Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-18T17:24:12.736Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Flame volume prediction and validation for lean blow-out of gas turbine combustor

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 January 2017

E. Ahmed  and
Y. Huang
E. Ahmed*
Affiliation:
Collaborative Innovation Center of Advanced Aero-Engines, National Key Laboratory of Science and Technology on Aero-Engines, School of Energy and Power Engineering, Beihang University, Beijing, People's Republic of China
Y. Huang
Affiliation:
Collaborative Innovation Center of Advanced Aero-Engines, National Key Laboratory of Science and Technology on Aero-Engines, School of Energy and Power Engineering, Beihang University, Beijing, People's Republic of China
*
[email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Lean Blow-Out (LBO) limits are critically important in the operation of aero engines. Previously, Lefebvre's LBO empirical correlation has been extended to the flame volume concept by the authors. Flame volume takes into account the effects of geometric configuration, spatial interaction of mixing jets, turbulence, heat transfer and combustion processes inside the gas turbine combustion chamber. For these reasons, LBO predictions based on flame volume are more accurate. Although LBO prediction accuracy has improved, it poses a challenge associated with Vf estimation in real gas turbine combustors. This work extends the approach of flame volume prediction based on fuel iterative approximation with cold flow simulations to reactive flow simulations. Flame volume for 11 combustor configurations were simulated and validated against experimental data. To make prediction methodology robust, as required in preliminary design stage, reactive flow simulations were carried out with the combination of presumed Probability Density Function (PDF) and discrete phase model (DPM) in Fluent 15.0 The criterion for flame identification was defined. Two important parameters—critical injection diameter (Dp,crit) and critical temperature (Tcrit)—were identified and their influence on reactive flow simulation was studied for Vf estimation. Results exhibit ±15% error in Vf estimation with experimental data.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Aeronautical Journal , Volume 121 , Issue 1236 , February 2017 , pp. 237 - 262
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Aeronautical Society 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1. Lieuwen, T., McDonell, V., Santavicca, D. and Sattelmayer, T.B. Development and operability issues associated with steady flowing syngas fired combustors. Combustion Science and Technology, 2008, 180, (6), pp 1169–1192. doi: 10.1080/00102200801963375.Google Scholar
2. Li, S., Zhang, X., Zhong, Di, Weng, F., Li, S. and Zhu, M. Effects of inert dilution on the lean blowout characteristics of syngas flames. Int J Hydrogen Energy, 2016, 41, (21), pp 9075–9086. doi: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2016.02.099.Google Scholar
3. Longwell, J.P. and Weiss, M.A. High temperature reaction rates in hydrocarbon combustion. Industrial and Engineering Chemistry, 1955, 47, (8), pp 1634–1643. doi: 10.1021/ie50548a049.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4. Longwell, J.P., Frost, E.E., Weiss and Malcolm, A. Flame stability in bluff body recirculation zones. Industrial and Engineering Chemistry, 1953, 45, (8), pp 1629–1633. doi: 10.1021/ie50524a019.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5. Zukoski, E.E. and Marchble, F.E. The role of wake transition in the process of flame stabilization on bluff bodies. AGARD Combust Research Review, 1955, pp 167–180.Google Scholar
6. Mellor, A.M., Jarymowycz, T.A., Stow, S.R. and Dowling, A.P. Correlation of lean blowoff in an annular combustor. J Propulsion and Power 1986, 2, (2), pp 190–192. doi: 10.1115/2001-GT-0037.Google Scholar
