Grid Plate Flame Stabilizer for High Intensity Gas Turbine Combustion: The Influence of the Method of Fuel Injection on Mixing, Flame Development and NOx Emissions

José Ramón Quiñonez Arce, G. Andrews, A. Burns, Naman Al-Dabbagh
{"title":"Grid Plate Flame Stabilizer for High Intensity Gas Turbine Combustion: The Influence of the Method of Fuel Injection on Mixing, Flame Development and NOx Emissions","authors":"José Ramón Quiñonez Arce, G. Andrews, A. Burns, Naman Al-Dabbagh","doi":"10.1115/gt2021-60105","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Grid plate flame stabilizers for low NOx emissions have renewed interest in recent years due to their use in low NOx hydrogen gas turbine combustors. For non-premixed grid plate combustion, the difference in flame stabilizer design is in how the grid plate air flow is fueled. In the present work a simple four hole grid plate is investigated using CFD with three methods of fueling the air holes: radially inward fuel injection using 8 fuel nozzles per air hole (Grid Mix, GM 1 and Micromix); central fuel injection (FLOX method); and through a fuel annulus around each air hole (GM2). ANSYS FLUENT CFD predictions for GM2 are compared with axial gas composition traverses inside the combustor and with the mean combustor exit plane emissions. The three methods of fuel injection are also compared using isothermal CFD to determine which of the three methods offer the best mixing quality, which controls the relative NOx emissions. The predictions were for an equivalence ratio of 0.624 for the combustion stage and 0.5 for the isothermal study, using industrial propane. CFD modelling used RANS simulation with Realizable k-epsilon turbulence model, non-premixed combustion with the Steady Laminar Flamelet model. The temperature and mixing profiles obtained for GM2 were in reasonable agreement with the experiments and the other two fuel injection methods were then compared with GM2.","PeriodicalId":395231,"journal":{"name":"Volume 3B: Combustion, Fuels, and Emissions","volume":"49 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Volume 3B: Combustion, Fuels, and Emissions","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1115/gt2021-60105","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Grid plate flame stabilizers for low NOx emissions have renewed interest in recent years due to their use in low NOx hydrogen gas turbine combustors. For non-premixed grid plate combustion, the difference in flame stabilizer design is in how the grid plate air flow is fueled. In the present work a simple four hole grid plate is investigated using CFD with three methods of fueling the air holes: radially inward fuel injection using 8 fuel nozzles per air hole (Grid Mix, GM 1 and Micromix); central fuel injection (FLOX method); and through a fuel annulus around each air hole (GM2). ANSYS FLUENT CFD predictions for GM2 are compared with axial gas composition traverses inside the combustor and with the mean combustor exit plane emissions. The three methods of fuel injection are also compared using isothermal CFD to determine which of the three methods offer the best mixing quality, which controls the relative NOx emissions. The predictions were for an equivalence ratio of 0.624 for the combustion stage and 0.5 for the isothermal study, using industrial propane. CFD modelling used RANS simulation with Realizable k-epsilon turbulence model, non-premixed combustion with the Steady Laminar Flamelet model. The temperature and mixing profiles obtained for GM2 were in reasonable agreement with the experiments and the other two fuel injection methods were then compared with GM2.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
高强度燃气轮机燃烧用栅格板稳定剂:喷油方式对混合、火焰发展和NOx排放的影响
近年来,由于在低氮氧化物氢燃气轮机燃烧器中的应用,用于低氮氧化物排放的栅格板火焰稳定剂重新引起了人们的兴趣。对于非预混栅格板燃烧,火焰稳定剂设计的不同之处在于栅格板气流的燃料方式。本文对一个简单的四孔网格板进行了CFD研究,采用三种方法对气孔进行加油:径向向内喷射,每个气孔使用8个燃料喷嘴(grid Mix, GM 1和Micromix);中央燃油喷射(FLOX法);并通过每个空气孔(GM2)周围的燃料环空。将ANSYS FLUENT CFD对GM2的预测与燃烧室内的轴向气体成分流动和燃烧室出口平面的平均排放量进行了比较。同时,采用等温CFD对三种燃油喷射方式进行了比较,以确定哪种方式能够提供最佳的混合质量,从而控制氮氧化物的相对排放。使用工业丙烷,燃烧阶段的等效比为0.624,等温研究的等效比为0.5。CFD建模采用RANS模拟,采用可实现k-epsilon湍流模型,非预混燃烧采用Steady Laminar Flamelet模型。GM2的温度分布和混合分布与实验结果吻合较好,并与其他两种喷射方式进行了比较。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Modeling of Flashback With Different Blends of CH4 and H2 by Using Finite Rate Chemistry With Large Eddy Simulation Experimental and Numerical Advancement of the MGT Combustor Towards Higher Hydrogen Capabilities Flame Response of a Lean Premixed Swirl Flame to High Frequency Azimuthal Forcing FGM Applied to Grid Plate Flame Stabilisers for NOx Prediction in Non-Premixed Gas Turbine Combustion Characterization of Flame Behavior and Blowout Limits at Different Air Preheating Temperatures in Plasma Assisted Stabilized Combustor
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1