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

Investigation of Flame Structure and Soot Formation in a Single Sector Model Combustor Using Experiments and Numerical Simulations Based on the Large Eddy Simulation/Conditional Moment Closure Approach

[+] Author and Article Information
Andrea Giusti

Department of Engineering,
University of Cambridge,
Trumpington Street,
Cambridge CB2 1PZ, UK
e-mail: ag813@cam.ac.uk

Epaminondas Mastorakos

Department of Engineering,
University of Cambridge,
Trumpington Street,
Cambridge CB2 1PZ, UK

Christoph Hassa, Johannes Heinze, Eggert Magens

German Aerospace Center (DLR),
Linder Hoehe,
Cologne 51147, Germany

Marco Zedda

Combustion Aerothermal Methods,
Rolls-Royce plc.,
P.O. Box 31,
Derby DE24 8BJ, UK

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Combustion and Fuels Committee of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING FOR GAS TURBINES AND POWER. Manuscript received July 1, 2017; final manuscript received August 7, 2017; published online February 13, 2018. Editor: David Wisler.

J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power 140(6), 061506 (Feb 13, 2018) (9 pages) Paper No: GTP-17-1246; doi: 10.1115/1.4038025 History: Received July 01, 2017; Revised August 07, 2017

In this work, a single sector lean burn model combustor operating in pilot only mode has been investigated using both experiments and computations with the main objective of analyzing the flame structure and soot formation at conditions relevant to aero-engine applications. Numerical simulations were performed using the large eddy simulation (LES) approach and the conditional moment closure (CMC) combustion model with detailed chemistry and a two-equation model for soot. The CMC model is based on the time-resolved solution of the local flame structure and allows to directly take into account the phenomena associated to molecular mixing and turbulent transport, which are of great importance for the prediction of emissions. The rig investigated in this work, called big optical single sector rig, allows to test real scale lean burn injectors. Experiments, performed at elevated pressure and temperature, corresponding to engine conditions at part load, include planar laser-induced fluorescence of OH (OH-PLIF) and phase Doppler anemometry (PDA) and have been complemented with new laser-induced incandescence (LII) measurements for soot location. The wide range of measurements available allows a comprehensive analysis of the primary combustion region and can be exploited to further assess and validate the LES/CMC approach to capture the flame behavior at engine conditions. It is shown that the LES/CMC approach is able to predict the main characteristics of the flame with a good agreement with the experiment in terms of flame shape, spray characteristics and soot location. Finite-rate chemistry effects appear to be very important in the region close to the injection location leading to the lift-off of the flame. Low levels of soot are observed immediately downstream of the injector exit, where a high amount of vaporized fuel is still present. Further downstream, the fuel vapor disappears quite quickly and an extended region characterized by the presence of pyrolysis products and soot precursors is observed. The strong production of soot precursors together with high soot surface growth rates lead to high values of soot volume fraction in locations consistent with the experiment. Soot oxidation is also very important in the downstream region resulting in a decrease of the soot level at the combustor exit. The results show a very promising capability of the LES/CMC approach to capture the main characteristics of the flame, soot formation, and location at engine relevant conditions. More advanced soot models will be considered in future work in order to improve the quantitative prediction of the soot level.

Copyright © 2018 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.


