See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/226537365

A numerical study of turbulent opposed impinging jets issuing from

triangular nozzles with different geometries

Article  in  Heat and Mass Transfer · April 2010

DOI: 10.1007/s00231-010-0741-0

CITATIONS READS

14 431

4 authors:

Kiyan Parham Esmaeil Esmaeilzadeh

University of Stavanger (UiS) University of Tabriz
23 PUBLICATIONS   302 CITATIONS    82 PUBLICATIONS   609 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Ugur Atikol Loay B. Younis Aldabbagh

Eastern Mediterranean University University of Mosul
47 PUBLICATIONS   757 CITATIONS    27 PUBLICATIONS   666 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Enhancement of transport phenomena View project

Performance of Flat-Plate and Compound Parabolic Concentrating Solar Collectors in Underfloor Heating Systems View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Kiyan Parham on 22 July 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Heat Mass Transfer (2011) 47:427–437
DOI 10.1007/s00231-010-0741-0
ORIGINAL
A numerical study of turbulent opposed impinging jets issuing
from triangular nozzles with different geometries
Kiyan Parham • Esmaeil Esmaeilzadeh •
Ugur Atikol • L. B. Y. Aldabbagh
Received: 12 April 2009 / Accepted: 25 November 2010 / Published online: 8 December 2010
Ó Springer-Verlag 2010
Abstract In present research, two turbulent opposed
impinging air jets issuing from triangular nozzles with
fixed and variable exit velocity ratios and different nozzle-
to-nozzle distances have been studied numerically and then
compared with rectangular and circular nozzles. The finite
volume method has been applied for solving mass and
momentum equations. The turbulence model being used
here is k-e RNG. Distributions of pressure, turbulence,
kinetic energy and its dissipation rate in various regions
especially on the impingement regions have been obtained
with high accuracy. Study of the nozzle geometries has
shown the advantage of triangular nozzles over other
geometries. First, the triangle’s base in nozzle geometry
has an important role in our study case which, mixing two
flows and regions with high turbulence intensity, directly
depends on it. Second, our results show that circular and
rectangular nozzles have less efficiency than triangular
nozzles in mixing applications. Third and last, it was found
that the radial jet being created by opposed jets has some
similarities to free jets. In this investigation, air in standard
atmospheric pressure has been applied as working fluid.
1 Introduction
Jet to jet impingement is an engineering field that pertains
to the research, development, and design of propulsion
K. Parham (&)  U. Atikol  L. B. Y. Aldabbagh
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Eastern Mediterranean
University, G. Magosa, TRNC, Mersin 10, Turkey
e-mail: kian_parham@yahoo.com
E. Esmaeilzadeh
Mechanical Engineering Department, University of Tabriz,
P.O. Box 51666-16471, Tabriz, Iran
systems and various systems demanding a dynamic mixing
of two or several jet flows in order to achieve their intended
purpose [1]. The system may be a side dump combustor of
a vertical short takeoff and landing aircraft [2], powder
production via electro-hydrodynamic assisted molten metal
jet impingement [3], a combustion chamber of an internal
combustion engine, the environmental control system of a
civilian airplane, the mix head for reaction injection
molding (RIM) [4], etc., which are of great industrial sig-
nificance. This complex flow is regarded by numerous
researchers in various fields. However, most of the studies
refer to special applications such as a side dump combustor
[5], mix head for RIM [4, 6, 7], combustion and flame
investigations [8], chemical processing in reactors [9–11],
absorption [12, 13], extraction and stripping processes [14]
and drying technology [15]. These specific studies make
assessment of the non-reacting opposed jets flow field
difficult. Consequently a sparse amount of literature exists
on free opposed turbulent impinging jet flows. The fol-
lowing is a review of some of them.
Denshchikov et al. [16] were the first who conducted
free opposed impinging jet experiments. Their work out-
lined the oscillatory character of the interaction between
two identical planar submerged water jets. They observed
that the amplitude and period of the oscillations are
determined by the system itself.
Denshchikov et al. [17] published their second paper in
1983 on the same topic. But this time the working fluid was
tap water. Their findings were about the range of laminar
flows, transition flow regime and fully turbulent flows.
