4.7 Article

Supersonic reaction front propagation initiated by a hot spot in n-heptane/air mixture with multistage ignition

期刊

COMBUSTION AND FLAME
卷 162, 期 11, 页码 4183-4193

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.combustflame.2015.08.002

关键词

Autoignition; Detonation; Hot spot; n-Heptane; Multistage ignition

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51322602]
  2. China Postdoctoral Science Foundation [2015M570011]
  3. State Key Laboratory of Engines at Tianjin University [K2014-01]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

For large hydrocarbon fuels such as n-heptane, multistage ignition occurs at low initial temperature. Therefore, multiple pressure pulses produced by multistage ignition and complitated reaction-pressure wave interactions are expected to happen during autoignition and reaction front propagation initiated by a hot spot. In this study, 1D simulations are conducted for n-heptane/air mixture with three ignition stages respectively caused by low-, intermediate- and high-temperature chemistries. Multiple pressure waves, shock waves, and detonation waves are identified and they are found to be generated by heat release from different ignition stages and reaction-pressure wave interactions. The thermal states of flow particles at different initial locations are tracked and analyzed; and the mechanism for the development of multiple shock waves and detonation waves is discussed. With the change of temperature gradient inside the hot spot or the hot spot size, such interactions can be strengthened or weakened and thereby the mode of supersonic reaction front propagation changes. Furthermore, both planar and spherical configurations are considered and the curvature effects are examined. It is found that in spherical configuration, the pressure wave caused by intermediate-temperature ignition is not strong enough to induce a second detonation wave as that in planar configuration. (C) 2015 The Combustion Institute. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据