View
5
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
Paper # 070LT-0329 Topic: Laminar Flames
8th
U. S. National Combustion Meeting
Organized by the Western States Section of the Combustion Institute
and hosted by the University of Utah
May 19-22, 2013
Laminar Flame Speeds of Natural Gas Blends with Hydrogen at
Elevated Pressures and Temperatures
Drew Plichta1, Olivier Mathieu
1, Eric Petersen
1, Gilles Bourque
2, Henry Curran
3,
Sin ́ad Burke3, Wayne Metcalfe
3, and Felix Güthe
4
1Department of Mechanical Engineering, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843, USA
2 Rolls-Royce Canada
3National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland
4Alstom, Baden, Switzerland
Recently there has been a push for more fuel flexibility in gas turbine engines. Designers need base-line data, such as laminar flame
speed, to effectively design said engines. Engineers also need these data at a variety of conditions such as elevated pressures and
temperatures. This study examined the effect of fuel blending as well as initial conditions on laminar flame speed. Natural gas-based
fuels that contain high hydrogen content have recently become of interest in the gas turbine industry. This study examined flame speed
data resultant from a blending of natural gas and hydrogen at various initial conditions. A parametric sweep of equivalence ratios, 0.7-
1.3, was conducted at each condition. The hydrogen content was varied from 50-90%. The initial temperature and pressure were also
varied from 300-450 K and 1-5 atm, respectively. Experiments conducted above atmospheric pressure utilized a 1:6 oxygen-to-helium
ratio to curb the hydrodynamic and thermal instabilities that arise when conducting laminar flame speed experiments. A heated,
constant-volume combustion vessel was utilized to experimentally determine flame speed. The experimentally determined flame
speeds were also compared to the latest AramcoMech chemical kinetics models. These chemical kinetics models are being developed
by Curran and coworkers at National University of Ireland Galway. The experimental data matches well with the calculated flame
speed from the mechanism. The discrepancies between the model and experimental data can be mostly justified when taking into
account the uncertainty of the experimental flame speed.
1. Introduction
The need for fuel flexibility in gas turbine engines comes from fuel availability. Processes such as the gasification of coal
or biomass can produce fuels with high hydrogen content. Hydrogen addition is particularly attractive because of the
potential to extend the flammability limits, increase combustion efficiency, and reduce pollutant emissions (Wu et al.,
2011). These fuels can then be used in turbines, but replacing its designed fuel with one that is relatively more or less
reactive can lead to problems such as blowout, flashback, and auto-ignition. While the flame speed of the main
component of natural gas, methane, has been extensively studied in the literature (Hassan et al., 1998; Aung et al., 1995),
the flame speeds of methane and natural gas blends with high hydrogen content at elevated temperatures and pressures
remains to be studied.
Because the flame speed of blended fuels cannot be obtained by linear combination of each blended fuel constituent,
modeling work has been done to predict the flame speeds of methane and hydrogen blends by Chen et al. (2012).
Correlations for similar fuel blends such as ethane and hydrogen mixtures have been studied by Wu et al. (2011). Flame
speeds of Butane-air mixtures with hydrogen addition have been experimentally determined in a study by Tang et al.
2
(2011), and Yu et al. (1986) conducted methane flame speed experiments at atmospheric conditions with a small amount
of hydrogen addition. Hu et al. (2009) studied the entire range of methane and hydrogen blends at room temperature and
pressure, while the present study covered similar binary fuel blends at elevated temperatures and pressures.
2. Methods
The laminar flame speed experiments presented in this study were carried out by two centrally-ignited, constant-volume
combustion vessels. The first was a centrally ignited cylindrical 7075 aluminum vessel with an internal diameter and
lengths of 30.5-cm and 35.6-cm, respectively. The end caps contained a 6.35-cm thick fused quartz viewing window that
when installed allowed for a 12.7-cm viewing port. The combustion event images were captured using a Z-type
Schlieren setup with a FastCam SAE 1.1 high-speed camera with a mercury arc lamp as the light source. Further details
on this design and experimental methods can be found in a study by de Vries (2009).