Ogawa et al. [18, 19] experimentally studied turbulent
opposed jets by hot wire anemometer. Their studies mainly
investigated the influences of a body on the axis of opposed
turbulent jets and impact position. There is no clear report
about the magnitude of fluid velocity used in these
123
428
experiments. So the lack of precision and reliability in this
work made the extraction of the main results and conclu-
sions a difficult task. Champion et al. [20] studied
numerically two closely spaced turbulent jets flowing
counter to each other, for both two-dimensional and axi-
symmetric configurations. They indicated that the diameter
of the jets was large in comparison to their separation
distance, therefore the option of two widely separated jets
where large-mixing with the surrounding ambient occurs,
was excluded. Rolon et al. [21] studied oscillation behav-
iors and hydrodynamic instabilities of the opposed jets.
Kind et al. [22] investigated experimentally the inter-
action between two opposed plane turbulent wall jets and
observed that the position of the interaction depends on the
ratio of the momentum fluxes of two wall jets.
Devahastin et al. [23] had a numerical study of flow
and mixing characteristics of laminar confined impinging
streams and concluded that the geometry of the system
and jet Reynolds number powerfully affects impinging
streams mixing. Plane opposed turbulent jets having dif-
ferent temperatures were studied numerically and experi-
mentally by Besbes et al. [24] and it were found that the
stagnation point moves toward the heated jet. Wang et al.
[25] evaluated numerically some approaches for improv-
ing mixing in laminar confined impinging streams and
found that unequal opposed jets caused better mixing
effects. Hosseinalipour et al. investigated flow and ther-
mal characteristics of confined laminar opposed jets where
the jets were equal and unequal [26, 27]. Weifeng et al.
[28] studied stagnation point offsets of turbulent opposed
jets at various exit velocity ratios and nozzle to nozzle
separation distances in circular nozzles experimentally
and numerically.
There is, thus, no study about impinging jets issuing
from nozzles with triangular cross sections. Such investi-
gation seems to be necessary, therefore, especially because
Fig. 1 Schematic map of opposed jets
123
Heat Mass Transfer (2011) 47:427–437
of the sharp corners in triangular nozzles which cause more
turbulence production in comparison with other kinds of
customary nozzles. The present work was carried out
to study the hydrodynamic characteristics of opposed
impinging jets, such as: turbulent kinetic energy and its
dissipation rate, velocity and pressure profile, etc.
2 Numerical simulation
2.1 Computational domain and boundary conditions
This section provides a short description of the computa-
tional details as they were applied, in order to obtain a
convergent solution of this flow.
The opposed impinging jets have been modeled as a
three dimensional block where all surfaces are defined as
pressure outlet boundaries. Two velocity inlets with the
geometries of triangle were placed on the two opposite
surfaces of the block (Fig. 1). The fluid of the domain is
stagnant air of atmospheric pressure and the inlet jet
velocity of the air is 105 m/s in x direction while its tur-
bulent intensity is 5%. The hydraulic diameters of the inlets
are 10.046 mm and their geometries are equilateral trian-
gles with all sides 17.4 mm. Outlet boundaries applied
constant pressure outlet equal to standard atmosphere
pressure, so gauge pressure was set to 0. The jet-to-jet
spacing used in three different cases are 24, 32 and 40 cm.
The dimension of the plates that velocity inlets are placed
on them are 40 9 40 cm2.
2.2 CFD modeling strategy, turbulence model
and numerical details
To date the k-e model is the most widely and validated
turbulence model. The generally chosen turbulence models
Heat Mass Transfer (2011) 47:427–437
for impinging jets are various versions of two-equation
models like k-e model. Several versions of the k-e model
have been proposed by Yakhot et al. [29]. They developed
a more popular version of k-e model called k-e RNG. It has
the same form as the standard model, but the model con-
stants are derived analytically from a mathematical method
referred to as renormalization group theory. In addition, a
second term also appears in the e equation. In comparison
with the standard k-e, the k-e RNG turbulence model
introduces smaller coefficients in the k-e equations. These
reduced values mean that the decay of the turbulent dissi-
pation, e, in the e equation is also reduced. This leads to
higher values of e, and subsequently, lower values of k and
lt; therefore, it is expected that the k-e RNG model gives
better results in the regions of the flow where the mean
strain rates are high, such as impingement region in our
study case, because it is more responsive to the effects of
rapid strain [29]. In contrast to this, k-e Standard was found
by Stan et al. [1] to have poor predictions within the
impingement region on opposed impinging jets which
constitutes the most important zone of interest in these
kinds of works.
The performance of the k-e RNG model of turbulence
has been investigated by Knowles et al. [30], Gordeev et al.
[31], Sharif et al. [32], Fernandez et al. [33], Chem et al.
[34], Liakos et al. [35, 36], M. A. R. Sharif et al. [37] in
impinging jet flows and all confirmed that the k-e RNG
model can be successfully used to model this type of
complex flows. The k-e RNG model is numerically robust,
faster than the triple transport model and has minimum turn
over time requirements for the calculations [36]. Thus the
K-e RNG turbulence model is used for modeling the tur-
bulent behavior of the flow.
The first order upwind discretization scheme is applied
for the momentum, turbulent kinetic energy and turbulent
energy dissipation rate. SIMPLEST scheme has been used
for the pressure–velocity coupling. Steady state simulations
are carried out and the solution was considered to be
converged when the sum of normalized residuals for con-
tinuity and momentum equations were on the order of
10-4. All the simulations were conducted using the com-
mercial software Phoenics 3.2.
2.3 Grid generation
An acceptable grid distribution is one in which grids are
focused on important regions of domain. Regions sur-
rounding the centerline of the axial and radial jets are given
the most importance. Therefore, the densest grid covers
these areas. As on the axis of the jets, not only are the
nozzle outlets important but the impinging plane as well.
The size of the cells being employed in the x direction is
therefore uniform. Beyond the inlet region, a geometrically
429
expanding grid is used with an expansion factor of 1.6 in
both y and z directions. Employed meshes are quadrilateral.
According to the chosen turbulent model and boundary
conditions, L = 0.32 m was chosen to carry out grid tests
at U0 = 105 m/s. Four kinds of grid distributions were
employed with 40,000, 80,000, 120,000 and 160,000 nodes
in the region and pressure on the jet axis was plotted to
compare their accuracy. The 120,000, 160,000 grids did
not produce any noticeable changes and then agreed with
each other. So the distributed grid with 120,000 nodes may
be considered as fine enough to provide acceptable, grid
independent solutions and can be used throughout the rest
of the calculations in this paper.
3 Results and discussions
3.1 Validation
It is necessary to validate the predicted values of the
numerical simulations employed. In the present work,
results are compared with data available from experimental
studies in the literature similar to our study case.
In the first case, computations were performed on a test
case of an unconfined horizontally impinging jet on a flat
plate [38]. The properties of the nozzle exit were the same
as our study case: The geometry of the nozzle was equi-
lateral triangle with all sides 17.4 mm (Dh = 10.046 mm),
the velocity of the inlet air jet was 105 m/s in x direction
with turbulent intensity of 5% and the domain fluid was
stagnant air of atmospheric pressure. The dimension of the
plate that velocity inlet was placed on it was 40 9 40 cm2.
Pressure at the stagnation point and the nozzle distance to
the plate were respectively Ps = 1,672 Pa and 16 cm.
Figure 2a compares the predicted values of normalized
pressure profiles as a function of vertical distance in the
impinging plane. It can be seen that there is a good
agreement between the CFD predictions and experimental
data sets.
The second validation case is two turbulent unconfined
opposed impinging jets issuing from circular nozzles
mentioned earlier [28].
The diameter D of the circular nozzle used in the
experiment, the air velocity at the nozzle exit and nozzle
to nozzle distance were 30 mm, 11.8 m/s and 30 mm,
respectively (Rej = 23,460). Domain fluid was stagnant air
of atmospheric pressure. Outlet boundary applied, was
constant pressure outlet equal to standard atmosphere
pressure (101,325 Pa), so gauge pressure was set to 0. The
inlet values of turbulence intensity were set to 12%
according to measurements.
Velocities of the flow field of the opposed jets has been
measured with a DANTEC hot-wire anemometry system.
123
430 Heat Mass Transfer (2011) 47:427–437

