TU Darmstadt / ULB / TUprints

Ignition Under Strained Conditions: A Comparison Between Instationary Counterflow and Non-premixed Flamelet Solutions

Sun, Z. ; Hasse, C. ; Scholtissek, A. (2024)
Ignition Under Strained Conditions: A Comparison Between Instationary Counterflow and Non-premixed Flamelet Solutions.
In: Flow, Turbulence and Combustion : An International Journal published in association with ERCOFTAC, 2021, 106 (4)
doi: 10.26083/tuprints-00023885
Article, Secondary publication, Publisher's Version

[img] Text
s10494-020-00198-y.pdf
Copyright Information: CC BY 4.0 International - Creative Commons, Attribution.

Download (2MB)
Item Type: Article
Type of entry: Secondary publication
Title: Ignition Under Strained Conditions: A Comparison Between Instationary Counterflow and Non-premixed Flamelet Solutions
Language: English
Date: 18 December 2024
Place of Publication: Darmstadt
Year of primary publication: April 2021
Place of primary publication: Dordrecht
Publisher: Springer Science
Journal or Publication Title: Flow, Turbulence and Combustion : An International Journal published in association with ERCOFTAC
Volume of the journal: 106
Issue Number: 4
DOI: 10.26083/tuprints-00023885
Corresponding Links:
Origin: Secondary publication DeepGreen
Abstract:

The transient evolution of counterflow diffusion flames can be described in physical space [i.e. by the model of Im et al. (Combust. Sci. Technol. 158:341–363, 2000)], and in composition space through flamelet equations. Both modeling approaches are employed to study the ignition of diluted hydrogen–air, methane–air and DME–air diffusion flames including detailed transport and chemistry modeling. Using the physical space solution as a reference, this work elucidates the capability of flamelet modeling to predict ignition characteristics in terms of ignition temperature and ignition delay time. Varying pressure and strain rate for the hydrogen–air configurations, the agreement between reference solution and flamelet results is shown to strongly depend on the ignition limits as characterized by Kreutz and Law (Combust. Flame 104:157–175, 1996). In limit 2 and at elevated temperatures, where the ignition kernel formation is governed by chemical reactions and less dependent on mass transport (high Damköhler numbers), the flamelet model yields accurate results. Close to the ignition limits 1 and 3 however, significant deviations can be observed. In these limits, the residence time of radicals during ignition kernel formation is strongly influenced by diffusive transport and Damköhler numbers are low. The analysis of the hydrocarbon flames shows that differences between the physical space model and the flamelet model are smaller. This is attributed to a smaller influence of differential diffusion on the ignition process for methane and DME as compared to hydrogen as fuel. This paper underlines that flamelet models can be used to describe ignition processes under strained conditions, but care should be taken if ignition takes place in certain parameter ranges, i.e. close to the ignition limits or at high strain rates.

Uncontrolled Keywords: Ignition, Strain, Counterflow, Flamelet
Status: Publisher's Version
URN: urn:nbn:de:tuda-tuprints-238857
Additional Information:

Special Issue: Advances in Combustion Research

Classification DDC: 600 Technology, medicine, applied sciences > 620 Engineering and machine engineering
Divisions: 16 Department of Mechanical Engineering > Simulation of reactive Thermo-Fluid Systems (STFS)
Date Deposited: 18 Dec 2024 12:25
Last Modified: 18 Dec 2024 12:25
SWORD Depositor: Deep Green
URI: https://tuprints.ulb.tu-darmstadt.de/id/eprint/23885
PPN:
Export:
Actions (login required)
View Item View Item