Professional Documents
Culture Documents
S. P. Lin
Mechanical and Aeronautical Engineering Department, Clarkson University, Potsdam,
by Princeton University Library on 10/24/05. For personal use only.
R. D. Reitz
Mechanical Engineering Department, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin,
53706; e-mail: reitz@engr.wisc.edu
KEY WORDS: jet instability, breakup regimes, atomization, sprays, surface tension
ABSTRACT
A liquid jet emanating from a nozzle into an ambient gas is inherently unstable.
It may break up into drops of diameters comparable to the jet diameter or into
droplets of diameters several orders of magnitude smaller. The sizes of the drops
formed from a liquid jet without external control are in general not uniform. The
sizes as well as the size distribution depend on the range of flow parameters in
which the jet is produced. The jet breakup exhibits different characteristics in
different regimes of the relevant flow parameters because of the different physical
mechanisms involved. Some recent works based on linear stability theories aimed
at the delineation of the different regimes and elucidation of the associated phys-
ical mechanisms are reviewed, with the intention of presenting current scientific
knowledge on the subject. The unresolved scientific issues are pointed out.
1. INTRODUCTION
The breakup of a liquid jet emanating into another fluid has been quantitatively
studied for more than a century. Plateau (1873) observed that the surface energy
of a uniform circular cylindrical jet is not the minimum attainable for a given
jet volume. He argued that the jet tends to break into segments of equal length,
each of which is 2π times longer than the jet radius, such that the spherical
drops formed from these segments give the minimum surface energy if a drop
is formed from each segment. Rayleigh (1879a, b) showed that the jet breakup
85
0066-4189/98/0115-0085$08.00
P1: ARS/kja P2: HCS/plb QC: MBL/agr T1: MBL
November 25, 1997 11:20 Annual Reviews AR049-04
jet circumference.
Tomotika (1935) showed that an optimal ratio of viscosities of the jet and
the ambient fluid exists for which a disturbance of finite wavelength attains
by Princeton University Library on 10/24/05. For personal use only.
the maximum growth rate. Chandrasekhar (1961) took into account the liquid
viscosity and the liquid density, which was neglected by Rayleigh, and showed
mathematically that the viscosity tends to reduce the breakup rate and increase
the drop size. He also showed that the physical mechanism of the breakup of a
viscous liquid jet in a vacuum is capillary pinching. The theoretical results of
Rayleigh and Chandrasekhar appear to be in agreement with the experiments
of Donnelly & Glaberson (1966) and Goedde & Yuen (1970).
Weber (1931) considered the effects of the liquid viscosity as well as the
density of the ambient fluid. His theoretical prediction did not agree well with
experimental data, as pointed out by Sterling & Sleicher (1975), who improved
Weber’s theory with partial success. Taylor (1962) showed that the density of
the ambient gas has a profound effect on the form of the jet breakup. For a
sufficiently large gas inertia force (which is proportional to the gas density)
relative to the surface tension force per unit of interfacial area, the jet may
generate at the liquid-gas interface droplets with diameters much smaller than
its own diameter. This Taylor mode of jet breakup is the so-called “atomization”
that leads to fine spray formation.
The number of publications following the above pioneering works is indeed
very large owing to the increasingly wide applications of the jet breakup pro-
cesses. There have been several review articles in this area (e.g. Sirignano
1993). The latest ones are by Chigier & Reitz (1996) and Lin (1996). In this
review, we focus on the physical mechanisms that cause the onset of the jet
breakup at the liquid-gas interface. The nonlinear evolution after the onset of
jet breakup is not considered. The physical mechanism of breakup frequently
remains the same during the nonlinear evolution, although the nonlinear theory
may produce additional quantitative results. For example, the satellite droplets
formed from the ligament between two main drops are not predicted by lin-
ear theories, but the mechanism of the satellite formation remains capillary
pinching of the Rayleigh mode.
P1: ARS/kja P2: HCS/plb QC: MBL/agr T1: MBL
November 25, 1997 11:20 Annual Reviews AR049-04
JET BREAKUP 87
tions are based mainly on temporal linear stability theory. Section 2 provides a
framework for the discussion in Section 3 of the physical mechanisms at work
in the different regimes. The elucidations of the physical mechanisms are based
by Princeton University Library on 10/24/05. For personal use only.
2. BREAKUP REGIMES
The breakup of a liquid jet injected through a circular nozzle hole into a stagnant
gas has been studied most frequently. Previous studies have established that
the spray properties are influenced by an unusually large number of parameters,
including nozzle internal flow effects resulting from cavitation, the jet velocity
profile and turbulence at the nozzle exit, and the physical and thermodynamic
states of both liquid and gas (e.g. Wu et al 1992, Eroglu et al 1991, and Reitz
& Bracco 1979). The precise mechanisms of breakup are still being researched
(e.g. Lin 1996, Chigier & Reitz 1996). However, linear stability theory can
provide qualitative descriptions of breakup phenomena and predict the existence
of various breakup regimes. It is noteworthy that the influence of nozzle internal
flow effects is included only empirically in most jet breakup theories. These
effects are known to be important, particularly for high-speed jet breakup.
