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

Measurements and Modeling of the Dynamic Response of a Pilot Stabilized Premixed Flame Under Dual-Input Perturbation

[+] Author and Article Information
Chunyan Li, Suhui Li, Xu Cheng

Key Laboratory for Thermal Science and
Power Engineering,
Department of Thermal Engineering,
Tsinghua University,
Beijing 100084, China

Min Zhu

Key Laboratory for Thermal Science and
Power Engineering,
Department of Thermal Engineering,
Tsinghua University,
Beijing 100084, China
e-mail: zhumin@tsinghua.edu.cn

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 March 25, 2018; final manuscript received April 20, 2018; published online August 6, 2018. Editor: David Wisler.

J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power 140(12), 121502 (Aug 06, 2018) (11 pages) Paper No: GTP-18-1142; doi: 10.1115/1.4040175 History: Received March 25, 2018; Revised April 20, 2018

Pilot flames have been widely used for flame stabilization in low-emission gas turbine combustors. Effects of pilot flame on dynamic instabilities, however, are not well understood. In this work, the dynamic interactions between main and pilot flames are studied by perturbing both flames simultaneously, i.e., with a dual-input forcing. A burner is used to generate a premixed axisymmetric V-shaped methane flame stabilized by a central pilot flame. Servo valve and sirens are used to produce forcing in the pilot and main flames, respectively. A diagnostic system is applied to measure the flame structure and heat release rate. The effects of forcing frequency, forcing amplitude, phase difference between the two forcing signals as well as the Reynolds number are studied. Both the flame transfer function (FTF) and the flame dynamic position are measured and analyzed. It is found that the total flame response can be modified by the perturbation in the pilot flame. The mechanism can be attributed to the effect of pilot flame on the velocity field of the burnt side. Vortex is found to be able to amplify the pilot–main dynamic interactions under certain conditions. An analytical model is developed based on the linearized G-equation, to further understand the flame interactions through the velocity perturbations in the burnt side. Good agreements were found between the prediction and the experiment results.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2018 by ASME
Topics: Flames
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Lieuwen, T. , McDonell, V. , Santavicca, D. , and Sattelmayer, T. , 2008, “Burner Development and Operability Issues Associated With Steady Flowing Syngas Fired Combustors,” Combust. Sci. Technol., 180(6), pp. 1169–1192. [CrossRef]
Farber, J. , Koch, R. , Bauer, H. J. , Hase, M. , and Kerbs, W. , 2009, “Effects of Pilot Fuel and Liner Cooling on the Flame Structure in a Full Scale Swirl-Stabilized Combustion Setup,” ASME J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power, 132(9), pp. 277–286.
Albrecht, P. , Bade, S. , Lacarelle, A. , Paschereit, C. O. , and Gutmark, E. , 2010, “Instability Control by Premixed Pilot Flames,” ASME J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power, 132(4), p. 041501. [CrossRef]
Bhagwan, R. , Zarzalis, N. , Habisreuther, P. , and Zarzalis, N. , 2014, “Experimental Investigation on Lean Blow Out of a Piloted Aero-Engine Burner,” ASME Paper No. GT 2014-25199.
Kumaran, K. , and Shet, U. S. P. , 2007, “Effect of Swirl on Lean Flame Limits of Pilot-Stabilized Open Premixed Turbulent Flames,” Combust. Flame, 151(1–2), pp. 391–395. [CrossRef]
Levy, Y. , Gany, A. , Goldman, Y. , Erenburg, V. , Sherbaum, V. , Ovcharenko, V. , Rosentsvit, L. , Chudnovsky, B. , Herszage, A. , and Talanker, A. , 2010, “Increasing Operational Stability in Low NOx GT Combustor by a Pilot Flame,” ASME Paper No. GT 2010-22785.
Chaudhuri, S. , and Cetegen, B. M. , 2009, “Response Dynamics of Bluff-Body Stabilized Conical Premixed Turbulent Flames With Spatial Mixture Gradients,” Combust. Flame, 156(3), pp. 706–720. [CrossRef]
Kopp-Vaughan, K. M. , Jensen, T. R. , Cetegen, B. M. , and Renfro, M. W. , 2013, “Analysis of Blowoff Dynamics From Flames With Stratified Fueling,” Proc. Combust. Inst., 34(1), pp. 1491–1498. [CrossRef]
