FLUID FLOW ANALYSIS IN A SUDDENLY EXPANDED AND

CONTRACTED RECTANGULAR CHANNEL

1. NTRODUCTION

The flow of a fluid through a channel having a section, where sudden expansion or sudden contraction or combination
of sudden expansion and contraction of the geometry takes place is encountered in many engineering and industrial
applications such as Combustors, mixing chamber, heat exchangers, diffuser, evaporators, condensers, burners, spray
driers, polymer processing, extrusion, mold filling, flow through porous media, various manufacturing processes,
chemical plants, Medical technology, bio-medical, bioengineering etc. Although, a few numbers of researchers have
carried out the numerical and experimental investigations on the behaviour of the various types of Newtonian and non-
Newtonian fluids through the geometry of sudden expansion and contraction in many ways, but before our study,
expansion and contraction flow presented some unresolved issues from fundamental point of view. Hence the need was
felt to investigate the combined expansion and contraction flow characteristics with the variation of different flow
parameters along with some modifications in the said configurations. Accordingly, in this research activity, we have
become interested to study numerically the flow characteristics of fluid passing through three configurations namely;
plain sudden expanded and contracted rectangular channel (Model-1), sudden expanded and contracted rectangular
channel with fence (Model-2), and sudden expanded and contracted rectangular channel with rectangular tab (Model-3)
respectively. In order to understand the effect of fluid flow through the configurations of plain sudden expansion,
sudden contraction and combination of sudden expansion - contraction, different researchers have performed theoretical
and experimental investigation. Among them, Macagno and Hung (1967) have studied computationally and
experimentally on the flow of a viscous liquid through axisymmetric sudden expansion configuration. They have
considered an expansion ratio of 2:1 for Reynolds number up to 200. They have obtained experimental results through
flow visualization techniques. They have presented the streamline and vorticity contours as function of the Reynolds
number flow. They have carried out the experiment for a Reynolds number range of 36 to 4500. They have concluded
that the flow remains symmetry at higher Reynolds number, but the trapped eddy becomes progressively longer and less
prominent. Fletcher et al. (1985) have studied the detailed heat or mass transfer rate using a finite difference computer
model for laminar flow in an axisymmetric sudden expansion. They have employed a finite element algorithm and
extended the investigation to expansion ratio of 6 at a fixed Reynolds number of 200. They have observed that the
recirculation length is the linear variation of its nondimensional value with the Reynolds number in the laminar regime.
They have also observed that a Couette flow analysis of the appropriate scale equations gives the essential details of the
mass transfer behaviour. Badekas and Knight (1992) have investigated eddy correlation for laminar axisymmetric
sudden expansion configuration. They have examined the flow for 50  Re  200 and 1.5  E  6 (E is expansion
ratio) using the full axisymmetric Navier-Stokes equations with the SIMPLE algorithm. They have considered the eddy
characteristics which includes eddy reattachment length, relative eddy intensity and location of eddy centre from throat.
They have observed that the reattachment length is a linear function of Re at E = 6 for 50  Re  200 . Sau (1999) has
carried out detailed three dimensional numerical predictions of the effect of vortex generators on Vorticity dynamics
and the phenomenon of axis switching for the laminar in compressible flows through a rectangular and square sudden
expansion. The rectangular tabs are used as vortex generators, placed on the plane of the expansion. From the study he
has observed that the flow in absence of tabs is dominated by re-circulations on the major axis plane and has showed no
recirculation on the minor axis place. Chakrabarti et al. (2003) have made an extensive study on the performance of
sudden expansion from the perspective of a diffuser. From the study they have seen that the diffuser wall pressure
encounters a sharp change in the region of the throat. The stagnation pressure drop gradient is not constant along the
length of the diffuser. In low Reynolds number and low aspect ratio region, the stagnation pressure drop gradient starts
with a high value and decreases in a near asymptotic manner with either increase in Reynolds number or aspect ratio.
For significant ranges of Reynolds number, this stagnation pressure drop is marginal. Nag and Datta (2007) have
carried out a numerical study for the laminar flow of Newtonian and non-Newtonian power-law fluids through a
suddenly expanded axisymmetric geometry. They have observed that the effect of increasing the expansion ratio at
constant Reynolds number is to shorten the non-dimensional recirculation length for the shear-thinning fluids, while, it
is opposite in case of shear-thickening and Newtonian fluids. Banerjee et al. (2011) have numerically studied the
performance of a modified sudden expansion diffuser in terms of static pressure rise. In their configuration, they have
considered two fences at the downstream of the sudden expansion for fixed fence subtended angle of 10 o. In high
Reynolds number regime, they have observed that average static pressure rise is more in case of sudden expansion with
two fences or single fence compared to the plain sudden expansion configuration. Fattah (2012) has experimentally and
numerically studied fluid flow and heat transfer characteristics in the case of wall injection besides main flow through a
circular sudden enlargement. He has noted that the recirculation zone decreases at higher value of injection flow rate
(for constant value of injection flow rate and small value of the main flow). As the injection flow rate increases at
constant injection angle (θ = 0o) and constant main flow rate, the turbulent kinetic energy decreases. As the injection
flow angle increases, he has observed that the pressure recovery increases and its maximum value at the reattachment
point shifts in upstream direction. Zivkovic et al. (2013) have numerically developed a correlation for pressure drop
arising from the orifice for low Reynolds number incompressible Newtonian fluid flow through rectangular orifice.
They have shown that the pressure drop is proportional to the average velocity through the orifice, and a function of the
orifice contraction ratio, length-to-width ratio and the orifice aspect ratio. They have also observed that the two-
dimensional approximation is only valid for orifice aspect ratios greater than 30. Bae and Kim (2013) have numerically
investigated the turbulent flow in axisymmetric sudden expansion with a chamfered edge. They have observed that for
chamfer length greater than is equal to 0.02, the local loss coefficient is initially decreases with increases in the chamfer
angle. When the chamfer angle is further increased above the threshold, however, the flow separates from the wall of
the chamfer and the local loss coefficient increases again. For chamfer length less than 0.2, they have found that the
flow remains attached to the chamfer surface even at a higher chamfer angle, and the pressure loss gradually decreases
with an increases in the chamfer angle. Brewster (2013) has computed numerical solution of pressure drops and
centreline velocity for the steady laminar fully-developed flow of non-Newtonian fluids in circular ducts. They have
observed that simpler constitutive models can be used in cases where the ratio of the limiting Newtonian viscosities are
extreme. Love et al. (2013) have investigated the turbulent flow through a diffuser featuring a double expansion using
computational fluid dynamics. They have seen that the resulting flow is asymmetric with a large recirculation forming
in one of the four corners of the diffuser for Re ≥ 80,000. Below this Reynolds number greater separation occurs
leading to the formation of additional large recirculation zones, vortices, and a more chaotic flow field. GUO et al.
(2010) have studied experimentally the pressure drop caused by flow area contraction in Microchannels using the tiny
gap pressure measurement method. From the experimental results, they have seen that the abrupt contraction coefficient
kc decreases with the Reynolds number increasing, and it is much higher than that of conventional tubes in laminar
flow. They have also observed that the contraction coefficient decreases as the tube diameter increases and the
transition from laminar to turbulent flow is not obvious when the diameter of the small tube is 0.32mm. Yamagata et al.
(2011) have experimentally investigated the flow behaviors of viscoelastic flows in asymmetric planar contraction
geometries by flow visualization and PIV measurement, and the influence of contraction width on the vortex formation
was studied. They have observed that the entry flow to the contraction was varied from a Newtonian-like flow to a
vortex formation flow through a transitional flow, with increasing in Weissenberg number and Reynolds number. Yazdi
et al. (2012) have numerically investigated the flow of a viscoelastic matrix filled with different volume concentrations
of rigid fibers in 4:1 planar contractions. They have seen that fiber orientation could be used for determining the flow
regime through the contraction geometry. A suspension of 10% volume of fibers with aspect ratio of 20 was
investigated. They have found that vortex size increases with enhancing the volume concentration of fibers. Sau (2002)
has numerically studied the vortex dynamics and mass entrainment in a rectangular channel with a suddenly expanded
and contracted part. He has observed that when the tabs are placed at the major axis ends coinciding with the plane of
expansion, the strength of the developed inflow-type streamwise vortices, the downstream of the plane of expansion
increased significantly. As a result the mass entrainment over a jet section increased by a considerably large percentage
of the corresponding no-tab case value. He has also observed that the local flow acceleration from the developed high

