Fuel 85 (2006) 910–917

www.fuelfirst.com

Development and validation of a theoretical model

for diesel spray penetration
J.M. Desantes, R. Payri *, F.J. Salvador, A. Gil
CMT-Motores Térmicos, Universidad Politécnica de Valencia, Camino de Vera s/n, E-46022 Valencia, Spain
Received 13 June 2005; received in revised form 18 October 2005; accepted 25 October 2005
Available online 28 November 2005

Abstract
A research on the diesel spray injected into stagnant ambient air in a chamber is reported in this paper. The main objective of the investigation is
to carry out an in-depth analysis on the influence of injection parameters on the spray internal dynamics and spray macroscopic characteristics. As
a result of a theoretical approach based on momentum flux conservation along the sprays’ axis, a model which predicts the spray axis velocity and
spray tip penetration is obtained. Measurements of momentum flux and spray cone angle are needed in order to predict axis velocity and spray
penetration. The chamber density is assumed to be constant and equal to the density of the pressurized air inside the chamber. A Gaussian radial
profile is assumed for the axial velocity. Experimental results from a conventional common rail injection system with five axisymmetric nozzles
tested in a wide range of injection pressure values and density conditions have been used in order to obtain additional information of the model and
also for validation purposes. These experimental results include a large number of momentum flux (impact force), spray tip penetration and spray
cone angle measurements.
q 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Spray; Penetration; Injection

1. Introduction unlike previous theoretical analysis in the literature as Wakuri

The efficiency of the combustion of the fuel and therefore the
performance of a diesel engine depends on the quality of the
fuel–air mixture [1,2]. In conventional combustion systems,
where the fuel is injected directly into air, it is necessary to
provide adequate conditions for a good macrostructure of the
mixture in the combustion chamber. This involves that the
injected fuel must be uniformly distributed in the combustion
chamber in the very short time interval available for the mixture
formation. The fuel–air mixture process is strongly influenced
by the spray behavior, which depends on several parameters.
These parameters can be classified into two groups: parameters
related to the diesel injection system and parameters related to
the environment where the spray is injected.
In this paper, a theoretical model based on momentum flux
conservation along the spray axis which predicts the spray axis
velocity and spray tip penetration is presented. This model,
* Corresponding author. Tel.: C34 963879658; fax: C34 963877659.
E-mail address: rpayri@mot.upv.es (R. Payri).
0016-2361/$ - see front matter q 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.fuel.2005.10.023
[3] or Naber and Siebers [4] is based on a differential analysis
in a generic section of the spray. The model key parameter is
the momentum flux, considered by several authors as one of the
most important parameter governing the spray dynamics [5–8].
The momentum flux brings together the effective flux velocity
at the orifice outlet, the fuel density, and the effective diameter
of the nozzles’ orifices.
More recently, computer improvements have led to research-
ers to develop CFD codes and break-up models that produce
reliable results [9]. These models may become a very valuable
tool in the near future, while they provide complete information
about the structure of the flow and the spray behavior.
As far as the structure of the paper is concerned, the article is
divided in four parts. In Section 2, the development of the spray
model is shown and the assumptions and simplifications taken
into account are justified. In Section 3, the experimental
conditions and procedure are described. In this section, the
dimensional characteristics of the nozzles and the operating
points are explained. Basically, two kinds of measurements
have been performed to validate the model: macroscopic spray
behavior (penetration and spray cone angle) and momentum
flux [6,10]. The results obtained are described in the following
section of the paper (Section 4), and finally the analysis of the
 J.M. Desantes et al. / Fuel 85 (2006) 910–917 911

Nomenclature
Ku velocity coefficient in the spray model x axial coordinate
M _o momentum flux at the nozzle outlet orifice
Greek symbols
Pback backpressure
a coefficient of the Gaussian radial profile for the
Pin injection pressure
axial velocity
r radial coordinate
feq equivalent diameter
R radius of the spray
fo outlet diameter of the nozzle’s orifices
S spray tip penetration
x non-dimensional radial coordinate (xZr/R)
t time
DP pressure drop, DPZPinKPback
Uaxis(x) velocity in the coordinate x of the spray’s axis
ra ambient density
Umean(x) mean velocity in a section located in the
rf fuel density
coordinate x of the spray
r (x,r) density in the coordinates (x,r) of the spray
Uo orifice outlet velocity
qu spray cone angle
Utip penetration velocity
U(x,r) velocity in the coordinates (x,r) of the spray

results and the validation of the model are carried out in the last effects [5,6,10]. Nevertheless, with this simple analysis is not
part of the paper (Section 5). possible to obtain estimation for the constant that appears in the
penetration correlation.

