4.7 Review

Kinetic modeling of the decomposition and flames of hydrazine

Journal

COMBUSTION AND FLAME
Volume 124, Issue 1-2, Pages 106-126

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/S0010-2180(00)00187-5

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A detailed N/H reaction mechanism has been developed and validated by comparing modeling results with measurements of hydrazine pyrolysis in shock waves, and in hydrazine decomposition flames at low and atmospheric pressures. The mechanism consists of 51 reactions for II species. Rate constants for several decomposition reactions have been estimated employing updated thermodynamic data. Analysis of the reactions abstracting an H atom from NH3, NH2 NH and N2H4 from 1000 to 2000 K demonstrates that the Evans-Polanyi correlation holds for the radicals H, MI, and NH2. probably it is also valid for the radicals N, NNH and N2H3. Several rate constants were estimated with this assumption. No further adjustment of the mechanism was attempted. The modeling correctly reproduces the experimental rate of decomposition of hydrazine and also the product distribution. The initial decomposition of N2H4 into two NH2 radicals and the subsequent reaction N2H4 + NH2 --> NH3 + N2H3 mainly govern the decomposition of hydrazine in dilute mixtures and together with the reaction NH2 + NH2 --> N2H2 + H-2 control the propagation speed of a hydrazine flame. The computed speeds of such decomposition flames agree well with low-pressure and atmospheric pressure experiments far pure hydrazine and its mixtures with Ar, N-2 H2O and NH3. Also the concentration profiles of major and minor species in low-pressure hydrazine flames are well reproduced. A sensitivity analysis identifies the critical reactions in particular experimental conditions. The choice of rate constants for key reactions and further development of the mechanism is discussed. (C) 2001 by The Combustion Institute.

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