The second vessel is made of 17-4PH stainless steel equipped with a circumferential heating jacket. This heating jacket
allows for the elevated initial temperatures in this study of 450 K; it has insulation around the entire vessel to provide
temperature uniformity within the vessel. The development and temperature profile are detailed elsewhere in a study by
Krejci et al. (2011). To view the combustion events on this vessel, a modified Z-type Schlieren setup was utilized as
detailed by Plichta et al. (2013).
Table 1 Experimental Conditions for laminar flame speed measurements.
The test matrix was determined by varying the fuel, hydrogen content, temperature, and pressure. The fuel designated
NG2 (natural gas) in the Table 1 is made of the following constituents (%mol): 81.25% CH4, 10% C2H6, 5% C3H8,
nC4H10 2.5%, and nC5H12 1.25%. This mixture was prepared in-house using the partial pressure method. Air was used as
the oxidizer for the atmospheric experiments. To curb hydrodynamic and thermal-diffusive instabilities, a 1:6 O2:He
ratio was used as the oxidizer for the 5-atm experiments. The high diluent-to-oxygen ratio increased flame thickness
thereby suppressing hydrodynamic instabilities, and helium’s higher diffusivity than nitrogen increased Lewis number,
thus decreasing thermal-diffusive instabilities (Rozenchen et al., 2002). The 1:6 ratio was specifically chosen to mimic
the adiabatic flame temperature of that same fuel with air. A parametric sweep of equivalence ratios was conducted at
each condition in Table 1. All percentages presented in this study are on a molar basis.
The procedure for extracting laminar flame speed is well documented in the literature and therefore will only be briefly
discussed subsequently. Constant pressure is one main assumption for the data analysis to find flame speed and is proven
by previous studies conducted in the facility used in this study (de Vries, 2009). The flame radius in this study was also
limited to the range where no flame acceleration was detected as to neglect wall and ignition effects. A post-processing
program using the density gradients to track the flame edge used a Taubin circle fit and six-point radius method to find
the radius as a function of time as depicted in Figure 1, which shows flame images from 50/50 CH4/H2 and air at
standard temperature and pressure. The bottom row shows the detected flame edge with a white line, and fit to that white
line are six red points from which the flame radius is extracted. After the change in flame radius over time is determined,
corrections need to be made for stretching and to convert to unburned flame speed.
Figure 1 depicts a smooth, laminar flame. As these images were taken from a room temperature and pressure experiment,
one would expect such a laminar flame. These images are representative of flame fronts seen in the present study as no
turbulent, cellular fronts developed while the flame was propagating throughout the viewing window. Only large
wrinkles were seen to form and they did not grow therefore not affect the flame speed values. Helium dilution had the
desired effect of stabilizing the flame front.
Fuel %H2 Temperature(K) Pressure(atm) Oxidizer
CH4 50 300 1 Air
CH4 70 450 5 1:6 O2:He
NG2 90 300 5 1:6 O2:He
CH4 90 450 1 Air
3
The change in radius over change in time for spherically expanding flames is found by the six-point method. Next, the
well-known stretch rate, Eq. (1), for spherically expanding flames was applied and then the linear method, Eq. (2), was
used to extract the flame speed. The linear method was chosen because it is accurate to the first order in finding the
laminar flame speed and Markstein lengths (Chen, 2011). The resultant burned flame speed is divided by the unburned-
to-burned density ratio, σ, to calculate the unburned, un-stretched laminar flame speed, .
(
) (
) (1)
( ) ( ) (2)
(3)
Two versions of the chemical kinetics model developed at the National University of Ireland Galway (NUIG) were used
for this study (Metcalfe et al., 2012). The Aramco mech 1.0 was utilized for the mixture containing methane and
hydrogen, while a higher-order mechanism, Aramco mech 1.0 C5-HT, was used because of the constituents of NG2.