2. Theoretical analysis 2.2. Global considerations

2.1. Background
Due to its great influence on the combustion efficiency, the
spray behaviour has been the subject of several experimental
and theoretical works for a long time and intensive
investigations are still underway by many researchers. Most
of these investigations conclude with empirical or semi-
empirical laws, which predict the penetration as a function of
several parameters. In this way, the work of Hay and Jones [11]
includes a critical revision on the correlations available in the
literature proposed for diesel sprays, and concludes that the
best ones are those proposed by Dent [12] and Wakuri et al. [3].
Dent’s correlation is based on the theory of the gaseous
injection, whilst Wakuri proposes a penetration law, which
depends on the spray cone angle. Later, Hiroyasu and Arai [13]
proposed a different penetration law divided in two regions:
before and after the break-up time.
More recently, Naber and Siebers [4] derived a penetration
correlation for non-vaporizing spray which follows the spray
penetration analyses of Wakuri et al. but including significant
modifications. These modifications include estimation for the
arbitrary constant that appears in the penetration correlation.
The correlation of Naber and Siebers is based on the fuel mass
balance and an overall momentum balance in the axial
direction in a control surface.
All these mentioned correlations involve the same par-
ameters (DP, fo, ra, t) with more or less the same weights. The
main dependencies of these variables found by these authors
can be obtained just performing a dimensional analysis of the
following variables: ambient gas density (ra), time from the
start of injection and instantaneous momentum flux ðM _ oÞ
through the orifice [14]. The instantaneous momentum flux
brings together the injection pressure and the nozzle diameter
Fig. 1 shows a typical transient spray. As can be seen, there
are two different regions in the spray: a conical-shape region
from the nozzle to approximately 70% of the total penetration
and so-called the steady region, and an elliptical-shape region,
which is called the transient region or unsteady region.
Regarding to the transient region, located at the spray tip, it
has a very complicated vortical structure that makes it difficult
to study. There is a lot of information about this subject
available in the literature, but there is no clear agreement
among the different authors. For this reason, several authors
[1,13] have tried to avoid this region and focus their study on
the steady part of the spray.
As far as the internal structure of the spray is concerned, the
spray can be divided into two other regions: the initial region,
located near the orifice of the nozzle, where the fuel on the
spray axis has not been perturbed by the entrained air (and
therefore fuel concentration can be considered as one, and the
local velocity is still the same as the exit velocity), and the main
region or fully developed region, where the fuel in the whole
Fig. 1. Generic spray.
912 J.M. Desantes et al. / Fuel 85 (2006) 910–917
section of the spray has been perturbed by the entrained air
[13]. A schematic view of these two regions is presented in
Fig. 2. The present theoretical development will focus on the
main steady region of the spray.
2.3. Hypotheses
The hypotheses assumed to carry out the theoretical
derivation of the model are the following:
† The environment is quiescent.
† Momentum, and so, injection velocity and mass flow rate
are constant during the whole injection process.
† Gaussian radial profile is assumed for the velocity along the
x direction. At this stage, it is necessary to point out that
axial velocity distributions are not well known in sprays.
Some authors use gas jet distributions as a first approxi-
mation. Spalding was the first one to treat the diesel spray as
a gaseous turbulent jet [15]. Experimental similarities
between them have been always remarked by other
researchers [1,4,16–20]. A hypothesis about axial velocity
and concentration distribution is required in the model.
Different expressions can be found in the literature [1,15–
17,20–23]. Correas [17] made a comparative study of all of
them, and proposed a modification of the expressions
proposed by Hinze [21] which has been usually considered
the profile that better fits the available experimental data in
the literature. This profile [17] was also assumed by Pastor
et al. [24] in a more recent study and it is also assumed for
this study.
† Air density is constant during the whole injection process.
† The concept of equivalent diameter is used in order to make
use of the concept of an isodensity jet. Ricou and Spalding
[25] found that different gas jets behave in a similar way if
both momentum flux and exit velocity are the same. This
finding mean that the author were able to define an
equivalent diameter so that:
rffiffiffiffiffi
2 pf2eq 2
_ o Z rf pfo Uo2 Z ra
M Uo 0 feq Z fo
rf
(1)
4 4 ra
feq in Eq. (1) represents the orifice diameter of a gas jet
equivalent to the original jet, maintaining the same momentum
flux and exit velocity of the latter, but with a fuel density equal
Fig. 2. Initial and main region in a jet.
to the air density (this definition is also valid for diesel sprays).
Density of fuel can be several orders of magnitude bigger than
the gas density (rfZ835 kg/m3 at 20 8C), and so, the previous
expression means that, a spray with a fuel density rf, a
momentum, Mo, and diameter, fo which is injected into air
with a density ra, behaves in a similar way that a spray with a
fuel density equal to the air density, ra (very small compared
rf) and diameter, feq, (bigger than fo).
In the following theoretical analysis the interest of such a
definition will be the use of an isodensity spray.
2.4. Theoretical model
In Fig. 1, a coordinates system (x, r) is considered located at
the origin of the spray, such a way that the x-coordinate
coincides with the spray axis and the r-coordinate is the radial
position (perpendicular to the spray axis). The momentum flux
in any position of the spray (x), can be written as:
ðR
MðxÞ Z M o Z 2prðx; rÞrU 2 ðx; rÞdr
_ _ (2)
0
where M _ o is the momentum at the orifice outlet, r is the local
density, and U (x,r) is the velocity along the x direction defined
by the following Gaussian distribution:
   
