Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
Computational study of combustion in flares: structure and emission of a jet flame in turbulent cross-flow
GERG Academic Network Event Brussels 3 - 4 June 2010
CENTRE FOR
Introduction
Flares: safe burning of waste hydrocarbons Oilfields, refinery, LNG Pollutants: NOx, CO2, CO, unburned hydrocarbons, greenhouse gases Global flaring >100 billion m3 /year Operating conditions have significant effect on flare flame stability, efficiency and emissions Important to predict this effect to control emissions (stringent regulation / taxes )
CENTRE FOR
Motivation
Accurate emission measurement: Unresolved in large-scale flares Passive Fourier-transform infra-red spectroscopy failed validation testing1 Experiment /Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) Few CFD study on emissions pattern from high momentum jet flares Challenging aspect of flares CFD : (3-D, turbulence, complex chemistry, unsteadiness, partial-premixing e.t.c.)
1.
TCEQPFTIRITestingReport,URS(2004):http://www.tceq.state.tx.us
CENTRE FOR
Research Objectives
Identify range of fuel jet and wind velocities for sustainable operations (refinery and oil-field flares) Investigate effect of: fuel jet and cross-flow velocities Improved prediction of important physical phenomenon (turbulence, unsteadiness, partial-premixing and coherent structures) Study unresolved issues associated with scaling from small-scale to industrialscale flares: minimum burner diameter appropriate dimensionless parameter
CENTRE FOR
Flow conditions: Fuel: pure methane uj = 10 - 85 m/s, ucf = 2.3 and 5.0 m/s Recf = 103,500 - 193,500
Cross-flow (Air) 0.17 m
CENTRE FOR
Mathematical models
Reynolds average Nervier-Stokes (RANS) transport equations for: continuity, momentum, enthalpy, mixture fraction/variance Turbulence: realizable
Radiation: discrete ordinate method Soot : Brookes and Moss (1990) Combustion: steady / unsteady flamelet model (Peters, 1986)
Multiple flamelet profile, scalar dissipation rate (SDR) ranges: 0.01 39/s; 0.0001 39/s
CENTRE FOR
(a)
X=0.3 m
Mean flame temperature(K) on symmetric plane. (a) Contours, (b) Radial profile at axial location, x = 0.3 m
3.
Birch, A.D., Brown, D.R., Fairweather, M., and Hargrave, G.K. (1989). Combust. Sci. and Tech., 66, 217- 232
CENTRE FOR
cf ucf
2
Curvilinear distance from the pipe exit to the flame tip (1200 K) Longer flame at low and high M Increase in M cause decrease and increase in flame length Trend of flame length with M is similar Varying jet exit velocity Varying cross-flow velocity
Momentumratio,M
CENTRE FOR
(c)
Mean flame temperature contour on the symmetric plane for: (a) M = 332, (b) M = 192, and (c) M = 116
CENTRE FOR
cf ucf
2
Curvilinear distance from the pipe exit to the flame tip (1200 K) Longer flame at low and high M Increase in M cause decrease and increase in flame length Trend of flame length with M is similar Varying jet exit velocity Varying cross-flow velocity
Momentumratio,M
CENTRE FOR
Lower radiant fraction at high M Trend correlate with decrease in flame volume and residence time due to higher Reynolds number
Momentumfluxratio,M
CENTRE FOR
CENTRE FOR
Computational details
400
500
600
700
800
Momentumratio,M
CENTRE FOR
Computational details
NO2/NOx trend similar to CO species NO2/NOx ratio increases slightly at higher M No significant changes in NO2/NOx with increase in M Can same conclusion be made for large-scale flares?
Momentum ratio, M
CENTRE FOR
Current work
Large-scale industrial flare modelling (CANMET Flare test Facility,
Ottawa, Canada) : Computational domain: 1.83 x 1.2 x 8.3 m3, burner diameters: 2 to 6 Fuel: pure CH4 and mixture of CH4 and N2 Range of jet / wind velocities: 0.23 to 22 ms-1 / 2.0 to 8.5 ms-1 Low momentum flux ratios: 0.2 < M < 15 Second-order turbulence closure resolves secondary flow features Unsteadiness RANS resolves unsteady mean flow structures Preliminary results
CENTRE FOR
SKE
Better prediction of recirculation region and flame temperature Similar prediction for the species? (inconclusive: work-in-progress)
Comparison of predicted temperature profile: (a) Reynolds stress (b) standard turbulence model
CENTRE FOR
Conclusion
Longer flame in the high and low momentum ratio regime Lower radiant heat flux and NOx at high momentum ratio Higher CO and NO2/NOx ratio at high M, no significant increase as M increases Flare operation is more likely acceptable at high momentum ratio ranges Unsteady calculation important in large-scale buoyancy dominated flares
Future Work Improved accuracy of emission prediction through advance turbulence (LES) and combustion models (transported PDF )
CENTRE FOR
Acknowledgement
Nigerian Government funding for PhD research through the PTDF overseas scholarship scheme
CENTRE FOR