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

Experimental Study of the Interaction of Water Sprays With Swirling Premixed Natural Gas Flames

[+] Author and Article Information
Stephan Lellek

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

Christoph Barfuß, Thomas Sattelmayer

Lehrstuhl für Thermodynamik,
Technische Universität München,
Garching 85748, Germany

Contributed by the Combustion and Fuels Committee of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING FOR GAS TURBINES AND POWER. Manuscript received June 27, 2016; final manuscript received June 30, 2016; published online September 13, 2016. Editor: David Wisler.

J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power 139(2), 021506 (Sep 13, 2016) (9 pages) Paper No: GTP-16-1279; doi: 10.1115/1.4034238 History: Received June 27, 2016; Revised June 30, 2016

Water injection is often used to control NOx emissions or to increase power output from nonpremixed combustion of gaseous and liquid fuels. Since the emission level in premixed natural gas combustion is significantly lower than for nonpremixed combustion, water injection for emission reduction is usually not an issue. However, the increasing share of fluctuating power output from renewables motivates research activities on the improvement of the operational flexibility of combined cycle power plants. One aspect in that context is power augmentation by injection of liquid water in premixed combustors without drawbacks regarding emissions and flame stability. For research purposes, water injection technology has therefore recently been transferred to premixed combustors burning natural gas. In order to investigate the influence of water injection on premixed combustion of natural gas, an atmospheric single burner test rig has been set up at Lehrstuhl für Thermodynamik, TU München. The test rig is equipped with a highly flexible water injection system to study the influence of water atomization behavior on flame shape, position, and stabilization. Presented investigations are conducted at gas turbine like preheating temperatures (673 K) and flame temperatures (1800–1950 K) to ensure high technical relevance. In this paper, the interaction between water injection, atomization and macroscopic flame behavior is outlined. Favorable and nonfavorable operating conditions of the water injection system are presented in order to clarify the influence of water atomization and vaporization on flame stability and the emission behavior of the test rig. Water spray quality is assessed externally with a Malvern laser diffraction spectrometer whereas spray distribution in the test rig is determined by means of Mie scattering images at reacting conditions. The flame shape is analyzed using time-averaged OH* chemiluminescence images while the efficiency of water injection at various operating points is evaluated using global emission concentration measurements. Finally, the important influence of the water injection system design on the combustor performance will be shown using combined Mie scattering and OH* chemiluminescence images. At constant adiabatic flame temperatures, a stable flame could be established for water-to-fuel ratios of up to 2.25. While only minor changes could be detected for the heat release distribution in the combustion chamber, the water distribution changes significantly while increasing the amount of water. Finally, changes in NOx emission concentrations can directly be related to water droplet sizes and the global water distribution in the combustion chamber.

Copyright © 2017 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.



Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Scheme of the combustion test rig with water injection

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Scheme of the dual fluid nozzles

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

OH* chemiluminescence intensities for configuration C3 with m˙a,sec =3 g/s and different water contents

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Axial position of the centroid of the OH* intensity for configuration C3 at different operating conditions in comparison to C1

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

NOx concentration values for configuration C3 at different atomizing air mass flow rates in comparison to C1

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Spatial distribution of the droplet density for configuration C3 at m˙a,sec=4 g/s and different operating conditions

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Combined OH* chemiluminescence images and droplet densities for configuration C3 at m˙a,sec=4 g/s and different operating conditions

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

NOx concentrations for C2 and C3 at different atomizing air mass flow rates

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Droplet size distribution for different operating conditions. (a) C2, m˙a,sec = 4.0 g/s, Ω = 0.5, (b) C2, m˙a,sec  = 4.0 g/s, Ω = 1.5, (c) C3, m˙a,sec  = 4.0 g/s, Ω = 1.5, (d) C3, m˙a,sec  = 2.0 g/s, Ω = 1.5.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

D90 for different operating conditions

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Characteristic droplet diameter of the NOx increase




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