Professional Documents
Culture Documents
com
ISSN : 2248-9622, Vol. 4, Issue 3( Version 1), March 2014, pp.883-895
Abstract
The mean aim of this work is to study the Air-lift pumps characteristics according to design parameters such as
the percentage of the distance between throat section and nozzle and the driving air pressure, suction head and
also study the effect of each parameter on the air lift pump characteristics in order to have a better performance
of such pump under various conditions.
A certain geometry for air-lift pump designed and manufactured. The experiments show that there must be
careful in increasing the suction head, and a balance must be considered between the suction head and the
driving air volumetric flow rate. While the effect of increasing air pressure will stop at certain maximum of the
ratio of the volumetric flow rate of water and air that is any increase in air pressure will meet no change ratio of
the volumetric flow rate of water and air, While Increasing S/Dth will leads to decrease in the percentage of
ratio of the volumetric flow rate of water and air because the optimum S/Dth so that at this value we will have
the best performance and any other values for S/Dth the percentage of ratio of the volumetric flow rate of water
and air will decreases , but this effect is not so clear and it could be neglected. The pump performance is not so
sensitive with the change of S/Dth after a certain value, this information will help in the use of the air-lift pump
in several applications using the predetermined operating conditions.
www.ijera.com 883|P a g e
Mohammed E. Al-Shibani et al Int. Journal of Engineering Research and Applications www.ijera.com
ISSN : 2248-9622, Vol. 4, Issue 3( Version 1), March 2014, pp.883-895
in the diffuser, both of which are proportional to the efficiency. The optimum value for S/Dth for pumping
square of the velocity. water is about 1.
Static pressure (driving air pressure) at the Ibrahim (2012) insure the same investigations and the
entrance of the nozzle is converted to kinetic energy driving pressure of 1 bar gives the maximum
by permitting the fluid to flow freely through a delivered concentration in case of R=0.25 and 0.4 but
converging nozzle. The resulting- high velocity at R= 0.155 the driving pressure of 1.5 bar gives the
stream entrains the suction fluid in the suction maximum delivered concentration.
chamber where the driving air jet creates a vacuum in
the plenum chamber upstream of the diffuser section, 1-1-Consequences of Nozzle-Throat Interface
increasing of the velocity decreases the pressure In addition to promoting cavitation,
value for the same stream line according to Bernoulli interference between the nozzle exterior and the
equation. Water is, thereby drawn from the suction throat entry interior surfaces is an important cause of
tank through a flexible hose, resulting in a flow of the large losses in the jet pumps.
mixed fluids (air and water) at an intermediate Ibrahim (2012), the distance between the
velocity. The diffuser section (at the top of the jet driving nozzle to the beginning of mixing chamber to
pump) converts the velocity back to static pressure at driving nozzle diameter ratio of 1.5 gives the
the discharge of the jet pump. maximum for all tested cases.
Standard jet pump uses an axial nozzle, a Mueller (1964) is one of the few
generally cylindrical mixture and a divergent diffuser investigators who measured the throat entry loss
with a small angle (7 to 8 degree). This is the coefficient and his results graphically illustrate the
simplest design, but one having the largest profound effect of an adequate nozzle to throat
dimensions and poorest performance. Thus, different spacing on the loss coefficient Ken (If S/Dth = 0.55
techniques should be examined to improve the where the measured Ken value was 0.061).
efficiency and compactness. When the nozzle is inserted to S/Dth = 0.023, the
Following are the major techniques listed in order to measured Ken values increased by an order of
increase performance of the jet pump: magnitude to 0.745, actually this radical increase in
1. The pumps with partial injection of the driving the throat entry loss coefficient reflects a combination
fluid by an annular slot at the inlet of the mixture of the main flow losses and a secondary flow losses.
are well suited to the pneumatic conveyance of
products or the extraction and cooling of the 1-2- Optimum Mixing Throat Length
gasses. Ibrahim (2012), the mixing chamber length
2. Multi tube and BI-dimensional pump which can of 7.25 Dmix had proven superiority over the other
comprise three, seven, nine, 19, 37 and so for two mixing chamber length of 6.75 and 7.86 Dmix.
