Applied Physics B

, 125:168 | Cite as

Two-dimensional temperature field imaging in laminar sooting flames using a two-line Kr PLIF approach

  • Abinash SahooEmail author
  • Venkateswaran Narayanaswamy
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Laser-Induced Incandescence


A two-line Kr PLIF approach is presented for thermometry in moderately sooting flames. This technique leverages the spectral line-broadening phenomenon to choose the two excitation wavelengths whose Kr PLIF signal ratio effectively cancels out the composition dependence while retaining the temperature dependence. Furthermore, the Kr PLIF ratio for the chosen wavelengths also exhibits a monotonic trend with temperature, and span a wide range of values to ensure adequate dynamic range on the measurements. The technique is evaluated in the near field of an ethylene laminar jet flame where the peak soot loading was about \(0.15~\mathrm{ppm}\). Krypton gas was added in small amounts to both fuel mixture and air co-flow. Comparing the Kr PLIF fields with the LII fields showed that the main source of interference to Kr PLIF signal is from the soot interference, which contributed to a maximum of \(20-50\%\) of the total signal at different axial locations. Interestingly, the interference from PAH molecules was observed to be less than \(1\%\) of the total signal. The soot interference was retained during data processing to obtain an evaluation of the measurement uncertainty caused by the soot interference and the maximum soot loading that could be tolerated. The temperature in the regions away from soot layers exhibit very consistent values with literature, where the value extended from close to \(300~\mathrm{K}\) in the fuel core and air co-flow through about \(2200~\mathrm{K}\) in the reaction zone. The presence of soot, however, caused a noticeable depreciation in the measured temperature by about \(200~\mathrm{K}\) at the peak sooting location. It is further noted that the mean systematic error of \(50~\mathrm{K}\) is expected at \(f_v = 60~\mathrm{ppb}\). This limit is observed to be a strong function of the fractional contribution of the soot interference to the overall signal and can be substantially extended by subtracting the soot interference and using higher excitation energies.



The authors acknowledge the funding support from NSF CBET grant 1511216 and ARO grant W911NF-16-1-0087 with Ralph Anthenien as program manager for this work. The first author also acknowledges the support from North Carolina State University Graduate Fellowship Award to execute this work.


