4.7 Article

Effects of infinitely fast chemistry on combustion behavior of coaxial diffusion flame predicted by large eddy simulation

Journal

FUEL PROCESSING TECHNOLOGY
Volume 199, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.fuproc.2019.106226

Keywords

Large eddy simulation; Combustion; Eddy break up model; Flamelet/progress variable model; Flame structure

Funding

  1. Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS) [JP18K03964]
  2. Tonen General Sekiyu Research/Development Encouragement & Scholarship Foundation
  3. Leading Young Researcher Overseas Visit Program of Tohoku University
  4. JSPS [JP18J11135]
  5. EPSRC [EP/K024558/1] Funding Source: UKRI

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Large eddy simulations (LES) based on turbulent combustion models aid the design and optimization of combustors. Of the various combustion models available, the eddy break up (EBU) model is widely used because it assumes an infinitely fast chemistry. However, omitting the actual chemical kinetics can cause unexpected behavior, and the characteristics of the combustion models need to be elucidated. Here, the effects of an infinitely fast chemistry on the combustion behavior of a coaxial diffusion flame as predicted by an LES were analyzed. Although the EBU model captured the overall behavior of the chemical species as well as the flow field, the gas temperature and mass fractions of the combustion products in the mixing region of the fuel and oxidizer streams were overestimated. In contrast, the flamelet/progress variable (FPV) model yielded results that were in better agreement with the experimental data, because while the EBU model assumes an infinitely fast chemistry, the look-up tables used in the FPV model are based on the actual chemical kinetics. As these models can be used for the CFD simulations of coal and spray combustion, the results of this study should be useful for efficiently simulating practical combustion systems.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available