driving nozzles. Mixing throat length ranging from 3.5 to
3. Annular jet pumps with thin divergent flow approximately 10 times the throat diameters has been
whose performance is comparable to that of jet studied. Vogel (1965) measured the static pressure
pumps with seven or nine divergent injectors. rise in a very long throat length up to 20 diameters in
4. Jet pumps with several annular flows, concentric length, his results illuminated an often over looked
and divergent, whose compactness and point that is the dependence of optimum throat length
performance with a diffuser are the best for jet on the flow ratio M, regardless, of the design area
pumps handling Uni. -Interrupted flows. ratio of the pump. For an area ratio of R = 0.219 he
5. Pulse jet pump, which's driving flow, comprises found that the pressure rise in the mixing throat is at
successive–bursts or –blasts- of gasses sucking 5.3 diameters at low secondary flows approaching the
in waves of induced air, the efficiency can be cut-off point, and the required or optimum mixing
high. length increased many times the diameters at high
Most of the papers in the literature on the values of the flow ratio m, i. e., under low Pd
design of liquid-liquid jet pumps contain empirical conditions. Schulz and Fasol in 1958 using a
information on the coefficient S/Dth. larger area of area ratio R = 0.219 found that the
1I. A. El-Sawaf, 2M. A. Halawa, 3M. A. pressure peaked at L/Dth = 4.2 for (M) goes to zero
Younes and 4I. R. Teaima (2011) Study the effects of as contracted with a required mixing length of L/Dth
the pump operating conditions and geometries on the > 8.3 at a maximum flow ratio.
performance, the experimental investigations that the
pump head and the head ratio decrease with 1-3- Interrelationship Between S/ Dth and L/ Dth
increasing suction capacity and the area ratio R The mixing length required to achieve
(An/AMC) of 0.25 gives the maximum highest maximum pressure rise in the throat is properly
efficiency and the area ratio of 0.155 gives a lowest viewed as the total distance from the tip of the nozzle
to completion of mixing. i.e. (S/Dth + L/Dth). Note
www.ijera.com 884|P a g e
Mohammed E. Al-Shibani et al Int. Journal of Engineering Research and Applications www.ijera.com
ISSN : 2248-9622, Vol. 4, Issue 3( Version 1), March 2014, pp.883-895
that the optimum S/Dth increased from zero for the Cavitation may be induced in a pump as a result of
longest throat to 2.3 throat diameters for the shortest increased velocity of the primary jet or decreased
length. Since the L/Dth values declined at a more suction port pressure or decreased delivery pressure,
1
rapid rate than growth in S/Dth, The totals declined X. Long, 2H. Yao, 3J. Zhao (2009) study the effect of
somewhat. Note that the peak efficiency was cavitation on the pump performance they concludes
obtained with the intermediate case, i.e., 1 diameter that flow patterns in the throat pipe of liquid pump
spacing and a 5.66 diameter mixing throat length under operating limit are observed, while the axial
show in table (1) for two short-throat pumps. pressure distribution along the wall of the pump are
The same trend is evident; namely, a also measured. Based on the analysis of the
reduction in throat length requires a doubling in observation and calculations of the distribution of the
nozzle to throat spacing. Sanger study provides mach No, it can be concluded that the critical liquid-
further information on one of the undesirable effects vapor two phase flow will occur when a jet pump
of excessive S/Dth values when used with a long works under the operating limit. In this situation, the
(7.25)-mixing throat. The corresponding static velocity of mixed flow reaches the corresponding
pressure profiles with S/Dth = 0 or 0.96 showed sound velocity. That's the reason why the outlet flow
continuous pressure rise through the throat and rate remains uncharged with the decrease of outlet
leveling off at the exit, indicating an optimum length. pressure under a certain driving pressure when
In contrast, a similar profile with S/Dth = 2.68 operating limits occurs.
resulted in a throat pressure rise, which peaked at Mixing throat cavitation in a liquid jet pump
about 4.5 diameters and then declined due to results from high jet velocity, low suction pressure
frictional losses in the throat. (NPSH) or low Net Positive Suction Head developing
cavitation at the jet boundary has no effect on the
1-4- Effect of nozzle-throat spacing on pump efficiency, but under severe conditions it
performance and theory-experiment comparisons spreads to the walls. Cavitation can be avoided by
Unfortunately, the liquid pump is increasingly prone reducing Vn and R or by raising suction port pressure.
to cavitation as the throat spacing (S/Dth) is reduced
to zero. Static pressure measurements at the throat II. EXPERMENTAL SET-UP AND
entry show that zero spacing causes large pressure MEASUREMENT
drops at the throat entry and consequently promotes A new experimental-set up is constructed to
cavitation. investigate the effect of the design parameters on the
For S/Dth = 0optimum nozzle setting for pump performance in order to have a better
pump efficiency. understanding about the behavior of such pump under
A. H. Hammoud and A. A. Abdel Naby various conditions.
(2006) for nozzle to throat spacing to nozzle diameter
ratio (L/D), the optimum pump performance was 2-1- The set-up assembly:
obtained for drive pressure of 1.5 bar, while The set-up assembly shown in figure (1)
increasing the motive pump pressure the pump consists of the main following components:
performance decreased. V. P. sharma1, S. 1. Main compressed air valve.
