Turbulent combustion modeling

Denis Veynante
a,
*
, Luc Vervisch
b
a
Laboratoire E.M2.C., CNRS et Ecole Centrale Paris, Grande Voie des Vignes, 92295 ChaÃtenay-Malabry Cedex, France
b
Institut National des Sciences AppliqueÂes de Rouen, UMR CNRS 6614/CORIA, Campus du Madrillet,
Avenue de l'Universite ÐBP 8, 76801 Saint Etienne du Rouvray Cedex, France
Received 4 November 2000; accepted 12 October 2001
Abstract
Numerical simulation of ¯ames is a growing ®eld bringing important improvements to our understanding of combustion. The
main issues and related closures of turbulent combustion modeling are reviewed. Combustion problems involve strong coupling
between chemistry, transport and ¯uid dynamics. The basic properties of laminar ¯ames are ®rst presented along with the major
tools developed for modeling turbulent combustion. The links between the available closures are illuminated from a generic
description of modeling tools. Then, examples of numerical models for mean burning rates are discussed for premixed turbulent
combustion. The use of direct numerical simulation (DNS) as a research instrument is illustrated for turbulent transport
occurring in premixed combustion, gradient and counter-gradient modeling of turbulent ¯uxes is addressed. Finally, a review
of the models for non-premixed turbulent ¯ames is given. q 2002 Published by Elsevier Science Ltd.
Keywords: Premixed ¯ames; Non-premixed ¯ames; Turbulent combustion; Scalar turbulent transport; Direct numerical simulation; Reynolds
averaged Navier±Stokes modeling
Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 195
2. Balance equations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 196
2.1. Instantaneous balance equations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 196
2.2. Reynolds and Favre averaging . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 197
2.3. Favre averaged balance equations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 198
2.4. Filtering and Large Eddy Simulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 198
3. Major properties of premixed, non-premixed and partially premixed ¯ames . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200
3.1. Laminar premixed ¯ames . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200
3.2. Laminar diffusion ¯ames . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 201
3.3. Partially premixed ¯ames . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 204
4. A direct analysis: Taylor's expansion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 206
5. Scales and diagrams for turbulent combustion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 208
5.1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 208
5.2. Turbulent premixed combustion diagram . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 208
5.2.1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 208
5.2.2. Combustion regimes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 208
5.2.3. Comments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 209
5.3. Non-premixed turbulent combustion diagram . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 210
5.3.1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 210
Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 PERGAMON
www.elsevier.com/locate/pecs
0360-1285/02/$ - see front matter q 2002 Published by Elsevier Science Ltd.
PII: S0360-1285(01)00017-X
* Corresponding author. Tel.: 133-1-41-13-10-80; fax: 133-1-47-02-80-35.
E-mail address: denis@em2c.ecp.fr (D. Veynante).
6. Tools for turbulent combustion modeling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 212
6.1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 212
6.2. Scalar dissipation rate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 214
6.3. Geometrical description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 214
6.3.1. G-®eld equation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 214
6.3.2. Flame surface density description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 216
6.3.3. Flame wrinkling description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 218
6.4. Statistical approaches: probability density function . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 218
6.4.1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 218
6.4.2. Presumed probability density functions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 219
6.4.3. Pdf balance equation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 219
6.4.4. Joint velocity/concentrations pdf . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 221
6.4.5. Conditional moment closure (CMC) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 221
6.5. Similarities and links between the tools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 221
7. Reynolds-averaged models for turbulent premixed combustion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 223
7.1. Turbulent ¯ame speed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 223
7.2. Eddy-break-up model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 223
7.3. Bray±Moss±Libby model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 224
7.3.1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 224
7.3.2. BML model analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 225
7.3.3. Recovering mean reaction rate from tools relations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 226
7.3.4. Reynolds and Favre averaging . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 227
7.3.5. Conditional averagingÐcounter-gradient turbulent transport . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 227
7.3.6. Extensions to partially premixed combustion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 228
7.4. Models based on the ¯ame surface area estimation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 229
7.4.1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 229
7.4.2. Algebraic expressions for the ¯ame surface density S . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 229
7.4.3. Flame surface density balance equation closures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 232
7.4.4. Analysis of the ¯ame surface density balance equation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 234
7.4.4.1. Turbulent transport. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 234
7.4.4.2. Strain rate induced by the mean ¯ow ®eld, A
T
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 234
7.4.4.3. Strain rate a
T
due to turbulent motions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 235
7.4.4.4. Propagation and curvature terms. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 236
7.4.5. Flame stabilization modeling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 237
7.4.6. A related approach: G-equation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 237
8. Turbulent transport in premixed combustion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 237
8.1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 237
8.2. Direct numerical simulation analysis of turbulent transport . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 238
8.2.1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 238
8.2.2. Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 238
8.3. Physical analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 239
8.3.1. Comments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 241
8.4. External pressure gradient effects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 242
8.5. Counter-gradient transportÐexperimental results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 242
8.6. To include counter-gradient turbulent transport in modeling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 243
8.7. Towards a conditional turbulence modeling? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 244
9. Reynolds averaged models for non-premixed turbulent combustion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 245
9.1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 245
9.2. Fuel/air mixing modeling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 246
9.2.1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 246
9.2.2. Balance equation and simple relaxation model for ~ x . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 246
9.3. Models assuming in®nitely fast chemistry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 247
9.3.1. Eddy dissipation model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 247
9.3.2. Presumed pdf: in®nitely fast chemistry model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 247
9.4. Flamelet modeling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 248
9.4.1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 248
D. Veynante, L. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 194
9.4.2. Flame structure in composition space, Y
SLFM
i
(Z
p
; x
p
) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 249
9.4.3. Mixing modeling in SLFM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 251
9.4.4. Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 252
9.5. Flame surface density modeling, coherent ¯ame model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 252
9.6. MIL model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 253
9.7. Conditional moment closure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 254
9.8. Pdf modeling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 254
9.8.1. Turbulent micromixing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 255
9.8.2. Linear relaxation model, IEM/LMSE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 256
9.8.3. GIEM model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 256
9.8.4. Stochastic micromixing closures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 257
9.8.5. Interlinks PDF/¯ame surface modeling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 257
9.8.6. Joint velocity/concentrations pdf modeling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 258
10. Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 260
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 260
1. Introduction
The number of combustion systems used in power
generation and transportation industries is growing
rapidly. This induces pollution and environmental problems
to become critical factors in our societies. The accurate
control of turbulent ¯ames therefore appears as a real
challenge.
Computing is now truly on par with experiment and
theory as a research tool to produce multi-scale information
that is not available by using any other technique. Computa-
tional ¯uid dynamics (CFD) is ef®ciently used to improve
the design of aerodynamical systems, and today no real
progress in design can be made without using CFD. With
the same objectives, much work has been devoted to turbu-
lent combustion modeling, following a variety of
approaches and distinct modeling strategies. This paper is
intended to provide a generic review of these numerical
models.
A wide range of coupled problems are involved in turbu-
lent ¯ames:
² The ¯uid mechanical properties of the combustion system
must be well known to carefully describe the mixing
between reactants and, more generally, all transfer
phenomena occurring in turbulent ¯ames (heat transfer,
molecular diffusion, convection, turbulent transport,
etc.).
² Detailed chemical reaction schemes are necessary to esti-
mate the consumption rate of the fuel, the formation of
combustion products and pollutant species. A precise
knowledge of the chemistry is absolutely required to
predict ignition, stabilization or extinction of reaction
zones together with pollution.
² Two (liquid fuel) and three (solid fuel) phase systems may
be encountered. Liquid fuel injection is a common pro-
cedure and the three-dimensional spatial distribution of
gaseous reactants depends on complex interactions
between the breakdown of the liquid sheets, the vapor-
ization of the liquid, turbulent mixing, and droplet
combustion.
² Radiative heat transfer is generated within the ¯ame by
some species and carbon particles resulting from soot
formation and transported by the ¯ow motion. In
furnaces, walls also interact with combustion through
radiative transfer.
Turbulent combustion modeling is therefore a very
broad subject. All the aspects of the problem are not
addressed in the present review. We will only focus on
the closure schemes developed and used to understand
and calculate turbulent transport and mean burning rates
in turbulent ¯ames. The detail of chemistry, its reduc-
tion, tabulation, etc. are not considered. However, the
links existing between the models are identi®ed, showing
similarities which are sometimes much stronger than is
usually thought.
Numerical modeling of ¯ames is developed from the
following steps (Fig. 1):
² Under assumptions such as the high activation energy
limit, asymptotic analysis [1±4] allows the analytical
determination of ¯ame properties in well-de®ned model
problems (ignition, propagation of ¯ame front, instabil-
ities and acoustics, etc.). This approach, limited to simpli-
®ed situations, leads to analytical results exhibiting
helpful scale factors (dimensionless numbers) and
major ¯ame behaviors. Asymptotic analysis is particu-
larly well suited to perform quantitative comparison
between various phenomena.
² Simpli®ed experiments are useful to understand the basic
properties of combustion (laminar ¯ames, ¯ame/vortex
interactions, etc.) [5,6]. These experiments are accom-
panied by numerical simulations of laminar ¯ames incor-
porating complex chemistry and multi-species transports
along with radiative heat losses [7].
D. Veynante, L. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 195
² For given chemistry and transport model, in direct
numerical simulation (DNS) all the scales of the turbu-
lence (time and length) are calculated without resorting to
closures for turbulent ¯uxes and mean burning rate.
Turbulent ¯ames are analyzed in simple con®gurations
to extract data impossible to measure in experiments, and
to isolate some speci®c phenomena (heat release, Lewis
number¼) [8±12].
Because of the large number of degrees of freedominvolved
in turbulent combustion, a full DNS of a practical system
cannot be performed and averaging techniques leading to
unclosed equations are necessary. Models for turbulent ¯ames
are then developed: closure techniques are proposed for
unknown terms found in exact averaged balance equations.
Once the models have been implemented in numerical
codes, validation procedures are required. The numerical
modeling is validated against measurements obtained from
experiments. Con®gurations as close as possible to actual
industrial systems are chosen for these tests. Then, the ultimate
step is the simulation of a real combustion device.
The decomposition discussed in Fig. 1 is quite formal.
Turbulent combustion modeling is actually a continuous
ring between theoretical studies to analyze combustion,
understand ¯ames and improve models, implementation of
these models into CFD, experimental measurements
and comparison between these experimental data and the
numerical results.
Following a short presentation of the balance equa-
tions for reactive ¯ows (Section 2), a ®rst part is
devoted to a brief description of laminar ¯ames (Section
3). After a presentation of the unsuccessful Taylor's
expansion for closing the mean burning rate (Section
4), the physical analysis leading to turbulent combustion
diagrams is developed (Section 5). Then, modeling tools
available to derive turbulent combustion models are
described and the relations between a priori quite differ-
ent formalisms are established (Section 6). The next
three sections are devoted to combustion modeling in
the context of Reynolds Averaged Navier±Stokes
(RANS) equations. For premixed turbulent combustion,
we review the available closures for the mean reaction
rate (Section 7) and turbulent transport (Section 8). In a
subsequent section (Section 9), the modeling of the
mean burning rate in non-premixed turbulent ¯ames is
addressed.
2. Balance equations
2.1. Instantaneous balance equations
The basic set of balance equations comprises the classical
Navier±Stokes, species and energy transport equations.
These instantaneous local balance equations are, using the
classical lettering [13±15]:
² Mass:
2r
2t
1
2ru
j
2x
j
= 0 (1)
² Momentum (i = 1,2,3):
2ru
i
2t
1
2ru
j
u
i
2x
j
= 2
2p
2x
i
1
2t
ij
2x
j
1F
i
(2)
D. Veynante, L. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 196
Fig. 1. Combustion modeling steps.
where t
ij
denotes the viscous force tensor and F
i
a body
force.
² Species (N species with k = 1; ¼; N):
2rY
k
2t
1
2ru
j
Y
k
2x
j
= 2
2J
k
j
2x
j
1 _ v
k
(3)
where J
k
j
is the molecular diffusive ¯ux of the species k
and _ v
k
the mass reaction rate of this species per unit
volume.
² Total enthalpy h
t
= h 1u
i
u
i
=2 :
2rh
t
2t
1
2ru
j
h
t
2x
j
=
2p
2t
1
2
2x
j
(J
h
j
1u
i
t
ij
) 1u
j
F
j
(4)
where u
i
t
ij
and u
i
F
j
denote respectively the power due to
viscous and body forces.
These equations are closed by expressions for the species
molecular ¯uxes and the viscous forces. In practical situa-
tions, all ¯uids are assumed to be Newtonian, i.e. the viscous
tensor is given by the Newton law:
t
ij
= m
l
2u
i
2x
j
1
2u
j
2x
i
_ _
2
2
3
m
l
d
ij
2u
k
2x
k
_ _
(5)
where the molecular viscosity m
l
depending on the ¯uid
properties is introduced. d
ij
is the Kronecker symbol.
Species molecular diffusivities are generally described
using the Fick law, assuming a major species:
J
k
j
= 2
m
l
Sc
k
2Y
k
2x
j
(6)
Sc
k
is the Schmidt number of the species k, de®ned as:
Sc
k
=
m
l
rD
k
(7)
D
k
is the molecular diffusivity of the species k relative to the
major species.
More complex expressions may be used to describe multi-
species molecular diffusion. Soret effect (species diffusion
under temperature gradients) and molecular transport due to
pressure gradients are usually neglected. Enthalpy diffusion
is described according to the Fourier law:
J
h
j
= 2
m
l
Pr
2h
2x
j
1

N
k=1
Pr
Sc
k
21
_ _
h
k
2Y
k
2x
j
_ _
(8)
The Prandtl number Pr compares the diffusive transport
of momentum (viscous forces) and temperature. In the
previous expressions, radiative heat transfer and Dufour
effect (enthalpy diffusion under mass fraction gradients)
are neglected. The Prandtl number is written as a function
of the thermal diffusivity l and the constant pressure
speci®c heat C
p
:
Pr =
m
i
C
p
l
_ _
(9)
Then, the Lewis number Le
k
of the species k, comparing
thermal and mass diffusivities is introduced:
Le
k
=
Sc
k
Pr
_ _
=
l
rC
p
D
k
_ _
(10)
Under the assumption of unity Lewis number, the enthalpy
diffusive ¯ux (Eq. (8)) is simpli®ed and mass fraction and
enthalpy balance equations are formally identical if 2P=2t;
u
i
t
ij
and u
i
F
j
are negligible (low Mach number assumption)
[16]. This assumption is generally made to simplify tur-
bulent ¯ame modeling, especially in premixed ¯ames
when species mass fractions and temperature are assumed
to be equivalent variables. Nevertheless, thermo-diffusive
instabilities occur in premixed systems when the Lewis
number is lower than unity (for example for hydrogen).
One direct consequence of these instabilities is an increase
of the premixed ¯ame area and of the global reaction rate
[14,17].
2.2. Reynolds and Favre averaging
Unfortunately, the full numerical solution of the instanta-
neous balance equations is limited to very simpli®ed cases
(DNS [9,11,12]), where the number of time and length
scales present in the ¯ow is not too great. To overcome
this dif®culty, an additional step is introduced by averaging
the balance equations to describe only the mean ¯ow ®eld
(local ¯uctuations and turbulent structures are integrated in
mean quantities and these structures have no longer to be
described in the simulation). Each quantity Q is split into a
mean

Q and a deviation from the mean denoted by Q
/
:
Q =

Q 1Q
/
with

Q
/
= 0 (11)
Then, the previous instantaneous balance equations may be
ensemble averaged to derive transport equations for the
mean quantity

Q: This classical Reynolds averaging tech-
nique, widely used in non-reacting ¯uid mechanics, brings
unclosed correlations such as u
/
Q
/
that are unknown and
must be modeled. The numerical procedure is called
Reynolds Averaged Navier±Stokes (RANS) modeling.
In turbulent ¯ames, ¯uctuations of density are observed
because of the thermal heat release, and Reynolds averaging
induces some additional dif®culties. Averaging the mass
balance equation leads to:
2 r
2t
1
2
2x
i
ru
i
1r
/
u
/
i
_ _
= 0 (12)
where the velocity/density ¯uctuations correlation r
/
u
/
i
appears. To avoid the explicit modeling of such correlations,
a Favre (mass weighted) [18] average
~
Q is introduced and
any quantity is then decomposed into Q =
~
Q 1Q
//
:
~
Q =
rQ
r
;
¯
Q
//
=
r Q 2
~
Q
_ _
r
= 0 (13)
D. Veynante, L. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 197
The Favre averaged continuity equation:
2 r
2t
1
2 r ~ u
i
2x
i
= 0 (14)
is then formally identical to the Reynolds averaged conti-
nuity equation for constant density ¯ows. This result is true
for any balance equations (momentum, energy, mass frac-
tions, etc.). Nevertheless, Favre averaging is only a math-
ematical formalism:
² There is no simple relation between Favre,
~
Q and
Reynolds,

