Spray and deposition characteristics of unsaturated polyester resin applied for impregnating long fiber preform composites
Source abstract
Abstract
Abstract Spray up is a method intensively applied for short fiber reinforced plastic (FRP) products manufacturing. The current study investigated the application of spray up for impregnation and manufacturing of long fiber FRP products, which can bring major advantages of minimized impregnation time and fewer product defects. Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) modeling was applied to investigate the spray and deposition characteristics of the viscous general‐purpose unsaturated polyester resin on a glass fiber preform. Validation of CFD results was done using phase Doppler anemometer and camera imaging techniques, and errors were calculated. Droplet velocity distributions 30 cm from the nozzle tip showed an average absolute percentage error of 4.3% and root mean square error value of 0.68 m/s, which are minimal. CFD and experimental values of sprayed resin area coverage (main area) after 4 s of spray were 17 and 16.3 cm in diameter, respectively; this is a relatively small error. Resin pool thickness on the target surface was variable, values predicted numerically. Non‐uniformity of pool thickness can be compensated by using appropriate compaction mechanisms. It is also possible to impregnate large size and complex shape products using multiple nozzles of proper arrangement.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Aerosol Filtration and Electrostatic Precipitation · Plant Surface Properties and Treatments · Fluid Dynamics and Heat Transfer
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Bahir Dar Institute of Technology Bahir Dar University Bahir Dar Ethiopia
College of Science Bahir Dar University Bahir Dar Ethiopia
References (49)
Show source-provided references
1. 10.1002/pc.2647810.1002/pc.26478 ↗
2. 10.1002/pc.2687810.1002/pc.26878 ↗
3. 10.1002/pc.2672710.1002/pc.26727 ↗
4. Ali HT · 2021 · 774
5. 10.3390/ma1011128510.3390/ma10111285 ↗
6. 10.1016/j.rser.2013.08.03010.1016/j.rser.2013.08.030 ↗
7. 10.3390/app1017612210.3390/app10176122 ↗
8. 10.1533/978085709625810.1533/9780857096258 ↗
9. 10.1016/j.compscitech.2004.05.02110.1016/j.compscitech.2004.05.021 ↗
10. Hand lay‐up: understanding the manual process
11. 10.1533/9780857098641.2.15510.1533/9780857098641.2.155 ↗
12. 10.1002/pc.2737810.1002/pc.27378 ↗
13. 10.1016/S1359-835X(98)00055-410.1016/S1359-835X(98)00055-4 ↗
14. 10.3139/217.344410.3139/217.3444 ↗
15. 10.3390/polym1422487310.3390/polym14224873 ↗
16. 10.3390/polym1402031310.3390/polym14020313 ↗
17. 10.1002/pc.2719510.1002/pc.27195 ↗
18. 10.1615/AtomizSpr.v4.i4.4010.1615/AtomizSpr.v4.i4.40 ↗
19. ANSYS · 2021
20. ANSYS · 2021
21. 10.1201/978020391006110.1201/9780203910061 ↗
22. CFD simulation of paint deposition in an air spray process
23. Ye Q · 2002
24. 10.2514/3.1214910.2514/3.12149 ↗
25. 10.1017/S002211207200180610.1017/S0022112072001806 ↗
26. A particle numerical model for wall film dynamics in port‐injected engines
27. 10.1039/C6SM00933F10.1039/C6SM00933F ↗
28. KimW MitraS LiX ProciwL HuT.Initial Droplet Size and Velocity Distributions in Sprays: Modeling and Comparison with Experiments. Proceedings of the 1st International Energy Conversion Engineering Conference (IECEC).2003.10.2514/6.2003-5946 ↗
29. 10.1016/j.jmapro.2020.11.02910.1016/j.jmapro.2020.11.029 ↗
30. 10.1016/j.fuel.2020.11779210.1016/j.fuel.2020.117792 ↗
31. 10.1016/j.elstat.2020.10347110.1016/j.elstat.2020.103471 ↗
32. 10.1016/j.firesaf.2009.07.00310.1016/j.firesaf.2009.07.003 ↗
33. 10.1016/j.cherd.2022.07.01010.1016/j.cherd.2022.07.010 ↗
34. 10.1205/cherd0601410.1205/cherd06014 ↗
35. 10.1016/j.firesaf.2017.03.04010.1016/j.firesaf.2017.03.040 ↗
36. 10.1016/0021-8502(83)90083-610.1016/0021-8502(83)90083-6 ↗
37. Alsulami R Nates S Wang W Won SH Windom B.Effects of varying liquid fuel and air co‐flow rates on spray characterization of an annular co‐flow spray burner. Proceedings of ASME Turbo Expo: Turbomachinery Technical Conference and Exposition; June 17–21 2019;Phoenix Arizona USA. doi:10.1115/GT2019‐9098910.1115/GT2019-90989 ↗
38. 10.1016/j.expthermflusci.2021.11050510.1016/j.expthermflusci.2021.110505 ↗
39. 10.1007/s00170-020-05131-110.1007/s00170-020-05131-1 ↗
40. Contribution to spraying nozzle study: a comparative investigation of imaging and simulation approaches
41. 10.3390/app1017612210.3390/app10176122 ↗
42. 10.1177/146808741774686010.1177/1468087417746860 ↗
43. Leick P · 2008
44. 10.1016/j.ijmultiphaseflow.2017.04.01410.1016/j.ijmultiphaseflow.2017.04.014 ↗
45. 10.1177/1687813222109885110.1177/16878132221098851 ↗
46. 10.4271/2019-01-028510.4271/2019-01-0285 ↗
47. YeQ DomnickJ KhalifaE.Simulation of the spray coating process using a pneumatic atomizer. Proceedings of the 18th Annual Conference on Liquid Atomization and Spray Systems ILASS‐Europe 2002.2002.
48. 10.1109/TASE.2005.85163110.1109/TASE.2005.851631 ↗
49. 10.1108/0143991101101898410.1108/01439911011018984 ↗