Fig. 2 a Comparison of predicted pressure distribution on wall jet with previous literature. b Comparison between predicted values of
distribution of normalized axial velocity magnitudes on opposed impinging jets with previous literature

The probe used is a single wire and sampling frequency is

set at 20 kHz and sampling duration was 5 s.
Comparison between predicted and measured values of
distribution of normalized axial velocity magnitudes on the
x axis has been shown in Fig. 2b. It is clear that the
agreement between our numerical results and experimental
data sets is acceptable.
In the next sections we also discuss results that are
qualitatively in agreement with different available datasets
from previous literature.

3.2 Results of numerical simulations

3.2.1 Impinging jets

Figure 3 shows the lateral velocity or the velocity distri-

bution on the radial jet created by free jets impact in the
impingement region.
At the point of impingement (stagnation point) the flow
turns in the radial direction and is called impingement
region. It is perpendicular to the nozzle centerline.
On average the impingement region is likely a surface
and its position coincides with the geometrical symmetry
plane of the two nozzle-to-nozzle distance which is also the
centerline of the radial jet (YZ plane).
Impingement region is characterized by high lateral
velocity and high turbulent kinetic energy while longitu-
dinal velocity approximately has no role in this region. On
the other hand a characteristic feature of a free jet, as
shown by theory and also numerous experiments, is the
smallness of lateral velocity components in any section of
the jet compared with the longitudinal velocity. Hence, if
X axis is aligned parallel with the nozzle axis, the velocity
components in other directions prove so small that they can
Fig. 3 The effect of nozzle to nozzle distance on the radial velocity
distribution on the radial jet axis
be disregarded in engineering problems involving jet the-
ory [36]. So longitudinal velocity covers velocity in the
x direction (according to Fig. 1) and only in free jet region
is important. Its magnitude in the impingement region is so
low that we can ignore it. So it is reasonable that in the
impingement region, longitudinal velocity need not be
discussed. As fluid moves up on the upper region of the
stagnation point, lateral velocity value is positive and for
the same reason it is negative in the lower region. Also this
figure shows that when the distance between two opposed
nozzles decreases, the lateral velocity value on the
impingement plane increases.

123
Heat Mass Transfer (2011) 47:427–437 431

Fig. 4 a Radial velocity distribution on the axis of radial jet region, b velocity distribution on the axis of free jet region

The most important conclusion evident in this diagram

is the similarity between free and radial jets. In general the
lateral velocity distribution as plotted in Fig. 3 exhibits an
almost linear rise (within about 1Dh region surrounding the
stagnation point) followed by a decay portion. The radial
acceleration exhibited by lateral velocity distribution on the
rise portion is due to the strong adverse pressure gradient
present in the impingement region. Passage from one
velocity range to the other is sharply marked.
Regardless of the flow direction, significant similarities
between the velocity decay and pressure distribution on the
axis of free and radial jets are observed. (Figs. 4, 5).
If we plot the previous diagram from the maximum
point of the lateral velocity versus Y beyond the rise portion
(Fig. 4a) and then compare it with velocity distribution in
the streamwise direction (X) for the free jet issuing from
the nozzle of our study case (Fig. 4b), we discern inter-
esting similarities between free and radial jets.
The evolution of the free jet starts with an almost Fig. 5 Pressure distribution on the radial jet axis
inviscid flow termed potential core within which, the
centerline velocity remains almost constant. The potential interval it behaves exactly like a free jet and no external
core vanishes at a distance of about one diameter from the force affects it (Pressure is constant).
nozzle exit and the velocity profile loses its mixing layer Figure 6 illustrates the kinetic energy on the axis of the
flat core shape [39]. impinging jets. In the potential core region, because gra-
This stage is followed by velocity decay which is very dients are negligible, K remains constant. But after this
similar to the radial jet’s behavior in decay portion. Now inviscid region, since there are rigorous gradients and
the similarities between decay portion in radial jet and the because of shear layer effects on the jets edges which leads
decay region in free jet could be observed. Both of them to vigorous mixing of adjacent fluid layers and rapid
have a decreasing shape from a maximum point. spreading of the region, intense turbulence and therefore a
The same happens for pressure distribution. As is well sharp growth in K diagram is created [40]. Afterwards it is
known, static pressure in the free jet axis is constant and no seen that as the jet advances upstream, with the reduction
external force affects it or is negligible or in other words of gradients, the K value is reduced too. But since in the
pressure proves continuous [39]. Now again if we plot vicinity of impingement region gradients increase, K
pressure distribution approximately from the same point enhances as well. This is in agreement with the findings of
plotted for velocity we will find out that after a very small Lytle and web who noted that there are relatively high

123
432 Heat Mass Transfer (2011) 47:427–437

Fig. 6 Turbulent kinetic energy on the axis of impinging triangular Fig. 7 Turbulent kinetic energy on the impinging plane for opposed
jets impinging triangular and circular jets

levels of turbulence in the stagnation regions [41, 42].

Another explanation for the growths of K diagram may be
due to large-scale vortexes in the boundary layer of the jets
caused by the Kelvin–Helmholtz shear instability. Theses
large scale vortexes are instable [43].
A comparison between the turbulent kinetic energy of
impinging triangular and circular jets on their impinging
planes has been carried out in Fig. 7. As expected, trian-
gular jets possess more turbulence intensity than circular
jets. Sharp corners in triangular nozzles create more
intensive turbulence in comparison to the circular nozzles
and, due to this; the mixing power of triangular jets is
greater than circular ones. This would have considerable
uses in combustion chambers in which a high level of
mixing is needed. So it can be concluded that the turbu-
lence intensity in the impinging plane of triangular
impinging jets is greater than circular jets. The dissipation
rate of turbulent kinetic energy qualitatively exhibits the Fig. 8 Pressure distribution on the impingement plane for impinging
same behavior. jets
Another important discussion is the distribution of
pressure in this region. Figure 8 shows the pressure dis- 3.3 Effects of nozzle separation
tribution in the impinging plane. As it is seen, in the
stagnation point wherein velocity is zero, pressure value is One of the important parts of our study is the effect of the
maximum and when the fluid goes upstream in the radial nozzle-to-nozzle distance on the hydrodynamic properties
jet axis it tends towards zero. of opposed impinging jets. As shown in Fig. 9a–c, the
In a comparison between triangular and circular general properties of diagrams do not change with varying
impinging jets, the maximum value of pressure in the the nozzle-to-nozzle distance; all of them are similar and
impinging plane in triangular jets is more than circular jets are independent. But the values of the hydrodynamic
which is an advantage for triangular impinging jets. In parameters on the impinging plane decrease as the distance
some applications a high pressure impingement region is between nozzles increases. The effect of impinging plane
needed. on flow properties reduces as well.

123
Heat Mass Transfer (2011) 47:427–437
Fig. 9 Turbulent kinetic energy (a), its dissipation rate (b) and pressure distribution (c) on the impingement plane for three several nozzle to
nozzle separation distances
3.4 Jets issuing from slot nozzles
In this section we will study the opposed impinging jets
issuing from nozzles with isosceles triangular and rect-
angular slot cross sections. The height of the equilateral
triangle (nozzle cross section) will be kept constant while
its base will increase and thus isosceles triangles will be
created. We will do this until the base of the total isos-
celes triangle comes to the length of the slot rectangular
nozzle. When this is done a slot nozzle with triangular
cross section has been created. So it may be compared
with the jets issuing from nozzles with rectangular cross
sections. We will make the base of the nozzle’s equilat-
eral triangle cross section, 2, 4, 8 and 10 times larger and
show their respective properties with R2, R4, R8, and R10.
Now we can compare them with each other and with
the slot rectangular jet with the same height and base
of R10.
In Fig. 10a–c, the properties of the mentioned jets in the
impingement plane have been compared to each other
when U0 = 105 m/s and L = 0.32 m for all of them. As it
433
is shown, all of the parameters increase as the triangle
width increases, tending toward rectangular (nozzle cross
sections).
Regarding these figures, it can be seen that the values of
kinetic energy and its dissipation rate on the impingement
plane in triangular slot nozzles are greater than rectangular
slot nozzles. This is a reasonable result as the sharp cor-
ners in triangular nozzles lead to increasing turbulence
intensity.
Pressure, however not only depends on the flow turbu-
lence intensity, but also on hydraulic diameter of nozzle
exit cross section.
3.5 Jets with different velocity ratios and nozzle
to nozzle distances
The remainder of this paper will investigate turbulent
opposed jets at various exit velocity ratios with varying
nozzle-to-nozzle distances. Three different cases with noz-
zle distances of 0.24, 0.32 and 0.4 m, in which the exit nozzle
velocities are unequal, are studied.
123
434
Fig. 10 Kinetic energy (a), its dissipation rate (b) and pressure on the impingement plane (c) for impinging jets issuing from nozzles with
isosceles triangular and rectangular cross sections
The exit air velocity ratio (a) of the two opposed jets is
defined as:
U1
a¼
U0
where U0, U1 are the velocities at the exits of the left and
right nozzles, respectively.
In our study, the stronger jet is always ejected from left
nozzle, so the impact point is always closer to the exit of
the right nozzle. Moreover, the exit air velocity of the left
nozzle is fixed (U0 = 105 m/s) and the exit air velocity of
the right nozzle is variable. So the exit velocity ratio of the
two opposed jets is always less than or equal to 1 in the
present paper.
As Figs. 11a, b, c and 12 show, as the exit velocity ratio
decreases, the impact point slightly moves curving towards
the weak jet. It can also be seen that the velocity gradients
are approximately homogeneous in the vicinity of the
123
Heat Mass Transfer (2011) 47:427–437
impinging plane. Regarding the velocity distributions of
various velocity ratios at certain nozzle separation, the
velocity gradient is nearly uniform and the curves are
parallel in the vicinity of the impinging plane. Our results
are in agreement with the results of Li Weifeng et al. [28].
As shown in Fig. 11 when a = 1, a different type of
behavior is observed and it crosses all the other graphs. We
mentioned previously that when a = 1 the impingement
plane is curved toward the weak jet (right nozzle). So
approximately, we can consider two independent jets
impinging to curved surfaces (the right jet impinging to a
concave surface and left jet impinging to a convex surface
according to Fig. 12).
The shape of the impinging surface seems to have a
considerable effect on the structure of the flow and should
be taken into consideration.
Chio et al. [44] indicated that when the target surface is
located outside the potential core, it seems the concave
Heat Mass Transfer (2011) 47:427–437
Fig. 11 Velocity distribution at various exit velocity ratios and nozzle to nozzle distances: a L = 0.24 m, b L = 0.32 m, c L = 0.4 m
curvature makes the flow entrainment difficult, conse-
quently reducing the turbulence level and making the
potential core region greater.
Gau et al. [45] visualized the jet flow impinging on both
convex and concave semi-circular surfaces. They observed
that in the case of an impinging jet on a convex surface; the
flow structure before reaching the impingement surface is
very similar to the case of impinging jet on a concave
surface.
Thus, the velocity distribution on the jet axis when
a = 1 or when the impinging surface is curved shows a
different structure of the flow and growth of the potential
core seems to be reasonable.
Figure 13 compares velocity gradients in the vicinity of