7. Mellor, A.M. and Derr, W.S. Characteristic times for lean blowoff in turbine combustors. J Propulsion and Power, 1987, 3, (4), pp 377–80. doi: 10.2514/3.23001.Google Scholar
8. Mellor, A.M. Design of Modern Turbine Combustors, 1990, Academic Press.Google Scholar
9. Leonard, P.A., Mellor, A.M., Ley, C.P. and Yates, M.H. Correlation of lean blowoff of gas turbine combustors using alternative fuels. J Energy 1983, 7, (6), pp 729–732. doi: 10.1115/1.1571088.Google Scholar
10. Ballal, D.R. and Lefebvre, A.H. Weak extinction limits of turbulent flowing mixtures. J Engineering for Power, 1979, 101, (3), pp 343–348. doi: 10.1115/1.3230272.Google Scholar
11. Ballal, D.R. and Lefebvre, A.H. Weak extinction limits of turbulent heterogeneous fuel/air mixtures. J Engineering for Power, 1980, 102, (2), pp 416–421.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12. Lefebvre, A.H. Fuel effects on gas turbine combustion-ignition, stability, and combustion efficiency. J Engineering for Gas Turbines and Power, 1985, 107, (1), pp 24–37. doi: 10.1016/0142-727X(84)90057-2.Google Scholar
13. Ateshkadi, A., McDonell, V. G. and Samuelsen, G.S. Lean blowout model for a spray-fired swirl-stabilized combustor. Proceedings of the Combustion Institute, 2000, 28, (1), pp 1281–1288. doi: 10.1016/S0082-0784(00)80341-0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14. Menon, S. Modeling pollutant emission and lean blow out in gas turbine combustors. 39th AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference 20-23 July 2003/Huntsville, AL, 2003. doi: 10.2514/6.2003-4496.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15. El-Asrag, H. and Menon, S. Large eddy simulation of bluff-body stabilized swirling non-premixed flames. Proceedings of the Combustion Institute, 2007, 31 II, pp 1747–1754. doi: 10.1016/j.proci.2006.07.251.Google Scholar
16. Menon, S., Stone, C. and Patel, N. Multi-scale modeling for les of engineering designs of large-scale combustors, 2004, Reno, Nevada, USA, AIAA Paper, doi: 10.2514/6.2004-157.Google Scholar
17. Eggenspieler, G. and Menon, S. Structure of locally quuenched swirl stablized turbulent premixed flames. 42nd AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting Exhibit, January 2004, Reno, Nevada, USA, 21. doi: 10.2514/6.2004-979.Google Scholar
18. Kim, W.-W., Lienau, J.J., Van Slooten, P.R., Colket, M.B., Malecki, R.E. and Syed, S. Towards modeling lean blow out in gas turbine flameholder applications. J Engineering for Gas Turbines and Power, 2006, 128, (1), pp 40–48. doi: 10.1115/1.2032450.Google Scholar
19. Gokulakrishnan, P., Bikkani, R., Klassen, M.S., Roby, R.J. and Kiel, B.V. Influence of turbulence-chemistry interaction in blow-out predictions of bluff-body stabilized flames. AIAA Paper, 2009, Orlando, Florida, USA, (2009-1179), pp 1–17. doi: 10.2514/6.2009-1179.Google Scholar
20. Gokulakrishnan, P., Foli, K., Klassen, M., Roby, R., Soteriou, M., Kiel, B. and Sekar, B. LES–PDF modeling of flame instability and blow-out in bluff-body stabilized flames. AIAA Paper, 2009, Denver, Colorado, USA, (2009-5409), pp 1–13. doi: 10.2514/6.2009-5409.Google Scholar
21. Porumbel, I. and Menon, S. Large eddy simulation of bluff body stabilized premixed flame. AIAA Paper, 2006, Reno, Nevada, USA, (2006-152).Google Scholar
22. Smith, C.E., Nickolaus, D., Leach, T., Kiel, B. and Garwick, K. LES blowout analysis of premixed flow past V-gutter flameholder. AIAA Paper, 2007, Reno, Nevada, USA, p 170.Google Scholar
23. Khosla, S., Leach, T.T., Smith, C.E. Flame stabilization and role of Von Karman vortex shedding behind bluff body flameholders. AIAA Paper, 2007, Cincinnati, OH, USA, 5653 (July): 2007. doi: 10.2514/6.2007-5653.Google Scholar
24. Ge, Y., Cleary, M.J. and Klimenko, A.Y. Sparse-Lagrangian FDF simulations of Sandia Flame E with density coupling. Proceedings of the Combustion Institute, 2011, 33, (1), pp 1401–1409. doi: 10.1016/j.proci.2010.06.035.Google Scholar
