High Temperature

, Volume 57, Issue 3, pp 430–437 | Cite as

Effects of Gravity on Plane-Symmetric Rod-Stabilized Flame Stabilization

  • A. I. KrikunovaEmail author


The current research is focused on the study of methane-air flame stabilization under the flow geometry variation for normal and upside-down (reverse) flame orientation. The experimental studies of plane-symmetrical rod-stabilized flames under the normal and reverse-oriented gravity conditions were carried out. The results of numerical simulation are presented. The blow-off is shown to be the function of stabilization-body position. We consider both V-shaped and M-shaped plane-symmetrical open flames for different Reynolds numbers, fuel-air ratio and flame orientation relative to the gravity direction. Blow-off limits appear to be independent on the gravity for the lean methane-air mixtures while the quenching processes are different for the normal and reverse-oriented gravity conditions. Blow-off is also accompanied by the chemiluminescence intensity decrease under reverse-oriented gravity conditions, which is exhibited in localized plume extinction and gradual quenching. While under the normal gravity, it appears via stepwise vortex separation from the lateral plume parts. Under such conditions chemiluminescence intensity remains almost constant. The blow-off time scale under the normal gravity conditions is bigger as compared to reversed-oriented ones by several times.



The experimental results were provided within the Russian Foundation for Basic Research, project no. 18-31-00462.

The numerical simulation was supported by the Ministry of education and science of the Russian Fede-ration within the framework of the research activities on the subject of “Investigation of electrophysical and thermal processes in multiphase and reactive environments,” state registration no. AAAA-A-16-116051810083-4.


  1. 1.
    Kim, M.K., Chung, S.H., and Kim, H.H., Combust. Flame, 2012, vol. 159, no. 3, p. 1151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Wu, W., Fuh, C.A., and Wang, C., Combust. Sci. Technol., 2015, vol. 187, no. 7, p. 999.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Yu, Y., Li, X., Zhao, S., An, X., Yu, X., Chen, D., and Sun, R., Combust. Sci. Technol., 2017, vol. 189, no. 10, p. 1681.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chaparro, A.A. and Cetegen, B.M., Combust. Flame, 2006, vol. 144, nos. 1–2, p. 318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Krikunova, A.I., Son, E.E., and Saveliev, A.S., J. Phys.: Conf. Ser., 2016, vol. 774, no. 1, 012087.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Colorado, A. and McDonell, V., Combust. Sci. Technol., 2017, vol. 189, no. 12, p. 2115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Zukoski, E.E. and Marble, F.E., Proc. Gas Dyn. Symp. Aerothermochem., 1955, p. 205.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    The Aerothermodynamics of Aircraft Gas Turbine Engines, Oates, G.C., Ed., Air Force Propulsion Laboratory, AFAPL-TR-78-52, 1978, chap. 21, p. 45.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Candel, S., Proc. Combust. Inst., 2002, vol. 29, no. 1, p. 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bédat, B. and Cheng, R.K., Combust. Flame, 1996, vol. 107, nos. 1–2, p. 13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Cheng, R.K., Bédat, B., and Kostiuk, L.W., Combust. Flame, 1999, vol. 116, no. 3, p. 360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hegde Nyma, U., Zhou, L., and Bahadori, M.Y., Combust. Sci. Technol., 1994, vol. 102, no. 1, p. 95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Nair, S. and Lieuwen, T.C., J. Propul. Power, 2007, vol. 23, no. 2, p. 421.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Wang, Y., König, J., and Eigenbrod, C., Microgravity Sci. Technol., 2003, vol. 14, no. 3, p. 25.ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Aksenov, A.A., Komp’yut. Issled. Model., 2017, vol. 9, no. 1, p. 5.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Pleiades Publishing, Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology (State University)DolgoprudnyRussia
  2. 2.Joint Institute for High Temperatures, Russian Academy of SciencesMoscowRussia

Personalised recommendations