Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-mzp66 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-09T22:11:29.211Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Direct numerical simulation of premixed flame boundary layer flashback in turbulent channel flow

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 August 2012

A. Gruber ,
J. H. Chen ,
D. Valiev  and
C. K. Law
A. Gruber*
Affiliation:
SINTEF Energy Research, 7465 Trondheim, Norway
J. H. Chen
Affiliation:
Combustion Research Facility, Sandia National Laboratories, Livermore, CA 94550, USA
D. Valiev
Affiliation:
Combustion Research Facility, Sandia National Laboratories, Livermore, CA 94550, USA Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ 08544, USA
C. K. Law
Affiliation:
Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ 08544, USA
*
†Email address for correspondence: [email protected]
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Direct numerical simulations are performed to investigate the transient upstream propagation (flashback) of premixed hydrogen–air flames in the boundary layer of a fully developed turbulent channel flow. Results show that the well-known near-wall velocity fluctuations pattern found in turbulent boundary layers triggers wrinkling of the initially flat flame sheet as it starts propagating against the main flow direction, and that the structure of the characteristic streaks of the turbulent boundary layer ultimately has an important impact on the resulting flame shape and on its propagation mechanism. It is observed that the leading edges of the upstream-propagating premixed flame are always located in the near-wall region of the channel and assume the shape of several smooth, curved bulges propagating upstream side by side in the spanwise direction and convex towards the reactant side of the flame. These leading-edge flame bulges are separated by thin regions of spiky flame cusps pointing towards the product side at the trailing edges of the flame. Analysis of the instantaneous velocity fields clearly reveals the existence, on the reactant side of the flame sheet, of backflow pockets that extend well above the wall-quenching distance. There is a strong correspondence between each of the backflow pockets and a leading edge convex flame bulge. Likewise, high-speed streaks of fast flowing fluid are found to be always colocated with the spiky flame cusps pointing towards the product side of the flame. It is suggested that the origin of the formation of the backflow pockets, along with the subsequent mutual feedback mechanism, is due to the interaction of the approaching streaky turbulent flow pattern with the Darrieus–Landau hydrodynamic instability and pressure fluctuations triggered by the flame sheet. Moreover, the presence of the backflow pockets, coupled with the associated hydrodynamic instability and pressure–flow field interaction, greatly facilitate flame propagation in turbulent boundary layers and ultimately results in high flashback velocities that increase proportionately with pressure.

JFM classification

Waves/Free-surface Flows: Channel flow Reacting Flows: Flames Reacting Flows: Turbulent reacting flows
Type
Papers
Information
Journal of Fluid Mechanics , Volume 709 , 25 October 2012 , pp. 516 - 542
Creative Commons
The online version of this article is published within an Open Access environment subject to the conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike licence . The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use.
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2012 The online version of this article is published within an Open Access environment subject to the conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike licence <http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/>. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use.

