SEARCH · Engineering Papers
Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.
Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Abstract not provided.
Abstract not provided.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Abstract Not Provided
Abstract not provided.
Abstract not provided.
Abstract not provided.
Abstract not provided.
This supplementary material complements the article and provides additional information to the chemical mechanism used in this work, boundary conditions for the LES con guration and table generation, comparisons of axial velocities, results from a LES/ nite-rate chemistry (FRC) approach, and results from the LES/DTF/SPF approach with a particular chemistry table that is generated using a single strained premixed amelet solution.
Laminar diffusion flames are of interest because they provide model flame systems that are far more tractable for analysis and experiments than more practical turbulent diffusion flames. Certainly, understanding flame processes within laminar diffusion flames must precede understanding these processes in more complex turbulent diffusion flames. In addition, many properties of laminar diffusion flames are directly relevant to turbulent diffusion flames using laminar flamelet concepts. Laminar jet diffusion flame shapes (luminous flame boundaries) have been of particular interest since the classical study of Burke and Schumann because they are a simple nonintrusive measurement that is convenient for evaluating flame structure predictions. Thus, consideration of laminar flame shapes is undertaken in the following, emphasizing conditions where effects of gravity are small, due to the importance of such conditions to practical applications. Another class of interesting properties of laminar diffusion flames are their laminar soot and smoke point properties (i.e., the flame length, fuel flow rate, characteristic residence time, etc., at the onset of soot appearance in the flame (the soot point) and the onset of soot emissions from the flame (the smoke point)). These are useful observable soot properties of nonpremixed flames because they provide a convenient means to rate several aspects of flame sooting properties: the relative propensity of various fuels to produce soot in flames; the relative effects of fuel structure, fuel dilution, flame temperature and ambient pressure on the soot appearance and emission properties of flames; the relative levels of continuum radiation from soot in flames; and effects of the intrusion of gravity (or buoyant motion) on emissions of soot from flames. An important motivation to define conditions for soot emissions is that observations of laminar jet diffusion flames in critical environments, e.g., space shuttle and space station facilities, cannot involve soot emitting flames in order to ensure that test chamber windows used for experimental observations are not blocked by soot deposits, thereby compromising unusually valuable experimental results. Another important motivation to define conditions where soot is present in diffusion flames is that flame chemistry, transport and radiation properties are vastly simplified when soot is absent, making such flames far more tractable for detailed numerical simulations than corresponding soot-containing flames. Motivated by these observations, the objectives of this phase of the investigation were as follows: (1) Observe flame-sheet shapes (the location of the reaction zone near phi=1) of nonluminous (soot free) laminar jet diffusion flames in both still and coflowing air and use these results to develop simplified models of flame-sheet shapes for these conditions; (2) Observe luminous flame boundaries of luminous (soot-containing) laminar jet diffusion flames in both still and coflowing air and use these results to develop simplified models of luminous flame boundaries for these conditions. In order to fix ideas here, maximum luminous flame boundaries at the laminar smoke point conditions were sought, i.e., luminous flame boundaries at the laminar smoke point; (3) Observe effects of coflow on laminar soot- and smoke-point conditions because coflow has been proposed as a means to control soot emissions and minimize the presence of soot in diffusion flames.
Recent experimental, numerical and analytical work has shown that the stoichiometric mixture fraction (Z(sub st)) can have a profound effect on soot formation in diffusion flames. These findings were obtained at constant flame temperature (T(sub ad)), employing the approach described in Du and Axelbaum (1995, 1996). For example, a fuel mixture containing 1 mole of ethylene and 11.28 moles of nitrogen burning in pure oxygen ((Z(sub st)) = 0.78) has the same adiabatic flame temperature (2370 K) as that of pure ethylene burning in air ((Z(sub st)) = 0.064). An important finding of these works was that at sufficiently high (Z(sub st)), flames remain blue as strain rate approaches zero in counterflow flames, or as flame height and residence time approach infinity in coflowing flames. Lin and Faeth (1996a) coined the term permanently blue to describe such flames. Two theories have been proposed to explain the appearance of permanently-blue flames at high (Z(sub st)). They are based on (1) hydrodynamics and (2) flame structure. Previous experimental studies in normal gravity are not definitive as to which, if either, mechanism is dominant because both hydrodynamics and structure suppress soot formation at high (Z(sub st)) in coflowing and counterflowing diffusion flames. In counterflow flames with (Z(sub st)) < 0.5 streamlines at the flame sheet are directed toward the fuel. Newly formed soot is convected into richer regions, favoring soot growth over oxidation. For (Z(sub st)) > 0.5, convection at the flame is toward the oxidizer, thus enhancing soot oxidization. Thus, in counterflow flames, hydrodynamics causes soot to be convected towards the oxidizer at high (Z(sub st)) which suppresses soot formation. Axelbaum and co-workers maintain that while the direction of convection can impact soot growth and oxidation, these processes alone cannot cause permanently-blue flames. Soot growth and oxidation are dependent on the existence of soot particles and the presence of soot is invariably accompanied by yellow luminosity. Soot-particle inception, on the other hand, arises from gas-phase reactions and its dependence on flow direction is weak, similar to that of other gas-phase reactions in flames. For example, when the flame moves across the stagnation plane no significant changes in flame chemistry are observed. Furthermore, since the soot-inception zone has a finite thickness, soot has been produced in counterflow flames with (Z(sub st)) > 0.5. For large (Z(sub st)) the fuel concentration decreases and oxygen concentration increases in the soot forming regions of the flame. This yields a shift in the OH profile toward the fuel side of the flame, and this shift can dramatically influence soot inception because it essentially narrows the soot inception zone. Soot-free (permanently-blue) conditions can be realized when the structure of the flame is adjusted to the extent that significant oxidizing species exist on the fuel side of the flame at temperatures above the critical temperature for soot inception, ca. 1250 K. In previously considered flames it was impossible to independently vary flame structure and convection direction. In contrast, spherical diffusion flames (which generally require microgravity) allow both properties to be varied independently. We altered structure (Z(sub st)) by exchanging inert between the oxidizer and the fuel and we independently varied convection direction at the flame sheet by interchanging the injected and ambient gases. In this work we established four flames: (a) ethylene issuing into air, (b) diluted ethylene issuing into oxygen, (c) air issuing into ethylene, and (d) oxygen issuing into diluted ethylene. (Z(sub st)) is 0.064 in flames (a) and (c) and 0.78 in flames (b) and (d). The convection direction is from fuel to oxidizer in flames (a) and (b) and from oxidizer to fuel in flames (c) and (d). Under the assumption of equal diffusivities of all species and heat, the stoichiometric contours of these flames have identical temperatures and nitrogen concentrations.
Turbulent combustion occurs naturally in almost all combustion systems and involves complex dynamic coupling of chemical and fluid mechanical processes. It is considered as one of the most challenging combustion research problems today. Though buoyancy has little effect on power generating systems operating under high pressures (e.g., IC engines and turbines), flames in atmospheric burners and the operation of small to medium furnaces and boilers are profoundly affected by buoyancy. Changes in burner orientation impacts on their blow-off, flash-back and extinction limits, and their range of operation, burning rate, heat transfer, and emissions. Theoretically, buoyancy is often neglected in turbulent combustion models. Yet the modeling results are routinely compared with experiments of open laboratory flames that are obviously affected by buoyancy. This inconsistency is an obstacle to reconciling experiments and theories. Consequently, a fundamental understanding of the coupling between turbulent flames and buoyancy is significant to both turbulent combustion science and applications. The overall effect of buoyancy relates to the dynamic interaction between the flame and its surrounding, i.e., the so-called elliptical problem. The overall flame shape, its flowfield, stability, and mean and local burning rates are dictated by both upstream and downstream boundary conditions. In steady propagating premixed flames, buoyancy affects the products region downstream of the flame zone. These effects are manifested upstream through the mean and fluctuating pressure fields to influence flame stretch and flame wrinkling. Intuitively, the effects buoyancy should diminish with increasing flow momentum. This is the justification for excluding buoyancy in turbulent combustion models that treats high Reynolds number flows. The objectives of our experimental research program is to elucidate flame-buoyancy coupling processes in laminar and turbulent premixed flames, and to characterize microgravity (micro g) premixed flames. The results are used to derive appropriate scaling parameters for guiding the development of theoretical models to include the effects of buoyancy. Knowledge gain from the analysis will also contribute to further understanding of the elliptical nature of premixed flames. Our current emphasis is to examine the momentum limit above which the effects of buoyancy would become insignificant. This is accomplished by comparing the flowfields and the mean properties of normal gravity flames (+g), and reversed gravity flames (-g, up-side-down flames) at different flow velocities and turbulence intensities. Microgravity (micro g) flames experiments provide the key reference data to reconcile the differences between flames in +g and -g. As flame configuration has significant impact on premixed flames characteristics we have studied axi-symmetric conical flames and plane-symmetric rod-stabilized v-flames. The two configurations produce distinct features that dictates how the flames couple with buoyancy. In a conical flame, the hot products plume completely envelopes the flame cone and shields the flame from direct interaction with the ambient air. The plume originates at the burner rim and generates a divergent flowfield. In comparison, the products region of v-flames forms between the twin flame sheets and it is convergent towards the center-plane. Interaction with ambient air is limited to the two end regions of the stabilized rod and beyond the flame sheets.