Research Papers

Numerical Study of Flame Shapes and Structures in a Two-Stage Two-Injection Aeronautical Burner With Variable Fuel Staging Using Eulerian Large Eddy Simulations

[+] Author and Article Information
Benoit Cheneau

Laboratoire EM2C, CNRS,
Université Paris-Saclay,
Gif-sur-Yvette, 91190, France;
Safran Aircraft Engines,
Rond Point René Ravaud—Réau,
Moissy-Cramayel, 77550, France
e-mail: benoit.cheneau@centralesupelec.fr

Aymeric Vié

Laboratoire EM2C, CNRS,
Université Paris-Saclay,
Gif-sur-Yvette, 91190, France
e-mail: aymeric.vie@centralesupelec.fr

Sébastien Ducruix

Laboratoire EM2C, CNRS,
Université Paris-Saclay,
Gif-sur-Yvette, 91190, France
e-mail: sebastien.ducruix@centralesupelec.fr

1Corresponding author.

Manuscript received January 30, 2018; final manuscript received December 5, 2018; published online February 11, 2019. Assoc. Editor: Riccardo Da Soghe.

J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power 141(7), 071014 (Feb 11, 2019) (12 pages) Paper No: GTP-18-1035; doi: 10.1115/1.4042205 History: Received January 30, 2018; Revised December 05, 2018

The aim of the present work is to evaluate the ability of large eddy simulation (LES) to predict flame shape and structures in a two-stage two-injection burner representative of new generation staged aeronautical engine: the Banc à Injection Multiple pour les Écoulements Réactifs (BIMER) burner. This combustor is a unique design because of an additional parameter, the staging factor, which controls the fuel mass flow rate splitting between the two swirl stages. Experiments conducted on the BIMER combustor at atmospheric pressure and for a constant power output have revealed that the shape of the flame changes with the staging factor; this shape also depends on the staging factor evolution history (SFEH). Targeting a single operating point and three staging situations, the objectives are to prove the ability of our simulation strategy to predict the proper shapes by reproducing these stabilization processes and to participate in their explanation, using numerical post-treatments. After validation through comparisons with experiments, our study focuses on these three configurations, two of them only differing by their SFEH. Remarkably, correct flame shapes are obtained numerically for the same operating point, fuel staging factors and SFEH. Qualitative and quantitative comparisons show very satisfactory agreement. In a second step, the three flame shapes are analyzed in depth. The key role played by the central and corner recirculation zones in the flames' existence and stabilization processes is emphasized. An original composition space analysis highlights the combustion regimes observed in these three cases, confirming the distinct stabilization scenarios proposed here for the three operating points.

Copyright © 2019 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.


Lefebvre, A. , 1999, Gas Turbine Combustion, 2nd ed., Taylor and Francis, Philadelphia, PA.
Syred, N. , 2006, “ A Review of Oscillation Mechanisms and the Role of the Precessing Vortex Core (PVC) in Swirl Combustion Systems,” Prog. Energy Combust. Sci., 32(2), pp. 93–161.
Galley, D. , Ducruix, S. , Lacas, F. , and Veynante, D. , 2011, “ Mixing and Stabilization Study of a Partially Premixed Swirling Flame Using Laser Induced Fluorescence,” Combust. Flame, 158(1), pp. 155–171.
Ducruix, S. , Schuller, T. , Durox, D. , and Candel, S. , 2003, “ Combustion Dynamics and Instabilities: Elementary Coupling and Driving Mechanisms,” J. Prop. Power, 19(5), pp. 722–734.
Lieuwen, T. , and Yang, V. , 2005, Combustion Instabilities in Gas Turbine Engines: Operational Experience, Fundamental Mechanisms, and Modeling (Progress in Astronautics and Aeronautics, Vol. 210), American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Reston, VA.
Durox, D. , Moeck, J. P. , Bourgouin, J.-F. , Morenton, P. , Viallon, M. , Schuller, T. , and Candel, S. , 2013, “ Flame Dynamics of a Variable Swirl Number System and Instability Control,” Combust. Flame, 160(9), pp. 1729–1742.
Providakis, T. , 2013, “ Compétition entre structures aérodynamiques et modes acoustiques dans une flamme swirlée: Influence de la répartition de carburant,” Ph.D. thesis, Ecole Centrale Paris, Châtenay-Malabry, France.
Jaegle, F. , Senoner, J.-M. , Garcia, M. , Bismes, F. , Lecourt, R. , Cuenot, B. , and Poinsot, T. , 2011, “ Eulerian and Lagrangian Spray Simulations of an Aeronautical Multipoint Injector,” Proc. Combust. Inst., 33(2), pp. 2099–2107.
Providakis, T. , Zimmer, L. , Scouflaire, P. , and Ducruix, S. , 2012, “ Characterization of the Acoustic Interactions in a Two-Stage Multi-Injection Combustor Fed With Liquid Fuel,” ASME J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power, 134(11), p. 111503.
Providakis, T. , Zimmer, L. , Scouflaire, P. , and Ducruix, S. , 2013, “ Characterization of the Coherent Structures in Swirling Flames Stabilized in a Two-Stage Multi-Injection Burner: Influence of the Staging Factor,” C. R. Mec., 341(1–2), pp. 4–14.
Renaud, A. , Ducruix, S. , Scouflaire, P. , and Zimmer, L. , 2015, “ Flame Shape Transition in a Swirl Stabilised Liquid Fueled Burner,” Proc. Combust. Inst., 35(3), pp. 3365–3372.
Renaud, A. , Ducruix, S. , and Zimmer, L. , 2017, “ Bistable Behaviour and Thermo-Acoustic Instability Triggering in a Gas Turbine Model Combustor,” Proc. Combust. Inst., 3, pp. 3899–3906.
Cheneau, B. , Vié, A. , and Ducruix, S. , 2015, “ Large Eddy Simulations of a Liquid Fuel Swirl Burner: Flame Characterization for Pilot and Multipoint Injection Strategies,” ASME Paper No. GT2015-42821.
Cheneau, B. , Vié, A. , and Ducruix, S. , 2018, “ Characterization of the Hysteresis Cycle in a Two-Stage Liquid-Fueled Swirled Burner Through Numerical Simulation,” Proc. Combust. Inst., (in press).
Barbosa, S. , Scouflaire, P. , and Ducruix, S. , 2009, “ Time Resolved Flowfield, Flame Structure and Acoustic Characterization of a Staged Multi-Injection Burner,” Proc. Combust. Inst., 32(2), pp. 2965–2972.
Renaud, A. , 2015, “ High-Speed Diagnostics for the Study of Flame Stabilization and Transient Behaviour in a Swirled Burner With Variable Liquid-Fuel Distribution,” Ph.D. thesis, Université Paris-Saclay, Châtenay-Malabry, France.
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.
Schmitt, P. , Poinsot, T. , Schuermans, B. , and Geigle, K. , 2007, “ Large-Eddy Simulation and Experimental Study of Heat Transfer, Nitric Oxide Emissions and Combustion Instability in a Swirled Turbulent High Pressure Burner,” J. Fluid Mech., 570, pp. 17–46.
Roux, S. , Lartigue, G. , Poinsot, T. , Meier, U. , and Bérat, C. , 2005, “ Studies of Mean and Unsteady Flow in a Swirled Combustor Using Experiments, Acoustic Analysis, and Large Eddy Simulations,” Combust. Flame, 141(1–2), pp. 40–54.
Colin, O. , and Rudgyard, M. , 2000, “ Development of High-Order Taylor-Galerkin Schemes for LES,” J. Comput. Phys., 162(2), pp. 338–371.
Senoner, J.-M. , Sanjosé, M. , Lederlin, T. , Jaegle, F. , García, M. , Riber, E. , Cuenot, B. , Gicquel, L. , Pitsch, H. , and Poinsot, T. , 2009, “ Eulerian and Lagrangian Large-Eddy Simulations of an Evaporating Two-Phase Flow,” C. R. Méc., 337(6–7), pp. 458–468.
Sanjosé, M. , Senoner, J.-M. , Jaegle, F. , Cuenot, B. , Moreau, S. , and Poinsot, T. , 2011, “ Fuel Injection Model for Euler-Euler and Euler-Lagrange Large-Eddy Simulations of an Evaporating Spray Inside an Aeronautical Combustor,” Int. J. Multiphase Flow, 37(5), pp. 514–529.
Franzelli, B. , Vié, A. , Boileau, M. , Fiorina, B. , and Darabiha, N. , 2016, “ Large Eddy Simulation of Swirled Spray Flame Using Detailed and Tabulated Chemical Descriptions,” Flow, Turbul. Combust., 98(2), pp. 633–661.
Poinsot, T. , and Veynante, D. , 2011, Theoretical and Numerical Combustion, Edwards, Irvine, CA.
Nicoud, F. , and Ducros, F. , 1999, “ Subgrid-Scale Stress Modelling Based on the Square of the Velocity Gradient Tensor,” Flow, Turbul. Combust., 62(3), pp. 183–200.
Franzelli, B. , Riber, E. , Sanjosé, M. , and Poinsot, T. , 2010, “ A Two-Step Chemical Scheme for Kerosene–Air Premixed Flames,” Combust. Flame, 157(7), pp. 1364–1373.
Colin, O. , Ducros, F. , Veynante, D. , and Poinsot, T. , 2000, “ A Thickened Flame Model for Large Eddy Simulations of Turbulent Premixed Combustion,” Phys. Fluids, 12(7), pp. 1843–1863.
Charlette, F. , Meneveau, C. , and Veynante, D. , 2002, “ A Power-Law Flame Wrinkling Model for LES of Premixed Turbulent Combustion—Part II: Dynamic Formulation,” Combust. Flame, 131(1–2), pp. 181–197.
Moreau, M. , Simonin, O. , and Bédat, B. , 2010, “ Development of Gas-Particle Euler-Euler LES Approach: A Priori Analysis of Particle Sub-Grid Models in Homogeneous Isotropic Turbulence,” Flow, Turbul. Combust., 84(2), pp. 295–324.
Vié, A. , Jay, S. , Cuenot, B. , and Massot, M. , 2013, “ Accounting for Polydispersion in the Eulerian Large Eddy Simulation of the Two-Phase Flow in an Aeronautical-Type Burner,” Flow, Turbul. Combust., 90(3), pp. 545–581.
Hannebique, G. , Sierra, P. , Riber, E. , and Cuenot, B. , 2013, “ Large Eddy Simulation of Reactive Two-Phase Flow in an Aeronautical Multipoint Burner,” Flow, Turbul. Combust., 90(2), pp. 449–469.
Lancien, T. , Dumont, N. , Prieur, K. , Durox, D. , Candel, S. , Gicquel, O. , and Vicquelin, R. , 2016, “ Uncertainty Quantification of Injected Droplet Size in Mono-Dispersed Eulerian Simulations,” Nineth International Conference on Multiphase Flow, Firenze, Italy, May, pp. 1–6.
Schiller, L. , and Naumann, A. , 1935, “ A Drag Coefficient Correlation,” Vdi Zeitung, 77, pp. 318–320.
Abramzon, B. , and Sirignano, W. , 1989, “ Droplet Vaporization Model for Spray Combustion Calculations,” Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer, 32(9), pp. 1605–1618.
Poinsot, T. , and Lele, S. , 1992, “ Boundary Conditions for Direct Simulations of Compressible Viscous Flows,” J. Comput. Phys., 101(1), pp. 104–129.
Franzelli, B. , Vié, A. , Fiorina, B. , and Darabiha, N. , 2013, “ Large Eddy Simulation of Swirling Kerosene/Air Spray Flame Using Tabulated Chemistry,” ASME Paper No. GT2013-94451.
Bilger, R. , Starner, S. , and Kee, R. , 1990, “ On Reduced Mechanisms for Methane-Air Combustion in Nonpremixed Flames,” Combust. Flame, 80(2), pp. 135–149.


Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Scheme (left) and side view (right) of the burner (from Ref. [7])

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Scheme of the experimental combustor BIMER

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Left: Mean images of OH* chemiluminescence obtained experimentally in Ref. [10]. Signals are normalized with the maximum value of case α20↗. Right: Mean images of heat release rate obtained numerically, time averaged and integrated over the line of sight. From top to bottom: α20↗, α60↗, α60↘: (a) experiments and (b) simulations.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Numerical domain of the BIMER experimental test bench (from Ref. [13])

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Center plane of the mesh from the air inlet to the combustion chamber (a) and zoom of a clip view of the burner (b)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Comparison of normalized experimental Mie signal (symbols) and numerical mean droplet surface (blue lines) for α20↗ (M-flame, left), α60↗ (M-flame, center) and α60↘ (V-flame, right): (a) α20↗: M-flame, (b) α60↗: M-flame, and (c) α60↘: V-flame

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Comparison of experimental (phase doppler anemometry, symbols) and numerical (blue lines) axial (left) and vertical (center) velocities, and SMD (right) for α20↗ (M-flame, left) and α60↗ (M-flame, center) and α60↘ (V-flame, right) at X =15 mm: (a)liquid axial velocity, (b) liquid vertical velocity, and (c) SMD

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

M-shaped flames: mean (top) and instantaneous (bottom) temperature (top half), and equivalence ratio (bottom half) fields at the central plane for operating conditions α20↗ (left) and α60↗ (right). Mean pseudo-streamlines of gas velocity (gray). Isolines of null axial velocity (black) and heat release rate at ω˙T=5×107 W·m−3 (white): (a) α20↗: mean field, (b) α60↗: mean field, (c) α20↗: instantaneous field, and (d) α60↗: instantaneous field.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

M-shaped flame (α60↗): flow structure in transverse cuts (X = 5, 25 and 50 mm away from the combustion chamber entrance). Mean fields of temperature with superimposed mean heat release rate. Pseudo streamlines (white) and null axial velocity isolines (black). Top and bottom walls are water-cooled: (a) X = 5 mm, (b) X = 25 mm, and (c) X = 50 mm.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

V-shaped flame (α60↘): mean (a) and instantaneous (b) temperature (top half), and O2 mass fraction (bottom half) fields at the central plane. Mean pseudo-streamlines of gas velocity (a/top, gray). Isolines of null axial velocity (black) and heat release rate at ω˙T=5×107 W·m−3 (white): (a) mean field and (b) instantaneous field.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

V-shaped flame (α60↘): flow structure in transverse cuts (X = 5, 25 and 50 mm away from the combustion chamber entrance). Mean fields of temperature and superimposed mean heat release rate. Pseudo streamlines (white) and null axial velocity isolines (black). Top and bottom walls are water-cooled: (a) X = 5 mm, (b) X = 25 mm, and (c) X = 50 mm.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Takeno index in the flame region at the central plane: blue color stands for premixed regime, and red color stands for diffusion regime: (a) α60↘, (b) α60↗, and (c) α20↗

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Colored two-dimensional cut planes at Y =0 (a). Temperature (b), oxygen mass fraction (c) and heat release rate (d) as functions of the mixture fraction for this plane. Left and center: M-shaped flames (α20↗ and α60↗). Right: V-shaped flame (α60↘).



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