Q; averages. A relation between
~
Q and

Q
requires the knowledge of density ¯uctuations correla-
tions r
/
Q
/
remaining hidden in Favre averaging (see
Section 7.3.4):
r
~
Q = r

Q 1r
/
Q
/
(15)
² Comparisons between numerical simulations, providing
Favre averaged quantities
~
Q; with experimental results
are not obvious. Most experimental techniques determine
Reynolds averaged data

Q and differences between
~
Q and

Q may be signi®cant (Section 7.3.4 and Fig. 17).
2.3. Favre averaged balance equations
Averaging instantaneous balance equations yields:
² Mass:
2 r
2t
1
2 r ~ u
j
2x
j
= 0 (16)
² Momentum (i = 1,2,3):
2 r ~ u
i
2t
1
2 r ~ u
j
~ u
i
2x
j
= 2
2 r
¯
u
//
i
u
//
j
2x
j
2
2 p
2x
i
1
2 t
ij
2x
j
1

F
i
(17)
² Chemical species (for N species, k = 1; ¼; N):
2 r
~
Y
k
2t
1
2 r ~ u
j
~
Y
k
2x
j
= 2
2 r
¯
u
//
j
Y
//
k
2x
j
2
2J
k
j
2x
j
1

_ v
k
(18)
² Total enthalpy
~
h
t
:
2 r
~
h
t
2t
1
2 r ~ u
j
~
h
t
2x
j
= 2
2 r
¯
u
//
j
h
//
t
2x
j
1
2 p
2t
1
2
2x
j
J
h
j
1u
i
t
ij
_ _
1u
j
F
j
(19)
The objective of turbulent combustion modeling is to
propose closures for the unknown quantities appearing in
the averaged balance equations, such as:
² Reynolds stresses
¯
u
//
i
u
//
j
: The turbulence model provides
an approximation for this term. The closure may be done
directly or by deriving balance equations for these
Reynolds stresses. However, most combustion works
are based on turbulence modeling developed for non-
reacting ¯ows, such as k±1; simply rewritten in terms
of Favre averaging, and heat release effects on the
Reynolds stresses are generally not explicitly included.
² Species (
¯
u
//
j
Y
//
k
) and temperature (
¯
u
//
j
T) turbulent ¯uxes.
These ¯uxes are usually closed using a gradient transport
hypothesis:
r
¯
u
//
j
Y
//
k
= 2
m
t
Sc
kt
2
~
Y
k
2x
j
(20)
where m
t
is the turbulent viscosity, estimated from the
turbulence model, and Sc
kt
a turbulent Schmidt number
for the species k.
Nonetheless, theoretical and experimental works have
demonstrated that this assumption may be wrong in
some premixed turbulent ¯ames and counter-gradient
turbulent transport may be observed [19,20] (i.e. in an
opposite direction compared to the one predicted by Eq.
(20), see Sections 7.3.5 and 8).
² Laminar diffusive ¯uxes J
k
j
; J
h
j
; etc. are usually small
compared to turbulent transport, assuming a suf®ciently
large turbulence level (large Reynolds numbers limit).
² Species chemical reaction rates

_ v
k
: Turbulent combus-
tion modeling generally focuses on the closure of these
mean burning rates.
These equations, closed with appropriate models, allow
only for the determination of mean quantities, that may
differ from the instantaneous ones. Strong unsteady mixing
effects, resulting from the rolling up of shear layers, are
observed in turbulent ¯ames, and the knowledge of steady
statistical means is indeed not always suf®cient to describe
turbulent combustion. An alternative is to use large eddy
simulation (LES).
2.4. Filtering and Large Eddy Simulation
The objective of Large Eddy Simulation (LES) is to ex-
plicitly compute the largest structures of the ¯ow (typically
the structures larger than the computational mesh size),
while the effects of the smaller one are modeled. LES is
widely studied in the context of non-reactive ¯ows [21±
24], its application to combustion modeling is still at an
early stage [25]. As in RANS, the complex coupling
between micromixing and chemical reactions occurring at
unresolved scales needs models, however, LES possesses
some attractive properties:
² Large structures in turbulent ¯ows generally depend on
the geometry of the system. On the contrary, smaller
scales feature more universal properties. Accordingly,
turbulence models may be more ef®cient when they
have to describe only the smallest structures.
D. Veynante, L. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 198
² Turbulent mixing controls most of the global ¯ame prop-
erties. In LES, unsteady large scale mixing (between
fresh and burnt gases in premixed ¯ames or between
fuel and oxidizer in non-premixed burners) is simulated,
instead of being averaged.
² Most reacting ¯ows exhibit large scale coherent struc-
tures [26], which are also especially observed when
combustion instabilities occur. These instabilities result
from the coupling between heat release, the hydrody-
namic ¯ow ®eld and acoustic waves. They need to be
avoided because they induce noise variations of the
main properties of the system, large heat transfers
and, even in some extreme cases, the destruction of
the device.LES may be a powerful tool to predict the
occurrence of such instabilities [27] and consequently
improve passive or active control systems.
² With LES, large structures are explicitly computed and
instantaneous fresh and burnt gases zones, with different
turbulence characteristics (Section 8.7) are clearly iden-
ti®ed. This may help to describe some properties of the
¯ame/turbulence interaction.
In LES, the relevant quantities Q are ®ltered in the spec-
tral space (components greater than a given cut-off
frequency are suppressed) or in the physical space (weighted
averaging in a given volume). The ®ltered operation is
de®ned by:

Q(x) =
_
Q(x
p
)F(x 2x
p
) dx
p
(21)
where F is the LES ®lter. Standard ®lters are:
² A cut-off ®lter in the spectral space:

F(k) =
1 if k # p=D
0 otherwise
_
(22)
where k is the spatial wave number. This ®lter preserves
the length scales greater than the cut-off length scale 2D:
² A box ®lter in the physical space:
F(x) = F(x
1
; x
2
; x
3
) =
1=D
3
if ux
i
u # D=2; i = 1; 2; 3
0 otherwise
_
(23)
where (x
1
; x
2
; x
3
) are the spatial coordinates of the loca-
tion x. This ®lter corresponds to an averaging of the
quantity Q over a box of size D.
² A Gaussian ®lter in the physical space:
F(x) = F(x
1
; x
2
; x
3
)
=
6
pD
2
_ _
3=2
exp 2
6
D
2
x
2
1
1x
2
2
1x
2
3
_ _
_ _
(24)
All these ®lters are normalized:
_11
21
_11
21
_11
21
F(x
1
; x
2
; x
3
) dx
1
; dx
2
; dx
3
= 1 (25)
In combusting ¯ows, a mass-weighted, Favre ®ltering, is
introduced as:
r
~
Q(x) =
_
rQ(x
p
)F(x 2x
p
)dx
p
(26)
Instantaneous balance equations (Section 2) may be ®ltered
to derived balance equations for the ®ltered quantities

Q or
~
Q: This derivation should be carefully conducted:
Any quantity Q may be decomposed into a ®ltered
component

Q and a `¯uctuating' component Q
/
; according
to: Q =

Q 1Q
/
: But, in disagreement with classical
Reynolds averaging (ensemble average), Q
/
may be non-
zero:
Q
/
(x) =
_
Q(x
p
) 2

Q(x
p
)
_ _
F(x 2x
p
)dx
p
=
_
Q(x
p
)F(x 2x
p
)dx
p
2
_

Q(x
p
)F(x 2x
p
)dx
p
=

Q(x) 2Q(x) (27)
where
Q(x) =
_ _
Q(x
1
)F(x
p
2x
1
)dx
1
_ _
F(x 2x
p
)dx
p
=
__
Q(x
1
)F(x
p
2x
1
)F(x 2x
p
)dx
1
dx
p
±

Q(x)
(28)
To summarize:
Q ±

Q; Q
/
± 0;
~
~
Q ±
~
Q;
¯
Q
//
± 0 (29)
The relations used in RANS Q =

Q; Q
/
= 0;
~
~
Q =
~
Q;
¯
Q
//
= 0
are true when a cut-off ®lter in the spectral space is chosen
(Eq. (22)). Then, all the frequency components greater than
a cut-off wave number k
c
= p=D vanish.
The derivation of balance equations for the ®ltered quan-
tities

Q or
~
Q requires the exchange of ®ltering and differ-
entiation operators. This exchange is theoretically valid only
under restrictive assumptions and is wrong, for example,
when the ®lter size varies (®lter size corresponding to the
mesh size, depending on the spatial location). This point has
been carefully investigated [28]. In most simulations, the
uncertainties due to this operator exchange are neglected
and assumed to be incorporated in subgrid scale modeling.
Filtering the instantaneous balance equations leads to
equations formally similar to the Reynolds averaged balance
equations given in Section 2.3:
² mass:
2 r
2t
1
2 r ~ u
j
2x
j
= 0 (30)
D. Veynante, L. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 199
² momentum (for i = 1; 2; 3):
2 r ~ u
i
2t
1
2 r ~ u
j
~ u
i
2x
j
= 2
2
2x
j
r ¯ u
i
u
j
2 ~ u
i
~ u
j
_ _ _ _
2
2 p
2x
i
1
2 t
ij
2x
j
1

F
i
(31)
² Chemical species (N species, k = 1; ¼; N):
2 r
~
Y
j
2t
1
2 r ~ u
j
~
Y
k
2x
j
= 2
2
2x
j
r
¯
u
j
Y
k
2 ~ u
j
~
Y
k
_ _ _ _
1

_ v
k
(32)
² Total enthalpy h
t
= h 1u
i
u
i
=2
2 r
~
h
t
2t
1
2 r ~ u
j
~
h
t
2x
j
= 2
2
2x
j
r
¯
u
j
h
t
2 ~ u
j
~
h
t
_ _ _ _
1
2 p
2t
1
2
2x
j
J
h
j
1u
i
t
ij
_ _
1u
j
F
j
(33)
where

Q and
~
Q denote LES ®ltered quantities instead of
ensemble means.
The unknown quantities are:
² Unresolved Reynolds stresses
_
¯ u
i
u
j
2 ~ u
i
~ u
j
_
; requiring a
subgrid scale turbulence model.
² Unresolved species ¯uxes
_
¯
u
j
Y
k
2 ~ u
j
~
Y
k
_
and enthalpy
¯uxes
_
¯
u
j
h
t
2 ~ u
j
~
h
t
_
:
² Filtered laminar diffusion ¯uxes J
k
j
; J
h
j
:
² Filtered chemical reaction rate

_ v
k
:
These ®ltered balance equations, coupled to subgrid scale
models may be numerically solved to simulate the unsteady
behavior of the ®ltered ®elds. Compared to direct numerical
simulations (DNS), part of the information contained in the
unresolved scales is lost (and should be modeled).
Compared to RANS, LES provides valuable information
on the large resolved motions.
Either using RANS or LES, combustion occurs at the
unresolved scales of the computations. Then, the basic
tools and formalism of turbulent combustion modeling are
somehow the same for both techniques. Most of the RANS
combustion models can be modi®ed and adapted to LES
modeling. The scope of this review is limited to RANS.
3. Major properties of premixed, non-premixed and
partially premixed ¯ames
3.1. Laminar premixed ¯ames
The structure of a laminar premixed ¯ame is displayed in
Fig. 2. Fresh gases (fuel and oxidizer mixed at the molecular
level) and burnt gases (combustion products) are separated
by a thin reaction zone (typical thermal ¯ame thicknesses,
d
l
, are about 0.1±1 mm). A strong temperature gradient is
observed (typical ratios between burnt and fresh gases
temperatures are about 5±7). Another characteristic of a
premixed ¯ame is its ability to propagate towards the
fresh gases. Because of the temperature gradient and the
corresponding thermal ¯uxes, fresh gases are preheated
and then start to burn. The local imbalance between diffu-
sion of heat and chemical consumption leads to the propa-
gation of the front. The propagation speed S
L
of a laminar
¯ame depends on various parameters (fuel and oxidizer
compositions, fresh gases temperature, etc.) and is about
0.1±1 m/s. There is an interesting relation between the ther-
mal ¯ame thickness, d
l
, the laminar ¯ame speed, S
L
and the
kinematic viscosity of the fresh gases, n:
Re
f
=
d
l
S
L
n
< 4 (34)
where the thermal thickness d
l
corresponds to a temperature
jump of 98% of the temperature difference between fresh
and fully burnt products. The ¯ame Reynolds number, Re
f
,
is then almost constant. This relation, derived, for example,
from the Zeldovich/Frank-Kamenetskii (ZFK) theory
[14,15] is often implicitly used in theoretical derivation of
models for premixed turbulent combustion.
For a simple one-step irreversible chemical scheme:
reactants - products
the ¯ame is described using a progress variable c, such as
c = 0 in the fresh gases and c = 1 in the fully burnt ones.
This progress variable may be de®ned as a reduced tempera-
ture or a reduced mass fraction:
c =
T 2T
u
T
b
2T
u
or c =
Y
F
2Y
u
F
Y
b
F
2Y
u
F
(35)
D. Veynante, L. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 200
Fig. 2. Structure of a laminar plane premixed ¯ame.
where T, T
u
and T
b
are respectively the local, the unburnt gas
and the burnt gas temperatures. Y
F
, Y
u
F
and Y
b
F
are respec-
tively the local, unburnt gas and burnt gas fuel mass frac-
tions. Y
b
F
is non-zero for a rich combustion (fuel in excess).
For a unity Lewis number (same molecular and thermal
diffusivities), without heat losses (adiabatic combustion)
and compressibility effects, the two de®nitions (35) are
equivalent and mass and low Mach number energy balance
equations reduce to a single balance equation for the
progress variable:
2rc
2t
17´ ruc
_ _
= 7´ rD7c
_ _
1 _ v (36)
The previous Eq. (36) may be recast in a propagative form,
introducing the displacement speed v of the iso-c surface:
2c
2t
1u´7c =
1
r
7´ rD7c
_ _
1 _ v
u7cu
_ _
.........,,.........
displacement speed
7c } } = wu7cu (37)
Eq. (36) then describes the displacement of an iso-c surface
with the displacement speed w measured relative to the ¯ow.
Introducing the vector n normal to the iso-c surface and
pointing towards fresh gases (n = 27c=u7cu); the displace-
ment speed may be split into three contributions:
w =
1
r 7c } }
nn : 7 rD7c
_ _
2D7´n 1
1
r 7c } }
_ v (38)
w = 2
1
ru7cu
2
2n
rDu7cu
_ _
........,,........
w
n
2 D7´n
..,,..
w
c
1
1
ru7cu
_ v
...,,...
w
r
where 2=2n = n´7 denotes a normal derivative. w
n
corre-
sponds to molecular diffusion normal to the iso-c surface,
w
c
is related to the curvature 7´n of this surface and corre-
sponds to tangential diffusion. w
r
is due to the reaction rate
_ v: In a ®rst approximation, w
n
1w
r
may be modeled with
the laminar ¯ame speed, S
L
, whereas w
c
incorporates wrink-
ling surface effects and may be expressed using Markstein
lengths [29].
The propagation of reactive fronts has been the subject of
various developments and more discussion may be found in
Ref. [2] and references therein.
3.2. Laminar diffusion ¯ames
In laminar diffusion ¯ames, fuel and oxidizer are on both
sides of a reaction zone where the heat is released. The
burning rate is controlled by the molecular diffusion of the
reactants toward the reaction zone (Figs. 3 and 4). In a
counter-¯owing fuel and oxidizer ¯ame (Fig. 4), the amount
of heat transported away from the reaction zone is exactly
balanced by the heat released by combustion. A steady
planar diffusion ¯ame with determined thickness may be
observed in the vicinity of the stagnation point. Increasing
the jet velocity, quenching occurs when the heat ¯uxes
leaving the reaction zone are greater than the chemical
heat production. The structure of a steady diffusion ¯ame
therefore depends on ratios between characteristic times
representative of molecular diffusion and chemistry [30].
The thicknesses of the mixing zone and of the reaction
zone vary with these characteristic times. In opposition
with premixed ¯ames:
² Diffusion ¯ames do not bene®t from a self-induced propa-
gation mechanism, but are mainly mixing controlled.
D. Veynante, L. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 201
Fig. 3. Generic structure of a laminar diffusion ¯ame.
Fig. 4. Sketch of a counter-¯owing fuel and oxidizer diffusion
¯ame.
² The thickness of a diffusion ¯ame is not constant, but
depends on the local ¯ow properties.
Let us consider the irreversible single step chemical reac-
tion between fuel and oxidizer:
F 1sO - (1 1s)P
where s is the mass stoichiometric coef®cient.
In term of mass fraction, this chemical reaction may be
written:
n
P
dY
P
= n
F
dY
F
1n
o
dY
o
where dY
F
, dY
O
and dY
P
are the variations of fuel, oxidizer
and product mass fractions. n
i
are the stoichiometric molar
coef®cients of the reaction, W
i
denotes the species molar
weight and _ v is the reaction rate. The balance equations
for mass fractions and temperature are necessary to identify
the properties of the ¯ame:
2rY
F
2t
17´(ruY
F
) = 7´(rD
F
7Y
F
) 2n
F
W
F
_ v
2rY
O
2t
17´(ruY
O
) = 7´(rD
O
7Y
O
) 2n
O
W
O
_ v
2rT
2t
17´(ruT) = 7´
l
C
P
7T
_ _
1n
F
W
F
Q
C
p
_ _
_ v
The molecular diffusion is expressed using the Fick law,
the chemical rate of fuel and oxidizer are respectively _ v
F
=
n
F
W
F
_ v and _ v
O
= n
O
W
O
_ v: Q is the amount of heat released
by the combustion of an unit mass of fuel.
The internal structure of diffusion ¯ames is usually
discussed using the extent of mixing between fuel and oxidi-
zer. It is ®rst assumed that fuel and oxidizer molecular
diffusivities are equal (i.e. D
F
= D
O
= D). Combining the
transport equation for Y
F
and Y
O
, a conserved scalar (quan-
tity that is not in¯uenced by the chemical reaction, a
Schwab±Zeldovitch variable) w(Y
F
; Y
O
) = Y
F
2Y
O
=s is
introduced, with the mass stoichiometric coef®cient s =
(n
O
W
O
=n
F
W
F
): The mixture fraction Z is then de®ned by
normalizing w using values in the fuel and oxidizer streams.
Z evolves through the diffusive layer from zero (oxidizer) to
unity (fuel):
Z =
f
Y
F
Y
F;o
2
Y
O
Y
O;o
11
f 11
(39)
Y
F,o
is the fuel mass fraction in the fuel feeding stream.
Similarly, Y
O,o
is the oxidizer mass fraction in the oxidizer
stream (for instance, in air, Y
O,o
<0.23), f is the chemical
equivalence ratio:
f =
sY
F;o
Y
O;o
(40)
The mixture fraction follows the balance equation:
2rZ
2t
17´(ruZ) = 7´(rD7Z) (41)
Other Schwab±Zeldovitch variables w(Y
F
, T) and w(Y
O
, T)
(conserved scalars) may be derived by combining the
variables (Y
F
, T) and (Y
O
, T). The mixture fraction and these
additional conserved scalars are linearly related and one
may write:
Y
O
(x; t) = Y
O;o
(1 2Z(x; t))
.......,,.......
Mixing
1
n
O
W
O
n
F
W
F
C
p
Q
_ _
[Z(x; t)(T
F;o
2T
O;o
) 1(T
O;o
2T(x; t))]
.......................,,.......................
Combustion
(42)
Y
F
(x; t) = Y
F;o
Z(x; t)
....,,....
Mixing
1
C
p
Q
[Z(x; t)(T
F;o
2T
O;o
) 1(T
O;o
2T(x; t))]
...................,,...................
Combustion
(43)
where T
O,o
and T
F,o
are the temperatures of the fuel and
oxidizer streams respectively. Using these algebraic re-
lations, the diffusion ¯ame is fully determined when the
mixture fraction Z and any one of T, Y
F
, or Y
O
is known.
The conserved scalar approach may still be useful when
fuel and oxidizer molecular diffusivities differ, but an ad-
ditional mixture fraction:
Z
L
=
F
Y
F
Y
F;o
2
Y
O
Y
O;o
11
F11
(44)
should be introduced, satisfying [31]:
r
DZ
Dt
=
1
L

