Materials Today: Proceedings 46 (2021) 3521–3525

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Materials Today: Proceedings

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/matpr

Augmenting the design of a nozzle used in abrasive jet machining

process with computational fluid dynamics
M. Balasubramanian a,⇑, S. Madhu b, S. Murali c
a
R.M.K College of Engineering and Technology, Thiruvallur, India
b
Saveetha School of Engineering, Saveetha Institute of Medical and Technical Sciences, Chennai 602105, India
c
Sri Sai Ram Institute of Technology, Chennai, India

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: The nozzle is an important part that affects the performance of the abrasive jet machining. It is a micro-
Received 12 November 2020 machining process, where the target material is being eroded by the effect of a high-speed continuous
Received in revised form 20 November 2020 flow of abrasive particles, which are move out from a nozzle. A nozzle is required to carry out the parti-
Accepted 30 November 2020
cles to remove the material with the help of a large velocity of the microjet. The common nozzle shape
Available online 22 January 2021
presently used in this process is a rectangle and circular shape, which gives a low flow rate and further
demands to reduce the material removal rate (MRR). In this work, three different geometrical types of
Keywords:
nozzles: (i) convergent nozzle (25 mm) length, (ii) convergent nozzle (50 mm) length, (iii) modified con-
CFD
Nozzle
vergent nozzle has been designed. The simulations of the flow have been analyzed using computational
Abrasive fluid dynamics. The velocity and pressure of the particles inside the nozzle were compared. The results
Flow characteristics show the improvements in the modified convergent nozzle are about 42.84 m/s of velocity and the pres-
MRR sure inside the nozzle tip is about 994424.5 Pa. Due to the swirl flow in a modified convergent nozzle, the
high material removal rate is achieved.
Ó 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the International Confer-
ence on Materials, Manufacturing and Mechanical Engineering for Sustainable Developments-2020.

1. Introduction
Abrasive particles touch the workpiece at large velocity through
nozzles. Convergent nozzles are widely used in abrasive jet
machines. Convergence nozzle has gradually decreased diameter
towards the tip of the nozzle whereas divergent nozzle has
increased diameter nozzle, so the velocity of fluid will also
decrease. However convergent-divergent nozzle has a throat sec-
tion which is increasing in their performance when compared to
both the convergent nozzle and divergent nozzle.
The shape of the hole made by abrasive jet machining is like a
reverse bell [1]. A mathematical equation was also developed to
predict the shape of the hole. A cross-drilled hole on the plaster
of paris work Sample was made using an Abrasive jet deburring
Machine. The effects of various process parameters on the debur-
ring process and the methods necessary to maximize the material
removal rate were discussed in this work [2]. Certain feed rate was
given to the nozzle to eliminate the change in nozzle standoff dis-
⇑ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: manianmb@gmail.com (M. Balasubramanian).
tance due to machining. By using this method kerf angle is reduced
approximately 58% [3]. Computational fluid dynamic analysis was
done to find the effect of pressure on friction inside the nozzle and
kinetic energy of abrasive jet from the nozzle tip. From this study,
if the concentration of the abrasive increases the kinetic energy
also decreases [4]. A computer simulation by changing the mass
flow rate of abrasive was done to determine the characteristics of
material removal for the different particle angles [5].
A modified supersonic nozzle was designed to calculate opti-
mum Mach number at the nozzle exit with the uniform flow at
both converging and diverging section of the nozzle [6]. A study
was conducted to compare the wear in composite ceramic and
conventional nozzle due to abrasive jet. Because of gradient struc-
ture, the wear resistance improved over conventional ceramic noz-
zles [7]. Collision of each abrasive particles, particle to particle, and
particle with the surface was investigated using computational
methods. Shape of the machined profile was found to vary with
the size of abrasive particles [8]. A mathematical model was devel-
oped to predict the erosion rates in micro-hole drilling and micro-
channel cutting on glasses [9]. Properties of moving abrasive parti-
cles inside the high-speed jet and the abrasive distribution over the

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2020.11.991
2214-7853/Ó 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the International Conference on Materials, Manufacturing and Mechanical Engineering for
Sustainable Developments-2020.
M. Balasubramanian, S. Madhu and S. Murali Materials Today: Proceedings 46 (2021) 3521–3525

fluid flow was discussed using the discrete element method. It was
inferred that the particle size and the nozzle size did not affect the
flow property [10].
Computational fluid dynamics was used to find the kinetic
energy of the aluminium abrasives to predict the surface roughness
and material removal rate on glass workpiece. A one-dimensional
isentropic flow model was developed to measure each abrasive
particle velocity in two different types of nozzles. It has been noted
that the Laval nozzle can increase the particle velocity by more
than 30% [11,12]. A nonlinear model was been developed [13] to
simulate the erosion of the workpiece caused by the abrasive water
jet flow and compared with previous works. Four different types of
abrasive jet nozzles using the value analysis and ideas diagram
method was analyzed. From this research, it has been noted that
the third type of nozzle is optimum for engraving purpose compare
with other nozzles [14]. Computational method of steady-state,
turbulent, solid–liquid flow through nozzles used in abrasive water
jet machining was studied. It has been noted that the inside shape
of the nozzle is important to get the optimum flow of the abrasive
particles [15]. Computational fluid dynamics of the abrasive parti-
cle flow path to predicting the profiles of channels machined using
the abrasive slurry jet machine on polymethyl methacrylate, alu-
minium alloy, stainless steel, and Ti–6Al–4V titanium alloy work-
pieces was studied [16,17]. Computational fluid dynamic analysis
on a water jet and abrasive water jet machining was analysed to
optimize the flow parameters inside the nozzle through the opti-
mized nozzle design and flow characteristics. In this work, three
different geometrical types of nozzles were designed and devel-
oped: (i) Convergent nozzle with 25 mm length. (ii) Convergent
nozzle with 50 mm length. (iii) Modified convergent nozzle. Com-
putational simulation was conducted on the three nozzles to find
the jet velocity and pressure inside the nozzle. Ansys fluent tool
was used for the computational fluid dynamics (CFD) simulation.
2. Methodology
The pressure and velocity of the air and abrasive particles of the
nozzle consist of two equations: a) One-dimensional continuity
equation b) Gas characteristic equation
2.1. Theoretical abrasive jet velocity
The flow from the nozzle is one dimensional because the con-
stancy of the cross-sectional area of the nozzle is in the direction
of abrasive flow. Even though the area of the nozzle varies in the
direction of flow then flow should be considered as three-
dimensional flow. However, if such a variation is gradual then
we can neglect the changes taking place in cross-stream directions.
In our work, we select the convergent type nozzle. Such flows are
called quasi-one-dimensional flows. One dimensional and a quasi-
one-dimensional flow is given in Eq. (1)
q1 l1 A1 ¼ q2 l2 A2 ð1Þ
Density is constant (for incompressible flow)
V 1 A1 ¼ V 2 A2
V 2 A2 ¼ V 2 A2
V 2 ¼ V 1 A1 =A2
V2 = 42 m/s
Hence the velocity of the abrasive particle analytical result cor-
related with the simulation result.
2.2. Theoretical abrasive jet pressure
To find the pressure, we can solve this through a thermody-
namic approach. As we know the gas characteristic Eq. (2)
PV ¼ mRT ð2Þ
where P = Pressure, V = Volume, M = Mass, R = Gas constant,
T = Temperature
From Eq. (2)
P ¼ ðm=VÞRT
Here density is constant We modify the above equation
P1 P2
¼
R1 T 1 R2 T 2
From the boundary conditions
P1 = 6 bar, T1 = 288 T2 = 430
Finally, we get P2 = 9 bar
3. Geometry and parameters
For the CFD simulation, a 3-D model of three different nozzles
was designed in CATIA V5R17, and Ansys Fluent software was used
for meshing. All the necessary boundary conditions were applied in
Ansys CFX 11.0 Table 1 shows the geometrical conditions of three
different nozzles used for this investigation and Table 2 shows the
boundary conditions for the simulation. In the symmetrical model,
the computation was made in less time as the total number of
mesh decreased compared to the full model. Whenever possible,
Ansys CFX suggests applying symmetry.
4. Simulation procedure
CATIA V5 R17 Software is used to model all three types of the
nozzle. A non-linear finite element model was developed, which
simulates the air and abrasive flow inside the nozzle. A combina-
tion of tetrahedron elements is used for all three types of the noz-
zle to handle their interaction. The mesh method was adopted to
simulate and solve the abrasive jet nozzle problem. An advanced
meshing was used to mesh the whole system of the nozzle, and

Here we considered flow is one dimensional because z, y-

direction value is negligible. Assume the density of the fluid inside Table 1
Geometry Conditions.
the nozzle is constant. For modified convergent nozzle
Where Geometry/boundary condition Parameters
Geometry Type – 1 Inlet Diameter – 18 mm
A1 = Area inlet of the nozzle (0.09 m) Convergent Nozzle (25 mm L) Nozzle Tip Diameter- 3 mm
A2 = Area outlet of the nozzle (0.03 m) Length – 25 mm
Geometry Type – 2 Inlet Diameter – 18 mm
P1 = 6 bar
Convergent Nozzle (50 mm L) Nozzle Tip Diameter- 3 mm
V1 = 4.5 m/s Length – 50 mm
Geometry Type – 3 Inlet Diameter – 18 mm
The above values we applied in the Continuity Equation Modified Convergent Nozzle Nozzle Tip Diameter- 3 mm
Taper Length – 25 mm
q1 l1 A1 ¼ q2 l2 A2 Straight length – 25 mm

3522
M. Balasubramanian, S. Madhu and S. Murali Materials Today: Proceedings 46 (2021) 3521–3525

Table 2
Boundary Conditions.

S. NO Process condition Values

1 Air Density 1.225 kg/m3
Air Pressure 6 Bar
2 Abrasive Particle Young’s Modulus 410 GPa
3 Abrasive Particle Poisons Ratio 0.14

Fig. 3. CAD model of the modified convergent nozzle.

Fig. 1. CAD model of the convergent nozzle 25 mm length.

Fig. 4. Velocity contour of the convergent nozzle (25 mm length).

Fig. 2. CAD model of the convergent nozzle 50 mm length.

target material. The main aim is to develop a fine mesh near the
wall of the nozzles to gain better accuracy in velocity profile and
pressure contour. Additionally, the mesh at the surface of the tar-
get is intended to be very fine so that the erosion stages can be pre-
cisely computed. The type of element used is 8-node brick and the
abrasive jet nozzle data are identical.

4.1. Convergent nozzle of 25 mm

From the previous literature, we have designed the convergent

nozzle with a length of 25 mm. The inlet and outlet diameters are
18 mm and 3 mm respectively. Fig. 1 shows the CAD model of the
convergent nozzle (25 mm). The length of the nozzle is short when Fig. 5. Velocity contour of the convergent nozzle (50 mm length).

3523
M. Balasubramanian, S. Madhu and S. Murali Materials Today: Proceedings 46 (2021) 3521–3525

Fig. 8. Contours of total pressure in the convergent nozzle (25 mm).

Fig. 6. Velocity contour of a modified convergent nozzle.

compared to the other existing nozzle. A model of the 3D conver-

gent nozzle was made symmetrical with its respective axis
increases while.
After completion of the CATIA model, the model is imported in
ANSYS. A pressure of 6 bar is applied at the inlet of the nozzle. The
velocity of the outlet is shown in the velocity contour diagram. The
fine mesh is applied at all the portions of the nozzle. Towards the
edges and corners of the nozzle, the fine mess has maximum. So
the swirl flow rate of the fluid is obtained. From the CFD Simula-
tions, the outlet pressure of the convergent nozzle short length
with swirl flow is 312417.83 Pa. Similarly, the convergent nozzle
without swirl flow the pressure value is 586910.35 Pa.

4.2. Convergent nozzle of 50 mm Fig. 9. Contours of total pressure in the convergent nozzle (50 mm).

In this design the length of the convergent nozzle is increased

to50 mm. Fig. 2 shows the CAD model of the convergent nozzle
(50 mm L). Increasing the length of the convergent nozzle will
result in a higher velocity ratio when compared to the convergent
nozzle short length. So the distance between the inlet and outlet of
the nozzle is higher than the short length nozzle. The long length
convergent nozzle is meshed by using ANSYS messing tools. A fine
mess and tetrahedral prism methods are used to discretize the
given nozzle. The pressure of this nozzle with swirl flow is
923047.36 Pa but without swirl flow the pressure value is
687017.05 Pa. Thus we have observed that the velocity of this noz-
zle has dramatically increased when compared to the short length
nozzle.

Fig. 7. Comparison of the velocity profile of nozzles.

3524
M. Balasubramanian, S. Madhu and S. Murali
Fig. 10. Contours of total pressure in the modified convergent nozzle.
4.3. Modified convergent nozzle
Based on the existing design calculations, some design modifi-
cations were made on the Convergent nozzle with 50 mm Length.
We have taken for the experiment that let us increase the length of
the nozzle through some extended surface from the outlet of the
nozzle. The whole structure of the nozzle is to look like in the
shape of a funnel. Fig. 3 shows the CAD model of the modified con-
vergent nozzle. When compared to the existing nozzle by the con-
vergent performance the velocity rate of fluid flow is enormously
high.
5. Results and discussions
5.1. Velocity profile at various positions across the nozzle
For all three types of nozzles, the input pressure value is 6 bar
and the nozzle tip diameter is 3 mm. It is important to calculate
the velocity profile of the abrasive jet at the exit of the nozzle, con-
sidering a uniform entry velocity. In this work velocity profile was
analyzed for all three types of nozzles.
Fig. 4 shows the velocity of the convergent nozzle of 25 mm
length and the velocity of this nozzle obtained from the analysis
is 33.016348 m/s. The velocity contour value of the Convergent
nozzle (50 mm L) without swirl flow is shown in Fig. 5. The simu-
lation value is 32.972918 m/s. The velocity of the air and abrasive
Particle inside the nozzle with swirl flow is 39.242693 m/s. By
using this nozzle in AJM a better removal rate is achieved when
compared to the convergent short length nozzle.
Fig. 6 shows the velocity profile of the air and abrasive particles
without swirl flow inside the modified convergent nozzle. The
velocity of the modified nozzle obtained from the analysis is
33.463763 m/s. From Fig. 7, it is noted that the modified conver-
gent nozzle delivers more velocity compared with the other two
nozzles. Similarly, pressure intensity inside the nozzle has simu-
lated using CFD. The same meshing conditions followed for pres-
sure analysis. Fig. 8 shows the pressure intensity contour of the
convergent nozzle (25 mm L) without and with swirl flow obtained
from the CFD simulations. The Fig. 9 shows the pressure intensity
contour of the convergent nozzle (50 mm L). Fig 10. shows the total
pressure contour of the modified convergent nozzle.
3525
Materials Today: Proceedings 46 (2021) 3521–3525
6. Conclusion
From the above arguments based on the computer simulations,
the velocity of the modified convergent nozzle gives relatively
high. From the simulations, the velocity of the modified convergent
nozzle is 33.46 m/s, when compared with the other types and it
delivers more velocity. So by using a modified convergent nozzle
in an abrasive jet machine the material removal rate will be
increased. The simulation model can provide a lot of results to
the user and it can be useful in studying the overall nozzle velocity
in abrasive jet machining.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
M. Balasubramanian: Conceptualization, Methodology. S.