  1. 1.
    I. Glassman, R.A. Yetter, N.G. Glumac, Combustion (Elsevier Inc. Press, Amsterdam, 1977)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    C.K. Law, Combustion physics (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2006)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    S.R. Turns, An introduction to combustion: concepts and applications (McGraw-Hill Press, New York City, 1996)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    C.S. McEnally, L.D. Pfefferle, B. Atakan, K. Kohse-Höinghaus, Studies of aromatic hydrocarbon formation mechanisms in flames: progress towards closing the fuel gap. Prog. Energy Combust. Sci. 32(3), 247–294 (2006)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    H.A. Michelsen, Probing soot formation, chemical and physical evolution, and oxidation: a review of in situ diagnostic techniques and needs. Proc. Combust. Inst. 36(1), 717–735 (2017)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    C. R. Shaddix, J. Zhang, Joint Temperature-Volume Fraction Statistics of Soot in Turbulent Non-Premixed Jet Flames, in 8th U.S. National Combustion Meeting, vol. 3 (Park City, Utah, 2013), pp. 2386–2393.
  7. 7.
    C. R. Shaddix, J. Zhang, R. W. Schefer, J. Doom, C. Joseph, S. Kook, L. M. Pickett, H. Wang, Understanding and Predicting Soot Generation in Turbulent Non-Premixed Jet Flames. Technical Report 7178, Sandia National Laboratories, Livermore, CA (2010).
  8. 8.
    C.R. Shaddix, J.E. Harrington, K.C. Smyth, Quantitative measurements of enhanced soot production in a flickering methane/air diffusion flame. Combust. Flame 99, 723–732 (1994)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    R.J. Santoro, H.G. Semerjian, R.A. Dobbins, Soot particle measurements in diffusion flames. Combust. Flame 51, 203–218 (1983)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    R.J. Santoro, T.T. Yeh, J.J. Horvath, H.G. Semerjian, The transport and growth of soot particles in laminar diffusion flames. Combust. Sci. Technol. 53(2–3), 89–115 (1987)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    H. Pitsch, E. Riesmeier, N. Peters, Unsteady flamelet modeling of soot formation in turbulent diffusion flames. Combust. Sci. Technol. 158(1), 389–406 (2000)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    A. Attili, F. Bisetti, M.E. Mueller, H. Pitsch, Damköhler number effects on soot formation and growth in turbulent nonpremixed flames. Proc. Combust. Inst. 35(2), 1215–1223 (2015)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    H. Wang, Formation of nascent soot and other condensed-phase materials in flames. Proc. Combust. Inst. 33(1), 41–67 (2011)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    A.C. Eckbreth, Laser diagnostics for combustion temperature and species (Gordon and Breach Publishers, Amsterdam, 1996)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    R.A. Patton, K.N. Gabet, N. Jiang, W.R. Lempert, J.A. Sutton, Multi-kHz temperature imaging in turbulent non-premixed flames using planar Rayleigh scattering. Appl. Phys. B Lasers Opt. 108(2), 377–392 (2012)ADSGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    C. Espey, J.E. Dec, Planar laser rayleigh scattering for quantitative vapor-fuel imaging in a diesel jet. Combust. Flame 109, 65–86 (1997)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    A.G. Hsu, V. Narayanaswamy, N.T. Clemens, J.H. Frank, Mixture fraction imaging in turbulent non-premixed flames with two-photon LIF of krypton. Proc. Combust. Inst. 33(1), 759–766 (2011)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    R.B. Miles, W.R. Lempert, J.N. Forkey, Laser Rayleigh scattering. Measure. Sci. Technol. 12(5), R33–R51 (2001). ADSGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    J.N. Forkey, Development and demonstration of filtered Rayleigh scattering: a laser based flow diagnostic for planar measurement of velocity, temperature and pressure. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses. ProQuest Dissertations Publishing, Princeton University (1996)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    G. Elliott, N. Glumac, C. Carter, Molecular filtered rayleigh scattering applied to combustion. Measure. Sci. Technol. 12, 452–466 (2001)ADSGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    B. Kip, R. Meier, Determination of the local temperature at a sample during Raman experiments using stokes and anti-stokes Raman bands. Appl. Spectrosc. 44(4), 707–711 (2000)ADSGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    F. Rabenstein, A. Leipertz, Two-dimensional temperature determination in the exhaust region of a laminar flat-flame burner with linear Raman scattering. Appl. Opt. 36(27), 6989–6996 (1997)ADSGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    P.E. Bengtsson, M. Aldén, S. Kröll, D. Nilsson, Vibrational CARS thermometry in sooty flames: quantitative evaluation of C2 absorption interference. Combust. Flame 82(2), 199–210 (1990)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    P.E. Bengtsson, L. Martinsson, M. Aldén, S. Kröll, Rotational cars thermometry in sooting flames. Combust. Sci. Technol. 81(1–3), 129–140 (1992)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    S.P. Kearney, M.N. Jackson, Dual-pump coherent anti-stokes Raman scattering thermometry in heavily sooting flames. AIAA J. 45(12), 2947–2956 (2007)ADSGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    S.P. Kearney, K. Frederickson, T.W. Grasser, Dual-pump coherent anti-stokes Raman scattering thermometry in a sooting turbulent pool fire. Proc. Combust. Inst. 32 I(1), 871–878 (2009)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    C.J. Kliewer, Y. Gao, T. Seeger, J. Kiefer, B.D. Patterson, T.B. Settersten, Picosecond time-resolved pure-rotational coherent anti-Stokes Raman spectroscopy in sooting flames. Proc. Combust. Inst. 33(1), 831–838 (2011)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    R. Giezendanner-Thoben, U. Meier, W. Meier, M. Aigner, Phase-locked temperature measurements by two-line OH PLIF thermometry of a self-excited combustion instability in a gas turbine model combustor. Flow Turbul. Combust. 