Kumaraswamy*1 and A. Mani2 (2011), Nozzle to 2. Secondary compressed air tank.
mixing tube spacing play an important role in the 3. Manometer.
performance of the jet pump. 4. Orifice meter.
5. Air-lift pump.
1-5- Cavitation 6. Delivered water tank.
One of the most important problems in the 7. Feed water tank.
design of the pump systems is the prediction of A 500 liter pressurized air tank (2) is used as
cavitation .The pressure at the throat entrance is a main air tank (outside the laboratory) connected to
always less than the suction head Hs for suction flows a 150-liter tank as a secondary tank beside the system
greater than zero. If the driving air pressure is to increase the stable periods of the pressure feeding.
reduced below the vapor pressure P V of the fluid The secondary tank is connected to the orifice meter
being pumped, cavitation will result. Since P v is the though a flexible tube connected to the control valve,
minimum pressure that can be obtained at the throat the orifice meter is connected to the nozzle-tube by a
entrance, the suction flow at this point is the galvanized 18 mm pipe and a pressure gauge is
maximum that can be obtained with the particular placed just before the nozzle-tube to measure the
value of the suction head. Attempts to lower the driving air pressure.
driving air pressure below PV by increasing the To enable the nozzle-tube moving up and
nozzle flow rate will simply lead to greater vapor down to change the percentage S/Dth the lower flange
volumes at PV in the suction fluid. figure (4) is threaded in the center by 2 mm fine
www.ijera.com 885|P a g e
Mohammed E. Al-Shibani et al Int. Journal of Engineering Research and Applications www.ijera.com
ISSN : 2248-9622, Vol. 4, Issue 3( Version 1), March 2014, pp.883-895
www.ijera.com 886|P a g e
Mohammed E. Al-Shibani et al Int. Journal of Engineering Research and Applications www.ijera.com
ISSN : 2248-9622, Vol. 4, Issue 3( Version 1), March 2014, pp.883-895
increase the flow rate up to the choking pressure, reverse effect. At the same Pa increasing Hs results in
after which the flow rate shall remain constant. decreasing of M, at the same driving pressure P a
Same as the first series but at S/Dth = 1.5 and 3.0 increasing the percentage S/Dth results in decreasing
respectively in figures (8, 9, 10) they show the same of the percentage of M. The effect of increasing P a
trend as described above. will stop at certain maximum of M that is any
Another Series in figure 9 ( a, b, c, and d) increase in the driving air pressure P a will meet no
show the variations of ṁw, against ṁa at Hs = -10, 10, change in M.
20, 30 Cm., at a constant S/Dth =1.5 The results (as
shown in the figures) as expected, the tendency for 4-3- Effect Of The Percentage S/Dth
the characteristics to reach a maximum followed by a Increasing S/Dth will leads to decrease in the
slight fall before flattening off is clear particularly for percentage of M because the optimum S/Dth = 0.5 so
the low pumping heads. The characteristic shape that at this value we will have the best performance
beyond an air mass flow rate of 1.1×10 -2 Kg/sec and any other values for S/Dth the percentage M will
(corresponding to a supply pressure of approximately decreases, but this effect is not so clear and it could
6.5 atm.) could not be established due to limitations. be neglected. The pump performance is not so
Another Series in figure 10 ( a, b, c, and d) show the sensitive with the change of S/Dth after S/Dth =0.5. It
variations of ṁw, against ṁa at Hs = -10, 10, 20, 30 is important to mention here that S/Dth = 0is the
Cm., at a constant S/Dth =3.0 The results (as shown in reason for highcavitation losses.
the figures) as expected. For certain value of S/Dth as
Pa increased, the dimensionless percentage M 4-4- Effect of Hysteresis
increased up to the maximum value, and then the From figure 8&9 (a, b, c, and d) for the two
curve falls down slowly. The graphs show that the runs as a result of the presence of the Hysteresis
maximum Mat different values of S/Dth. Table (1) phenomena there was a difference between the two
show the locations of maximum M at various driving runs because of the friction, and thermal effects. It
pressure and suction head. In each series the three could be summarized that: -
curves have the same trend. 1. S/Dth should be of the order of 0.5 to 1.5 throat
diameters.