l
C
p
7Z
L
_ _
(45)
where:
L= Le
O
(1 1f)=(1 1F) with F = (Le
O
=Le
F
)f
(46)
where Le
i
is the Lewis number of the species i. The relations
between Z and Z
L
are given in Table 1. When Le
O
= Le
F
;
Z
L
= Z: In experiments or in simulations involving complex
chemistry, the mixture fraction is de®ned from mass frac-
tions of atomic elements [32].
Mass fractions and temperature balance equations may be
reorganized into a new frame where Z is one of the coordi-
nates (see for instance Ref. [14] or Ref. [33]). A local or-
thogonal coordinate system attached to the surface of
stoichiometric mixture is introduced and the derivatives in
the stoichiometric plane are denoted '. For unity Lewis
number and using Eq. (41), the species transport equation
D. Veynante, L. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 202
may be written:
r
2Y
i
2t
1ru
'
´7
'
Y
i
= rx
2
2
Y
i
2Z
2
17
'
´(rD7
'
Y
i
)
2rD7
'
(lnu7Zu)´7
'
Y
i
1 _ v
i
(47)
In Eq. (47), x is the scalar dissipation rate of the mixture
fraction Z:
x = D
2Z
2x
j
2Z
2x
j
_ _
= Du7Zu
2
(48)
measuring the inverse of a diffusive time t
x
= x
21
: As this
time decreases, mass and heat transfers through the stoichio-
metric surface are enhanced.
When iso-Z surface curvatures are not too strong, the
gradients measured along the stoichiometric surface are
smaller than the gradients in the direction Z perpendicular
to the stoichiometric surface, the balance equation for the
mass fractions reduces to:
r
2Y
i
2t
= rx
2
2
Y
i
2Z
2
1 _ v
i
(49)
Neglecting unsteady effects, the time derivative vanishes
and for unity Lewis numbers, the ¯ame structure is fully
described by:
rx
2
2
Y
i
2Z
2
1 _ v
i
= 0 and rx
2
2
T
2Z
2
1 _ v
T
= 0 (50)
showing that the chemical reaction rate is directly related to
the function T(Z, x). Under these hypothesis, the diffusion
¯ame is completely determined as a function of the mixture
fraction Z and the scalar dissipation rate x (or 7Z):
Y
i
= Y
i
(Z; x); T = T(Z; x)
An expression for x(Z,t) and full solutions for various lami-
nar ¯ames may be derived from asymptotic developments
[30,34], or solving Eq. (50) leading to Fig. 5.
A coordinate j is de®ned across the one-dimensional
¯amelet such as:
dZ
dj
= 2n
Z
´7Z = u7Zu (51)
where n
Z
denotes the normal vector to the iso-Z surfaces,
pointing towards Z = 0: The reaction rate may be integrated
in the direction j through the ¯ame, using Eq. (50):
_
V
i
=
_11
21
_ v
i
(j)dj =
_1
0
_ v
i
(x; Z)
u7Zu
dZ
= 2
_1
0
rDu7Zu
2
2
Y
i
2Z
2
dZ (52)
Assuming that r, D and u7Zu do not vary across the ¯ame
(this is typical of a ¯amelet assumption used in turbulent
combustion modeling where the ¯ame is assumed very
thin),
_
V
i
becomes:
_
V
i
< 2rDu7Zu
2Y
i
2Z
_ _
Z=1
Z=0
= 2 rD
2Y
i
2j
_ _
Z=1
Z=0
(53)
This last relation illustrates how the integrated reaction
rate of a species i is directly related to the molecular diffu-
sion ¯ux of that species through the ¯ame.
Diffusion combustion is limited by two regimes corre-
sponding to pure mixing of the reactants and in®nitely fast
chemistry (Fig. 5). When the chemistry is in®nitely fast, the
temperature depends on mixing through Z, but not on the
rate of mixing x [35]. Then, piecewise relationships exist
between Z, Z
L
, species mass fractions and temperature,
summarized in Table 1. Eq. (43) provides the maximum
¯ame temperature T
f
obtained when Y
F
= Y
O
= 0 and Z =
Z
st
= 1=(1 1f)
T
f
=
T
F;o
1T
O;of
1Y
F;o
Q
C
p
1 1f
In many combustion systems, the in®nitely fast chemistry
hypothesis cannot be invoked everywhere. For example in
ignition problems or in the vicinity of stabilization zones,
and more generally when large velocity gradients are found.
The characterization of diffusion ¯ames from the in®nitely
fast chemistry situation to the quenching limit is therefore of
fundamental interest for turbulent combustion. The counter-
¯ow diffusion ¯ame (Fig. 4) is a generic con®guration well
suited to reproduce and to understand the structure and the
extinction of laminar diffusion ¯ames. These extinction
phenomena have been theoretically described using asymp-
totic developments [30,34,36]. A diffusive time t
x
< x
21
st
=
(Du7Zu
2
)
21
Z=Z
st
and a chemical time t
c
are combined to build a
DamkoÈhler number Da
p
= (t
x
=t
c
) < (t
c
x
st
)
21
: The response
D. Veynante, L. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 203
Table 1
Piecewise relations for in®nitely fast chemistry including non-unity Lewis number. Z
st
= 1=(1 1f) and Z
L
st
= 1=(1 1F) (see Eq. (46)). The
subscript
o
denotes a quantity measured in pure fuel or oxidizer, T
f
is the ¯ame temperature
Oxidizer side
Z , Z
st
and Z
L
, Z
L
st
Fuel side
Z . Z
st
and Z
L
. Z
L
st
Z = Z
L
(1 1F)=(1 1f) Z = (f(Z
L
(1 1F) 21)=F11)=(1 1f)
Y
F
= 0 Y
O
= 0
Y
O
= Y
O;o
(1 2Z(1 1f)) Y
F
= Y
F;o
(Z(1 1f) 21)=f
T = (T
f
2T
O;o
)Z(f 11) 1T
O;o
T = (T
F;o
2T
f
)(Z(f 11) 21)=f 1T
f
of the burning rate to variations of Da
p
leads to the so-called
`S' curve (Fig. 6) [14]. Starting from a situation where the
chemistry is fast, decreasing Da
p
(increasing x) makes the
burning rate and transport through the stoichiometric
surface greater, until chemistry cannot keep up with the
large heat ¯uxes. Then, extinction develops. The value of
the DamkoÈhler Da
p
q
at the extinction point may be estimated
by quantifying the leakage of fuel (or oxidizer) through the
stoichiometric surface [37].
Two limit cases are thus important for non-premixed
turbulent combustion modeling: pure mixing without
combustion (Da
p
- 0) and in®nitely fast chemistry
(Da
p
-1). These cases delineate the domain where ¯ames
may develop in planes (Z, Y
F
), (Z, Y
O
) and (Z, T) (Fig. 5).
Moreover, for a given location within a diffusion ¯ame, by
traveling along the normal to the stoichiometric surface,
T(Z) can be constructed and characterizes the combustion
regime (i.e. fast or slow chemistry, Fig. 5). Many turbulent
combustion models are based on this description of diffusion
¯ame; when the ¯ow is turbulent, T(Z) is replaced by the
mean temperature calculated for a given value of Z, i.e. for a
given state in the mixing between fuel and oxidizer.
3.3. Partially premixed ¯ames
In non-premixed combustion, some partial premixing of
the reactants may exist before the reaction zone develops.
Then, the pure diffusive/reactive layer, as observed in a
D. Veynante, L. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 204
Fig. 5. Inner structure of non-premixed ¯ames. The distribution in mixture fraction space of fuel, oxidizer and temperature lies between the
in®nitely fast chemistry limit and the pure mixing case. The thickness of the diffusive zone l
d
is estimated from the scalar dissipation rate x at
the stoichiometric surface, whereas the characteristic thickness of the reaction zone l
r
depends on both l
d
and the DamkoÈhler number [12].
laminar diffusion ¯ame, may not be the unique relevant
model problem. Furthermore, many ¯ames in burners are
stabilized by the recirculation of burnt gases, leading to
stabilization mechanisms controlled by the mixing between
fuel, oxidizer, and burnt gases. The mixtures feeding the
reaction zone are then not always pure fuel and pure
oxidizer. There are situations where partial premixing is
clearly important:
² Auto-ignition in a non-homogeneous distribution of fuel
and oxidizer, where the reactants can be mixed before
auto-ignition occurs.
² Laminar or turbulent ¯ame stabilization, when combus-
tion does not start at the very ®rst interface between fuel
and oxidizer in the vicinity of burner exit, so that fuel and
oxidizer may mix without burning.
² After quenching of the reaction zone, the reactants may
mix leading to possibility of re-ignition and combustion
in a partially premixed regime [38].
The triple ¯ame is an interesting model problem to
approach partially premixed combustion. In a laminar
shear layer where the mixing between cold fuel and oxidizer
develops, a diffusion ¯ame may be stabilized at the splitter
plate by the combination of heat losses with viscous ¯ow
effects, or, further downstream [39]. In this latter case,
combustion starts in a region where fuel and oxidizer have
been mixed in stoichiometric proportion. The resulting
premixed kernel tends to propagate towards fresh gases
and contributes to the stabilization of the trailing diffusion
¯ame. In a mixing layer con®guration, the stoichiometric
premixed kernel evolves to a rich partially premixed ¯ame
in the direction of the fuel stream, while a lean partially
premixed ¯ame develops on the air side (Fig. 7). These
two premixed ¯ames are curved because their respective
propagation velocities decrease when moving away from
the stoichiometric condition. The overall structure,
composed of two premixed ¯ames and of a diffusion
¯ame, is usually called `triple ¯ame'. Such triple ¯ames
have been ®rstly experimentally observed by Phillips [40].
Since this pioneer work, more recent experiments have
con®rmed the existence of triple ¯ames in laminar ¯ows
[41±43]. Theoretical studies [44±48] and numerical simula-
tions [49±53] have been devoted to triple ¯ames. The propa-
gation speed of triple ¯ames is controlled by two
parameters: the curvature of the partially premixed front,
increasing with the scalar dissipation rate imposed in front
of the ¯ame, and the amount of heat release. The effect of
heat release is to de¯ect the ¯ow upstream of the triple
¯ame, making the triple ¯ame speed greater than the propa-
gation speed of a planar stoichiometric ¯ame. This de¯ec-
tion also induces a decrease of the mixture fraction gradient
in the trailing diffusion ¯ame. The triple ¯ame velocity
decreases when increasing the scalar dissipation rate at the
¯ame tip. Triple ¯ame velocity response to variations of
scalar dissipation rate may be derived by approximating
the ¯ame tip by a parabolic pro®le and using results from
expansions in parabolic-cylinder coordinates. This analysis
was used by Ghosal and Vervisch to include small but ®nite
heat release and gas expansion, the triple ¯ame velocity U
TF
may be written [47]:
U
TF
< S
L
(1 1a) 2
b
Z
st
(1 1a)

4n
F
22
_

l
rC
p
x
st
_
(54)
where a = (T
burnt
2T
fresh
)=T
burnt
is de®ned from the
D. Veynante, L. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 205
Fig. 6. Generic response of the heat released by a one-dimensional strained diffusion ¯ame versus DamkhoÈler number. The dashed line denotes
in®nitely fast chemistry. Da
p
q
and Da
p
i
are the critical values of Da
p
= (t
c
x
st
)
21
at quenching and ignition, respectively. t
c
is a given chemical
time and x
st
= Du7Zu
2
Z=Z
st
is the scalar dissipation rate under stoichiometric conditions.
temperatures on both sides of a stoichiometric premixed
¯ame for the same mixture, b = a(T
A
=T
burnt
) is the Zeldo-
vitch number [14], T
A
is the activation temperature, n
F
the stoichiometric coef®cient of the fuel and x
st
is measured
far upstream in the mixing layer where the triple ¯ame
propagates. The value of the scalar dissipation rate at the
triple point is of the order of x
st
=(1 1a)
2
[47]. These re-
lations are valid for small values of a and moderate, but
non-zero, values of x
st
. The triple ¯ame velocity given by
Eq. (54) may be combined with Landau±Squire solution for
non-reacting laminar round jet to construct a stability
diagram for lift-off and blowout of jet laminar diffusion
¯ames [54].
A variety of studies suggest that ®nite rate chemistry and
quenching in non-premixed combustion are somehow
linked to partially premixed combustion [55].
4. A direct analysis: Taylor's expansion
A direct approach to describe turbulent combustion is ®rst
discussed in this section. This simple formalism, based on
series expansion, illustrates the dif®culties arising from the
non-linear character of chemical sources.
Consider a simple irreversible reaction between fuel (F)
and oxidizer (O):
F 1sO - (1 1s)P
where the fuel mass reaction rate _ v
F
is expressed from the
Arrhenius law as:
_ v
F
= 2Ar
2
T
b
Y
F
Y
O
exp 2
T
A
T
_ _
(55)
where A is the pre-exponential constant, and T
A
is the acti-
vation temperature.
As the reaction rate is highly non-linear, the averaged
reaction rate

_ v
F
cannot be easily expressed as a function
of the mean mass fractions
~
Y
F
and
~
Y
O
the mean density r
and the mean temperature
~
T: The ®rst simple idea is to
expand the mean reaction rate

_ v
F
as a Taylor series:
exp 2
T
A
~
T
_ _
= exp 2
T
A
~
T
_ _
1 1

11
n=1
P
n
T
//n
~
T
n
_ _
;
T
b
=
~
T
b
1 1

11
n=1
Q
n
T
//n
~
T
n
_ _
(56)
where P
n
and Q
n
are given by:
P
n
=

n
k=1
(21)
n2k
(n 21)!
(n 2k)![(k 21)!]
2
k
T
A
~
T
_ _
k
;
Q
n
=
b(b 11)¼(b 1n 21)
n!
(57)
D. Veynante, L. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 206
Fig. 7. Schematic of a freely propagation triple ¯ame.
The mean reaction rate,

