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

Flame Dynamics With Hydrogen Addition at Lean Blowout Limits

[+] Author and Article Information
Shengrong Zhu

Turbine Innovation and Energy
Research (TIER) Center,
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Louisiana State University,
Baton Rouge, LA 70803
e-mail: shengrong11@gmail.com

Sumanta Acharya

Professor
Turbine Innovation and Energy
Research (TIER) Center,
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Louisiana State University,
Baton Rouge, LA 70803
e-mail: acharya@me.lsu.edu

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Coal, Biomass and Alternate Fuels Committee of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING FOR GAS TURBINES AND POWER. Manuscript received October 9, 2013; final manuscript received November 27, 2013; published online January 9, 2014. Editor: David Wisler.

J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power 136(5), 051506 (Jan 09, 2014) (12 pages) Paper No: GTP-13-1359; doi: 10.1115/1.4026321 History: Received October 09, 2013; Revised November 27, 2013

Lean premixed combustion is widely used in power generation due to low nitric oxide emissions. Recent interest in syngas requires a better understanding of the role of hydrogen addition on the combustion process. In the present study, the extinction process of hydrogen enriched premixed flames near lean blow out (LBO) in a swirl-stabilized combustor has been examined in both unconfined and confined configurations. High speed images of the flame chemiluminescence are recorded, and a proper orthogonal decomposition (POD) procedure is used to extract the dominant flame dynamics during the LBO process. By examining the POD modes, the spectral information and the statistical properties of POD coefficients, the effect of hydrogen addition on the LBO processes are analyzed and described in the paper. Results show that in unconfined flames, the shear layer mode along with flame rotation with local quenching and reignition is dominant in the methane-only case. For the open hydrogen enriched flames, the extinction times are longer and are linked to the lower minimum ignition energy for hydrogen that facilitates reignition events. In confined methane flames, a conical flame is observed and the POD mode representing the burning in the central recirculation zone appears to be dominant. For the 60% hydrogen enriched flame, a columnar burning pattern is observed and the fluctuation energies are evenly spread across several POD modes making this structure more prone to external disturbances and shorter extinction times.