References

1. Alshaalan, T. M. & Rutland, C. J. 1998 Turbulence, scalar transport, and reaction rates in flame–wall interaction. In Twenty-Seventh Symposium (International) on Combustion, pp. 793–799. The Combustion Institute.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2. Alshaalan, T. M. & Rutland, C. J. 2002 Wall heat flux in turbulent premixed reacting flow. Combust. Sci. Technol. 174, 135–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3. Blint, R. J. 1986 The relationship of the laminar flame width to flame speed. Combust. Sci. Technol. 49, 79–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4. Bolland, O. & Undrum, H. 2003 A novel methodology for comparing capture options for natural gas-fired combined cycle plants. Adv. Environ. Res. 7 (4), 901–911.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5. Bruneaux, G., Akselvoll, K., Poinsot, T. & Ferziger, J. H. 1996 Flame–wall interaction simulation in a turbulent channel flow. Combust. Flame 107, 27–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. Bychkov, V. V. & Liberman, M. A. 2000 Dynamics and stability of premixed flames. Phys. Rep. 325, 115–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7. Carroni, R. 2006 Development of a gas turbine burner for the lean-premixed combustion of -rich fuels. In 8th International Conference on Greenhouse Gas Control Technologies, Trondheim, Norway, 19th–22nd June 2006. IEAGHG.Google Scholar
8. Chaudhuri, S., Akkerman, V. & Law, C. K. 2011 Spectral formulation of turbulent flame speed with consideration of hydrodynamic instability. Phys. Rev. E 84, 026322.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
9. Chen, J. H., Choudhary, A., de Supinski, B., DeVries, M., Hawkes, E. R., Klasky, S., Liao, W. K., Ma, K. L., Mellor-Crummey, J., Podhorski, N., Sankaran, R., Shende, S. & Yoo, C. S. 2009 Terascale direct numerical simulations of turbulent combustion using S3D. Comput. Sci. Disc. 2, 1–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. Chiesa, P., Lozza, G. & Mazzocchi, L. 2005 Using hydrogen as gas turbine fuel. ASME J. Engng Gas Turbines Power 127, 73–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11. Creta, F., Fogla, N. & Matalon, M. 2011 Turbulent propagation of premixed flames in the presence of Darrieus–Landau instability. Combust. Theor. Model. 15 (2), 267–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12. Dabireau, F., Cuenot, B., Vermorel, O. & Poinsot, T. 2003 Interaction of flames of with inert walls. Combust. Flame 135, 123–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13. Echekki, T. & Chen, J. H. 2003 Direct numerical simulation of autoignition in non-homogeneous hydrogen–air mixtures. Combust. Flame 134, 169–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14. Egolfopoulos, F. N., Zhang, H. & Zhang, Z. 1997 Wall effects on the propagation and extinction of steady, strained, laminar premixed flames. Combust. Flame 109, 237–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15. Eichler, C., Baumgartner, G. & Sattelmayer, T. 2011 Experimental investigation of turbulent boundary layer flashback limits for premixed hydrogen–air flames confined in ducts. In Proceedings of ASME Turbo Expo 2011, June 6–10, 2011, Vancouver, Canada, pp. GT2011–45362. American Society of Mechanical Engineers.Google Scholar
16. Eichler, C. & Sattelmayer, T. 2011 Experiments on flame flashback in a quasi-2D turbulent wall boundary layer for premixed methane–hydrogen–air mixtures. ASME J. Engng Gas Turbines Power 133, 011503.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
17. Eichler, C. & Sattelmayer, T. 2012 Premixed flame flashback in wall boundary layers studied by long-distance micro-PIV. Exp. Fluids 52 (2), 347–360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
18. Ezekoye, O., Greif, R. & Sawyer, R. F. 1992 Increased surface temperature effects on wall heat transfer during unsteady flame quenching. In Proceedings 24th International Symposium on Combustion, pp. 1465–1472. The Combustion Institute.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
19. Fritz, J., Kröner, M. & Sattelmayer, T. 2004 Flashback in a swirl burner with cylindrical premixing zone. ASME J. Engng Gas Turbines Power 126, 276–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
