Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-j7cmm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-10T00:26:46.816Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Dynamics of gas–liquid annular flow: from wall-film instability to fragmentation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 November 2025

Yoshiaki Kamada
Affiliation:
Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Kyushu University , 744 Motooka, Nishi-Ku, Fukuoka 819-0395, Japan
Zhenying Wang
Affiliation:
Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Kyushu University , 744 Motooka, Nishi-Ku, Fukuoka 819-0395, Japan International Institute for Carbon-Neutral Energy Research (WPI-I2CNER), Kyushu University, 744 Motooka, Nishi-Ku, Fukuoka 819-0395, Japan
Chihiro Inoue*
Affiliation:
Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Kyushu University , 744 Motooka, Nishi-Ku, Fukuoka 819-0395, Japan
*
Corresponding author: Chihiro Inoue, inoue.chihiro@aero.kyushu-u.ac.jp

Abstract

We highlight the complete transition from liquid-wall-film instability of an annular gas–liquid flow inside a nozzle to spray formation at the trailing edge, aiming to identify two distinct flow regimes of ripple waves and disturbance waves and to clarify their distinct fragmentation mechanisms. Experiments conducted under strictly controlled boundary conditions support our theoretical analysis, revealing that the onset of disturbance waves coincides with the liquid-film Weber number (${\textit{We}}$) of unity, marking a significant change in following fragmentation dynamics. For ${\textit{We}}\lt 0.5$, the liquid wall film forms three-dimensional ripple waves driven by the superposition of Kelvin–Helmholtz and Rayleigh–Taylor (RT) instabilities, with no disturbance waves present. At the trailing edge, the liquid film temporarily accumulates, extends into isolated ligaments along the axial direction via RT instability, and subsequently fragments into droplets through Plateau–Rayleigh instability, displaying a weak coupling between ripple wave dynamics and fragmentation. In contrast, for ${\textit{We}}\gt 0.5$, disturbance waves with long wavelengths and large amplitudes become prominent, superimposed on the base ripple waves. As these disturbance waves reach the trailing edge, they are spontaneously ejected as liquid sheets at the same frequency, forming transverse rims through RT instability and rapidly disintegrating into fine droplets. This regime demonstrates a direct coupling between disturbance-wave dynamics and fragmentation.

Information

Type
JFM Papers
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution and reproduction, provided the original article is properly cited.
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2025. Published by Cambridge University Press
Figure 0

Figure 1. (a) Schematic diagram of the experimental set-up. (b) Liquid-film flow at mean gas velocity $u_g = 0\ \mathrm{m\,s^{-1}}$. The $x$-axis is defined in the axial direction with the gas exit as the origin.

Figure 1

Table 1. Experimental conditions.

Figure 2

Figure 2. (a,b) Visualisation results. (c,d) Spatio-temporal diagram of the liquid film in $70\,\mathrm{mm} \le x \le 90\,\mathrm{mm}$. The dark lines indicate the wave fronts, and their inclination corresponds to the wave velocity. (a,c) Ripple-wave regime (${\textit{Re}}_l=30, {\textit{Re}}_g=8.4\times 10^4$). (b,d) Disturbance-wave regime (${\textit{Re}}_l=160, {\textit{Re}}_g=8.4\times 10^4$).

Figure 3

Figure 3. (a) Visualisation results at ${\textit{Re}}_l=70$. From left to right: $u_g$ = 20, 40, 60 and 80 m s−1. The yellow arrows indicate the disturbance waves. (b) Flow-regime map for gas and liquid-film Reynolds numbers. The solid line presents ${\textit{We}} = 0.5$, considering both gravity and airflow shear by (3.2), while the dashed line takes into account only airflow shear by (3.3). The dash-dotted line represents the capillary-length model of Crowe (2005).

Figure 4

Figure 4. (a) Frequency and phase velocity of disturbance and ripple waves depending on axial position at ${\textit{Re}}_l=130$ and ${\textit{Re}}_g=1.1 \times 10^5$. The red symbols present frequencies, and the black symbols show phase velocities. The solid line shows the theoretical value of (3.7). Error bars depict standard errors (SE). (b) Histograms of the phase velocity and axial wavelength of ripple waves measured at $x = 70\,\mathrm{mm}$ (depicted by the arrow in (a)).

Figure 5

Figure 5. (a) Time series images of ripple wave and ligament breakup at ${\textit{Re}}_g=8.4\times 10^4$ and ${\textit{Re}}_l=30$. Droplets break up periodically from the tip of the ligament at $t=0,\,14 \,\mathrm{ms}$. (b) Schematic diagram of film dynamics and fragmentation process in ripple-wave regime.

Figure 6

Figure 6. (a) Axial wavelength $\lambda$ and circumferential wavelength $\lambda _p$ of ripple waves as a function of ${\textit{Re}}_g$. The solid lines and dashed lines present theoretical results given by (3.5) and (3.6), respectively. (b) Measured wave frequency $f_r$ against theoretical value $f_a$ of (3.8). The solid line depicts linear fit with a prefactor of 0.7.

Figure 7

Figure 7. (a) Circumferential wavelength normalised by the trailing-edge thickness $\lambda _t/h_t$ versus the non-dimensional flow conditions at $h_t$ = 0.5, 1.0 and 2.0 mm. The solid line shows (3.10) with a prefactor of 6. (b) Ligament diameter just before breakup $d_t$ versus the square root of the liquid-film cross-sectional area. The solid line shows (3.11).