2
pressure regions to the surrounding low pressure regions inside the channel is responsible for the generation of the
streamwise vortices and their sustained downstream evolution. Nassar et al. (2011) have numerically investigated the
flow of elasto-viscoplastic liquids through an axisymmetric expansion-contraction. They have obtained the velocity
and stress fields for different combinations of the governing parameters, and have observed that elasticity leads to
significant changes in the shape and position of the yield surface, affecting both the extra-stress and the rate of
deformation fields in the cavity. The trends observed are in qualitative agreement with visualization results available in
the literature. Ray, S. et al. (2012) have numerically investigated the Newtonian fluid flow through a two-dimensional
sudden expansion and sudden contraction flow passage. They have observed that the size of the recirculation zone, flow
reattachment length, redevelopment of flow, recirculating flow strength depends on several parameters, primarily on
flow rate i.e. Reynolds number, expansion/contraction ratio and flow direction. They have also seen that the flow tends
to become unstable at lower Reynolds number for high expansion ratio. Hermany et al. (2013) have numerically studied
the effect of both low and high inertia on the flow of viscoplastic liquids through an axisymmetric expansion followed
by a contraction. They have found that the topology of the yield surface is strongly affected by the flow intensity, but
only mildly influenced by the shear-thinning fluid behaviour. They have also observed that the inertia dramatically
changes the topology of the yield surfaces, such that the fore-aft symmetry observed for low-inertia flows in the middle
tube is lost. Chai, L., et al. (2015) have investigated experimentally two-phase flow pattern and pressure drop in silicon
multi-microchannel with expansion-contraction cross-section. They have seen that the intermittent sub regimes in the
newly proposed mocrochannels are different from those displayed in the rectangular straight microchannel. They have
observed that the homogeneous flow model cannot predict the two-phase pressure drop data well, while the separated
flow model is proposed to provide a better prediction of the two-phase frictional pressure drop. From the above review
of literature, it may be noted that a number of researchers have studied the flow characteristics of fluid passing through
the configurations of sudden expansion, sudden contraction and combination of sudden expansion and contraction. But,
the numerical or experimental study on plain sudden expansion and contraction configuration with some modifications
is very less. Again, it is noted that systematic detailed study on the effect of Reynolds number, expansion length,
percentage of fence restriction, percentage of tab restriction and tab length on average static pressure distribution,
average stagnation pressure distribution, wall pressure distribution, magnitude of maximum static pressure rise, stream
line contours and pattern of velocity distribution for different configurations of sudden expansion and contraction is not
addressed so far. Therefore, in order to understand the complex flow characteristics of fluid passing through sudden
expansion and contraction, in the present work, an attempt has been made to perform a systematic numerical study on
the flow characteristics of fluid passing through suddenly expanded and contracted configurations and its modifications
considering three different models namely; plain suddenly expanded and contracted rectangular channel as Model-1. In
Model – 2, a fence has been incorporated at throat of plain sudden expansion and contraction configuration. Finally, in
Model – 3, a rectangular tab has been incorporated at throat and pre-throat region of plain suddenly expanded and
contracted configuration.

2. OBJECTIVES OF WORK
• Study on the flo w characteristics of Newtonian and incompressible fluid passing through three
configurations namely; plain sudden expanded and contracted rectangular channel (Model-1), sudden expanded and
contracted rectangular channel with fence (Model-2), and sudden expanded and contracted rectangular channel with
rectangular tab (Model-3) respectively along with its performance in terms of average static pressure distribution,
average stagnation pressure distribution, wall pressure distribution, stream line contours, variation of axial velocity .
Moreover, the results of the considered parameters have also been compared with each other of the said three
configurations.

• The effect of Reynolds number and expansion length on average static pressure distribution, average stagnation
pressure distribution, wall pressure distribution, magnitude of maximum static pressure rise, stream line contours and
pattern of velocity distribution has been studied in detail in model-1. In model-2, the effect of Reynolds number and
percentage of fence restriction on average static pressure distribution, average stagnation distribution, wall pressure
distribution, and stream line contours has been studied in detail and compared with the configuration of plain sudden
expansion and contraction (i.e. without fence), for few cases. The effect of Reynolds number, percentage of tab

3
restriction and tab length on average static pressure, average stagnation pressure drop, wall pressure and stream line
contours has been studied in detail and compared with the configurations of plain sudden expansion and contraction
(i.e. without tab), and sudden expansion and contraction with fence for few cases for model-3.

• Development of Mathematical Correlation in Different Suddenly Expanded and Contracted Configurations

3. PROGRESS OF WORK
The objectives of the Ph.D work are more or less fulfilled along with the following publications;

(a) Journal Publications:

1. B. P. Biswas and S. Chakrabarti, “A Numerical Study on Pressure and Velocity Characteristics of Fluid Passing
through a Plain Suddenly Expanded and Contracted Channel”, International Journal of Emerging Technology
and Advanced Engineering, 2014, Volume 4, Issue 7, Pages 218-227.

2. B. P. Biswas and S. Chakrabarti, “Two-Dimensional Simulation of Flow through Suddenly Expanded and
Contracted Rectangular Channel with Tab”, International Journal of Engineering Sciences Research, 2014,
Volume 5, Article 10379, Pages 1595-1602.

3. B. P. Biswas and S. Chakrabarti, “Numerical Simulation of Flow in a Configuration of Combined Sudden

Expansion and Contraction with Rectangular Tab”, International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research,
2015, Volume 6, Issue 4, Pages 842-850.

4. B. P. Biswas and S. Chakrabarti, “Flow Characteristics Study and Mathematical Correlation Development in
Different Suddenly Expanded and Contracted Configurations”, International Journal of Fluid Mechanics
Research, 2015, Volume 42, Issue 6, Pages 509-536.

(b) Conference Publications:

1. B. P. Biswas and S. Chakrabarti, “Effect of Reynolds Number and Expansion Length on Flow of Fluid Passing
through a Configuration of Sudden Expansion and Contraction”, Proceedings of International Conference on
Advances in Mechanical Engineering and its Interdisciplinary Areas (ICAMEI), Kolaghat, India, 27-28
December, 2012, Pages 54-60.

4. MATHEMATICAL FORMULATION
4.1 Computational Domain

4
 Fig. 4.1 Schematic diagram of the computational domain of flow through an
axisymmetric plain sudden expansion and contraction (Model-1)

Fig. 4.2 Schematic diagram of the computational domain of flow through an

axisymmetric plain sudden expansion and contraction with fence (Model-2)

Fig. 4.3 Schematic diagram of the computational domain of flow through an

axisymmetric plain sudden expansion and contraction with rectangular tab (Model-3)

4.2 Assumptions

5
 Flow: steady, two-dimensional and laminar.

Fluid: Newtonian and incompressible.

4.3 Mass and Momentum Equations

The mass and momentum conservation equations in the non-dimensional form becomes as follows,

u * v * -------------- (1)
 0
x *
y *

u * u * p * 1    u *    u *  -------------- (2)
u*  v*        
x *
y *
x *
Re  x *  x * * 
 y  y
*


v * v * p * 1    v *    v *  -------------- (3)
u*  v*    
 x * 
  y * 
 y * 

x * y * y *  x
Re  *
   

where, the flow Reynolds number, Re  UWi 

4.4 Boundary Conditions

Four different types of boundary conditions have been applied to the present problem.

They are as follows,

1. At the walls: No slip condition is used, i.e., u *  0 , v *  0 .

2. At the inlet: Axial velocity is specified and the transverse velocity is set to zero, i.e., u *  specified , v *  0 .

Fully developed flow condition is specified at the inlet, i.e., u *  1.51  2 y * 2  .

   

3. At the exit: Fully developed condition is assumed and hence gradients is set to zero, i.e., u * x *  0 ,
v * x *  0 .

4. At the line of symmetry: The normal gradient of the axial velocity and the transverse velocity is set to zero, i.e.,
u * y *  0 , v *  0 .

4.5 Numerical Procedure

 The partial differentials equations discretised by control volume based finite difference method

 Power law scheme to discretise the convective terms

 SIMPLE algorithm with line-by-line ADI method

 Convergence achieved at error below 10-8

 Flow assumed: Fully developed at the inlet and exit.

 Exit chosen : Far away from the throat.

 Grid node distribution: Non-uniform and Staggered

4.6 Grid Independence Test

Grid sensitivity study has been carried out for different models at various stages of the computation considering
Re =100 & 300, AR = 2, L*exp  9 , L*i  1 and L*ex  9 for several test cases are run by using different grid size to

6
 quantify grid independence study in terms of the magnitude and location of Ψmax.. Slight discrepancy, as far as the
location of the Ψmax is observed. However this is unavoidable in view of the changes in mesh size.

Finally, we have considered the following grid nodes during our numerical computation for considered three
models;

 19×17 grid at inlet section as X-direction and Y-direction respectively

 147×43 grid at expansion section as X-direction and Y-direction respectively

 147×37 grid at exit section as X-direction and Y-direction respectively

4.7 Code Validation

A few numbers of researchers have carried out the numerical and experimental investigations on suddenly expanded
and contracted configuration, but their considered flow parameters are different from our research work. For code
validation, therefore, we have compared the results of expansion zone of our considered models with the results of
sudden expansion configuration studied by different researchers (both numerical and experimental studies). The results
show good agreement between our numerical results and the results obtained by different researchers in their
numerical /experimental work. But, slight deviation is observed in between two results due to different configurations.
The relevant figure and tables are given below.

Fig.4.4 Comparisons between numerical and experimental non-dimensional

*
reattachment length ( L R ) for Re =50, 100, 150 and 200.
*
Table 4.1 Comparison of numerical non-dimensional reattachment length ( L R ) for Re = 50, 100, 150 and 200, based

on aspect ratio (AR) of 2.

Re Present Study (Model - 1) Nag and Dutta (2007) Percentage Deviation

(L R / Wi )xAR  L*R Lr / h  L*R
50 4.222 4.500 6.58

100 8.702 9.000 3.42

150 12.692 13.500 6.37

200 17.03 18.000 5.69

7
 *
Table 4.2 Comparison of numerical non-dimensional reattachment length ( L R ) for Re = 50, 100, 150 and 200, based

on Aspect ratio (AR) of 2.

Re Present Study (Model-2) Flecher et al. (1985) Percentage Deviation

(L R / Wi )xAR  L*R Lr / h  L*R
50 4.698 4.560 2.94

100 9.894 9.060 8.43

150 14.416 13.520 6.22

200 18.176 17.900 1.52

*
Table 4.3 Comparison of numerical non-dimensional reattachment length ( L R ) for Re = 50, 100, 150 and 200, based
on Aspect ratio of 2.

Re Present Study (Model - 3) Badekas and Knight (1992) Percentage Deviation

L R / Wi  L*R lr / d  L*R
50 2.464 2.280 7.47

100 5.000 4.560 8.80

150 7.348 6.84 6.91

200 9.289 9.12 1.89

5. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

5.1 Plain Sudden Expansion and Contraction Rectangular Channel (Model-1)

5.1.1. Average static pressure distribution

The computation of the average static pressure has been done by the following expression:

Pav 
 pdA
 dA
From the curves in fig. 5.1(a) & 5.1(b) we have noted three observations -----

1. The maximum magnitude of average static pressure rise from throat increases with increase in Reynolds number of
50 and 100. But it decreases with increase in Reynolds number of 200 and 300. This can be reasoned as, with increase
in Reynolds numbers, the kinetic energy diffusion increases, simultaneously the length of the corner recirculation zone
increases which gives more negative pressure zone, resulting in loss of static pressure at a particular section.

2. The average static pressure rise occurs at its maximum magnitude earlier for lower value of Reynolds number.
Because, in the post-throat region, higher the Reynolds number lower is the rate of increase in the average static
pressure. This happens due to the higher negative pressure zone involved during higher Reynolds number flow with
larger length of recirculation bubble.

8
3. In fig. 5.1(a), the average static pressure does not reach to its maximum magnitude within expansion length of 9 for
Reynolds number of 200 and 350. In fig. 5.1(b), the average static pressure does not reach to its maximum magnitude
within expansion length of 20 for Reynolds number of 350. These are happened due to shortage of space.

Figure 5.1 Variation of average static pressure distribution with axial distance

From the curves in fig. 5.2(a) and 5.2(b), it is noted that in case of Reynolds numbers of 100, the average static pressure
is reached at its maximum value within all the considered expansion lengths except expansion length of 1, where as in
case of Reynolds numbers of 350, the average static pressure does not reach at its maximum value within any
considered expansion length due to shortage of space.

Fig.5.2 Variation of average static pressure distribution with axial distance

5.1.2. Average stagnation pressure distribution

In our research, the computation of P sav has been done with the help of the following expression developed by
Chakrabarti et al. (2003);

 1 2 
  pe 
 2
Ve u e dA e

Ae
Psav 
 u e dA e
Ae

Fig. 5.3(a) and 5.3(b) show the variation of average stagnation pressure with axial distance for Reynolds numbers of
50, 100, 200 and 350 at expansion length of 9 and 20 respectively. The general behaviour of all curves is drooping
characteristics. The average stagnation pressure drop decreases with increase in Reynolds number. This is because for
higher Reynolds number flow, the kinetic energy contribution towards the working fluid at a section will be higher
leading to higher average stagnation pressure at that section.

9
 Figure 5.3 Variation of average stagnation pressure with axial distance

5.1.3 Wall pressure distribution:

The wall pressure plays important roles in assessing the constraints during selection of wall materials and wall thickness
of various equipment or components.
From the curves in fig. 5.4(a), it is noted that in the post-throat region, higher the Reynolds number lower is the
maximum wall pressure. This happens due to the higher negative pressure zone involved during higher Reynolds
number flow with larger length of recirculation bubble.

It is also observed that in fig. 5.4(a) and 5.4(b) that the maximum pressure rise occurs earlier for lower values of
Reynolds number. This is because, for very low Reynolds number flow, the fluid will almost adhere to the wall without
showing any tendency to separation and the point of maximum pressure rise will be sufficiently close to the throat. As
the flow Reynolds number is increased, it is natural to expect a larger reattachment length; consequently pressure rise
will be continued over a larger length, before a maxima is reached.

In fig. 5.4(a), the average static pressure does not reach to its maximum magnitude within expansion length of 9
for Reynolds number of 200 and 350. In fig. 5.4(b), the average static pressure does not reach to its maximum
magnitude within expansion length of 20 for Reynolds number of 350. These are happened due to shortage of space.