Jet breakup phenomena have been divided into regimes that reflect differ-
ences in the appearance of jets as the operating conditions are changed. The
regimes are due to the action of dominant forces on the jet, leading to its breakup,
and it is important that these forces be identified in order to explain the breakup
mechanism in each regime (Reitz & Bracco 1986). The case of a round liq-
uid jet injected into a stagnant gas is shown in Figure 1. Four main breakup
regimes have been identified that correspond to different combinations of liquid
inertia, surface tension, and aerodynamic forces acting on the jet. These have
been named the Rayleigh regime, the first wind-induced regime, the second
wind-induced regime, and the atomization regime (Figure 1) (Reitz & Bracco
1986).
P1: ARS/kja P2: HCS/plb QC: MBL/agr T1: MBL
November 25, 1997 11:20 Annual Reviews AR049-04
Figure 1 (a) Rayleigh breakup. Drop diameters larger than the jet diameter. Breakup occurs many
nozzle diameters downstream of nozzle. (b) First wind-induced regime. Drops with diameters of
the order of jet diameter. Breakup occurs many nozzle diameters downstream of nozzle. (c)
Second wind-induced regime. Drop sizes smaller than the jet diameter. Breakup starts some
distance downstream of nozzle. (d) Atomization regime. Drop sizes much smaller than the jet
diameter. Breakup starts at nozzle exit.
JET BREAKUP 89
Λ
L
L
Λ
Annu. Rev. Fluid. Mech. 1998.30:85-105. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org
by Princeton University Library on 10/24/05. For personal use only.
A
B
C
D
U
Figure 2 Schematic diagram of the jet breakup length curve.
breakup regimes. The drop sizes are very much less than the jet diameter in the
second wind-induced and atomization regimes.
A convenient method for categorizing jet breakup regimes is to consider
the length of the coherent portion of the liquid jet or its unbroken length, L,
as a function of the jet exit velocity, U (Figure 2) (e.g. Leroux et al 1996).
Beyond the dripping flow regime, the breakup length at first increases linearly
with increasing jet velocity, reaches a maximum, and then decreases (regions A
and B). Drops are pinched off from the end of the jet, with diameters comparable
P1: ARS/kja P2: HCS/plb QC: MBL/agr T1: MBL
November 25, 1997 11:20 Annual Reviews AR049-04
to that of the jet (Figure 1a and b). These first two breakup regimes, which are
reasonably well understood, correspond to the Rayleigh and first wind-induced
breakup regimes.
The form of the breakup curve in these two regimes is well predicted by linear
stability theories such as that of Sterling & Sleicher (1975). In this temporal
stability theory, it is assumed that the interface, r = a, of a circular jet of radius,
a, is perturbed by an axisymmetric wave with a Fourier component of the form
η = η0 exp(ωt + ikx), (1)
Annu. Rev. Fluid. Mech. 1998.30:85-105. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org
and Re1 = Ua/ν 1. U is the relative velocity between the jet and the gas,
and the subscripts 1 and 2 identify properties based on the liquid and the gas,
respectively. As can be seen from Equations 2a and 2b, the maximum wave
growth rate increases and the corresponding wavelength decreases rapidly with
increasing Weber number, which is the ratio of the inertia force to surface
tension force acting on the jet. The effect of the liquid viscosity (which appears
in the Reynolds number, Re, and the Ohnesorge number, Z) is seen to reduce
the wave growth rate and to increase the wave length significantly as the liquid
viscosity increases.
P1: ARS/kja P2: HCS/plb QC: MBL/agr T1: MBL
November 25, 1997 11:20 Annual Reviews AR049-04
JET BREAKUP 91
2b, predicts the linear increase in jet breakup length with jet velocity at low
gas densities, since τ is independent of the jet velocity. A maximum in the
breakup length curve is predicted if the gas density is non-zero, i.e. the theory
by Princeton University Library on 10/24/05. For personal use only.
predicts that aerodynamic effects are responsible for the decrease in the breakup
length as the Weber number is increased beyond the maximum point. However,
discrepancies have been found between the predicted location of the maximum
point and experimental data.
The shape of the breakup curve has been reviewed by many researchers,
including Grant & Middleman (1966) and McCarthy & Malloy (1974) who
discussed the effects of the ambient gas, fluid properties, and nozzle design.
Leroux et al (1996) pointed out that the location of the maximum point de-
pends on nozzle parameters [presumably through the influence of the initial
disturbance term, ln(a/η0)], and also on the magnitude of the gas density itself.
Indeed, Leroux et al (1996) proposed empirical modifications to account for
these effects, which extend the theory of Sterling & Sleicher (1975).
Beyond the first wind-induced breakup regime (region B, Figure 2) there is
even more confusion about the breakup-length trends. For example, Haenlein
(1932) reported that the jet breakup length increases again with increasing jet
velocity (region C), and then abruptly reduces to zero (region D). McCarthy
& Malloy (1974) reported that the breakup length continually increases. More
recently, Hiroyasu et al (1991) discovered discontinuous elongations and short-
enings of the jet with changes in the jet velocity. These apparent anomalies are
associated with changes in the nozzle internal flow patterns caused by separation
and cavitation phenomena, which also exhibited hysteresis effects. Jets from
cavitating nozzles were found to have very short breakup lengths. Detached
flow jets have long breakup lengths. These phenomena may help explain the
previous discrepancies in measurements of breakup lengths in the spray liter-
ature, since only recently have investigators paid attention to nozzle flow and
geometry effects.
Equation 3 predicts that the breakup length decreases continuously as the jet
velocity is increased when the effect of the gas density is significant. How-
ever, the validity of the assumption that L = Uτ becomes questionable for
P1: ARS/kja P2: HCS/plb QC: MBL/agr T1: MBL
November 25, 1997 11:20 Annual Reviews AR049-04
from the core by the action of aerodynamic forces at the liquid-gas interface
(Reitz & Bracco 1982). Attempts have been made to measure the length of
the core region by using intrusive techniques such as electrical conductivity
by Princeton University Library on 10/24/05. For personal use only.
JET BREAKUP 93
(i.e. a jet is formed) if WeL > 8, where WeL = ρ 1U2(2a)/σ . The criterion
Weg ≡ ρ 2U2(2a)/σ < 0.4 corresponds to the point where the inertia force of
the surrounding gas reaches about 10% of the surface tension force. Ranz
(1956) suggested that this would mark the beginning of the first wind-induced
breakup regime, where the effects of the ambient gas are no longer negligible.
Numerical results of Sterling & Sleicher (1975) indicate that the maximum in
the jet breakup length (see Figure 2) occurs when WeL = 1.2 + 3.41 Z 10.9 , where
Z1 ≡ We0.5L /ReL, ReL ≡ U(2a)/ν 1. This could also indicate the importance of
aerodynamic effects, so that the criteria for Rayleigh breakup (see Figure 1a)
Annu. Rev. Fluid. Mech. 1998.30:85-105. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org
would be
We L > 8 and Weg < 0.4 or 1.2 + 3.41 Z 10.9 . (5)
by Princeton University Library on 10/24/05. For personal use only.
Note, however, that nozzle turbulence and other flow effects are not included
in Equation 5. Ranz (1956) argued that the gas inertia force is of the same order
as the surface tension force when Weg = 13. This could serve as a definition
of the end of the first wind-induced regime (see Figure 1b), which then occurs
when
1.2 + 3.41 Z 10.9 < Weg < 13 (6)
In this case, Weg > 13 marks the onset of the second wind-induced regime,
where the interaction with the surrounding gas starts to become dominant.
Miesse (1955) suggested the criterion Weg > 40.3 to predict the onset of the
atomization regime, the point at which breakup appears to start at the nozzle
exit (see Figure 1d). Thus, the criteria for breakup in the second wind-induced
regime are
13 < Weg < 40.3 (7)
In the second wind-induced regime, the breakup starts some distance down-
stream of the nozzle exit, and a smooth unbroken section of the jet is visible
downstream of the nozzle exit (Figure 1c).
As mentioned previously, no account is made of nozzle internal flow effects
in the above correlations. To address this shortcoming, Reitz (1978) assumed
that atomization corresponds to a critical value of the breakup length/nozzle
diameter ratio. With this assumption, the onset of atomization is predicted to
occur when
ρ2 /ρ1 > K f (T )−2 (8)
In this case, the parameter K was obtained from experiments on atomizing jets
and was found to be a function of the nozzle geometry, where
K = (0.53[3.0 + (`/2a)]1/2 − 1.15)/744 (9)
P1: ARS/kja P2: HCS/plb QC: MBL/agr T1: MBL
November 25, 1997 11:20 Annual Reviews AR049-04
and `/2a is the nozzle length-to-diameter ratio. K empirically accounts for the
effect of initial disturbances in the flow caused by nozzle internal flow phenom-
ena such as turbulence, cavitation, and flow separation. Equation 9 includes
the effect of liquid viscosity and nozzle internal flows, and it predicts that at-
omization is favored at high gas densities and for sharp inlet edge nozzles, with
small length-to-diameter ratio. These trends agree with experiments reported
in the literature (Hiroyasu et al 1991, Reitz 1978, Reitz & Bracco 1979).
