Journal of Nuclear Science and Technology

ISSN: 0022-3131 (Print) 1881-1248 (Online) Journal homepage: www.tandfonline.com/journals/tnst20

Analysis of Jet Flows with the Two-Fluid Particle

Interaction Method

Noriyuki SHIRAKAWA, Hideki HORIE, Yuichi YAMAMOTO, Yasushi OKANO &

Akira YAMAGUCHI

To cite this article: Noriyuki SHIRAKAWA, Hideki HORIE, Yuichi YAMAMOTO, Yasushi
OKANO & Akira YAMAGUCHI (2001) Analysis of Jet Flows with the Two-Fluid Particle
Interaction Method, Journal of Nuclear Science and Technology, 38:9, 729-738, DOI:
10.1080/18811248.2001.9715089

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/18811248.2001.9715089

Published online: 07 Feb 2012.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 362

View related articles

Citing articles: 3 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=tnst20
Journal of NUCLEAR SCIENCE and TECHNOLOGY, Vol. 38, No. 9, p. 729–738 (September 2001)

Analysis of Jet Flows with the Two-Fluid Particle Interaction Method

Noriyuki SHIRAKAWA1, ∗ , Hideki HORIE1 , Yuichi YAMAMOTO2 ,
Yasushi OKANO3 and Akira YAMAGUCHI3
1
TOSHIBA Power & Industrial Systems R & D Center, 4-1, Ukishima-cho, Kawasaki-ku, Kawasaki 210-0862
2
Toshiba Advanced Systems Corporation, 1-2-4, Isago, Kawasaki-ku, Kawasaki 210-0006
3
O-arai Engineering Center, Japan Nuclear Cycle Development Institute, 4002, Narita, O-arai-machi,
Higashi-ibaraki-gun, Ibaraki 311-1393
(Received March 27, 2001)

The particle interaction method called MPS (Moving Particle Semi-implicit) method has been developed in re-
cent years, which is formulated by representing the differential operators in Navier-Stokes equation as the interaction
between particles characterized with a kernel function and adopts a mesh-free algorithm. This method is suitable es-
pecially for treating liquid breakup. We extended the MPS method to two-fluid system, introduced a potential-type
surface tension, and modified the calculation algorithm to simulate jet flows. The objective of this study is to evaluate
the interfacial area (or, so called binary contact area) of immiscible two-fluid systems with a chemical reaction, where
one is injected as a jet into a pool of the other fluid. As a first step, we investigated if the proposed method is capa-
ble of reproducing the hydrodynamics of jet flow by analyzing Tanasawa’s experiment. In this paper, we describe the
formulation and the calculation algorithm of the method, and results of the verification studies.
KEYWORDS: jet flow, jet breakup, binary contact area, particle interaction method, MPS method, hydrodynam-
ics, two-fluid system

I. Introduction Flow regime

In the conventional two-phase flow analysis, the flow
regime has characteristics that need to be complemented by
experiments. Figure 1 shows the relation among the flow
regime, physical models and numerical computation. The
interfacial areas between two phases and between fluid and
structures are evaluated depending on the flow regime. Then,
the mass, momentum and energy transfers are evaluated with
the interfacial areas considering the phase change, friction,
and heat transfer to give the source terms of the mass, mo-
mentum and energy conservation equations. Finally, mass,
momentum and energy conservation equations are solved to
evaluate the next time step flow regime. The same circum-
stances hold in liquid-liquid multi-phase flows.
The conventional method1–5) which determines flow
regimes from the hydrodynamic state and evaluates the con-
tact areas, has been improved by taking the transport of in-
terfacial areas into consideration. However, since the exper-
imental correlation is obtained only for some simple and/or
specific conditions, the conventional method cannot be di-
rectly extended to general flow simulations. From a calcu-
lational point of view, the size of calculation mesh should be
consistent with the flow regime. That is, a finer calculation
mesh does not always promise more accurate results, which
differs from the situation in the single-phase flow calculation.
A number of methods have been developed these years
to analyze multi-fluid and two-phase flows in a more ac-
curate and general manner. The methods such as Level
Set,6, 7) improved VOF (Volume of Fluid)8–10) and generic
BFC (Boundary Fitted Coordinate)11) have been developed
∗
Corresponding author, Tel. +81-44-288-8035, Fax. +81-44-270-
1806, E-mail: noriyuki.shirakawa@toshiba.co.jp
Interfacial areas among components
and between components & structures
Phase change Drag on
Momentum transfer
structures
and heat transfer between phases
between phases Relative velocities
Mass, momentum & energy conservation
Numerical computation
Fig. 1 Relation among flow regime, physical models and numeri-
cal computation
to trace accurately the interface between liquid and gas. To
ensure its applicability to complicated boundaries and accu-
racy, the CIVA (Cubic Interpolation with Volume/Area co-
ordinates) method12, 13) has been developed as a gridless and
high-accuracy method.
Each method has good features of its own to analyze free
surface or two-phase problems. However, it has not been ap-
plied yet to two-phase flows over a wide range of the void
fraction, or to jet flows for example. The particle interaction
method called MPS (Moving Particle Semi-Implicit) method
has been also developed in recent years,14, 15) which formu-
lates the differential operators in the Navier-Stokes equation
in terms of the interaction between particles characterized by
a kernel function. This method adopts a mesh-free algorithm
and is suitable especially for treating liquid breakup. MPS has
been widely applied to such problems as the free surface com-
pound with structure deformation16) and vapor explosion.17)

