Assessment of optimal reaction progress variable characteristics for partially premixed flames

References

• N. Peters, Turbulent Combustion (Cambridge Monographs on Mechanics). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000. doi:https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511612701.
   Google Scholar
• P. Domingo, L. Vervisch, and D. Veynante, Large-eddy simulation of a lifted methane jet flame in a vitiated coflow. Combust. Flame 152 (2008), pp. 415–432.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• S. Delhaye, L.M.T. Somers, J.A. Van Oijen, and L.P.H. De Goey, Incorporating unsteady flow-effects beyond the extinction limit in flamelet-generated manifolds. Proc. Combust. Inst. 32(I) (2009), pp. 1051–1058.
   Google Scholar
• J.A.V. Oijen and L.P.H.D. Goey, Modelling of premixed laminar flames using flamelet-generated manifolds. Combust. Sci. Technol. 161 (2000), pp. 113–137.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• J.A.V. Oijen, A. Donini, R.J.M. Bastiaans, J.H.M.T. Boonkkamp, and L.P.H.D. Goey, State-of-the-art in premixed combustion modeling using flamelet generated manifolds. Prog. Energy Combust. Sci. 57 (2016), pp. 30–74.
   Google Scholar
• B. Fiorina, D. Veynante, and S. Candel, Modeling combustion chemistry in large eddy simulation of turbulent flames. Flow, Turbul. Combust. 94 (2015), pp. 3–42.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• N. Peters, Laminar diffusion flamelet models in non-premixed turbulent combustion. Prog. Energy Combust. Sci. 10 (1984), pp. 319–339.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• K. Bray, P. Domingo, and L. Vervisch, Role of the progress variable in models for partially premixed turbulent combustion. Combust. Flame 141 (2005), pp. 431–437.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• B. Fiorina, O. Gicquel, L. Vervisch, S. Carpentier, and N. Darabiha, Approximating the chemical structure of partially premixed and diffusion counterflow flames using FPI flamelet tabulation. Combust. Flame 140 (2005), pp. 147–160.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• A.W. Vreman, B.A. Albrecht, J.A. van Oijen, L.P.H. de Goey, and R.J.M. Bastiaans, Premixed and nonpremixed generated manifolds in large-eddy simulation of Sandia flame D and F. Combust. Flame 153 (2008), pp. 394–416.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• E. Knudsen and H. Pitsch, A general flamelet transformation useful for distinguishing between premixed and non-premixed modes of combustion. Combust. Flame 156 (2009), pp. 678–696.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• P.D. Nguyen, L. Vervisch, V. Subramanian, and P. Domingo, Multidimensional flamelet-generated manifolds for partially premixed combustion. Combust. Flame 157 (2010), pp. 43–61.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• L.M. Verhoeven, W.J.S. Ramaekers, J.A.V. Oijen, and L.P.H.D. Goey, Modeling non-premixed laminar co-flow flames using flamelet-generated manifolds. Combust. Flame 159 (2012), pp. 230–241.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• D. Bradley, L.K. Kwa, A.K.C. Lau, M. Missaghi, and S.B. Chin, Laminar flamelet modeling of recirculating premixed methane and propane-air combustion. Combust. Flame 71 (1988), pp. 109–122.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• U. Maas and S.B. Pope, Simplifying chemical kinetics: intrinsic low-dimensional manifolds in composition space. Combust. Flame 88 (1992), pp. 239–264.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• M. Ihme, L. Shunn, and J. Zhang, Regularization of reaction progress variable for application to flamelet-based combustion models. J. Comput. Phys. 231 (2012), pp. 7715–7721.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Y.-s. Niu, L. Vervisch, and P. Dinh, An optimization-based approach to detailed chemistry tabulation: automated progress variable definition. Combust. Flame 160 (2013), pp. 776–785.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• H. Atoof and M.D. Emami, Numerical simulation of laminar premixed CH4/air flame by flamelet-generated manifolds: A sensitivity analysis on the effects of progress variables. J. Taiwan Inst. Chem. Eng. 60 (2016), pp. 287–293.
   Google Scholar
• J.A.V. Oijen and L.P.H. de Goey, A numerical study of confined triple flames using a flamelet-generated manifold. Combust. Theor. Model. 8 (2004), pp. 141–163.
   Google Scholar
• M. Chrigui, A.R. Masri, A. Sadiki, and J. Janicka, Large eddy simulation of a polydisperse ethanol spray flame. Flow, Turbul. Combust. 90 (2013), pp. 813–832.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• A. Najafi-Yazdi, B. Cuenot, and L. Mongeau, Systematic definition of progress variables and intrinsically low-dimensional, flamelet generated manifolds for chemistry tabulation. Combust. Flame 159 (2012), pp. 1197–1204.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• E. Abtahizadeh, P. De Goey, and J. Van Oijen, Development of a novel flamelet-based model to include preferential diffusion effects in autoignition of CH4/H2 flames. Combust. Flame 162 (2015), pp. 4358–4369.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• U. Prüfert, S. Hartl, F. Hunger, D. Messig, M. Eiermann, and C. Hasse, A constrained control approach for the automated choice of an optimal progress variable for chemistry tabulation. Flow, Turbul. Combust. 94 (2015), pp. 593–617.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• A. Vasavan, P. de Goey, and J. van Oijen, A novel method to automate FGM progress variable with application to igniting combustion systems. Combust. Theor. Model. 24 (2020), pp. 221–244.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• A. Scholtissek, P. Domingo, L. Vervisch, and C. Hasse, A self-contained progress variable space solution method for thermochemical variables and flame speed in freely-propagating premixed flamelets. Proc. Combust. Inst. 37 (2019), pp. 1529–1536.