Figure 5.4 Variation of wall pressure distribution with axial distance

5.1.4 Variation of axial velocity profile

Since, the velocity field is directly related to stream function, the variation of velocity profile is much important to
study the flow behaviour downstream of a sudden expansion and contraction plane.

From the figures 5.5(a) and 5.5(b), it is noted that the velocity profiles are mildly disturbed at all the corner
region. It is also observed that a negative axial velocity region is formed at corner zone, which indicates flow
separation. This negative velocity zone along the axial locations increases with the increase in Reynolds number. At
main flow region velocity profiles are flattened downstream to the throat section. This flattenness increases with the
increase in Reynolds number in expansion region. In the contraction region, the flattenness of the velocity profiles is
more than the other region and the flattenness is same for different Reynolds number, since the fully developed
condition is exist at this region.

10
 Figure 5.5(a) Axial Velocity Profiles Figure 5.5(b) Axial Velocity Profiles at
at different axial locations for the different axial locations for the length of
length of Inlet=1, expansion=9 and exit=9 Inlet=1, expansion=20 and exit=9

From the figures 5.6(a) and 5.6(b), it is observed that the velocity profiles are mildly disturbed at all the corner
region and main flow region. At corner zone negative axial velocity region decreases with the increase in expansion
length. The flattenness at the main flow region decreases with the increase in expansion length. Since the negative
velocity zone reflects the zone of recirculation, therefore, our study depicts the increase in the size of recirculation zone
with increase in Reynolds number. This has also been observed in the flow study through the streamlines as shown in
the later sub-section.

11
 Figure 5.6(a) Axial Velocity Profiles Figure 5.6(b) Axial Velocity Profiles
at different axial locations for Re=100 at different axial locations for Re=350

5.1.5 Variation of streamline contours

The recirculating bubble occurs immediately downstream of the sudden expansion is encountered in many practical
systems the chemical process industry, mixing chamber or combustor. This recirculation zone improves the mixing of
the reactants, provides higher heat release inside chamber, and improves performance of the system. The mixing
intensity of the combustion process is increased with increasing of recirculation zone. The proper mixing inside
combustion chamber results stable combustion, fuel economy, lower NOx emission etc.

From the figures 5.7(a) & 5.7(b), it is noted that the size of the recirculation zone increases with increase in
Reynolds number for a particular magnitude of expansion length. This can be reasoned as, for higher Reynolds number
flow, the kinetic energy contributions towards the working fluid at corner zones will be higher resulting in higher size
of recirculating bubbles.

12
 Figure 5.7(a) Variation of streamline Figure 5.7(b) Variation of streamline
contour for AR=2 and expansion length=9 contour for AR=2 and expansion length=20
From the figures 5.8(a) & (b), it is noted that at low expansion length of 1, the bubble becomes compacted due to
shortage of space, where as in case of expansion length of 3, 9, 15 & 20, for higher Reynolds number flow and
expansion length, the kinetic energy contributions towards the working fluid at corner zones will be higher resulting in
higher size of recirculating bubbles.

Figure 5.8(a) Variation of streamline contour Figure 5.8(b) Variation of streamline contour
for AR=2 and Re=100 for AR=2 and Re=350

13
5.2 Sudden Expansion and Contraction Rectangular Channel with Fence (Model-2)
5.2.1. Average static pressure distribution
The general characteristics of all the curves are same in nature. From the figures 5.9(a) and 5.9(b), it is observed that the
maximum magnitude of average static pressure increases with increase in percentage of fence restriction of 0%, 10%
and 20% , but it decreases at percentage of fence restriction of 30% and 40%. This can be reasoned as, with increase in
FR, though the kinetic energy diffusion increases, simultaneously the length of the corner recirculation zone increases
which gives more negative pressure zone, resulting in loss of static pressure at a particular section.

From the figures 5.9(c) and 5.9(d), it is observed that the maximum magnitude of average static pressure
increases with increase in Reynolds numbers from 50 to 100, but it decreases with increase in Reynolds numbers from
100 to 300 for all considered percentage of fence restriction. This can be reasoned as, with increase in Reynolds
number, though the kinetic energy diffusion increases, simultaneously the length of the corner recirculation zone
increases which gives more negative pressure zone, resulting in loss of static pressure at a particular section.

From the figures 5.9(c) and 5.9(d) the main feature is that the maximum magnitude of average static pressure
rise is more for the configuration of Model – 2 as compared to Model – 1 at percentage of fence restriction of 10%, 20%
and 30% for typical Reynolds numbers of 50 and 100. But, the maximum magnitude of average static pressure rise is
more for the configuration of Model – 2 as compared to Model – 1 at percentage of fence restriction of 10% for all
considered typical Reynolds numbers.

Figure 5.9 Variation of average static pressure with axial distance

5.2.2. Average stagnation pressure distribution

From the figure 5.10(c) and 5.10(d), it is seen that average stagnation pressure drop at any section decreases
with increase in Reynolds number. This can be reasoned as, for higher Reynolds number the kinetic energy contribution
towards the working fluid at a section will be higher leading to the possibility of higher average stagnation pressure at
that section.

14
 From the figure, it is also observed that at a particular value of Reynolds number, average stagnation pressure
drop at any section is always more when a fixed percentage of fence restriction is considered compared to the plain
sudden expansion and contraction configuration.

Figure 5.10 Variation of average stagnation pressure with axial distance

5.2.3. Wall pressure distribution

From the figures 5.11(a) and 5.11(b), it is observed that wall pressure increases with increase in percentage of
fence restriction. This can be reasoned as, with increase in percentage of fence restriction, the wall pressure rise
increases steeply due to more kinetic energy diffusion for the fence restriction.

From the figures 5.11(c) and 5.11(d), it is observed that for a typical percentage of fence restriction, wall
pressure decreases with increase in Reynolds number. This can be reasoned as, with increase in Reynolds numbers, the
kinetic energy diffusion increases, simultaneously the length of the corner recirculation zone increases which gives
more negative pressure zone, resulting in loss of wall pressure at a particular section.

From the figure 5.11, the interesting main observation is that in case of Model - 2, at a particular value of
Reynolds number, the wall pressure at any section is more compared to case of Model - 1.

15
 Figure 5.11 Variation of wall pressure distribution with axial distance

5.2.4. Variation of streamline contours

From the figure 5.12, in the plain S.E & S.C. configuration it is observed that the size of the corner recirculation zone
increases with increase in Reynolds number when all other conditions remain constant. From the figures 5.13(a) &
5.13(b), it is noted that at expansion length of 9 for higher Reynolds numbers, the bubble becomes compacted due to
shortage of space. From the figures, it is interesting to note that the size of the corner recirculating bubble is more in
case of sudden expansion and contraction with fence configuration compared to plain sudden expansion and contraction
configuration for a particular value of Reynolds number.

Figure 5.12 Variation of streamline contour for AR = 2, L*exp = 9 and

plain sudden expansion and contraction configuration

16
Figure 5.13(a) Variation of Streamline Figure 5.13(b) Variation of Streamline
Contour for AR = 2 and FR = 10% contour for AR = 2 and FR = 40%

Figure 5.14(a) Variation of streamline Figure 5.14(b) Variation of streamline

contour for AR = 2 and Re = 100 contour for AR = 2 and Re = 300

17
 From the figure 5.14(a) and 5.14(b), it is observed that at a fixed value of Reynolds number the length of the
recirculating bubble at corner region increases with increase in percentage of fence restriction. This can be reasoned as,
with increase in percentage of fence restriction kinetic energy diffusion increases at the corner zone, resulting in higher
size of recirculating bubbles at this zone. From the above figures, it is also noted that at expansion length of 9 for higher
Reynolds numbers, the bubble becomes compacted due to shortage of space. From the figure, it is interesting to note
that the size of the corner recirculating bubble is more in case of sudden expansion and contraction with fence
configuration compared to plain sudden expansion and contraction configuration for a particular value of Reynolds
number.

