Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Investigations of the effects of two typical jet crushing methods on the atomization and dust reduction performance of nozzles
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Investigations of the effects of two typical jet crushing methods on the atomization and dust reduction performance of nozzles
Do you wish to request the book?
Investigations of the effects of two typical jet crushing methods on the atomization and dust reduction performance of nozzles
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Investigations of the effects of two typical jet crushing methods on the atomization and dust reduction performance of nozzles
2023
Overview
Single-fluid nozzles and dual-fluid nozzles are the two typical jet crushing methods used in spray dust reduction. To distinguish the atomization mechanism of single-fluid and dual-fluid nozzles and improve dust control efficiency at the coal mining faces, the atomization characteristics and dust reduction performance of the two nozzles were quantitatively compared. Results of experiments show that, as water supply pressure increased, the atomization angle of the swirl pressure nozzle reaches a maximum of 62° at 6 MPa and then decreases, but its droplet size shows an opposite trend with a minimum of 41.7 μm. The water supply pressure helps to improve the droplet size and the atomization angle of the internal mixing air–liquid nozzle, while the air supply pressure has a suppressive effect for them. When the water supply pressure is 0.2 MPa and the air supply pressure reaches 0.4 MPa, the nozzle obtains the smallest droplet size which is 10% smaller than the swirl pressure nozzle. Combined with the dust reduction experimental results, when the water consumption at the working surface is not limited, using the swirl pressure nozzle will achieve a better dust reduction effect. However, the internal mixing air–liquid nozzle can achieve better and more economical dust reduction performance in working environments where water consumption is limited.
Publisher
Springer Nature Singapore,Springer,Springer Nature B.V,SpringerOpen