75(1–4), 317–333 (2005)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    J.L. Palmer, R.K. Hanson, combustion gases with two-line OH fluorescence. Appl. Opt. 35(3), 435–499 (1996)ADSGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    W.G. Bessler, F. Hildenbrand, C. Schulz, Two-line laser-induced fluorescence imaging of vibrational temperatures in a NO-seeded flame. Appl. Opti. 40(6), 748–756 (2001)ADSGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    N. Omenetto, P. Benetti, G. Rossi, Flame temperature measurements by means of atomic fluorescence spectrometry. Spectrochim. Acta Part B 27(10), 453–461 (1972)ADSGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    N. Omenetto, P. Benetti, L.P. Hart, J.D. Winefordner, C. Th, J. Alkemade, Non-linear optical behavior in atomic fluorescence flame spectrometry. Spectrochim. Acta Part B 28(8), 289–300 (1973)ADSGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    J.E. Dec, J.O. Keller, High speed thermometry using two-line atomic fluorescence. Symposium (International) on Combustion 21(1), 1737–1745 (1988). Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    J. Engström, J. Nygren, M. Aldén, C.F. Kaminski, Two-line atomic fluorescence as a temperature probe for highly sooting flames. Opt. Lett. 25(19), 1469–1471 (2000)ADSGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    P.R. Medwell, Q.N. Chan, P.A.M. Kalt, Z.T. Alwahabi, B.B. Dally, G.J. Nathan, Development of temperature imaging using two-line atomic fluorescence. Appl. Opt. 48(6), 1237–48 (2009)ADSGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Q.N. Chan, P.R. Medwell, Z.T. Alwahabi, B.B. Dally, G.J. Nathan, Assessment of interferences to nonlinear two-line atomic fluorescence (NTLAF) in sooty flames. Appl. Phy. B 104(1), 189–198 (2011)ADSGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    D. Gu, Z. Sun, B.B. Dally, P.R. Medwell, Z.T. Alwahabi, G.J. Nathan, Simultaneous measurements of gas temperature, soot volume fraction and primary particle diameter in a sooting lifted turbulent ethylene/air non-premixed flame. Combust. Flame 179, 33–50 (2017)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    N. Hansen, R.S. Tranter, K. Moshammer, J.B. Randazzo, J.P.A. Lockhart, P.G. Fugazzi, T. Tao, A.L. Kastengren, 2D-imaging of sampling-probe perturbations in laminar premixed flames using Kr X-ray fluorescence. Combust. Flame 181, 214–224 (2017)Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    O. Park, R.A. Burns, O.R.H. Buxton, N.T. Clemens, Mixture fraction, soot volume fraction, and velocity imaging in the soot-inception region of a turbulent non-premixed jet flame. Proc. Combust. Inst. 36(1), 899–907 (2017)Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    D. Zelenak, V. Narayanaswamy, Composition-independent mean temperature measurements in laminar diffusion flames using spectral lineshape information. Experiments in Fluids 58(10), 147 (2017). ADSGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    D.C. Zelenak, An investigation of the Krypton laser-induced fluorescence spectral lineshape for composition-independent thermometry applied to combustion environments. PhD thesis, North Crolina State University (2018).
  42. 42.
    D.C. Zelenak, V. Narayanaswamy, Demonstration of a two-line Kr PLIF thermometry technique for gaseous combustion applications. Opt. Lett. 44(2), 367–370 (2019)ADSGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    D.C. Zelenak, W. Sealy, V. Narayanaswamy, Collisional broadening of Kr (4p6S01 to 5p[3/2]2) transition with combustion species as collision partners. J. Quant. Spectrosc. Radiat. Transf. 174, 28–38 (2016)ADSGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    A. Thorne, U. Litzén, S. Johansson, Spectrophysics – principles and applications (Springer, Berlin, 1999)Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    J.C. Miller, Two-photon resonant multiphoton ionization and stimulated emission in krypton and xenon. Phys. Rev. A 40(12), 6969–6976 (1989)ADSGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    N.H. Qamar, G.J. Nathan, Z.T. Alwahabi, K.D. King, The effect of global mixing on soot volume fraction: measurements in simple jet, precessing jet, and bluff body flames. Proc. Combust. Inst. 30(1), 1493–1500 (2005)Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    V. Narayanaswamy, N.T. Clemens, Simultaneous LII and PIV measurements in the soot formation region of turbulent non-premixed jet flames. Proc. Combust. Inst. 34(1), 1455–1463 (2013)Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    J. Zhu, M.Y. Choi, G.W. Mulholland, S.L. Manzello, L.A. Gritzo, J. Suo-Anttila, Measurement of visible and near-IR optical properties of soot produced from laminar flames. Proc. Combust. Inst. 29(2), 2367–2374 (2002)Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    C.S. McEnally, A.M. Schaffer, M.B. Long, L.D. Pfefferle, M.D. Smooke, M.B. Colket, Computational and Experimental Study of Soot Formation in a Co-flow, Laminar Ethylene Diffusion Flame. Symposium (International) on Combustion 27(1), 1497–1505 (1998). Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    M.D. Smooke, C.S. McEnally, L.D. Pfefferle, R.J. Hall, M.B. Colket, Computational and experimental study of soot formation in a coflow, laminar diffusion flame. Combust. Flame 117(1–2), 117–139 (1999)Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    A. Gomez, M.G. Littman, I. Glassman, Comparative study of soot formation on the centerline of axisymmetric laminar diffusion flames: fuel and temperature effects. Combust. Flame 70(2), 225–241 (1987)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Mechanical and Aerospace EngineeringNorth Carolina State UniversityRaleighUSA

Personalised recommendations