5.3. Sudden Expansion and Contraction Rectangular Channel with Tab(Model-2)

5.3.1. Average static pressure distribution
From the said figures 5.15(a) and 5.15(b), it is observed that the maximum magnitude of average static
pressure increases with increase in tab length for all Reynolds number. This can be reasoned as, with increase in length
of tab, the static pressure rise increases steeply due to more kinetic energy diffusion for the tab restriction.

It is also observed that the maximum magnitude of average static pressure is more for the configurations of
Model - 3 than the configurations of Model - 1 and Model - 2. This can be reasoned as, there is more kinetic energy
diffusion in case of the configuration considered with rectangular tab.

Fig. 5.15(c) and 5.15(d) represent the variation of average static pressure with distance for plain sudden
expansion and contraction, and sudden expansion and contraction with tab for Reynolds numbers of 50, 100 and 300
and typically tab length of 0.25 and 1.00 at tab restriction of 20%. From the figure, it is observed that the maximum
magnitude of average static pressure decreases with increase in Reynolds numbers for typical length of tab. This can be
reasoned as, with increase in Reynolds numbers, though the kinetic energy diffusion increases, simultaneously the
length of the corner recirculation zone increases which gives more negative pressure zone, resulting in loss of static
pressure at a particular section.

It is also observed that the maximum magnitude of average static pressure is more for the configurations of
Model - 3 than the configurations of Model - 1.

From the figure 5.15(e), it is observed that the maximum average static pressure rise increases with increase in
both tab restriction and length of the tab. This can be reasoned as, with increase in tab restriction, the kinetic energy
diffusion increases.

18
 Figure 5.15 Average static pressure distribution with axial length

5.3.2. Average stagnation pressure distribution

From the figure 5.17(a) and 5.17(b), it is observed that as the length of the tab increases with a fixed Reynolds
number, the average stagnation pressure drop at any section increases in post throat zone. This is happening because,
with increase in tab length, the viscous dissipative effect dominates the effect of kinetic energy diffusion which
decreases static pressure, and this leads to increase in average stagnation pressure drop at any section.

From the figures, it is also observed that at a particular value of Reynolds number, average stagnation pressure
drop at any section is always more when a fixed rectangular tab restriction is considered compared to the plain sudden
expansion and contraction configuration. But the average stagnation pressure drop across a section for rectangular tab
configuration is less compared to the fence configuration.

19
 Figure 5.17 Average stagnation pressure distribution with axial length

From the figure 5.17(c) and 5.17(d), it is again seen that average stagnation pressure drop at any section
decreases with increase in Reynolds number. This can be reasoned as, for higher Reynolds number the kinetic energy
contribution towards the working fluid at a section will be higher leading to the possibility of higher average stagnation
pressure at that section.

From the figure 5.17(e), it is observed that the average stagnation pressure drop increases with increase in both
tab restriction and length of the tab. This is happening because, with increase in tab restriction, the viscous dissipative
effect dominates the effect of kinetic energy diffusion which decreases static pressure, and this leads to increase in
average stagnation pressure drop at any section.

5.3.3. Wall pressure distribution

From the figures 5.18(a) and 5.18(b), it is observed that wall pressure increases with increase in tab length for
typical Reynolds number and percentage of tab restriction. This can be reasoned as, with increase in tab length, the wall
pressure rise increases steeply due to more kinetic energy diffusion which may cause the enhancement of wall pressure.

From the figures 5.18(a) and 5.18(b), the interesting main observation is that at a particular value of Reynolds
number, the wall pressure at any section for Model - 3 is more compared to Model - 1 and Model - 2. It may be
attributed that the presence of the tab causes increased diffusion of fluid kinetic energy at corner region which may
cause the enhancement of wall pressure.

In figures 5.18(c) and 5.18(d), the maximum magnitude of wall pressure decreases with increase in Reynolds
number for considered percentage of tab restriction. This is because, for increasing the Reynolds number, though the
kinetic energy diffusion increases, simultaneously the length of the corner recirculation zone increases which gives
more negative pressure zone, resulting in loss of wall pressure at a particular section.

It is also observed that at a particular value of Reynolds number, the wall pressure at any section for Model - 3
is more compared to Model - 1.

20
 Figure 5.18 Variation of wall pressure distribution with axial distance

5.3.4. Variation of streamline contours

From the figure 5.19, it is observed that the size of the corner recirculation zone increases with increase in Reynolds
number when all other conditions remain constant. This can be reasoned as, for higher Reynolds number, the kinetic
energy contribution towards the working fluid at corner recirculation zone will be higher resulting in higher size of
recirculating bubbles.

In fig. 5.20(a) and 5.20(b), at considered tab restriction, it is observed that the size of recirculating bubble at
corner region increases with increase in Reynolds number. This reveals that at a fixed value of Reynolds number,
kinetic energy diffusion increases when tab restriction is considered. From the figure it is also note that the size of the
corner recirculating bubble is more in case of Model - 3 compared to Model - 1 for a particular value of Reynolds
number. From the figure 5.21(a) & 5.21(b), it is observed that at a fixed value of Reynolds number the length of the
recirculating bubble at corner region increases with increase in length of the tab restriction. This can be reasoned as,
with increase in percentage of tab restriction diffusion increases at the corner zone, resulting in higher size of
recirculating bubbles at this zone. From the above figures, it is also noted that at expansion length of 9 for higher
Reynolds numbers, the bubble becomes compacted due to shortage of space. From the figure it is interesting to note that
the size of the corner recirculating bubble is more in case of Model - 3 compared to Model - 1 and Model - 2 for a
particular value of Reynolds number.

21
 Figure 5.19 Variation of streamline contour for AR = 2, L*exp = 9 and plain sudden
expansion and contraction configuration

Figure 5.20(a) Variation of streamline Figure 5.20(b) Variation of Streamline

contour for TR=20% and L*t = 0.25 contour for TR=20% and L*t = 1.00

22
 Figure 5.21(a) Variation of Streamline contour forFigure 5.21(b) Variation of Streamline contour for
Re = 100 and TR = 20% Re = 300 and TR = 20%

5.4. Mathematical Correlations

Apart from that, mathematical correlations have been developed to predict the magnitudes of flow characteristic
parameters i.e. maximum average static pressure rise, average stagnation pressure drop at the location where static
pressure rise becomes maximum, magnitude of maximum wall pressure and corner recirculating bubble length for
Model – 1, Model – 2 and Model – 3. Flow variables are used as Reynolds number (Re), expansion length ( L*exp ),
percentage of fence restriction (FR), percentage of tab restriction (TR) and tab length ( L*t ). The least square
approximation is used to develop these equations in exponential form. All the numerical data obtained from
computations are used to develop the equations. The detailed model wise mathematical equations are formed with the
specified boundary conditions.

6. FUTURE SCOPE OF THE WORK

 This study is on low Reynolds number regime up to 350, this can be extended.

 Inlet Fence and Tab restriction is up to throat, this can be extended at downstream region of the throat.

 This is 2-D analysis; 3-D analysis may be performed for improvement.

 Heat transfer analysis is not included here; this can be performed by adding energy equation.

 Transient analysis
 Fixed aspect ratio of 2 is considered, this can be extended.