20. Grout, R. W., Gruber, A., Kolla, H., Bremer, P.-T., Bennet, J. C., Gyulassy, A. & Chen, J. H. 2012 A direct numerical simulation study of turbulence and flame structure in transverse jets analysed in jet-trajectory based coordinates. J. Fluid Mech. 706, 351–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
21. Grout, R. W., Gruber, A., Yoo, C. S. & Chen, J. H. 2011 Direct numerical simulation of flame stabilization downstream of a transverse fuel jet in cross-flow. Proc. Combust. Inst. 33 (1), 1629–1637.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
22. Gruber, A., Sankaran, R., Hawkes, E. R. & Chen, J. H. 2010 Turbulent flame–wall interaction: a direct numerical simulation study. J. Fluid Mech. 658, 5–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
23. Hawkes, E. R. & Chen, J. H. 2005 Evaluation of models for flame stretch due to curvature in the thin reaction zones regime. In Proceedings 30th International Symposium on Combustion, pp. 647–655. The Combustion Institute.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
24. Hawkes, E. R., Sankaran, R., Sutherland, J. C. & Chen, J. H. 2007 Scalar mixing in direct numerical simulations of temporally evolving plane jet flames with skeletal co/h2 kinetics. In Proceedings 31th International Symposium on Combustion, pp. 1633–1640. The Combustion Institute.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
25. Heeger, C., Gordon, R. L., Tummers, M. J., Sattelmayer, T. & Dreizler, A. 2010 Experimental analysis of flashback in lean premixed swirling flames: upstream flame propagation. Exp. Fluids 49, 853–863.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
26. Hocks, W., Peters, N. & Adomeit, G. 1981 Flame quenching in front of a cold wall under two-step kinetics. Combust. Flame 41, 157–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
27. Jiménez, J. 1998 The largest scales of turbulent wall flows. In Annual Research Briefs of the Center for Turbulence Research, Stanford University, CA, pp. 137–154.Google Scholar
28. Kee, R. J., Dixon-Lewis, G., Warnatz, J., Coltrin, M. E., Miller, J. A. & Moffat, H. K. 1999 A fortran chemical kinetics package for the analysis of gas-phase chemical kinetics. Tech. Rep. Release 3.5. Reaction Design Inc., San Diego, CA.Google Scholar
29. Kennedy, C. A. & Carpenter, M. H. 1994 Several new numerical methods for compressible shear-layer simulations. Appl. Numer. Maths 14 (0), 397–433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
30. Kennedy, C. A., Carpenter, M. H. & Lewis, R. M. 2000 Low-storage, explicit Runge–Kutta schemes for the compressible Navier–Stokes equations. Appl. Numer. Maths 35 (0), 177–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
31. Kim, J. & Hussain, F. 1994 Propagation velocity of perturbations in turbulent channel flow. Phys. Fluids 5, 695–706.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
32. Kim, J. & Moin, P. 1989 Transport of passive scalars in a turbulent channel flow. In Proceedings 6th International Symposium on Turbulent Shear Flow, 7–9 September, Tolouse, France, pp. 85–96.Google Scholar
33. Kobayashi, H. & Kawazoe, H. 2000 Flame instability effects on the smallest wrinkling scale and burning velocity of high-pressure turbulent premixed flames. Proc. Combust. Inst. 28 (1), 375–382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
34. Kolla, H., Grout, R. W., Gruber, A. & Chen, J. H. 2012 Mechanisms of flame stabilization and blowout in a reacting turbulent hydrogen jet in cross-flow. Combust. Flame 159 (8), 2755–2766.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
35. Kurdyumov, V. N. & Fernandez-Tarrazo, E. 2002 Lewis number effect on the propagation of premixed laminar flames in narrow open ducts. Combust. Flame 128, 382–394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
36. Kurdyumov, V. N., Fernandez, E. & Linan, A. 2000 Flame flashback and propagation of premixed flames near a wall. Proc. Combust. Inst. 28 (1), 1883–1889.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
37. Kurdyumov, V. N., Fernandez-Tarrazo, E., Truffaut, J. M., Quinard, J., Wangher, A. & Searby, G. 2007 Experimental and numerical study of premixed flame flashback. Proc. Combust. Inst. 31 (1), 1275–1282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
38. Law, C. K. 2006 Combustion Physics, 1st edn. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
39. Law, C. K., Jomaas, G. & Bechtold, J. K. 2005 Cellular instabilities of expanding hydrogen/propane spherical flames at elevated pressures: theory and experiment. Proc. Combust. Inst. 30 (1), 159–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
40. Lee, S. T. & T’ien, J. S. 1982 A numerical analysis of flame flashback in a premixed laminar system. Combust. Flame 48, 273–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
41. Lewis, B. & von Elbe, G. 1943 Stability and structure of burner flames. J. Chem. Phys. 11, 75–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
42. Li, J., Zhao, Z., Kazarov, A. & Dryer, F. L. 2004 An updated comprehensive kinetic model of hydrogen combustion. Intl J. Chem. Kinet. 36, 566–575.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
43. Lipatnikov, A. N. & Chomiak, J. 2010 Effects of premixed flames on turbulence and turbulent scalar transport. Prog. Energy Combust. Sci. 36, 1–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
44. Mayer, C., Sangl, J., Sattelmayer, T., Lachaux, T. & Bernero, S. 2011 Study on operational window of a swirl stabilized syngas burner under atmospheric and high pressure conditions. In Proceedings of ASME Turbo Expo 2011, June 6–10, 2011, Vancouver, Canada, pp. GT2011–45125. American Society of Mechanical Engineers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
45. Moser, R., Kim, J. & Mansour, N. 1999 Direct numerical simulation of turbulent channel flow up to . Phys. Fluids 11 (4), 943–945.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
46. Poinsot, T., Haworth, D. C. & Bruneaux, G. 1993 Direct simulation and modeling of flame–wall interaction for premixed turbulent combustion. Combust. Flame 95, 118–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
47. Poinsot, T. & Lele, S. K. 1992 Boundary conditions for direct simulations of compressible viscous flow. J. Comput. Phys. 101, 104–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
48. Poinsot, T. & Veynante, D. 2001 Theoretical and Numerical Combustion, 1st edn. Edwards.Google Scholar
49. Popp, P. & Baum, M. 1997 Analysis of wall heat fluxes, reaction mechanisms, and unburnt hydrocarbons during the head-on quenching of a laminar methane flame. Combust. Flame 108, 327–348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
50. Popp, P., Smooke, M. & Baum, M. 1996 Heterogeneous/homogeneous reaction and transport coupling during flame–wall interaction. In Proceedings 26th International Symposium on Combustion, pp. 2693–2700. The Combustion Institute.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
51. Sankaran, R., Hawkes, E. R., Chen, J. H., Lu, T. & Law, C. K. 2007 Structure of a spatially developing turbulent lean methane–air bunsen flame. In Proceedings 31th International Symposium on Combustion, pp. 1291–1298. The Combustion Institute.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
52. Sankaran, R., Im, H. G., Hawkes, E. R. & Chen, J. H. 2005 The effects of non-uniform temperature distribution on the ignition of a lean homogeneous hydrogen–air mixture. In Proceedings 30th International Symposium on Combustion, pp. 875–882. The Combustion Institute.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
53. Sutherland, J. C. & Kennedy, C. A. 2003 Improved boundary conditions for viscous, reactive, compressible flows. J. Comput. Phys. 191, 502–524.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
54. Westbrook, C. K., Adamczyk, A. A. & Lavoie, G. A. 1981 A numerical study of laminar flame wall quenching. Combust. Flame 40, 81–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
55. Williams, F. A. 1985 Combustion Theory, 2nd edn. Addison Wesley Publishing Company.Google Scholar
56. Yoo, C. S. & Im, H. G. 2007 Characteristic boundary conditions for simulations of compressible reacting flows with multi-dimensional, viscous and reaction effects. Combust. Theor. Model. 11 (2), 259–286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
57. Yoo, C. S., Sankaran, R. & Chen, J. H. 2009 Three-dimensional direct numerical simulation of a turbulent lifted hydrogen jet flame in heated coflow: flame stabilization and structure. J. Fluid Mech. 640, 453–481.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
58. Yoo, C. S., Wang, Y., Trouvé, A. & Im, H. G. 2005 Characteristic boundary conditions for direct simulations of turbulent counterflow flames. Combust. Theor. Model. 9 (4), 617–646.CrossRefGoogle Scholar