729
730 N. SHIRAKAWA et al.

We extended MPS to a immiscible two-fluid (liquid-liquid where re is the cut-off length of particle interactions, that is,
and gas-liquid) system and introduced a potential-type sur- w(r)=0 outside it.
face tension to calculate two-phase flows without experimen- The gradient of physical quantity f is modeled as the slope
tal correlation. With this extended method, a several number averaged with the weight between the object particle and the
of two-phase flow experiments were analyzed successfully as particles within re ,
reported in our previous papers.18–20)  
d
f j − fi
In this study, the calculation algorithm of the liquid-liquid ∇ f i = 0 (r j − r i )w(|r j − r i |) ,
n j =i |r j − r i |2
version was modified to simulate jet flows. The objective of
this study is to evaluate the binary contact areas (BCAs) in the (4)
immiscible two-fluid systems with a chemical reaction, where where ri is the position vector of a particle i, d is the spatial
one fluid is injected as a jet into a pool of the other. dimension and n 0 is the number density in the initial configu-
Such a phenomenon occurs in an LMFBR’s steam gener- ration,
ator if a heat transfer tube fails to give rise to sodium-water

chemical reaction. The reaction rate depends on the binary n0 = w(|r 0j − r i0 |). (5)
j =i
contact areas between any combinations of components such
as continuous liquids, droplets, solid particles, and bubbles. The Laplacian is interpreted as a diffusion process of the
The contact areas across the interface change sharply accord- physical quantity f to the particles within re ,
ing to the interface state between components. Since no 2d

experiments to investigate the interface of the jet flow with ∇ 2 f i = 0 [( f j − f i )w(|r j − r i |)], (6)
n λ j =i
sodium-water chemical reaction have been done, the goal of
this study is to obtain the knowledge of flow regimes and con- where λ is a coefficient to adjust the variance of f to that of
tact areas by analyzing the fluid dynamics of multiphase and the analytical solution of the diffusion equation, and defined
reactive components mechanistically with our method. For as
the first stage of the study, we investigated if our method   −1
is capable of reproducing the jet flow behavior by analyz- λ= w(r)r 2 dv w(r)dv . (7)
V V
ing Tanasawa’s experiment21) where water is injected into a
gasoline pool, and tried to evaluate the BCA to see its spa- After the calculation of the diffusion and gravity terms, the
cial distribution. We also analyzed SWAT3/Run19 test per- velocity and location of particles are updated explicitly. Then,
formed at Japan Nuclear Cycle Development Institute (JNC), the pressure equation derived by imposing an incompressible
where water was jetted into a sodium pool with a rod bun- condition is solved implicitly with the updated location and
dle, to investigate the applicability of the method to a compli- velocity of particles.
cated boundary excluding the chemical reaction. The calcu-
lated fluid dynamics of both analyses were in good agreement 2. Two-Fluid Model
with the experiment, at least qualitatively. (1) Basic Algorithm
In this paper, we describe the formulation and the calcula- The original calculation algorithm18) is as follows.
tion algorithm of the method, and results of the verification (a) Calculation of the diffusion, gravity and surface tension
studies. terms:
(g)
u∗ξ,i = uξ,i + [νξ ∇ξ,i
2
u + F ξ,i + F (st)
ξ,i ] t
II. Two-Fluid Particle Interaction Method
 Nξ =1 +Nξ =2