Copyright © 2014 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Nair, S., 2006, “Acoustic Characterization of Flame Blowout Phenomenon,” Ph.D. thesis, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA.
Bender, W. R., 2006, “Lean Premixed Combustion,” U.S. Department of Energy, http://www.netl.doe.gov
Chao, Y. C., Chang, Y. L., Wu, C. Y., and Cheng, T. S., 2000, “An Experimental Investigation of the Blowout Process of a Jet Flame,” Proc. Combust. Inst., 28, pp. 335–342. [CrossRef]
Nicholson, H., and Field, J., 1951, “Some Experimental Techniques for the Investigation of Mechanism of Flame Stabilization in the Wakes of Bluff Bodies,” Proc. Combust. Inst., 3, pp. 44–68.
De Zilwa, S. R. N., Uhm, J. H., and Whitelaw, J. H., 2000, “Combustion Oscillations Close to the Lean Flammability Limit,” Combust. Sci. Technol., 160, pp. 231–258. [CrossRef]
Li, H., Zhou, X., Jeffries, J. B., and Hanson, R. K., 2007, “Active Control of Lean Blowout in a Swirl-Stabilized Combustor Using a Tunable Diode Laser,” Proc. Combust. Inst., 31, pp. 3215–3223. [CrossRef]
Chaudhuri, S., Kostka, S., Renfro, M. W., and Cetegen, B. M., 2010, “Blowoff Dynamics of Bluff Body Stabilized Turbulent Premixed Flames,” Combust. Flame, 157, pp. 790–802. [CrossRef]
Nair, S., and Lieuwen, T., 2007, “Near-Blowoff Dynamics of a Bluff-Body Stabilized Flame,” J. Propul. Power, 21(1), pp. 32–39. [CrossRef]
Smith, C., Nickolaus, D., Leach, T., Kiel, B., and Garwick, K., 2007, “LES Blowout Analysis of Premixed Flow Past V-Gutter Flameholder,” 45th AIAA Aerospace Sciences, Meeting and Exhibit, Reno, NV, January 8–11, AIAA Paper No. 2007-170. [CrossRef]
Longwell, J. P., 1953, “Flame Stabilization by Bluff Bodies and Turbulent Flames in Ducts,” Proc. Combust. Inst., 4, pp. 90–97.
Williams, F. A., 1966, “Flame Stabilization of Premixed Turbulent Gases,” Applied Mechanics Surveys, H. N.Abramson, H.Liebowitz, J. M.Crowley, and S.Juhasz, eds., Spartan Books, Washington, DC, pp. 1157–1170.
Williams, G. C., Hottel, H. C., and Scurlock, A. C., 1949, “Flame Stabilization and Propagation in High Velocity Gas Streams,” Proc. Combust. Inst., 3, pp. 21–40.
Kundu, K. M., Banerjee, D., and Bhaduri, D., 1980, “On Flame Stabilization by Bluff-Bodies,” ASME J. Eng. Power, 102, pp. 209–214. [CrossRef]
Kundu, K. M., Banerjee, D., and Bhaduri, D., 1977, “Theoretical Analysis on Flame Stabilization by a Bluff-Body,” Combust. Sci. Technol., 17, pp. 153–162. [CrossRef]
Zukoski, E. E., 1954, “Flame Stabilization on Bluff Bodies at Low and Intermediate Reynolds Numbers,” Ph.D. thesis, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA.
Spalding, D. B., 1953, “Theoretical Aspects of Flame Stabilization,” Aircr. Eng., 25, pp. 264–276.
Zukoski, E. E., 1997, “Afterburners,” Aero-Thermodynamics of Gas Turbine and Rocket Propulsion, G. C.Oates, ed., AIAA, Reston, VA.
Yamaguchi, S., Ohiwa, N., and Hasegawa, T., 1985, “Structure and Blow-Off Mechanism of Rod-Stabilized Premixed Flame,” Combust. Flame, 62, pp. 31–41. [CrossRef]
Pan, J. C., Vangsness, M. D., and Ballal, D. R., 1992, “Aerodynamics of Bluff-Body Stabilized Confined Turbulent Premixed Flames,” ASME J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power, 114, pp. 783–789. [CrossRef]
Füri, M., Papas, P., and Monkewitz, P. A., 2000, “Non-Premixed Jet Flame Pulsations Near Extinction,” Proc. Combust. Inst., 28, pp. 831–838. [CrossRef]
Christiansen, E. W., Law, C. K., and Sung, C. J., 2000, “The Role of Pulsating Instability and Global Lewis Number on the Flammability Limit of Lean Heptane/Air Flames,” Proc. Combust. Inst.29, pp. 807–814. [CrossRef]
Shanbhogue, S., Husain, S., and Lieuwen, T., 2009, “Lean Blowoff of Bluff Body Stabilized Flames: Scaling and Dynamics,” Prog. Energy Combust. Sci., 35, pp. 98–120. [CrossRef]
Hawkes, E. R., and Chen, J. H., 2004, “Direct Numerical Simulation of Hydrogen-Enriched Lean Premixed Methane–Air Flames,” Combust. Flame, 138, pp. 242–258. [CrossRef]
Choundhuri, A. R., and Gollahalli, S. R., 2003, “Characteristics of Hydrogen–Hydrocarbon Composite Fuel Turbulent Jet Flame,” Int. J. Hydrogen Energy, 28, pp. 445–454. [CrossRef]
Day, M. S., Bell, J. B., Cheng, R. K., Tachibana, S., Beckner, V. E., and Lijewski, M. J., 2009, “Cellular Burning in Lean Premixed Turbulent Hydrogen Air Flames: Coupling Experimental and Computational Analysis at the Laboratory Scale,” J. Phys.: Conf. Ser., 180, p. 012031. [CrossRef]
Birbaud, A. L., Durox, D., Ducruix, S., and Candel, S., 2007, “Dynamics of Confined Premixed Flames Submitted to Upstream Acoustic Modulations,” Proc. Combust. Inst., 31(1), pp. 1257–1265. [CrossRef]
Durox, D., Schuller, T., and Candel, S., 2005, “Combustion Dynamics of Inverted Conical Flames,” Proc. Combust. Inst., 30, pp. 1717–1724. [CrossRef]
Kulsheimer, C., and Buchner, H., 2002, “Combustion Dynamics of Turbulent Swirling Flames,” Combust. Flame, 131, pp. 70–84. [CrossRef]
Archer, S. S., 2005, “Morphology of Unconfined and Confined Swirling Flow Under Non-Reacting and Combustion Conditions,” Ph.D. thesis, University of Maryland, College Park, MD.
Sirovich, L., 1987, “Turbulence and the Dynamics of Coherent Structures. Part I: Coherent Structures,” Q. Appl. Math., 45(3), pp. 561–571.
Caver, D., and Meyer, K. E., 2012, “LES of Turbulent Jet in Cross Flow: Part 2—POD Analysis and Identification of Coherent Structures,” Int. J. Heat Fluid Flow, 36, pp. 35–46. [CrossRef]
Kostka, S., Lynch, A. C., Huelskamp, B. C., Kiel, B. V., Gord, J. R., and Roy, S., 2012, “Characterization of Flame-Shedding Behavior Behind a Bluff-Body Using Proper Orthogonal Decomposition,” Combust. Flame, 159, pp. 2872–2882. [CrossRef]
Kopp-Vaughan, K. M., Jensen, T. R., Cetegen, B. M., and Renfro, M. W., 2012, “Analysis of Blowoff Dynamics From Flames With Stratified Fueling,” Proc. Combust. Inst., 34, pp. 1491–1498. [CrossRef]
Zhu, S., and Acharya, S., 2012, “Dynamics of Lean Blowout in Premixed Combustion With Hydrogen Addition,” ASME Paper No. GT2012-69189. [CrossRef]
Kuchta, J. M., 1985, Investigation of Fire and Explosion Accidents in the Chemical, Mining, and Fuel-Related Industries , The International Society of Automation, Research Triangle Park, NC.
Bizon, K., Continillo, G., Leistner, K. C., Mancaruso, E., and Vaglieco, B. M., 2009, “POD-Based Analysis of Cycle-To-Cycle Variations in an Optically Accessible Diesel Engine,” Proc. Combust. Inst., 32, pp. 2809–2816. [CrossRef]
D'Agostino, R. B., and Stephens, M. A., eds., 1986, Goodness of Fit Techniques, Marcel Dekker, New York.

