2011
DOI: 10.1021/ef200707h
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Measurements of Laminar Flame Velocity for Components of Natural Gas

Abstract: This paper presents new experimental measurements of the laminar flame velocity of components of natural gas, methane, ethane, propane, and n-butane as well as of binary and tertiary mixtures of these compounds proposed as surrogates for natural gas. These measurements have been performed by the heat flux method using a newly built flat flame adiabatic burner at atmospheric pressure. The composition of the investigated air/hydrocarbon mixtures covers a wide range of equivalence ratios, from 0.6 to 2.1, for whi… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

13
113
0

Year Published

2012
2012
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 185 publications
(126 citation statements)
references
References 39 publications
(113 reference statements)
13
113
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Uncertainties in equivalence ratio for the heat flux burner are typically range from 0.01 to 0.04 which increases as φ increases [30]. Note that for other gaseous or liquid fuels, such methane [33], ethanol [43] or n-heptane [34], there is a notably better agreement between the measurements made using heat flux method than in the present case. In comparison to the current mechanism, AramcoMech 1.3 under-predicts the flame speed of the new experimental data across the range of equivalence ratios.…”
Section: Laminar Flame Speed Resultsmentioning
confidence: 57%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Uncertainties in equivalence ratio for the heat flux burner are typically range from 0.01 to 0.04 which increases as φ increases [30]. Note that for other gaseous or liquid fuels, such methane [33], ethanol [43] or n-heptane [34], there is a notably better agreement between the measurements made using heat flux method than in the present case. In comparison to the current mechanism, AramcoMech 1.3 under-predicts the flame speed of the new experimental data across the range of equivalence ratios.…”
Section: Laminar Flame Speed Resultsmentioning
confidence: 57%
“…The apparatus has been modified to the study of gaseous and liquid fuels and allow an increase of the fresh gas temperature up to 398 K. The experimental device has been described previously [33,34]. The principle is similar to that used at VUB described above (Section 2.10.2).…”
Section: Lrpg Flamesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, Fig. 18 shows the large uncertainty in 80% methane/20% hydrogen laminar flame speeds at 1 atm and 298 K reported in the literature [15,[62][63][64]. Aram- Comparisons of model predictions compared to experimental data taken by…”
Section: Mechanism Validationmentioning
confidence: 93%
“…Battin-Leclerc et al 2006;Bounaceur et al 2007;Anderlohr et al 2010;Bounaceur et al 2010;Wang et al 2010). Obviously, it is not possible to describe all these validations in detail, but we can mention, for instance, the very recent work of Dirrenberger et al (2011) who has studied the laminar burning velocity of several mixtures including air, hydrogen, and components of natural gas experimentally and modeled it with success. Laminar burning velocities are important parameters in many areas of combustion science, such as the design of burners and the prediction of explosions.…”
Section: -C 2 Reaction Basementioning
confidence: 99%