the stagnation point. As is evident, velocity gradient
decreases with the increasing of nozzle separations in the
vicinity of the stagnation point. This means as the nozzle
to-nozzle distance increases, longitudinal velocity in the
435
region of the stagnation point decreases that is an inter-
esting result.
Kostiuk et al. [46] defined the axial bulk strain along the
impinging plane as:
ou
Sax ¼
ox
and concluded that the bulk strain rate increases with a
reduction of nozzle-to-nozzle distance.
In the present study, the axial bulk strains at the
impinging plane decreases with the increasing of nozzle-
to-nozzle distance, which is in agreement with the results
of Kustuik et al.
Figure 14 shows stagnation point offset at various exit
velocity ratios and nozzle to nozzle distances.
In Fig. 14 the stagnation point offset increases linearly
as the exit velocity ratio decreases. It also demonstrates
that with decreasing nozzle distances the position of the
123
436
Fig. 12 Velocity contour at L = 0.32 m, a = 0.8
Fig. 13 Longitudinal velocity distributions of various nozzle
separations
stagnation point becomes insensitive to the varying of exit
velocity ratio.
It should be mentioned here that, qualitatively our last
three results are in agreement with the results of Weifeng
et al. who investigated turbulent opposed jets issuing from
circular nozzles [28].
Weifeng’s results, then, are a validation of our work.
123
Heat Mass Transfer (2011) 47:427–437
Fig. 14 Stagnation point offset at various exit velocity ratios
4 Conclusion
In this work opposed impinging jets issuing from triangular
nozzles were studied and the following results were
obtained:
(1) Increasing the nozzle-to-nozzle distance decreases all
flow properties but preserve its initial property.
(2) By increasing the nozzle base in triangular nozzles
kinetic energy and its dissipation rate on the impinge-
ment plane has increased but pressure has decreased.
This happens because pressure not only depends on
the intensity of turbulence in the flow, but also on the
hydraulic diameter of the nozzle exit.
(3) Unconfined impinging jets have greater properties
than confined jets.
(4) The radial jet created by impinging free jets has
similarities to free jets.
(5) The velocity gradient in the vicinity of the stagnation
point decreases with increased nozzle-to-nozzle dis-
tances, but bulk strain rate increased with reduced
nozzle-to-nozzle distance.
(6) When the turbulent opposed jets have varying exit
velocity ratios, velocity gradients are nearly uniform
and the curves are parallel in the vicinity of the
impinging plane. Also as the exit velocity ratio
decreases stagnation point offset increases linearly
and the impingement plane curves towards the
weak jet.
Acknowledgments We thank Dr. S. P. Alavi from Tabriz Univer-
sity for having provided us with his experimental data.
Heat Mass Transfer (2011) 47:427–437
References
1. Stan G, Johnson DA (2001) Experimental and numerical analysis
of turbulent opposed impinging jets. AIAA J 39:1901–1908
2. Liou TM, Wu YY (1993) Turbulent flows in a model SDR
combustor. J Fluids Eng Trans ASME 115:468–473
3. Kandjani AE, Khoshnevis A, Hemayatkhah M, et al. (2010) Powder
production via electrohydrodynamic-assisted molten metal jet
impingement into a viscous medium. Powder Technol 203:518–528
4. Wood P, Hrymak A, Yeo R et al (1991) Experimental and
computational studies of the fluid mechanics in an opposed jet
mixing head. Phys Fluids A Fluid Dyn 3:1362–1372
5. Nosseir NS, Behar S (1986) Characteristics of jet impingement in
a side dump combustor. AIAA J 24:1752–1760
6. Teixeira AM, Santos RJ, Rui M et al (2005) Hydrodynamics of
the mixing head in RIM: LDA flow-field characterization. Aiche
J 51:1608–1619
7. Santos RJ, Teixeira AM, Lopes JCB (2005) Study of mixing and
chemical reaction in RIM. Chem Eng Sci 60:2381–2398
8. Williams FA (2000) Progress in knowledge of flamelet structure
and extinction. Prog Energy Combust Sci 26:657–682
9. Johnson BK, Prud’homme RK (2003) Chemical processing
and micromixing in confined impinging jets. Aiche J 49:2264–2282
10. Liu Y, Fox RO (2006) CFD predictions for chemical processing
in a confined impinging-jets reactor. Aiche J 52:731–744
11. Gavi E, Marchisio DL, Barresi AA (2007) CFD modelling and scale-
up of confined impinging jet reactors. Chem Eng Sci 62:2228–2241
12. Berman Y, Tanklevsky A, Oren Y et al (2000) Modeling and
experimental studies of SO2 absorption in coaxial cylinders with
impinging streams. Part I. Chem Eng Sci 55:1009–1021
13. Berman Y, Tanklevsky A, Oren Y et al (2000) Modeling and
experimental studies of SO2 absorption in coaxial cylinders with
impinging streams, Part II. Chem Eng Sci 55:1023–1028
14. Dehkordi AM (2002) A novel two-impinging-jets reactor for
copper extraction and stripping processes. Chem Eng J 87:227–238
15. Hosseinalipour SM, Mujumdar AS (1995) Flow, heat transfer and
particle drying characteristics in confined opposing turbulence