Madhu: Writing - review & editing, Formal analysis. S. Murali:
Investigation, Validation.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing finan-
cial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared
to influence the work reported in this paper.
References
[1] R. Balasubramaniam, A study on the shape of surface generated by Abrasive jet
machining, J. Mater. Process. Technol. 121 (102–106) (2002).
[2] R. Balasubramaniam, J. Krishnan, N. Ramakrishnan, An experimental study on
the abrasive jet deburring of cross-drilled holes, J. Mater. Process. Technol. 91
(1-3) (1999) 178–182, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0924-0136(98)00386-0.
[3] A. Kumar, S.S. Hiremath, Improvement of geometrical accuracy of micro holes
machined through micro abrasive jet machining, Procedia CIRP 46 (2016) 47–
50, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2016.03.139.
[4] D. Deepak, D. Anjaiah, K.V. Karanth, N.Y. Sharma, CFD simulation of flow in an
abrasive water suspension jet: the effect of inlet operating pressure and
volume fraction on skin friction and exit kinetic energy, Adv. Mech. Eng. 4
(2012) 186430, https://doi.org/10.1155/2012/186430.
[5] M.G. Mostofa, K.Y. Kil, A.J. Hwan, Computational fluid analysis of abrasive
waterjet cutting head, J. Mech. Sci. Technol. 24 (1) (2010) 249–252, https://doi.
org/10.1007/s12206-009-1142-5.
[6] H. Ali, M. Mashud, A.A. Bari, M.-U. Islam, Numerical solution for the design of
minimum length Supersonic Nozzle, ARPN J. Eng. Appl. Sci. (2012).
[7] D. Jianxin, W.u. Fengfang, Z. Jinlong, Wear mechanisms of gradient ceramic
nozzles in abrasive air-jet machining, Int. J. Mach. Tools Manuf. 47 (12-13)
(2007) 2031–2039, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmachtools.2007.01.011.
[8] N. Shafiei, H. Getu, A. Sadeghian, M. Papini, Computer simulation of developing
abrasive jet machined profiles including particle interference, J. Mater. Process.
Technol. 209 (9) (2009) 4366–4378, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jmatprotec.2008.11.020.
[9] J.M. Fan, C.Y. Wanga, J. Wang, Modeling the erosion rate in micro abrasive air
jet machining of glasses, Wear 266 (2009) (2009) 968–974.
[10] H. Li, A. Lee, J. Fan, G.H. Yeoh, J. Wang, On DEM–CFD study of the dynamic
characteristics of high speed micro-abrasive air jet, Powder Technol. 267
(2014) 161–179, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.powtec.2014.07.018.
[11] R. Haj Mohammad Jafar, H. Nouraei, M. Emamifar, M. Papini, J.K. Spelt, Erosion
modeling in abrasive slurry jet micro-machining of brittle materials, J. Manuf.
Processes 17 (2015) 127–140, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmapro.2014.08.006.
[12] M. Achtsnick, P.F. Geelhoed, A.M. Hoogstrate, B. Karpuschewski, Modelling and
evaluation of the micro abrasive blasting process, Wear 259 (1-6) (2005) 84–
94, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wear.2005.01.045.
[13] K. Maniadaki, T. Kestis, N. Bilalis, A. Antoniadis, A finite element-based model
for pure waterjet process simulation, Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 31 (9-10)
(2007) 933–940, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-005-0274-8.
[14] Alina Oancea, Lorelei Gherman, Laurentßiu Slătineanu, Vasile Braha, Modified
nozzle for abrasive jet engraving, Nonconventional Technologies Review,
2012.
[15] J. Ye, R. Kovacevic, Turbulent solid–liquid flow through the nozzle of premixed
abrasive water jet cutting system, Instittution of mechanical engineering, Part
B, 1999.
[16] H. Nouraei, K. Kowsari, B. Samareh, J.K. Spelt, M. Papini, Calibrated CFD erosion
modeling of abrasive slurry jet micro-machining of channels in ductile
materials, J. Manuf. Processes 23 (2016) 90–101, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jmapro.2016.06.007.
[17] H. Liu, J. Wang, N. Kelson, R.J. Brown, A study of abrasive waterjet
characteristics by CFD simulation, J. Mater. Process. Technol. 153-154 (2004)
488–493, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2004.04.037.