Investigation of a Miniature Combustor Using Porous Media Surface Stabilized Flame

Marbach, Timothy; Vijaykant, S.; Agrawal, Ajay K.

doi:10.1080/00102200701385034

Cited by 35 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Therefore, it is strongly recommended that the microcombustor not be exposed to the cold surrounding air directly. The double tube microcombustor of Marbach et al (2007) and the triple tube microcombustor of Turkeli-Ramadan (2010;2012) are two good examples of preventing high heat loss from the microcombustor to the surrounding air. In these two designs, the combustion chambers exist at the core of the systems and are encapsulated by the heat exchanger parts.…”

Section: Effect Of Heat Transfer Coefficient With and Without Radiationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Two-dimensional simulation of premixed laminar flame at microscale

Turkeli-Ramadan

Sharma

Raine

2015

Chemical Engineering Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Effect Of Heat Transfer Coefficient With and Without Radiationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Two-dimensional simulation of premixed laminar flame at microscale

Turkeli-Ramadan

Sharma

Raine

2015

Chemical Engineering Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Finally, we compare our combustor with the combustor developed by Marbach et al (2007). Both Vo and Vi of Marbach et al are smaller than ours.…”

Section: Performance Comparison With the Other Combustorsmentioning

confidence: 90%

“…The flame in this research is formed in the cylindrical stagnating flow field. The flame used by Marbach et al (2007) is formed on a porous media surface, the flame by Sakurai et al (2013) is stabilized in the stagnation flow field, and the flame by Wan et al (2015) is formed by utilizing the low-speed region of the cavity. First, our results are compared with the combustor developed by Wan et al Both combustor volume Vo and chamber volume Vi in the present study are smaller than those of Wan et al (2015).…”

Section: Exergy Loss Ratementioning

confidence: 99%

“…There are several different types of meso-scale combustors: (1) the premixed flat flame type formed on a porous plate (Marbach et al, 2007), (2) the flat flame type formed in stagnation flow (Sakurai et al, 2013), (3) the flame type stabilized by the cavity (Fan et al, 2009;Wan et al, 2015), (4) the flame type formed in the vortex flow (Li et al, 2009;Shimokuri et al, 2015) and so forth. Sakurai et al (2013) have developed a combustor that can be applied to the ultra-micro gas turbine.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Combustion characteristics of an annular type meso-scale combustor

Suenaga

Yanaoka

Takeda

et al. 2016

JTST

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study was conducted to develop a meso-scale annular type combustor that uses two types of coaxial cylindrical flames, rich premixed flame and diffusion flame. The combustor consists of inner and outer porous tubes, and rich C 3 H 8 -air mixture and air issued, respectively, through the inner tube outwardly and through the outer tube inwardly, forms a cylindrical stagnation plane sandwiched by the inner rich premixed flame and the outer diffusion flame. A petal type flame was also observed in the downstream of the cylindrical flames. Maintaining a constant equivalence ratio φ i and flow rate q i of the rich mixture, the overall equivalence ratio φ all is controlled by varying the air flow rate q o of the outer tube. In order to investigate the combustion performance, the temperature was measured inside and at the outlet of the combustion chamber. The heat loss rate and exergy loss rate were evaluated from the obtained temperature data. The minimum values of the heat loss rate and exergy loss rate were 0.30 and 0.57, respectively. These loss rates were compared with the performance of other meso-scale combustors.

show abstract

“…Hydrocarbon fuels provide energy storage of typically 45 MJ kg −1 , whereas the best currently available batteries (lithium-ion) provide only about 0.5 MJ kg −1 . Even at 10% conversion efficiency from thermal to electrical energy, the energy storage density of hydrocarbon fuels is over 10 times higher than that of batteries [5][6][7]. Other advantages of hydrocarbon fuels over conventional batteries include low cost, no memory effect, and instant rechargeability.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 96%