(PDF) Improved Calculation of Diffuser

9/14/2018 (PDF) Improved calculation of diffuser
Search for publications, researchers, or questions or Discover by subject area Join for free Log in
See all › See all › Share

Download citation
9 References 6 Figures
Improved calculation of diffuser
Data (PDF Available) · May 2011 with 379 Reads
Cite this publication
Moshe Tarnopolsky
4.1 · Technion - Israel Institute of Technology
Abstract
Experimental data and computational results are compared for a pressure-driven separation in a turbulent boundary layer in short diffusers. The
ow conditions in diffusers with larger divergence angles can be greatly improved, and the resistance lowered, by preventing ow separation within
them or by attenuation vortex formation.The comparison includes main measures that improve ow conditions in the diffuser: use of curvilinear and
stepped walls, and boundary-layer suction. This paper outlines a semi-empirical method for calculating the velocity and temperature elds in
diffusers. The method takes into consideration the interaction between the various jets in the diffuser, the boundaries of the diffuser and the exhaust
ow by adding the momentum ux of all jets at each point and later correcting the velocity elds for deviations from the equation of continuity.
Similarly, the temperature eld is calculated so that the heat balance equation is preserved. The effect of the walls is calculated by the mirror
method. Boundary layer suction is used to prevent laminar and turbulent separation by removing ow of low momentum to remove the boundary
layer. The method consists of operating a powered system to suck boundary layer ow from wall slots and superposes the ow in the diffuser and
the suction ow by adding the velocity components at each point and later correcting the velocity elds for deviations from the equations of
continuity and momentum ux. The results of the calculations are shown to be in good agreement with measurements in scaled models. This paper
compares calculations with computer modeling using computational uid dynamics (CFD) Fluent.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/262012083_Improved_calculation_of_diffuser 1/124
Figures
+2
Diffuser ow scheme. This Different means to improve Schematic description of the NASA Velocity vectors along symmetrical
phenomenon is known as bo… operation of diffusers. test section. boundary of the domain.
File (PDF)
Available from: Moshe Tarnopolsky, May 04, 2014

Download full-text PDF
Tarnopolsky M. Improved calculation of diffuser. 2011 1 of 39
Improved calculation of diffuser.

M. Tarnopolsky, Ph.D.
Abstract
Experimental data and computational results are compared for a pressure-driven separation
in a turbulent boundary layer in short diffusers. The flow conditions in diffusers with larger
divergence angles can be greatly improved, and the resistance lowered, by preventing flow
separation within them or by attenuation vortex formation.The comparison includes main
measures that improve flow conditions in the diffuser: use of curvilinear and stepped walls,
and boundary-layer suction. This paper outlines a semi-empirical method for calculating
the velocity and temperature fields in diffusers. The method takes into consideration the
interaction between the various jets in the diffuser, the boundaries of the diffuser and the
exhaust flow by adding the momentum flux of all jets at each point and later correcting the
velocity fields for deviations from the equation of continuity. Similarly, the temperature
field is calculated so that the heat balance equation is preserved. The effect of the walls is
calculated by the mirror method. Boundary layer suction is used to prevent laminar and
turbulent separation by removing flow of low momentum to remove the boundary layer.
The method consists of operating a powered system to suck boundary layer flow from wall
slots and superposes the flow in the diffuser and the suction flow by adding the velocity
components at each point and later correcting the velocity fields for deviations from the
equations of continuity and momentum flux. The results of the calculations are shown to
be in good agreement with measurements in scaled models. This paper compares
calculations with computer modeling using computational fluid dynamics (CFD) Fluent.
Introduction
An increasing crossection area of flow causes a velocity reduction (according to continuity)
and hence a pressure rise (according to the Bernoulli equation). Howevever an opening
angle of a diffuser increases the probability of boundary layer separation.
Fluid outside the boundary layer has enough momentum to overcome this pressure which is
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr. Moshe Tarnopolsky is with Department o f Civil and Environmental Engineering, Technion, Haifa, Israel
(tarm@tx.technion.ac.il)
trying to push it backwards. The fluid within the boundary layer has so little momentum
that it will very quickly be brought to rest, and possibly reversed in direction. If this
reversal occurs it moves the boundary layer away from the wall surface as shown in Figure
1
Figure 1. Diffuser flow scheme.

This phenomenon is known as boundary layer separation. At the separation point, where
the velocities change direction, a line of vortices (known as a vortex sheet) is generated.
This happens because fluid to either side is moving in the opposite direction. This boundary
layer separation and increase in turbulence because of the vortices results in very large
energy losses far more than in parallel or convergent flows. Our objective is to increase the
outlet crossection in order to slow down the fluid flow and gain enrergy. However we must
make sure that a boundary layer separation will not occur.
Boundary layer control includes all those methods that can be used to reduce the skin
friction drag, by controlling the turbulent transition, the development of turbulent flows and
separation (laminar as well as turbulent), all phenomena occurring within the boundary
layer. Understanding the stability of the boundary layer is in fact of great importance for
the development of technology for skin friction drag reduction. Some technical methods for
diffuser boundary layer control, both powered and unpowered, are described below.
Early research efforts of basic flow-separation control were experiments conducted at the
NASA Langley Research Center Wind Tunnel (Schubauer, 1949). Numerous types of
passive flow-control devices were examined and compared for their separation-control
effectiveness. The most effective performance results for each device category were
summarized (Lin, 1999).
The main measures that improve flow conditions in the diffuser (Figure 2) include
boundary-layer suction (Figure 2a) and blowing (renewal) (Figure 2b), instalation of guide
vanes (baffles, Figure 2c) and dividing walls or splitters (over the whole length of the
diff t f it Fi
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/262012083_Improved_calculation_of_diffuser 2d) f ili d ti diff (Fi 2 ) 9/124
diffusers or part of it, Figure 2d), use of curvilinear and preseparation diffusers (Figure 2e),
stepped walls (stepped diffusers, Figure 2f) (Idelchik, 1986).
With the use of boundary-layer suction (Figure 2a), the portion of the flow that separated
from the wall reattached to the surface with the result that the separation zone displaced
downstream, the flow becomes smoother, and the resistance diminished. The efficiency of
boundary-layer suction depends on the ratio of the flow rate of the medium aspirated
through the slots in the side walls of the diffuser (Gs) to the total flow rate of this medium
(G) through the diffuser (depends on the discharge coefficient Gr = G/Gs) and the relative
distance between the slot and the inlet section of the diffuser. At Gr = 0.02 – 0.06 diffuser
resistance decreases by 30 – 40%. In this case the losses in the suction system are relatively
small.
Blowing (renewal) of the boundary layer (Figure 2b) increases the flow velocity at the
Figure 2. Different means to improve operation of diffusers.
walls. Guide vanes (baffles, Figure 2c) deflect portion of the flow with higher velocity
f th t l i
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/262012083_Improved_calculation_of_diffuser f th diff t it ll I th th ti i l 12/124
from the central region of the diffuser to its walls. In these cases the separation zone is also
displaced downstream.
Splitters divide the diffuser with large divergence angles into several diffusers with smaller
angles (Figure 2d). This provides both the decrease in the resistance and a more uniform
velocity distribution in the section.
The variation of the pressure gradient is smoother in a diffuser with curved walls (Figure
2e), in which the rate of increase of the cross-sectional area is lower in the initial section
than in the end section. This reduces the main cause of flow separation, and, consequently,
diminishes the main source of losses.
In stepped diffusers (Figure 2f) a smooth change of the cross-sectional area is followed by
a sudden expansion. The main losses (shock losses) occur even at relatively low velocities.
As a result, the losses in the diffuser are greatly reduced.
Boundary layer suction is used to prevent laminar and turbulent separation, by removing
flow of low momentum, to remove the boundary layer. The method consists of operating a
powered system to suck boundary layer flow from closely spaced vertical slots (Wilbur,
1957).
A straight outer-wall annular diffuser having a centr al-body length of one-half the outer-
body diameter and area ratio of 1.9:1 was investigated for mean inlet flow angles of 0 o and
19.5o in order to determinate the effect of area suction applied on the inner wall. The
entrance shape, number, and location of the openings through which the air was removed
were changed. The auxilary air flow was varied from 0 to 4% of the main stream air flow.
For suction flow rates in excess of 1%, the measured values of static-pressure rise and
total-pressure loss through the diffuser were not affacted by the number of rows of suction
holes used. With increasing flow rate, the measured values of total-pressure loss decrased
contnuously to a maximum of 22.6% static-pressure rise and 63% of total-pressure loss at
ti fl f 2 8%
a suction flow of 2.8% .
A three-dimensional separation pattern in a turbulent boundary layer was studied at the