_ v
F
becomes [56]:

_ v
F
= 2A r
2
~
T
b
~
Y
F
~
Y
O
exp
_
2
T
A
~
T
_
×
_
1 1
¯
Y
//
F
Y
//
O
~
Y
F
~
Y
O
1(P
1
1Q
1
)
_
¯
Y
//
F
T
//
~
Y
F
~
T
1
¯
Y
//
O
T
//
~
Y
O
~
T
_
1(P
2
1Q
2
1P
1
Q
1
)
_
¯
Y
//
F
T
//
2
~
Y
F
~
T
2
1
¯
Y
//
O
T
//
2
~
Y
O
~
T
2
_
1
¼
_
(58)
Eq. (58) leads to various dif®culties. First, new quantities
such as
¯
Y
//
k
T
//n
have to be closed using algebraic expressions
or transport equations. Because of non-linearities, large
errors exist when only few terms of the series expansion
are retained. Expression (58) is quite complicated, but is
only valid for a simple irreversible reaction and cannot be
easily extended to realistic chemical schemes (at least 9
species and 19 reactions for hydrogen combustion, several
hundred species and several thousand reactions for hydro-
carbon combustion, etc.). For these reasons, reaction rate
closures in turbulent combustion are not based on Eq. (58).
D. Veynante, L. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 207
Fig. 8. Turbulent premixed combustion regimes as identi®ed by Borghi and Destriau [62]: (a) ¯amelet (thin wrinkled ¯ame), (b) thickened
wrinkled ¯ame regime, and (c) thickened ¯ame regime.
Models are rather derived from physical analysis as discuss
below.
Nevertheless, this approach is used in some simulations
of supersonic reacting ¯ows [57] or to describe reaction in
atmospheric boundary layer where the temperature T may
be roughly assumed to be constant [58]. In these situations,
only the ®rst two terms in the series expansion are kept.
A segregation factor, a
FO
, is then introduced:
a
FO
= 2
¯
Y
//
F
Y
//
O
~
Y
F
~
Y
O
= 2 1 2
¯
Y
F
Y
O
~
Y
F
~
Y
O
_ _
(59)
to characterize the mixing between the reactants F and O. If
they are perfectly separated
¯
Y
F
Y
O
= 0 and a
FO
= 21: On
the other hand, a perfect mixing (
¯
Y
//
F
Y
//
O
= 0) leads to a
FO
=
0: This segregation factor may be either postulated or
provided by a balance equation (see Ref. [59] in a large
eddy simulation context). Then, the mean reaction rate
becomes:

_ v = 2A(1 1a
FO
) r
2
~
T
b
~
Y
F
~
Y
O
exp 2
T
A
~
T
_ _
(60)
5. Scales and diagrams for turbulent combustion
5.1. Introduction
As the mean burning rate

_ v cannot be found from an
averaging of Arrhenius laws, a physical approach is required
to derive models for turbulent combustion. Turbulent
combustion involves various lengths, velocity and time
scales describing turbulent ¯ow ®eld and chemical reac-
tions. The physical analysis is mainly based on comparison
between these scales.
The turbulent ¯ow is characterized by a Reynolds number
comparing turbulent transport to viscous forces:
Re =
u
/
l
t
v
(61)
where u
/
is the velocity rms (related to the square root of the
turbulent kinetic energy k), l
t
is the turbulence integral
length scale and n the kinematic viscosity of the ¯ow.
The DamkoÈhler number compares the turbulent (t
t
) and
the chemical (t
c
) time scales:
Da =
t
t
t
c
(62)
In the limit of high DamkoÈhler numbers (Da q1); the
chemical time is short compared to the turbulent one, corre-
sponding to a thin reaction zone distorted and convected by
the ¯ow ®eld. The internal structure of the ¯ame is not
strongly affected by turbulence and may be described as a
laminar ¯ame element called a `¯amelet'. The turbulent
structures wrinkle and strain the ¯ame surface. On the
other hand, a low DamkoÈhler number (Da p1) corresponds
to a slow chemical reaction. Reactants and products are
mixed by turbulent structures before reaction. In this
perfectly stirred reactor limit, the mean reaction rate may
be expressed from Arrhenius laws using mean mass frac-
tions and temperature, corresponding to the ®rst term of the
Taylor's expansion (58).
In turbulent ¯ames, as long as quenching does not occur,
most practical situations correspond to high or medium
values of the DamkoÈhler numbers. It is worth noting that
various chemical time scales may be encountered: fuel
oxidation generally corresponds to short chemical time
scales (Da q1) whereas pollutant production or destruc-
tion such as CO oxidation or NO formation are slower.
5.2. Turbulent premixed combustion diagram
5.2.1. Introduction
The objective is to analyze premixed turbulent combus-
tion regimes by comparing turbulence and chemical char-
acteristic length and time scales. This analysis leads to
combustion diagrams where various regimes are presented
as function of various dimensionless numbers [14,23,29,60±
62]. These diagrams could be a support to the selection and
development of the relevant combustion model for a given
situation. A formalism combining recent analysis [29,62] is
retained here.
For turbulent premixed ¯ames, the chemical time scale,
t
c
, may be estimated as the ratio of the thickness d
l
and the
propagation speed S
L
of the laminar ¯ame.
1
Estimating the
turbulent time from turbulent integral scale characteristics
(t
t
= l
t
=u
/
); the DamkoÈhler number becomes:
Da =
t
t
t
c
=
l
t
d
l
S
L
u
/
(63)
where a velocity ratio (u
/
/S
L
) and a length scale ratio (l
t
/d
l
)
are evidenced.
5.2.2. Combustion regimes
For large values of the DamkoÈhler number (Da q1); the
¯ame front is thin and its inner structure is not affected by
turbulence motions which only wrinkle the ¯ame surface.
This ¯amelet regime or thin wrinkled ¯ame regime (Fig. 8a)
occurs when the smallest turbulence scales (i.e. the Kolmo-
gorov scales), have a turbulent time t
k
larger than t
c
(turbulent motions are too slow to affect the ¯ame structure).
This transition is described in term of the Karlovitz
number Ka:
Ka =
t
c
t
k
=
d
l
l
k
u
k
S
L
(64)
D. Veynante, L. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 208
1
This chemical time t
c
corresponds to the time required for the
¯ame to propagate over a distance equal to its own thickness. This
time may also be viewed as a diffusive time scale, using Eq. (34)
t
c
= d
l
=S
L
= (1=Re
f
)(d
2
l
=n):
The size l
k
and the velocity u
k
of Kolmogorov structures
are given by [64]:
l
k
=
v
3
1
_ _
1=4
; u
k
= (v1)
1=4
(65)
where 1 is the dissipation rate of the turbulent kinetic energy
k. The integral length scale lt may be written:
l
t
=
u
/3
1
_ _
(66)
using v = d
l
S
L
; corresponding to a unity ¯ame Reynolds
number Re
f
(Eq. (34)), yields
Ka =
u
/
S
L
_ _
3=2
l
t
d
l
_ _
21=2
(67)
Reynolds, Re, DamkoÈhler, Da, and Karlovitz, Ka, numbers
are related as:
Re = Da
2
Ka
2
(68)
and a set of two parameters (Re, Da), (Re, Ka) or (Da, Ka) are
necessary to discuss regimes in the case of premixed reactants.
The Karlovitz number also compares the ¯ame and the
Kolmogorov length scales according to:
Ka =
d
l
l
k
_ _
2
(69)
The Karlovitz number is used to de®ne the Klimov±
Williams criterion, corresponding to Ka = 1; delineating
between two combustion regimes. This criterion was ®rst
interpreted as the transition between the ¯amelet regime
(Ka , 1); previously described, and the distributed combus-
tion regime where the ¯ame inner structure is strongly modi-
®ed by turbulence motions. A recent analysis [29] has
shown that, for Karlovitz numbers larger than unity (Ka .
1); turbulent motions become able to affect the ¯ame inner
structure but not necessarily the reaction zone. This reaction
zone, where heat is released, has a thickness d
r
much lower
that the thermal thickness d
l
of the ¯ame (d
r
< 0:1d
l
): The
Karlovitz number based on this reaction thickness is:
Ka
r
=
d
r
l
k
_ _
2
=
d
r
d
l
_ _
2
d
l
l
k
_ _
2
<
1
100
d
l
l
k
_ _
2
<
Ka
100
(70)
Then, the following turbulent premixed ¯ame regimes are
proposed [29]:
² Ka ,1: Flamelet regime or thin wrinkled ¯ame regime
(Fig. 8a). Two subdivisions may be proposed depending
on the velocity ratio u
/
/S
L
:
Ð(u
/
/S
L
) ,1: wrinkled ¯ame. As u
/
may be viewed as
the rotation speed of the larger turbulent motions,
turbulent structures are unable to wrinkle the ¯ame
surface up to ¯ame front interactions. The laminar
propagation is predominant and turbulence/combus-
tion interactions remain limited.
Ð(u
/
/S
L
) .1: wrinkled ¯ame with pockets (`corrugated
¯ames'). In this situation, larger structures become able
to induce ¯ame front interactions leading to pockets.
² 1 , Ka # 100 (Ka
r
, 1) : Thickened wrinkled ¯ame
regime or thin reaction zone. In this case, turbulent
motions are able to affect and to thicken the ¯ame preheat
zone, but cannot modify the reaction zone which remains
thin and close to a laminar reaction zone (Fig. 8b).
² Ka .100 (Ka
r
.1): Thickened ¯ame regime or well-
stirred reactor. In this situation, preheat and reaction
zones are strongly affected by turbulent motions and no
laminar ¯ame structure may be identi®ed (Fig. 8c).
These various regimes are generally displayed on a log-
arithmic diagram (u
/
/S
L
; l
t
/d
l
), similar to the one presented
on Fig. 9.
5.2.3. Comments
This analysis, leading to a rough classi®cation of combus-
tion regimes as a function of characteristic numbers, has
been developed as a support to derive and choose turbulent
combustion models. Following this classi®cation, most
practical applications correspond to ¯amelet or thickened
wrinkled ¯ame regimes. Nevertheless, such analyses are
only qualitative and should be used with great care. A
diagram such as the one displayed on Fig. 9 cannot be
readily used to determine the combustion regime of a prac-
tical system from (u
/
/S
L
) and (d
l
/l
t
) ratios:
² The analysis is based on the assumption of a homo-
geneous and isotropic turbulence unaffected by heat
release, which is not the case in combustion systems.
² Some quantities used are not clearly de®ned. For
example, the ¯ame thickness d
l
may be based on the
thermal thickness or on the diffusive thickness. Accord-
ingly, the limits between the various regimes may notice-
ably change.
² All regime limits are based on order of magnitude esti-
mations and not on precise derivations. For example, the
¯amelet regime limit could correspond to a Karlovitz
number Ka = 0:1 or Ka = 10; rather than Ka = 1:
² Various effects are not taken into account. Unsteady and
curvature effects play an important role neglected here.
Turbulent premixed combustion diagrams were analyzed
using direct numerical simulations of ¯ame/vortex inter-
actions [65]. Results show that the ¯amelet regime seems
to extend above the Klimov±Williams criterion (see Fig.
9). DNS has revealed that small turbulent scales, which
are supposed in classical theories to have the strongest
effects on ¯ames, have small lifetimes because of viscous
dissipation and therefore only limited effects on combus-
tion, results recovered experimentally [66]. Peters [29]
shows that the criterion Ka = 100 (i.e. Ka
r
= 1) is in
quite good agreement with the transition proposed in
Ref. [65], at least when the length scale ratio, l
t
/d
l
, is
suf®ciently large.
D. Veynante, L. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 209
² Additional length scales have been introduced in the
literature. For instance the Gibson scale l
G
, to character-
ize the size of the smaller vortex able to affect the ¯ame
front was used [63]. This length was de®ned as the size of
the vortex having the same velocity as the laminar ¯ame
speed S
L
.
² All these analyses are implicitly based on a single step
irreversible reaction. In actual turbulent combustion, a
large number of chemical species and reactions are
involved (several hundred species and several thousand
reactions for propane burning in air). These reactions
may correspond to a large range of chemical time scales.
For example, the propane oxidation may assumed to be
fast compared to turbulent time scale. On the other hand,
the CO
2
formation from carbon monoxide (CO) and OH
radical in the burnt gases is much slower with a chemical
time of the same order as turbulent times.
5.3. Non-premixed turbulent combustion diagram
5.3.1. Introduction
Two numbers, a length ratio and a velocity ratio, have
been used to identify premixed turbulent combustion
regimes. The problem is more dif®cult in non-premixed
turbulent combustion because diffusion ¯ames do not propa-
gate and, therefore, exhibit no intrinsic characteristic speed.
In addition, the thickness of the ¯ame depends on the aero-
dynamics controlling the thickness of the local mixing
layers developing between fuel and oxidizer (Section 3.2)
and no ®xed reference length scale can be easily identi®ed
for diffusion ¯ames. This dif®culty is well illustrated in the
literature, where various characteristic scales have been
retained depending on the authors [33,67±71]. These
classi®cations of non-premixed turbulent ¯ames may be
organized in three major groups:
² The turbulent ¯ow regime is characterized by a Reynolds
number, whereas a DamkoÈhler number is chosen for the
reaction zone [72].
² The mixture fraction ®eld is retained to describe the
turbulent mixing using
¯
Z
//2
and a DamkoÈhler number
(ratio of Kolmogorov to chemical time) characterizes
the ¯ame [33].
² A velocity ratio (turbulence intensity to premixed lami-
nar ¯ame speed) and a length ratio (integral scale to
premixed laminar ¯ame thickness) may be constructed
[68] to delineate between regimes.
Additional lengths have also been introduced, using for
instance thicknesses of pro®les in mixture fraction space
[67].
A laminar diffusion ¯ame is fully determined from a
DamkoÈhler number Da
p
= (t
c
x
st
)
21
; where the value of
the chemical time t
c
depends on the fuel chemistry [30]
D. Veynante, L. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 210
Fig. 9. Turbulent premixed combustion diagram [29,62]. Combustion regimes are identi®ed using the length scale (l
t
=d
l
) and the velocity
(u
/
=S
L
) ratios. The Klimov±Williams criterion (Ka = 1) corresponds to a ¯ame thickness d
l
equal to the Kolmogorov scale l
k
. Below this line,
the ¯ame is thinner than any turbulent scale. Below the line delineating the Peters criterion (Ka = 100 or Ka
r
= 1), the reaction zone thickness,
d
r
, is thinner than any turbulent scale and is not affected by turbulent motions (the criterion is plotted assuming d
r
< 0:1d
l
). The ¯amelet regime
limit devised by Poinsot et al. [65] from direct numerical simulations is also displayed. The criterion proposed in Ref. [140] to delineate
between gradient (above) and counter-gradient (below) turbulent transport is displayed assuming a heat release factor t = T
b
=T
u
21 = 6 where
T
u
and T
b
are, respectively, the fresh and the burnt gases temperature (see Section 8).
(Section 3.2). In this number, the scalar dissipation rate
under stoichiometric condition (Z = Z
st
); x
st
= Du7Zu
2
st
;
measures at the same time a mechanical time, t
x
= x
21
st
;
and, a characteristic mixing length, l
d
= (D=x
st
)
1=2
: Accord-
ing to asymptotic developments [30], the reaction zone
thickness is of the order of l
r
< l
d
(Da
p
)
21=(a11)
; where a is
the order of a global one-step reaction.
Because diffusion ¯ames do not feature a ®xed reference
length, a main dif®culty arises when effects of unsteadiness
need to be quanti®ed. In a steady laminar ¯ame the local rate
of strain is directly related to x
st
(and to a ¯ame thickness),
however, when the velocity ®eld ¯uctuates, unsteadiness in
diffusion ¯ames develops at two levels [73]:
² The mixture fraction ®eld Z does not immediately
respond to velocity ¯uctuations, leading to a distribution
of x
st
for given rates of strain. Because a strong correla-
tion exists between x
st
and velocity gradients taken along
the stoichiometric line [74], this effect is not the dominant
one when ®nite rate chemistry occurs.
² For ®nite rate chemistry, the burning rate does not im-
mediately follow variations of x
st
, leading to a second
level of unsteadiness, modifying the burning rate (Eq.
(71)).
u
/
- [Unsteadiness in mixing] - x
s
- [Burning rate unsteadiness(for Da
p
, 1)] - _ v
i
(71)
Summarizing these effects in a generic diagram is an
arduous task.
A diagram for laminar ¯ames submitted to curvature
associated to a time varying strain rate was obtained by
Cuenot and Poinsot from DNS results of ¯ame/vortex inter-
action [70]. In this diagram presented on Fig. 10, the ¯ame
thickness is d
i
<l
d
, whereas r and u
/
denote respectively the
characteristic size and velocity of the vortex pair. This
analysis identi®es two limiting DamkoÈhler numbers,
Da
LFA
and Da
ext
. When Da
p
is larger than Da
LFA
, the ¯ame
front may be viewed as a steady laminar ¯ame element and
its inner structure is not affected by vortices. On the other
hand, when Da
p
# Da
ext
; ¯ame extinction occurs. In the
intermediate DamkoÈhler number range (i.e. Da
ext
,Da
p
,
Da
LFA
), strong unsteadiness effects are observed.
In a non-premixed turbulent ¯ame, the reaction zones
develop within a mean mixing zone whose thickness l
z
is
of the order of the turbulent integral length scale l
t
(Fig. 11):
l
z
< u7
~
Zu
21
< l
t
<
k
3=2
1
_ _
(72)
Turbulent small scale mixing mainly depends both on
velocity ¯uctuations, transporting the iso-Z surfaces (stir-
ring), and diffusion between these iso-surfaces that compose
the mixing layer of thickness l
d
, with
l
d
<
D
~ x
st
_ _
1=2
(73)
where ~ x
st
denotes the conditional mean value of the scalar
dissipation rate x for Z = Z
st
:
When transport of species and heat by velocity ¯uctua-
tions is faster than transfer in the diffusion ¯ame, a departure
from laminar ¯amelet is expected. Also, when the Kolmo-
gorov scale l
k
is of the order of the ¯ame thickness, the inner
D. Veynante, L. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 211
Fig. 10. Non-premixed ¯ame/vortex interaction regimes by Cuenot and Poinsot [70]. This diagram delineates the steady laminar ¯amelet
assumption (LFA) validity regions, the quenching limits and the zone where unsteady and curvature effects are important during ¯ame vortex
interaction. u
/
is the level of velocity ¯uctuations, d
i
= l
d
is the ¯ame thickness (l
d
< u7Zu
21
), t is a chemical time and r the characteristic size
of the vortices.
structure of the reaction zone may be modi®ed by the turbu-
lence. As diffusion ¯ame scales strongly depend on the local
¯ow motions, one may write:
l
d
< a
1
l
k
and ~ x
st
<
a
2
t
k
(74)
where a
1
$ 1 and a
2
# 1 (the maximum local strain rate
would correspond to l
d
= l
k
).
Then using t
t
=t
k
=