r 2
Uðx; rÞ Z Uaxis ðxÞ exp Ka (3)
R
where Uaxis(x) is the velocity in the spray axis, r, the radial
position, and R the radius of the cone angle defined by the
border of the spray (steady region). The parameter a is a shape
factor of the Gaussian distribution [17,24].
In order to simplify the previous mathematical expressions,
an isodensity spray equivalent to the one being studied will be
considered. For this purpose, fo could be substituted by feq and
rf by ra. This implies that the momentum of the original spray
is equal to the momentum of the equivalent spray which has a
density equal to the air density but with a higher diameter equal
to the feq as established by Eq. (1). Nevertheless, the model
directly takes as an input the momentum flux, which is
identical in both (original and equivalent spray). As shown in
the following formulation of the model, the equivalent
diameter does not appear explicitly in the model and so, the
only assumption taken for the model development is that the
local density is constant and equal to ra.
Therefore:
rðx; rÞ Z cte Z ra : (4)
The radial position, r, can be normalised by the radius of the
spray defining a new variable:
r dr
x Z 0 dx Z (5)
R R
 J.M. Desantes et al. / Fuel 85 (2006) 910–917 913

The Eq. (2) becomes: So, finally the expression for the spray tip penetration is:
 1=4  
ð1 2a 2 _ o1=4 rKð1=4Þ q
SZ ð1KexpðK2aÞÞKð1=4Þ M a t1=2 tanKð1=2Þ u
M o Z ra 2pR Uaxis ðxÞ x expðK2ax2 Þdx
_ 2 2
(6) p Ku 2
0 (16)
And integrating Eq. (6): Taking into account Eq. (3), a value for a can be estimated if
 1 it is assumed that the radial position which define the boundary
_ o Z ra 2pR2 Uaxis
2 1 between the spray and non-perturbed ambient (defining the spray
M ðxÞ K expðK2ax2 Þ (7)
4a 0 radius) corresponds to the points where the velocity is 1% of the
velocity in the axis. With this assumption, if it is considered that
and so:
rZR and U (x,R)Z0.01 Uaxis(x) in Eq. (3), a value of aZ4.605
_ o Z ra p R2 Uaxis
M 2
ðxÞð1KexpðK2aÞÞ (8) is obtained. This assumption has been also considered by several
2a authors in the literature [17,24].
taking into account that: For this value of a, the term (1Kexp(K2a)) in Eq. (16) can
  be approximated to one, and therefore the following expression
q is obtained for the spray tip penetration:
R Z x tan u (9)
2    
2 !4:605 1=4 2 _ 1=4 Kð1=4Þ 1=2 Kð1=2Þ qu
substituting in Eq. (8) and Eq. (10) is obtained: SZ M r t tan (17)
p Ku o a 2
 