NASA test section. It consisted of an upstream portion having a rectangular cross section of
150 mm height x 1150 mm width followed by an adverse pressure gradient section where
the roof contoured upward, increasing the height of the channel to 258 mm (Schwarz,
1996). A suction slot at the roof provided the impetus for a three-dimensional separation
pattern to develop on the floor of the test section. The suction mass flow rate was 6% of the
test-section entrance mass flow rate. A schematic of the side view of the test section is
shown in Figure 3.
Figure 3. Schematic description of the NASA test section.
Diffuser flow analysis.
Our analysis assumes that a jet is supplied from a rectangular inlet to the diffuser. It also
assumes that the cross-section of the diffuser is also rectangular (see Figure 4).
Th l i i f
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/262012083_Improved_calculation_of_diffuser di t t I iti ll th ff t f th id ll ili d 18/124
The analysis is performed in two stages: Initially, the effect of the side walls, ceiling and
floor is taken into consideration by the mirror method using virtual jets symmetrical to real
jet (ignoring friction in the boundary layer). The real jet is shown by solid lines and the
virtual jets are shown by dotted lines in cros-section 1 - 1 of Figure 4 (total number of jets
are My and Mz along axes Y and Z, respectively). The velocity field obtained in this stage
will be denoted as current by the index c (Uc).
In the second stage of the calculation this solution must be corrected to take into
consideration the counterflow between jet and enclosure. The velocity field in the diffuser
(U) is calculated using a correction denoted as a velocity shift by the index s (Us):
U =Uc - U s , (1)
To calculate the current velocity normal to the cros-section and temperature difference at
point considered inlet, are divided to Ny and Nz increments along axes Y and Z,
respectively. The current velocity (Uc) and temperature difference (Tc) are determined by
adding momentum flux and excess heat, as supplied from all real and mirror jets jy and jz,
and all inlet increments Ky and Kz, along axes Y and Z (Tarnopolsky 1994):
My Ny Mz Nz k1 k  1
 U 2c 1
g
=
g Bo H o
      U
jy=1 ky=1 jz=1 kz=1
2
i
d  d , (2)
  k k
and
My Ny Mz Nz k 1  k 1
Ch
Ch  Uc T c =   
Bo H o jy=1 ky=1 jz=1 kz=1    U i T i d  d , (3)
k k
where γ is the specific weight of the air at a given point:
 a Ta
 = , (4)
Ta + T
Ui and Ti are air velocity and temperature difference, respectively, induced by elementary
jet i:
2 2
(Yj +  )  (Z j + )
Ui = Um Exp [- ] (5)
2 C2 S 2
and
U

Ti = Tm ( i ) , (6)
Um
where Yj and Zj are coordinates of a point in real and virtual jets jy and jz, m:
jy
j y - M - (-1 ) jy
Y j = Br ) - B( 1 + (-1 ) ) - Y (7)
2
and
jz
jz - (M - (-1 )
Zj = Hr - H(1 +(-1 )
jz
 - Z, (8)
2
The values of Um and Tm have to be calculated by assuming conservationt of momentum

flux and excess heat of cell made by increments ky and kz :
Br -B Hr - H
 U i 2dYdZ  Uk 2  k  1   k k1  k 
  = , (9)
-B -H g g
and
Br -B Hr - H
  Ch  Ui Ti dYdZ = Ch  U k Tk  k 1   k  k1   k  , (10)

-B - H
Taking into consideration Equations 4 through 6 and after further integration, we obtain:
  a U m C S   Uk  k 1  k k 1 k ,

2 2 2 2
(11)
and
 Ch  a Um Tmy C 2t S = Ch  U k Tk  k 1   k k 1  k , (12)

2
1 β
U
Z
βc
Bo*Ho Btp*Htp
H
X 1
Xa
Cross-section 1-1
Z
Br Br Br
H
Y Hr-H
Hr-H
Hr η Z
δ Y
H
Hr
Hr-H
B Br-B B Br-B B Br-B
Figure 4. Rectangular diffuser jet interaction diagram.
where Ct is a temperature profile constant:
 
0.5
2
Ct = C  0.095 , (13)
1+ 
Equations 11 and 12 can be used to find Um and Tm.
After substitution of Equations 4, 5, 11, and 12 into Equations 2 and 3 and further
integration, current velocity and temperature difference can be presented as:
g Ic 0.5
Uc = ( ) Uy Uz (14)
 a Bo H o
and
Qo
Tc = T yT z , (15)
Ch (g  a Ic Bo Ho )0.5
h U dU th
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/262012083_Improved_calculation_of_diffuser di i l t f th t l it 30/124
where Uy and Uz are the nondimensional components of the current velocity:

2
Uy =0.5   
My Ny
 U  (Erf[ Y
k
j + i 1 Y j  i
] ) ,
0.5
 CS
] - Erf[
CS
(16)
jy =1 ky=1
U  o
and
2
U z = 0.5   
Mz Nz
U  k Z j + i1 Z j - i 0.5
] ) .
 (Erf[
CS
] - Erf[
CS
(17)
jz=1 kz=1
U  o
Similarly Ty and Tz are given by:
My Ny
U kTk Y j + i 1 Yj - i
Ty = 0.5   (Erf[ ] - Erf[ ]) , (18)
jy =1 T U
ky=1 U o o y C t S C t S
and
Mz Nz
T Z j + i 1 Z j - i
Tz = 0.5   Uk k (Erf[ ] - Erf[ ]) , (19)
jz=1 kz=1 U T U
o o z C t S C t S
where Io and Qo are the inlet momentum flux and excess heat of the diffuser calculated as
the product of sums of increments of momentum flux and excess heat in the inlet along the
axes Y and Z:
Ny Nz
 U k 2  k 1   kk 1  k 
Io=  , (20)
ky=1 kz=1 g
and
Ny Nz
Qo =   Ch  Uk Tk   k1   k k 1  k  . (21)
ky=1 kz=1
This solution must be corrected to take into consideration the velocity “shift” (Us), which is
determined by the equation of continuity:
Br -B Hr - H
 U dY dZ = Gc , (22)
 
-B -H
Accordingly, we obtain the following from Equations 1, 14, and 22:
Gc
Us = -U e, (23)
 a Br Hr
where Ue is air-removal velocity in considered cross-section of diffuser:
G
Ue = ; (24)
 a Br H r
Gc is the quantity of air in considered current cross-section:
0.5
Gc = (g  a Bo H o Ic ) Ly Lz ; (25)
and Ly and Lz are nondimensional discharge factors:
Br -B
Uy
L y=  dY (26)
-B
Bo
Hr - H
Uz
L z=  dZ . (27)
-H
Ho
To determine the trajectory of the jet, we have to calculate the effect of the momentum flux
and the buoyancy flux. The momentum flux in the cross-section of the diffuser is:
Br -B Hr - H
 U2
Iu =   dY dZ , (28)
-B -H
g
Taking into consideration Equations 1, 23 through 27 and after integration, we obtain:
Bo H o 2 2
Iu = Ic (1 - Ly L z ) + I e , (29)
Br H r
where Ie is momentum flux of air removal in considered cross-section of diffuser:
a Ue2
Ie = Br H r . (30)
g
The buoyancy force, created by temperature-density difference between elementary volume

of current and ambient air, is:
Br -B Hr - H
dI t =   ( a -  ) dY dZ dX , (31)
-B -H
Using Equations 4 and 15, and after approximate integration, Equation 31 becomes:
Qc
dI t =   a Bo Ho 0.5 Qy Qz dX , (32)
Ta C h g Ic
where Qy and Qz are nondimensional components of the excess heat:
Br -B
Ty
Qy =  dY (33)
-B
Bo
and
Hr - H
Tz
Qz =  dZ . (34)
-H
Ho
The components and the resultant momentum flux in a cross-section of diffuser will be:
I x = I u cos  c cos  xy , (35)
I y = I x tan c , (36)
X
I z = I x tan c +  dIt , (37)
0
and
2
I =( Ix + Iy +I z ) ,
2 2 0.5
(38)
The coordinates of the current trajectory can now be calculated:
S
Ix
X=  dS , (39)
0 I
and
S
Iy
Y = 0 I dS , (40)
and
S
Iz
 H = dS . (41)
0 I
Y H
Now ratious of the coordinates of current trajectory and can be used as
X X
tangents to find the angles of current trajectory αc and βc along axes Y and Z.
The above analysis can also be used to calculate the air distribution for the case of a plane
jet. In this case, Bo = Br and Uy = Ly = 1. It should be noted that plane jets are greatly
affected by the ceiling or floor, as a result of the Coanda effect. The static pressure
difference between the lower and upper regions of the current (relative to the current axis)
creates a vertical pressure force:
X
I p =  Br PdX , (42)
0
where ΔP is static pressure difference between the lower and upper regions of the current
and calculated as momentum flux difference between these current regions:
Br -B Hr - H 0
 dZ  dZ dY
P =  (  U
2
-  U2 ) . (43)
-B 0
g H r - H -H g H Br
The jet trajectory can be calculated using Equations 41 and 42, taking into consideration
Equation 43:
X
Iz + I p
H =  dX . (44)
0
I
Now, the static pressure in the cross-section of the diffuser is given (from the momentum
flux equation for closed space):
X
dI x
Ps = Po   , (45)
o Br H r
To solve the above equations, initial values of the total quantity of air and the momentum
flux the of the diffuser should be known. The total quantity of air depends on the position
of the exit and on the cross-section considered. If the distance from the inlet to the cross-
section is less than the distance to the outlet (X < Xa), the total quantity of the air in this
cross-section equals the initial value (G =Go). The initial momentum flux of the diffuser
can be calculated (taking into consideration that when S = 0, then Ly = Lz =1, Ie = 0, and Iu
= Io) from (29) as follows:
Io
Ic = , (46)
B H
1- o o
Br H r
In case of boundary layer suction when the outlets and inlets are placed in the walls
perpendicularly to one another, additional correction to the velocity field must be applied
using a semi-empirical method for calculating suction patterns in the vicinity of outflow
orifices. The method takes into consideration the superposition of the flow in the diffuser,
the boundaries of the diffuser and the suction flow, by adding the velocity components at
each point and later correcting the velocity field for deviations from the equations of
continuity and momentum flux. The effect of the walls is calculated by the mirror method.
The vertical Vi and longtitudinal Wi componets of the elementary suction velocity are
determined by the adding velocities, as a result of elementary suction flows interaction

(Shepelev 1978 ):
V o Zi
dV i  dd (47)
2  i 3
and
V o i
dWi  d d , (48)
2 i 3
where ρi – distance from orifice i-point to suction flow point, m

 i  Z2i  i  i
2

2 0.5
(49)
Taking into consideration the coordinates of the orifice in the diffuser (Xs, Ys, and Zs):
iX X  , (50)
 i  YS  Y   , (51)
and
Z i  ZS  , (52)
the vertical V and longtitudinal W componets of the suction velocity could be determined
by the adding velocities, as a result of elementary suction flows interaction,
r o
V   dV i (53)
r
 o
and
r o
W    dW i , (54)
r  o
ςo – the orifice circle abssissa, m:
 o  r2  2  .
0.5
(55)
Figure 5 shows the resultant velocity Cs calculated along the centerline of the circular
orifice:
Cs  V 2  W 2 
0.5
(56)
Circular orifice suction.