Tuttle, S. G. , Chaudhuri, S. , Kopp-Vaughan, K. M. , Jensen, T. R. , Cetegen, B. M. , Renfro, M. W. , and Cohen, J. M. , 2013, “Lean Blowoff Behavior of Asymmetrically-Fueled Bluff Body-Stabilized Flames,” Combust. Flame, 160(9), pp. 1677–1692. [CrossRef]
Han, Z. , Balusamy, S. , and Hochgreb, S. , 2014, “Spatial Analysis on Forced Heat Release Response of Turbulent Stratified Flames,” ASME Paper No. GT 2014-26260.
Bahr, D. W. , and Gleason, C. C. , 1975, “Experimental Clean Combustor Program Phase I Final Report,” General Electronic Company, Evendale, OH, Report No. NASA CR-134732.
Mongia, H. , 2003, “TAPS: A Fourth Generation Propulsion Combustor Technology for Low Emissions,” AIAA Paper No. 2003-2657.
Pitsch, H. , and Steiner, H. , 2000, “Large-Eddy Simulation of a Turbulent Piloted Methane/Air Diffusion Flame (Sandia Flame D),” Phys. Fluids, 12(10), pp. 2541–2554. [CrossRef]
Barlow, R. S. , Meares, S. , Magnotti, G. , Cutcher, H. , and Masri, A. R. , 2015, “Local Extinction and Near-Field Structure in Piloted Turbulent CH4/Air Jet Flames With Inhomogeneous Inlets,” Combust. Flame, 162(10), pp. 3516–3540. [CrossRef]
Lieuwen, T. , 2013, Unsteady Combustor Physics, Cambridge University Press, New York.
Dowling, A. , and Mahmoudi, Y. , 2015, “Combustion Noise,” Proc. Combust. Inst., 35(1), pp. 65–100. [CrossRef]
Nair, S. , and Lieuwen, T. , 2003, “Acoustic Detection of Imminent Blowout in Pilot and Swirl Stabilized Combustors,” ASME Paper No. GT 2003-38074.
Paschereit, C. O. , Flohr, P. , and Gutmark, E. J. , 2006, “Combustion Control by Vortex Breakdown Stabilization,” ASME J. Turbomach., 128(4), p. 679C688. [CrossRef]
Kendrick, D. W. , Anderson, T. J. , Sowa, W. A. , and Snyder, T. S. , 1999, “Acoustic Sensitivities of Lean-Premixed Fuel Injectors in a Single Nozzle Rig,” ASME J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power, 121(3), pp. 429–436. [CrossRef]
Bradley, D. , Gaskell, P. H. , Gu, X. J. , Lawes, M. , and Scott, M. J. , 1998, “Premixed Turbulent Flame Instability and NO Formation in a Lean-Burn Swirl Burner,” Combust. Flame, 115(4), pp. 515–538. [CrossRef]
Lin, K. C. , Kennedy, P. J. , Donbar, J. M. , Jackson, T. A. , and Carter, C. D. , 2000, “Active Combustion Control for Diffusion Flames Using an Integrated Fuel Injector/Flameholder Device,” AIAA Paper No. 2000-3349.
Sengissen, A. X. , Giauque, A. V. , Staffelbach, G. S. , Porta, M. , Krebs, W. , Kaufmann, P. , and Poinsot, T. J. , 2007, “Large Eddy Simulation of Piloting Effects on Turbulent Swirling Flames,” Proc. Combust. Inst., 31(2), pp. 1729–1736. [CrossRef]
Dhanuka, S. K. , Temme, J. E. , Driscoll, J. F. , and Mongia, H. C. , 2009, “Vortex-Shedding and Mixing Layer Effects on Periodic Flashback in a Lean Premixed Prevaporized Gas Turbine Combustor,” Proc. Combust. Inst., 32(2), pp. 2901–2908. [CrossRef]
Dhanuka, S. K. , and Temme, J. E. , 2010, “Unsteady Aspects of Lean Premixed-Prevaporized Gas Turbine Combustors: Flame-Flame Interactions,” J. Propul. Power, 27(3), pp. 631–641. [CrossRef]
Fu, X. , Yang, F. , and Guo, Z. , 2015, “Combustion Instability of Pilot Flame in a Pilot Bluff Body Stabilized Combustor,” Chin. J. Aeronaut., 28(6), pp. 1606–1615. [CrossRef]
Schuller, T. , Durox, D. , and Candel, S. , 2003, “A Unified Model for the Prediction of Laminar Flame Transfer Functions: Comparisons Between Conical and V-Flame Dynamics,” Combust. Flame, 134(1–2), pp. 21–34. [CrossRef]
Boyer, L. , and Quinard, J. , 1990, “On the Dynamics of Anchored Flames,” Combust. Flame, 82(1), p. 51C65.
Li, C. , Tang, H. , Jing, L. , and Zhu, M. , 2015, “Investigations of the Stabilities of Piloted Flames Using Blast Furnace Gas,” ASME J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power, 138(3), p. 031505. [CrossRef]
Seitzman, J. , and Lieuwen, T. , 2010, Turbulent Flame Speed Measurements and Modeling of Syngas Fuels, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA.
Tang, H. , Yang, D. , Zhang, T. , and Zhu, M. , 2013, “Characteristics of Flame Modes for a Conical Bluff Body Burner With a Central Fuel Jet,” ASME J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power, 135(9), p. 091507. [CrossRef]

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Measured FTF under conditions of (a) Re = 1500, (b) Re = 3500, and (c) Re = 5400, with pilot forcing signal kp set at 0, 4, and 10 V

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

The geometry of three concentric pipes for pilot and main gas supply

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Schematic of experiment setup, mass flow controller

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Geometry of the perturbation model for an axisymmetric V-shaped flame, with a central conical pilot flame

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

The coupling strength λ=1−min(|H|)/|H0| under different conditions, with pilot forcing amplitude kp=10V

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Measured FTF against phase difference between two forcing signals (δ), working conditions (a) Re = 1500, (b) Re = 3500, and (c) Re = 5400, with f=20Hz, pilot forcing signal kp set at 0, 4, and 10 V

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Analytical solution of FTF as a function of forcing frequency

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Comparison between analytical calculation and experiment measurements of FTF as a function of δ, working condition f=20Hz, pilot forcing amplitude kp=10V in the experiments

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Detailed description of velocity disturbance in the reference frame with pilot flame forced: (a) illustration of the main flame forced by the oscillating pilot flame and (b) details of velocity disturbance near the pilot flame

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Measurements of forced flame position compared to analytical descriptions for pilot forcing only. Experiment conditions: Re = 1500, equivalence ratio 0.7, v̂m/v¯m=0, kp=10V: (a) 0, (b) π/3, (c) 2π/3, (d) π, (e) 4π/3, and (f) 5π/3.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Measurements of forced flame position compared to analytical descriptions. Experiment conditions: Re = 1500, equivalence ratio 0.7, v̂m/v¯m=0.05, kp=10V: (a) 0, (b) π/3, (c) 2π/3, (d) π, (e) 4π/3, and (f) 5π/3.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Measurements of forced flame position under nonlinear forcing. Experiment conditions: Re = 1500, equivalence ratio 0.7, v̂m/v¯m=0.45, kp=10V: (a) 0, (b) π/3, (c) 2π/3, (d), π, (e) 4π/3, and (f)5π/3.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Comparisons of measured and predicted flame position under main forcing only. Experiment conditions: Re = 1500, equivalence ratio 0.7, v̂m/v¯m=0.05, kp=0: (a) 0, (b) π/3, (c) 2π/3, (d) π, (e) 4π/3, and (f)5π/3.

Tables

Errata

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