Re
_
; the DamkoÈhler number com-
paring turbulent ¯ame scale and chemical ¯ame scale is
recast as:
Da =
t
t
t
c
=
t
t
t
k
t
k
t
c
<
t
t
t
k
a
2
~ x
st
t
c
< a
2

Re Da
p
_
(75)
Constant DamkoÈhler numbers Da
p
correspond to lines of
slope 1/2 in a log±log (Da, Re) diagram. When the chemistry
is suf®ciently fast (large Da values), the ¯ame is expected to
have a laminar ¯ame structure. This condition may be
simply expressed as Da
p
$ Da
LFA
On the other hand, for
large chemical times (i.e. when Da
p
# Da
ext
), extinction
occurs. Laminar ¯ames are encountered for low Reynolds
numbers (Re , 1): Results are summarized in Fig. 12.
In a practical combustion devices, a
1
and a
2
would
evolve in space and time according to ¯ow ¯uctuations,
velocity and scalar energetic spectra. In a given burner, it
is likely that one may observe at different locations ¯amelet
behavior and strong unsteadiness, or even quenching.
As the classi®cation of premixed turbulent ¯ames, these
considerations are limited by the numerous hypothesis
necessary to derive the regimes.
6. Tools for turbulent combustion modeling
6.1. Introduction
The mean heat release rate is one of the main quantities of
practical interest that should be approximated by turbulent
combustion models. The simplest and most direct approach
is to develop the chemical rate in Taylor series as a function
of species mass fractions and temperature (Eq. (58)). This
analysis is limited by its low accuracy and by the rapidly
growing complexity of the chemistry (Section 4). It is then
concluded that the non-linear character of the problem
requires the introduction of new tools. These new tools
must be designed to describe turbulent ¯ames and have to
provide an estimation of mean production or consumption
rates of chemical species. They also need to be based on
known quantities (mean ¯ow characteristics, for example)
or on quantities that may be easily modeled or obtained from
closed balance equations. In this section, a generic descrip-
tion of the main concepts used to model turbulent combus-
tion is proposed. Relations between the various approaches
are also emphasized, but the discussion of the closure
strategy is postponed to subsequent sections.
The basic ingredients to describe turbulent ¯ames remain
the quantities introduced for laminar ¯ame analysis: the
progress variable c for premixed combustion (c = 0 in
fresh gases and c = 1 in burnt gases, see Section 3.2),
and, the mixture fraction Z for non-premixed ¯ames (Z is
a passive scalar, with Z = 0 in pure oxidizer and Z = 1 in
pure fuel, see Section 3.2). The ¯ame position would corre-
spond to values of the progress variable c lying between 0
and 1, or, to Z taking on values in the vicinity of Z = Z
st
:
Three main types of approaches are summarized in
Fig. 13:
The burning rate may be quanti®ed in terms of turbulent
mixing. When the DamkoÈhler number Da = t
t
=t
c
; com-
paring turbulent (t
t
) and chemical (t
c
) characteristic times,
is large (a common assumption in combustion modeling),
the reaction rate is limited by turbulent mixing, described in
D. Veynante, L. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 212
Fig. 12. Schematic of non-premixed turbulent combustion regimes
as function of the DamkoÈhler number Da = t
t
=t
c
(constructed from
the turbulent integral time scale t
t
and chemical time t
c
) and Re the
turbulent Reynolds number.
Fig. 11. Sketch of a non-premixed turbulent ¯ame. Z is the mixture
fraction, l
d
the diffusive thickness, l
r
the reaction zone thickness, l
t
the turbulence integral length scale.
terms of scalar dissipation rates [75]. The small scale dissi-
pation rate of species controls the mixing of the reactants
and, accordingly, plays a dominant role in combustion
modeling, even for ®nite rate chemistry.
In the geometrical analysis, the ¯ame is described as a
geometrical surface, this approach is usually linked to a
¯amelet assumption (the ¯ame is thin compared to all
¯ow scales). Following this view, scalar ®elds (c or Z) are
studied in terms of dynamics and physical properties of iso-
value surfaces de®ned as ¯ame surfaces (iso-c
p
or iso-Z
st
).
The ¯ame is then envisioned as an interface between fuel
and oxidizer (non-premixed) or between fresh and burnt
gases (premixed). A ¯ame normal analysis is derived by
focusing the attention on the structure of the reacting ¯ow
along the normal to the ¯ame surface. This leads to ¯amelet
modeling when this structure is compared to one-dimen-
sional laminar ¯ames. The density of ¯ame surface area
per unit volume is also useful to estimate the burning rate.
D. Veynante, L. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 213
Fig. 13. Three types of analysis of premixed or non-premixed turbulent ¯ames.
The statistical properties of scalar ®elds may be collected
and analyzed for any location within the ¯ow. Mean values
and correlations are then extracted via the knowledge of
one-point probability density functions (pdf). The determi-
nation of these pdfs leads to pdf modeling. A one-point
statistical analysis restricted to a particular value of the
scalar ®eld is related to the study of conditional statistics.
Conditional statistics which are obviously linked to the
geometrical analysis and to ¯ame surfaces when the con-
ditioning value is c
p
or Z
st
.
6.2. Scalar dissipation rate
In a ®rst step, the transport equation for
¯
c
//2
or
¯
Z
//2
is
derived, these ¯uctuations characterize non-homogeneities
and intermittencies. In the case of the progress variable, the
variance
¯
c
//2
is de®ned as:
r
¯
c
//2
= r (c 2 ~ c)
2
= r(
¯
c
//2
2 ~ c
2
) = rc
2
2 r ~ c
2
(76)
Starting from the balance equation for the progress vari-
able (Eq. (36)), c is decomposed into c = ~ c 1c
//
; then the
new equation is multiplied by c
//
and averaged. After
straightforward manipulations, the exact transport equation
for
¯
c
//2
reads:
2 r
¯
c
//2
2t
17( r ~ u
¯
c
// 2
) 17( r
¯
u
//
c
// 2
) = (77)
7´(rD7c
// 2
) 12c
//
7´(rD7~ c)
22 r
¯
u
//
c
//
´7~ c
.....,,.....
Production
22rD7c
//
´7c
//
.....,,.....
Dissipation
1 2 _ vc
//
..,,..
Source
In addition to the two diffusive terms 7´(rD7c
// 2
) and
2c
//
7´(rD7~ c); which are non-zero, but expected small for
large Reynolds number ¯ows (especially the second one),
two important terms are found: The ¯uctuating part of the
scalar dissipation rate 2rD7c
//
´7c
//
and a correlation _ vc
//
involving the chemical source.
In the literature, various expressions have been associated
to the terminology scalar dissipation rate (in laminar ¯ame
theory, it actually quanti®es a diffusion speed, Section 3.2).
It may include the density r, a factor 2 and be written in
term of instantaneous (c) or ¯uctuating (c
//
) values of the
concentration species. Hereafter:
r ~ x = rD7c´7c = rD7~ c´7~ c 12rD7c
//
´7~ c 1rD7c
//
´7c
//
leading to, when mean gradients are neglected:
r ~ x < rD7c
//
´7c
//
(78)
Then, r ~ x is the dissipation rate of the ¯uctuations of the
scalar ®eld.
In the simpli®ed case of homogeneous ¯ames (no ~ c or
~
Z
gradient), the time evolution of the scalar variances are
governed by:
Premixed combustion:
2 r
¯
c
// 2
dt
= 22rD7c
//
´7c
//
12 _ vc
//
Non-premixed combustion:
2 r
¯
Z
// 2
dt
= 22rD7Z
//
´7Z
//
These equations have important implications:
The scalar dissipation rate directly measures the decaying
speed of ¯uctuations via turbulent micromixing. Since the
burning rate depends on the contact between the reactants,
in any models, the scalar dissipation rate enters directly or
indirectly the expression for the mean burning rate. For
instance, when assuming very fast chemistry and a combus-
tion limited by mixing, the mean burning rate is proportional
to the scalar dissipation rate of Z or c.
Within a premixed system, turbulent mixing occurs
between fresh and burnt gases. One may then expect a
very strong coupling between mixing phenomena and
chemical reaction. This is observed in the equation for
¯
c
// 2
where, at the same time, ~ x and the chemical source _ vc
//
are
involved.
In a non-premixed ¯ame, fresh fuel and fresh oxidizer
have to be mixed at the molecular level for reacting
and the ¯ame is mainly controlled by turbulent mixing
occurring between the fresh gases. In consequence, there
is no chemical source acting on the evolution of
¯
Z
//2
:
The mixture fraction Z is sensitive to chemistry only via
density change, making the coupling between chemistry
and mixing different than in the case of premixed
combustion.
This preliminary analysis shows that dissipation rate of
scalars is a very key concept of turbulent combustion and,
directly or indirectly, x appears in any tools used to model
¯ames. The main stumbling block in turbulent combustion
modeling and bridges between the various modeling
concepts emerge through the scalar dissipation rate.
6.3. Geometrical description
The ¯ame front is here described as a geometrical entity.
This analysis is generally linked to the assumption of a
suf®ciently thin ¯ame, viewed as an interface between
fresh and burnt gases in premixed combustion or as an inter-
face between fuel and oxidizer in non-premixed situations.
Two formalisms have been proposed: ®eld equation or ¯ame
surface density concept.
6.3.1. G-®eld equation
The balance equation for the progress variable may
D. Veynante, L. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 214
be written:
2c
2t
1u´7c =
1
r
(7´(rD7c) 1 _ v) = wu7cu
or
2c
2t
1u
c
´7c = 0
(79)
where u
c
is the absolute propagation velocity of the progress
variable ®eld. This velocity is easily decomposed into the
¯ow velocity u and w the relative velocity of the iso-c
surface measured with respect to the ¯ow, leading to u
c
=
u 1wn; where n = 2(7c=u7cu) is the local normal vector to
the iso-c surface, pointing toward the fresh gases. The rela-
tive displacement speed w is given by Eq. (37).
In laminar ¯ames, a G-®eld whose level G = G
0
repre-
sents the ¯ame surface, was introduced to simulate the
propagation of fronts [76]. The `G-equation' may be written:
2G
2t
1u
c
´7G = 0 or
2G
2t
1u´7G = wu7Gu (80)
This kinematic description of premixed combustion
possesses some attractive aspects:
² The internal ¯ame front structure does not need to be
resolved on the computational mesh. Only the G-®eld,
generally much thicker than the ¯ame front, needs to be
resolved. Usually, G(x) is de®ned as the distance of the
given location x to the ¯ame front [77].
² Under the assumption of constant density (thermodiffu-
sive assumption), the G-equation may be used for low
cost direct numerical simulations. Each G iso-surface is
then related to a ¯ame front, and one may argue that a
single simulation corresponds to the computation of
several ¯ames.
In non-constant density ¯ows where thermal heat release
is included, the displacement speed w of the G-iso-surface is
affected by thermal expansion and should be corrected for
density variations, even in the case of a steady laminar ¯ame
propagating at the constant laminar ¯ame speed S
L
, de®ned
relatively to the unburnt gases. This correction is:
w =
r
u
r
w
u
(81)
where w
u
is the ¯ame displacement speed relative to the
unburnt gases of density r
u
.
A more dif®cult point is the coupling required between
the G-equation and the species or energy balance equations.
The G-equation provides a kinematic description of the
¯ame front and involves its displacement speed w. The
reactant consumption and the heat release rate are controlled
by the consumption speed S
c
:
r
u
S
c
=
_1
21
_ vdj (82)
where r
u
is the fresh gases density and j the spatial coordi-
nate along the normal direction to the ¯ame front. Of course,
w and S
c
are related but may be quite different, especially in
high ¯ame front curvature zones [78]. The displacement
speed w may also be quite different from the laminar
¯ame speed S
L
.
The coupling between the consumption speed S
c
and the
displacement speed w is a very key point in G-®eld model-
ing. Three approaches have been proposed to overcome this
dif®culty:
² Flame front tracking technique: The displacement of the
¯ame front is evaluated from the displacement speed w,
leading to an estimation of the volume of burnt gases
produced along with the thermal heat release [79,80].
Based on a purely geometric approach, this technique is
well suited to two dimensional simulations, but its exten-
sion to 3D cases may not be straightforward.
² Temperature (or energy) reconstruction: The temperature
®eld is directly estimated from the G-®eld as [81]:
T = T
u
1
Q
C
p
H(G 2G
p
) (83)
where T
u
is the temperature of unburnt gases, Q the reac-
tion heat release and H denotes the Heaviside function
(the Heaviside function is smoothed on the mesh of the
simulation). This approach does not require a balance
equation for the energy but is not applicable when heat
losses or compressibility effects (for example in an in-
ternal combustion engines) occur.
² Estimation of the heat release rate from the G-®eld: The
G-®eld is used to estimate the heat release rate to be
incorporated in the balance energy equation from a
formulation similar to Eq. (83) [82]. Accordingly, any
other effects (heat losses, compressibility) may be
included.
This formalism may be extended to turbulent ¯ames.
Averaging the progress variable Eq. (79) leads to:
2~ c
2t
1 ~ u´7~ c =
ru
r
27´( r
¯
u
//
c
//
) 1rwu7cu
u7~ cu

_

_
............,,............
S
T
u7~ cu (84)
where the turbulent ¯ame speed, S
T
, has to be modeled. The
G-equation becomes:
2
~
G
2t
1 ~ u´7
~
G =
ru
r
S
T
u7
~
Gu
The mean turbulent ¯ame brush is then located at the
points where
~
G = G
0
: The G-equation does not required
thin ¯ame elements per se. The overall turbulent ¯ame is
only viewed as a propagating surface without solving for the
internal ¯ame structure. This formalism is therefore a good
candidate for the numerical simulation of large systems
where the knowledge of the internal structure of the ¯ame
brush is not required [79]. Nevertheless, a model has to be
D. Veynante, L. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 215
supplied for S
T
, when doing so, turbulent transport and
propagation may be separated to carefully model the effect
of turbulence on w, the instantaneous displacement speed of
the premixed front [29,33].
6.3.2. Flame surface density description
The ¯ame is identi®ed as a surface and the ¯ame surface
density S is introduced, S measures the available ¯ame area
d A per unit volume d V. The mean burning rate of a species
i is then modeled as:

_ v
i
=
_
V
i
S (85)
where V
Ç
i
is the mean local burning rate per unit of ¯ame area
integrated along the normal direction to the ¯ame surface.
V
Ç
i
is related to the properties of the local ¯ame front and is
generally estimated from a prototype laminar ¯ame, incor-
porating more or less complexity. For instance, one may
consider a planar laminar ¯ame, submitted or not to a steady
strain, a laminar ¯ame where curvature effects have been
introduced, or even a laminar unsteady strained and curved
¯ame. The main advantage of this formulation, summarized
on Fig. 14, is to decouple the chemical description (V
Ç
i
) from
the ¯ame/turbulence interaction (S). The ¯ame surface is
convected, diffused, curved and strained by the velocity
®eld [17,83].
The ¯ame surface density S may be estimated either from
algebraic relations (see Section 7.4.2) or as a solution of a
balance equation. Using a phenomenological analysis, this
balance equation was ®rst proposed by Marble and
Broadwell [84] for non-premixed turbulent combustion.
More rigorous derivations were obtained from geo-
metrical considerations [17,85] and from a statistical
description [86±88] leading to an exact, but unclosed,
balance equation. The derivation using statistical tools is
now brie¯y summarized.
In premixed combustion, the ¯ame surface density S of
the iso-c
p
surface is estimated from the conditional gradient
of the progress variable c [86]:
S(c
p
) = u7cud(c 2c
p
) = u7cuuc = c
p
_ _

P(c
p
) (86)
where d(c 2c
p
) is a local measure of the probability (see
Section 6.4.3),
_
u7cuuc = c
p
_
is the conditional average of
u7cu for c = c
p
and

P(c
p
) is the probability to ®nd c = c
p
at
the given location. From this de®nition and the balance
equation for the progress variable c, an exact equation for
the ¯ame surface density S may be derived according to the
following steps [87]:
1. Derivation of an equation for u7cu from the equation for
the instantaneous progress variable c.
2. Derivation of an equation for u7cu d(c 2c)
p
by condi-
tioning the previous u7cu balance equation.
3. Averaging the u7cu d (c 2c)
p
balance equation leading
to an exact equation for the ¯ame surface density S =
u7cud(c 2c
p
):
This derivation is valid for any iso-scalar surface (c
p
can
take any values between zero and unity) and S(c
p
; x; t) is also
called a surface density function, the derivation of its balance
equation is quite tedious [87] and similar to the derivation of
a balance equation for the probability density function
(Section 6.4.3), details are not given here. Two equivalent
forms of the progress variable equation may be used:
² A classical reaction/diffusion formulation:
2c
2t
1u´7c =
1
r
[7´(rD7c) 1 _ v] (87)
D. Veynante, L. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 216
Fig. 14. Flame surface density modeling.
² A propagative form:
2c
2t
1u´7c = wu7cu (88)
where the displacement speed w of the ¯ame front rela-
tively to the ¯ow was introduced (Eq. (37)). This equa-
tion corresponds to the G-equation [77] (Section 6.3.1).
Two different types of equation for S are associated to
these two formulations of the progress variable balance
equation.
² A reaction/diffusion formulation:
2S
2t
17´(kul
s
S) = k7´u 2nn : 7ul
s
S
2
_
1
u7cu
2
2n
_
1
r
[7´(rD7c) 1 _ v]
__
s
S
2
2
2c
p
__
1
r
[7´(rD7c) 1 _ v]
_
s
S
_
(89)
² A propagative formulation:
2S
2t
17´(kul
s
S)
= k7´u 2nn : 7ul
s
S 27´ kwnl
s
S
_ _
1kw7´nl
s
S
(90)
where n is the unit vector normal to the c = c
p
surface and
pointing towards the fresh gases (n = 27c=u7cu): 7´n corre-
sponds to the ¯ame front curvature. 2=2n = n´7 is a deriva-
tive normal to the ¯ame front. 2/2c
p
is a derivative in the
sample space c
p
. The surface average of Q, kQl
s
, is de®ned
as:
kQl
s
=
Qu7cud(c 2c
p
)
u7cud(c 2c
p
)
=
_
Qu7cu c } = c
p
_
_
u7cu c } = c
p
_ (91)
Here the notation kQl
s
implicitly indicates that the mean
is taken for c = c
p
; and kQl
s
is a function of c
p
.
The propagative formulation is often written in term of
total stretch A
c
p
of the iso-c
p
surface
1
S
2S
2t
17´(ku 1wnl
s
S)
_ _
= A
c
p
= k 7´u 2nn : 7u
......,,......
tangential strain rate
1 w7´n
,....,
Curvature
l
s
(92)
The LHS terms in the two balance Eqs. (89) and (90) corre-
spond to unsteady effects and to the ¯ame surface convec-
tion. The ®rst term in the RHS expresses the action of the
tangential strain rate on the ¯ame surface. The last two terms
in Eq. (89) describe respectively reaction/diffusion effects
along the ¯ame normal direction and ¯uxes in the sample
space c
p
. The last two terms in the RHS of the propagative
Eq. (90) correspond to front convection due to a normal
propagation and combined propagation/curvature effects.
These two formulations of the S balance equation induce
the following comments:
² The two balance Eqs. (89) and (90) are mathematically
strictly equivalent but the problem is not expressed in the
same way. In the propagative form (Eq. (90)), many
effects are incorporated in the ¯ame front propagation
speed, w, that may differ from the laminar ¯ame speed
S
L
[78]. On the other hand, a ¯ux term in the sample space
is found in the reaction/diffusion derivation. In Eq. (90)
the imbalance between diffusion and reaction is cast in
the form of the propagation velocity w, Eq. (89) recalls
that transfer phenomena between iso-surfaces are
involved in this propagation.
² The derivation of the balance Eqs. (89) and (90) impli-
citly forgets some mathematical singularities that may
become important in particular situations. For example,
the normal vector n is assumed to be well de®ned and
having a ®nite derivative. This may not be the case when
two close ¯ame fronts interacts.
² In combustion modeling, a single iso-c
p
surface is
assumed to correspond to the ¯ame front. This is a priori
true when the ¯ame is in®nitely thin, assuming that the
local reaction rate per unit ¯ame area, V
Ç
i
, describes
whether the ¯ame is actually burning or not. However
in real turbulent ¯ames, the local burning zone is not
in®nitely thin and the ¯ame front, identi®ed as the
location of the maximum reaction, may differ from the
c
p
iso-surface. This may be for instance the case when
analyzing data of direct numerical simulations where the
¯ame front has to be resolved on the computational grid.
² Using the Favre decomposition (u = ~ u 1u
//
); the
convection ¯ux term may be decomposed into mean
and turbulent components:
kul
s
S = ~ uS 1ku
//
l
s
S (93)
² The strain rate term is also split into a contribution due to
the mean ¯ow and a contribution due to turbulent velo-
city ¯uctuations:
k7´u 2nn : 7ul
s
S = (7´ ~ u 2knnl
s
: 7~ ul
s
........,,........
S
A
T
1k7´u
//
2nn : 7~ u)S
........,,........
a
T
(94)
All these de®nitions may be extended to ¯ame fronts which
are not in®nitely thin. Integrating Eq. (86) across iso-surface
levels leads to:
_1
0
S(c
p
)dc
p
=
_1
0
_
u7cuuc = c
p
_

P(c
p
)dc
p
= u7cu (95)
D. Veynante, L. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 217
that is a direct estimation of the inverse of the mean local
¯ame thickness d (d = (1=u7cu)
21
) and may be viewed as a
`generalized ¯ame surface density', u7cu follows a balance
equation similar to the S(c
p
) balance Eq. (90), where
surface averages kQl
s
are replaced by `generalized surface
averages' kQl
s
which do not depend on c
p
:
kQl
s
=
1
u7cu
_1
0
kQl
s
S(c
p
)dc
p
(96)
In ¯ame surface density models, under a ¯amelet assump-
tion, for any values of c
p
, the ¯ame surface is assumed to
behave such as S(c
p
) < u7cu = S:
All balance equations remain formally the same but have
to be closed. The same modeling issues emerge using the G-
equation formalism [89]. One needs to develop closures for
the turbulent ¯ux of ¯ame surface, for the propagation vel-
ocity of the surface, as well as for the effects of curvature
and strain rate.
6.3.3. Flame wrinkling description
The previous formalism may be recast in term of ¯ame
surface wrinkling. The basic idea is to introduce the ratio
J(c
p
) of the ¯ame surface to its projection in the direction of
propagation n
p
:
J(c
p
) =
S(c
p
)
n
p
´(nu7cud(c 2c
p
))
=
_
u7cuuc = c
p
_

P(c
p
)
n
p
´
_
nu7cud(c 2c
p
)
_
=
_
u7cuuc = c
p
_
n
p
´
_
nu7cuuc = c
p
_ =
1
n
p
´knl
s
(97)
where n and n
p
are the unit vectors normal to the instan-
taneous ¯ame front and to the mean propagating direction
respectively. These vectors are chosen pointing towards the
fresh gases and are given by:
n = 2
7c
u7cu
; n
p
= 2
_
7cuc = c
p
_
_
7cuc = c
p
_ _
_
_
_
_
_
(98)
Then:
J(c
p
) =
_
u7cuuc = c
p
_
_
7cuc = c
p
_ _
_
_
_
_
_
=
S(c
p
)
_
7cuc = c
p
_ _
_
_
_
_
_

P(c
p
)
(99)
As in Section 6.3.2, a generalized ¯ame surface wrinkling,

J; is introduced:

J =
_1
0
S(c
p
)dc
p
_1
0
_
7cuc = c
p
_ _
_
_
_
_
_

P(c
p
)dc
p
=
u7cu
u7 cu
=

S
u7 cu
(100)
For an in®nitely thin ¯ame front, J(c
p
) =

J for any c
p
value.
Flame surface density and ¯ame wrinkling factor are
closely related. Balance equations may also be derived
and closed for J(c
p
) or

J: These equations are considerably
more complicated than ¯ame surface density balance equa-
tions, but the wrinkling factor may be more convenient for
initial and/or boundary conditions (

J $ 1 everywhere).
This approach has been explored by Weller et al. [90,91].
6.4. Statistical approaches: probability density function
6.4.1. Introduction
Predictions of radicals and intermediate species such as
OH, or pollutants like CO, require the description of the
¯ame front internal structure, for intermediate states
between fresh and burnt gases in premixed ¯ames or
between fuel and oxidizer in non-premixed ¯ames. Even
though G-®eld and density of ¯ame surface S need some
statistical treatments, they are initially based on a geo-
metrical view describing the ¯ame as a thin interface. In
probability density function methods, one wishes to relax
this assumption by focussing on the statistical properties of
intermediate states within the ¯ame front.
The probability density function (pdf)

P(Y
p
; x; t) quanti-
®es the probability to ®nd, for a given location x and a time t,
a variable Y (mass fraction, temperature, velocity, etc.)
within the range [Y
p
2DY=2; Y
p
1DY=2]: This probability
is equal to

P(Y
p
; x; t)DY [92±96]. The pdf satis®es the
following simple relations:
_
Y

P(Y
p
; x; t)dY
p
= 1
_
Y

P(Y
p
; x; t)dY
p
=

Y(x; t)
_
Y
(Y
p
2

Y)
2

P(Y
p
; x; t)dY
p
= Y
/2
(x; t)
where Y
p
is the sample space variable corresponding to the
random variable Y. When more than one variable is required
to capture the ¯ame structure, a joint probability density
function

P(Y
p
1
; ¼; Y
p
N
; x; t) is introduced [97]. The mean
burning rate (or any mean quantity) is then estimated as:
_ v
Y
1
(x; t)
=
_
Y
1
¼
_
Y
N
_ v
Y
1
(Y
p
1
; ¼; Y
p
N
)

P(Y
p
1
; ¼; Y
p
N
; x; t)dY
p
1
¼dY
p
N
(101)
Conditional statistics have been used to de®ned the ¯ame
surface density (Section 6.3.2), these conditional means are
also useful in a pdf context. Consider a non-premixed ¯ame
where the chemistry is reduced to a single step reaction, and
where radiative heat losses are neglected. Laminar combus-
tion would be parameterized with two variables, for
example, fuel mass fraction Y
F
and mixture fraction Z (see
Section 3.2). The turbulent ¯ame is then fully described by
the joint pdf of mixture fraction and fuel mass fraction,

P(Y
p
F
; Z
p
; x; t): For such ¯ames, it is interesting to focus on
the statistical properties of the fuel mass fraction Y
F
for a
given value of the mixture fraction Z (Section 3.2 and
Fig. 5).The conditional pdf

P
c
(Y
p
F
uZ
p
; x; t) is introduced
D. Veynante, L. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 218
and de®ned for a given value of Z
p
as:

P(Y
p
F
; Z
p
; x; t) =

P
c
(Y
p
F
uZ
p
; x; t)

P(Z
p
; x; t)
The conditional mean is readily de®ned from:
_
Y
F
uZ(x; t) = Z
p
_
=
_1
0
Y
p
F

P
c
(Y
p
F
uZ
p
; x; t)dY
p
F
In this decomposition,

P(Z
p
; x; t) describes the statistical
properties of fuel/air mixing, whereas

P
c
(Y
p
F
uZ
p
; x; t) and
_
Y
F
uZ(x; t) = Z
p
_
are linked to the internal structure of the
¯ame front.
Two main directions may be chosen to built numerical
models from pdf:
² To presume the pdf shape from available mean quantities.
² To solve a balance equation for the pdf.
6.4.2. Presumed probability density functions
The simplest approach to the mixing between fuel and
oxidizer in a non-premixed ¯ame is to presume the shape
of the pdf
~
P(Z
p
; x; t); usually with a Beta function [72]:
~
P Z
p
; x; t
_ _
=
(Z
p
)
a21
1 2Z
p
_ _
b21
_1
0
(Z
1
)
a21
1 2Z
1
_ _
b21
dZ
1
This presumed pdf should reproduce the mean of the
mixture fraction
~
Z and its variance
¯
Z
//2
:
~
Z =
_1
0
Z
p
~
P Z
p
; x; t
_ _
dZ
p
;
¯
Z
//2
=
_1
0
Z
p
2
~
Z
_ _
2
~
P Z
p
; x; t
_ _
dZ
p
and using the relation [98]:
_1
0
(Z
p
)
n
~
P Z
p
; x; t
_ _
dZ
p
=
a(a 11)¼(a 1(n 21))
(a 1b)(a 1b 11)¼(a 1b 1(n 21))
The two-parameters a and b are determined as:
a =
~
Z
~
Z(1 2
~
Z)
¯
Z
//2
21
_ _
$ 0; b = a
1
~
Z
21
_ _
$ 0
This technique requires the solving of a balance equation for
the mean and the variance of Z (Section 9.2).
¯
Z
//2
vanishes
when reactants are perfectly mixed and reaches its maxi-
mum value,
~
Z
_
1 2
~
Z
_
; when fuel and oxidizer are comple-
tely segregated (Section 5.3), then the pdf takes the formof a
double peak function, with peaks located at Z = 0 and Z = 1:
This approach is also used in premixed ¯ames replacing the
mixture fraction Z by the progress variable c [99].
6.4.3. Pdf balance equation
The pdf balance equation is ®rst written for the progress
variable c. The time evolution of a probability density func-
tion is easily derived by expressing the pdf as the average of
a function d(c
p
2c(x; t)) de®ned as [100]:
d c
p
2c(x; t)
_ _
= 1=Dc
p
if c
p
2Dc
p
=2 , c , c
p
1Dc
p
=2
d(c
p
2c(x; t)) = 0 otherwise
By de®nition:

P(c
p
; x; t) = d(c
p
2c(x; t)) (102)
The time evolution of the reactive species c(x; t) is given by:
2c
2t
= 2u´7c 1
1
r
[7´(rD7c(x; t)) 1 _ v] (103)
and d(c
p
2c(x; t)) satis®es:
2
2C
[d(c
p
2c(x; t))] =
2
2c
[d(c
p
2c(x; t))]
2c(x; t)
2C
= 2
2
2c
p
[d(c
p
2c(x; t))]
2c(x; t)
2C
(104)
2
2
2C
2
[d(c
p
2c(x; t))]
= 2
2
2c
p
[d(c
p
2c(x; t))]
2
2
c(x; t)
2C
2
1
2
2
2c
p2
[d(c
p
2c(x; t))]
×
_
2c(x; t)
2C
_
2
(105)
where C can either be time or any spatial coordinates. These
relations (104) and (105) and Eq. (102) are key relations,
useful to obtain all equations discussed in this section.
After simple manipulations combining Eqs. (102) and
(103) with Eq. (104) the transport equation for the pdf
may be written:
2
2t
[

P(c
p
; x; t)] = 2
2
2c
p
2c(x; t)
2t
uc(x; t) = c
p
_ _

P(c
p
; x; t)
_ _
(106)
where conditional averaging
Q(c)d(c
p
2c(x; t)) =
_
Q(c)uc(x; t) = c
p
_

P(c
p
; x; t)
is introduced.
Eq. (106) shows that the time evolution of the pdf is
controlled by a ¯ux in the sample space c
p
. This ¯ux is
driven by a velocity equal to the conditional mean of the
time evolution of the progress variable c. In other words,
when the mean of (2c(x; t)=2t) is non-zero for the value c =
c
p
; the probability of ®nding the occurrence c = c
p
is modi-
®ed. Because the probability to ®nd all the possible values is
constant and equal to unity:
_1
0

