首页> 外文会议>ASME Gas Turbine India Conference >A COMPARATIVE CFD STUDY ON FLAMELET GENERATED MANIFOLD AND STEADY LAMINAR FLAMELET MODELING FOR TURBULENT FLAMES
【24h】

A COMPARATIVE CFD STUDY ON FLAMELET GENERATED MANIFOLD AND STEADY LAMINAR FLAMELET MODELING FOR TURBULENT FLAMES

机译:爆震火焰爆震歧管和稳压层压型爆震火焰的比较CFD研究

获取原文

摘要

Laminar Flamelet Model (LFM) [1-2] represents the turbulent flame brush using statistical averaging of laminar flamelets whose structure is not affected by turbulence. The chemical non-equilibrium effects considered in this model are due to local turbulent straining only. In contrast, Flamelet Generated Manifold (FGM) [3] model considers that the scalar evolution, the realized trajectories on the thermo-chemical manifold in a turbulent flame is approximated by the scalar evolution similar to that in a laminar flame. This model does not involve any assumption on flame structure. Therefore, it can be successfully used to model ignition, slow chemistry and quenching effects far away from the equilibrium. In FGM, 1D premixed flamelets are solved in reaction-progress space rather than physical space. This helps better solution convergence for the flamelets over the entire mixture fraction range, especially with large kinetic mechanisms at the flammability limits [4]. In the present work, a systematic comparative study of FGM model with LFM for four different turbulent diffusion/premixed flames is presented. First flame considered in this work is methane-air flame with dilution air at the downstream. Second and third flame considered are jet flames in a coaxial flow of hot combustion products from a lean premixed flame called Cabra lifted H_2 and CH_4 flames [5-6] where the reacting flow associated with the central jet exhibits similar chemical kinetics, heat transfer and molecular transport as recirculation burners without the complex recirculating fluid mechanic. The fourth flame considered is Sandia flame D [7], a piloted methane-air jet flame. It is observed that the simulation results predicted by FGM model are more physical and accurate compared to LFM in all the flames presented in this work.
机译:层流挥动模型(LFM)[1-2]表示使用层状挥发物的统计平均的湍流火焰刷,其结构不受湍流的影响。在该模型中考虑的化学非平衡效果是由于局部湍流紧张。相比之下,燧发物型生成歧管(FGM)[3]模型认为标量进化,在湍流火焰中的热化学歧管上的实现轨迹近似于与层状火焰相似的标量演化。该模型不涉及对火焰结构的任何假设。因此,它可以成功地用于模拟点火,慢化的化学和远离均衡的淬火效果。在FGM中,在反应 - 进展空间而不是物理空间中解决了1D预混挥动物。这有助于在整个混合物分数范围内更好地解决挥动叶片的溶液收敛,特别是在可燃性限制下具有大的动力学机制[4]。在本作工作中,提出了一种具有四种不同湍流扩散/预混火焰的LFM的FGM模型的系统对比研究。在这项工作中考虑的第一火焰是甲烷 - 空气火焰,下游在下游稀释空气。所考虑的第二和第三火焰是来自称为Cabra的贫燃烧产物的同轴流动的喷射火焰,称为Cabra举起的H_2和CH_4火焰[5-6],其中与中央喷射相关的反应流动表现出类似的化学动力学,传热和传热和分子运输作为再循环燃烧器,没有复合循环的流体机械机械。第四火焰被认为是桑迪亚火焰D [7],导向甲烷 - 空气喷射火焰。观察到,与在这项工作中呈现的所有火焰中,FGM模型预测的模拟结果与LFM相比更为物理和准确。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号