When injection takes place into a coflowing gas, additional breakup regimes
are observed, as described by Chigier & Reitz (1996). This situation is of
Annu. Rev. Fluid. Mech. 1998.30:85-105. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org
pressure gas flows passing through annular orifices surrounding the liquid jet.
The high coflowing gas velocity transmits momentum to the liquid interface.
Large-scale eddy structures in the gas flow impact upon the liquid jet, causing
stretching, destabilization, and flapping of the liquid jet. Eroglu et al (1991)
measured breakup lengths of round liquid jets in annular coaxial air streams
and found that the breakup length decreases with increasing Weber number and
increases with increasing liquid jet Reynolds number according to the relation
L/2a = 0.5We−0.4
L Re0.6
g (10)
where L is the liquid intact length, a is the central tube inner radius, and the
Weber and Reynolds numbers are based on the relative velocity between the
gas and the liquid.
Jet breakup in coaxial flows is highly unsteady, and unstable liquid structures
are observed to disintegrate in a time-varying, bursting manner. Farago &
Chigier (1992) refer to these as pulsating and super-pulsating breakup processes.
At high air-flow rates, the unstable liquid cylindrical jet undergoes a flapping
motion and can be transformed into a curling liquid sheet. The sheet becomes
stretched into a membrane bounded by thicker rims, which finally burst into
ligaments and drops of various sizes.
Farago & Chigier (1992) classified coaxial jet disintegration into three main
categories: (a) Rayleigh-type breakup where the mean drop diameter is of the
order of the jet diameter—both axisymmetric breakup (for Weg < 15) and non-
axisymmetric breakup patterns (for 15 < Weg < 25) were observed; (b) jet
disintegration via the stretched-sheet mechanism, which produces membrane-
type ligaments (25 < Weg < 70)—in this case, the diameter of the drops formed
is considerably smaller than the diameter of the jet; and (c) jet disintegration
via fiber-type ligaments (100 < Weg < 500)—at even higher air-flow rates,
fibers are formed that peel off the liquid-gas interface. This breakup mecha-
nism resembles the short-wavelength breakup mechanism of jets in the second
P1: ARS/kja P2: HCS/plb QC: MBL/agr T1: MBL
November 25, 1997 11:20 Annual Reviews AR049-04
JET BREAKUP 95
3. BREAKUP MECHANISMS
Jet Instability
Annu. Rev. Fluid. Mech. 1998.30:85-105. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org
The regimes of jet breakup have been delineated above with correlations in
terms of relevant parameters. The results of recent works based on the the-
ory of absolute and convective instability of liquid jets enable us to elucidate
by Princeton University Library on 10/24/05. For personal use only.
the different physical mechanisms responsible for the jet breakup in the various
regimes. In the aerodynamic theory of spontaneous jet breakup without external
excitation, it is assumed that the onset of breakup is caused by the amplification
of natural disturbances in a jet. Any arbitrary form of disturbance can be con-
structed by superposition of all Fourier components. Each Fourier component
has the form A exp[ikx + ωt], where A is the wave amplitude, k = kr + iki is
the complex wave number whose real and imaginary parts give, respectively,
the number of waves over a distance 2π and the exponential spatial growth rate
per unit distance in the axial x-direction, and ω = ωr + iωi is the complex
wave frequency, the real and imaginary part of which give, respectively, the
exponential temporal growth rate and the frequency of the Fourier wave.
Not all the Fourier components are capable of extracting energy from the jet
system and amplifying, however. The Fourier components must have special
values of k and ω, which depend on specific characteristics of the jet system,
in order to grow from initially infinitesimal amplitudes. Mathematically, (k, ω)
is determined as the eigenvalue of a linear system containing relevant flow
parameters. The eigenvalues or the characteristic values are so determined that
the condition of the existence of a nontrivial solution of the system is satisfied.
This condition is the so-called characteristic equation or dispersion relation. In
the linear aerodynamic theory of jet instability, the finite amplitude disturbances
introduced outside or inside the nozzle by the various means mentioned above
are excluded from consideration.
Absolute Instability and Formability of a Jet
In the pioneering works cited above, the liquid jet is considered to be infinitely
long and k is assumed to be real. Thus the disturbance must grow or decay
everywhere in space at the same time rate ωr. However, Keller et al (1972)
noted that the disturbance initiating from the nozzle tip actually grows in space
as it is swept downstream to break up the jet into drops, leaving a section of jet
P1: ARS/kja P2: HCS/plb QC: MBL/agr T1: MBL
November 25, 1997 11:20 Annual Reviews AR049-04
intact near the nozzle tip. They set k to be complex and allow the disturbance
to grow in space as well as in time in a semi-infinite weightless inviscid jet in
a vacuum. They found that Rayleigh’s results are relevant only in the case of
large Weber number, WeL (WeL = ρ LU 22a/σ is based on the liquid density).
They also showed that in the limit of WeL → ∞, the spatial growth rate kI can
be inferred from the temporal growth rate ωr by the relation ki = ± ωr + O
(1/WeL), while the disturbance travels at the jet velocity. For Weber number less
than the order of one, they found a new mode of faster-growing disturbances
whose wavelengths are so long that they may not be actually observable.
Annu. Rev. Fluid. Mech. 1998.30:85-105. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org
Using the theory of absolute and convective instability (Briggs 1964, Bers
1983), Leib & Goldstein (1986b) showed that the new mode actually corre-
sponds to absolute instability arising from a saddle-point singularity in the
by Princeton University Library on 10/24/05. For personal use only.
JET BREAKUP
97
Figure 3 Critical Weber number as a function of the Reynolds number. The jet is absolutely unstable below each curve of constant Q.
The jet is convectively unstable in the rest of the parameter space.
P1: ARS/kja P2: HCS/plb QC: MBL/agr T1: MBL
November 25, 1997 11:20 Annual Reviews AR049-04
will propagate back to the nozzle tip to interrupt the formation of a jet of any
length. It is likely that the phenomenon of absolute instability also exists in a
jet in the presence of gravity, because the physical mechanism is unlikely to
by Princeton University Library on 10/24/05. For personal use only.
E = Pg + P` + S + V + D, (11)
where Pg is the rate of work done by the gas pressure fluctuation at the liquid-gas
interface, P` is the rate of work done by the liquid pressure fluctuation at the
inlet and outlet of the control volume, S is the rate of work done by the surface
tension, V is the rate of work done by the liquid viscous stress, and D is the rate
of viscous dissipation of mechanical energy.
P1: ARS/kja P2: HCS/plb QC: MBL/agr T1: MBL
November 25, 1997 11:20 Annual Reviews AR049-04
JET BREAKUP 99
to the idealized Rayleigh jet. The presence of the low density gas increases
only slightly the most amplified wave number, 0.696, predicted by Rayleigh.
Moreover, s dominates all other work terms. This is a classical case of Rayleigh
by Princeton University Library on 10/24/05. For personal use only.
depending on the flow parameters (see Figure 1b). Since the surface tension is
mainly responsible for the breakup in this regime, and the gas inertia force only
assists in the breakup, rather than inducing the breakup, it is probably more
appropriate to call this regime the wind assisted breakup regime instead of the
first wind-induced breakup regime. The second wind-induced breakup regime
is genuinely wind-induced, as is explained below.
to be more than one order of magnitude larger than in the previous four cases.
Thus, the drop radii produced in these parameter ranges are much smaller than
the jet radius (see Figure 1c and d ). In contrast to the previous four cases, the
by Princeton University Library on 10/24/05. For personal use only.
pressure work-term dominates the surface tension work-term in the last four
rows. In fact the surface tension term is negative. That is to say, the surface
tension acts against the formation of small droplets generated by the interfacial
pressure fluctuation in the second wind-induced and atomization regimes. Part
of the kinetic energy in a jet is converted through the pressure work-term to the
surface energy in the droplets. Thus the second wind-induced and atomization
regimes are genuinely wind-induced.
It is seen (Table 1) that while the atomization and second wind-induced
regimes exist in the parameter range WeL Q, the rest of the regimes exist for
WeL ≤ 1. It has been shown (Kang & Lin 1987) that the unstable disturbances
in the atomization regime scale with the gas capillary length c = σ /ρ 2U2. The
condition WeL Q implies that c is much smaller than the jet diameter (Lin &
Lian 1990). The interfacial shear stress fluctuation will augment the pressure
fluctuation in the breakup process, if the gas viscosity is considered.
It should be remembered that the linear stability theory is not capable of
differentiating between the second wind-induced and the atomization regimes.
The linear theory can only predict the onset of instability, which produces in-
terfacial waves of different length scales depending on the parameters. The
nonlinear processes of pinching off a small droplet from the interface, subse-
quent to the onset, and the continuous generation of droplets from the receding
interface toward the core of a jet are involved in reaching the atomization state
(see Figure 1d). However, the physical mechanism involved in the initial stage
of the second wind-induced and the atomization regimes may be the same.
4. DISCUSSION
Interfacial Shear Layer
A serious defect common to all of the above reviewed works is the lack of
a rigorous treatment of the effect of the gas viscosity. Sterling & Sleicher
P1: ARS/kja P2: HCS/plb QC: MBL/agr T1: MBL
November 25, 1997 11:20 Annual Reviews AR049-04
(1975) assumed with Benjamin (1959) that the Kelvin-Helmholtz model can
be applied locally along the interfacial wave with an arbitrary correction factor
that—because of the viscous effect—is used to reduce the pressure distribution
predicted by the Kelvin-Helmholtz model. Thus the possibility of generation
of droplets by shear waves is missed. Lin & Lian (1990) modeled the liquid-gas
interfacial boundary layer with the boundary layer over a wavy solid surface in
order to estimate the interfacial shear effect. This is not satisfactory because a
fluid-fluid interfacial shear layer is fundamentally different from that of a solid-
fluid boundary layer. The effect of gas viscosity was rigorously analyzed by
Annu. Rev. Fluid. Mech. 1998.30:85-105. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org
Lin & Ibrahim (1990) with temporal theory, and by Lin & Lian (1993) with the
theory of absolute and convective instability for a viscous liquid jet in a viscous
gas in a vertical circular pipe. The basic flow is an exact solution of the Navier-
by Princeton University Library on 10/24/05. For personal use only.
Stokes equation. Unfortunately, the numerical results for the case of very strong
interfacial shear were not sufficiently accurate to allow the drawing of definitive
conclusions on the effect of the gas viscosity on the atomization process. The
relative importance of the shear stress fluctuation to the pressure fluctuation in
the atomization process in various parameter ranges remains unknown.
Nonaxisymmetric Disturbances
The above description is based on works that assume that axisymmetric distur-
bances are more unstable than asymmetric ones. Rayleigh was able to prove
that asymmetric temporal disturbances in an inviscid jet are all stable. Tem-
porally stable waves are also convectively stable evanescent waves (Huerre &
Monkewitz 1990). For ReL = O (10), Lin & Webb (1994) showed that the
asymmetric disturbances are evanescent waves in the parameter range 10−4 ≤
Q ≤ 10−2, 10 ≤ We ≤ 103. Yang (1992) demonstrated that temporally grow-
ing asymmetric long-wavelength disturbances may become dominant when
the Weber number of an inviscid jet in an inviscid gas is in the atomization
regime. However, the viscosity of the liquid tends to bring down the temporal
growth rate of nonaxisymmetric disturbances (Avital 1995), and the maximum
temporal growth rates of axisymmetric disturbances remain higher than those
of asymmetric ones except when the jet is almost inviscid, for example when
ReL = 105 and WeL = 104 (Li 1995).
A similar conclusion was reached by EA Ibrahim (personal communication),
who investigated convectively unstable asymmetric disturbances in a viscous
jet emanating into an inviscid gas, when WeL and ReL are of order 103 and
higher. There is also experimental evidence of asymmetric disturbances in
the atomization regime mentioned above (Meister & Scheele 1969, Taylor &
Hoyt 1983, Eroglu et al 1991). However, the appearance of non-axisymmetric
disturbances may also be caused by the secondary instability after the onset of
instability from axisymmetric disturbances. In the Rayleigh, the wind-induced,
P1: ARS/kja P2: HCS/plb QC: MBL/agr T1: MBL
November 25, 1997 11:20 Annual Reviews AR049-04
and the wind-assisted regimes, the asymmetric disturbances may be brought out
prominently by the swirl in the liquid jet (Ponstein 1959, Kang & Lin 1989) or
less prominently by the swirl in the gas (Lin & Lian 1990).
(Kang & Lin 1987, Reitz & Bracco 1982). These comparisons include the
intact length, spray angle, and droplet size, which scales with the gas capillary
length σ /ρ 2U2. The quantities that have just been mentioned are the products
by Princeton University Library on 10/24/05. For personal use only.
development of the liquid-gas interfacial shear layer (before the jet flow is fully
developed) on the receptivity of the jet to instability need to be investigated. The
effect of gravity in the absolute instability regime and the Weber-Chandrasekhar
by Princeton University Library on 10/24/05. For personal use only.
Literature Cited
Avital E. 1995. Asymmetric instability of a vis- ity of a liquid jet. In Hydrodynamic and Hy-
cid capillary jet in an inviscid media. Phys. dromagnetic Stability, pp. 537–42. Oxford:
Fluids. 7:1162–64 Oxford Univ. Press. 652 pp.
Benjamin TB. 1959. Shearing flow over a wavy Chehroudi B, Bracco FV. 1985. On the intact
boundary. J. Fluid Mech. 6:161–205 core of full cone sprays. Soc. Automot. Eng.
Bers A. 1983. Space-time evolution of plasma Tech. Pap. 850126
instabilities—absolute and convective. In Chigier N, Reitz RD. 1996. Regimes of jet
Handbook of Plasma Physics, ed. M. Rosen- breakup and breakup mechanisms (physical
bluth, 1:452–516 Amsterdam: North Hol- aspects). In Recent Advances in Spray Com-
land bustion: Spray Atomization and Drop Burn-
Briggs RJ. 1964. Electron Stream Interaction ing Phenomena, ed. KK Kuo, 1:109–35. Re-
with Plasmas. Cambridge: MIT ston: AIAA
Chandrasekhar S. 1961. The capillary instabil- Dan T, Yamamoto T, Senda J, Fujimoto H. 1997.
P1: ARS/kja P2: HCS/plb QC: MBL/agr T1: MBL
November 25, 1997 11:20 Annual Reviews AR049-04
Effect of nozzle configurations for character- tion: Spray Atomization and Drop Burning
istics of non-reacting diesel fuel sprays. Soc. Phenomena, ed. KK Kuo, 1:137–60. Reston,
Automot. Eng. Tech. Pap. 970355 VA: AIAA
Donnelly RJ, Glaberson W. 1996. Experiments Lin SP, Creighton B. 1990. Energy budget in
on the capillary instability of a liquid jet. atomization. J. Aerosol. Sci. and Technol.
Proc. R. Soc. London Ser. A. 290:547–56 12:630–36
Eroglu H, Chigier N, Farago Z. 1991. Coaxial Lin SP, Ibrahim EA. 1990. Instability of a vis-
atomizer liquid intact lengths. Phys. Fluids cous liquid jet surrounded by a viscous gas in
A. 3:303–8 a pipe. J. Fluid Mech. 218:641–58
Farago Z, Chigier N. 1992. Morphological clas- Lin SP, Kang DJ. 1987. Atomization of a liquid
sification of disintegration of round liquid jets jet. Phys. Fluids. 30:2000–6
in a coaxial air stream. At. Sprays. 2:137–54 Lin SP, Lian ZW. 1989. Absolute instability in
Goedde EF, Yuen MC. 1970. Experiments on a gas. Phys. Fluids A. 1:490–93
Annu. Rev. Fluid. Mech. 1998.30:85-105. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org
liquid jet instability. J. Fluid Mech. 40:495– Lin SP, Lian ZW. 1990. Mechanism of atomiza-
512 tion. AIAA J. 28:120–26
Grant RP, Middleman S. 1966. Newtonian jet Lin SP, Lian ZW. 1993. Absolute and convective
stability. A.I.Ch.E. J. 12:699–78 instability of a viscous liquid jet surrounded
by Princeton University Library on 10/24/05. For personal use only.
Gulder OL, Smallwood GJ, Snelling DR. 1994. by a viscous gas in a vertical pipe. Phys. Flu-
Internal structure of transient full-one dense ids A. 5:771–73
diesel sprays. Int. Symp. COMODIA, pp. Lin SP, Webb RD. 1994. Nonaxisymmetric
355–60 evanescent waves in a viscous liquid jet. Phys.
Haenlein A. 1932. Uber den Zerfall eines Flus- Fluids. 6:2545–47
sigkeitsstrahls (On the disruption of a liquid McCarthy MJ, Malloy NA. 1974. Review of sta-
jet). NACA TM Report. 659 bility of liquid jets and the influence of nozzle
Hiroyasu H, Arai M, Shimizu M. 1991. Break- design Chem. Eng. J. 7:1–20
up length of a liquid jet and internal flow in a Mei CC. 1994. Applied Dynamics of Ocean Sur-
nozzle. Proc. ICLASS-91, Pap. 26 face Waves. Hong Kong: World Sci. 740 pp.
Honohan A. 1995. Experimental measurement Meister BJ, Scheele GF. 1969a. Drop formation
of the spatial instability of a viscous liquid jet from cylindrical jets in immiscible liquid sys-
at microgravity. MS thesis. Clarkson Univ., tems. AIChE J. 15:700–6
Potsdam, NY. 95 pp. Meister BJ, Scheele GF. 1969b. Prediction of jet
Huerre P, Monkewitz PA. 1990. Local and length in immiscible liquid system. AIChE J.
global instabilities in spatially developing 15:689–99
flows. Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 22:473–537 Miesse CC. 1955. Correlation of experimental
Kang DJ, Lin SP. 1989. Breakup of swirling liq- data on the disintegration of liquid jets. Ind.
uid jets. Int. J. Eng. Fluid Mech. 2:47–62 Eng. Chem. 47:1690–95
Keller JB, Rubinow SI, Tu YO. 1972. Spatial Plateau J. 1873. Statique Experimentale et The-
instability of a jet. Phys. Fluids. 16:2052–55 orique des Liquids Soumie aux Seules Forces
Leib SJ, Goldstein ME. 1986a. Convective and Moleculaire, vols. 1, 2. Paris: Cauthier Vil-
absolute instability of a viscous liquid jet. lars. 450 pp. 495 pp.
Phys. Fluids. 29:952–54 Ponstein P. 1959. Instability of rotating cylin-
Leib SJ, Goldstein ME. 1986b. The generation drical jets. Appl. Sci. Res. 8:425–57
of capillary instability on a liquid jet. J. Fluid Ranz WE. 1956. On sprays and spraying. Dep.
Mech. 168:479–500 Eng. Res., Penn State Univ. Bull. 65. 53 pp.
Leroux S, Dumouchel C, Ledoux M. 1996. The Rayleigh L. 1879a. On the capillary phe-
stability curve of Newtonian liquid jets. At. nomenon of jets. Proc. R. Soc. London.
Sprays 6:623–47 29:71–97
Li HS, Kelly RE. 1992. The instability of a liq- Rayleigh L. 1879b. On the instability of jets.
uid jet in a compressible air stream. Phys. Proc. London Math. Soc. 10:4–13
Fluids A. 4:2162–68 Rayleigh L. 1892a. On the instability of a cylin-
Li HS, Kelly RE. 1993. On the transfer of energy der of viscous liquid under capillary force.
to an unstable liquid jet in a coflowing com- Phil. Mag. 34:145–54
pressible airstream. Phys. Fluids A. 5:1273– Rayleigh L. 1892b. On the instability of cylin-
74 drical fluid surfaces. Phil. Mag. 34:177–
Li X. 1995. Mechanism of atomization of a liq- 80
uid jet. At. Sprays 5:89–105 Reitz RD. 1978. Atomization and other breakup
Lighthill J. 1987. Waves in Fluids, pp. 239–43 regimes of a liquid jet. PhD thesis. Princeton
Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press. 504 pp. Univ., Princeton, NJ. 231 pp.
Lin SP. 1996. Regimes of jet breakup and Reitz RD. 1987. Modeling atomization pro-
breakup mechanisms (Mathematical as- cesses in high-pressure vaporizing sprays.
pects). In Recent Advances in Spray Combus- Atom. Spray Technol. 3:309–37
P1: ARS/kja P2: HCS/plb QC: MBL/agr T1: MBL
November 25, 1997 11:20 Annual Reviews AR049-04
Reitz RD, Bracco FV. 1979. On the dependence graphy—techniques and methods. Exp. Flu-
of the spray angle and other spray parameters ids. 1:113–20
on nozzle design and operating conditions. Tomotika S. 1935. On the instability of a cylin-
Soc. Automot. Eng. Tech. Pap. 790494 drical thread of a viscous liquid surrounded
Reitz RD, Bracco FV. 1982. Mechanism of by another viscous fluid. Proc. R. Soc. Lon-
atomization of a liquid jet. Phys. Fluids. don Ser. A. 150:322–37
25:1730–42 Vihinen I. 1996. Absolute and convective in-
Reitz RD, Bracco FV. 1986. Mechanisms of stability of a liquid jet in microgravity. MS
breakup of round liquid jets. The Encyclope- thesis. Clarkson Univ., Potsdam, NY. 104 pp.
dia of Fluid Mechanics, ed. N Cheremisnoff, Weber CZ. 1931. Zum Zerfall eines Flus-
3:233–49. Houston: Gulf sigkeitsstrahles. Math. Mech. 11:136–54
Sirignano WA. 1993. Fluid dynamics of sprays. Wu PK, Tseng LK, Faeth GM. 1992. Primary
J. Fluid Eng. 115:345–78 breakup in gas/liquid mixing layers for tur-
Annu. Rev. Fluid. Mech. 1998.30:85-105. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org
Sterling AM, Sleicher CA. 1975. The instabil- bulent liquids. At. Sprays 2:295–318
ity of capillary jets. J. Fluid Mech. 68:477– Yang HQ. 1992. Asymmetric instability of a liq-
95 uid jet. Phys. Fluids A. 4:681–89
Taylor GI. 1962. Generation of ripples by wind Zhou ZW, Lin SP. 1992a. Absolute and convec-
by Princeton University Library on 10/24/05. For personal use only.
blowing over viscous fluids. In The Scien- tive instability of a compressible jet. Phys.
tific Papers of G.I. Taylor, ed. GK Batche- Fluids A. 4:277–82
lor, 3:244–54. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Zhou ZW, Lin SP. 1992b. Effects of compress-
Press ibility on the atomization of liquid jets. J.
Taylor JJ, Hoyt JW. 1983. Water jet photo- Propuls. Power. 8:736–40
Annual Review of Fluid Mechanics
Volume 30, 1998
CONTENTS
Lewis Fry Richardson and His Contributions to Mathematics,
0
Meteorology, and Models of Conflict, J.C.R. Hunt
Aircraft Laminar Flow Control , Ronald D. Joslin 1
Lattice Boltzmann Method for Fluid Flows, Shiyi Chen, Gary D. Doolen 329