1. One-Fluid Model 2d
= uξ,i + νξ 0 [u j − uξ,i ]
The particle interaction method is a type of representation n λ j =i
of differential operators using a weight or a kernel function. 
(g)
This method is applied to the Navier-Stokes equation in the × w(|r j − r ξ,i |) + F ξ,i + F (st)
ξ,i t, (8)
following way.14, 15) Mass and momentum conservation equa-
tions for a single fluid are and
Dρ r ∗ξ,i = r ξ,i + u∗ξ,i t,
= 0, (1) (9)
Dt
and where ξ =1 is for liquid-1 and ξ =2 is for liquid-2, r ξ,i and
uξ,i are the position and the velocity vectors of particle i of
Du 1 F (g)
= − ∇p +ν u + . (2) ξ , respectively; F ξ,i is the gravity force, F (st)
ξ,i is the surface
Dt ρ ρ
tension, and Nξ is a number of particles of ξ .
The interaction between particles is specified by a hyper- (b) Implicit calculation of the pressure balance with incom-
bolic weight function and the initial distance between parti- pressibility condition:
cles corresponds to the mesh size in the ordinary difference -Calculation of pressure equation;
method. The following weight is used for the calculations in
the present work, ρξ n ∗ξ,i − n 0
∇ 2 Pξ,i = − · . (10)
t2 n0
w(r) = (re /r) − 1, (3)
-Correction of velocity and position;

JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY

Analysis of Jet Flows with the Two-Fluid Particle Interaction Method
Nξ =1 +Nξ =2
td
P j − Pξ,i ∗
uξ,i = − (r − r ∗ξ,i )
n ρξ
0
j =i
|r ∗j − r ∗ξ,i |2 j
× w(|r ∗j − r ∗ξ,i |), (11)
and
r ξ,i = uξ,i t. (12)
-Update velocity and position;
u∗ξ,i = u∗ξ,i + uξ,i , (13)
and
r ∗ξ,i = r ∗ξ,i + r ξ,i . (14)
(c) Check convergence. If it does not converge, go back to
(b).
(d) If convergence is achieved, go to the next time step.
With regard to this calculation algorithm, preliminary ex-
perimental analyses of liquid jets with large momentum into
a liquid pool have revealed that the pressure gradient term
between the jet and pool particles overestimates the momen-
tum transfer in the normal direction to the jet axis. In order to
avoid this difficulty, the algorithm of the implicit correction of
the velocity and position was modified from the original one
as that the correction of the velocity and position of Eqs. (11)
and (12) are done only for pool particles, say ξ =2, for the first
several (n pool ) iterations. For the further iterations than n pool ,
the corrections are taken for both the jet and pool particles (for
both ξ =1 and ξ =2), i.e. returning to the original algorithm.
This method actually suppresses the large diffusion of the jet
kinetic energy in the normal direction to the jet axis. The
n pool was determined through preliminary experimental anal-
yses and was found that it produced almost the same results
in the range of n pool ≈5–15 with 20 implicit iterations. In the
following calculations, the number of implicit iterations and
n pool are 20 and 10, respectively. The overestimation of mo-
mentum transfer in the interface in the original algorithm is
possibly attributed to the lost hydrodynamic mechanism due
to large particle size.
(2) Surface Tension Model
The surface tension is formulated with a pair-potential as

N  
∂φ(ri j )
F i(st) = − r̂ i j , (15)
j =i
∂ri j
where φ is a potential between i- and j-particle and r̂ i j is
the unit vector from i- to j-particle. This potential method
is robust and generic, but involves tuning parameters in the
potential which should be determined by experimental anal-
yses.18, 19) After trying several types of potentials considering
statistical mechanics, a curvilinear function which has a re-
pulsive force in the distance [0, 1] and has an attractive force
in the distance [1, 2] in the unit of dx as shown in Fig. 2,
where the value of the differential with r is in the unit of m/s2 ,
was selected. This force is applied to the liquid particles in the
vicinity of the surface and is formulated as
VOL. 38, NO. 9, SEPTEMBER 2001
731
dx 2dx
r
4.5
r
0.9
r
Fig. 2 Potential for the surface tension