jets: a numerical study. Dry Technol 13:753–781
16. Denshchikov VA, Kondrat’ev VN, Romashov AN (1978) Inter-
action between two opposed jets. Fluid Dyn 13:924–926
17. Denshchikov VA, Kondrat’ev VN, Romashov AN, Chubarov VM
(1983) Auto-oscillations of planar colliding jets. Fluid Dyn
18:460–463
18. Ogawa N, Maki H (1986) Studies on opposed turbulent jets
(Influences of a body on the axis of opposed turbulent jets). JSME
Bull 29:2872–2877
19. Ogawa N, Maki H, Hijikata K (1992) Studies on opposed tur-
bulent jets (Impact position and turbulent component in jet cen-
ter). JSME Int J 35:205–211
20. Champion M, Libby PA (1993) Reynolds stress description of
opposed and impinging turbulent jets. Part I: closely spaced
opposed jets. Phys Fluids A Fluid Dyn 5:203–216
21. Rolon JC, Veynante D, Martin JP et al (1991) Counter jet stag-
nation flows. Exp Fluids 11:313–324
22. Kind RJ, Suthanthiran K (1972) The interaction of two opposing
plane turbulent wall jets. J Fluid Mech 58:389–402
23. Devahastin S, Mujumdar AS (2002) A numerical study of flow
and mixing characteristics of laminar confined impinging
streams. Chem Eng J 85:215–223
24. Besbes S, Mhiri H, Le Palec G et al (2003) Numerical and
experimental study of two turbulent opposed plane jets. Heat
Mass Transf 39:675–686
25. Wang SJ, Devahastin S, Muiumdar AS (2005) A numerical
investigation of some approaches to improve mixing in laminar
confined impinging streams. Appl Therm Eng 25:253–269
View publication stats
437
26. Hosseinalipour SM, Mujumdar AS (1997) Flow and thermal
characteristics of steady two dimensional confined laminar
opposing jets. Part I. Equal jets. Int Commun Heat Mass Transf
24:27–38
27. Hosseinalipour SM, Mujumdar AS (1997) Flow and thermal
characteristics of steady two dimensional confined laminar
opposing jets. Part II. Unequal jets. Int Commun Heat Mass
Transf 24:39–50
28. Li WF, Sun ZG, Liu HF et al (2007) Experimental and numerical
study on stagnation point offset of turbulent opposed jets. Chem
Eng J 138:283–294
29. Yakhot V, Orszag SA, Thangam S, Gatski TB, Speziale CG
(1992) Development of turbulence models for shear flows by a
double expansion technique. Phys Fluids A 4:1510–1520
30. Knowles K, Saddington AJ (2002) Modelling and experiments on
underexpanded turbulent jet mixing, 5th international symposium
on engineering turbulence modelling and measurements, Mall-
orca, Spain, Sept 16–18
31. Gordeev S, Heinzel V, Slobodchuk V (2006) Simulation of single
and multiple impinging jet cooling and comparison with experi-
mental data, Proceedings of the 8th biennial conference on
engineering systems design and analysis, Turin, Italy, July 04–07
32. Sharif MAR, Mothe KK (2009) Evaluation of turbulence models
in the prediction of heat transfer due to slot jet impingement on
plane and concave surfaces. Numer Heat Transf B Fundam
55:273–294
33. Fernandez JA, Elicer-Cortes JC, Valencia A, et al. (2007) Com-
parison of low-cost two-equation turbulence models for predic-
tion flow dynamics in twin-jets devices, 13th international heat
transfer conference, Sydney, Australia, Aug 13–18
34. Chen Q (1995) Comparison of different k-e models for indoor air
flow computations. Numer Heat Transf B Fundam 28:353–369
35. Liakos HH, Koukou MK, Founti MA, Markatos NC(1998)
Modeling of impinging turbulent jets and premixed flames, 4th
European computational fluid dynamics conference, Athens,
Greece, Sept 07–11
36. Liakos HH, Keramida EP, Founti MA et al (2002) Heat and mass
transfer study of impinging turbulent premixed flames. Heat and
Mass Transfer 38:425–432
37. Sharif MAR, Mothe KK (2009) Parametric study of turbulent
slot-jet impingement heat transfer from concave cylindrical sur-
faces. Int J Therm Sci 49:428–442
38. Mirzaie S (2006) Experimental and numerical studies on
impinging jets, Dissertation, University of Tabriz
39. Abramovich GN (1963) The theory of turbulent jets. The MIT
Press, Massachusette
40. Faghani E, Saemi S, Maddahian R, Farhanieh B (2009) Numer-
ical investigation of corner angle and wing number effects on
fluid flow characteristics of a turbulent stellar jet. Heat and Mass
Transfer 46:25–37
41. Lytle D (1990) Air jet impingement heat transfer at low nozzle-to
plate spacings, Dissertation, Brigham Young University
42. Lytle D, Webb BW (1994) Air jet impingement heat transfer at
low nozzle-plate spacings. Int J Heat Mass Transf 37:1687–1697
43. Castaing B, Huerre P, Rossi M (1998) Hydrodynamics and
nonlinear instabilities. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
44. Choi MS, Yoo HS, Yang GY et al (2000) Measurements of
impinging jet flow and heat transfer on a semi-circular concave
surface. Int J Heat Mass Transf 43:1811–1822
45. Gau C, Chung CM (1991) Surface curvature effect on slot-air-jet
impingement cooling flow and heat-transfer process. J Heat
Transf Trans ASME 113:858–864
46. Kostiuk LW, Bray KNC, Cheng RK (1993) Experimental study
of premixed turbulent combustion in opposed streams. Part I.
Nonreacting flow field. Combust Flame 92:377–395
123