 Effect of Tfo on spray cone angle . Plate P-55b .

provide a clearer picture, the results are separated into four graphs (Figs . 13a, 13b, 13c,
13d), corresponding to the four oil temperatures . Although some dispersion is still apparent in the graphs, this strategy makes it possible to draw some tentative conclusions :
Inviscid theory predictions produce higher values than those obtained from published correlations and the results of the present work.
The expression proposed by Rizk and Lefebvre [15] provides good estimates fo r
K ? 0 .2 and Tfa = 100C .
For K < 0.2, i .e ., plates with larger orifices, the discrepancy between measure-

MEASUREMENTS FOR SMALL PRESSURE-SWIRL NOZZLES

363

16
14
12 0

--Inrmd theory
10 0

o Meusomer=ts

20

x Bizlc et al [15]
+ Tommm~oa:al [11 ]

80
60

40
20

0 .05

0 .1

V ' l5

0 .2

0 .25

0 .3

0 .35

0.4

16
14
12
--Inviscid d=ry
zO V

20

Mean=ent /

x Riak a al [15]

80

TuuusonmwxuJ[ll]

60

o 0+ +
40
20

0 .05

0 .1

0 . 15

0 .3

0 .25

0 .3

0 .35

0.4

K
Fig . 13 Comparison among present measurements o[syray cone angle, inviscid theory predictions ,
and available correlations : (a) Tft, = 100C ; (b) Tia = 110C ; (c) Tfi, = 120C ; (d) Tfa = 135C .

ments oodthc inviscid thenrxlneconocs less important . Furtboumcases, hocxpccumioumF

The large differeoceobetween theory and experiments can aloobe explained bmth e
rcductiooin the taogeoa7cmmpmueot of the liquid velm :tYcouoedby the vs000VDricuu .
Tbiocoouluoimoiacoofirmedby the o}eazcouvecgeoce o[coeuaurcnneoLmood the theoretical curve as oil temperature increases .
The expression proposed by Rizk and Lefebvre [15] provides good estimates mftb c
cone angle fbrK  0 .2 and T' = 100C . However, despite including viscosity, the increase of 20 is not followed by this correlation and, for 135 " C, differences from th e

36 4

J . BALLESTER AND C . DOPAZO

16
t

14
-

12

i_

.. .

- ...ami

-*_-- .*. .

Inviscid theory
10 0

20

o Measuremcnts

80

x Rizk et al [15 ]
+ Tanasawa et al [11 ]

60

40
20

05

0 .1

0 .15

(C)

0 .2

0 .25

0 .3

0 .35

0.4

16
14
12
Inviscid theory

10

o Measurements

20
80

Rizk et al [15]

Tanasawa et al [11 ]

60
40
20

(d)

0 .1

0 .1 5

0.2

0 .25

0 .3

0 .35

0 .4

K
Fig . 1 3

present data are very important . Therefore, that expression cannot be considered t o
represent the behavior of the atomizers tested in this work .
The expression of Tanasawa and Kobayasi [111 includes only geometric parameter s
and cannot predict the effect of viscosity .
Multiple regression calculations for spray cone angle also showed that the exponen t
affecting the exit orifice diameter depends on the range of Do over which calculations are
made, as already observed for Co . The expression obtained when all the data points are
considered is (in SI units)
20 = 16 .156K 0 .39D 1* .13 * 0 .9

0 .39

(8)

MEASUREMENTS FOR SMALL PRESSURE-SWIRL NOZZLES

365

100

80

4:
ee

60

40

p .* .

o Do < 0.8 mm
e Do>0.8mm

__

20

20

40

60

80

10 0

Estimates
Fig . 14 Scatter of measurement data points of 20 with respect to Eq . (8) .

Figure 14 shows the degree of agreement between the correlation and the measurements .
When the experimental points obtained for Do > 0 .8 mm are excluded, the best fi t
is given by
20 = 0.2197K0 .39D0.63, 0 .91

p0 .42

(9)

Differences between measurements and estimates are smaller for this expression
(Fig . 15) . However, cone angle is underestimated for orifice diameters larger than thos e
in the considered range .
With the exception of Do, the powers affecting K, l, and [XP remain remarkably
constant in both equations . Therefore, the influence of those variables seems to be approximately the same over the range of atomizers used in the tests .
The powers in both correlations are much larger than those in the expressio n
proposed by Rizk and Lefebvre [15] . The second term in Eq. (7) is the Reynolds number
at the exit orifice, and it appears as 20 Re2 .22 . If variables in Eqs . (8) and (9) are grouped
in a similar way, it results in 20 Re2 .9 . The important difference again suggests th e
decissive influence of viscous effects on the flow inside the atomizer for the experiment s
reported here when compared with previous results .