N    0 2
∂φ(ri j ) N
F i(st) = − r̂ i j , (16)
j =i
∂r ij Ni
where N 0 and N i are the number of particles in the region of
2dx around the particle i in the initial regular configuration
of particles and the number of the same kind of particles as
the i-particle in the current one, respectively. In Eq. (16), the
factor (N 0 /N i )2 has the effect to restricts this force only over
liquid particles in the vicinity of the liquid surface.
However, the potential shown in Fig. 2 were obtained by
experimental analyses for water. In the following calcula-
tions, the potential for other kind of liquids, e.g. gasoline, are
needed, which is determined using the ratio of the surface ten-
sion coefficients of water and gasoline as,
(∂φ/∂r)gasoline σgasoline
= . (17)
(∂φ/∂r)water σwater
III. Experimental Analyses of the Liquid Jet into a
Liquid Pool
1. Tanasawa’s Experiment
It seems that there are few experiments which investigate
the liquid jet behavior in a liquid which has a close density.
To investigate the basic principle of the atomization of liq-
uid, Tanasawa and Toyoda21) observed the behavior of the liq-
uid jet issuing from a cylindrical nozzle, changing the condi-
tions which were expected to affect the modes of atomization.
There were some kinds of series of experiments to investigate
the effect of the surrounding medium. Fortunately, in one se-
ries of them, gasoline was used as the surrounding medium
and water was injected into a gasoline pool in the parameter
of water jet velocity.
2. Calculational Setup for Tanasawa’s Experiments
Generally speaking of the particle method, there are restric-
tions on the number of particles mainly caused by computing
time and deterioration of the convergence of the particle num-
ber density in the implicit stage. In the current development
stage, the three dimensional problems involving a few hun-
dred thousand particles seem to be difficult to calculate from
our experience.
Therefore, one need to set a limited calculation domain be-
ing careful on the boundary conditions. For the Tanasawa’s
experiment, the boundary conditions which conserve the to-
732
Fig. 3 Calculational setup for “water jet into a gasoline pool” and
sectors to evaluate the binary contact area
tal particle number are considered to be appropriate because
the two fluids are incompressible. To realize this condition,
the gasoline particles were removed through the upper sur-
face to conserve the total number of particles as the water jet
injected into the gasoline pool. Furthermore, the water par-
ticles reached the bottom plane were also removed from the
calculation domain.
The calculational setup is shown in Fig. 3(a), where the
diameter of the vessel is a little smaller than that of the exper-
iment. The initial distance between particles is set to 0.001 m
and the number of liquid (i.e. water and gasoline) and struc-
ture particles are 16,500 and 8,000, respectively. Figure 3(b)
shows the rings temporarily set to evaluate the binary contact
areas.
3. Analyses of Tanasawa’s Experiments
Figure 4 compares the calculated jet behavior with that of
the experiment in 7-velocity cases, 0.18, 0.37, 0.72, 1.0, 1.4,
2.0, and 3.0 m/s. In the figure, only the water particles are
shown in three dimension omitting the gasoline particles in
the same way as the photographs of the experiments. The
angle of the jet cone, which is shown in the figure for u=1.4,
2.0, and 3.0 m/s cases, is in good agreement with that of the
experiment in each case. The length of the laminar liquid
column is not well reproduced in 4 cases of u=0.18–1.0 m/s.
It seems difficult unless the particle size is set much less than
0.001 m.
Figures 5 and 6 show the transient behavior of the jet in
the cases of u=1.4 and 3.0 m/s, respectively, where the tip of
the laminar liquid column is unstable and oscillates in longi-
tudinal direction as described in the paper.21)
We examined the effect of the size of calculational region.
N. SHIRAKAWA et al.
Figure 7 compares the results of reference size with that of
the twice-size, which shows the small effect on the water dis-
tribution within the reference region.
4. Evaluation of the Binary Contact Areas
The objective of this study is to evaluate and predict the bi-
nary contact area between two fluids. Since a direct measure-
ment of the binary contact area is almost impossible, we can
not compare the calculation with the experiment. We propose
a formulation of binary contact areas in the context of our
method and show the example of the evaluated binary contact
areas.
In the conventional multi-fluid method, the binary con-
tact areas (BCAs) are evaluated for the interface of bubbles-
continuous liquid, bubbles-bubbles, liquid droplets-bubbles,
droplets-droplets, droplets-continuous liquid, and so on.
Since the thermal and momentum exchange between fluid
components is evaluated based on BCAs, BCA is a most im-
portant parameter in the conventional multi-fluid method.
In our method, we assume that fluids are composed of par-
ticles and that there is an interface at the midpoint between i-
and j-particle as shown in Fig. 8(a),
A0

BCA(r̄i j ) = 0 w(|r j − r i |), (18)
n j =i
where
1
r̄i j = (|r j + r i |). (19)
2
A0 is a area to be determined as follows. Considering a parti-
cle surrounded by the different kind of particles, the summa-
tion of BCAs becomes
A0

BCA(r̄i j ) = 0 w(|r j − r i |) = A0 , (20)
n j =i
because n 0 is the number density in the initial particle config-
uration.
If we assume that this BCA is equal to the surface area of a
certain sphere of radius , A0 becomes
A0 = 4π 2
, (21)
where we used the initial particle distance dx as .
Here, we briefly discuss about how the BCA of Eq. (18)
depends on the initial distance between particles . For sim-
plicity, we consider the situation where the boundary between
two kinds of fluid is a plane. Suppose that we evaluate the
BCA with 1/n times smaller , the initial distance between
particles, the number of particle pairs contributing to the BCA
becomes n 2 times larger than that of the original case. This
means that, since we usually use re in proportion to , the
sum of the kernel functions also becomes n 2 times larger. On
the other hand, it is obvious from Eq. (21) that the coefficient
A0 is proportional to 1/n 2 . Consequently, the BCA defined by
Eqs. (18)–(21) does not depend on the initial distance between
particles as long as we use re in proportion to . Even in more
complicated interfaces, the above consideration holds as we
make smaller because the interface is locally regarded as a
plane. Namely, the BCA converges to a unique value in the
limit of infinitesimal .
JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
Analysis of Jet Flows with the Two-Fluid Particle Interaction Method
Fig. 4 Comparison of the calculation with the experiment of “water jet into a gasoline pool”
The volume fractions of the water and gasoline at 0.1 and
0.2 s are shown in Figs. 9 and 10, respectively, where r is the
radius and z is the distance from the bottom of the nozzle. The
BCA estimated by Eq. (18) are shown in Fig. 11. The inlet
water velocity is 2.0 m/s. In these figures, both of the volume
fractions and BCAs are averaged in the temporary cells shown
in Fig. 3(b).
IV. Preliminary Analysis of SWAT-3/Run19 Test
1. SWAT-3/Run19 Test
The SWAT-3/Run19 test22, 23) was performed at JNC to
clarify the potential of overheating failure of the tubes in
VOL. 38, NO. 9, SEPTEMBER 2001
733
LMFBR evaporator upper region. In the test, no failure prop-
agation occurred on the tubes where prototypical thermal con-
ditions including tube cooling from inside were simulated.
The failure propagation test program for MONJU was termi-
nated by Run19.
The heat transfer tubes are disposed vertically in two kinds
of the pitch 48 mm and 50 mm alternately. The initial test con-
ditions are; in a leak heat transfer tube, the pressure=15 MPa,
the water temperature=623 K, the leak flow rate=1.85 kg/s,
in the reactor vessel, the pressure=0.13 MPa, and the sodium
temperature=733 K. All of the heat transfer tubes and a part
of the thermocouples in the test were shown in Fig. 12.
734 N. SHIRAKAWA et al.

0.005 s 0.015 s 0.025 s 0.035 s 0.005 s 0.015 s 0.025 s 0.035 s

0.045 s 0.055 s 0.065 s 0.075 s 0.045 s 0.055 s 0.065 s 0.075 s

0.085 s 0.095 s 0.105 s 0.115 s 0.085 s 0.095 s 0.105 s 0.115 s

0.125 s 0.135 s 0.145 s 0.155 s 0.125 s 0.135 s 0.145 s 0.155 s

Fig. 5 Transient behavior of “water jet into a gasoline pool Fig. 6 Transient behavior of “water jet into a gasoline pool
(u=1.4/ms)” (u=3.0/ms)”

2. Calculational Setup for SWAT-3/Run19 Test
The objective of this analysis is to investigate the appli-
cability of the present method to a complicated rod-bundle
geometry, which is a final objective component in this study.
Phase change and chemical reaction models are not yet intro-
duced in the analysis in order to see only the fluid dynamics
of the water jet in a rod-bundle.
The difficulty described in Chap. III forced us to set the
limited calculational region shown in Fig. 12, where the heat
transfer tubes #79, #80, #71, #72, #63, and #64 were involved
in the calculation.
The physical phenomenon is essentially three-dimensional
so that 1 mm distance between particles is difficult even for
the limited calculational region around a leak hole. We used
a much larger initial distance between particles for this anal-
ysis. With regard to the boundary conditions, water particles

JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY

Analysis of Jet Flows with the Two-Fluid Particle Interaction Method 735

t = 0.1 s Flow dir

ection
1.0

Volume fraction
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.0

0.049
0.041
0.033
5.0E-04

0.025
0.017
9.5E-03 r (m)

0.009
z (m)

0.001
t = 0.2 s Flow dir
Fig. 7 Effect of the calculational region size (u=2.0 m/s) ection
1.0

Volume fraction
0.8
A0 0.6
BCA rij w r j ri
n0
0.4
j 1
rij r j ri 0.2
2
i
0.0
0.049
0.041
0.033
5.0E-04

0.025
0.017
(a) BCA between two particles. 9.5E-03 r (m)

0.009
z (m)

0.001
A0
BCA rij w rj ri A0 Fig. 9 Contour of the volume fraction of the water (u=2.0 m/s)
n0 j i

A0 4 2
: e.g. x
(b) Definition of the BCA constant.
Fig. 8 Evaluation of the binary contact area
going through the boundary are removed from the calculation
so as to conserve total number of particles. The number of
particles to model this region excluding the boundary struc-
ture is 40 in the horizontal direction (x), 66 in the vertical
direction (z), and 10 in depth (y). The number of fluid and
structure (i.e. the heat transfer tubes and boundary) particles
are 19,684 and 14,588, respectively. The initial configura-
tion distance dx is 0.0025 m, resulting the size in each direc-
tion to be (x, y, z) = (0.1, 0.025, 0.165) m. The water jet
leaks out of a hole of #79 heat transfer tube with the velocity
24 m/s, flow rate 1.85 kg/s and the angle 66◦ from the hori-
zontal axis. This flow rate of water out of the leak hole with
the area 0.0001 m2 is given by the input velocity.
3. Calculation of SWAT-3/Run19 Test
The calculated water jet behavior is shown in Fig. 13,
where only the water particles are shown omitting sodium
particles. We would like to correlate the calculated re-
sults to the temperature measurement in the experiment. It
might be reasonable to suppose that the sodium-water chem-
ical reaction should occur over and around the interface of
the expanding water region resulting temperature increase.
In other words, the thrmocouple temperature does not rise
without water. The temperatures of thermocouples T1190,
T1186, T1181, and T1179 measured every 0.02 s are shown
in Fig. 14.
For example, the water injected toward T1181 has not
reached there by 0.005 s. At 0.01 s, a relatively large water
lump reaches T1181 and a part of the injected water creeps
under #72 heat transfer tube reaching T1186. At 0.015 s, a
part of the injected water also creeps under #63 heat trans-
fer tube reaching T1179. At that time, the water has not yet
reached T1190 of #88 heat transfer tube. We cannot judge
around #80 because it has no thermocouples. We can see that
the calculated water distribution has clearly correlated to the
measured temperatures at least until 0.027 s.
The proposed method is shown to be applicable to the jet
flow into a tube-bundle structure with the fluid dynamical in-
teraction between two liquids.

VOL. 38, NO. 9, SEPTEMBER 2001

736 N. SHIRAKAWA et al.

t = 0.1 s Flow t = 0.1 s Flow dir

dire ection
ction 1.0E-04
1.0
Volume fraction

8.0E-05

BCA (m )
0.8

2
6.0E-05
0.6
4.0E-05
0.4
0.2 2.0E-05

0.0 0.0E+00

0.049
0.001

0.041
0.033
0.009

0.025
5.0E-04
0.017

0.017

0.009
0.025

9.5E-03

0.001
z (m) 9.5E-03 r (m)
0.033

z (m)
0.041

5.0E-04 r (m)
0.049

t = 0.2 s Flow dir

ection
t = 0.2 s Flow 1.0E-04
dire
ction 8.0E-05

BCA (m )
2
1.0
6.0E-05
Volume fraction

0.8
4.0E-05
0.6
2.0E-05
0.4
0.0E+00
0.2
0.049
0.041
0.033
0.0

0.025
5.0E-04
0.001

0.017
0.009

0.009
0.001
9.5E-03 r (m)
0.017

z (m)
9.5E-03
0.025
0.033

z (m)
0.041

5.0E-04 r (m) Fig. 11 Contour of the binary contact area (BCA) (u=2.0 m/s)
0.049

Fig. 10 Contour of the volume fraction of the gasoline (u=2.0 m/s)