23
7. CONCLUSIONS
 Maximum magnitude of average static pressure rise from throat increases with increase in Re from 50 to 100 for all
three models.
 At lower percentage of FR (FR = 10% and 20%), this magnitude increases with increase in FR, but it decreases for
FR = 30% and 40%.
 This peak value increases with increase in TR for all considered Re.
 After comparison of all models, higher magnitude of average static pressure at any section is achieved in case of
Model – 3.

 Average stagnation pressure drop at any section decreases with increase in Re for all three models.
 This pressure drop at a section increases with increase in FR and TR & for the case of model-2 and model-3
respectively.
 After comparison of all models, the average stagnation pressure drop at any section has been found minimum in
case of Model – 1 compared to all other considered models, and it increases sequentially in the order of model-3
and model-2.

 Maximum magnitude of wall pressure at any section decreases with increase in Re for all three models.
 This pressure at a section increases with increase in FR, and TR & for the case of model-2 and model-3
respectively.
 After comparison of all models, at a particular value of Reynolds number, the wall pressure at any section for
Model-1 is minimum compared to all other considered models, and it increases sequentially in the order of
Model–2 and Model–3.

 The corner recirculating bubble length increases with increase in Re, FR, TR and for three considered models.
 After comparison of all three models for constant value of all considered parameters, this length in case of
Model - 3 is more compared to Model - 1 and Model - 2, and it decreases gradually in sequence for Model – 2, and
Model – 1 respectively.
 As higher recirculating bubble size provides better mixing, therefore, Model – 3 may be considered suitable in
comparison to other models (i.e. Model – 1 and Model – 2), as far as mixing is concerned.

8. NOMENCLATURE

Li Inlet length (i.e., length between inlet section and starting section of sudden expansion), m

Lexp Expansion length (i.e., length between starting section of sudden expansion and starting section of sudden
contraction), m

Lex Exit length (i.e., length between starting section of sudden contraction and exit sections), m

LR Reattachment length, m

P or p Static pressure, Nm-2

Pav* Dimensionless average static pressure

*
Pav max Maximum magnitude of average static pressure rise from throat

*
Psav Dimensionless average stagnation pressure

*
Psavdrop Average stagnation pressure drop at the location where static pressure rise becomes maximum

Pw* max Maximum value of wall pressure on the wall

X* Dimensionless distance along the x-axis

Re Reynolds Number

u Velocity in x-direction, ms-1

24
U Average velocity, ms-1

v Velocity in y-direction, ms-1

Ve Velocity vector at section e-e, ms-1

Wi Width of inlet duct, m

Wexp Width of expansion duct, m

Wex Width of exit duct, m

AR Aspect ratio = Wexp / Wi

Hf Fence height, m

Ht Tab height, m

Lt Tab length, m

Ri Inner radius of duct, m

FR Percentage of fence restriction = (Hf /Ri) × 100

TR Percentage of tab restriction = (Ht /Ri) × 100

x, y Cartesian co-ordinates

ρ Density, kg m-3

μ Dynamic viscosity, kg m-1s-1

Ψ Stream function, m-2s-1

Subscripts

* Dimensionless terms

1-1 Inlet

2-2 Exit

e pertaining to section e-e

9. REFERENCES

Abdelall, F. F., Hahn, G., Ghiaasiaan, S. M., Khalik-Abdel, S. I., Jeter, S. S., Yoda, M. and Sadowski, D. L., 2005,
“Pressure Drop Caused by Abrupt Flow Area Changes in Small Channels”, Experimental Thermal and Fluid
Science, 29,425-434.
Afonso, A. and Pinho, F. T., 2006, “Numerical Investigation of the Velocity Overshoots in the Flow of Viscoelastic
Fluids inside a Smooth Contraction” J. Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech., 137, 31-38.
Ahmed, W. H., Ching, C. Y. and Shoukri, M., 2008, “Development of Two-Phase Flow Downstream of a Horizontal
Sudden Expansion”, Int. J. of Heat and Fluid Flow, 29, 194-206.
Alves, M. A. and Poole, R. J., 2007, “Divergent Flow in Contractions”, J. Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech. 144,
140-148.
Badekas, D. and Knight, D. D., 1992, “Eddy Correlations for Laminar Axisymmetric Sudden Expansion Flows”,
ASME, J. Fluids Engg, 114, 119 – 121.
Bae, Y. and Kim, Y. I., 2013, “Prediction of Local Pressure Drop for Turbulent Flow in Axisymmetric Sudden
Expansions with Chamfered Edge,” Chemical Engineering Research and Design, Article in press.

25
Banerjee, N., Mondal, D. K. and Chakrabarti, S., 2011, “A Numerical Experimentation on the Performance of a
Sudden Expansion with Two Fences in Terms of Static Pressure Rise When Viewed as a Diffuser”,
Proceedings of the International Conferences on Design and Advances in Mechanical Engineering, 706-712.
Battaglia, F. and Papadopoulos, G., 2005, “Bifurcation Characteristics of Flows in Rectangular Sudden Expansion
Channels”, ASME, Proceedings of Fluids Engineering Division Summer Meeting and Exhibition, FEDSM2005-
77098:1-11.
Brewster, R. A., 2013, “Pressure Drop Predictions for Laminar Fully-Developed Flows of Purely-Viscous Non-
Newtonian Fluids in Circular Ducts,” Journal of Fluids Engineering, 135, pp. 101106-(1-9).

Budwig, R., Egelhoff, C. J. and Tavoularis, S., 1997, “Laminar Pulsatile Flow through an Axisymmetric Sudden
Expansion”, Journal of Fluids Engineering, 119:208-211.
Chai, L., Wang, L., Zhou, M. and Xia, G., 2015, “Two-phase Flow Pattern and Pressure Drop in Silicon Multi-
microchannel with Expansion-Contraction Cross-section”, J. of Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science, 60,
241-251.
Chakraborty, S., Ray, S. and Sarkar, A., 2002, “Numerical Simulation of the Performance of Vortex Controlled
Diffuser in Low Reynolds Number Regime”, Int. Journal of Numerical Methods for Heat & Fluid Flow, 12(3),
224-240.
Chakrabarti, S., Ray, S. and Sarkar, A., 2003, “Low Reynolds Number Flow through Sudden Expansion from a
Diffuser Viewpoint”, Journal of Energy.Heat and mass Transfer, 25, 45-66.
Chakrabarti, S., Ray, S. and Sarkar, A., 2008, “Numerical Analysis for Sudden Expansion with Fence in Low
Reynolds Number Regime”, Journal of Energy, Heat and mass Transfer, 30, 131-148.
Chakrabarti, S., Rao S. and Mandal, D. K., 2010, “Numerical Simulation of the Performance of a Sudden
Expansion with Fence Viewed as a Diffuser in Low Reynolds Number Regime”, ASME, Journal of Engg. for
Gas Turbines and Power, 132, 114502:1-4.