IV. CONCLUSIONS 2. Performance is insensitive in this range and a
From all the previous results, different value of 1 is commonly recommended.
points can be calculated: 3. It is unlikely that commercial jet pumps will be
constructed with S/Dth values of zero because of
4-1- Effect of Water Head (Hs) the cavitation penalty.
For this series of tests, the following values
of the dimensionless geometric parameters are REFRENCES
chosen: [1] H. Yano, 1. Funaki, T. Shinoki, A. Kieda
S/d1 = 0.5 and S. Simotori (1990) "Performance of a
L/ d2= 5.12 New Type of Water Jet Pump", Transactions
d2/d1 = 2.25 of ASME Journal, Vol (2), pp. 98-112.
It is clearly that for the same configuration [2] I.J. Karassic, J.P. Messina, P. Cooper, C.C.
of the system, increasing Hs lead to increase in ṁw for Healed (2008) Pump Handbook, Fourth
the same ṁa in Figure 8 ( a, b, c, and d) edition, McGraw-Hill, NY.
proportionally, but the optimum performance is at [3] Mueller N. H. G., (1964) "Water Jet Pump"
S/Dth = 0.5, Hs= 30 Cm. J. Am. Soc. Civil Eng. 90-HY3, 83.
This is agreeing with the previous [4] Iran, E and Rodrego E.( 2004) "Performance
investigations done. Increasing Hs from -10 Cm to 30 of low-Cost Ejectors", Journal of Irrigation
Cm leads to decrease in M because of the required and Drainage Engineering. ASCE trans.,
increase ṁa so that it could be concluded that there pp.122-128. H. Hammoud, (2006) "Effect of
must be careful in increasing the suction head, and a Design and Operational parameters on The
balance must be considered between the suction head pump Performance", Beirut Arab
and the driving air mass flow rate. University, Mechanical Engineering
Department, Proceedings of the 4th WSEAS
4-2- Effect Of The Driving Air Pressure Pa International Conference on fluid mechanics
For the same S/Dth, Hs increasing the driving and Aerodynamics, Elounda, Greece,
air pressure Pa leads to proportional increase in M up August 21-23, pp. 245-252.
to the optimum region, and then increasing P a will [5] Jerzy M. Sawicki (2007), "Hydraulic Loss
leads to decreases in M. This means that the driving Coefficient in 1D flows", University of
air pressure must be limited otherwise it cause a Technology, Faculty of Civil and
www.ijera.com 887|P a g e
Mohammed E. Al-Shibani et al Int. Journal of Engineering Research and Applications www.ijera.com
ISSN : 2248-9622, Vol. 4, Issue 3( Version 1), March 2014, pp.883-895
3
Environmental Engineering, Archives of National Microgravity Laboratory, Institute
Hydro-Engineering and Environmental of Mechanics, Chinese Academy of Science,
Mechanics., Vol. 54,No. 2, pp. 95-116 Beijing, China. International Journal of Heat
1
[6] E. Lisowski and 2H. Momeni (2010), "CFD and Mass Transfere52 2415-2420
Modeling of a jet Pump with [10] Ibrahim R. Teaima (2012) "A Central-Type
Circumferential Nozzles for Large Flow Jet Pump Model For Wheat Grains
Rates", 1Institute of Applied Informatics, Removing From Water Channels"
Cracow University of Technology, Poland, Mechanical& Electrical Research Institute,
2
Institute of Machine and Marine National Water Research Center, Delta,
Technology, Bergen University College, Barrage, Egypt, Sixteenth International
Norway. Archives of Foundry Engineering Water Technology Conference, IWTC
Volume 10, Special Issue 3/2010. pp.69-72. 16,Turkey.
[7] Vogal, R., (1965), “Theoretische und [11] P. sharma1, S. Kumaraswamy*1 and A.
Experimentelle Untersuchungen as Mani2 (2011),1 Hydroturbomachines
Strohlopparaten, Maschinenbautechnick, Laboratory, Department of mechanical
Berlin, Germany, Vol. 5, P. 619. Engineering Indian Institute of Technology
1
[8] I. A. El-Sawaf, 2M. A. Halawa, 3M. A. Madras, Chennai, India, 2Refrigiration &
Younes and 4I. R. Teaima (2011), "Study of Air-conditioning Laboratory, Department of
the Different Parameters that Influence on mechanical Engineering Indian Institute of
the Performance of Water Jet Pump", Technology Madras, Chennai, India.
