Numerical investigation of turbulent swirling flames with validation in a gas turbine model combustor

被引:45
作者
Benim, Ali Cemal [1 ]
Iqbal, Sohail [1 ]
Meier, Wolfgang [2 ]
Joos, Franz [3 ]
Wiedermann, Alexander [4 ]
机构
[1] Duesseldorf Univ Appl Sci, Dept Mech & Proc Engn, CFS, Josef Gockeln Str 9, D-40474 Dusseldorf, Germany
[2] German Aerosp Ctr DLR, Inst Combust Technol, Pfaffenwaldring 38-40, D-70569 Stuttgart, Germany
[3] Helmut Schmidt Univ, Lab Turbomachinery, Holstenhofweg 85, D-2208 Hamburg, Germany
[4] MAN Diesel & Turbo SE, Engn Gas Turbines, Steinbrinkstr 1, D-46145 Oberhausen, Germany
关键词
Turbulent swirling flames; URANS; LES; EDC; LFM; LARGE-EDDY SIMULATION; FLOW;
D O I
10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2016.08.143
中图分类号
O414.1 [热力学];
学科分类号
摘要
Numerical investigation of turbulent swirling flames is performed in a model gas turbine combustor. The calculations are performed using the CFD code OpenFOAM. Large Eddy Simulation (LES) approach based on the Smagorinsky model is used as the main turbulence modelling strategy, whereas Unsteady Reynolds Averaged Numerical Simulations (URANS) are also applied, employing the Shear Stress Transport model as the turbulence model. Turbulence-chemistry interactions are modelled by the Eddy Dissipation Concept (EDC) and the Laminar Flamelet Model (LFM). In EDC, a three-step global reaction mechanism is used. In LFM, limitations of the standard non-premixed approach, based on the mixture fraction and the scalar dissipation rate, for lifted flames like the present one, is overcome by adding the progress variable as an additional dimension to the flamelet libraries. URANS is applied only with combination with LFM. LES is applied in combination with EDC and LFM. Special attention is paid to obtaining an adequate grid resolution. Predictions are compared with measurements. It is observed that LES provides a better accuracy compared to URANS, whereas the latter may still be seen useful, since its computational time is shorter. For LES, it is observed that EDC provides a similar, or even slightly better overall-accuracy compared to LFM. On the other hand, it is observed that LFM requires substantially shorter computational times compared to EDC. This makes LFM attractive especially for LES of real combustors requiring much larger grids and/or for cases where a detailed reaction mechanism is of interest. (C) 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:202 / 212
页数:11
相关论文
共 25 条
  • [1] [Anonymous], GT201022688 ASME
  • [2] [Anonymous], 1998, TECHNICAL REPORT
  • [3] Benim A., 2014, GT201425008 ASME
  • [4] Benim AC, 2008, ADVANCES IN HYBRID RANS-LES MODELLING, P172
  • [5] Experimental and numerical investigation of isothermal flow in an idealized swirl combustor
    Benim, A. C.
    Escudier, M. P.
    Nahavandi, A.
    Nickson, A. K.
    Syed, K. J.
    Joos, E.
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF NUMERICAL METHODS FOR HEAT & FLUID FLOW, 2010, 20 (3-4) : 348 - 370
  • [6] Benim A.C., 2009, P 6 INT C COMP HEAT, P338
  • [7] Laminar flamelet modelling of turbulent premixed combustion
    Benim, AC
    Syed, KJ
    [J]. APPLIED MATHEMATICAL MODELLING, 1998, 22 (1-2) : 113 - 136
  • [8] URANS and LES analysis of turbulent swirling flows
    Benim, AC
    Nahavandi, A
    Syed, KJ
    [J]. PROGRESS IN COMPUTATIONAL FLUID DYNAMICS, 2005, 5 (08): : 444 - 454
  • [9] Index of resolution quality for large eddy simulations
    Celik, IB
    Cehreli, ZN
    Yavuz, I
    [J]. JOURNAL OF FLUIDS ENGINEERING-TRANSACTIONS OF THE ASME, 2005, 127 (05): : 949 - 958
  • [10] A laminar flamelet approach to subgrid-scale chemistry in turbulent flows
    Cook, AW
    Riley, JJ
    Kosaly, G
    [J]. COMBUSTION AND FLAME, 1997, 109 (03) : 332 - 341