1981
DOI: 10.1016/s0082-0784(81)80041-0
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Limiting factor of flame propagation in low-volatility fuel clouds

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
8
0
1

Year Published

1992
1992
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 15 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 7 publications
0
8
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…In the third stage, the total area of the flames shrank at a rate of −79.25 cm 2 /s, which corresponds with the large flames splitting into smaller flames before quenching at the top. Different combustion modes of flames in aerosol systems have also been reported by previous researchers. ,, Among the three stages of flame propagation, the second stage, which is characterized by large yellow flames and rapid flame size expansion, is considered to be the most hazardous scenario of aerosol flames and may result in more severe damage to the plant environment if it occurs on a large scale.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 58%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…In the third stage, the total area of the flames shrank at a rate of −79.25 cm 2 /s, which corresponds with the large flames splitting into smaller flames before quenching at the top. Different combustion modes of flames in aerosol systems have also been reported by previous researchers. ,, Among the three stages of flame propagation, the second stage, which is characterized by large yellow flames and rapid flame size expansion, is considered to be the most hazardous scenario of aerosol flames and may result in more severe damage to the plant environment if it occurs on a large scale.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 58%
“…In addition, the values of flame front speed were found to vary considerably with different test methods in the previous studies. For instance, velocity of the flame front was found to reduce with the existence of fuel droplets as compared to other experiments performed using a fuel vapor system with the same fuel concentration. ,,, In other studies, the flame front velocity in the aerosol system was found to be higher than that in the gaseous mixtures, and the phenomenon of flame speed oscillation was also reported. ,, The seemingly contradictory results actually arose due to the complexity of flame characteristics in the aerosol system. For the case of flames in the current aerosol system, there was little uniformity or even discreteness in the flame shapes, followed by the observation of different stages of flame propagation.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 74%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…It is important to note, however, that optimum two-phase characteristics for successful ignition do not necessarily correspond to those for optimal fuel-mist flammability. An example of this was shown by Hayashi et al (1981) who established that the MIE generally correspond to < 30 µm droplet mists, dominated by evaporation timescales, whereas the lower flammability limit (LFL) reduces for droplet diameter > 40 µm due to the established inhomogeneouis droplet-droplet relay flame propagation mechanism. For this study, this potential source of confusion is allayed, as for all releases considered, those spray/mists that ignited also indeed propagated.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The minimum ignition energy for a particular spray is then defined as the ignition energy which results in 50% probability of ignition (Danis et al, 1988). Another model for ignition probabililty in sprays has been developed by Hayashi et al (1981) based on a product of the probability for a droplet to ignite and the probability that a propagating flame would result. This was prompted by the realization that in real sprays the droplet spacing mayor may not be small relative to the spark gap.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%