1981
DOI: 10.1016/0010-2180(81)90047-x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Burning carbon particles in the presence of water vapor

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

1
36
0
1

Year Published

1982
1982
2014
2014

Publication Types

Select...
6
3

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 122 publications
(38 citation statements)
references
References 15 publications
1
36
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Libby et al [32] assume that the kinetic rates of the two oxidation mechanisms are identical. Under this assumption, water vapor being ten times more concentrated than carbon dioxide in the nozzle, the mass loss is mainly caused by H 2 O.…”
Section: Heterogeneous Reactionsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Libby et al [32] assume that the kinetic rates of the two oxidation mechanisms are identical. Under this assumption, water vapor being ten times more concentrated than carbon dioxide in the nozzle, the mass loss is mainly caused by H 2 O.…”
Section: Heterogeneous Reactionsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The model was an extension of the carbon combustion analysis of Libby and Blake [17]. Major assumptions of the model are: spherical isolated particle; uniform particle properties at each instant consisting of pure carbon; quasisteady gas phase; mass diffusion only by concentration gradiews; all species assumed to have equal molecular weights and specific heats; and constant average gas-phase properties at each instant of time (evaluated at the reference state given elsewhere [6,7]), and radiation from the agglomerate to the surroundings treated assuming a transparent flame and an opaque blackbody agglomerate.…”
Section: I-mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The reactions of C with H 2 O and CO 2 have been extensively investigated. The kinetics data compiled by Libby and Blake [10] considered the specific rates of both reactions to be equal. It has been suggested in previous studies that at high temperature, H 2 O was the most detrimental oxidizing species responsible for nozzle ablation.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%