A filtered-laminar-flame PDF sub-grid scale closure for LES of premixed turbulent flames. Part I: Formalism and application to a bluff-body burner with differential diffusion

2014 ◽  
Vol 161 (7) ◽  
pp. 1756-1774 ◽  
Author(s):  
Suresh Nambully ◽  
Pascale Domingo ◽  
Vincent Moureau ◽  
Luc Vervisch
Keyword(s):  
Bluff Body ◽  
Laminar Flame ◽  
Turbulent Flames ◽  
Differential Diffusion ◽  
Premixed Turbulent Flames

Numerical Modeling of Stationary But Developing Premixed Turbulent Flames

2006 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pratap Sathiah ◽  
Andrei N. Lipatnikov
Keyword(s):  
Bluff Body ◽  
Burning Velocity ◽  
Rectangular Channel ◽  
Turbulent Flame ◽  
Flame Stabilization ◽  
Turbulent Flames ◽  
Turbulent Diffusivity ◽  
Flame Thickness ◽  
Premixed Turbulent Flames ◽  
Premixed Turbulent Flame

A typical stationary premixed turbulent flame is the developing flame, as indicated by the growth of mean flame thickness with distance from flame-stabilization point. The goal of this work is to assess the importance of modeling flame development for RANS simulations of confined stationary premixed turbulent flames. For this purpose, submodels for developing turbulent diffusivity and developing turbulent burning velocity, which were early suggested by our group (FSC model) and validated for expanding spherical flames [4], have been incorporated into the so-called Zimont model of premixed turbulent combustion and have been implemented into the CFD package Fluent 6.2. The code has been run to simulate a stationary premixed turbulent flame stabilized behind a triangular bluff body in a rectangular channel using both the original and extended models. Results of these simulations show that the mean temperature and velocity fields in the flame are markedly affected by the development of turbulent diffusivity and burning velocity.

Fuel Variation Effects in Propagation and Stabilization of Turbulent Counter-Flow Premixed Flames

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ehsan Abbasi-Atibeh ◽  
Sandeep Jella ◽  
Jeffrey M. Bergthorson
Keyword(s):  
High Speed ◽  
Laminar Flame ◽  
Turbulent Flame ◽  
Mass Diffusion ◽  
Flame Stabilization ◽  
Turbulent Flames ◽  
Flame Speed ◽  
Flame Surface ◽  
Differential Diffusion ◽  
Turbulent Flame Speed

Sensitivity to stretch and differential diffusion of chemical species are known to influence premixed flame propagation, even in the turbulent environment where mass diffusion can be greatly enhanced. In this context, it is convenient to characterize flames by their Lewis number (Le), a ratio of thermal-to-mass diffusion. The work reported in this paper describes a study of flame stabilization characteristics when the Le is varied. The test data is comprised of Le ≪ 1 (Hydrogen), Le ≈ 1 (Methane), and Le > 1 (Propane) flames stabilized at various turbulence levels. The experiments were carried out in a Hot exhaust Opposed-flow Turbulent Flame Rig (HOTFR), which consists of two axially-opposed, symmetric turbulent round jets. The stagnation plane between the two jets allows the aerodynamic stabilization of a flame, and clearly identifies fuel influences on turbulent flames. Furthermore, high-speed Particle Image Velocimetry (PIV), using oil droplet seeding, allowed simultaneous recordings of velocity (mean and rms) and flame surface position. These experiments, along with data processing tools developed through this study, illustrated that in the mixtures with Le ≪ 1, turbulent flame speed increases considerably compared to the laminar flame speed due to differential diffusion effects, where higher burning rates compensate for the steepening average velocity gradient, and keeps these flames almost stationary as bulk flow velocity increases. These experiments are suitable for validating the ability of turbulent combustion models to predict lifted, aerodynamically-stabilized flames. In the final part of this paper, we model the three fuels at two turbulence intensities using the FGM model in a RANS context. Computations reveal that the qualitative flame stabilization trends reproduce the effects of turbulence intensity, however, more accurate predictions are required to capture the influences of fuel variations and differential diffusion.

Fuel Variation Effects in Propagation and Stabilization of Turbulent Counter-Flow Premixed Flames

2018 ◽  
Vol 141 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ehsan Abbasi-Atibeh ◽  
Sandeep Jella ◽  
Jeffrey M. Bergthorson
Keyword(s):  
High Speed ◽  
Laminar Flame ◽  
Turbulent Flame ◽  
Mass Diffusion ◽  
Flame Stabilization ◽  
Turbulent Flames ◽  
Flame Speed ◽  
Flame Surface ◽  
Differential Diffusion ◽  
Turbulent Flame Speed

Sensitivity to stretch and differential diffusion of chemical species are known to influence premixed flame propagation, even in the turbulent environment where mass diffusion can be greatly enhanced. In this context, it is convenient to characterize flames by their Lewis number (Le), a ratio of thermal-to-mass diffusion. The work reported in this paper describes a study of flame stabilization characteristics when Le is varied. The test data are comprised of Le≪1 (hydrogen), Le≈1 (methane), and Le>1 (propane) flames stabilized at various turbulence levels. The experiments were carried out in a hot exhaust opposed-flow turbulent flame rig (HOTFR), which consists of two axially opposed, symmetric jets. The stagnation plane between the two jets allows the aerodynamic stabilization of a flame and clearly identifies fuel influences on turbulent flames. Furthermore, high-speed particle image velocimetry (PIV), using oil droplet seeding, allowed simultaneous recordings of velocity (mean and rms) and flame surface position. These experiments, along with data processing tools developed through this study, illustrated that in the mixtures with Le≪1, turbulent flame speed increases considerably compared to the laminar flame speed due to differential diffusion effects, where higher burning rates compensate for the steepening average velocity gradient and keeps these flames almost stationary as bulk flow velocity increases. These experiments are suitable for validating the ability of turbulent combustion models to predict lifted, aerodynamically stabilized flames. In the final part of this paper, we model the three fuels at two turbulence intensities using the flamelet generated manifolds (FGM) model in a Reynolds-averaged Navier–Stokes (RANS) context. Computations reveal that the qualitative flame stabilization trends reproduce the effects of turbulence intensity; however, more accurate predictions are required to capture the influences of fuel variations and differential diffusion.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document