Test Data AC2-09: Difference between revisions
Line 45: | Line 45: | ||
<math>\langle T\rangle, | <math>\langle T\rangle, | ||
\langle Y_{H_2 0}\rangle, \langle Y_{O_2}\rangle, \langle Y_{N_2}\rangle, | \langle Y_{H_2 0}\rangle, \langle Y_{O_2}\rangle, \langle Y_{N_2}\rangle, | ||
\langle Y_{H_2}\rangle,</math> <math>\langle Y_{CO}\rangle, \langle Y_{CO_2}\rangle, | \langle Y_{H_2}\rangle,</math> | ||
<math>\langle Y_{CO}\rangle, \langle Y_{CO_2}\rangle, | |||
\langle Y_{CH_4}\rangle, \langle\eta_{rms}\rangle,</math> | \langle Y_{CH_4}\rangle, \langle\eta_{rms}\rangle,</math> | ||
<math>\langle T_{rms}\rangle, \langle Y_{{H_2O}_{rms}}\rangle, | <math>\langle T_{rms}\rangle, \langle Y_{{H_2O}_{rms}}\rangle, | ||
\langle Y_{{O_2}_{rms}}\rangle,</math> <math>\langle Y_{{N_2}_{rms}}\rangle, | \langle Y_{{O_2}_{rms}}\rangle,</math> | ||
<math>\langle Y_{{N_2}_{rms}}\rangle, | |||
\langle Y_{{H_2}_{rms}}\rangle, \langle Y_{{CO}_{rms}}\rangle,</math> | \langle Y_{{H_2}_{rms}}\rangle, \langle Y_{{CO}_{rms}}\rangle,</math> | ||
<math>\langle Y_{{CO_2}_{rms}}\rangle, \langle Y_{{CH_4}_{rms}}\rangle</math> | <math>\langle Y_{{CO_2}_{rms}}\rangle, \langle Y_{{CH_4}_{rms}}\rangle</math> |
Revision as of 11:06, 3 May 2011
SANDIA Flame D
Application Challenge AC2-09 © copyright ERCOFTAC 2024
Overview of Tests
The velocity measurements were performed with two-component fiber-optic laser Doppler anemometer (Dantec). All the details of the flow field measuring techniques applied in Sandia Flame D experiment are explained in[1]. Measured scalars for Sandia D Flame include temperature, mixture fraction, N2, O2, H2O, H2, CH4, CO, CO2, OH and NO. Experimental methods and measurement uncertainties are outlined in[1] Spontaneous Raman scattering of the beams from two Nd:YAG lasers (532 nm) was used to measure concentrations of the major species. The Rayleigh scattering signal was converted to temperature using a species-weighted scattering cross section, based on the Raman measurements. Linear laser-induced fluorescence (LIF) was used to measure OH and NO, and the fluorescence signals were corrected on a shot-to-shot basis for variations in Boltzmann fraction and collisional quenching rate. The concentration of CO was measured by Raman scattering and by two-photon laser-induced fluorescence (TPLIF).
Name | GNDPs | PDPs (Problem Definition Parameters) | MPs (Measured Parameters) | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Re | Fuel jet composition | Pilot flame composition | Detailed data | DOAPs | |
EXP1 | Re=22400 | 25% of methane (CH4) and 75% of air | C2H2, H2, air, CO2 and N2 |
|
axial profiles, Tmax, z/D(Tmax) |
TEST CASE EXP1
Description of Experiment
The Application Challenge includes just one test case, Sandia Flame D with defined Reynolds number of the fuel jet and the fuel and pilot flame compositions as given in Table EXP-A.
Boundary Data
The inlet mean and fluctuating velocity at the distance x/D=1 from the burner are shown in Fig.3. The inlet parabolic profile had a maximum at the centre of the fuel nozzle of Umax = 62 m/s. The pilot flame bulk velocity Upilot = 11.4 m/s and the coflow velocity Ucfl = 0.9 m/s.
Fig. 3. Mean and RMS inlet profiles of the axial velocity. |
Measurement Errors
The flow field measurement statistical errors are estimated in[1] as below 5% for the mean velocities and within 10% for fluctuating components. The scalar measurement errors are estimated and analyzed in[2]. The relative uncertainty (not including statistical noise or potential effects of spatial averaging) is estimated to be within 2% for the Raman measurements, 5% for OH, 5% for CO, and 10% for NO.
Measured Data
References
Contributed by: Andrzej Boguslawski — Technical University of Częstochowa
© copyright ERCOFTAC 2024