0
Research Papers: Gas Turbines: Combustion, Fuels, and Emissions

Large Eddy Simulation-Based Study of the Influence of Thermal Boundary Condition and Combustor Confinement on Premix Flame Transfer Functions

[+] Author and Article Information
Wolfgang Polifke

e-mail: polifke@td.mw.tum.de
Lehrstuhl für Thermodynamik,
Technische Universität München,
Boltzmannstrasse 15,
85748 Garching, Germany

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the International Gas Turbine Institute (IGTI) for publication in the Journal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and Power. Manuscript received July 16, 2012; final manuscript received August 6, 2012; published online January 8, 2013. Editor: Dilip R. Ballal.

J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power 135(2), 021502 (Jan 08, 2013) (9 pages) Paper No: GTP-12-1282; doi: 10.1115/1.4007734 History: Received July 16, 2012; Revised August 06, 2012

The influence of the thermal boundary condition at the combustor wall and combustor confinement on the dynamic flame response of a perfectly premixed axial swirl burner is investigated. Large eddy simulations are carried out using the dynamically thickened flame combustion model. Then system identification methods are used to determine the flame transfer function (FTF) from the computed time series data. Two configurations are compared against a reference case with a 90 mm × 90 mm combustor cross section and nonadiabatic walls: (1) a combustor cross section similar to the reference case with adiabatic combustor walls, and (2) a different confinement (160 mm × 160 mm) with nonadiabatic walls. It is found that combustor confinement and thermal boundary conditions have a noticeable influence on the flame response due to differences in the flame shape and flow field. In particular, the FTF computed with an adiabatic wall boundary condition which produces a flame with a significant heat release in both shear layers, differs significantly from the FTF with nonadiabatic walls, where the flame stabilizes only in the inner shear layer. The observed differences in the flow field and flame shape are discussed in relation to the unit impulse response of the flame. The impact of the differences in the FTF on stability limits is analyzed with a low-order thermoacoustic model.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2013 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Scheme of the numerical setup of the burner

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Mean axial velocity in the combustor middle cross plane (see Fig. 1). (a) HC-NA, (b) HC-A, and (c) LC-NA. Zero mean axial velocity isolines are shown in black.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Mean axial velocity (top), mean tangential velocity (middle), and turbulent kinetic energy (bottom) profiles at different positions of the middle cross plane shown in Fig. 1

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Normalized spatial distribution of heat release: (a) HC-NA, (b) HC-A, and (c) LC-NA. Line-of-sight integrated heat release. Dump plane of combustor at axial position = 0 m.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Area normalized axial heat release distribution

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Identified flame transfer functions. Harmonic excitation at 100 Hz for high confinement cases.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Instantaneous reaction rate for one cycle with harmonic excitation at 100 Hz

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

UIR from the FTF time lag model

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Flame transfer functions from the time lag model

Tables

Errata

Discussions

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