Chalfi, Y. T. and Ghiaasiaan, S. M., 2008, “Pressure Drop Caused by Flow Area Changes in Capillaries Under
Low Flow Conditions”, Int. J. of Multiphase Flow, 34, 2-12.
Chen b, I. Y., Liu a, C. C., Chien a, K. H. and Wang a, C. C., 2007, “Two Phase Flow Characteristics Across Sudden
Expansion in Small Rectangular Channels”, Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science 32, 696-706.
Chen, I. Y., Chu, M. C., Liaw, J. S. and Wang, C. C., 2008, “Two- Phase flow Characteristics Across sudden
Contraction in Small Rectangular Channels” Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science, 32, 1609-1619.
Chen, I. Y., Tseng, C. Y., Lin, Y. T. and Wang, C. C., 2009, “Two- Phase flow Pressure Change subject to Sudden
Contraction in Small Rectangular Channels” , Int. J of Multiphase Flow, 35, 297-306.
Cherdron, W., Durst, F. and Whitelaw, J. H., 1978, “Asymmetric Flows and Instabilities in Symmetric Ducts with
Sudden Expansions”, J. Fluid Mech., 84(1), 13-31
Chiang, T. P. and Sheu, T. W. H., 2002, “Bifurcations of Flow through Plane Symmetric Channel Contraction”,
ASME, J. of Fluids Engineering, 124, 444-451.
Chiang, T. P. and Sheu, T. W. H., 2002, “Numerical Studies of a Three-dimensional Flow in Suddenly Contracted
Channels”, J. of Physics of Fluids, 14, 1601-1616.
Devenport, W. J. and Sutton, E. P., 1993, “An experimental study of two flows through an axisymmetric sudden
expansion”, Experiments in Fluids, 14: 423 432.
Durst, F., Melling, A. and Whitelaw, J. H., 1974, “Low Reynolds Number Flow over a Plane Symmetric Sudden
Expansion”, J. Fluid Mech., 64(1), 111 – 128.
Fattah, A., 2012, “Control of the Separation Flow in a Sudden Enlargement”, Journal of Applied Fluid Mechanics,
5(1):57-66.
Fernandes, E. C., Heitor, M. V. and Shtork, S. I., 2006, “An Analysis of Unsteady Highly Turbulent Swirling Flow
in a Model Vortex Combustor”, Experiments in Fluids, 40, 177-187.
Firouzi, M. and Hashemabadi, S. H., 2009, “Analytical Solution for Newtonian Laminar Flow through the Concave
and Convex Ducts,” Journal of Fluids Engineering, 131, pp. 1-6.

Fletcher, D., Maskel, S. and Patrick, M., 1985, “Heat and Mass Transfer Computations for Laminar Flow in an
Axisymmetric Sudden Expansion,” Comput. Fluids, 13, 207-221.

26
Foumeny, E. A., Ingham, D. B. and Walker, A. J., 1996, “Bifurcations of Incompressible Flow through Plane
Symmetric Channel Expansions”, Computers & Fluids, 25(3):335-351.
Forliti, D. J. and Strykowski, P. J., 2005, “Controlling Turbulence in a Rearward – Facing Step Combustor using
Countercurrent Shear”, ASME, J. Fluids Engineering, 127, 438-448.
Goharzadeh, A. and Rodgers, P., 2009, “Experimental Measurement of Laminar Axisymmetric Flow through
Confined Annular Geometries with Sudden Inward Expansion”, ASME, Journal of Fluid Engineering, 131,
124501:1-4.
Guo, B., Langrish, T. A. G. and Fletcher, D. F., 2001, “Numerical Simulation of Unsteady Turbulent Flow in
Axisymmetric Sudden Expansions”, ASME, J. Fluids Engg., 123, 574 – 587.
GUO, H., WANG, Ling, Yu Jiar, YE Fang, MA Chgongfarg, LT Zhuo, 2010, “Local Resistance of Fluid Flow Across
Sudden Contraction in small Channels”, Front Energy Power Engg. China, 4(2):149-154.
Hallett, W. L. H. and Toews, D. J., 1987, “The effects of inlet conditions and expansion ratio on the onset of flow
reversal in swirling flow in a sudden expansion”, Experiments in Fluids, 5:129-133.
Hammad, K. J., Otugen, M. V., Vradis, G. C. and Arik, E. B., 1999, “Laminar Flow of a Nonlinear Viscoplastic
Fluid Through an Axisymmetric Sudden Expansion”, ASME, Journal of Fluids Engineering, 121:488-495.
Hammad, K. J., Vradish, G. C. and Volkan, O. M., 2001, “Laminar Flow of a Herschel Bulkley Fluid over an
Asisymmetric Sudden Expansion”, ASME, J. Fluids Engg., 123, 588 – 594.
Hermany, L., Santos, D. D. D., Frey, S., Naccache, M. F. and Mendes, P. R. D. S., 2013, “Flow of Yield-Stress
Liquids through an Axisymmetric Abrupt Expansion-Contraction,” Journal of Non-Newtonian Fluid
Mechanics, 201, pp. 1-9.
Iyogun, O. C. and Birouk, M., 2009, “Effect of Sudden Expansion on Entrainment and Spreading Rates of a Jet
Issuing from Asymmetric Nozzles”, Flow Turbulence Combust, 82, 287-315.
Jay, P., Magnin, A. and Piau, J. M., 2002, “Numerical Simulation of Viscoplastic Fluid Flows Through an
Axisymmetric Contraction”, ASME, 124, 700-
Karmakar, S. and Kushari, A., 2005, “Recirculating Flow and Turbulence in a Low Aspect Ration Dump
Combustor”, Proceedings of FEDSM2005, ASME, Fluid Engineering Division Summer Meeting and Exhibition
June 19-23, 2005, Houston, TX, USA, 1-7.
Khezzar, L., De Zilwa, S.R.N., Whitelaw., J.H., 1999, “Combustion of Premixed Fuel and Air Downstream of a
Plane Sudden Expansion”, Experiments in Fluids, 27, 296-309.
Ko, S. C. and Sung, H. J., 2001, “Large-eddy simulation of turbulent flow inside a sudden-expansion cylindrical
chamber”, Journal of Turbulence, 2(001):1-16.
Layek, G. C., Midya, C. and Mukhopadhyay, S., 2008, “Effects of Suction and Blowing on Flow Separation in a
Symmetric Sudden Expanded Channel”, Nonlinear Analysis: Modelling and Control, 13(4):451–465.
Love, A. I. J., Giddings, D. and Power, H., 2013, “Numerical Analysis of Vortex Dynamics in a Double Expansion,”
Journal of Fluids Engineering, 135, pp. 111104 – 111104 - 8.

Macagno, O. E. and Hung, T. K., 1967, “Computational and Experimental Study of Captive Annular Eddy,”
J. Fluid Mech., 28(1), 43-64
McManus, K. R. and Bowman, C. T., 1990, “Effects of controlling Vortex Dynamics on the Performance of a
Dump Combustor”, Twenty Third Symposium (International) on Combustion/The Combustion Institute, 1093-
1099.
Mendes, P. R. D. S., Naccache, M. F., Varges, P. R. and Marchesini, F. H., 2007, “Flow of Viscoplastic Liquids
Through Axisymmetric Expansions – Contractions”, J. Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech, 142, 207-217.
Naccache, M. F. and Barbosa, R. S., 2007, “Creeping Flow of Viscoplastic Materials Through a Planar Expansion
Followed by a Contraction”, Mechanics Research Communications, 34, 423-431.
Nag, D. and Dutta, A., 2007, “Variation of the Recirculation Length of Newtonian and Non-Newtonian Power-
Law Fluids in Laminar Flow through a Suddenly Expanded Axisymmetric Geometry,” Journal of Fluids
Engineering, 129, pp. 245-250.
Nassar, B., Mendes, P. R. S. and Naccache, M. F., 2011, “Flow of Elasto-Viscoplastic Liquids Through an
Axisymmetric Expansion – Contraction”, J. Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech. 166, 386-394.
Neofytou, P., 2006, “Transition to Asymmetry of Generalised Newtonian Fluid Flows through a Symmetric
Sudden Expansion”, J. Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech, 133, 132-140.

27
Nickolaus, D. A. and Smith, C. E., 2005, “Analysis of Highly Swirled, Turbulent flows in Dump Combustor with
Exit Contraction”, Proceedings of GT2005, ASME, Turbo Expo: Power for Land, Sea and Air June 6-9, Reno-
Tahoe, Nevada, USA, 1-14.
Oliveira, P. J. and Pinho, F. T., 1997, “Pressure Drop Coefficient of Laminar Newtonian Flow in Axisymmetric
Sudden Expansions”, Int. Journal Heat and Fluid Flow 18, 518-529.
Oliveira, M. S. N., Oliveira, P. J., Pinho, F. T. and Alves, M. A., 2007, “Effect of Contraction Ratio Upon
Viscoelastic Flow in Contractions : The Axisymmetric Case”, Journal Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech., 147, 92-
108.

Paik, J. and Sotiropoulos, F., 2010 “Numerical simulation of strongly swirling turbulent flows through an abrupt
expansion”, International Journal of Heat and Fluid Flow, 31:390–400.
Patankar, S. V., 1980, “Numerical Heat Transfer and Fluid Flow”, Hemisphere Publication.
Pinho, F. T., Oliveira, P. J. and Miranda, J. P., 2003, “Pressure Losses in the Laminar Flow of Shear-thinning
Power-law Fluids Across a Sudden Axisymmetric Expansion”, Int. J. Heat and Fluid Flow, 24, 747-761.
Poole, R. J. and Escudier, M. P., 2003, “Turbulent flow of a viscoelastic shear-thinning liquid through a plane
sudden expansion of modest aspect ratio”, J. Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech., 112:1–26.
Ray, S., Biswas, N. and Roy, P. C., 2012, “Investigation of Newtonian Fluid Flow through a Two-dimensional
Sudden Expansion and Sudden Contraction Flow Passage”, International Journal of Engineering Research and
Development,1(12), 01-09.
Sau, A., 1999, “Three Dimensional Simulation of Flows through a Rectangular Sudden Expansion”, Physics of
Fluids, 11(10), 3003-3016.
Sau, A., 2002, “Vortex Dynamics and Mass Entrainment in a Rectangular Channel with a Suddenly Expanded
and Contracted Part”, Physics of Fluids, 14(9), 3280-3308.
Schreck, E. and Schafer, M., 2000, “Numerical Study of Bifurcation in Three-dimensional Sudden Channel
Expansions”, Computers & Fluids, 29, 583-593.
So, R. M. C., and Ahmed, S. A., 1989, “Characteristics of dump combustor flows”, Int. J. Heat and Fluid Flow,
10(1):66-74.
Sharma, N. Y., Datta, A. and Som, S. K., 2001, “Influences of Spray and Operating Parameters on Penetration of
Vaporizing Fuel Droplets in a Gas Turbine Combustor”, Applied Thermal Engineering, 21, 1755-1768.
Sheen, H. J., Chen, W. J. and WU, J. S., 1997, “Flow Patterns for an Annular Flow Over an Axisymmetric Sudden
Expansion”, J. Fluid Mech, 350:177-188.
Sisavath, S., Jing, X., Pain, C. C. and Zimmerman, R. W., 2002, “Creeping Flow Through an Axisymmetric Sudden
Contraction or Expansion”, ASME, J. Fluids Engg., 124, 273 – 278.
Smith, B. L., 2004, “Pressure Recovery in a Radiused Sudden Expansion”, Experiments in Fluids, 36, 901-907.
Sousa, P. C., Coelho, P. M., Oliveira, M. S. N. and Alves, M. A., 2011, “Laminar flow in three-dimensional square–
square expansions”, Journal of Non-Newtonian Fluid Mechanics, 166:1033–1048.
Sunarso, A., Yamamoto, T. and Mori, N., 2007, “Numerical Analysis of Wall Slip Effect on Flow of Newtonian and
Non-Newtonian Fluids in Macro and Micro Contraction Channels,” Journal of Fluids Engineering, 129, pp.
23-30.

Tavoularis, S., Singh, R. K., 1999, “Vortex Detachment and Reverse Flow in Pulsatile Laminar Flow through
Axisymmetric Sudden Expansions”, ASME, Journal of Fluids Engineering, 121:574-579.
Ternik, P., 2010, “New Contributions on Laminar Flow of Inelastic Non-Newtonian Fluid in the Two-
Dimensional Symmetric Expansion:Creeping and Slowly Moving Flow Conditions”, Journal of Non-
Newtonian Fluid Mechanics, 165, 1400-1411.
Tsai, J. H., Lin, C. A. and Lu, C. M., 1995, “Modelling Dump Combustor Flows With and Without Swirl at The
Inlet Using Reynolds Stress Models”, Int. J. Num. Meth. Heat Fluid Flow, 5:577-588.
Tsai, C. H., Yeh, C. P., Lin, C. H., Yang, R. J. and Fu, L. M., 2012, “Formation of recirculation zones in a sudden
expansion microchannel with a rectangular block structure over a wide Reynolds number range”, Microfluid
Nanofluid, 12:213-220.

28
Tsui, Y. and Wang, C., 1995, “Calculation of Laminar Separated Flow in Symmetric Two-Dimensional Diffusers”,
Transactions of the ASME, 117, 612-616.
Vanierschot, M. and Bulck, E. V., 2008, “The Influence of Swirl on the Reattachment Length in an Abrupt
Axisymmentric Expansion” Int. J. of Heat and Fluid Flow, 29,75-82.
Vradis, G. C. and Otugen, M. V., 1997, “The Axisymmetric Sudden Expansion Flow of a Non-Newtonian
Viscoplastic Fluid”, ASME, Journal of Fluids Engineering, 119:193-200.
Voutsinas, A., Shakouchi, T., Tsujimoto, K. and Ando, T., 2009, “Fluctuating Phenomena and Flow Control of
Bubbly Two-Phase Flow Through Sudden Expansion Pipe”, Journal of Fluid Science and Technology, 4, 84 -
94.
Voutsinas, A., Shakouchi, T., Tsujimoto, K. and Ando, T., 2009, “ Investigation of Bubble Size Effect on Vertical
Upward Bubbly Two-Phase Pipe Flow Consisted With an Aprupt Expansion”, Journal of Fluid Science and
Technology, 4, 442 - 453.
Walker, D. A., Denman, Paul A., M. Guirk, James J., 2004, “Experimental and Computational Study of Hybrid
Diffusers for Gas Turbine Combustors”, Journal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and Power, 126, 717-725.
Yamagata, T., Yajima, T. and Fujisawa, N., 2011, “Effect of Contraction Width on the Vortex Formation of
Viscoelastic Flow in Asymmetric Planar Contractions” J. of Fluid Science and Technology, 6, 1011 - 1020.
Yamaguchi, H., Ito, A., Kurbayashi, M., Zhang, X. R. and Nishiyama, H., 2005, “An Experimented Study on the
Flow Characteristics in a Three –Dimensional Cylindrical Branching Channel” Flow Measurement and
Instrumentation, 16, 241-249.
Yasuda, K. and Sugiura, Y., 2008, “Entry Flows of Polymer Solutions Through a Planer Contraction in a
Microchannel” J. of Fluid Science and Technology, 3, 987 - 998.
Yazdi, M. K., Ramazani, S. A., Kamyabi, A. and Amoli, H., 2012, “ Simulation of Flow of Short Fiber Suspensions
Through a Planar Contraction” , Scientia Iranica C, 19(3), 579-584.
Zhuo, L., Jian, Y. and Chong, F., 2008, “Characteristics of Pressure Drop for Single Phase Flow and Two-Phase
Flow Across Sudden Contraction in Microtubes”, Science in China Series E:Technological Sciences,51,2,162-
169.
Zivkovic, V., Zerna, P., Alwahabi, Z. T. and Biggs, M. J., 2013, “A Pressure Drop Correlation for Low Reynolds
Number Newtonian Flows Through a Rectangular Orifice in a Similarly Shaped Micro-Channel,” Chemical
Engineering Research and Design, 91, pp. 1-6.

29