Numerical simulation of detonation re-initiation following Mach reflection

S. She-Ming Lau-Chapdelaine Rohit Bhattacharjee Matei I. Radulescu 2012/10/26

Combustion

Channel filled with premixed gas

Deflagration Detonation

Detonation

Supersonic combustion wave

Shock wave heats mixture Mixture reacts Energy release propels shock wave

Detonation Applications

Pulse detonation engine

Detonation Applications

Rotating detonation engine

Detonation Application

Dust/powder explosion

Lakeland Mills sawmill, Prince George, B.C., April 2012

Detonation Applications

Nuclear safety - hydrogen explosions

Chernobyl, 1986

Fukushima, 2011

Detonation

Supersonic combustion wave

Shock wave heats mixture Mixture reacts Energy release propels shock wave

Detonation

Zeldovich-von Neumann-Doring

Detonation structure

ZND structure is unstable

Detonation structure

ZND structure is unstable

Shock Reflection

Unburnt Gas

plane of symmetry

Detonation re-initiation

Importance of rapid reactions mechanisms in detonations difficult to determine

1

Rapid reaction mechanisms

1) Transverse wave 2) Mach-stem 3) Wall jetting effect 4) Kelvin-Helmholtz 5) Richtmyer-Meshkov

5

2 4 3

Previous work

Teodorczyk, A., J.H.S. Lee, and R. Knystautas. 1991. Prog. Astronaut. and Aeronaut. 133:223240.

Previous work

T. Obara, J. Sentanuhady, Y. Tsukada, S. Ohyagi, Reinitiation process of detonation wave behind a slit-plate, Shock Waves 18 (2) (2008) 117127.

Previous work

R. Bhattacharjee, S.SM. Lau-Chapdelaine, G. Maines, L. Maley, M.I. Radulescu. Detonation reinitiation following the Mach reflection of a quenched detonation. Proceedings of the International Combustion Symposium, (2012).

Previous work

R. Bhattacharjee, S.SM. Lau-Chapdelaine, G. Maines, L. Maley, M.I. Radulescu. Detonation reinitiation following the Mach reflection of a quenched detonation. Proceedings of the International Combustion Symposium, (2012).

Objectives

Model detonation re-initiation Isolate re-ignition mechanisms Gain insight from simulations Predict detonation re-initiation

Numerical Model

Reactive Euler equations

u v + +v =0 t x y u 2 + ( u + p )+ ( vu)=0 t x y v 2 + ( uv )+ ( v + p)=0 t x y ( E+ Q )+ (( E+ p+ Q )u)+ (( E+ p+ Q ) v)=0 t x y

1-step Arrhenius chemistry

+u + v =k ( 1)e t x y
Ea RT

Numerical Model

Reactive Euler model 1-step Arrhenius reaction Non-dimensionalized by half-reaction length and initial conditions
+u + v =k ( 1)e R T t x y
Ea

Pre-exponential Factor

Numerical Model

Reactive Euler model 1-step Arrhenius reaction Non-dimensionalized Calibrated for post-shock conditions (CH4 + 2O2)
RT +u +v =k (1)e t x y
Ea
0

Activation Energy

Numerical Model: Chemistry (CH4 + 2O2)

ig e
Ea RT

Numerical Model

Reactive Euler model 1-step Arrhenius reaction Non-dimensionalized Calibrated for post-shock conditions (CH4 + 2O2)
Heat Release
( E+ Q )+ (( E+ P+ Q )u)+ ((E + P+ Q ) v )=0 t x y

Numerical Model

Reactive Euler model 1-step Arrhenius reaction Non-dimensionalized by half-reaction length Calibrated for post-shock conditions (CH4 + 2O2)

Ea Q =1.17 ; =48.3 ; =60.5 RT 0 RT0

Domain

Base grid: 200x24 Adaptive grid refinement technique Resolution: >32 points per induction length

Numerical Model: Domain

Reflect

Extrapolate

Post-ZND

Reflect

Numerical Model

Reactive Euler model 1-step Arrhenius reaction Non-dimensionalized by half-reaction length Calibrated for post-shock conditions (CH4 + 2O2)

Ea Q =1.17 ; =48.3 ; =60.5 RT 0 RT0

Domain Base grid: 200x24 Adaptive grid refinement technique Resolution: >32 points per induction length AMRITA CFD

Results: P0=5.5kPa

Results: P0=5.5kPa

Quenching

Results: P0=10.3kPa

Results: P0=10.3kPa

Hot-spot re-ignition

Results: P0=11.9kPa

Results: P0=11.9kPa

Detonation re-initiation

Results: P0=11.9kPa
Density

Reaction progress

Results: P0=12.5kPa

Experimental results from 11.9kPa

Detonation re-initiation

Results: P0=12.5kPa

Results: P0=17.6kPa

Results: P0=17.6kPa

Detonation transmission

Summary
P0
5.5kPa 10.3kPa 11.9kPa 17.6kPa

Experimental
Quenched

Simulation

Hot-spot ignition behind Mach stem Detonation re-initiation along Detonation re-initiation along Mach stem & transverse wave Mach stem Detonation direct transmission

Summary
Experiments Detonation diffraction over obstacle Numerical model of experiment

Detonation Structure

Numerical simulations

Reactive Euler 1-step Arrhenius Post-shock calib. >32 grid/induc.

P0 5.5kPa 10.3kPa 11.9kPa

Results Quenched Hot-spot Re-initation

17.6kPa Transmission

Conclusions

Adiabatic Mach compression appears to play an important role Wall jetting could be significant Transverse wave not recreated in simulations Experiments show rapid combustion in unburnt tongue, strong effect of wall jet

Acknowledgements

Alexander Graham Bell CGS