Advertisement

Study of Swirl Contribution to Stabilization Turbulent Diffusion Flame

  • Djemoui LalmiEmail author
  • Redjem Hadef
Chapter

Abstract

The objective of this study is to predict numerically the flow effects of two coaxial jets with different swirl numbers (swirl number) on the characteristics of the turbulent diffusion flame. The study focused on the rotation influence of the secondary flow; that is to say, two configurations were processed and compared: co-swirl and counter-swirl. Obviously, the latter showed higher shear than the first. The calculation results were validated by actual measurement (laser anemometry) of the same configuration for two cases: co- and counter-swirl for reactant with combustion. The calculation results focused on the characteristics of the average flow (reactive) and its turbulence for the two cases cited above. Different parameters were presented such as velocities, temperature, turbulent kinetic energy, and mass fractions of species. The obtained results confirm the swirl effects to stabilize the flame.

Keywords

Swirl Simulation Turbulence Flame stabilization Co- and counter-swirl 

References

  1. Anacleto PM, Femandes EC, Heitor MV, Shtork SI (2003) Swirl flow structure and flame characteristics in a model lean premixed combustor. Combust Sci Tech 175:1369–1388Google Scholar
  2. Chen RH, Driscoll JF (1988) The role of the recirculation vortex in improving fuel air mixing within swirling flames. Proc Combust Institute 22:531–540Google Scholar
  3. Claypole TC, Syred N (1981) The effect of swirl burner aerodynamics on NOx formation. Proc Combust Inst 18:81–89Google Scholar
  4. Ducruix S, Schuller T, Durox D, Candel S (2003) J Propul Power 19:722–734Google Scholar
  5. Gupta AK, Lilley DG, Syred N (1984) Swirl flows. Abacus Press, Tunbridge WellsGoogle Scholar
  6. Gupta AK, Ramavajjala M, Chomiak J, Marchionna N (1991) Burner geometry effects on combustion and emission characteristics using variable geometry swirl combustor. J Propul Power 7:473–480Google Scholar
  7. Kucukgokoglan S, Aroussi A, Pickering SJ (1999) Prediction of interaction between burners in multi-burner systems. University of Nottingham, Nottingham, NG7 2RD, UK, p 1Google Scholar
  8. Lalmi D, Hadef R (2015a) 3D, numerical study of turbulent mixing (fuel/air) in confined swirling flow. Congrèe Français de Mécanique 24–28Google Scholar
  9. Lalmi D, Hadef R (2015b) Evaluation of the statistical approach for the simulation of a swirling turbulent flow. Am J Mech Eng AJME 03(N°3A27-31)Google Scholar
  10. Lalmi D, Hadef R (2015c) evaluation of the performance of two turbulent models in the prediction of a swirling flow. Int J Mech Energy (IJME) 3(1) (ISSN: 2286-584)Google Scholar
  11. Lalmi D, Hadef R (2015d) Numerical simulation of co- and counter- swirls on the isothermal flow and mixture field in a combustion chamber. Adv Appl Fluid Mech AAFM 18(2):199–212Google Scholar
  12. Magnussen BF, Hjertager BH (1976) On mathematical models of turbulent combustion with special emphasis on soot formation and combustion. Proc Combust Inst 16:719–729CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Martin C, Benoit L, Sommerer Y, Nicoud F, Poinsot T (2006) Large-eddy simulation and acoustic analysis of a swirled staged turbulent combustor. AIAA J 44:741–749Google Scholar
  14. Merkle K, Haessler H, Büchner H, Zarzalis N (2003) Effect of co- and counter-swirl on the isothermal flow- and mixture-field of an airblast atomizer nozzle. Int J Heat Fluid Flow 24:529–537Google Scholar
  15. Ridluan A, Eiamsa-ard S, Promvonge P (2007) Numerical simulation of 3D turbulent isothermal flow in a vortex combustor. Int Commun Heat Mass Transfer 34:860–869Google Scholar
  16. Rawe R, Kremer H (1981) Stability limits of natural gas diffusion flames with swirl. Proc Combust Institute 18:667–677Google Scholar
  17. Roux S, Lartigue G, Poinsot T, Meier U, Berat C (2005) Studies of mean and unsteady flow in a swirled combustor using experiments, acoustic analysis, and large eddy simulations. Combust Flame 141:40–54Google Scholar
  18. Selle L, Lartigue G, Poinsot T, Koch R, Schildmacher KU, Krebs W, Kaufman P, Veynante D (2004) Compressible large eddy simulation of turbulent combustion in complex geometry on unstructured meshes. Combust Flame 137:489–505Google Scholar
  19. Syred N (2006) Prog Energy Combust Sci 32:93–161Google Scholar
  20. Syred N, Beer JM (1974) Combustion on swirling flows. Combust Flame 23:143–181Google Scholar
  21. Tangirala V, Chen RH, Driscoll JF (1987) Combust Sci Technol 51–75Google Scholar
  22. Wegner B, Maltsev A, Schneider C, Sadiki A, Dreizler A, Janicka J (2004a) Assessment of unsteady RANS in predicting swirl flow instability based on LES and experiments. Int J Heat Fluid Flow 25:528–536CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Wegner B, Kempf A, Schneider C, Sadiki A, Dreizler A, Janicka J, Schäfer M (2004b) large eddy simulation of combustion processes under gas turbine conditions. Prog Comput Fluid Dyn 4:257–263CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Widmann JF, Charagundla SR, Presser C (1999) Report No. NISTIR 6370, National Institute of Standards and TechnologyGoogle Scholar
  25. Zhang J, Nieh S (1997) Comprehensive modelling of pulverized coal combustion in a vortex combustor. Fuel 76:123–131Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Exact Sciences, Natural Sciences and LifeUniversity of L’Arbi Ben M’hidiOebAlgeria
  2. 2.Unité de Recherche Appliquée en Energies RenouvelablesURAERGhardaïaAlgeria
  3. 3.Faculty of Sciences and Applied SciencesUniversity of L’Arbi Ben M’hidiOum El BouaghiAlgeria

Personalised recommendations