Over the last years, aero-engines are progressively evolving toward design concepts that permit improvements in terms of engine safety, fuel economy, and pollutant emissions. With the aim of satisfying the strict NOx reduction targets imposed by ICAO-CAEP, lean burn technology is one of the most promising solutions even if it must face safety concerns and technical issues. Hence, a depth insight on lean burn combustion is required, and computational fluid dynamics can be a useful tool for this purpose. In this work, a comparison in large eddy simulation (LES) framework of two widely employed combustion approaches like the artificially thickened flame (ATF) and the flamelet generated manifold (FGM) is performed using ANSYS fluent v16.2. Two literature test cases with increasing complexity in terms of geometry, flow field, and operating conditions are considered. First, capabilities of FGM are evaluated on a single swirler burner operating at ambient pressure with a standard pressure atomizer for spray injection. Then, a second test case, operated at 4 bar, is simulated. Here, kerosene fuel is burned after an injection through a prefilming airblast atomizer within a corotating double swirler. Obtained comparisons with experimental results show different capabilities of ATF and FGM in modeling the partially premixed behavior of the flame and provide an overview of the main strengths and limitations of the modeling strategies under investigation.
Modeling Strategies for Large Eddy Simulation of Lean Burn Spray Flames
Contributed by the Combustion and Fuels Committee of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING FOR GAS TURBINES AND POWER. Manuscript received July 26, 2017; final manuscript received August 9, 2017; published online November 21, 2017. Editor: David Wisler.
- Views Icon Views
- Share Icon Share
- Search Site
Puggelli, S., Bertini, D., Mazzei, L., and Andreini, A. (November 21, 2017). "Modeling Strategies for Large Eddy Simulation of Lean Burn Spray Flames." ASME. J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power. May 2018; 140(5): 051501. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4038127
Download citation file: