0
Research Papers

Numerical Investigation of Soot Formation in Turbulent Diffusion Flame With Strong Turbulence–Chemistry Interaction

[+] Author and Article Information
B. Manedhar Reddy

Department of Aerospace Engineering,
Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur,
Kanpur, Uttar Pradesh 208016, India
e-mail: manedhar@iitk.ac.in

Ashoke De

Mem. ASME
Department of Aerospace Engineering,
Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur,
Kanpur, Uttar Pradesh 208016, India
e-mail: ashoke@iitk.ac.in

Rakesh Yadav

ANSYS Fluent India Pvt. Ltd.,
Pune, Maharashtra 411057, India
e-mail: rakesh.yadav@ansys.com

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Heat Transfer Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF THERMAL SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING APPLICATIONS. Manuscript received April 7, 2014; final manuscript received March 24, 2015; published online November 11, 2015. Assoc. Editor: P.K. Das.

J. Thermal Sci. Eng. Appl 8(1), 011001 (Nov 11, 2015) (11 pages) Paper No: TSEA-14-1069; doi: 10.1115/1.4030694 History: Received April 07, 2014

The present work is aimed at examining the ability of different models in predicting soot formation in “Delft flame III,” which is a nonpremixed pilot stabilized natural gas flame. The turbulence–chemistry interactions are modeled using a steady laminar flamelet model (SLFM). One-step and two-step models are used to describe the formation, growth, and oxidation of soot particles. One-step is an empirical model which solves the soot mass fraction equation. The two-step models are semi-empirical models, where the soot formation is modeled by solving the governing transport equations for the soot mass fraction and normalized radical nuclei concentration. The effect of radiative heat transfer due to gas and soot particulates is included using P1 approximation. The absorption coefficient of the mixture is modeled using the weighted sum of gray gases model (WSGGM). The turbulence–chemistry interaction effects on soot formation are studied using a single-variable probability density function (PDF) in terms of a normalized temperature or mixture fraction. The results shown in this work clearly elucidate the effect of radiation and turbulence–chemistry interaction on soot formation. The soot volume fraction decreases with the introduction of radiation interactions, which is consistence with the theoretical predictions. It has also been observed in the current work that the soot volume fraction is sensitive to the variable used in the PDF to incorporate the turbulence interactions.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2016 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Top and cross view of axisymmetric nonpremixed jet burner [29]

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Illustrative view of the mesh used (D: diameter of fuel jet)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Center line plots of axial velocity, temperature, and mean mixture fraction using MSKE turbulence model: solid lines are coarse mesh, dashed lines are fine mesh, and symbols are measurements [29]

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Radial profiles of axial velocity, turbulent kinetic energy, temperature, and mean mixture fraction at three different locations from the fuel jet exit: lines are predictions and symbols are measurements [29]

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Contours of mean temperature with (a) no radiation, (b) gray radiation, and (c) nongray radiation

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Radial profiles of mass fraction of OH, CO, H2, and H2O at three different locations from the fuel jet exit: lines are predictions and symbols are measurements

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Axial profile of soot volume fraction: solid lines are without radiation, dashed lines are with gray radiation, dashed-dotted lines are with nongray radiation, and solid symbols are measurements [9]

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Axial profile of soot volume fraction with different oxidation models: lines are predictions and symbols are measurements [9]

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Contour of soot volume fraction showing (a) one-step, (b) two-step, and (c) Moss–Brookes

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Contours of soot nucleation (left), soot surface growth (middle), and soot oxidation (right) using Moss–Brookes model with (a) gray radiation and (b) nongray radiation

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Axial profile of soot volume fraction with soot–turbulence interaction: (a) gray radiation and (b) nongray radiation and solid symbols are measurements [9]

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Axial profile of soot surface growth rate and soot oxidation rate using different presumed PDF for soot–turbulence interactions: solid lines are gray radiation and dashed lines are with nongray radiation

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Radial profile of normalized soot volume fraction with soot–turbulence interactions: solid lines are gray radiation, dashed lines are with nongray radiation, and symbols are measurements [9]

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In