A rigorous uncertainty analysis was also performed. Using the methods developed by Kline and McClintock (1953) the
bias and precision uncertainty were coupled to find the total uncertainty. Three main factors contribute to uncertainty-
temperature, pressure, and equivalence ratio. To find the bias limit, a relationship needed to be developed between these
three factors and flame speed. Other places in the literature have developed such correlations by proposing a quadratic
function of equivalence ratio with temperature and pressure raised to a constant value (Elia et al., 2001). The authors
present Eq. (4) to find the correlation between all the relevant parameters and flame speed, where represents
equivalence ratio. and represent standard temperature and pressure, 1 atm and 298 K , respectively.
( ) ( ) (
)( )
(
)( )
(4)
Figure 1 Captured images (top) and post-processed images (bottom)(50/50 CH4/H2 T = 298 K, P =
1atm).
4
This model was applied to each condition and showed that it was of good form. The temperature dependence in Eq. (4)
was ignored for the room-temperature experiments as it became unity. As the experiments were only performed once at
each condition and equivalence ratio the precision limit was taken as the standard deviation of experimental data with the
correlation in Eq. (4). As the partial pressures method was utilized in the present study, the uncertainty in was
calculated by assuming the worst-case scenario of the lower uncertainty of the fuel and the higher uncertainty of the
oxidizer to find the largest estimated discrepancy of
3. Results and Discussion
While hydrogen has been studied at similar conditions by Krejci et al. (2012) and others places in the literature have
studied hydrogen addition, few comparisons between literature values will be made because only one source was found
to have the same degree of hydrogen addition. In each of the following figures, the data points represent experimental
data, and the line represents the results of the chemical kinetics model. Uncertainty is shown at one equivalence ratio in
each figure so that the other data and trends may be readily visible.
Figure 2 shows a comparison of the experimentally determined flame speeds between the pure fuel cases and 50/50
blended case as seen in the present study. It is readily seen that the blended-fuel flame speed portrays a non-linear
relationship between the flame speed of its two pure components. Similar non-linear relationships have been found with
fuel blending in studies by Hirasawa et al. (2002) and Kochar et al. (2011). Ilbas et al. (2006) also shows a plot of the
flame speeds with the blend showing a non-liner profile that is closer to that of methane than hydrogen. This is indicative
of the fact that unreactive methane severely limits the flame speed even with an equal amount of highly reactive
hydrogen present. The peak of the blended fuels falls much closer to that of methane and at a similar equivalence ratio.
Methane is usually flammable from equivalence ratios of 0.7-1.3, while the addition of hydrogen increases the
flammability limit range from 0.5 to 1.4.
1 2 3
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
T=300K / P=1atm
SL
o (
cm
/s)
H2
50/50 CH4/H
2
CH4
Figure 2 Laminar Flame speeds comparison of pure and blended CH4 and H2 at various equivalence ratios at STP.
Figure 3 depicts the close up view of the 50/50 CH4/H2 blended experimental flame speed results. The solid line
represents the Aramco 1.0 C3 chemical kinetics mechanism. The chemical kinetics model agrees very well with the
experimental data. The peak flame speed occurs at ϕ = 1.1, a similar equivalence ratio to that of peak methane flame
speed. The profile of the flame speed curve is accurately predicted while the indicated uncertainty explains the
discrepancy between the model and experimental data. Hu et al. (2009) also performed experiments. There is very good
agreement between both data sets, and the higher profile of the literature values can be explained by the higher initial
temperature as flame speed is highly dependent upon initial temperature.
5
0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
CH4:50%H
2 + Air
T=300K / P=1atm
SL
o (
cm
/s)
TAMU
Hu et al. (2009)(303 K, .987 atm)
Aramco Mech 1.0
Figure 3 Blended 50/50 CH4/H2 laminar flame speeds compared to model
and literature values.
