4.6 Article

Large eddy simulations of nanoparticle synthesis from flame spray pyrolysis

期刊

PROCEEDINGS OF THE COMBUSTION INSTITUTE
卷 36, 期 1, 页码 1077-1087

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.proci.2016.08.005

关键词

Flame spray pyrolysis; Nanoparticle synthesis; Silica; Large eddy simulation; Premixed flamelet generated manifold

资金

  1. AiF [18298N/3]
  2. state North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Large eddy simulations of the nanoparticle synthesis from flame spray pyrolysis are presented. A standard reactor is investigated, with ethanol/hexamethyldisiloxane (HMDSO) mixture as spray/precursor composition and oxygen as dispersion gas for the production of silica nanoparticles. Spray evaporation, ignition and stabilisation of the flame are achieved by a premixed methane/oxygen pilot flame. The gas, spray and nanoparticle phases are modelled with Eulerian, Lagrangian and Eulerian approaches, respectively. A modified tabulated chemistry model, adapted from the premixed flamelet generated manifold approach (PFGM) with artificial flame thickening (ATF) is proposed, tested and applied for the system. The control variables are the element mass fractions of hydrogen and carbon together with a joint progress variable. The population balance equation of the nanoparticles is modelled in terms of number, volume and surface area concentration, its subfilter distribution is modelled with a delta function. The combustion of HMDSO and formation of silica particle monomers is described by a twostep global mechanism. The nucleation source term is tabulated as a function of the control variables. The submodels for spray and combustion are validated separately to compensate for the shortage in detailed experimental data for nanoparticle spray flames. Subsequently, simulation results for the particles are presented and discussed, in particular the polydisperse particle size distributions resulting from turbulence. (C) 2016 by The Combustion Institute. Published by Elsevier Inc.

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

4.6
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