Model Comparisons of Flow and Chemical Kinetic Mechanisms for Methane–Air Combustion for Engineering Applications
The reasonably accurate numerical simulation of methane–air combustion is important for engineering purposes. In the present work, the validations of sub-models were carried out on a laboratory-scale turbulent jet flame, Sandia Flame D, in comparison with experimental data. The eddy dissipation conc...
| Main Authors: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
MDPI AG
2021-04-01
|
| Series: | Applied Sciences |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3417/11/9/4107 |
| _version_ | 1797535668347338752 |
|---|---|
| author | Di He Yusong Yu Yucheng Kuang Chaojun Wang |
| author_facet | Di He Yusong Yu Yucheng Kuang Chaojun Wang |
| author_sort | Di He |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | The reasonably accurate numerical simulation of methane–air combustion is important for engineering purposes. In the present work, the validations of sub-models were carried out on a laboratory-scale turbulent jet flame, Sandia Flame D, in comparison with experimental data. The eddy dissipation concept (EDC), which assumes that the molecular mixing and subsequent combustion occur in the fine structures, was used for the turbulence–chemistry interaction. The standard <i>k</i>-<i>ε</i> model (SKE) with the standard or the changed model constant <i>C</i><sub>1<i>ε</i></sub>, the realizable <i>k</i>-<i>ε</i> model (RKE), the shear-stress transport k-ω model (SST), and the Reynolds stress model (RSM) were compared with the detailed chemical kinetic mechanism of GRI-Mech 3.0. Different reaction treatments for the methane–air combustion were also validated with the available experimental data from the literature. In general, there were good agreements between predictions and measurements, which gave a good indication of the adequacy and accuracy of the method and its further applications for industry-scale turbulent combustion simulations. The differences between predictions and measured data might have come from the simplifications of the boundary settings, the turbulence model, the turbulence–reaction interaction, and the radiation heat transfer model. For engineering predictions of methane–air combustion, the mixture fraction probability density function (PDF) model for the partially premixed combustion with RSM is recommended due to its relatively low simulation expenses, acceptable accuracy predictions, and quantitatively good agreement with the experiments. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-10T11:48:37Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-dbd619b33b7848699b4afb00c5118d72 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2076-3417 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-10T11:48:37Z |
| publishDate | 2021-04-01 |
| publisher | MDPI AG |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Applied Sciences |
| spelling | doaj.art-dbd619b33b7848699b4afb00c5118d722023-11-21T17:55:08ZengMDPI AGApplied Sciences2076-34172021-04-01119410710.3390/app11094107Model Comparisons of Flow and Chemical Kinetic Mechanisms for Methane–Air Combustion for Engineering ApplicationsDi He0Yusong Yu1Yucheng Kuang2Chaojun Wang3Institute of Combustion and Thermal Systems, School of Mechanical, Electronic and Control Engineering, Beijing Jiaotong University, Beijing 100044, ChinaInstitute of Combustion and Thermal Systems, School of Mechanical, Electronic and Control Engineering, Beijing Jiaotong University, Beijing 100044, ChinaInstitute of Combustion and Thermal Systems, School of Mechanical, Electronic and Control Engineering, Beijing Jiaotong University, Beijing 100044, ChinaInstitute of Combustion and Thermal Systems, School of Mechanical, Electronic and Control Engineering, Beijing Jiaotong University, Beijing 100044, ChinaThe reasonably accurate numerical simulation of methane–air combustion is important for engineering purposes. In the present work, the validations of sub-models were carried out on a laboratory-scale turbulent jet flame, Sandia Flame D, in comparison with experimental data. The eddy dissipation concept (EDC), which assumes that the molecular mixing and subsequent combustion occur in the fine structures, was used for the turbulence–chemistry interaction. The standard <i>k</i>-<i>ε</i> model (SKE) with the standard or the changed model constant <i>C</i><sub>1<i>ε</i></sub>, the realizable <i>k</i>-<i>ε</i> model (RKE), the shear-stress transport k-ω model (SST), and the Reynolds stress model (RSM) were compared with the detailed chemical kinetic mechanism of GRI-Mech 3.0. Different reaction treatments for the methane–air combustion were also validated with the available experimental data from the literature. In general, there were good agreements between predictions and measurements, which gave a good indication of the adequacy and accuracy of the method and its further applications for industry-scale turbulent combustion simulations. The differences between predictions and measured data might have come from the simplifications of the boundary settings, the turbulence model, the turbulence–reaction interaction, and the radiation heat transfer model. For engineering predictions of methane–air combustion, the mixture fraction probability density function (PDF) model for the partially premixed combustion with RSM is recommended due to its relatively low simulation expenses, acceptable accuracy predictions, and quantitatively good agreement with the experiments.https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3417/11/9/4107eddy dissipation concept (EDC)Sandia Flame Dmethane–air combustionchemical kinetic mechanismprobability density function (PDF) |
| spellingShingle | Di He Yusong Yu Yucheng Kuang Chaojun Wang Model Comparisons of Flow and Chemical Kinetic Mechanisms for Methane–Air Combustion for Engineering Applications Applied Sciences eddy dissipation concept (EDC) Sandia Flame D methane–air combustion chemical kinetic mechanism probability density function (PDF) |
| title | Model Comparisons of Flow and Chemical Kinetic Mechanisms for Methane–Air Combustion for Engineering Applications |
| title_full | Model Comparisons of Flow and Chemical Kinetic Mechanisms for Methane–Air Combustion for Engineering Applications |
| title_fullStr | Model Comparisons of Flow and Chemical Kinetic Mechanisms for Methane–Air Combustion for Engineering Applications |
| title_full_unstemmed | Model Comparisons of Flow and Chemical Kinetic Mechanisms for Methane–Air Combustion for Engineering Applications |
| title_short | Model Comparisons of Flow and Chemical Kinetic Mechanisms for Methane–Air Combustion for Engineering Applications |
| title_sort | model comparisons of flow and chemical kinetic mechanisms for methane air combustion for engineering applications |
| topic | eddy dissipation concept (EDC) Sandia Flame D methane–air combustion chemical kinetic mechanism probability density function (PDF) |
| url | https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3417/11/9/4107 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT dihe modelcomparisonsofflowandchemicalkineticmechanismsformethaneaircombustionforengineeringapplications AT yusongyu modelcomparisonsofflowandchemicalkineticmechanismsformethaneaircombustionforengineeringapplications AT yuchengkuang modelcomparisonsofflowandchemicalkineticmechanismsformethaneaircombustionforengineeringapplications AT chaojunwang modelcomparisonsofflowandchemicalkineticmechanismsformethaneaircombustionforengineeringapplications |