TECHNICAL PAPERS: Gas Turbines: Combustion and Fuels

Towards Modeling Lean Blow Out in Gas Turbine Flameholder Applications

[+] Author and Article Information
Won-Wook Kim, Jeffrey J. Lienau, Robert E. Malecki, Saadat Syed

 Pratt & Whitney, East Hartford, CT 06108

Paul R. Van Slooten, Meredith B. Colket

 United Technologies Research Center, East Hartford, CT 06108

J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power 128(1), 40-48 (Mar 01, 2004) (9 pages) doi:10.1115/1.2032450 History: Received October 01, 2003; Revised March 01, 2004

The objective of this study was to assess the accuracy of the large-eddy simulation (LES) methodology, with a simple combustion closure based on equilibrium chemistry, for simulating turbulent reacting flows behind a bluff body flameholder. Specifically, the variation in recirculation zone length with change in equivalence ratio was calculated and compared to experimental measurements. It was found that the present LES modeling approach can reproduce this variation accurately. However, it understated the recirculation zone length at the stoichiometric condition. The approach was assessed at the lean blow out condition to evaluate its behavior at the lean limit and to analyze the physics of combustion instability.

Copyright © 2006 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.



Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

Test using Taylor-Green vortex demonstrated that the Allstar code has second order of accuracy

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

Four component parts of turbulent combustion model

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

Combined PSR-PFR test indicates that chemical reaction at the stoichiometric condition has the most nonequilibrium nature

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

Schematic of the bluff body flameholder

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

Time-averaged axial velocity flow fields calculated by LES and RANS models; comparison of the mean axial velocity along the centerline of the combustor

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

Comparison of the axial distribution of the normalized reverse flow rate

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

Comparison of the axial profiles of turbulent kinetic energy at four different normal locations

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

Comparison of the time-averaged velocity field (depicted by the velocity vector arrows superimposed with the axial velocity contours) and the time-averaged temperature field at three different equivalence ratios (Φ=0.0, 0.7, and 1.4)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 9

Comparison of the mean axial velocity distribution at the combustor centerline with three different equivalence ratios (Φ=0.6, 1.0, and 1.4)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 10

Comparison between LES results and experimental data of the recirculation zone length as a function of equivalence ratio

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 11

Time sequence of instantaneous temperature fields at the lean blow out condition

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 12

Instantaneous temperature field at the rich blow out condition

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 13

Fourier transformation of the normalized pressure fluctuations for four different equivalence ratio cases



Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In