4.6 Article

Laminar flame speeds of n-decane, n-butylbenzene, and n-propylcyclohexane mixtures

Journal

PROCEEDINGS OF THE COMBUSTION INSTITUTE
Volume 35, Issue -, Pages 671-678

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.proci.2014.05.125

Keywords

n-Decane; n-Butylbenzene; n-Propylcyclohexane; Laminar flame speed; Surrogate fuel

Funding

  1. Total, PSA-Peugeot-Citroen
  2. CNRS in the framework of the French program PNIR/CAM1

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In the present investigation new experimental data on laminar flame speeds of n-decane, n-butylbenzene, and n-propylcyclohexane single-and multi-component mixtures are presented. The experiments have been conducted in a spherical bomb heated to 403 K and at an initial pressure of 1 bar. The comparison between the results indicates that the flame speeds of n-decane and n-butylbenzene are similar at lean conditions diverging for stoichiometric and rich conditions while the opposite was observed for n-decane and n-propylcyclohexane. The flame speeds of the multi-component mixtures are influenced by the corresponding components for most of the conditions considered, although on the rich side the experimental curves seem to be mainly affected by the compound with the fastest propagation speed. The experimental results were also used to validate a comprehensive kinetic model which extends the chemistry of the JetSurF 2.0 model to include the aromatic compounds up to n-butylbenzene. The simulations well reproduce the experimental measurements over a wide range of conditions. Additional sensitivity and rate of production analyses were performed to clarify how the specific structures of the fuels (one linear alkane, one cyclic alkane, and one aromatic) influence the formation of several intermediate compounds relevant to the flame propagation properties. (C) 2014 The Combustion Institute. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available