1
Proffessor, Mechanical Power Engineering [12] Sadek Z. Kassaba, Hamdy A. Kandila,
Department, Faculty of Engineering, Port- Hassan A. Wardaa and Wael H. Ahmedb,
Said University, Egypt, 2Assistant Professor, (2008) " Air-lift pumps characteristics under
Mechanical Power Engineering Department, two-phase flow conditions" aMechanical
Faculty of Engineering, Al-Azhar Engineering Department, Faculty of
University, Egypt, 3Professor, MERI, Engineering, Alexandria University
4
NWRC, Egypt, Assistant Researcher, Alexandria, Egypt, bNuclear Safety Solution
MERI, NWRC, Egypt. Fifteenth Ltd., AMEC, 700 University Avenue,
International Water Technology Conference Toronto, Ontario, Canada M5G 1X6
IWTC 15, Alexandria Egypt. [13] S. Z. Kassab1, H. A. Kandil2, H. A. Warda3,
1
[9] X. Long, 2H. Yao, 3J. Zhao (2009) W. A. Ahmed4,(2001) " Performance of an
"Investigation on Mechanism of Critical Airlift Pump Operating in Two-Phase Flow"
Cavitating Flow in Liquid Jer Pump Under Mechanical engineering department, faculty
Operating Limits" 1School of Power and of engineering, Alexandria University,
Mechanical Engineering, Wuhan University, Egypt,ICFDP7-2001004.
China. 2Nuclear Power Qinsham Joint
Venture Company Limited, Haiyan, China.
I. APPINDIX
Basic Laws Used in Calculations:
6-1-Determining Driving Air Volumetric Flow Rate ( Q air )
www.ijera.com 888|P a g e
Mohammed E. Al-Shibani et al Int. Journal of Engineering Research and Applications www.ijera.com
ISSN : 2248-9622, Vol. 4, Issue 3( Version 1), March 2014, pp.883-895
Pu . p (bar ) * 10 4
u .S
R ( 29.3) * Tu .S ( K )
u
H air Y * ( 1)
a
u 13.6
1
a
800
u
Wair * H air Wair * Y * ( 1)
a
Where :-
Right reading left reading
Y=
100
W air = ( 1/ 800 ) * 9800 = 12.25 N /m3
u N
P u .S PD.S Wair * Y * ( 1)
a m2
N 5
= 2 * 10 bar
m
6-2-Determining Water Volumetric Flow Rate
Volume of water in the upper tank = 50 × 50 × Z ( Cm 3 )
where : -
50 ( Cm ) × 50 ( Cm )= Upper tank base area
1 v 2 Rv 2 1
v{2 R[ ] (1 Z 6 Z 5 )[ ] v2[ 2 Z 4 Z 6 ]}
1 R 1 R Cs
1 ' 1 v 2 R' v 2
R{Z 1 2 Z 5 v 2 R [
' 2
] (1 Z 6 Z 5 Z 5 )[
' "
] }
Cm 1 R' 1 R'
Where:
For the specific geometry constructed in the present study v = 1/ 2.25
For Lm =14.35 Cm
1- Friction loss in driving line Z1 = 0.0012
www.ijera.com 889|P a g e
Mohammed E. Al-Shibani et al Int. Journal of Engineering Research and Applications www.ijera.com
ISSN : 2248-9622, Vol. 4, Issue 3( Version 1), March 2014, pp.883-895
Table (1)
Reference Throat entry shape L / Dth
o
Vogal and Sanger Conical, approx. 200 6
o
Schultz and Fasol Conical, 120 4
Mueller Rounded, radius = 0.9 / Dth 6 – 7.5
Vogal Conical (180o ), elliptical 8.3
3 Conical (180o , 90o , 40o )
Cunningham 6–8
One rounded radius = 2 Dth
o
Hansen and Kinnavy Conical, 40 4.1
Sanger Rounded, radius = 3.7 Dth 3.54 , 5.66 , 7.25
In all cases, corners are rounded at transitions (Cunningham and Sanger)
www.ijera.com 890|P a g e
Mohammed E. Al-Shibani et al Int. Journal of Engineering Research and Applications www.ijera.com
ISSN : 2248-9622, Vol. 4, Issue 3( Version 1), March 2014, pp.883-895
Figure (3) Schematic drawing of the convergent divergent tube of the jet- pump