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Sectional view of the swirl injector

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Time series of normalized light intensity for (a) unconfined CH4, (b) unconfined 60% H2, (c) confined CH4, and (d) confined 60% H2

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Calculated POD modes for unconfined CH4 flame at ΦLBO = 0.65. Contour scale: red-positive maximum (negative maximum for mode 1), blue-negative minimum (positive minimum for mode 0).

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Image sequence for unconfined CH4 flame at ΦLBO = 0.65 captured from top with 30 deg inclination angle (while dot-dash and dash lines denote the burner center line and the boundary of center-body, respectively). Contour scale: red-maximum, blue-minimum.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Typical image sequence reconstructed with mode 0 and mode 3 for unconfined CH4 flame at ΦLBO = 0.65. Contour scale: red-maximum, blue-minimum.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Typical image sequence reconstructed with mode 0 and mode 4 for unconfined CH4 flame at ΦLBO = 0.65. Contour scale: red-maximum, blue-minimum.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Power spectrum for mode 1–6 for unconfined CH4 flame at ΦLBO = 0.65

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Calculated POD modes for unconfined 60% H2 flame at ΦLBO = 0.33. Contour scale: red-positive maximum (negative maximum for mode 1), blue-negative minimum (positive minimum for mode 0).

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Calculated POD modes for confined CH4 flame at ΦLBO = 0.52. Contour scale: red-positive maximum (negative maximum for mode 1), blue-negative minimum (positive minimum for mode 0).

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Amplitudes for first two modes for confined CH4 flame

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Typical image sequence reconstructed with mode 0 and mode 2 for confined CH4 flame at ΦLBO = 0.52. Contour scale: red-maximum, blue-minimum.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Calculated POD modes for confined 60% H2 flame ΦLBO = 0.22. Contour scale: red-positive maximum (negative maximum for mode 1), blue-negative minimum (positive minimum for mode 0).

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Typical image sequence reconstructed with mode 0 and mode 3 for confined 60% H2 flame at ΦLBO = 0.22. Contour scale: red-maximum, blue-minimum.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Typical image sequence reconstructed with mode 0 and mode 4 for confined 60% H2 flame at ΦLBO = 0.22. Contour scale: red-maximum, blue-minimum.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Power spectrum for modes 1–5 for confined 60% H2 flame

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Statistical properties of POD mode amplitudes for confined 60% H2 flame

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