_ p 2 2 2 qu
M o Z ra U ðxÞð1KexpðK2aÞÞx tan (10) In this expression, the tendencies found for density, time
2a axis 2 and spray cone angle are similar to those existing in the
from which an expression for the velocity in the spray axis is literature [3,4,11–14] but in this study the momentum flux is
found: included and the only parameter in the correlation which can
not be directly characterized from the measurements is the
_ 1=2
M o value of the constant Ku, which has a physical meaning as
Uaxis ðxÞ Z

q  (11)
1=2 p 1=2
ra ð1KexpðK2aÞÞ1=2 x tan u shown in Eq. (12).
2a 2
In the following sections, the comparison of this expression
This expression is very useful because with it, and taking with the experimental results of penetration, spray cone angle
into account the Gaussian radial profile for the velocity, it is and spray momentum makes it possible to obtain a value for the
possible to determine the axial velocity of any point of the constant Ku and also to validate the correlation.
spray in spite of the fact of the presence of droplets.
The velocity on the jet axis is obviously related to the tip
3. Experimental conditions and procedure
penetration velocity. Even if the exact relationship between
these two parameters is not clear, it is apparent that one is
In order to perform this study, a modified commercial
proportional to the other. Under this assumption, which will be
common rail was used in order to generate sprays (including a
justified later, it is possible to write:
high pressure volumetric pump driven by a motor and
dS appropriated software to govern the electronic system).
Uaxis ðx Z SÞ Z Ku Utip Z Ku (12) The nozzles used are five cylindrical mono-orifice nozzles
dt
with different outlet diameters: 119, 140, 165, 183 and 206 mm
with S, the spray tip penetration, and dS/dt the spray tip and especially manufactured for this research. The nozzle
penetration velocity. outlet diameters and dimensional characteristics were obtained
Substituting in Eq. (11), the following expression is
using the silicone technique [26] and other dimensional
obtained:
parameters can be found in Ref. [27].
_ 1=2
M For these nozzles, spray momentum flux measurements and
o
S dS Z
p 1=2
q  dt (13) a spray macroscopic characterization have been carried out.
ra1=2 Ku 2a ð1KexpðK2aÞÞ1=2 tan 2
u
For the macroscopic spray characterization, an injection test rig
and integrating both terms in Eq. (13): that reproduce both the high gas density and pressure
encountered in a diesel engine combustion chamber is used.
ðS ðt _ 1=2 The test rig is pressurized with nitrogen and it is based on a
M o
SdS Z
p 1=2
q  dt (14) constant volume vessel with optical access for visualization
r1=2
a Ku 2a ð1KexpðK2aÞÞ1=2 tan 2
u
purposes. In this test rig isothermal conditions are considered
0 0
and evaporation is not present. Details of this rig, as well as for
the following expression is obtained: the image-acquisition system and image processing software
S2 _ 1=2
M are given in Refs. [5,14,28].
o
Z

p 1=2

t (15) The images were taken at steps of 25 ms during the whole
2 ra1=2 Ku 2a ð1KexpðK2aÞÞ1=2 tan q2u injection period. A minimum of five images per instant was
914 J.M. Desantes et al. / Fuel 85 (2006) 910–917

Table 1
Experimental conditions for the spray macroscopic characteristics and
momentum flux characterization

fo [mm] Pin [MPa] Pback [MPa] ra [kg/m3]

119 50/80/130 1/2/3/4/5/6 12/24/35/46/58/69
140 50/80/130 1/2/3/4/5/6 12/24/35/46/58/69
165 50/80/130 1/2/3/4/5/6 12/24/35/46/58/69
183 50/80/130 1/2/3/4/5/6 12/24/35/46/58/69
206 50/80/130 1/2/3/4/5/6 12/24/35/46/58/69

used for the analysis presented here. An injection duration of

1.5 ms was used.
As far as the momentum flux measurements are concerned,
a special test rig, pressurized with nitrogen based on the
measurement of the impact force of a spray with piezo-electric
pressure sensor is used. A sketch and the measuring principle
of this technique are provided in [6,10].
Either in the spray characterization test rig or the
momentum test rig the pressure inside the chamber (Pback)
can be controlled and regulated.
The experimental conditions used for the spray character-
isation and momentum measurements are summarised in
Table 1. Three injection pressures of 50, 80 and 130 MPa
were tested. For each pressure and nozzle, six different values
of back pressure were used: 1–6 MPa., which considering a
temperature inside both test rigs constant and fixed at 25 8C,
provides six different values of air density ranging from 12 to
69 kg/m3 and summarised in Table 1.
Fig. 3. Mean values of penetration and cone angle at different chamber density.
(foZ206 mm, PiZ80 MPa, PbackZ4 MPa).
4. Experimental results

