1932
0
  1. Home
  2. A-Z Publications
  3. Annual Review of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering
  4. Volume 10, 2019
  5. Article

Annual Review of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering

Volume 10, 2019

On Radical-Induced Ignition in Combustion Systems

Abstract

This article reviews recent theoretical developments on incipient ignition induced by radical runaway in systems described by detailed chemistry. Employing eigenvalue analysis, we first analyze the canonical explosion limits of mixtures of hydrogen and oxygen, yielding explicit criteria that well reproduce their characteristic Z-shaped response in the pressure–temperature plot. Subsequently, we evaluate the role of hydrogen addition to the explosion limits of mixtures of oxygen with either carbon monoxide or methane, demonstrating and quantifying its strong catalytic effect, especially for the carbon monoxide cases. We then discuss the role of low-temperature chemistry in the autoignition of large hydrocarbon fuels, with emphasis on the first-stage ignition delay and the associated negative-temperature coefficient phenomena. Finally, we extend the analysis to problems of nonhomogeneous ignition in the presence of convective–diffusive transport, using counterflow as an example, demonstrating the canonical similarity between homogeneous and nonhomogeneous systems. We conclude with suggestions for potential directions for future research.

Keyword(s): analytical methods, chemical kinetics, combustion
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-chembioeng-060718-030141
2019-06-07
2024-04-18
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/chembioeng/10/1/annurev-chembioeng-060718-030141.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-chembioeng-060718-030141&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