Figure 4 shows flame speed results for blending of much more hydrogen, 70 %, than that of methane, 30%. These
experiments were conducted at an elevated temperature and pressure, 450 K and 5 atm, respectively. The model agrees
well with the experimental data while slightly over predicting each condition. The calculated uncertainty at this condition
is the size of each data symbol. The largest discrepancy between the data and model come on the rich side where the
difference between the two seems to plateau. Overall, the model predictions prove to be accurate to a fairly good degree.
0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.625
50
75
100
125
150
175
200
225
30/70 CH4/ H
2 + 1:6 O
2:He
T=450K / P=5atm
SL
o (
cm
/s)
TAMU
Aramco Mech 1.0
Figure 4 30/70 CH4/ H2 blended laminar flame speed compared to chemical kinetics model.
Figure 5 shows the flame speed results of 90% Hydrogen with 10% Methane. The experimental results agree very well
with the chemical kinetics model. The peak is correctly predicted at ϕ = 1.4, and the slope of the flame speed matches
very well at lean and rich conditions. A sample uncertainty bar is shown that can explain the slightly higher profile than
that of the model. Multiple data points are shown on this profile to show that these experiments are very repeatable
within the calculated uncertainty. Each of these mixtures was made directly in the combustion vessel; earlier studies have
been conducted that show good agreement between experiments that were made previously in a mixing tank and allowed
ample time to form homogeneity.
6
0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0
100
150
200
250
300
350
CH4:90% H
2 + Air
T=450K / P=1atm
SL
o (
cm
/s)
TAMU
Aramco Mech 1.0
Figure 5 10/90 CH4/ H2 blended laminar flame speed compared to chemical kinetics model.
Figure 6 shows the resultant flame speed from experiments conducted 90% H2 and 10% NG at an elevated pressure of 5
atm. As can be seen, the experimental data match the chemical kinetics model well. The model correctly predicts the
peak flame speed at ϕ = 1.2 while also matching the slope of the experimental data as conditions go to lean and rich. The
uncertainty in flame speed is the size of the symbol in Figure 6. With uncertainty in mind, the model still over predicts
the flame speed slightly. Specifically, the model noticeably over predicts at lean conditions while predicting very well at
very rich conditions.
0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.220
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
NG2:90% H2 + O
2:He 1:6
T=300K / P=5atm
TAMU
Aramco Mech 1.0
SL
o (
cm
/s)
Figure 6 10/90 NG/ H2 blended laminar flame speed compared to chemical kinetics model.
7
4. Conclusions
The blended fuel flame speeds in this study have shown a highly non-linear behavior with respect to the flame speed of
each of the pure-fuel constituents. Helium dilution at elevated pressures had the desired effect of maintaining a laminar
flame throughout the experiments so that laminar flame speed could be measured. The blending effects of CH4, H2, and
NG2 were well captured by the chemical kinetics model as it accurately predicted the laminar flame speed as
experimentally determined in this study. Uncertainty analysis yielded values of 1.7 cm/s to 19.2 cm/s, reasonable when
looking at the same order of flame speeds as found in this study.
Acknowledgements
This research was funded in part by Alstom Power, Switzerland and in part by Rolls-Royce Canada.
References
Aung, K., Tseng, L., Ismail, M., Faeth, G. 1995. Laminar Burning Velocities and Markstein Numbers of
Hydrocarbon/Air Flames. Combustion and Flame, 102, 526-530.
Chen, Z. 2011. On the extraction of laminar flame speed and Markstein length from outwardly propagating spherical
flames. Combustion and Flame, 158, 291-300.
Chen, Z., Dai, P., Chen, S. 2012. A model for the laminar flame speed of binary fuel blends and its application to
methane/hydrogen mixtures. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy. 37, 103990-10396.
de Vries, J. 2009. A study on spherically expanding flame speeds of methane, ethane, and methane/ethane mixtures at
elevated pressures. Doctoral Dissertation, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, USA.
Elia, M., Ulinski, M., Metghalchi, M.2001. Laminar burning velocity of methane-air-diluent mixture. Trans. ASME, 123,
190-196.
Hassan, M., Aung, K., Faeth, G. 1998. Measured and Predicted Properties of Laminar Premixed Methane/Air Flames at
Various Pressures. Combustion and Flame, 155, 539-550.
Hirasawa, T., Sung, C., Yang, Z., Joshi, A., Wang, H., Law, C. 2002. Determination of Laminar Flame Speeds of Fuel
Blends Using Digital Particle Image Velocimetry: Ethylene, n-Butane, and Toluene Flames. Proceedings of the
Combustion Institute, 29, 1427-1434.
Hu, E., Huang, Z. He, J., Jin, C., Zheng, J. 2009. Experimental and numerical study on laminar burning characteristics of
premixed methane-hydrogen-air flames. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 34, 4876-4888.
Ilbas, M., Crayford, A., Yilmaz, I., Bowen, P., Syred, N. 2006. Laminar-burning velocities of hydrogen-air and
hydrogen-methane-air-mixtures: An experimental study. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 31, 1768-1779.
Kline, S., McClintock, F. 1953. Describing Uncertainties in Single Sample Experiments. Mechanical Engineering, 3-8.
Kochar, Y., Seitzman, J., Lieuwen, T., Metcalfe, W., Burke, S., Curran, H., Krejci, M. Lowry, W., Petersen, E. 2011.
Laminar Flame Speed Measurements and Modeling of Alkane Blends at Elevated Pressures with Various Diluents. 2011
ASME Turbo Expo, Vancouver, Canada, June 6-10, Paper# GT2011-45122.
Krejci, M., Vissotski, A., Lowry, W., Ravi, S., Petersen, E., 21-23/03/2011. Development of a High-Temperature and
High-Pressure Vessel for Laminar Flame Speed Measurements. 7th US Nat. Meeting of the Comb. Inst. Atlanta.
8
Krejci, M., Mathieu, O., Vissotski, A., Ravi, S., Sikes, T., Petersen, E., Keromnes, A., Metcalfe, W., Curran, H. 2012.
Laminar Flame speed and ignition delay time data for the kinetic modeling of hydrogen and syngas fuel blends.
Proceedings of ASME Turbo Expo. GT2012-69290.
Metcalfe, W., Burke, S., Ahmed, S., Curran, H. 2012. A Hierarchical and Comparative Kinetic Modeling Study of C1-
C2 Hydrocarbon and Oxygenated Fuels. Combustion and Flame, submitted.
Plichta, D., Petersen, E., Burke, S., Curran, H. 2013. “Laminar Flame Speeds of Hydrocarbons with Helium Dilution at
Raised Pressures and Temperatures”, AIAA Paper 2013-1164.
Rozenchan, G., Zhu, D.L., Law, C.K., and Tse, S.D. 2002. Outward propagation, burning velocities, and chemical
effects of methane flames up to 60 atm. Proceedings of the Combustion Institute, 29, 1461-1469.
Tang, C., Huang, Z., Law, C. 2011. Determination, correlation, and mechanistic interpretation of effects of hydrogen
addition on laminar flame speeds of hydrocarbon-air mixtures. Proceedings of the Combustion Institute, 33, 921-928.
Wu, F., Kelley, A., Tang, C., Zhu, D., Law, C. 2011. Measurement and correlation of laminar flame speeds of CO and
C2 hydrocarbons with hydrogen addition at atmospheric and elevated pressures. International Journal of Hydrogen
Energy, 36, 13171-13180.
Yu, G., Law, C., Wu, C. 1986. Laminar Flame Speeds of Hydrocarbon + Air Mixtures with Hydrogen Addition. 1986.
Combustion and Flame, 63, 339-347.
Recommended