The macroscopic parameters used for the characterization of value of momentum, 5.44 N, belongs to the nozzle with the
the spray are the penetration (S) and the spray cone angle (qu). maximum diameter, foZ206 mm, and maximum pressure
Both of these parameters are represented in Fig. 1 on the drop, DPZ129 MPa. On the other hand, the minimum value of
generic spray. For the case of the spray angle, this is considered 0.68 N is found for the nozzle with the lower diameter,
as the cone angle which is formed by the spray considering foZ119 mm, and minimum pressure drop, DPZ44 MPa.
60% of the penetration as justified in [28].
As an example, in Fig. 3, the mean values of penetration and
cone angle data are represented for the nozzle with
foZ206 mm, PiZ80 MPa and different densities inside the
chamber. The standard deviation found for penetration was
around 0.8 mm. And for the cone angle was 1.5 8. Therefore,
the accuracy of the experimental results was very high.
As can be seen from Fig. 3, the higher the density in the
chamber the higher the spray cone angle, and lower penetration
corresponding to a higher spreading angle is consistent with
conservation of momentum.
On the other hand, Fig. 4 shows the instantaneous
momentum flux for tests with a discharge pressure of 4 MPa
and three injection pressures: 130, 80 and 50 MPa. Typical top
hat profile can be observed during the time the needle is fully
open. It is during this time period that averaging has been
carried out for all conditions summarised in Table 1. The mean
value of momentum flux for all nozzles and conditions tested
are provided in Tables from 2 to 6. Obviously, as can be seen
from the figures, the momentum flux increases when increasing Fig. 4. Instantaneous momentum flux for the three injection pressures. (foZ
either the pressure differential or the diameter. The maximum 206 mm, PbackZ4 MPa).
 J.M. Desantes et al. / Fuel 85 (2006) 910–917 915

Table 2
Mean values of momentum flux in N for the nozzle with diameter foZ119 mm

foZ119 mm Pback [MPa]

Pi [MPa] 1 2 3 4 5 6
50 0.78 0.76 0.73 0.71 0.70 0.68
80 1.25 1.23 1.21 1.19 1.17 1.16
130 2.10 2.05 2.0 1.99 1.97 1.96

Table 3
Mean values of momentum flux in N for the nozzle with diameter foZ140 mm

foZ140 mm Pback [MPa]

Pi [Mpa] 1 2 3 4 5 6
50 0.99 0.97 0.95 0.93 0.91 0.88
80 1.60 1.57 1.56 1.54 1.52 1.49
130 2.61 2.59 2.57 2.55 2.53 2.51

Table 4
Mean values of momentum flux in N for the nozzle with diameter foZ165 mm

foZ165 mm Pback [MPa]

Pi [Mpa] 1 2 3 4 5 6 Fig. 5. Experimental penetration versus penetration predicted by the correlation
obtained.
50 1.21 1.18 1.16 1.13 1.11 1.08
80 1.95 1.93 1.90 1.88 1.85 1.83
130 3.20 3.17 3.15 3.12 3.10 3.07
obtain the penetration with a high degree of confidence which
is also indicated by the high value for the correlation factor (R-
Table 5 square) of 98.08%. It is important to point out the huge amount
Mean values of momentum flux in N for the nozzle with diameter foZ183 mm of measurements provided by the experimentation of around
foZ183 mm Pback [MPa]
28,000 samples.
The value obtained from the correlation is compared with
Pi [Mpa] 1 2 3 4 5 6
the constant in Eq. (17) as it is shown in Eq. (19) and makes it
50 1.54 1.50 1.47 1.44 1.41 1.38
possible to obtain a value for the unknown parameter of the
80 2.48 2.44 2.41 2.38 2.35 2.31
130 4.05 4.01 3.97 3.95 3.92 3.89 model, Ku:
 1=4
2 !4:605 2
1:26 Z (19)
Table 6 p Ku
Mean values of momentum flux in N for the nozzle with diameter foZ206 mm

foZ206 mm Pback [MPa] this equation leads to a value for the constant of KuZ2.076.
Pi [Mpa] 1 2 3 4 5 6 This result implies that as shown by Eq. (12):
50 2.06 2.02 1.98 1.94 1.89 1.85
80 3.33 3.29 3.25 3.21 3.15 3.12
dS
UaxisxZS Z Ku Utip Z 2:076 (20)
130 5.44 5.39 5.36 5.32 5.27 5.23 dt

5. Model validation
From the experimental measurements of spray tip pen-
etration, spray cone angle and momentum flux, the following
correlation of Eq. (17) has been fitted:
 
_ 1=4 Kð1=4Þ 1=2 Kð1=2Þ qu
S Z 1:26M o ra t tan
2 Although this result has been achieved following an
The comparison of the experimental penetration versus the
predicted penetration by the regression is shown in Fig. 5. As
can be seen from the figure, the correlation obtained is able to
and so, the velocity of spray droplets on the spray axis is the
double of the spray tip velocity. Qualitatively, this result can be
intuitive due to the fact that the front of the spray penetrates
against stagnant air which opposes to the spray’s growth.
Nevertheless, droplets in the axis of the spray penetrate in an
environment which is already in movement in the axis
direction by the previous particles. This procedure has allowed
obtaining the relationship between the axis velocity and spray
penetration velocity.
(18)
experimental procedure, it can be also demonstrated following
a theoretical reasoning. In fact, the same result is achieved if it
is supposed that the front of the spray moves forward with a
velocity equal to the mean velocity in the section.
916 J.M. Desantes et al. / Fuel 85 (2006) 910–917

The mean velocity in a generic section (x) can be worked out † The experiments have been used to validate the model
as the momentum flux in the section divided by the mass flow and to obtain, by means of some correlations, the
rate, as shown by Eq. (21) unknown parameters needed to completely define the
_ model.
MðxÞ
Umean ðxÞ Z (21) † Also an expression for the model has been obtained in
_
mðxÞ which no experimental data has been used. In this case,
with several hypotheses have been taking into account which
leads to very similar results to the experimental-
ð1 supported model, which demonstrates the validity of
2 2
_
MðxÞ Z Mo Z ra 2pR Uaxis ðxÞ x expðK2ax2 Þdx (22) that hypothesis and the model presented in this paper.
0

and
References
ð1
_ Z ra 2pR2 Uaxis ðxÞ x expðKax2 Þdx
mðxÞ (23) [1] Rife J, Heywood JB. Photographic and performance studies of Diesel
combustion with a rapid compression machine, SAE Paper 740948;
0
1974.
and therefore [2] Hiroyasu H, Arai M. Structures of fuel sprays in Diesel engines. SAE
Paper 900475; 1990.
Ð1 [3] Wakuri Y, Fujii M, Amitani T, Tsuneya R. Studies of the penetration of a
x expðK2ax2 Þdx fuel spray in a Diesel engine. Bull JSME 1960;3(9):123–30.
0
Umean ðxÞ Z Uaxis ðxÞ (24) [4] Naber J, Siebers DL. Effects of gas density and vaporisation on
Ð1 2 penetration and dispersion of Diesel sprays. SAE Paper 960034; 1996.
x expðKax Þdx
0
[5] Payri F, Bermúdez V, Payri R, Salvador FJ. The influence of cavitation on
the internal flow and the Spray characteristics in diesel injection nozzles.
Integrating, the following expression is obtained: Fuel 2004;83:419–31.
[6] Desantes JM, Payri R, Salvador FJ, Gimeno J. Measurements of spray
ð1=4aÞð1KexpðK2aÞÞ momentum for the study of cavitation in diesel injection nozzles. SAE
Umean ðxÞ Z Uaxis ðxÞ (25)
ð1=2aÞð1KexpðKaÞÞ Paper 2003-01-0703; 2003.
[7] Way RJB. Investigation of interaction between swirl and jets in direct
taking into account that aZ4.605: injection Diesel engines using a water model. SAE Paper 770412; 1997.
Umean ðxÞ Z 0:505 Uaxis ðxÞ (26) [8] Petersen U, MacGregor SA. Jet mixing in a model direct injection Diesel
engine with swirl. J Mech Eng Sci 1996;210:69–78 [IME C07394].
If, as stated before, it is assumed that the spray tip penetrates [9] Lee CS, Kim HJ, Park SW. Atomization characteristics and prediction
with a velocity equal to the mean velocity in the section: accuracies of hybrid break-up models for a gasoline direct injection spray.
Proc Inst Mech Eng 2004;218(D):1041–53.
dS [10] Payri R, Garcı́a JM, Salvador FJ, Gimeno J. Using spray momentum flux
Utip Z Umean ðx Z SÞ Z Z 0:505 Uaxis ðx Z SÞ (27) measurements to understand the influence of Diesel nozzle geometry on
dt
spray characteristics. Fuel 2005;84:551–61.
and so: [11] Hay N, Jones PL. Comparison of the various correlations for spray
penetration. SAE Paper 720776; 1972.
dS
Uaxis ðx Z SÞ Z 1:980 (28) [12] Dent JC. A basis for the comparison of various experimental methods for
dt studying spray penetration. SAE Paper 710571; 1971.
which implies that Ku_theoretical (Ku obtained by following a [13] Hiroyasu H, Arai M. Structures of fuel sprays in Diesel engines. SAE
Paper 900475; 1990.
theoretical reasoning) has almost the same value as obtained [14] Desantes JM, Payri R, Salvador FJ, Soare V. Study of the influence of
experimentally (1.980 vs 2.076). geometrical and injection parameters on Diesel sprays characteristics in
As demonstrated, taking a value of aZ4.605, the value of isothermal conditions, SAE Paper 2005-01-0913; 2005.
Ku obtained following either an experimental procedure or a [15] Spalding DB. Combustion and mass transfer. Pergamon press, ISBN 0-
theoretical reasoning is close to two. 08-022105-8; 1979.
[16] Prasad CMV, Kar S. An investigation on the difusión of momentum and
mass of fuel in a Diesel fuel spray. ASME J Eng Power 1976;76-DGP-1:
6. Conclusions 1–11.
[17] Correas D. Theoretical and experimental study of isothermal Diesel free
sprays (In Spanish), PhD Thesis, Universidad Politécnica de Valencia;
† A new theoretical model which predicts the spray axis
1998.
velocity and the spray tip penetration has been proposed in [18] Adler D, Lyn WT. The evaporation and mixing of a liquid fuel spray in a
this paper. This model is based on the momentum flux Diesel air swirl. Proc Inst Mech Eng 1969;184:171–80.
conservation along the spray axis. [19] Arcoumanis C, Whitelaw JH, Wong KY. Gaseous simulations of Diesel-
† The concept of equivalent diameter is used in order to make type sprays in a motored engine. SAE Paper 890793; 1989.
[20] Sinnamon JF, Lancaster DR, Stiener JC. And experimental and analytical
use of the concept of an isodensity jet.
study of engine fuel spray trajectories. SAE Paper 800135; 1980.
† Spray visualisation and spray momentum measurements [21] Hinze JO. Turbulence. McGraw-Hill, ISBN 0-07-029037-7; 1975.
have been performed in no-evaporating conditions, with [22] Abramovich GN. The theory of turbulent jets. MIT Press, ISBN 0-262-
different pressure levels and different nozzles. 01008-9; 1963.
 J.M. Desantes et al. / Fuel 85 (2006) 910–917 917

[23] Schlichting H. Boundary layer theory. McGrawHill, 7th ed; 1978.
[24] Pastor JV, Encabo E, Ruı́z S. New modelling approach for fast online
calculations in sprays. SAE Paper 2000-01-0287; 2000.
[25] Ricou FP. Spalding, measurements of entrainment by axi-symmetrical
turbulent jets. J Fluid Mech 1961;11:21–32.
[26] Macián V, Bermúdez V, Payri R, Gimeno J. New technique for
the determination of the internal geometry of Diesel nozzle with
the use of the silicone methodology. Exp Tech 2003;27(2):
39–43.
[27] Desantes JM, Payri R, Pastor JM, Gimeno J. Experimental analysis of fuel
evaporation in Diesel sprays. Part I. Nozzle characterisation. Atomization
Sprays 2005;15:489–516.
[28] Pastor JV, Arregle J, Palomares A. Diesel spray image segmentation with
a likelihood ratio test. Appl Opt 2001;40(17):2876–85.