Test Data AC2-09

Front Page

Description

Test Data

CFD Simulations

Evaluation

Best Practice Advice

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. 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 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).

Table EXP – A  Summary description of all test cases

Name	GNDPs	PDPs (Problem Definition Parameters)		MPs (Measured Parameters)
	Re	Fuel jet composition	Pilot flame composition	Detailed data	DOAPs
EXP1	22400	25% of methane (CH4) and 75% of air	C2H2, H2, air, CO2 and N2	$\langle U\rangle ,\langle U_{rms}\rangle ,\langle V\rangle ,\langle V_{rms}\rangle ,\langle \eta \rangle ,$ $\langle T\rangle ,\langle Y_{H_{2}0}\rangle ,\langle Y_{O_{2}}\rangle ,\langle Y_{N_{2}}\rangle ,\langle Y_{H_{2}}\rangle ,$ $\langle Y_{CO}\rangle ,\langle Y_{CO_{2}}\rangle ,\langle Y_{CH_{4}}\rangle ,\langle \eta _{rms}\rangle ,$ $\langle T_{rms}\rangle ,\langle Y_{{H_{2}O}_{rms}}\rangle ,\langle Y_{{O_{2}}_{rms}}\rangle ,$ $\langle Y_{{N_{2}}_{rms}}\rangle ,\langle Y_{{H_{2}}_{rms}}\rangle ,\langle Y_{{CO}_{rms}}\rangle ,$ $\langle Y_{{CO_{2}}_{rms}}\rangle ,\langle Y_{{CH_{4}}_{rms}}\rangle$	Axial profiles Tmax , z/D (Tmax ) Lconst(η , YCH4 , YO2) Lconst(YH2O , YCO2) YH2, max , z/D (YH2, max ) YCO, max , z/D (YCO, max ) RMSmax z/D (RMSmax ) Radial profiles x/D = 15, 30, 45 Fmax , Umax r½(η) , r½(U )

Table EXP – B  Summary description of all measured parameters and available data files

MP1	MP2	MP3	DOAPs or other miscellaneous data
U, V, u ′, v ′ (ms-1)	η, T, η ′, T ′ (m2s-2)	YN2, RMS(YN2) YO2, RMS(YO2) YH2O, RMS(YH2O ) YH2, RMS(YH2) YCH4, RMS(YCH4) YCO, RMS(YCO ) YCO2, RMS(YCO2) YOH, RMS(YOH ) YNO, RMS(YNO )
exp11.dat	exp12.dat	exp13.dat

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 U_max = 62 m/s. The pilot flame bulk velocity U_pilot = 11.4 m/s and the coflow velocity U_cfl = 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 as below 5% for the mean velocities and within 10% for fluctuating components. The scalar measurement errors are estimated and analyzed in. 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.

References

---

Contributed by: Andrzej Boguslawski — Technical University of Częstochowa

Front Page

Description

Test Data

CFD Simulations

Evaluation

Best Practice Advice

© copyright ERCOFTAC 2024