5. CONCLUSION S
An extensive series of measurements of discharge coefficient and spray cone angl e
for pressure-swirl nozzles atomizing heavy oil have been presented . The influence of oil
temperature, injection pressure, and nozzle geometry has been examined . The atomize r
dimensions belong to a range not covered by the available open literature . The most
significative findings are as follows .

366

J . BALLESTER AND C . DOPAZO

100
o
80

O
oo p

"e s

---

.;

20
o

20

40

60

80

100

Estimares
Fig. 15 Scatter of measurement data points of 20 with respect to Eq . (9) .

Measurements of CD and 20 display much higher deviations from the invisci d

theory than reported for larger atomizes . The application of either theoretical estimation s
or published correlations to the design of small-size nozzles would result in very importan t
errors .
Empirical correlations for discharge coefficient and spray cone angle have bee n
obtained . The expressions derived when all the measurements are included [Eqs . (4) an d
(8)] are different from the equivalent ones when only results corresponding to the smalle r
exit orifices are considered [Eqs . (5) and (9)] .
The observed differences in the behavior of small-size atomizers in relation t o
previous studies is attributed to the significant role of viscous effects . The large influence
of viscosity is corroborated by the magnitude of its power in the spray cone angle
correlations .
REFERENCES
1. C . Dumouchel, M . Ledoux, M . I. G . Bloor, N. Dombrowski, and D . B . Ingham, The Desig n
of Pressure Swirl Atomizers, Twenty-Third Symp . (Int .) on Combustion, The Combustio n
Institute, Pittsburgh, Pa ., pp . 1461-1467, 1990 .
2. C . Dumouchel, M. I . G. Bloor, N . Dombrowski, D . B . Ingham, and M . Ledoux, Viscou s
Flow in a Swirl Atomizer, Chem . Eng . Sci., vol . 48, no . 1, pp . 81-87, 1993 .
3. G . I. Taylor, The Mechanics of Swirl Atomizers, 7th Int . Congress of Applied Mechanics, vol .
2, pt . 1, pp. 280-285, 1948.
4. E. Giffen and A . Murascew, Atomization of Liquid Fuels, Chapman & Hall, London, 1953 .
5. G. 1 . Taylor, The Boundary Layer in the Converging Nozzle of a Swirl Atomizer, Quan . J .
Mech . Appl . .Math ., vol . 3, pt . 2, pp . 129-139, 1950.
6. C. Dumouchel, M . 1. G. Bloor, N . Dombrowski, D . B . Ingham, and M . Ledoux, BoundaryLayer Characteristics of a Swirl Atomizer, Atomization and Sprays, vol . 2, pp . 225-237, 1992 .
7. N. Dombrowski and D . Hasson, The Flow Characteristics of Swirl (Centrifugal) Spray Pres sure Nozzles with Low Viscosity Liquids, AIChE J ., vol. 15, 1969 .

MEASUREMENTS FOR SMALL PRESSURE-SWIRL NOZZLES

367

8. A. R. Jones, Factors Affecting the Performance of Large Swirl Pressure Jet Atomizers, CEG B
Rep . R/M/N1054, Marchwood, Southampton, UK, 1982 .
9. J. M . Ballester, Experimental Study of the Influence of Spray Characteristics on Heavy Oi l
Combustion (in Spanish), Ph .D . thesis, University of Zaragoza, 1992 .
10. N . K . Rizk and A. H . Lefebvre, Internal Flow Characteristics of Simplex Swirl Atomizers ,
AIAA J . Propulsion, vol . 1, no. 3, pp . 193-199, 1985 .
11. Y. Tanasawa and K . Kobayasi, Tech . Rep . Tohoku Univ ., vol . 20, 1955 .
12. N. Dombrowski and G . Munday, Spray Drying, in Biochemical and Biological Engineering
Science, Academic Press, New York, vol . 2, chap . 16, 1968 .
13. L . G . Dodge and J . A . Biaglow, Effect of Elevated Temperature and Pressure on Sprays fro m
Simplex Swirl Atomizers, J Eng. Gas Turbines and Power, vol . 108, pp . 209-215, 1986 .
14. S . M. De Corso and G . A. Kemeny, Effect of Ambient and Fuel Pressure on Nozzle Spra y
Angle, Trans . ASME, vol. 79, pp. 607-615, 1957 .
15. N. K . Rizk and A . H . Lefebvre, Prediction of Velocity Coefficient and Spray Cone Angle for
Simplex Swirl Atomizers, Proc . 3rd Int . Conf. on Liquid Atomization and Spray Systems ,
London, pp . IIIC/2/ 1-6, 1985 .
16. S . K . Chen, A . H . Lefebvre, and J . Rollbuhler, Influence of Geometric Features on th e
Performance of Pressure-Swirl Atomizers, J. Eng . Gas Turbines and Power, vol . 112, pp .
579-584, 1990 .
17. A. H . Lefebvre, Atomization and Sprays, Hemisphere, Washington, D .C., 1989 .