Cs / Vo (Y = 0) Cs / Vo
5
0-0.02 0.02-0.04
0.04-0.06 0.06-0.08
0.08-0.1 0.1-0.12
4 0.12-0.14 0.14-0.16
0.16-0.18 0.18-0.2
0.2-0.22 0.22-0.24
0.24-0.26 0.26-0.28
0.28-0.3 0.3-0.32
3 0.32-0.34 0.34-0.36
0.36-0.38 0.38-0.4
0.4-0.42 0.42-0.44
0.44-0.46 0.46-0.48
Z/ 0.48-0.5
0.52-0.54
0.5-0.52
0.54-0.56
2
0.56-0.58 0.58-0.6
0.6-0.62 0.62-0.64
0.64-0.66 0.66-0.68
0.68-0.7 0.7-0.72
0.72-0.74 0.74-0.76
1 0.76-0.78 0.78-0.8
0.8-0.82 0.82-0.84
0.84-0.86 0.86-0.88
0.88-0.9 0.9-0.92
0.92-0.94 0.94-0.96
0.1 0.96-0.98 0.98-1
-5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5
X/r
Vo
Figure 5. Resultant suction velocities along the centerline of the circular orifice.
The effect of the walls is calculated by the mirror method taking into consideration the
coordinates of the real and virtual orifices (Xs, Ys, and Zs) similar to the diffuser coordinates
(Equations 6, 7)
To correct the velocity field for deviation from the equation of continuity the air-removal
velocity (Equation 24) should be changed as:
G  Gs
U e= (57)
 a Br H r
where Gs is quantity of air suction at the cross-section of the diffuser:
X Br B Hr H
1
Gs     VdXdYdZ (58)
N s 0 B H
Comparison of diffuser flow analyses with experimental data.
For a comparison of results of the analytical study with the experimental data should be
conducted first the inlet velocity Uk and temperature Tk profiles. From these profiles the
inlet momentum flux and excess heat are calculated as:
I o = Go Ir U o (59)
and
Qo = Ch G o Qr To (60)
The static pressure in the cross-section of inlet (X = 0) is obtained from Equation 45

takinng into consideration the fricton losses in the diffuser:
Xa
dIx
Po = Pa  0 Br H r  k fr Pu . (61)
where Pu is the inlet dynamic pressure:
 a Uo 2
Pu = , (62)
2g
Kfr is the friction resistance coefficient of the diffuser As was mention above boundary
layer calculations were ignored. However, the friction losses in the diffuser were calculated
similarly to the calculation of losses in tubes with an increasing area cross-section:
X

K fr =  dX , (63)
0 De AR2
where De is equivalent diffuser diameter at cross section cosidered:
2 Br H r
De  , (64)
Br  H r
Figures 6 and 7 show calculated velocity contours in rectilinear (lin) and curved (curv)
diffusers of the same dimensions as in NASA test section (Figure 3) with the inlet axial
velocity of Uo = 30 m/s:
Velocity contours in rectilinear diffuser .
0.26
0.21 U, m/s
-1-0 0-1
1-2 2-3
3-4 4-5
0.15 5-6 6-7
7-8 8-9
9-10 10-11
Z, m 11-12 12-13
13-14 14-15
0.10 15-16 16-17
17-18 18-19
19-20 20-21
21-22 22-23
23-24 24-25
0.05
25-26 26-27
27-28 28-29
29-30 30-31
0.00
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8
X, m
Figure 6. Velocity contours in the rectilinear diffuser.
Velocity contours in curved diffuser.
0.26
U, m/s
0.21
-1-0 0-1
1-2 2-3
3-4 4-5
5-6 6-7
0.15 7-8 8-9
9-10 10-11
Z, m 11-12 12-13
13-14 14-15
0.10 15-16 16-17
17-18 18-19
19-20 20-21
21-22 22-23
23-24 24-25
0.05 25-26 26-27
27-28 28-29
29-30 30-31
0.00
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8
X, m
Figure 7. Velocity contours in the curved diffuser.
Plane diffusers with free discharge were studied in experiments of Miller (1971), where air
was supplied through an inlet of Bo = 0.46 m width and Ho = 0.23 m height, area ratio AR =
3 , 6, and 9, horizontal divergence angle α = 0, and vertical divergence angles of β =8, 12,
and 20 degree. Kinematic characteristic of the inlet was calculated by integration of the
initial velocity profiles: Ir = 1.08.
AR is diffuser area ratio:
Br H r
AR  , (65)
Bo H o
Satisfactory agreement was obtained in Figure 8 between measured resistance coefficient

and calculated values by static pressure in cross-section of outlet (X = Xa) , Pa = 0
(according to the Bernoulli equation):
Po  Pa
K pf 1  , (66)
Pu
Free discharge from rectangular dffuser.

Ir = I.08, α = 0
1.0
Miller, β = 20
0.8
Miller, β = 12
Resistance coefficient
0.6 Miller, β = 8
Calcul., β = 20
0.4
Calcul., β = 12
0.2
Calcul., β = 8
0.0
1 2 3 4 5
Area ratio
Figure 8. Resistance coefficient by free discharge from the plane diffusers.
Measured values of the resistance coefficient in the experiments of Idelchik (1986) and
calculated values by free discharge from the rectangular diffusers: (Bo = Ho, α = β) were
compared in Figure 9:
Free discharge from rectangular dffuser

Ir = 1, Bo = Ho, α = β
1.0
Idelchik, α = 4
Idelchik, α = 6
Idelchik, α = 8
0.8
Idelchik, α = 10
Idelchik, α = 14
0.6 Idelchik, α = 20
Idelchik, α = 30
calcul., α = 4
0.4 calcul., α = 6
calcul., α = 8
calcul., α = 10
0.2
calcul., α = 14
calcul., α = 20
calcul., α = 30
0.0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Area ratio
Figure 9. Resistance coefficient by free discharge from the rectangular diffusers
In the transition diffusers calculations, Equation 66 should be changed by taking into

consideration the outlet dynamic pressure (in Bernoulli equation) and the additional
recovery which takes place within about the first four diameters of tailpipe. Measured
values of the resistance coefficient in the experiments of Idelchik (1986) and calculated
values by supplying air through transition rectangular diffusers (Bo = Ho, α = β) are
compared in Figure 10:
1 Po  Ptp
K pt  1   (67)
AR
2
Pu
P ua
where is the outlet dynamic pressure ratio:
Pu
1
Pua = 1 2 , (68)
Pu AR
Ptp – tailpipe pressure recovery :
 B H  1
Ptp =  I  Io o o  (69)
 Btp H tp
  Btp H tp
Transition rectangular diffuser.

Ir = 1, Bo = Ho, α = β
0.6
Idelchik, α = 4
Idelchik, α = 6
Idelchik, α = 10
Idelchik, α = 12
Idelchik, α = 14
0.4
Idelchik, α = 16
Idelchik, α = 20
calcul., α = 4
calcul., α = 6
0.2 calcul., α = 8
calcul., α = 10
calcul., α = 12
0.1 calcul., α = 14
calcul., α = 16
calcul., α = 20
0.0 calcul., α = 30
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Area ratio
Figure 10. Resistance coefficient of the transition rectangular diffusers.
Air distribution in a diffuser with large divergence angles divided into several diffusers
with smaller angles (Figure 2d) can be calculated as separate diffusers.
In a stepped diffusers (Figure 2f) an abrupt enlargement of the cross-sectional area gives
rise to so-called shock losses. Measured values of the resistance coefficient in experiments
of Idelchik (1986) and calculated values by supplying air through transition rectangular
diffusers with stepped walls (Bo = Ho, α = β) were compared in Figure 11:
1 Po  Ptp  Psw
K ps  1   (70)
AR 2 Pu
where Psw is the additional shock pressure losses dependent only on the cross-sectional area
ratio (measure of expansion AR/ARtp) and is calculated from the Borda-Carnot formula
(Chanson, 2004, Massey, 1998) by measured and calculated relative distances to step
Xa
( ) compared in Figure 12 :
Do
2
Io  
Psw = 1  AR  (71)
2 ARB r H r  AR tp 
where Atp is the area ratio of the diffuser tailpipe at the step cross-section (X = Xa):
B tpH tp
ARtp  (72)
Bo H o
Transition rectangular diffuser with stepped walls.