Figure (4) Schematic drawing of the lower flange of the pump assembly
www.ijera.com 891|P a g e
Mohammed E. Al-Shibani et al Int. Journal of Engineering Research and Applications www.ijera.com
ISSN : 2248-9622, Vol. 4, Issue 3( Version 1), March 2014, pp.883-895
Figure (5) Schematic drawing of the upper flange of the jet -pump assembly
www.ijera.com 892|P a g e
Mohammed E. Al-Shibani et al Int. Journal of Engineering Research and Applications www.ijera.com
ISSN : 2248-9622, Vol. 4, Issue 3( Version 1), March 2014, pp.883-895
Fig. 8(a, b,c and d) Relation between discharge water mass flow rate and driving air mass flow rate at
S/ Dth = 0.5, Hs = -10, 10, 20, 30 Cm respectively for different values of suction heads
w ater flow rate-Air flow rate w ater flow rate- air flow rate
at constant S/D= 0.5& H=-10Cm at S/D= 0.5 & H=10Cm
5
5
4 4
3 3
2
ṁw (Kg/sec)
2
ṁw (Kg/sec)
1
1
0
0
0 0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02 0.025
0 0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02 0.025
ṁa (Kg/sec) ṁa (Kg/sec)
(a) (b)
Water flow rate - Air flow rate Water flow rate - Air flow rate
at const. S/D= 0.5 & H=30 Cm at const.S/D=0.5 & H = 20 Cm
ṁw (Kg/sec)
5
5
4 4
3 3
ṁw (Kg/sec)
2 2
1 1
0
0
0 2 4 6 8 10
0 2 4 6 8 10
ṁa (Kg/sec) ṁa (Kg/sec)
(c) (d)
Fig. 9 (a, b,c and d) Relation between discharge water mass flow rate and driving air mass flow rate at
S/ Dth = 1.5, Hs = -10, 10, 20, 30 Cm respectively for different values of suction heads
Water flow rate - Air flow rate Water flow rate - Air flow rate
at S/D=1.5 & H= -10Cm at S/D = 1.5 & H= 10
3.5 3.5
3
2.5 2.5
2
ṁw (Kg/sec)
1.5 1.5
ṁw (Kg/sec)
1
0.5
0.5
0 -0.5 0 2 4 6 8 10
0 2 4 6 8 10
ṁa (Kg/sec) ṁa (Kg/sec)
(a) (b)
www.ijera.com 893|P a g e
Mohammed E. Al-Shibani et al Int. Journal of Engineering Research and Applications www.ijera.com
ISSN : 2248-9622, Vol. 4, Issue 3( Version 1), March 2014, pp.883-895
Water flow rate - Air flow rate Water flow rate - Air flow rate
at S/D =1.5 & H = 30 Cm at S/D=1.5 &H = 20
5 3.5
4
2.5
3
1.5
ṁw (Kg/sec)
ṁw (Kg/sec)
1 0.5
0 -0.5 0 2 4 6 8 10
0 2 4 6 8 10
ṁa (Kg/sec) ṁa (Kg/sec)
(c) d)
Fig.10 (a, b, c and d) Relation between discharge water mass flow rate and driving air mass flow rate at
S/ Dth = 3.0, Hs = -10, 10, 20, 30 Cm respectively for different values of suction heads
Water flow rate - Air flow rate Water flow rate - Air flow rate
at S/D = 3 & H=-10 at S/D = 3 & H = 10
3 3
2.5 2.5
2 2
1.5 1.5
1 1
ṁw (Kg/sec)
ṁw (Kg/sec)
0.5 0.5
0 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 0 5 10
ṁa (Kg/sec) ṁa (Kg/sec)
(a) (b)
1
0.5
0
0 2 4 6 8 10
ṁa (Kg/sec)
(c) (d)
www.ijera.com 894|P a g e
Mohammed E. Al-Shibani et al Int. Journal of Engineering Research and Applications www.ijera.com
ISSN : 2248-9622, Vol. 4, Issue 3( Version 1), March 2014, pp.883-895
Nomenclature: -
A Cross sectional area (m2)
At Total flow area (m2)
An Nozzle (jet) cross sectional area (m2)
AMC Mixing chamber cross sectional area (m2)
Cd Calibration coefficient from the orifice calibration curve (-)
do Orifice diameter (m2)
Dth Driving nozzle exit diameter (m2)
D Tube diameter (m2)
www.ijera.com 895|P a g e