Lindstedt, R. , and Louloudi, S. , 2005, “ Joint-Scalar Transported PDF Modeling of Soot Formation and Oxidation,” Proc. Combust. Inst., 30(1), pp. 775–783. [CrossRef]
Jenny, P. , Roekaerts, D. , and Beishuizen, N. , 2012, “ Modeling of Turbulent Dilute Spray Combustion,” Prog. Energy Combust. Sci., 38(6), pp. 846–887. [CrossRef]
Pera, C. , Réveillon, J. , Vervisch, L. , and Domingo, P. , 2006, “ Modeling Subgrid Scale Mixture Fraction Variance in LES of Evaporating Spray,” Combust. Flame, 146(4), pp. 635–648. [CrossRef]
Olguin, H. , and Gutheil, E. , 2014, “ Influence of Evaporation on Spray Flamelet Structures,” Combust. Flame, 161(4), pp. 987–996. [CrossRef]
Triantafyllidis, A. , Mastorakos, E. , and Eggels, R. , 2009, “ Large Eddy Simulations of Forced Ignition of a Non-Premixed Bluff-Body Methane Flame With Conditional Moment Closure,” Combust. Flame, 156(12), pp. 2328–2345. [CrossRef]
Garmory, A. , and Mastorakos, E. , 2015, “ Numerical Simulation of Oxy-Fuel Jet Flames Using Unstructured LES-CMC,” Proc. Combust. Inst., 35(2), pp. 1207–1214. [CrossRef]
Zhang, H. , Garmory, A. , Cavaliere, D. E. , and Mastorakos, E. , 2015, “ Large Eddy Simulation/Conditional Moment Closure Modeling of Swirl-Stabilized Non-Premixed Flames With Local Extinction,” Proc. Combust. Inst., 35(2), pp. 1167–1174. [CrossRef]
Ukai, S. , Kronenburg, A. , and Stein, O. , 2015, “ Large Eddy Simulation of Dilute Acetone Spray Flames Using CMC Coupled With Tabulated Chemistry,” Proc. Combust. Inst., 35(2), pp. 1667–1674. [CrossRef]
Giusti, A. , and Mastorakos, E. , 2017, “ Detailed Chemistry LES/CMC Simulation of a Swirling Ethanol Spray Flame Approaching Blow-Off,” Proc. Combust. Inst., 36(2), pp. 2625–2632. [CrossRef]
Tyliszczak, A. , 2015, “ LES-CMC Study of an Excited Hydrogen Flame,” Combust. Flame, 162(10), pp. 3864–3883. [CrossRef]
Zhang, H. , and Mastorakos, E. , 2016, “ Prediction of Global Extinction Conditions and Dynamics in Swirling Non-Premixed Flames Using LES/CMC Modelling,” Flow Turbul. Combust., 96(4), pp. 863–889. [CrossRef]
Giusti, A. , and Mastorakos, E. , 2016, “ Numerical Investigation Into the Blow-Off Behaviour of Swirling Spray Flames Using the LES/CMC Approach,” 11th International ERCOFTAC Symposium on Engineering Turbulence Modelling and Measurements (ETMM), Sicily, Italy, Sept. 21–23.
Giusti, A. , Kotzagianni, M. , and Mastorakos, E. , 2016, “ LES/CMC Simulations of Swirl-Stabilised Ethanol Spray Flames Approaching Blow-Off,” Flow Turbul. Combust., 97(4), pp. 1165–1184. [CrossRef]
Kronenburg, A. , Bilger, R. , and Kent, J. , 2000, “ Modeling Soot Formation in Turbulent Methane-Air Jet Diffusion Flames,” Combust. Flame, 121(1–2), pp. 24–40. [CrossRef]
Bolla, M. , Wright, Y. M. , Boulouchos, K. , Borghesi, G. , and Mastorakos, E. , 2013, “ Soot Formation Modeling of n-Heptane Sprays Under Diesel Engine Conditions Using the Conditional Moment Closure Approach,” Combust. Sci. Technol., 185(5), pp. 766–793. [CrossRef]
Schneider, D. , Meier, U. , Quade, W. , Koopman, J. , Aumeier, T. , Langfeld, A. , Behrendt, T. , Hassa, C. , and Rackwitz, L. , 2010, “ A New Test Rig for Laser Optical Investigations of Lean Jet Burners,” 27th International Congress of the Aeronautical Sciences (ICAS), Nice, France, Sept. 19–24. http://www.icas.org/ICAS_ARCHIVE/ICAS2010/PAPERS/409.PDF
Freitag, S. , Behrendt, T. , Heinze, J. , Lange, L. , Meier, U. , Rackwitz, L. , and Hassa, C. , 2011, “ Study of an Airblast Atomizer Spray in a Lean Burn Aero-Engine Model Combustor at Engine Conditions,” 24th European Conference on Liquid Atomization and Spray Systems (ILASS), Estoril, Portugal, Sept. 5–7. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/225022153_Study_of_an_Airblast_Atomizer_Spray_in_a_Lean_Burn_Aero-Engine_Model_Combustor_at_Engine_Conditions
Meier, U. , Lange, L. , Heinze, J. , Hassa, C. , Sadig, S. , and Luff, D. , 2014, “ Optical Methods for Studies of Self-Excited Oscillations and the Effect of Dampers in a High Pressure Single Sector Combustor,” ASME No. GT2014-25873.
Heinze, J. , Meier, U. , Behrendt, T. , Willert, C. , Geigle, K. , Lammel, O. , and Lückerath, R. , 2011, “ PLIF Thermometry Based on Measurements of Absolute Concentrations of the OH Radical,” Z. Phys. Chem., 225(11–12), pp. 1315–1341. [CrossRef]
Klimenko, A. , and Bilger, R. , 1999, “ Conditional Moment Closure for Turbulent Combustion,” Prog. Energy Combust. Sci., 25(6), pp. 595–687. [CrossRef]
Mortensen, M. , and Bilger, R. W. , 2009, “ Derivation of the Conditional Moment Closure Equations for Spray Combustion,” Combust. Flame, 156(1), pp. 62–72. [CrossRef]
Anand, M. S. , Eggels, R. , Staufer, M. , Zedda, M. , and Zhu, J. , 2013, “ An Advanced Unstructured-Grid Finite-Volume Design System for Gas Turbine Combustion Analysis,” ASME Paper No. GTINDIA2013-3537.
