Impact of Combustion Models on Emissions Predictions From a Piloted Methane-Air Diffusion Flame

C. Naik, H. El-Asrag, Rakesh Yadav, Ahad Validi, E. Meeks
{"title":"Impact of Combustion Models on Emissions Predictions From a Piloted Methane-Air Diffusion Flame","authors":"C. Naik, H. El-Asrag, Rakesh Yadav, Ahad Validi, E. Meeks","doi":"10.1115/ajkfluids2019-5521","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Combustion models can have a significant impact on flame simulations. While solving finite rate chemistry typically yields more accurate predictions, they depend significantly on the detailed kinetics mechanism used. To demonstrate the effect, Large Eddy Simulation (LES) of Sandia Flame D [1] has been performed using various combustion models. Four different detailed kinetics mechanisms have been considered. They include DRM mechanism with 22 species, GRI-mech 2.11 with 49 species, GRI-mech 3.0 with 53 species [2], and Model Fuel Library (MFL) mechanism with 29 species [3]. In addition to the mechanisms, two modeling approaches considered are direct integration of finite rate kinetics (FR) and Flamelet Generated Manifold (FGM). The performance is compared between combinations of the mechanisms and combustion-modeling approaches for prediction of the flame structure and pollutants, including NO and CO. The mesh contains about half a million hexahedral cells and LES statistics were collected over ten flow throughs. Advanced solvers including dynamic cell clustering using the Chemkin-CFD solver in Fluent have been used for faster simulation time. Based on comparison of simulation results to the measurements at various axial and radial positions, we find that the results using the FGM approach were comparable to those using direct integration of FR chemistry, except for NO. In general, the simulation results are in good agreement with the experiment in terms of aerodynamics, mixture fraction and temperature profiles. However, kinetics mechanisms were found to have the most pronounced effect on emissions predictions. NO was especially more sensitive to the kinetics mechanism. Both versions of the GRI-mech fell short in predicting emissions. Overall, the MFL mechanism was found to yield the closest match with the data for flame structure, CO, and NO.","PeriodicalId":403423,"journal":{"name":"Volume 3A: Fluid Applications and Systems","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-07-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Volume 3A: Fluid Applications and Systems","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1115/ajkfluids2019-5521","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

Combustion models can have a significant impact on flame simulations. While solving finite rate chemistry typically yields more accurate predictions, they depend significantly on the detailed kinetics mechanism used. To demonstrate the effect, Large Eddy Simulation (LES) of Sandia Flame D [1] has been performed using various combustion models. Four different detailed kinetics mechanisms have been considered. They include DRM mechanism with 22 species, GRI-mech 2.11 with 49 species, GRI-mech 3.0 with 53 species [2], and Model Fuel Library (MFL) mechanism with 29 species [3]. In addition to the mechanisms, two modeling approaches considered are direct integration of finite rate kinetics (FR) and Flamelet Generated Manifold (FGM). The performance is compared between combinations of the mechanisms and combustion-modeling approaches for prediction of the flame structure and pollutants, including NO and CO. The mesh contains about half a million hexahedral cells and LES statistics were collected over ten flow throughs. Advanced solvers including dynamic cell clustering using the Chemkin-CFD solver in Fluent have been used for faster simulation time. Based on comparison of simulation results to the measurements at various axial and radial positions, we find that the results using the FGM approach were comparable to those using direct integration of FR chemistry, except for NO. In general, the simulation results are in good agreement with the experiment in terms of aerodynamics, mixture fraction and temperature profiles. However, kinetics mechanisms were found to have the most pronounced effect on emissions predictions. NO was especially more sensitive to the kinetics mechanism. Both versions of the GRI-mech fell short in predicting emissions. Overall, the MFL mechanism was found to yield the closest match with the data for flame structure, CO, and NO.
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
燃烧模型对甲烷-空气扩散火焰排放预测的影响
燃烧模型对火焰模拟有重要的影响。虽然求解有限速率化学通常会得到更准确的预测,但它们在很大程度上取决于所使用的详细动力学机制。为了证明这一效果,采用多种燃烧模型对桑迪亚火焰D[1]进行了大涡模拟(LES)。考虑了四种不同的详细动力学机制。其中DRM机制22种,GRI-mech 2.11机制49种,GRI-mech 3.0机制53种[2],Model Fuel Library (MFL)机制29种[3]。除了机理之外,还考虑了两种建模方法:有限速率动力学(FR)和火焰生成歧管(FGM)的直接集成。在预测火焰结构和污染物(包括NO和CO)方面,比较了机制和燃烧建模方法的组合性能。该网格包含大约50万个六面体单元,并收集了十次流动的LES统计数据。先进的求解器,包括使用Fluent中的Chemkin-CFD求解器的动态单元聚类,可以加快模拟时间。通过将模拟结果与不同轴向和径向位置的测量结果进行比较,我们发现除了NO之外,FGM方法的结果与直接积分法的结果相当。总体而言,在空气动力学、混合气分数和温度分布等方面,模拟结果与实验结果吻合较好。然而,动力学机制被发现对排放预测有最显著的影响。NO对动力学机制尤为敏感。两个版本的GRI-mech在预测排放量方面都有不足。总的来说,发现MFL机制与火焰结构、CO和NO的数据最接近。
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
Numerical Simulation and Vorticity Analysis of Cavitating Flow Around a Marine Propeller Behind the Hull Wake Flow Visualization of a Simplified Vehicle Model During Flow State Change Mixing of Dry Air With Water-Liquid Flowing Through an Inverted U-Tube for Power Plant Condenser Applications A Numerical Study on the Low Limit Auto-Ignition Temperature of Syngas and Modification of Chemical Kinetic Mechanism Design and Verification of Cooling Fans for Engine Rooms of Mobile Hydraulics Vehicles
×
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