4.7 Article

Combustion of fine aluminum and magnesium powders in water

Journal

COMBUSTION AND FLAME
Volume 160, Issue 10, Pages 2242-2250

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.combustflame.2013.04.019

Keywords

Metal combustion; Particle burn time; Hydrogen production; Underwater propulsion

Funding

  1. Defense Threat Reduction Agency

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Micron-sized metal powders carried by a nitrogen flow were fed along the axis of a cylindrical hydrogen/oxygen diffusion flame. The particles ignited and burned in the water vapor at approximately 2500 K. Experiments were performed at atmospheric pressure. The environment in which particles burned was characterized in detail using computational fluid dynamics. The computations confirmed that the metal powders burned in water while the effect of oxygen and other oxidizing species could be neglected. Combustion was characterized experimentally for micron-sized powders of both aluminum and magnesium. Particle size distributions were measured using low-angle laser light scattering. Optical emission of the burning particles was recorded using filtered photomultiplier tubes. Measured durations of individual particle emission pulses were assumed to represent their burn times; these data were classified into logarithmically spaced time bins. The distribution of the particle burn times was correlated with their size distributions assuming that larger size particles burned longer. It was observed that correlation between the burn times, t, and particle diameters, D, can be approximately described as t similar to D-0.64 and t similar to D-0.68 for aluminum and magnesium powders, respectively. The results were compared to previous reports and possible reasons for discrepancies between the present and earlier results were discussed. (C) 2013 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

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available