Tyliszczak, A. , Cavaliere, D. E. , and Mastorakos, E. , 2014, “ LES/CMC of Blow-Off in a Liquid Fueled Swirl Burner,” Flow Turbul. Combust., 92(1), pp. 237–267. [CrossRef]
Triantafyllidis, A. , and Mastorakos, E. , 2010, “ Implementation Issues of the Conditional Moment Closure Model in Large Eddy Simulations,” Flow Turbul. Combust., 84(3), pp. 481–512. [CrossRef]
Garmory, A. , and Mastorakos, E. , 2011, “ Capturing Localised Extinction in Sandia Flame F With LES-CMC,” Proc. Combust. Inst., 33(1), pp. 1673–1680. [CrossRef]
Donde, P. , Raman, V. , Mueller, M. E. , and Pitsch, H. , 2013, “ LES/PDF Based Modeling of Soot-Turbulence Interactions in Turbulent Flames,” Proc. Combust. Inst., 34(1), pp. 1183–1192. [CrossRef]
Lignell, D. O. , Chen, J. H. , and Smith, P. J. , 2008, “ Three-Dimensional Direct Numerical Simulation of Soot Formation and Transport in a Temporally Evolving Nonpremixed Ethylene Jet Flame,” Combust. Flame, 155(1–2), pp. 316–333. [CrossRef]
Nehse, M. , Warnatz, J. , and Chevalier, C. , 1996, “ Kinetic Modeling of the Oxidation of Large Aliphatic Hydrocarbons,” Proc. Combust. Inst., 26(1), pp. 773–780. [CrossRef]
Leung, K. , Lindstedt, R. , and Jones, W. , 1991, “ A Simplified Reaction Mechanism for Soot Formation in Nonpremixed Flames,” Combust. Flame, 87(3), pp. 289–305. [CrossRef]
Slavinskaya, N. A. , Riedel, U. , Dworkin, S. B. , and Thomson, M. J. , 2012, “ Detailed Numerical Modeling of PAH Formation and Growth in Non-Premixed Ethylene and Ethane Flames,” Combust. Flame, 159(3), pp. 979–995. [CrossRef]
Gepperth, S. , Koch, R. , and Bauer, H.-J. , 2013, “ Analysis and Comparison of Primary Droplet Characteristics in the Near Field of a Prefilming Airblast Atomizer,” ASME Paper No. GT2013-94033.
Abramzon, B. , and Sirignano, W. , 1989, “ Droplet Vaporization Model for Spray Combustion Calculations,” Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer, 32(9), pp. 1605–1618. [CrossRef]
Schmehl, R. , Maier, G. , and Wittig, S. , 2000, “ CFD Analysis of Fuel Atomization, Secondary Droplet Breakup and Spray Dispersion in the Premix Duct of a LPP Combustor,” 8th International Conference on Liquid Atomization & Spray Systems (ICLASS), Pasadena, CA, July 16–20 https://www.researchgate.net/publication/319624165_CFD_Analysis_of_Fuel_Atomization_Secondary_Droplet_Breakup_and_Spray_Dispersion_in_the_Premix_Duct_of_a_LPP_Combustor.
De, S. , and Kim, S. H. , 2013, “ Large Eddy Simulation of Dilute Reacting Sprays: Droplet Evaporation and Scalar Mixing,” Combust. Flame, 160(10), pp. 2048–2066. [CrossRef]
Langella, I. , and Swaminathan, N. , 2016, “ Unstrained and Strained Flamelets for LES of Premixed Combustion,” Combust. Theory Modell., 20(3), pp. 410–440. [CrossRef]
Sidey, J. A. M. , Giusti, A. , and Mastorakos, E. , 2016, “ Simulations of Laminar Non-Premixed Flames of Kerosene With Hot Combustion Products as Oxidiser,” Combust. Theory Modell., 120(5), pp. 958–973. [CrossRef]


Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Schematic of the measurement regions for the various experimental techniques used in this work; a schematic of the injection strategy is included

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Optical setup for OH-PLIF and LII

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Schematic of the big optical single sector rig [17]

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Isosurface of the stoichiometric mixture fraction colored with temperature

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Schematic of the computational domain with relevant boundary conditions

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Mean temperature field from the experiment and the numerical simulation

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Comparison between experiment and numerical simulation in terms of SMD at a location downstream of the injector exit (z = 20 mm) as a function of the nondimensional radius r/L (L is the side of the square section enclosure)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Selected instantaneous flow field quantities in a streamwise cross section of the combustor; the white line represents the stoichiometric mixture fraction

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Instantaneous mass fraction, Ỹ, of selected species and soot number density, ND̃soot, in a streamwise cross section of the combustor; the white line represents the stoichiometric mixture fraction

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Soot nucleation, surface growth, and oxidation source terms in a streamwise cross section of the combustor; the white line represents the stoichiometric mixture fraction

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Mean soot volume fraction in the experiment and numerical simulation



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