P(c
p
; x; t)dc
p
= 1
D. Veynante, L. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 219
an increase or a decrease of the density of probability for
c = c
p
; implies a modi®cation of this density for other
values of c
p
, justifying the convective term in sample
space. This term insures that the density of probability is
transported from point to point in the sample space c
p
in a
conservative manner. The ¯ux depends on the conditional
mean of the time evolution of the progress variable given by
Eq. (103):
2c
2t
uc(x; t) = c
p
_ _
= 2u´7cuc(x; t) = c
p
_ _
1
1
r
[7´(rD7c(x; t))]uc(x; t) = c
p
_ _
1 _ vuc(x; t) = c
p
_ _
(107)
In Eq. (107), the conditional value of the source term is a
function of c de®ned in one-point and is exactly known
since:
_ v(c)uc(x; t) = c
p
_ _
= _ v(c
p
)
The main advantage of pdfs in turbulent combustion lies in
this availability to deal with chemistry, any term de®ned in
one-point (as chemical source) is closed. Nonetheless, this
advantage is offset by the fact that reactants are brought to
the reaction zone by diffusion, and the conditional mean of
2c(x; t)=2t also includes a conditional diffusive term:
1
r
(7´(rD7c))uc(x; t) = c
p
_ _
(108)
named the micromixing term and remaining unclosed (as
any term involving spatial derivatives). This micromixing
term may be rewritten with the scalar dissipation rate,
x = Du7cu
2
; using Eq. (102) with Eq. (105) and assuming
rD < cst :
2
2c
p
D7
2
cuc(x; t) = c
p
_ _

P(c
p
; x; t)
_ _
= 2D7
2

P(c
p
; x; t) 1
2
2
2c
p2
xuc(x; t) = c
p
_ _

P(c
p
; x; t)
_ _
The ®rst term in the RHS, D7
2

P(c
p
; x; t) is usually neg-
ligible compared to the transport due to velocity ¯uctua-
tions. The total dissipation rate, x is recovered as:
x =
_1
0
xuc(x; t) = c
p
_ _

P(c
p
; x; t)dc
p
Using diffusion or scalar dissipation rate, the probability
density function balance equation may be organized in
two different forms:
² In terms of molecular diffusion:
2
2t
[

P(c
p
; x; t)]
= 2
2
2c
p
___
2u´7c 1
1
r
7´(rD7c)uc(x; t) = c
p
_
1 _ v(c
p
)
_

P(c
p
; x; t)
_
(109)
² In terms of scalar dissipation rate:
2
2t
[

P(c
p
; x; t)]
= 2
2
2c
p
2u´7cuc(x; t) = c
p
_ _
1 _ v(c
p
)
_ _

P(c
p
; x; t)
_ _
2
2
2
2c
p2
xuc(x; t) = c
p
_ _

P(c
p
; x; t)
_ _
The convective term may be split into mean,
u´7

P(c
p
; x; t)
and ¯uctuating components. Using an eddy viscosity model,
the ¯uctuating part becomes:
2n
t
7

P(c
p
; x; t)
leading to the pdf balance equation:
2
2t
[

P(c
p
; x; t)] 1 u´7

P(c
p
; x; t)
= n
t
7

P(c
p
; x; t) 2
2
2c
p
[ _ v(c
p
)

P(c
p
; x; t)]
2
2
2
2c
p2
xuc(x; t) = c
p
_ _

P(c
p
; x; t)
_ _
(110)
Weighted, or Favre, averages are also introduced in pdfs, for
instance when r = r(c) :
r
~
P(c
p
; x; t) = r(c
p
)d(c(x; t) 2c
p
) = r(c
p
)

P(c
p
; x; t)
When more than one species is taken into account, the pdf
balance equation is derived using the same formalism with
r
~
P(Y
p
1
; ¼; Y
p
N
) = r(Y
1
; ¼; Y
p
N
)d(Y
1
2Y
p
1
)¼d(Y
N
2Y
p
N
) [93]:
r
2
2t
~
P(Y
p
1
; ¼Y
p
N
; x; t)
= 2 r

N
i=1
2
2Y
p
i
___
2u´7Y
i
uY(x; t) = Y
p
_
1 _ v
p
i
_
×
~
P
_
Y
p
1
; ¼; Y
p
N
; x; t
__
2 r

N
i=1

N
j=1
2
2Y
p
i
2
2Y
p
j
__
D
2Y
i
2x
k
2Y
j
2x
k
uY(x; t) = Y
p
_
×
~
P
_
Y
p
1
; ¼; Y
p
N
; x; t
_
_
(111)
D. Veynante, L. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 220
The same terms are identi®ed on the RHS: convection by the
conditional velocity and by the chemical source, and micro-
mixing. As was done in Eq. (110), the convective term
in physical space can be decomposed into mean and
¯uctuating parts.
6.4.4. Joint velocity/concentrations pdf
To avoid the gradient transport assumption for the
turbulent ¯ux, (u
/
´7cuc(x; t) = c
p
); the joint velocity/
concentration pdf is introduced. Once this joint pdf is
known, turbulence models, such as k±1, are, a priori, no
longer required for the mean ¯ow. However, an equation
for 1 is still needed to estimate a characteristic mixing time,
except when the frequency of mixing is also included in the
joint pdf [101]. The transport equation for this joint compo-
sition/velocity pdf is given below for the progress variable c,
where the RHS contains the unclosed terms.
2
2t
[

P(u
p
; c
p
; x; t)] 1u
p
´7

P(u
p
; c
p
; x; t)
1 n7
2
u
i
2
1
r
2 p
2x
i
_ _
2
2u
p
i
[

P(u
p
; c
p
; x; t)]
1
2
2c
p
[ _ v(c
p
)

P(u
p
; c
p
; x; t)]
=
2
2u
p
i
1
r
2p
/
2x
i
_
_
_
_
u = u
p
; c = c
p
_ _

P(u
p
; c
p
; x; t)
_ _
....................,,....................
Pressure fluctuations
2
2
2u
p
i
n7
2
u
/
i
uu = u
p
; c = c
p
_ _

P(u
p
; c
p
; x; t)
_ _
...................,,...................
Viscous dissipation
2
2
2c
p
D7
2
cuu = u
p
; c = c
p
_ _

P(u
p
; c
p
; x; t)
_ _
...................,,...................
Molecular diffusion
(112)
The LHS terms are closed and represent respectively accu-
mulation, convection in physical space by the random vel-
ocity ®eld (incorporating turbulent transport), convection of
the pdf in velocity space, here the convective velocity is the
mean of the viscous dissipation and the mean pressure gradi-
ent, and ®nally the closed chemical source. The unclosed
terms (RHS) are the pressure ¯uctuations, the ¯uctuating
part of the viscous dissipation and micromixing. All these
phenomena remain to be closed.
6.4.5. Conditional moment closure (CMC)
Conditional moment closure modeling was ®rst proposed
in Refs. [102,103]. As with the pdf, the idea is to focus on
particular states between fresh gases and fully burnt product
in premixed ¯ames, or, between fuel and oxidizer in non-
premixed combustion. However, here only conditional
moments (rY
i
uc = c
p
) are considered. In premixed ¯ames,
the conditional quantity is the progress variable c, whereas
for non-premixed combustion, the mixture fraction is used.
In premixed ¯ames, the mean value,
~
Y
i
of Y
i
may be esti-
mated as:
r
~
Y
i
=
_1
0
rY
i
uc = c
p
_ _

P(c
p
; x; t)dc
p
(113)
One may solve a balance equation for the conditional quan-
tities Q
i
(c
p
) de®ned as:
Q
i
(c
p
) =
rY
i
uc = c
p
_ _
ruc = c
p
_ _
This balance equation is [104,105]:
ruc = c
p
_ _
2Q
i
2t
= 2 ru
i
uc = c
p
_ _
2Q
i
2x
i
1 rxuc = c
p
_ _
2
2
Q
i
2c
p2
1 _ v
i
uc = c
p
_ _
1E
Q
i
1E
Y
i
(114)
The two last terms of Eq. (114) are usually neglected,
E
Q
i
appears from molecular diffusion along with differ-
ential diffusion effects across the iso-c surface, E
Y
i
represents the effects of turbulent ¯uctuations on the
deviation from the conditional mean. The three ®rst
terms on the right hand side are unclosed, they describe
convective transport, micromixing (x enters this term) and
chemical source. Closures for the conditional values of the
scalar dissipation rate, but also for the conditional value of
the chemical source of Y
i
, calculated for a given value of the
progress variable c
p
or the mixture fraction Z, are required
[106,107]. One equation has to be solved for each value of
c
p
retained. The number of these values is determined from
the accuracy required to estimate both the mean from Eq.
(113) and the second order derivative in the sample space
(i.e. 2
2
/2c
p2
) found in Eq. (114). On the other hand, the
probability density function entering expression (113),

P(c
p
; x; t) is presumed.
CMC may also be viewed as a multi-surface description,
any conditional quantity
_
rY
i
uc = c
p
_
corresponding to the
conditional average of Y
i
along the iso-surface c = c
p
:
6.5. Similarities and links between the tools
Major links between the tools used in turbulent combus-
tion modeling are now developed. Without loss of the
generic character of the discussion, we consider the case
of a turbulent premixed ¯ame represented with a progress
variable c. To describe this turbulent ¯ame, three quantities
are useful:
² The scalar dissipation rate of the progress variable
r ~ x = rD7c´7c.
² The pdf of the progress variable

P(c
p
; x; t):
² The ¯ame surface density S or the mean ®eld

G:
Simple links exist between these quantities:
² The conditional value of the scalar dissipation rate enters
D. Veynante, L. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 221
the pdf transport equation (Eq. (110)), therefore there is a
direct connection between

P(c
p
; x; t) and ~ x:
² The surface density function S(c
p
; x; t); or ¯ame surface,
is related to the pdf via the conditional value of u7cu; S =
_
u7cuuc = c
p
_

P(c
p
) (Eq. (86)).
Since x is proportional to u7cu; the ¯ame surface S, the
pdf

P(c
p
) and the dissipation rate ~ x are very strongly
related. Using the joint pdf of c and x, the ¯ame surface
density may be written:
S(c
p
; x; t) =

x
D
_
uc = c
p
_ _

P(c
p
; x; t)
=
_
x

x
p
D
_

P(c
p
; x
p
; x; t)dx
p
(115)
and characteristic length scales d
c
=

D=x
_
of the iso-c
distribution are embedded within S(c
p
).
Combining Eq. (86) and Eq. (91) with Eq. (96), the mean
c-scalar dissipation rate is also a function of surface
densities:
r ~ x = rDu7cu
2
=
_1
0
krDu7cul
s
S(c
p
)dc
p
= krDu7cul
s
u7cu
(116)
where the generalized surface average kQl
s
is de®ned by
Eq. (96). Relations between ¯ame surface densities and
scalar dissipation rates were anticipated by Borghi [108].
In premixed combustion, using a G-®eld equation, the
¯ame front is identi®ed to a given level G = G
0
[29].
The ¯ame surface density is then:
S(G
0
) = u7GuuG = G
0
_ _

P(G
0
) (117)
Hence, previous relations may be recast in terms of the G-
equation.
The CMC formalism (see Section 6.4.5) may be re-
organized in term of ¯ame surface density:
r
~
Y
i
=
_1
0
rY
i
uc = c
p
_ _

P(c
p
; x; t)dc
p
=
_1
0
rY
i
u7cu
_ _
s
S(c
p
)dc
p
(118)
where the conditional mean Q
i
(c
p
) may be written:
Q
i
(c
p
) =
rY
i
uc = c
p
_ _
ruc = c
p
_ _
=
krY
i
=u7cul
s
kr=u7cul
s
(119)
and appears as directly related to c = c
p
surface averaged
quantities.
The links between the combustion modeling tools are
summarized in Table 2. The mean burning rate is given by:

_ v =
_1
0
_ v(c
p
)

P(c
p
)dc
p
(120)
Using relations (86) and (91) and Eq. (116), this expression
becomes:

_ v =
_1
0
_ vuc = c
p
_ _

P(c
p
)dc
p
=
_1
0
_ v
u7cu
_ _
s
S(c
p
)dc
p
=
_ v
u7cu
_ _
s
u7cu =
_ v

x=D
_
_ _
s
S =
1
krDu7cul
s
_ v
u7cu
_ _
s
r ~ x
(121)
Models based on probability density functions, conditional
means, ¯ame surface density function and generalized ¯ame
surface density are then related via the scalar dissipation rate.
These expressions are extended to burning rate depending
on many species using multi-dimensional pdfs and con-
ditional averaging. When the local reaction rate is a function
of various quantities (species mass fractions, temperature,
etc.), Y
i
and a sampling scalar c:

_ v =
_
Y
1
¼
_
Y
N
_1
0
_ v
i
(Y
p
1
; ¼; Y
p
N
; c
p
)

P(Y
p
1
; ¼; Y
p
N
; c
p
)dY
p
1
; ¼; dY
p
N
dc
p
=
_1
0
_
Y
1
¼
_
Y
N
_ v
i
(Y
p
1
; ¼; Y
p
N
; c
p
)

P
c
(Y
p
1
; ¼; Y
p
N
uc
p
)dY
p
1
; ¼; dY
p
N
_ _
..........................,,..........................
_ v;(Y
1
;¼;Y
N
;c)uc=c
p
_ _

P(c
p
)dc
p
(122)
decomposing the joint-pdf as

P(Y
p
1
; ¼; Y
p
N
; c
p
) =

P
c
(Y
p
1
; ¼; Y
p
N
uc
p
)

P(c
p
): Note that such a relation may be
used when in premixed ¯ames the progress variable, based
D. Veynante, L. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 222
Table 2
Exact relations between mean scalar dissipation rate, ~ x, probability density function,

P(c
p
), or surface density, S(c
p
), of iso-surface c = c
p
and
generalized ¯ame surface density S = u7cu: Connections with the G-equation are readily obtained with Eq. (117). kQl
s
is a surface average (Eq.
(91)), kQl
s
corresponds to generalized surface average and is de®ned in Eq. (96). c is the conditional variable (progress variable in premixed
¯ames, mixture fraction in non-premixed combustion)
Scalar dissipation rate r ~ x Probability density function

P(c
p
)
Flame surface density S(c
p
)
r ~ x ±
_1
0
_
rDu7cu
2
uc = c
p
_

P(c
p
)dc
p
_1
0
krDu7cul
s
S(c
p
)dc
p

P(c
p
)
_
xuc = c
p
_
via PDF Eq: ± S(c
p
)=
_
u7cuuc = c
p
_
S = u7cu
r ~ x
krDu7cul
s
_1
0
_
u7cuuc
p
_

P(c
p
)dc
p
_1
0
S(c
p
)dc
p
on reactant mass fractions, and the temperature are indepen-
dent (compressibility effects, heat losses, non-unity Lewis
numbers, etc.).
The fundamentals of turbulent combustion modeling
clearly rely on pdf, ¯ame surface density, G-®eld and scalar
dissipation rate concepts. The previous relations may be
used to carefully compare the proposed closure schemes
and Table 3 summarizes the tools and their related modeling
issues. Various expressions for mean reaction rates are
displayed in Table 4. Major differences between the various
approaches only appear when closing the unknown quanti-
ties, but at the light of these relations, many closures are
essentially equivalent.
7. Reynolds-averaged models for turbulent premixed
combustion
7.1. Turbulent ¯ame speed
Turbulent premixed ¯ames may be described in terms of a
global turbulent ¯ame speed S
T
. From experimental data
[109,110] or theoretical analysis (Renormalization group
theory [111]), the following expression has been proposed:
S
T
S
L
= 1 1a
u
/
S
L
_ _
n
(123)
where a and n are two model constants of the order of unity.
u' is the turbulent velocity (i.e the RMS velocity).
Unfortunately, the turbulent ¯ame speed S
T
is not a fully
well de®ned quantity [112]. Experimental data exhibit a
large scatter because they depend on various parameters
(chemistry characteristics, turbulence scales, ¯ow geometry,
etc.). While this global approach is not particularly well suited
to close Favre averaged transport equations, it may be of
interest in the context of Large Eddy Simulation [79,113].
7.2. Eddy-Break-Up model
Devised in Ref. [114], this model is based on a phenom-
enological analysis of turbulent combustion assuming high
D. Veynante, L. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 223
Table 3
Tools for turbulent combustion modeling
Description Tools Modeling issues
Geometrical G-®eld with G = G
p
at the ¯ame
2
~
G=2t 1 ~ u´7
~
G = (r
u
= r)S
T
u7
~
Gu
Propagation speed S
T
Flame surface S
Algebraic closure or transport equation