Literature Cited

  1. 1.
    Law CK. 2006. Combustion Physics Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
  2. 2.
    Buckmaster J, Clavin P, Liñán A, Matalon M, Peters N et al. 2005. Combustion theory and modeling. Proc. Combust. Inst. 30:11–19
     [Google Scholar]
  3. 3.
    Lu T, Law CK. 2009. Toward accommodating realistic fuel chemistry in large-scale computations. Prog. Energy Combust. Sci. 35:2192–215
     [Google Scholar]
  4. 4.
    Voevodsky VV, Soloukhin RI. 1965. On the mechanism and explosion limits of hydrogen-oxygen chain self-ignition in shock waves. Proc. Combust. Inst. 10:279–83
     [Google Scholar]
  5. 5.
    Griffiths JF, Scott SK. 1987. Thermokinetic interactions: fundamentals of spontaneous ignition and cool flames. Prog. Energy Combust. Sci. 13:3161–97
     [Google Scholar]
  6. 6.
    Griffiths JF, Barnard JA. 1995. Flame and Combustion Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press
  7. 7.
    Azatyan AA, Andrianova ZS, Ivanova AN 2010. Role of the HO2 radical in hydrogen oxidation at the third self-ignition limit. Kinet. Catal. 51:3337–47
     [Google Scholar]
  8. 8.
    Wang X, Law CK. 2013. An analysis of the explosion limits of hydrogen-oxygen mixtures. J. Chem. Phys. 138:13134305
     [Google Scholar]
  9. 9.
    Liang W, Law CK. 2018. An analysis of the explosion limits of hydrogen/oxygen mixtures with nonlinear chain reactions. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 20:2742–51
     [Google Scholar]
  10. 10.
    Alamo GD, Williams FA, Sanchez AL 2004. Hydrogen–oxygen induction times above crossover temperatures. Combust. Sci. Technol. 176:101599–626
     [Google Scholar]
  11. 11.
    Sánchez AL, Fernández-Tarrazo E, Williams FA 2014. The chemistry involved in the third explosion limit of H2–O2 mixtures. Combust. Flame 161:1111–17
     [Google Scholar]
  12. 12.
    Semenov NN. 1959. Some Problems of Chemical Kinetics and Reactivity, Vol. 1 Oxford, UK: Pergamon
  13. 13.
    Kreutz TG, Law CK. 1996. Ignition in nonpremixed counterflowing hydrogen versus heated air: computational study with detailed chemistry. Combust. Flame 104:1–2157–75
     [Google Scholar]
  14. 14.
    Chaos M, Dryer FL. 2008. Syngas combustion kinetics and applications. Combust. Sci. Technol. 180:61053–96
     [Google Scholar]
  15. 15.
    Liang W, Chen Z, Yang F, Zhang H 2013. Effects of Soret diffusion on the laminar flame speed and Markstein length of syngas/air mixtures. Proc. Combust. Inst. 34:1695–702
     [Google Scholar]
  16. 16.
    Olm C, Zsély IG, Varga T, Curran HJ, Turányi T 2015. Comparison of the performance of several recent syngas combustion mechanisms. Combust. Flame 162:51793–812
     [Google Scholar]
  17. 17.
    Ashraf C, Van Duin AC 2017. Extension of the ReaxFF combustion force field toward syngas combustion and initial oxidation kinetics. J. Phys. Chem. A 121:51051–68
     [Google Scholar]
  18. 18.
    Zhang K, Jiang X. 2018. An investigation of fuel variability effect on bio-syngas combustion using uncertainty quantification. Fuel 220:283–95
     [Google Scholar]
  19. 19.
    Jackson GS, Sai R, Plaia JM, Boggs CM, Kiger KT 2003. Influence of H2 on the response of lean premixed CH4 flames to high strained flows. Combust. Flame 132:3503–11
     [Google Scholar]
  20. 20.
    Zhang Y, Huang Z, Wei L, Zhang J, Law CK 2012. Experimental and modeling study on ignition delays of lean mixtures of methane, hydrogen, oxygen, and argon at elevated pressures. Combust. Flame 159:3918–31
     [Google Scholar]
  21. 21.
    Liang W, Liu J, Law CK 2017. On explosion limits of H2/CO/O2 mixtures. Combust. Flame 179:130–37
     [Google Scholar]
  22. 22.
    Kéromnès A, Metcalfe WK, Heufer KA, Donohoe N, Das AK et al. 2013. An experimental and detailed chemical kinetic modeling study of hydrogen and syngas mixture oxidation at elevated pressures. Combust. Flame 160:6995–1011
     [Google Scholar]
  23. 23.
    Healy D, Kalitan DM, Aul CJ, Petersen EL, Bourque G, Curran HJ 2010. Oxidation of C1−C5 alkane quinternary natural gas mixtures at high pressures. Energy Fuels 24:31521–28
     [Google Scholar]
  24. 24.
    Davis SG, Joshi AV, Wang H, Egolfopoulos F 2005. An optimized kinetic model of H2/CO combustion. Proc. Combust. Inst. 30:11283–92
     [Google Scholar]
  25. 25.
    Liang W, Liu Z, Law CK 2019. Explosion limits of H2/CH4/O2 mixtures: analyticity and dominant kinetics. Proc. Combust. Inst. 37:493–500
     [Google Scholar]
  26. 26.
    Bowman CT, Frenklach M, Gardiner WR, Smith G 1999. The GRI 3.0 Chemical Kinetic Mechanism Berkeley: Univ. Calif. Press77 pp.
  27. 27.
    Metcalfe WK, Burke SM, Ahmed SS, Curran HJ 2013. A hierarchical and comparative kinetic modeling study of C1−C2 hydrocarbon and oxygenated fuels. Int. J. Chem. Kinet. 45:10638–75
     [Google Scholar]
  28. 28.
    Hashemi H, Christensen JM, Gersen S, Levinsky H, Klippenstein SJ, Glarborg P 2016. High-pressure oxidation of methane. Combust. Flame 172:349–64
     [Google Scholar]
  29. 29.
    Lu T, Law CK. 2008. A criterion based on computational singular perturbation for the identification of quasi steady state species: a reduced mechanism for methane oxidation with NO chemistry. Combust. Flame 154:4761–74
     [Google Scholar]
  30. 30.
    Lignola PG, Reverchon E. 1987. Cool flames. Prog. Energy Combust. Sci. 13:175–96
     [Google Scholar]
  31. 31.
    Naidja A, Krishna CR, Butcher T, Mahajan D 2003. Cool flame partial oxidation and its role in combustion and reforming of fuels for fuel cell systems. Prog. Energy Combust. Sci. 29:2155–91
     [Google Scholar]
  32. 32.
    Battin-Leclerc F. 2008. Detailed chemical kinetic models for the low-temperature combustion of hydrocarbons with application to gasoline and diesel fuel surrogates. Prog. Energy Combust. Sci. 34:4440–98
     [Google Scholar]
  33. 33.
    Zhao P, Liang W, Deng S, Law CK 2016. Initiation and propagation of laminar premixed cool flames. Fuel 166:477–87
     [Google Scholar]
  34. 34.
    Liang W, Law CK. 2017. Extended flammability limits of n-heptane/air mixtures with cool flames. Combust. Flame 185:75–81
     [Google Scholar]
  35. 35.
    Liang W, Mével R, Law CK 2018. Role of low-temperature chemistry in detonation of n-heptane/oxygen/diluent mixtures. Combust. Flame 193:463–70
     [Google Scholar]
  36. 36.
    Liang W, Law CK. 2018. Theory of first-stage ignition delay in hydrocarbon NTC chemistry. Combust. Flame 188:162–69
     [Google Scholar]
  37. 37.
    Kong SC, Reitz RD. 2002. Application of detailed chemistry and CFD for predicting direct injection HCCI engine combustion and emissions. Proc. Combust. Inst. 29:1663–69
     [Google Scholar]
  38. 38.
    Reitz RD, Duraisamy G. 2015. Review of high efficiency and clean reactivity controlled compression ignition (RCCI) combustion in internal combustion engines. Prog. Energy Combust. Sci. 46:12–71
     [Google Scholar]
  39. 39.
    Campbell MF, Wang S, Goldenstein CS, Spearrin RM, Tulgestke AM et al. 2015. Constrained reaction volume shock tube study of n-heptane oxidation: ignition delay times and time-histories of multiple species and temperature. Proc. Combust. Inst. 35:1231–39
     [Google Scholar]
  40. 40.
    Zhang P, Ji W, He T, He X, Wang Z et al. 2016. First-stage ignition delay in the negative temperature coefficient behavior: experiment and simulation. Combust. Flame 167:14–23
     [Google Scholar]
  41. 41.
    Campbell MF, Wang S, Davidson DF, Hanson RK 2018. Shock tube study of normal heptane first-stage ignition near 3.5 atm. Combust. Flame 198:376–92
     [Google Scholar]
  42. 42.
    Zhao P, Law CK. 2013. The role of global and detailed kinetics in the first-stage ignition delay in NTC-affected phenomena. Combust. Flame 160:112352–58
     [Google Scholar]
  43. 43.
    Peters N, Paczko G, Seiser R, Seshadri K 2002. Temperature cross-over and non-thermal runaway at two-stage ignition of n-heptane. Combust. Flame 128:1–238–59
     [Google Scholar]
  44. 44.
    Beeckmann J, Cai L, Berens A, Peters N, Pitsch H 2015. An analytical approximation for low- and high-temperature autoignition for dimethyl ether–air mixtures. Proc. Combust. Inst. 35:1275–81
     [Google Scholar]
  45. 45.
    Merchant SS, Goldsmith CF, Vandeputte AG, Burke MP, Klippenstein SJ, Green WH 2015. Understanding low-temperature first-stage ignition delay: propane. Combust. Flame 162:103658–73
     [Google Scholar]
  46. 46.
    Liñán A. 1974. The asymptotic structure of counterflow diffusion flames for large activation energies. Acta Astronaut 1:7–81007–39
     [Google Scholar]
  47. 47.
    Zheng XL, Law CK. 2004. Ignition of premixed hydrogen/air by heated counterflow under reduced and elevated pressures. Combust. Flame 136:1–2168–79
     [Google Scholar]
  48. 48.
    Sánchez AL, Liñán A, Williams FA 1994. A bifurcation analysis of high-temperature ignition of H2−O2 diffusion flames. Symp. Combust.. 2511529–37
  49. 49.
    Sánchez AL, Balakrishnan G, Liñán A, Williams FA 1996. Relationships between bifurcation and numerical analyses for ignition of hydrogen—air diffusion flames. Combust. Flame 105:4569–90
     [Google Scholar]
  50. 50.
    Li S, Liang W, Yao Q, Law CK 2018. An analysis of the ignition limits of premixed hydrogen/oxygen by heated nitrogen in counterflow. Combust. Flame 198:230–39
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-chembioeng-060718-030141
Loading
On Radical-Induced Ignition in Combustion Systems
Annual Review of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering 10, 199 (2019); https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-chembioeng-060718-030141
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-chembioeng-060718-030141
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-chembioeng-060718-030141
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Review Article

Most Cited Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error