Ir = 1, Bo = Ho, α = β
0.6
Idelchik, α = 4
Idelchik, α = 6
Idelchik, α = 10
Idelchik, α = 12
Idelchik, α = 14
tance coefficient
0.4
Idelchik, α = 16
Idelchik, α = 20
Idelchik, α = 30
0.3
calcul., α = 4
calcul., α = 6
l l 8
calcul., α = 8
Resist
0.2 calcul., α = 10
calcul., α = 12
calcul., α = 14
0.1
calcul., α = 16
calcul., α = 20
calcul., α = 30
0.0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Area ratio
Figure 11. Resistance coefficient of the transition rectangular diffusers with stepped walls.
Transition rectangular diffuser with stepped walls.

Ir = 1, Bo = Ho, α = β
20 Idelchik, α = 4
Idelchik, α = 6
Idelchik, α = 8
Idelchik, α = 10
15 Idelchik, α = 12
Idelchik, α = 14
Relative distance.
Idelchik, α = 16
Idelchik, α = 20
Idelchik, α = 30
10
calcul., α = 4
calcul., α = 6
calcul., α = 8
calcul., α = 10
5 calcul., α = 12
calcul., α = 14
calcul., α = 16
calcul., α = 20
0 calcul., α = 30
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Area ratio
Figure 12. Relative distance to the sudden expansion of the transition rectangular diffusers.
As a result, the losses in the diffuser are greatly reduced: at divergence angles α = β = 4 -10
degree a diffuser resistance decreases by 5 – 10% and at divergence angles α = β = 12 -30
degree a diffuser resistance decreases by 15 – 25%.
The semi-empirical method for calculating suction patterns in the vicinity of outflow
orifices shows close agreement between the results of axial suction velocities calculation
and the experimental results (Delaval, 1932). The results are compared in Figure 13.
Circular orifice. Axial suction velocity.

1
0.8
0.6
Vs/Vo
0.4
0.2
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
X/R
Delaval, 1932 Calculated
Figure 13. Calculated and experimental axial suction velocities.
Boundary layer suction is used to prevent laminar and turbulent separation by removing
flow of low momentum. Figure 14 shows resultant suction velocity contours in NASA test
section diffuser (Figure 3) Cs calculated using Equation 56 (the effect of the walls is
calculated by the mirror method):

Resultant suction velocity contours in diffuser.
0.26
Cs, m/s
0.21 19-20
18-19
17-18
16-17
15-16
14-15
0.15 13-14
12-13
11-12
Z, m 10-11
9-10
8-9
0.10 7-8
6-7
5-6
4-5
3-4
0.05 2-3
1-2
0-1
0.00
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8
X, m
Figure 14. Resultant suction velocity contours in the diffuser along centerline of the orifice.
Figure 15 shows resultant velocity contours in diffuser Cd calculated using Equation 56

(taking into consideration the superposition between the flow in the diffuser and the suction
flow by adding the velocity components at each point and later correcting the velocity
fields for deviations from the equations of continuity and momentum flux):

C d  V 2  U  W  
2 0.5
(73)
Resultant velocity contours in diffuser.
0.25
Cd, m/s
-1-0 0-1
0.20 1-2 2-3
3-4 4-5
5-6 6-7
7-8 8-9
0.15 9-10 10-11
11-12 12-13
13-14 14-15
Z, m 15-16 16-17
17-18 18-19
0.10 19-20 20-21
21-22 22-23
23-24 24-25
25-26 26-27
0.05 27-28 28-29
29-30 30-31
0.00
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 X, m 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8
Figure 15. Resultant suction velocity contours in the diffuser along the centerline of the
orifice.
Results of tests on NASA section with a suction slot at the roof (Schwarz, 1996) were
compared with calculated values of the static-pressure coefficient Cp variation along the
section centerline in Figure 16:
Po  Ps
Cp   K fr (74)
Pu
Transition curved-wall diffuser

Uo=30 m/s, dTo= 0 C, Alpha=0, 0, 0, Beta=0, 0, curved
0.8
0.6
0.4
Schwarz, 1996
Cp
Cp (lin)
Cp (curv)
0.2 Cp (curv+suct)
0.0
-0.2
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0
X, m
Figure 16. Calculated and experimental static-pressure coefficients along the diffuser
centerline.
These results show close agreement between the experiment and the calculation using
Equations 48-61 and 65 for curved diffuser with suction (curv+suct in Figure 16).
However, the calculated pressure coefficient was slightly lower than the experimental data
near the suction orifice. Pressure recovery in rectilinear (Figure 6 and lin in Figure 16) and
curved (Figure 7 and curv in Figure 16) diffusers of the same dimensions was 10- 20%
lower, and exit velocity profiles were less equal than in curved diffuser with suction
(Figure 15 and curv+suct in Figure 16).
Comparison of diffuser flow analysis with Fluent Computations.

This paper compares calculations with computer modeling using computational fluid
dynamics (CFD) code. The CFD model included the scoop and the domain (Fig. 17) and
was developed using Fluent. Due to symmetry, only half of the scoop and associated area
were modeled. The modeled domain was made prismatic of 4000 * 2000 * 2200 m and had
a length and width of 13.3 times that of the tower radius of 200 m and a height two times
the scoop, in order to minimize the blockage problem.
The front boundaries of the domain were defined as velocity and the end and symmetrical
boundaries of the domain were defined as pressure outlet boundary conditions. The rotor of
the turbine inside the scoop was simplified as a porous ring of height Ho = 60 m and radius
R = 300 m. After the turbine was modeled radial diffuser by vertical divergence angle of β
= 12 degree.
Hexahedral, quadrilateral and mixed elements were used to mesh the domain and scoop,
resulting in a 514,592 cell mesh. RNG k–e turbulence model was selected for all
simulations.
Figs. 17, 18, and 19 show the velocity vectors, temperature and static pressure differences
contours along symmetrical boundary of the domain, respectively. The first plot shows a
gradual increase in airspeed after turning from the tower, until a peak of Uo =16.2 m/s is
reached at the turbine in the scoop by vertical angle of current trajectory βc = -3 degree.
After passing this peak the speed reduces due to increasing area of flow in the diffuser
(area ratio AR = 2.1) and then after exit from diffuser by radius of R = 440 m due to
increasing area of flow in the domain.
Figure 17. Velocity vectors along symmetrical boundary of the domain.
Contours of temperature difference between cold air from tower and ambient air in Fig. 18
show a slow decrease until a peak of To=-13 C is reached at the turbine and then, after
exiting the diffuser the temperature difference increases considerably.
Figure 18. Temperature difference contours along symmetrical boundary of the domain.
Contours of static pressure difference between airflow and domain in Fig. 19 show a rapid
decrease until a peak of Po = -116.6 Pa is reached after the turbine and then gradual
pressure recovery in the diffuser.
Figure 19. Static pressure difference contours along symmetrical boundary of the domain.
Turbine velocity and temperature difference profiles from Fluent data were used as inlet
profiles for calculation airflow parameters in the diffuser. The above analysis can also be
used to calculate the air distribution at difference radiuses R for the case of a radial flow
(Tarnopolsky 1967, 1987). In this case, Br = R * ά and Uy = Ly = 1.
Calculated (U) and Fluent (Uf) vertical velocity and temperature difference (Tc and Tf)
profiles are compared in Figs. 20 and 21.
Velocity and temperature difference profiles calculated at exit from diffuser were used as
inlet profiles for calculation airflow parameters in the domain. Calculated and Fluent axial
velocity(Uac and Uaf), temperature (Tac and Taf) and static pressure (Pc and Psf) differences
vs. radius R compared in Fig. 22.
Vertical velocity profile.

18
16
14
Uf_R300
Uf_R302
12
Uf_R314
Velocity, m/s
Uf_R377
10 Uf_R440
U_R300
8 U_R302
U_R314
6 U_R377
U_R440
0
0 20 40 60 80 100
Y, m
Figure 20. Calculated and Fluent vertical velocity profiles.
Vertical temperature profile.

R, m
0
-2
-4 Tf_R300
Temperature difference, deg

Tf_R302
-6 Tf_R314
Tf_R377
Tf_R440
-8 Tc_R300
Tc_R302
-10 Tc_R314
Tc_R377
Tc_R440
-12
-14
-16
0 20 40 60 80 100
Y, m
Figure 21. Calculated and Fluent vertical temperature difference profiles.
Axial velocity, temperature and static pressure differences vs R.

200 20
150 15
100 10
Velocity, m/s and temperature

Psf
Ps
Static pressure, Pa.
difference, deg
50 5 Uaf
Uac
Taf
0 0 Tac
-50 -5
-100 -10
-150 -15
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000
R, m
Figure 22. Calculated and Fluent velocity, temperature and static pressure differences along
centerline.
One can see formation region of velocity and shock pressure losses at exit from diffuser.
Overall, the magnitudes of velocity, temperature and static pressure differences were in
good agreement and the two sets results show good similarity.
Conclusions.
This study presents basic concepts of a semi-em pirical method for calculating the velocity
and temperature fields in diffusers. It compares this method calculations with computer
modeling using computational fluid dynamics (CFD Fluent).
The results of the calculations are in good agreement with measurements in scaled models
of rectangular, plane and radial diffusers with rectilinear and curvilinear walls.
In stepped diffusers an abrupt enlargement of the cross-sectional area gives rise to so-called
shock losses. Additional shock pressure losses depends only on the cross-sectional area
ratio (measure of expansion) and can be calculated from the Borda-Carnot formula. As a
result, the losses in the diffuser are greatly reduced relative to the losses in rectilinear
diffusers of the same dimensions: at divergence angles 4 - 10 degrees the diffuser
resistance decreases by 5 – 10% and at the divergence angles 12 - 30 degrees the deffuser
resistance decreases by 15 – 25%.
In case of boundary layer suction, additional correction to the velocity field must be applied
using a semi-empirical method to calculate the suction patterns in the vicinity of the
outflow orifices. The method takes into consideration the superposition between the flow in
the diffuser, the boundaries of the diffuser and the suction flow.
These results show close agreement between the experiment and the calculation for curved
diffuser with suction. In rectilinear and curved diffusers of the same dimensions, pressure
recovery was 10- 20% lower, and exit velocity profiles were less equal.
The results of the calculations are shown to be in good agreement with measurements in
l d d l S ll
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/262012083_Improved_calculation_of_diffuser l d li d Fl t t ti l f th i fl i diff 102/124
scaled models. Small-scale modeling and Fluent computational of the airflow in a diffuser
is relatively expensive. Experience indicates, however, that in most cases it is possible to
arrive at almost optimum solution on thebasis of analytical calculations.
NOMENCLATURE.
AR diffuser area ratio (given by Equation 65)

AR tp area ratio of the diffuser tailpipe at the step cross-section (given by Equation
72)
B, H distance from current axis to wall , respectively, along axes Y and Z, m
Bo, Ho width and height of inlet, respectively, along axes Y and Z, m
Br, Hr width and height of diffuser, respectively, along axes Y and Z, m
Btp, Htp width and height of the diffuser tailpipe, respectively, m
C empirical constant (a value of C = 0.082 is used here)
Ch specific heat of air (at constant pressure), kJ//kg/ oK
Cp static-pressure coefficient (given by Equation 73)
Cs resultant of suction velocity (given by Equation 56), m/s

Ct , temperature profile constant (given by Equation 13)
Do, De equivalent diameters of inlet and at cross section of diffuser considred (given
by Equation 64), m
dVi, dWi vertical and longtitudinal componets of elementary suction velocity (given
by Equations 47, 48), m/s/m2
ΔY, ΔH coordinates of current trajectory along axes Y and Z (given by Equations 40,
41), m
G quantity of air moving trough considered cross-section of diffuser, kg m2s-4
g acceleration due to gravity, m/s2
Gc quantity of air in considered current cross-section (given by Equation 25) ,
N s-1
Gs quantity of air suction at cross-section of diffuser considered (given by
Equation 58), N s-1
I, Ix, Iy, Iz components and resultant momentum flux in cross-section of diffuser
( i b E
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/262012083_Improved_calculation_of_diffuser ti 35 38) N 105/124
(given by Equations 35-38), N

Ic initial momentum flux of diffuser (given by Equation 46), N
Ie momentum flux of air removal in considered cross-section (given by
Equation 30), N
Io inlet momentum flux (given by Equations 20, 59), N
Ip vertical pressure force created by static pressure difference between the
lower and upper regions of the current (relative to the current axis) and
(given by Equation 42) , N
Ir kinematic characteristic of the inlet (selected from Equations 20 and 59)
It buoyancy force, created by temperature-density difference between
elementary volume of current and ambient air (given by Equation 32), N
Iu momentum flux in cross-section of diffuser (given by Equation 29), N
i elementary jet
Jy, My ordinal and total numbers of jets interacted, respectively, along axis Y
Jz, Mz ordinal and total numbers of jets interacted, respectively, along axis Z
Kfr friction resistance coefficient of diffuser (given by Equation 63)
Kpf resistance coefficient by free discharge from diffuser (given by Equation 66)
Kps resistance coefficient by supplying air through transition diffuser with
stepped walls (given by Equation 70)
Kpt resistance coefficient by supplying air through transition diffuser (given by
Equation 67)
Ky, Ny ordinal and total numbers of increments, respectively, in inlet along axis Y
Kz, Nz ordinal and total numbers of increments, respectively, in inlet along axis Z
L y, L z nondimensional discharge factors (given by Equations 26, 27)
Ns total number of integration steps along the axis Z
Pa static pressure in cross-section of outlet (X = Xa) , Pa
Po static pressure in the cross-section of inlet (given by Equation 61) , Pa
Ps static pressure in current cross-section considered (given by Equation 45) ,
Pa
Psf axial static pressure obtained by Fluent, Pa
Psw additional shock pressure losses (given by Equation 71), Pa
P t il i
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/262012083_Improved_calculation_of_diffuser ( i b E ti 69) P 108/124
Ptp tailpipe pressure recovery (given by Equation 69), Pa

Pu, Pua inlet and outlet dynamic pressure (given by Equations 62, 68), Pa
Qo inlet excess heat (given by Equation 21, 60), W
Qr thermal characteristic of the inlet (selected from Equations 21 and 60)
Qy, Qz nondimensional factors of excess heat (given by Equations 33, 34)
R radius of cross-section considered in radial diffuser, m
r orifice radius, m
S distance from inlet to cross section of current along jet axis, m
T temperature difference at point considered, oC
Ta absolute temperature of ambient air, oK
Tac, Taf calculated and obtained by Fluent axial temperature difference, oC
Tc current temperature difference (given by Equation 15), oC
Tf vertical temperature difference profiles obtained by Fluent, oC
Ti temperature difference induced by i - elementary jet, (given by Equation 6),
o
C
Tk inlet temperature difference of cell made by increments Ky and Kz, oC
Tm temperature difference on axis of i - elementary jet (selected from Equations

11 and 12), oC
To inlet axial temperature difference, oC
T y, T z nondimensional factors of current temperature difference (given by
Equations 18, 19)
U velocity at point considered (given by Equation 1), m/s
Uac, Uaf calculated and obtained by Fluent axial velocity, m/s
Uf vertical velocity profiles obtained by Fluent, m/s
Uc current velocity (given by Equation 14), m/s
Ue air-removal velocity in considered cross-section of diffuser (given by
Equations 24, 57), m/S
Ui air velocity induced by i - elementary jet (given by Equation 5), m/s
Uk inlet velocity of cell made by increments Ky and Kz, m/s
Um air velocity on axis of i - elementary jet (selected from Equations 11), m/s
Uo inlet axial velocity, m/s
U l i “ hif ” ( i
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/262012083_Improved_calculation_of_diffuser b E i 23) /S 111/124
Us velocity “shift” (given by Equation 23), m/S

Uy, Uz nondimensional factors of current velocity (given by Equations 16, 17)
V, W vertical and longtitudinal componets of suction velocity (given by Equations
53, 54), m/s
Vo velocity at the suction orifice, m/s
X, Y, Z coordinates of point considered, m
Xa distance from inlet to outlet position, m
Xs, Ys, Zs coordinates of the orifise in the diffuser, m
Yj, Zj coordinates of point in jet j (given by Equations 7, 8), m
Zi distance from orifice to cross-section considered (given by Equation 52), m
α, β divergence angles of diffuser in Y and Z directions, degrees
αc angle between current trajectory projection in XY plane an X axis, degrees
βc angle between current trajectory projection in XZ plane an X axis, degrees
βxy angle between current trajectory and XY plane [βxy = atan(cosαc tan βc)],
degrees
δ, η coordinates of elementary jet i in inlet along axes Y and Z, m
δk, δk+1 start and end of increment Ky, respectively, in inlet along axis Y, m
ΔP elementary static pressure difference between the lower and upper current
parts (given by Equation 43), Pa
γ specific weight of the air at point considered, N m
γa specific weight of ambient air, N m
ς, τ coordinates of the orifice i – point along the axes X and Y, m
ςi, τi distances from the orifice i-point to suction flow point considered along the
axes X and Y (given by Equations 50, 51), m
ςo orifice circle abssissa (given by Equation 55), m
ηk ,ηk+1 start and end of increment Kz, respectively, in intlet along axis Z, m
λ friction coefficient is function of Reynolds number (Re) and relative
roughness (h/De) (Idelchik 1986)
ρi distance from orifice i-point to suction flow point considered (given by
Equation 49), m
σ turbulent Prandtl number (a value of σ = 0.5 is used here)
REFERENCES
Chanson, Hubert (2004), Hydraulics of Open Channel Flow: An Introduction (2nd ed.),
Butterworth–Heinemann, 650 pp
T. Delaval. 1932. Velocity characteristics of hoods under suction. Heating, piping, air
conditioning, 5: 13-17.
Idelchik I. E. 1986. Handbook of hydraulic resistance. Hemisphere Publishing Corporation,
New York.
John C. Lin. 2002. Review of research on low-profile vortex generators to control
boundary-layer separation. Flow Physics and Control Branch, NASA Langley Research
Center, Progress in Aerospace Sciences 38 () 389–420Hampton, VA 23681-2199, USA
Massey, Bernard Stanford; Ward-Smith, John (1998), Mechanics of Fluids (7 th ed.), Taylor
& Francis, 744 pp.
Schubauer, G B Spangenberg. 1949. W G Effect of screens in wide-angle diffusers. NACA
Report 949, NACA TN 1610.
W. R. Schwarz, K. A. Flaek, D. M. Driver, S. Jovi. 1996. A Combined Experimental and
Computational Study of Pressure-Driven Three-Dimensional Separation in a Turbulent
Boundary Layer . Thermal and Fluid Science; 13:252-265.
I. A. Sheplev. Air flow room aerodinamics. 1978. Stroyizdat, Mooscow, 145 p.
TARNOPOLSKY, M. 1967. Spreading of fan jets in bounded space. Journal of
E i i Ph i V XII NI 20 25
Engineering Physics, V.XII, NI: 20-25.

TARNOPOLSKY, M.D. and GELMAN, N.A. 1987. Air diffuser with controlled flow
dissector. Air distribution in ventilated spaces, Stocholm:1-12.
TARNOPOLSKY, M. 1994. Improved calculation of air distribution in an auditorium.
ASHRAE Transactions.100:1195-1209.
Stafford W. Wilbur and James T. Higginbotham. 1957. Investigation of a short-annular-
diffuser configuration utilizing suction as a means of boundary-layer control. Langly
Aerodinamical Laboratory, NACA TN 3996.
Citations (0) References (9)
IMPROVED CALCULATION OF AIR DISTRIBUTION IN AN AUDITORIUM

Article Full-text available
May 1994
M Tarnopolsky · I D Ph
View Show abstract
A Combined Experimental and Computational Study of Pressure-Driven Three-Dimensional

Separation in a Turbulent Boundary Layer . Thermal and Fluid Science
Jan 1996 · 252-265
W R Schwarz · K A Flaek · D M Driver · S Jovi
W. R. Schwarz, K. A. Flaek, D. M. Driver, S. Jovi. 1996. A Combined Experimental and
Computational Study of Pressure-Driven Three-Dimensional Separation in a Turbulent Boundary
Layer. Thermal and Fluid Science; 13:252-265.
Air ow room aerodinamics