   Google Scholar
• P. Saxena and F.A. Williams, Numerical and experimental studies of ethanol flames. Proc. Combust. Inst. 31(I) (2007), pp. 1149–1156.
   Google Scholar
• R.W. Bilger, S.H. Stårner, and R.J. Kee, On reduced mechanisms for methane □ air combustion in nonpremixed flames. Combust. Flame 80(2) (1990), pp. 135–149.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• P.K. Jha and C.P.T. Groth, Tabulated chemistry approaches for laminar flames: evaluation of flame-prolongation of ILDM and flamelet methods. Combust. Theor. Model. 16 (2012), pp. 31–57.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• B. Franzelli, A. Vié, and M. Ihme, On the generalisation of the mixture fraction to a monotonic mixing-describing variable for the flamelet formulation of spray flames. Combust. Theor. Model. 19 (2015), pp. 773–806.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• D.E. Goldberg, Genetic algorithms in search, optimization and machine learning, Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co. Inc., Boston, 1989.
   Google Scholar
• F. Chitgarha and A. Mardani, Assessment of Steady and Unsteady Flamelet Models for MILD Combustion Modeling. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 43 (2018), pp. 15551–15563.
   Google Scholar
• H. Pitsch. FlameMaster: A c++ computer program for O-D Combustion and 1-D laminar flame calculations [Online] Available: Available at https://www.itv.rwth-aachen.de/downloads/flamemaster/.
   Google Scholar
• P. Deuflhard, A modified Newton method for the solution of ill-conditioned systems of nonlinear equations with application to multiple shooting. Numer. Math. 22 (1974), pp. 289–315.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• A. Bhagatwala, J.H. Chen, and T. Lu, Direct numerical simulations of HCCI/SACI with ethanol. Combust. Flame 161 (2014), pp. 1826–1841.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• D. Healy, N.S. Donato, C.J. Aul, E.L. Petersen, C.M. Zinner, G. Bourque, and H.J. Curran, n-Butane: ignition delay measurements at high pressure and detailed chemical kinetic simulations. Combust. Flame 157 (2010), pp. 1526–1539.
   Google Scholar
• S.J. Klippenstein, L.B. Harding, P. Glarborg, and J.A. Miller, The role of NNH in NO formation and control. Combust. Flame 158 (2011), pp. 774–789.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• A. Kazakov and M. Frenklach. Reduced reaction sets based on GRIMech1.2. http://www.me.berkeley.edu/drm/.
   Google Scholar
• H. Pitsch and N. Peters, A consistent flamelet formulation for non-premixed combustion considering differential diffusion effects. Combust. Flame 114 (1998), pp. 26–40.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• W.K. Metcalfe, S.M. Burke, S.S. Ahmed, and H.J. Curran, A hierarchical and comparative kinetic modeling study of C1 − C2 hydrocarbon and oxygenated fuels. Int. J. Chem. Kinet. 45 (2013), pp. 638–675.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• F.N. Egolfopoulos, D.X. Du, and C.K. Law, A study on ethanol oxidation kinetics in laminar premixed flames, flow reactors, and shock tubes. Symp. (Int.) Combust. 24 (1992), pp. 833–841.
   Google Scholar
• A.R. Laich, E. Ninnemann, S. Neupane, R. Rahman, S. Barak, W. J. Pitz, S. S. Goldsborough, and S. S. Vasu, High-pressure shock tube study of ethanol oxidation: ignition delay time and CO time-history measurements. Combust. Flame 212 (2020), pp. 486–499.
   Google Scholar
• N. Leplat, P. Dagaut, C. Togbé, and J. Vandooren, Numerical and experimental study of ethanol combustion and oxidation in laminar premixed flames and in jet-stirred reactor. Combust. Flame 158 (2011), pp. 705–725.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• C. Lee, S. Vranckx, K. A. Heufer, S. V. Khomik, Y. Uygun, H. Olivier, and R. X. Fernandez, On the chemical kinetics of ethanol oxidation: shock tube, rapid compression machine and detailed modeling study. Z. Phys. Chem. 226 (2012), pp. 1–28.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• S.M. Sarathy, P. Oßwald, N. Hansen, and K. Kohse-höinghaus, Alcohol combustion chemistry. Prog. Energy Combust. Sci. 44 (2014), pp. 40–102.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• B. Fiorina, R. Baron, O. Gicquel, D. Thevenin, S. Carpentier, and N. Darabiha, Modelling non-adiabatic partially premixed flames using flame-prolongation of ILDM. Combust. Theor. Model. 7 (2003), pp. 449–470.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• H. Bongers, J.A. Van Oijen, L.M.T. Somers, and L.P.H. De Goey, The flamelet generated manifold method to steady planar partially premixed counterflow flames. Combust. Sci. Technol. 177 (2005), pp. 2373–2393.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar