Water Jet/Spray Measurement Analysis

Final Report on Contract H - 787^36

G. Garland Lala

Atmospheric Sciences Research Center

State University of New York at Albany

1^00 Washington Avenue

Albany, NY 12222

JNASa-CE-178802) HATER JEl/SEESX

MEASUREMENT AMAIY.SIS Final Report {State

UBiv. of New YClK) 12 p HC A02/MF A01

CSCI 20D

January, 1986

G3/3U

N86-2'J930

Unclas

42917

Prepared for:

George C. Marshall Space Flight Center

Marshall Space Flight Center, AL 35812
1.0 Introduction

The objective of this study was to provide analysis of data

obtained under a previous contract entitled "Characterization of DropSpectra from High Volume Flow Water Jets." Under this previous contract measurements of drop spectra were obtained in the spray resulting fron the breakup of high volume flow water jets from a variety of

nozzle types. The drop spectra measurements were obtained from two

drop spectrometers covering a range from 10 microns to 12 millimeters

diameter. These tests were conducted at the Marshall Space Flight

Center during October, 198^. The task addressed was to select representative spectra from the individual tests and provide analyses in

both numerical and graphical formats as outlined in the proposal. The

intended application of these results is an evaluation of the feasibility of fog clearing by high volume water sprays.

During the tests, a fog event occurred making it possible

to test the concept of fog clearing. Visual range data and fog drop

spectra were analyzed, with particular emphasis placed on the modification of these parameters due to the water spray.

This report summarizes the analysis methods used for the reduction of the data from the drop spectrometers and documents the analysis provided under this contract.

2.0 Description of the Data Set

The measurement system for droplet distribution employed in the

study consisted of four particle/drop spectrometers manufactured by

Particle Measuring Systems (Table 1) connected to a central data

acquisiton system (PDS-HOO).
Table 1

Particle/Drop Spectrometers

Probe Size Range

1. ASASP-X 0.12 urn - 6 pm

2. FSSP-100 0.5 pro - 4? pm

3. OAP-230X 10.0 pm - 310 pm

14. GBPP-100 0.2 pm - 12.1 mm

Each spectrometer sizes individual particles and reports the

encoded binary size data to the data system which accumulates multichannel spectra for each probe. At the end of a sample interval

(controlled by the PDS-400), a report of measured counts in each size

channel for each probe is recorded on a cartridge tape system. For

these tests, a one-minute sample interval was used. Thus, for each of

the nozzle tests, many spectra from the individual probes were

recorded. After the conclusion of a test, the raw data was transferred to a computer system for analysis. Because the data recorded

were in the form of particle counts in a prescribed size range, additional analysis was necessary to incorporate the specific operating

characteristics of the probes and produce spectra in terms of volume

concentrations. The details of this data reduction scheme and analysis procedure are reported here.

3.0 Sample Volume Analysis

3-1 Scattering Probes (ASASP-X, FSSP-100)

Reduction of ASASP-X data to volume concentration is easily
accomplished because the sample volume depends only on the sample flow

rate which is preset to a constant value. Particle counts were scaled

to particle concentration by dividing by the product of the sample

flow rate (10 cnP sec"1) and the sample time. Similar procedures

were applied to the FSSP-100 data set using the sample flow rate of

o _ i

9.01* cm-5 sec provided by the manufacturer's calibration.

3.2 Imaging Probes (OAP-230X, GBPP-100)

Imaging probes determine a drop's diameter by measuring the size

of the image formed on a discrete element photodiode array during its

transit through the spectrometer beam. The size calibration is fixed

by the size of the diodes and the overall optical magnification.

Diodes at either end of the array are used to detect droplets which

are partially outside the sample volume. These measurements are

rejected. This edge rejection scheme leads to an effective sample

volume which is dependent on the particle size. Besides limitations

on the beam width imposed by the edge rejection system, the sample

volume is constrained by the depth of field of the- optical system for

resolving small drops. For larger drops the depth of field is the

mechanical limit of the probe which determines the volume for these

drops.

3.2.1 Sample Volume Calculations: OAP-230X

The sample volume for the OAP-230X is given by the following

equation.

V = DOF * EAW * u * t

where V = the sample volume

DOF = the depth of field for small drops or the mechanical limit

(6.1 cm) for large drops

EAW = 0.31 - D(mm) = the effective array width as a function of
drop size (D)

u = the velocity of the drops passing through the sample volume.

For the OAP-230X, this is the aspirator air speed of

13.45 m sec~1

t = sample time (which was typically 60 seconds during these

tests)

Thus, to convert particle counts to concentration this equation

is evaluated for each size channel to calculate the volume sampled.

3.2.2 Sample Volume Calculations: GBPP-100

The sample volume for the GBPP is given by the following equation:

V = DOF * EAW * V * t s

where DOF = the depth of field for small drops or the mechanical

limit (50 cm) for large drops

EAW = 12.3 - D(mm) = the effective array width as a function

of drop size (D) in millimeters

V = the velocity of drops passing through the sample volume.

For the GBPP this velocity is usually assumed to be the

the terminal fall speed of the drops which is a function

of drop diameter

t = the sample time (which was typically 60 seconds for these

tests)

Under typical operating conditions, particle counts are converted to concentration using the equation above for the sample volume. The influence of the unusual conditions during these tests on

this procedure will be considered in a subsequent section.

4.0 Correction of GBPP-100 drop spectra for drop flattening
Drops larger than one millimeter diameter become distorted into

oblate ellipsoids by a combination of aerodynamic and surface tension

forces. Thus, the diameter measured by the GBPP-100 is the dimension

of the largest axis of the ellipsoidal drop. Drop size distributionsare commonly reported in terms of the equivalent spherical diameter of

the drops which makes it necessary to adjust the measured spectra. The

basis of this correction is an equation relating the dimension of the

largest drop axis to the equivalent spherical diameter given by Beard

(1976) as

DO = 18.02 + 18.52 (0.9167 + 0.108 Dm)1/2 (1)

where DQ = equivalent spherical diameter

Dm = measured length of the major axis

Two approaches to the correction problem are possible. The simplest method is to redefine the instrument channels in terms of the

equivalent diameter. This has the disadvantage of producing spectra

with unequal channel widths which can be difficult to analyze. The

alternative to this approach is to redistribute the droplet counts by

linear interpolation in a way that allows the instrument channels to

be interpreted as equivalent spherical sizes rather than major axis

dimensions. This latter approach has been used in this analysis.

The interpolation of drop spectra from the measured size concentration to the equivalent spherical size can be summarized as follows. In the measurement coordinate system, the channel size bounds

are D and D.+1 with the corresponding concentration in this channel

of N Similarly, in the spherical drop coordinate system, channel

size bounds are d.^ and di + 1 with a concentration of ni. By means of

the equation (1) the channel bounds D. and D.+1 are transformed into

equivalent spherical sizes of D DH respectively. The conditions for
the interpolation from the measurement system to the equivalent

spherical diameter are as follows:

D

L > Qi and DH <

D

L < and DH < di + 1 ; r\i +

D

L > di and DH >

By means of this algorithm, spectra are transformed from one

coordinate system to the other while preserving the total concentration.

Correction of the drop spectra for equilibrium droplet distortion is only an approximate correction for drop shape variations. It

is well known that larger drops exhibit complicated modes of oscillation which may be excited by collisions, drop breakup or turbulence.

The transit time for droplets falling through the sample area of the

GBPP is less than the period of oscillation which will cause drops of

a given size to be distributed over several size channels. Due to the

complexity of this problem, at this time the best approach is to

correct for the average shape while remaining aware that the spectral

measurements are subject to spreading by oscillations. The influence

of the artificial broadening will be most apparent in distribution of

the higher moments such as the crossectional area and volume of the

drops.

5.0 Other External Sources of Error in the GBPP-100

As noted in an earlier section, the calculation of the sample

volume for precipitation drops depends on the value assumed for their

fall velocity. In this analysis, Beard's (1976) equation for the

terminal fall velocity of raindrops, which is a reasonable assumption

for natural rainfall, has been used. In some of the spray tests,
breakup processes were observed throughout the spray column. When

drops were breaking up above the GBPP-100 the actual fall speeds of

the drops may have been different than their theoretical terminal fall

speeds because insufficient time was available for acceleration or

deceleration. Because of the unsteady nature of the water spray

breakup, it is not feasible to try to correct for this effect.

Because of its geometry, the GBPP-100 is sensitive to the direction of drop trajectories. Components of velocity perpendicular to

the probe axis can lead to overestimation of the size of drops. In

the spray tests, the probe was aligned to minimize this effect but the

potential for sizing errors was still present.

6.0 Water Spary Tests - Data Selection and Analysis

From the large number of spectra measured during the nozzle

tests, spectra representative of specific nozzle types and operating

conditions were selected for analysis. Representativeness was judged

by inspecting the moments of the size distribution as well as total

water content and drop concentration. Spectra selected for analysis

were chosen from the middle of a sequence of measurements exhibiting

stable characteristics which is indicative of nearly constant test

conditions. Appendix 1 summarizes the spectra selected as well as

operating conditions for the tests. A detailed summary of the analysis provided in terms of plots of spectra as well as numerical listings is provided in Appendix 2.