Figure 8

Figure 8. (a) Breakup period $T$ versus capillary time $\tau _\sigma$ of ligament diameter $d_t$. The data collapse onto the line of $T\approx \tau _\sigma$ with a prefactor of 6. (b) Breakup period $T$ versus aerodynamic shear time $\tau _a$. The solid line shows linear fit with a prefactor of 40. (c) Frequency of ligament breakup $T^{-1}$ versus ripple-wave frequency $f_r$. The solid line depicts the theoretical value of $\tau _\sigma ^{-1}$ versus that of $f_a$ for each $h_t$.

Figure 9

Figure 9. (a) Mean droplet diameter $\langle d_r \rangle$ against theoretical ligament diameter calculated by flow conditions. The solid line shows (3.13) with a prefactor of 0.4. (b) The PDF of droplet diameter normalised by the mean diameter at $u_g=100\, \mathrm{m\,s^{-1}}$ and ${\textit{Re}}_l=30$. The solid line shows the gamma distribution with $n=4{\sim}6$.

Figure 10

Figure 10. (a) Typical time series images of disturbance waves and sheet breakup at ${\textit{Re}}_g =1.3 \times 10^5$ and ${\textit{Re}}_l=130$. A disturbance wave observed on the wall surface at $t = 0$ ms deforms into a liquid sheet at $t = 4$ ms. At $t = 5$ ms, holes form on the sheet surface and rims at the tips, eventually collapsing into droplets. (b) Schematic diagram of film dynamics and fragmentation process in disturbance-wave regime.

Figure 11

Figure 11. (a) Axial wavelength of ripple waves $\lambda$ and of disturbance waves $\lambda _d$ against ${\textit{Re}}_g$. The solid and dashed lines show the theoretical results of (3.5) with prefactors of 8 and 0.8, respectively. (b) Frequency of disturbance waves $f_d$ versus frequency of ripple waves $f_r$ in the axial direction. The solid line depicts linear fit with a prefactor of 0.15.

Figure 12

Figure 12. Sheet breakup frequency $f_s$ versus disturbance wave frequency $f_d$. The solid line depicts $f_s = f_d$.

Figure 13

Figure 13. Time series images of fragmentation process in the disturbance-wave regime at ${\textit{Re}}_l=160$. (a) Here, $u_g=30\,\mathrm{m\,s^{-1}}$. The red arrows indicate rim breakup events accompanied by bag formation, which subsequently undergo secondary atomization. (b) Here, $u_g=60\,\mathrm{m\,s^{-1}}$ without secondary breakup.

Figure 14

Figure 14. (a) Maximum sheet length $l_s$ against wavelength of disturbance wave $\lambda _d$. The solid line depicts $l_s \approx \lambda _d$ with a prefactor of 0.3. (b) Circumferential wavelength normalised by sheet thickness $\lambda _s/h_s$ versus dimensionless flow conditions. The solid line shows (3.18) with a prefactor of 4.

Figure 15

Figure 15. (a) Mean droplet diameter $\langle d_d \rangle$ against theoretical rim diameter. The solid line shows (3.20) with a prefactor of 0.35. (b) The PDF of droplet diameter normalised by the mean diameter at $u_g=100 \,\mathrm{m\,s^{-1}}$. The solid line presents the gamma distribution with $n=4{\sim} 6$.

Figure 16

Figure 16. (a) Pitot tube with a total pressure port located at the top, and three static pressure ports on the side. (b) Velocity profile of airflow at the outlet of the stainless steel pipe along the radial direction at $25\,\mathrm{m\,s^{-1}} \le u_{\textit{gmax}} \le 87\,\mathrm{m\,s^{-1}}$.

Figure 17

Figure 17. (a) Image processing steps for identifying in-focus droplets: (i) background-subtracted image; (ii) result of applying a Gaussian filter to (i); (iii) difference image by subtracting (ii) from (i). (b) Ratio of measured diameters $d_a$ to true diameters $d_i$ at three subtraction lengths of $\Delta _d$.

Figure 18

Figure 18. (a) Experimental set-up of the imaging system for BBLIF. (b) Theoretical film thickness $h$ in (C2) against $\overline {I(x,y)}$ at three different points. The gradient of each line represents the prefactor of $a(x,y)$. (c) BBLIF result showing disturbance waves at ${\textit{Re}}_l=160$ and $u_g=70\,\mathrm{m\,s^{-1}}$. Flow direction is downward.

Figure 19

Figure 19. (a) Experimental film thickness $h_{\textit{Exp.}}$ versus the theoretical results of (3.2). Filled symbols correspond to the ripple-wave regime, while open symbols represent the disturbance-wave regime. The inset shows film thickness as a function of ${\textit{Re}}_g$. (b) Experimental interfacial friction factor $f_{\textit{Exp.}}$ versus the Blasius correlation $f$. The dashed lines indicate a deviation of $\pm$20 % from the relation of $f_{\textit{Exp.}}=f$.

Figure 20

Figure 20. (a) Sharp-cut trailing edge with tip thickness $h_t = 0.1\,\mathrm{mm}$ for two types of outer surface: bare and hydrophobic. The yellow-shaded area indicates the hydrophobic area, coated circumferential for 5 mm from the bottom edge. Instantaneous snapshots superimposed on time-averaged images at ${\textit{Re}}_l = 30$ and ${\textit{Re}}_g=8.4\times 10^4$ for (b) bare surface and for (c) hydrophobic surface. The blue arrows depict the liquid thickness adhering on the pipe outside.

Figure 21

Figure 21. Overall visualisation results at ${\textit{Re}}_l = 30$ and ${\textit{Re}}_g=8.4\times 10^4$ for (a) bare case and for (b) hydrophobic case. (c) Dimensional droplet size distribution measured at $x = 200\,\mathrm{mm}$.

Supplementary material: File

Kamada et al. supplementary movie

Ripple wave regime (left) and disturbance wave regime (right)
Download Kamada et al. supplementary movie(File)
File 9.5 MB