This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

BooksAudiobooksComicsSheet Music### Categories

### Categories

### Categories

Editors' Picks Books

Hand-picked favorites from

our editors

our editors

Editors' Picks Audiobooks

Hand-picked favorites from

our editors

our editors

Editors' Picks Comics

Hand-picked favorites from

our editors

our editors

Editors' Picks Sheet Music

Hand-picked favorites from

our editors

our editors

Top Books

What's trending, bestsellers,

award-winners & more

award-winners & more

Top Audiobooks

What's trending, bestsellers,

award-winners & more

award-winners & more

Top Comics

What's trending, bestsellers,

award-winners & more

award-winners & more

Top Sheet Music

What's trending, bestsellers,

award-winners & more

award-winners & more

Welcome to Scribd! Start your free trial and access books, documents and more.Find out more

**P.G.M. Hoeijmakers, V.N. Kornilov, I. Lopez, H. Nijmeijer, L.P.H. de Goey.
**

Department of Mechanical Engineering, Eindhoven University of Technology. e-mail: p.g.m.hoeijmakers@tue.nl In this paper the thermo-acoustic properties of a system equipped with a segmented burner are investigated. Such segmentation can for example be realized by combining two different burners on the same deck. The study is conducted using ﬁnite element and network modelling techniques. It is found that even a small spatial separation of the burner’s sections can lead to signiﬁcant alteration of the global acoustic behavior of the system. In particular, the location of the eigenmodes and hence the stability of the system can be affected. It is shown that the local modiﬁcation of the acoustic ﬁeld in the vicinity of the partitioned burner is the physical reason for this phenomena. This ﬁnding poses some limitations on to use of the lumped transfer function decomposition approach to estimate the global burner response of a composite ﬂame/burner.

1.

Introduction

Thermo-acoustic combustion instabilities usually manifest themselves by the autonomous generation of acoustic tone(s) within a combustion system. This effect can arise in practically any combustor device where the burner/ﬂame is conﬁned in a vessel. Typical examples include gas turbines, rocket engines, industrial burners and domestic heating appliances. Regardless of the concrete application, instability is usually an undesirable effect which is difﬁcult to foresee during the design process and to eliminate in the development stage. Thermo-acoustic oscillations were ﬁrst explained by Rayleigh [6] and consist of a feedback loop between the systems acoustics and the ﬂame heat release rate. For many burner types the heat release ﬂuctuation is a direct result of the acoustic velocity perturbations at the ﬂame location. In this context, the thermo-acoustic response of a burner can be characterized via a ﬂame/burner transfer function (F ). Due to the coupled nature of the instability problem, the stability can be signiﬁcantly inﬂuenced by either changing the system acoustics or the burner response. In what follows we concentrate on the latter approach. In this context, it is desirable to be able to design a burner with a speciﬁc response. It is well known that the actual transfer function of a burner is strongly dependent on properties such as the burner type, ﬂow, and ﬂame(s). However, due to the complex interplay between the different parameters the a-priori prediction of the transfer function remains a challenge. One way to circumvent this problem is by combining two or more burner segments with a known response. In this setting, a technique known as transfer function decomposition can be used to calculate the overall response based on the weighted transfer functions of the individual segments [2]. The weight factors in this approach are the ratios of any segment’s individual power to the total burner power. Thus,

ICSV18, 10–14 July 2011, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

1

18th International Congress on Sound and Vibration, 10–14 July 2011, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil the total response may be tuned by changing the relative power ratios. The method is based on the additive nature of the ﬂame heat release and it assumes that the upstream acoustics for all segments of the burner(s) is the same. Under the assumption that the burners are acoustically compact and located at the same streamwise position one can expect that the acoustic oscillations close upstream of the burner are identical. In other words, the spatial non-uniformity of the transfer functions does not affect the acoustic ﬁeld. However, in the present paper it is shown that this is not necessarily true. In order to illustrate the effects of a spatially distributed transfer function we will investigate the properties of a simple burner conﬁguration composed out of two different burner segments. More speciﬁcally, the two sections are assumed to have equal powers where each section can be modelled by a different time delay transfer function. As illustrated in ﬁgure 1a, a practical burner with similar properties can easily be realized by a perforated burner deck with two ﬁelds of different diameter holes. Because the time-delay relates directly to the ﬂame height, the larger diameter holes will lead to a larger time-delay due to the higher ﬂames. To calculate the eigenfrequencies of the system a ﬁnite element model is used. The results are compared to a network model for further validation. It will be demonstrated that in the vicinity of the spatially nonuniform burner the acoustic ﬁeld can be signiﬁcantly affected by the ﬂame transfer function. As a result, the global eigen-mode frequencies, stability, and mode shapes can deviate signiﬁcantly from the one calculated based on the lumped approach. To our knowledge, this effect was not treated before in literature and it is the main focus of the present study. The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. In section 2 the system to which the burner is applied is shortly described. Next, section 3 is devoted to an overview of the available methods to model the composite burner deck and its interaction with the system acoustics. The main results are then presented in section 4. Finally, section 5 provides a discussion of the results and conclusions.

2.

System

As mentioned before, the main interest is in the thermo-acoustic properties of the burner depicted in ﬁgure 1a applied to a simple system. The speciﬁc conﬁguration under investigation is depicted in ﬁgure 1b and consists of a closed end, supply duct, burner, and open ended exhaust tube. The total length of the system is set at 1 [m]. Because the burner is placed in the middle this gives L1 = L2 = 0.5 [m]. In this case, the up- and downstream temperatures are chosen to be T1 = 300 and T2 = 1600[K ], yielding a density and speed of sound of ρ1 = 1.18, ρ2 = 0.22, [kg/m3 ] and c1 = 347.24, c2 = 774.38 [m/s]. These values are typical for a practical combustion conﬁguration operating at u ≈ 1[m/s] and a lean mixture. For the two-dimensional ﬁnite element simulation the width of the ducts and burner is set to 0.1 [m].

1

(a)

(b)

Figure 1. The burner and system under interest. (a) Segmented burner, and (b) Simple thermoacoustic system (A) Acoustically closed end, (B) Intake tube, (C) Burner, (D) Exhaust tube, (E) Open end.

The burner itself is splitted in two parts where each part can be approached by a simple timedelay model. The transfer function of the ﬁrst group of ﬂames is F1 = e−iτ ω , with τ = 2 × 10−3 , while the second half of the burner is modelled to be F2 = e−2iτ ω . Thus, the larger ﬂames are considered to have twice the time delay of the smaller ones. Note that the areas A1 and A2 in the ﬁgure refer to the perforation areas and not the surface area of the complete burner. 2

18th International Congress on Sound and Vibration, 10–14 July 2011, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

3.

Thermo-acoustic model

A thermo-acoustic model can be obtained via a number of methods. In principle one can distinguish between a distributed and a lumped approach. A distributed model is based on the governing equations and is typically solved in a ﬁnite element framework. Due to the space dependent nature of the burner of interest this is the main modelling method applied in this paper. The governing equations for the FEM model are described in section 3.1. In order to get further insight into the results, an acoustic network model based on two-port transfer matrices is also used. A short description of the network model is provided in section 3.2. In both the FEM and the Network model speciﬁc attention will be given to how the burner is represented in the model. 3.1 Finite element model

Notwithstanding the elegance of many academic and analytic test-cases most practical combustion devices are analytically intractable. Accordingly, a sizeable number of publications deal with the development and validation of thermoacoustic ﬁnite-element models, see for example [3, 5]. The derivations described in [5] and [1] forms the base for the model described below. In any case, the development starts with a model describing the propagation of small perturbations, e.g. sound waves, in a inhomogeneous medium including heat release. More speciﬁcally, after the combination and linearization of the equations for (i) conservation of mass, (ii) conservation of momentum, (iiv) conservation of energy, and (iv) a state equation one obtains an inhomogeneous Helmholtz equation, 1 γ−1 ˙ ω2 Q , p + ∇ · ( ∇p ) = −iωδ (x − b) (1) γp0 ρ γp0 v ˙ v , p, ρ and γ are the ﬂuctuating pressure [P a], ﬂuctuating heat release rate per unit volume where p , Q 3 [W/m ], mean pressure [P a], mean density [kg/m3 ], and the ratio of speciﬁc heats respectively. This equation describes how ﬂuctuating heat release acts as an acoustic monopole source. Note that at this stage such source is not directly coupled to the acoustic ﬁeld. 3.1.1 Heat release

In order to fully describe the problem it is necessary to couple the ﬂuctuating heat release and the acoustics. This can be achieved in two steps. ˙ v takes place at a location L1 on the x-axis in an First, let us assume that the heat release Q inﬁnitely small zone, and is of the form, ˙ =Q ˙ δ (x − L1 ), Q v a (2)

˙ is the heat release rate per unit area [W/m2 ]. In where δ (x − L1 ) is the Dirac delta function, and Q a other words, the heat release is assumed to be concentrated in a plane. Indeed, for a practical laminar burner, the ﬂame size is much smaller than the acoustical wavelength. Next, one can couple the acoustic ﬁeld to the heat release by using the ﬂame transfer function: ˙ ˙ a = Q Fu , Q uA0 (3)

˙ [W ] is the spatio-temporal mean heat release, u = − 1 ∂p (L1 ) [m/s] the ﬂuctuating velocity where Q iωρ ∂x component at the ﬂame base, and u [m/s] the mean velocity (at ﬂame base).

3

18th International Congress on Sound and Vibration, 10–14 July 2011, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil Substituting the latter expression in the acoustical source term of equation (1) and simplifying one obtains: 1 θ ∂p (L1 ) ω2 p + ∇ · ( ∇p ) = F δ (x − L1 ) , (4) γp0 ρ ρ ∂x where θ = T2 /T1 − 1 is the temperature ratio between the hot and cold parts of the ﬂame. 3.1.2 Modelling the burner

In principle the above framework can be used to model the system depicted in ﬁgure 1. However, one can seperate two approaches to model the heat-release zone. First, one can use the transfer function composition method to construct a single lumped ﬂame transfer function for the complete burner. Transfer function decomposition Here a short review of the transfer function decomposition technique is given, for further details see reference [2]. Let us consider the burnerdeck as depicted in ﬁgure 1a. The individual Fi , i = 1, 2 and complete transfer function FΣ can be deﬁned as, Q /Q Q /Q (5) , Fi = i i . (6) FΣ = Σ Σ u /u u /u Here the subscript Σ refers to the total transfer function and heat release, while the subscript i = [1, 2] denotes the individual parts. It is important to note that the transfer function deﬁnition used here implicitly assumes that the ﬂuctuating velocity is the same for both ﬂame groups. Based on the property that energy is additive, one may write the total ﬂuctuating and mean heat release as, QΣ =

i

Qi =

i

Fi Qi

u =q u

Fi Ai ui

i

u u

(7)

and QΣ =

i 3

Qi = q

i

Ai ui = qA0 u,

(8)

where q [J/m ] is the heat of combustion per unit volume, ui denotes the particular mean ﬂow speed throughout each burner deck portion, and A0 = A1 + A2 is the total area of the perforations. Substitution of (7) and (8) in (5) gives, Ai ui FΣ = Fi . (9) A0 u i Thus, the individual transfer functions are weighted according to the ratio of the individual to total mean heat release rates. As mentioned before, we will consider the speciﬁc case that the powers of each segment are equal. The transfer function to be used in equation (4) is then simply F = FΣ = 0.5F1 + 0.5F2 . In this case, any y-dependence of heat release and acoustic velocity is neglected, and hence one expects the same results as in a one dimensional network model. From now on, this shall be named method A. Explicit space dependence Alternatively, one can exploit the ﬂexibility of the FEM framework to directly include the space ˙ a is then deﬁned to be dependependence of the transfer function. More precisely, the heat release Q dent on the y-direction, ˙ ˙ (y ) = Q F (y )u (y ), Q (10) a uA0

4

18th International Congress on Sound and Vibration, 10–14 July 2011, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil where both the y-dependence of the ﬂame transfer function, as well as the possible variation of u (y ) in the y-direction are included. In case of the burner depicted in ﬁgure 1a the transfer function is deﬁned to be F (y ) = e−iωτ (y) with τ (y ) [s] a piecewise continuous function, τ (y ) = 2 × 10−3 , for 0 ≤ y < W 2 . W −3 4 × 10 , for 2 < y ≤ W (11)

Note that the approach is not limited to such a simple distribution of transfer functions and in principle can be used to model arbitrary distributions of ﬂame groups. In the following this is referred to as method B. 3.1.3 Solution

Because the ﬂame transfer function F gain and phase depend nonlinearly on the frequency this means that equation (4) leads to a nonlinear eigenvalue problem [5]. The commercial ﬁniteelement package Comsol Multiphysics was used to solve equation 4. Using COMSOL the nonlinear eigenvalue problem can be solved in an iterative manner. The solution procedure is as follows. First, a second order approximation of the transferfunction is made around some linearization point w0 , this leads to a quadratic eigenvalue problem which can be readily solved using standard methods [5]. Next, the linearization point is updated to the solution w1 of the quadratic eigenvalue problem around the ﬁrst point w0 . This procedure is repeated until the difference between the linearization point and solution is lower than a convergence limit of 1 × 10−5 . The whole procedure is then repeated for a range of initial points w0 in the frequency range of interest. 3.2 Network model

A complete model of the system might also be obtained using the common acoustic network modelling method. This technique is based on the so-called two-port acoustic transfer matrices of each system element [4]. For each of the elements the output variables, namely pressure p and velocity u are linked to the input variables by linear equations. A complete system description can be obtained by matching the subsequent in- and outputs of the elements. The eigenfrequencies are then determined from the resulting system of equations. Because the network model only serves as a validation tool here the description will be limited to the different network structures one might choose to model the conﬁguration of interest. 3.2.1 Modelling the burner

In close analogy to the the ﬁnite element approach, one can again separate two basic approaches, as depicted in ﬁgure 2. First, one can lump response of the complete burner to one transfer function using transfer function composition, F = 0.5F1 + 0.5F2 . Using this method one can then proceed to model the system using the simple network shown in ﬁgure 2a. Second, one can approximate the two different parts of the burner by two branches each containing it’s appropriate transfer function, F1 , and F2 respectively, as shown in ﬁgure 2b. The choice of the length of the intermediate ducts ’Duct-2’ and ’Duct-3’ is nontrivial and will be justiﬁed a-posteriori based on the FEM results. Note that the same name convention is used as for the FEM case, were method A refers to the lumped approach and method B for the branched layout. For both methods, the temperature, speed of sound, and density down- and upstream of the ﬂame were set according to the values stated in section 2. 5

18th International Congress on Sound and Vibration, 10–14 July 2011, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

(a)

(b)

Figure 2. The two possible network topologies to model the burner. (a) Simple one branch model, method A. (b) Branched network model, method B.

4.

Results

In this section the stability and frequencies of the eigenmodes of the burner in the system are investigated. In particular, we compare the results for the described methods A and B for both the FEM and the network models. Figure 3a shows a direct comparison of the eigenmode locations between the lumped (A) and distributed (B) modeling techniques in case of the ﬁnite element model. Note that fr corresponds to the actual eigenfrequency, and fi to imaginary value of the eigenvalue, with negative unstable. For clarity, all the modes are denoted by a lowercase letter.

50 40 30 20 10 0

i

50

a c

FEM−A FEM−B

40 30 20 10 0 −10 fi

NM−A NM−B

f

b1

−10 −20 −30 −40 −50

b

b2 d

−20 −30

e

0 100 200 300 fr [Hz] 400 500 600

−40 −50

0

100

200

300 fr [Hz]

400

500

600

(a)

(b)

Figure 3. Results from the (a) FEM model method A vs B, and (b) Network model method A vs B.

The lumped approach (A) leads to 3 unstable modes at 187, 363 and 590 [Hz ] respectively, further referenced to as mode b, d, and e. The calculation based on the space dependent transfer function on the other hand (B) shows a signiﬁcantly different picture. More precisely, mode b disappears and instead two unstable modes b1 and b2 appear at 154 and 252 [Hz ]. This is remarkable difference, and indicates that the space dependence cannot be neglected. Furthermore, the mode c at 328 [Hz ] shifts to a higher and slightly less stable location for method B. In order to get further insight into the problem, let us now evaluate the results from the network model. Figure 3b depicts the results in case of the network model. Comparing the eigenmode location for method A and B it is obvious that the network model reproduces the transition from mode b to b1 and b2 . Such result is surprising, as it suggests that the behavior of the FEM model with the space dependent transfer function approaches the branched conﬁguration. This is a fundamental result and 6

18th International Congress on Sound and Vibration, 10–14 July 2011, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil shows that a burner deck as modeled here can induce a signiﬁcant different behavior compared to one with a homogeneous distribution of ﬂames. However, it is intriguing that only mode b is affected signiﬁcantly and d and e are at approximately the same location for both method A and B. In order to extend our understanding of the aforementioned effects, it is illustrative to consider the eigenmode shapes of a and b1 for method B. To clarify the inﬂuence of the space dependence we consider cross-sections of the pressure-proﬁle along the length direction at two different y-locations; [0.025, 0.075] [m]. It is important to note that the eigenmodes are in general not pure standing waves and hence the pressure proﬁle varies during the cycle due to the traveling wave component. As to get insight into the inﬂuence of the variation of the transfer function in the y-direction, the shapes were plotted at the angle for which the greatest difference occurs between the two y-locations. Figure 4a depicts the pressure distribution at the two y-locations for mode a. Clearly, only a minor difference in pressure between the two y-location exists. This result is in contrast to the signiﬁcant difference in the y-locations for mode b1, as shown in ﬁgure 4b. In this case, there is a major phase difference between the two y-positions around the ﬂame position at x = 0.5 [m]. Note that the actual dissimilarity is visible from a distance of 0.1 [m] up- and downstream of the ﬂame. This observation leads to the a-posteriori justiﬁcation of the choice of the intermediate duct lengths for the network model as mentioned in section 3.2.1. Given the minor inﬂuence of the space dependence for mode a it is not surprising that the frequency and stability of this mode are virtually the same as for the space independent case. A similar reasoning can be followed for modes d and e. For mode b1 on the other hand, the large difference between the two y-locations suggest that here the behaviour is close to the branched duct system. Although not shown here, this is also the case for mode b2. As a consequence, these eigenmodes are only possible when the space-dependence is explicitly included.

0 y=0.025 y=0.075 −0.1 0.4 0.3 0.2 −0.2 0.1 −0.3 p [pa] p [pa] 0 −0.1 −0.2 −0.5 −0.3 −0.6 −0.4 −0.5 y=0.075 y=0.025

−0.4

−0.7

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5 x [m]

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5 x [m]

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

(a)

(b)

Figure 4. Modes shapes from the FEM model using method B. (a) Mode a, @60 [deg ] and (b) Mode b1, @110 [deg ]

5.

5.1

**Discussion and conclusions
**

Discussion

The analysis presented in the current paper suggests that the space dependence of the ﬂame transfer function for this particular burner deck can play an important role in the overall thermoacoustic behaviour of the system. The fact that both the ﬁnite-element and network model show exactly the same result further strengthens this observation. Overall, the results indicate that one has to be careful with applying the transfer function decomposition method. 7

18th International Congress on Sound and Vibration, 10–14 July 2011, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil Notwithstanding the importance of this result, it is unclear at this stage how general the presented results are in terms of changes in the transfer functions, burner deck layout, and other system properties. This question deserves further attention. Another interesting issue is the experimental veriﬁability of the results. First and foremost, the chosen pure time-delay transfer functions can hardly be achieved in practice because any practical ﬂame has a frequency dependent gain. With this in mind, a forced response measurement of a burnerdeck as shown in ﬁgure 1a is more likely to give concrete answers. In particular, based on the results presented here, one expects a strong acoustic velocity variation in the burner deck plane at certain frequencies. Clearly, this is another issue worthwhile to investigate. Finally, it is noteworthy that if the observed effects can be conﬁrmed in practice they might be exploited to yield a more desirable combustor behavior. From this perspective, the geometrical layout of the burner deck with regard to the location of the perforations can become a useful design parameter. 5.2 Conclusions

In the present paper a burner deck with a strongly space-dependent transfer function is investigated. In particular, the inﬂuence of such space dependence on the eigenmode locations, and shape for a simple thermo-acoustic system were considered. In order to model the system, a ﬁnite element model and a network model were used. The response of the system was calculated with and without explicitly taking into account the space dependent nature of the problem. For both approaches, the network model and the ﬁniteelement case give the same result. Based on the results presented in section 4, it can be concluded that the space dependency of the ﬂame transfer function for composite burner decks cannot always be neglected. Because of the very speciﬁc properties of the considered setup, it is not clear if this conclusion can be generalized to a larger class of systems and burner conﬁgurations. This is an excellent topic for further research.

REFERENCES

1

S. M. Camporeale, B. Fortunato, and G. Campa. A ﬁnite element method for three-dimensional analysis of thermo-acoustic combustion instability. Journal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and Power, 133(1):011506, 2011. V.N. Kornilov, M. Manohar, and L.P.H. de Goey. Thermo-acoustic behaviour of multiple ﬂame burner decks: Transfer function (de)composition. Proceedings of the Combustion Institute, 32(1):1383 – 1390, 2009. C. Martin, L. Benoit, F. Nicoud, and T. Poinsot. Analysis of acoustic energy and modes in a turbulent swirled combustor. In Center for Turbulence Research, Proceedings of the Summer Program, 2004. M.L. Munjal. Acoustics of ducts and mufﬂers. John Wiley & Sons, 1987. F. Nicoud, L. Benoit, C. Sensiau, and T. Poinsot. Acoustic modes in combustors with complex impedances and multidimensional active ﬂames. AIAA Journal, 45:426–441, February 2007. J.W.S. Rayleigh. Theory of sound; 2nd edition. Dover Publications, 1976.

2

3

4 5

6

8

g

g

Are you sure?

This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

We've moved you to where you read on your other device.

Get the full title to continue

Get the full title to continue listening from where you left off, or restart the preview.

scribd