7.0 Fog Tests

One episode of fog occurred during the test period providing an

opportunity to measure the effects of the water spray curtain on fog
drop size distribution and visibility. During this test, the water

spray curtain was periodically turned on providing data on fog drop

spectra under natural conditions as well as with spray curtain operation. Spectra used for analysis were selected from the observationsnear the midpoints of the test intervals. These times, as well as the

analysis performed, are summarized in Appendices 1 and 2. A variety

of time series plots of visual range, both from the visibility meter

and integration of drop spectra, of liquid water content calculated

from drop spectra, and of number concentration in selected size

channels were also provided.
APPENDIX 1

Summary of Selected Spectra

1. Nozzle Tests

Spectrum #

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

*14

15

16

17

18

A19

20

Date

•o/da/yr

10/23/84

10/23/84

10/23/84

10/23/84

10/25/84

10/19/84

10/19/84

10/22/84

10/22/84

10/22/84

10/22/84

10/23/84

10/23/84

10/16/84

10/24/84

10/24/84

10/23/84

10/23/84

10/18/84

10/24/84

Time

hr :mn: sc

17:32:27

17:22:55

17:39:47

17:08:13

12:10:53

13:14:15

13:51:14

18:10:43

17:25:57

18:15:23

17:44:03

09:50:34

12:02:41

14:54:29

12:32:33

14:47:21

17:48:09

13:29:25

14:05:42

16:06:28

Exp ID

F

F

F

F

I

D

D

E

E

E

E

F

F

A

H

H

F

F

C

H

Nozzle

1 1/4

1 1/4

1 1/4

1 1/4

1 3/B

Fixed teeth

Fixed teeth

Spin teeth

Spin teeth

Spin teeth

Spin teeth

Spin teeth

Spin teeth

1 3/8

1 3/4

1 3/4 curtain

1 1/4 st bore

1

1

2 streams

Pressure

(psi)

100

120

145 •

200

125

195

205

125

145

175

195

172

185

138

145

153

n/a

145

190

n/a

* No GBPP hood modification

2. Foa Tests

Spectrum #

1

2

3

4

5

6

Date

no/da/yr

10/24/84

10/24/84

10/24/84

10/24/84

10/24/84

10/24/84

Time

hr : inn : s c

07:53:45

08:02:09

08:09:34

08:22:50

08:27:58

08:35:19

Exp ID

G

G

G

G

G

G

Nozzle

spray on

spray off -

spray on

spray off -

spray on

spray off -

Pressure

(psi)

road array

road array

road array

road array

road array

road array
APPENDIX 2

Summary of Graphics

1. Nozzle Tests

Plot Type X-Axis Parameter [units! Y-Axis Parameter [units]

GAP

OAP

OAP

GBPP

GBPP

GBPP

OAP,GBPP

OAP,GBPP

OAP,GBPP

OAP,GBPP

OAP,GBPP

OAP,GBPP

Linear D CmmD

Linear D CmmD

Linear D CmmD

Linear D CmmD

Linear D CmmD

Linear D CmmD

Log D CmmD

Log D Cram3

Log D CmmD

Log D CmmD

Log D CmmD

Log D CmmD

Log dN/dD CnT-3 mm^-lD

Log dS/dD Cmm^ nT-3 mm'VID

Log dM/dD Cg m~-3 mm^-lD

Log dN/dD Cm^-3

Log dS/dD Cmm"2 m"-3 mmA-lD

Log dM/dD Cg m"-3 mm^-lD

Log dN/dlogD Cm^-SD

Linear dN/dlogD Cm~-3D

Log dS/dlogD Cmm~2 m^-SD

Linear dS/dlogD Cmm"2 nT-3D

Log dM/dlogD Cg m^-SD

Linear dM/dlogD Cg mA-3D

2. Fog Tests

Plot Type

PSSP

FSSP

FSSP

OAP

OAP

OAP

FSSP,OAP

FSSF,OAP

FSSP.OAP

FSSP,OAP

FSSP,OAP

FSSP,OAP

X-Axis Parameter CunitsD

Linear D CumD

Linear D CumD

Linear D CumD

Linear D CumD

Linear D CumD

Linear D CumD

Log D CumD

Log D CumD

Log D CumD

Log D CumD

Log D CumD

Log D CumD

Y-Axis Parameter CunitsD

Log dN/dD Ccm^-3 um^-lD

Log dS/dD Cum"2 cm"-3 um~-lD

Log dM/dD Cg mA-3 um^-lD

Log dN/dD CcmA-3 um~-lD

Log dS/dD CumA2 cm^-3 urn^-lD

Log dM/dD Cg m^-3 um^-lD

Log dN/dlogD Ccm^-3D

Linear dN/dlogD CcnT-3D

Log dS/dlogD Cum^2 cm~-3D

Linear dS/dlogD Cum-^2 cm^-3D

Log dM/dlogD Cg m"-3D

Linear dM/dlogD Cg m^-SD
References

Beard, K.V., 1976: Terminal velocity and shape of cloud and precipitation drops aloft. J. Atmos. Sci., 33, 851-863.