Jan 1978
I A Sheplev
I. A. Sheplev. Air ow room aerodinamics. 1978. Stroyizdat, Mooscow, 145 p.
Spreading of fan jets in bounded space

Jan 1967 · Journal of Engineering Physics · 20-25
TARNOPOLSKY, M. 1967. Spreading of fan jets in bounded space. Journal of Engineering
Physics, V.XII, NI: 20-25.
Investigation of a Short-annular-diffuser Con guration Utilizing Suction as a Means of

Boundary-layer Control
Article
Jun 1957
Stafford W Wilbur · James T Higginbotham
View
Handbook of Hydraulic Resistance, 2nd Edition

Article
Jan 1987 · J PRESS VESS-T ASME
I. E. Idelchik
View Show abstract
Review of research on low-pro le vortex generators to control boundary-layer separation

Article
Feb 2002 · PROG AEROSP SCI
John C Lin
View Show abstract
The Hydraulics of Open Channel Flow : An Introduction

Article
Jan 1999
Hubert Chanson
View Show abstract
Effect of Screens in Wide - Angle Diffusers

Article
G. B. Schubauer · W. G. Spengenberg
View
Recommended publications
Discover more publications, questions and projects in Diffusion
Data Full-text available
Tarnopolsky M. List of publications. 1964-2014

May 2014
Tarnopolsky M. List of publications. 1964-2014
View full-text
Conference Paper Full-text available
Tarnopolsky M., Yashkul A., Leschinskaya I. Ef cient and economical systems of air
distribution in...
May 1983
Modern development trends of ventilation and air-conditioning in public buildings are connected with enlarged air volumes necessary for assimilating enhanced thermal,
chemical and other pollution of space within buildings. On the other hand comfort standards, become stricter causing to achieve lower optimum velocities and
admissible air and temperature variations in the serviced space. The... [Show full abstract]
View full-text
Data Full-text available
Room air distribution calculation. 2015

December 2015
The objectives of this task are to evaluate the performance of air ow simulation techniques and to establish their viability as design tools. This paper outlines a semi-
empirical method for calculating the velocity and temperature elds in the room. The method takes into consideration interaction between the various jets in the room,
the walls of the room and the counter ow between jet and... [Show full abstract]
View full-text
Conference Paper
In uence of Sub-Boundary Layer Vortex Generators on Wall Shear Stress

June 2005
An experimental study of sub-boundary layer vortex generators in a low speed ow with no streamwise pressure gradient has been completed. The undisturbed boundary
layer thickness at the location where the arrays were inserted was measured as 45 mm, and counter-rotating arrays of vane-type generators with heights of 5, 10, 20 and
50 mm, all at ±18° were used. The Reynolds number at this point... [Show full abstract]
Read more
Discover more
Last Updated: 31 Jul 18
About Support Business solutions
News Help center Recruiting

Company FAQ Advertising
Careers
© ResearchGate 2018. All rights reserved. Imprint · Terms · Privacy

(PDF) Improved Calculation of Diffuser

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

(PDF) Improved Calculation of Diffuser

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

9/14/2018 (PDF) Improved calculation of diffuser

See all › See all › Share

Improved calculation of diffuser

Data (PDF Available) · May 2011 with 379 Reads

Cite this publication

Available from: Moshe Tarnopolsky, May 04, 2014

Tarnopolsky M. Improved calculation of diffuser. 2011 1 of 39

Improved calculation of diffuser.

Tarnopolsky M. Improved calculation of diffuser. 2011 2 of 39

Figure 1. Diffuser flow scheme.

Tarnopolsky M. Improved calculation of diffuser. 2011 3 of 39

Tarnopolsky M. Improved calculation of diffuser. 2011 4 of 39

Figure 2. Different means to improve operation of diffusers.

Tarnopolsky M. Improved calculation of diffuser. 2011 5 of 39

a suction flow of 2.8% .

A three-dimensional separation pattern in a turbulent boundary layer was studied at the

Tarnopolsky M. Improved calculation of diffuser. 2011 6 of 39

Figure 3. Schematic description of the NASA test section.

Diffuser flow analysis.

Tarnopolsky M. Improved calculation of diffuser. 2011 7 of 39

where γ is the specific weight of the air at a given point:

Tarnopolsky M. Improved calculation of diffuser. 2011 8 of 39

The values of Um and Tm have to be calculated by assuming conservationt of momentum

  Ch  Ui Ti dYdZ = Ch  U k Tk  k 1   k  k1   k  , (10)

  a U m C S   Uk  k 1  k k 1 k ,

 Ch  a Um Tmy C 2t S = Ch  U k Tk  k 1   k k 1  k , (12)

Tarnopolsky M. Improved calculation of diffuser. 2011 9 of 39

B Br-B B Br-B B Br-B

Figure 4. Rectangular diffuser jet interaction diagram.

where Ct is a temperature profile constant:

Tarnopolsky M. Improved calculation of diffuser. 2011 10 of 39

Equations 11 and 12 can be used to find Um and Tm.

where Uy and Uz are the nondimensional components of the current velocity:

Similarly Ty and Tz are given by:

Tarnopolsky M. Improved calculation of diffuser. 2011 11 of 39

Accordingly, we obtain the following from Equations 1, 14, and 22:

where Ue is air-removal velocity in considered cross-section of diffuser:

Gc is the quantity of air in considered current cross-section:

Tarnopolsky M. Improved calculation of diffuser. 2011 12 of 39

and Ly and Lz are nondimensional discharge factors:

Taking into consideration Equations 1, 23 through 27 and after integration, we obtain:

where Ie is momentum flux of air removal in considered cross-section of diffuser:

The buoyancy force, created by temperature-density difference between elementary volume

Tarnopolsky M. Improved calculation of diffuser. 2011 13 of 39

where Qy and Qz are nondimensional components of the excess heat:

I x = I u cos  c cos  xy , (35)

The coordinates of the current trajectory can now be calculated:

Tarnopolsky M. Improved calculation of diffuser. 2011 14 of 39

Tarnopolsky M. Improved calculation of diffuser. 2011 15 of 39

Tarnopolsky M. Improved calculation of diffuser. 2011 16 of 39

determined by the adding velocities, as a result of elementary suction flows interaction

where ρi – distance from orifice i-point to suction flow point, m

Tarnopolsky M. Improved calculation of diffuser. 2011 17 of 39

ςo – the orifice circle abssissa, m:

Circular orifice suction.

Tarnopolsky M. Improved calculation of diffuser. 2011 18 of 39

where Gs is quantity of air suction at the cross-section of the diffuser:

Comparison of diffuser flow analyses with experimental data.

The static pressure in the cross-section of inlet (X = 0) is obtained from Equation 45

where Pu is the inlet dynamic pressure:

Tarnopolsky M. Improved calculation of diffuser. 2011 19 of 39

where De is equivalent diffuser diameter at cross section cosidered:

Velocity contours in rectilinear diffuser .

Figure 6. Velocity contours in the rectilinear diffuser.