25. Tyliszczak, A., Cavaliere, D.E. and Mastorakos, E. LES/CMC of blow-off in a liquid fueled swirl burner. Flow, Turbulence and Combustion, 2014, (92), pp 237–267.Google Scholar
26. Black, D.L. and Smith, C.E. Transient lean blowout modelling of an aero low emission fuel injector. AIAA Paper, 2003, Huntsville, Alabama, USA, p 4520.Google Scholar
27. Pope, S.B. Turbulent premixed flames. Annual Review of Fluid Mechanics, 1987, 19, (1), pp 237–270. doi: 10.1146/annurev.fl.19.010187.001321.Google Scholar
28. Sturgess, G.J. and Shouse, D.T. A hybrid model for calculating lean blowouts in practical combustors. AIAA Paper, 1996, Lake Buena Vista, FL, USA, (July), pp 1–3. doi: 10.2514/6.1996-3125.Google Scholar
29. Sturgess, G.J., Gogineni, S. and Shouse, D.T. Influence of airblast-atomizing fuel injector design on primary zone flame characteristics at blowout. AIAA Paper, 1997, Reno, NV, USA, (97-0269). doi: doi:10.2514/6.1997-269.Google Scholar
30. Xie, Fa, Huang, Y., Wang, F. and Hu, B. Visualization of the lean blowout process in a model combustor with a swirl cup. ASME Turbo Expo 2010 Power Land, Sea, Air, 2010, Glasgow, UK, pp 433–439.Google Scholar
31. Xie, Fa, Huang, Y., Hu, B. and Wang, F. Improved semiempirical correlation to predict lean blowout limits for gas turbine combustors. J Propulsion and Power 2012, 28, (1), pp 197–203. Doi: doi.org/10.2514/1.B34296.Google Scholar
32. Hu, B., Huang, Y. and Wang, F. FIA method for LBO limit predictions of aero-engine combustors based on FV model. Aerospace Science and Technology, 2013, 28, (1), pp 435–446. doi: 10.1016/j.ast.2013.01.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
33. Gabruk, R.S. and Roe, L.A. Velocity characteristics of reacting and nonreacting flows in a dump combustor. J Propulsion and Power, 1994, 10, (2), pp 148–154. doi: 10.2514/3.23723.Google Scholar
34. Mishra, D.P. and Vishak, T. Computational studies of turbulent premixed flame based dump combustor. Fuel, 2007, 86, (17-18), pp 2881–2889. doi: 10.1016/j.fuel.2007.03.002.Google Scholar
35. Ezhil, K.P.K. and Mishra, D.P. Numerical investigation of the flow and flame structure in an axisymmetric trapped vortex combustor. Fuel, 2012, 102, pp 78–84. doi: 10.1016/j.fuel.2012.06.056.Google Scholar
36. Sivathanu, Y.R. and Faeth, G.M. Generalized state relationships for scalar properties in nonpremixed hydrocarbon/air flames. Combust Flame, 1990, 82, (2), pp 211–230. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0010-2180(90)90099-D.Google Scholar
37. Hu, B., Huang, Y., Wang, F. and Xie, Fa. CFD predictions of LBO limits for aero-engine combustors using fuel iterative approximation. Chinese Journal of Aeronautics, 2013, 26, (1), pp 74–84. doi: 10.1016/j.cja.2012.12.014.Google Scholar
38. De Giorgi, M.G., Sciolti, A., Campilongo, S. and Ficarella, A. Image processing for the characterization of flame stability in a non-premixed liquid fuel burner near lean blowout. Aerospace Science and Technology, 2016, 49, pp 41–51. doi: 10.1016/j.ast.2015.11.030.Google Scholar
39. McCaffrey, B.J. Purely buoyant diffusion flames: some experimental results, National Bureau of Standards, 1979.Google Scholar
40. Smith, D.A. and Cox, G. Major chemical species in buoyant turbulent diffusion flames. Combustion and Flame, 1992, 91, (3), pp 226–238. doi: 10.1016/0010-2180(92)90055-T.Google Scholar
41. Cox, G. and Chitty, R. A study of the deterministic properties of unbounded fire plumes. Combustion and Flame, 1980, 39, (2), pp 191–209. doi: 10.1016/0010-2180(80)90016-4.Google Scholar
42. Ingason, H. Two dimensional rack storage fires. Fire Safety Science, 1994, 4, pp 209–220. doi: 10.3801/IAFSS.FSS.4-1209.Google Scholar
43. Heskestad, G. Flame heights of fuel arrays with combustion in depth. Fire Safety Science, 1997, 5, pp 427–438. doi: 10.3801/IAFSS.FSS.5-427.Google Scholar
44. Kang, Y. and Wen, J.X. Large Eddy simulation of a small pool fire. Combustion Science and Technology,2004, 176, (12), pp 2193–2223. doi: 10.1080/00102200490515074.Google Scholar