1 2 3 4
6 8 10 12

5 7 9 11
V. Conclusions 14 16 18 20
13 15 17 19
Jet flow is one of the most difficult problem for the conven- 22 24 26 28
tional fluid dynamics methods. We have proposed the parti- 21 23 25 27
cle interaction method originated from MPS method to simu- 30 32 34 36
29 31 33 35
late liquid jet flows especially in the surrounding liquid with
38 40 42 42
a close density to the jet liquid. The objective of this study is 37 43
39 41
to evaluate the binary contact area between two liquids with a 46 48 50 52
chemical reaction, where one is injected as a jet into a pool of 45 47 49 51
the other fluid. Firstly, we showed that the proposed method 54 56 58 60

53 55 T1180 57 59
is capable of reproducing the jet flow behavior by analyzing
62 T1131 64 66 68
Tanasawa’s experiment. Secondly, we applied this to a rod
61 T1178 63 T1181 65 67
bundle geometry which is a part of a typical heat exchanger 70 T1179 72 T1187 74 76
and showed it to be applicable to hydrodynamics of a liquid 69 T1185 71 T1186 73 75
jet injected into another liquid filling a rod bundle structure 78 80 82 84
77 79 T1190 81 83
with the fluid dynamical interaction between two liquids, at
86 88 90 92
least qualitatively.
85 87 89 91
This method does not involve experimental correlations
of jet flow characteristics in the current development stage. Water/steam Gas-filled Instrument
However, it would be necessary to use a smaller particle size -flowing tube tube tube
in order to treat more realistic interaction across the inter- (Only a part of T/Cs are shown)
face and to evaluate BCAs for the chemical reaction. To cope
with this situation, we are now developing a method to evalu- Fig. 12 Calculational region of SWAT3/Run19 test

JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY

Analysis of Jet Flows with the Two-Fluid Particle Interaction Method 737

0.005 s 0.01 s 1000.0

900.0

800.0

700.0

600.0

500.0

400.0

300.0

200.0
-0.10 0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50
time (s)
55
0.015 s 0.02 s 64 T1179
T1131
T1181
520.0 63 T1181
T1186
T1179 72
T1186
T1190
500.0 71
80

79 T1190
480.0
88

460.0

440.0

420.0

400.0
0.025 s 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.03
0.027 s time (s)

Fig. 14 Temperature evolutions of the TCs in SWAT3/Run19 test

2d x in the current configuration

Nξ : Total number of particles of the liquid ξ
Pξ,i : Pressure of the particle i of the liquid ξ
r i0 : Initial position vector of the particle i
re : Radii of kernel function
ri : Position vector of the particle i
r ξ,i : Position vector of the particle i of the liquid ξ
ui : Velocity vector of the particle i
uξ,i : Velocity vector of the particle i of the liquid ξ
Fig. 13 Transient behavior of the water jet of SWAT3/Run19 test
w: Kernel function

(Greek Symbols)
ate “sub-particle scale effect,” which introduces experimental : Radii of the surface for the binary contact areas
correlations of liquid breakup using the “particle scale” shear t: Time step size
force obtained by the current method. φ: Surface tension potential between particles
νξ : Kinematic viscosity of the liquid ξ
Nomenclature ρξ : Density of the fluid ξ
σ: Surface tension coefficient
A0 : Area coefficient of binary contact area
BCA: Binary contact area
Acknowledgment
d: Spatial dimension
d x: Spatial mesh (the initial distance between particles) The authors are grateful to Mr. Yoshiharu Tobita, Mr.
(g)
F ξ,i : Gravitational force of the particle i of the liquid ξ Hirotsugu Hamada and Mr. Hiroshi Seino of Japan Nuclear
(st)
F ξ,i : Surface tension of the particle i of the liquid ξ Cycle Development Institute for their encouragement and
n 0 : Particle number density in the initial configuration useful discussions about SWAT-3 tests.
N 0 : Number of particles within the region of 2d x in the initial
configuration
N i : Number of particles around the particle i within the region of

VOL. 38, NO. 9, SEPTEMBER 2001


738
References
1) M. Ishii, K. Mishima, Study of Two Fluid Model and Interfacial
Area, NUREG/CR-1873, (1980).
2) G. Kocamustafaogullari, M. Ishii, “Interfacial area nucleation
site density in boiling systems,” Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer, 26,
1377–1387 (1983).
3) Y. Tobita, et al., Interfacial Area Modeling for a Multiphase,
Multicomponent Fluid-Dynamics Code, Int. Conf. on Multi-
phase Flows ’91-Tsukuba, Tsukuba, Japan, Sept. 24–27, 1991.
4) Sa. Kondo, et al., SIMMER-III, ANP ’92, Tokyo, Japan, Oct.
25–29, 1992, Vol. 4, p. 40.5/1–11, (1992).
5) M. Ishii, et al., Interfacial Area Transport; Data and Models,
OECD-CSNI Workshop on Advanced Thermal-Hydraulic and
Neutronic Codes, Barcelona, Apr. 2000.
6) M. Sussman, et al., “An improved level set method for incom-
pressible two-phase flows,” Comput. Fluids, 27[5–6], 663–680
(1998).
7) M. Sussman, et al., “An adaptive level set approach for incom-
pressible two-phase flows,” J. Comput. Phys., 148[1], 81–124
(1999).
8) L. Margolin, et al., “Application of the volume-of-fluid method
to the advection-condensation problem,” Mon. Weather Rev.,
125[9], 2265–2273 (1997).
9) J. H. Jeong, et al., “Finite element analysis of transient fluid
flow with free surface using VOF (volume-of-fluid) method
and adaptive grid,” Int. J. Numer. Methods Fluids, 26[10],
1127–1154 (1998).
10) R. Krishna, et al., “Rise characteristics of gas bubbles in a 2D
rectangular column: VOF simulations vs. experiments,” Int.
Commun. Heat Mass Transfer, 26[7], 965–974 (1999).
11) S. Takagi, et al., “Numerical analysis of a single rising bubble
using boundary-fitted coordinate system,” JSME Int. J., Ser. B,
40[1], 42–50 (1997).
12) N. Tanaka, “The CIVA method for mesh-free approaches, Im-
provement of the CIP method for n-simplex,” Comput. Fluid
Dyn. J., 8[1], 121–127 (1999).
.
N. SHIRAKAWA et al
13) N. Tanaka, “Development of a highly accurate interpolation
method for mesh-free flow simulations, 1; Integration of grid-
less, particle and CIP methods,” J. Numer. Methods Fluids,
30[8], 957–976 (1999).
14) S. Koshizuka, H. Tamako, Y. Oka, “A particle method for in-
compressible viscous flow with fluid fragmentation,” Comput.
Fluid Dyn. J., 4, 29–46 (1995).
15) S. Koshizuka, Y. Oka, “Moving-particle semi-implicit method
for fragmentation of incompressible fluid,” Nucl. Sci. Eng.,
123, 421–434 (1996).
16) S. Koshizuka, et al., “Numerical analysis of breaking waves
using the moving particle semi-implicit method,” Int. J. Numer.
Methods Fluids, 26[7], 751–769 (1998).
17) S. Koshizuka, et al., “Numerical analysis of fragmentation
mechanisms in vapor explosions,” Nucl. Eng. Des., 189[1–3],
423–433 (1999).
18) N. Shirakawa, H. Horie, Y. Yamamoto, “A study on the eval-
uation method of flow regimes with the particle interaction
method,” 7th Int. Conf. on Nucl. Eng., Tokyo, Japan, April 19–
23, 1999, ICONE-7278, (1999).
19) N. Shirakawa, H. Horie, Y. Yamamoto, S. Tsunoyama, “Devel-
opment and verification study of the two-fluid particle interac-
tion method—Two-phase flow analysis free from experimental
correlation,” Comput. Fluid Dyn. J., 9[4], 348–365 (2001).
20) N. Shirakawa, H. Horie, Y. Yamamoto, S. Tsunoyama, S.,
“Analysis of the void distribution in a circular tube with the
two-fluid particle interaction method,” Submitted to J. Nucl.
Sci. Technol.
21) Y. Tanasawa, S. Toyoda, “On the atomization of liquid jet issu-
ing from a cylindrical nozzle,” Technol. Rep. Tohoku Univ., 19,
135 (1955).
22) H. Tanabe, T. Watanabe, “Results of failure propagation tests
in the Steam Generator Safety Test Facility (SWAT-3) Report
No. 5,” PNC SN9410 86-104, (1986), [in Japanese].
23) N. Shirakawa, H. Horie, Y. Yamamoto, H. Matsumiya, A fea-
sibility study of the particle interaction method for the flow
regimes with the chemical reaction, JNC, TJ9440, 2000-08,
(2000).
JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY