2007
DOI: 10.1016/j.fuel.2006.08.030
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Experimental and computational study of a lifted, non-premixed turbulent free jet flame

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

2
9
0

Year Published

2008
2008
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
10

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 23 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 65 publications
2
9
0
Order By: Relevance
“…However, the gradient on the co-flow side remains very sharp while shifted radially outwards with the peak temperature. This means that the mixing near the co-flow is not as effective as the fuel side so that the composition remains very lean, as also reported by Becker and Yamazaki [50] and Mahmud et al [51]. The temperature profiles at locations between z / D = 10 -25 (Figure 5c) show that the temperature remains constant in the core region of the fuel jet and increases sharply in the shear layer till the peak value is reached.…”
Section: Temperature Fieldsupporting
confidence: 71%
“…However, the gradient on the co-flow side remains very sharp while shifted radially outwards with the peak temperature. This means that the mixing near the co-flow is not as effective as the fuel side so that the composition remains very lean, as also reported by Becker and Yamazaki [50] and Mahmud et al [51]. The temperature profiles at locations between z / D = 10 -25 (Figure 5c) show that the temperature remains constant in the core region of the fuel jet and increases sharply in the shear layer till the peak value is reached.…”
Section: Temperature Fieldsupporting
confidence: 71%
“…Roomina and Bilger [11] reported a first-order CMC study of a CH 4 /air jet flame with reasonable accuracy for NO prediction. Mahmud et al [12] reported an experimental and computational study of a CH 4 jet flame. Their calculation by using a mixedness-reactedness flamelet model showed large overprediction of NO in the fuel-rich zone.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Therefore, the experimental data at this nearest location to the nozzle exit are used as the inlet boundary conditions. The experimental data for the turbulence kinetic energy (k) at x/D e ¼ 0.5 are used as the inlet boundary condition for k. The dissipation rate of the turbulence kinetic energy (") at the inlet is calculated by " ¼ C 3=4 k 3=2 =l, where C is a constant (¼0.09), k is the turbulence kinetic energy, and l is the turbulence length scale which can be approximated as 0.33D e (Mahmud et al, 2007). The computational domain is chosen to be long enough to ensure complete development of the flow; that is, up to x/D e ¼ 120.…”
Section: Turbulence Closure Modelsmentioning
confidence: 99%