论文部分内容阅读
采用湍流火焰封闭燃烧模型(TFC)模拟了钝体燃烧器的湍流预混燃烧,比较了基于火焰褶皱率和湍流燃烧速度2种源项解法对钝体预混燃烧的预测,对3个不同湍流燃烧速度表达式模拟的性能进行了比较,采用粒子成像测速技术(PIV)测量了燃烧器中心射流出口的速度分布,并将其作为边界条件代入计算.结果表明:不同湍流燃烧速度公式的计算结果在火焰刷厚度、位置及火焰前锋位置方面存在较大差别;Gulder公式的计算结果最接近试验数据,火焰刷厚度与试验结果吻合较好,但火焰刷位置与试验结果差别较大;Dinkelacker的火焰褶皱率模型主要模拟燃烧器在高压条件下的燃烧,在运行压力接近标准大气压的情况下,计算结果与试验值存在较大误差.
A turbulent flame closed combustion model (TFC) was used to simulate the turbulent premixed combustion of a bluff body burner. The prediction of blunt body premixed combustion based on the flame source wrinkle and turbulent combustion velocities was compared. Three different turbulent flows The velocity distribution at the exit of the jet at the center of the combustor was measured by Particle Imaging Velocimetry (PIV), and was calculated as the boundary condition.The results show that the calculation results of different turbulent combustion velocity formulas The results of Gulder formula are the closest to the experimental data. The thickness of the flame brush is in good agreement with the experimental results, but the position of the flame brush differs greatly from the experimental results. The flame of Dinkelacker The wrinkle rate model mainly simulates the combustion of the burner under high pressure conditions. When the operating pressure is close to standard atmospheric pressure, there is a big error between the calculated result and the experimental value.