_ v
i
= Combustion
_
V
i
S
Turbulence
Total stretch = curvature 1strain rate
Small scales Scalar dissipation rate, r ~ x = rDu7Yu
2
Fast chemistry
~
_ v < ~ x
Algebraic closure or transport equation Provide the rate of micromixing
Statistical Probability density function
~
P(Y
p
F
; Z
p
; x; t) Micromixing
(1) Presumed 1¯amelets (1) Strategy to generate the pdf
(2) Transport equation (2) Solve 2
~
P=2t = ¼
Conditional mean, CMC, presumed PDF
_
Y
F
uZ(x; t) = Z
p
_
=
_
1
0
Y
p
F

P
c
(Y
p
F
uZ
p
; x; t)dY
p
F
Micromixing and conditional source
Fundamental links: S(x; t) =
_
u7cuuc = c
p
_

P(c
p
; x; t) and r ~ x = krDu7cul
s
u7cu
Table 4
Exact expressions for the averaged reaction rate as a function of the mean scalar dissipation, ~ x; probability density function,

P(c
p
) or surface
density, S(c
p
) of iso-surface c = c
p
: Connections with the G-equation are readily obtained with Eq. (117). kQl
s
is a surface average (Eq. (91)),
kQl
s
corresponds to generalized surface average and is de®ned in Eq. (96)
Tools Averaged reaction rate
Scalar dissipation r
_
1
0
_
_ v
u7cu
_
s
S(c
p
)dc
p
_
1
0
krDu7cul
s
S(c
p
)dc
p
~ x = r
_
_ v
u7cu
_
s
krDu7cul
s
~ x
Probability density function
_
1
0
_ v(c
p
)

P(c
p
)dc
p
Flame surface density
_
1
0
_
_ v
u7cu
_
s
S(c
p
)dc
p
=
_
_ v
u7cu
_
s
u7cu
Reynolds (Re @ 1) and DamkoÈhler (Da @ 1) numbers. The
reaction zone is viewed as a collection of fresh and burnt
gases pockets. Following the Kolmogorov cascade, turbu-
lence leads to a break down of fresh gases structures.
Accordingly, the mean reaction rate is mainly controlled
by the turbulent mixing time t
t
. When oxidizer is in excess,
the mean reaction rate is expressed as:

_ v
F
= 2C
EBU
r

¯
Y
//2
F
_
t
t
(124)
where Y
//
F
denotes the fuel mass fraction ¯uctuations and
C
EBU
is a model constant of the order of unity. The turbulent
mixing time, t
t
is estimated from the turbulence kinetic
energy k and its dissipation rate 1 according to:
t
t
=
k
1
as an approximation of the characteristic time of the integral
length scales of the turbulent ¯ow ®eld.
The reaction rate may be recast in terms of progress vari-
able, c, as:

_ v = 2C
EBU
r

¯
c
//2
_
t
t
(125)
Mass fraction ¯uctuations
¯
Y
//2
F
(or progress variable ¯uctua-
tions
¯
c
//2
) must be modeled and may be estimated from a
balance equation (see Eq. (77)). Assuming an in®nitely thin
¯ame front (i.e. c = 0 or c = 1),
¯
c
//2
is easily estimated
because c
2
= c :
r
¯
c
//2
= r(c 2 ~ c)
2
= r(
`
c
2
2 ~ c
2
) = r ~ c(1 2 ~ c) (126)
The square root has been introduced for dimensional reasons
in Eqs. (124) and (125) but, unfortunately, Eqs. (125) and
(126) lead to inconsistencies because the ~ c derivative of

_ v;
d

_ v=d~ c; is in®nite both when ~ c = 0 and when ~ c = 1 (Borghi,
1999, private communication). Then, a corrected version of
the Eddy-Break-Up model, without the square root, is used
for practical simulations:

_ v = C
EBU
r
1
k
~ c(1 2 ~ c) (127)
or, in terms of fuel mass fraction:

_ v
F
= 2C
EBU
r
1
k
~
Y
F
Y
0
F
1 2
~
Y
F
Y
0
F
_ _
(128)
where Y
0
F
is the initial fuel mass fraction in the reactant
stream, assuming excess of oxidizer.
The EBU model was found attractive because the reaction
rate is simply written as a function of known quantities
without any additional transport equation and is available
in most commercial CFD codes. The modeled reaction rate
does not depend on chemical characteristics and assumes a
homogeneous and isotropic turbulence. Some adjustments
of the model constant C
EBU
have been proposed to mimic
chemical features [115]. Eddy-Break-Up modeling tends to
overestimate the reaction rate, especially in highly strained
regions, where the ratio 1/k is large (¯ame-holder wakes,
walls, etc.).
7.3. Bray±Moss±Libby model
7.3.1. Introduction
Known under the initials of its authors, Bray, Moss and
Libby, or, from the involved physical hypothesis, BiModal
Limit, this model, ®rst proposed in 1977 [116], has been the
subject of a large amount of work leading to many improve-
ments (see papers by Bray, Moss and Libby, and then by
Bray, Champion and Libby). Combining a statistical
approach using probability density functions and a physical
analysis, this model has evidenced some special features of
turbulent premixed combustion (counter-gradient turbulent
transport, ¯ame turbulence generation, etc.). The presenta-
tion is mainly limited here to basic concepts of the Bray±
Moss±Libby (BML) formulation.
A one-step, irreversible chemical reaction between two
reacting species, fresh gases (R) and combustion products
(P) is considered:
R - P
Classical assumptions are made to simplify the formula-
tion: perfect gases, incompressible ¯ows, constant chemical
properties, unity Lewis numbers, etc. A progress variable, c,
of the chemical reaction is introduced where c = 0 in fresh
gases and c = 1 in fully burnt gases, as described in Section
3.1.
The basic idea of the BML formulation is to presume the
probability density function of the progress variable c at a
given location (x; t) as a sum of fresh, fully burnt and burn-
ing gases contributions (Fig. 15):

P(c
p
; x; t) = a(x; t)d(c
p
)
....,,....
fresh gases
1b(x; t)d(1 2c
p
)
......,,......
burnt gases
1g(x; t)f (c
p
; x; t)
......,,......
burning gases
(129)
where a, b and g respectively denote the probability to
have, at location (x; t); fresh gases, burnt gases and reacting
mixture. d(c
p
) and d(1 2c
p
) are respectively the Dirac delta
functions corresponding to fresh gases (c = 0) and fully
burnt ones (c = 1):
Normalization of the probability density function:
_1
0

P(c
p
; x; t)dc
p
= 1 (130)
leads to the following relations:
a 1b 1g = 1 (131)
D. Veynante, L. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 224
_1
0
f (c
p
; x; t)dc
p
= 1 (132)
with f (0) = f (1) = 0:
The balance equation for the progress variable c may be
written:
2rc
2t
17´(ruc) = 7´(rD7c) 1 _ v (133)
This equation is averaged and the mean reaction rate, at the
location (x; t) is:

_ v(x; t) =
_1
0
_ v(c
p
)

P(c
p
; x; t)dc
p
(134)
leading to Eq. (129):

_ v(x; t) = g(x; t)
_1
0
_ v(c
p
)f (c
p
; x; t)dc
p
(135)
All studies devoted to this line of models are based on such a
formulation. The objective is now to determine the unknown
functions a, b, g and the probability density function f.
Using the DamkoÈhler number, Da, comparing turbulence
and chemical time scales, and, the turbulent Reynolds
number Re, we will focus only on the case where
Re @Da @1. In this situation, the combustion is controlled
by the turbulent transport and the reaction zone may be
assumed to be in®nitely thin. Accordingly, g !1 (i.e.
a @g and b @g).
7.3.2. BML model analysis
This model is developed under the assumption that
Re @Da @1, corresponding to g !1. At a given location
in the ¯ow, an intermittency between fresh gases (c = 0)
and fully burnt ones (c = 1) is observed and the probability
density function of the progress variable c reduces to:

P(c
p
; x; t) = a(x; t)d(c
p
) 1b(x; t)d(1 2c
p
) 1O(1=Da)
(136)
which is `quasi-bimodal' for large DamkoÈhler numbers.
Then at the point (x; t) inside the reaction zone, c looks as
a telegraphic signal as displayed in Fig. 16. This signal also
satis®es:
c
2
= c 1O(1=Da) and c(1 2c) = O(1=Da) (137)
Under this assumption, a and b are easily determined as a
function of the Favre average progress variable ~ c :
r ~ c = r ~ c =
_1
0
rc
p

P(c
p
)dc
p
= r
b
b (138)
where r
b
is the burnt gases density.
b =
r ~ c
r
b
and a = 1 2
r ~ c
r
b
(139)
The mean density r may be written:
r =
_1
0
r

P(c
p
)dc
p
= ar
u
1br
b
= 1 2
r`c
r
b
_ _
r
u
1
r`c
r
b
r
b
(140)
One may also introduce the reaction heat release factor t,
de®ned as:
t =
r
u
r
b
21 =
T
b
T
u
21 (141)
leading to:
r
u
= (1 1t)r
b
= r(1 1t~ c) (142)
corresponding to the perfect gases state law, assuming a
constant pressure P. Then, the probabilities a and b
become:
a =
1 2 ~ c
1 1t~ c
; b =
(1 1t) ~ c
1 1t~ c
(143)
The probability density function

P(c) is determined and
depends only on the mean progress variable ~ c (and on the
heat release factor, t, which is ®xed for a given chemical
reaction). The BML model involves a presumed pdf (Eq.
(135)), however, the mean reaction rate cannot be calculated
from the pdf since g was neglected in Eq. (129)).
Starting from the conservative and non-conservative
forms of the progress variable c balance equations:
2rc
2t
17´(ruc) = 7´(rD7c) 1 _ v
r
2c
2t
1ru´7c = 7´(rD7c) 1 _ v
and multiplying by c and adding these equations:
2rc
2
2t
17´(ruc
2
) = 7´(rD7c
2
) 22rD7c´7c 12c _ v (144)
D. Veynante, L. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 225
Fig. 15. Probability density function in premixed turbulent
combustion.
Fig. 16. Intermittency between fresh and fully burnt gases at a given
location in the reaction zone. This signal corresponds to a bimodal
(c = 0 and c = 1) probability density function.
Subtracting the balance equation for c
2
(Eq. (144)) to the
balance equation for the progress variable c (Eq. (133))
leads to a balance equation for c(1 2c) :
2
2t
[rc(1 2c)] 17´[ruc(1 2c)]
= 7´(rD7[c(1 2c)]) 12rD7c´7c 22c _ v 1 _ v (145)
Under the assumption of the BML model, the progress vari-
able c is equal to zero or to unity. Accordingly, c(1 2c) = 0
and the balance Eq. (145) reduces to:
2rD7c´7c = 2c _ v 2 _ v (146)
leading to, after averaging:
2rD7c´7c = (2c
m
21)

_ v (147)
where a progress variable c
m
, de®ned as:
c
m
=
_1
0
c _ vf (c)dc
_1
0
_ vf (c)dc
(148)
has been introduced and characterizes the chemical reaction.
The mean reaction rate

_ v becomes:

_ v = 2
rx
2c
m
21
(149)
where rx is the scalar dissipation rate of the progress
variable c.
rx = r` x = rD7c´7c = rD
2c
2x
i
2c
2x
i
(150)
The mean reaction rate

_ v is then related to the dissipation
rate ~ x; describing the turbulent mixing, and to c
m
, character-
izing the chemical reaction. A transport equation for the
scalar dissipation rate may be written and solved [117], or
one may postulate a linear relaxation of the ¯uctuations
generated by micromixing (Section 9.2.2), leading to:
rx =
rc
//2
t
t
(151)
where a turbulent time scale, t
t
is introduced. Assuming an
intermittency between fresh and burnt gases (c = 0 or
c = 1),
¯
c
//2
is given by Eq. (126). Then:

_ v =
2
2c
m
21
r ~ c(1 2 ~ c)
t
t
(152)
The Eddy-Break-Up model expression (Eq. (127)) is
recovered (Section 7.2). The BML model may then be
viewed as a theoretical derivation, where the assumptions
made are clearly stated, of the Eddy-Break-Up (EBU)
model, initially based on a phenomenological approach.
7.3.3. Recovering mean reaction rate from tools relations
The analysis developed in Section 7.3.2 is the usual
derivation of the BML model. However, expression (149)
linking mean reaction rate and scalar dissipation may also be
recovered from the general relations between modeling
tools (Eq. (121)):

_ v =
1
krDu7cul
s
_ v
u7cu
_ _
s
r ~ x (153)
To link mean reaction rate and scalar dissipation rate using
the ¯amelet analysis, Eq. (153) requires estimates for _ v=u7cu
and rDu7cu; averaging of these quantities along iso-surface
c = c
p
and integration over all the possible c
p
values.
Assuming that in®nitely thin ¯ame elements may be viewed
as one-dimensional, steady state, premixed laminar ¯ame
propagating at a given laminar ¯ame speed S
L
, the balance
equation for the progress variable c in this 1D ¯ame is:
r
0
S
L
7´c = 7´(rD7c) 1 _ v (154)
where r
0
denotes the density in the fresh gases. Integrating
Eq. (154) across all the ¯ame front from fresh gases to burnt
gases (21 # x # 11) and up to a given location x
0
, corre-
sponding to a progress variable c
0
(21 # x # x
0
); leads to:
r
0
S
L
=
_11
21
_ vdx =
_1
0
_ v
u7cu
dc (155)
(rD7c)
x
0
= r
0
S
L
c
0
2
_x
0
21
_ vdx
=
_1
0
_ v
u7cu
dc
_ _
c
0
2
_c
0
0
_ v
u7cu
dc (156)
As the ¯ame front is supposed to be thin and planar, all c
p
iso-surfaces have the same surface and all quantities are
constant along these surfaces, moreover the ¯ame is
supposed locally one-dimensional and u7cu = 7c: Then:
_1
0
k _ v=u7cul
s
dc
p
_1
0
krDu7cul
s
dc
p
=
_1
0
_ v=u7cudc
_1
0
rDu7cudc
=
_11
21
_ vdx
_11
21
_ vdx
_1
0
c dc 2
_1
0
_c
0
0
( _ v=u7cu)dc dc
0
=
2
_11
21
_ v dx
2
_11
21
c _ vdx 2
_11
21
_ v dx
=
2
2c
m
21
(157)
where c
m
is de®ned as:
c
m
=
_11
21
c _ vdx
_11
21
_ vdx
(158)
D. Veynante, L. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 226
Then, from Eq. (153):

_ v = 2
rx
2c
m
21
(159)
recovering Eq. (149). This second analysis leads to the
following comments:
² The de®nition of c
m
is slightly different in Eqs. (149) and
(159). In the ®rst one, the integration is performed over
all possible values of the progress variable c at a given
location (x; t): In the second analysis, the integration is
performed along a normal direction to the ¯ame front,
assumed to be a laminar one-dimensional premixed
¯ame. The expressions (148) and (158) are identical
when:
f (c) =
1
d
l
dc
dx
_ _
21
f
(160)
where (dc=dx)
f
describes the inner structure of the ¯ame-
let.
² This second derivation clearly exhibits how a ¯amelet
model works (the turbulent ¯ame is viewed as a collec-
tion of thin laminar ¯ame elements). The c
m
parameter is
related to the inner structure of the ¯ame front and to the
properties of the chemical reaction.
² Making use of the ¯ame surface density S as de®ned by
Eq. (116), the expression for the mean burning rate
becomes:

_ v = r
0
S
L
S (161)
where
S =
2
2c
m
21
1
r
0
S
L
r ~ x <
2
2c
m
21
1
r
0
S
L
r
~ c(1 2 ~ c)
t
t
(162)
² The BML model has been developed starting from a
statistical analysis (two peaks pdf), the mean reaction
rate was written in terms of the scalar dissipation rate
of the progress variable c, which may be recast in terms
of ¯ame surface density, exhibiting simple links between
modeling tools.
7.3.4. Reynolds and Favre averaging
Assuming a bimodal distribution of the progress variable
c, Reynolds ( c) and Favre ( ~ c) averages are easily related.
From:
c =
_1
0
c

P(c)dc = b (163)
rc = r ~ c =
_1
0
rc

P(c)dc = r
b
b = r
b
c (164)
together with expressions (142) and (143), one easily
obtains:
c =
(1 1t) ~ c
1 1t~ c
(165)
corresponding to a model for the density/progress variable
correlations (Eq. (15)):
r
/
c
/
= 2 r
t~ c(1 2 ~ c)
1 1t~ c
(166)
Reynolds ( c) and Favre ( ~ c) averages of the instantaneous
progress variable c are compared on Fig. 17 for various
values of the heat release factor t. The discrepancy between
the two quantities strongly increases with t. r
/
c
/
is plotted
as a function of ~ c on Fig. 18.
7.3.5. Conditional averagingÐcounter-gradient turbulent
transport
The analysis of intermittency between fresh gases (c = 0)
and fully burnt gases (c = 1) leads to the introduction of
conditional averaging. The Favre average
~
Q of any quantity
Q may be expressed as a function of the conditional
averages for fresh gases (

Q
u
) and fully burnt products (

Q
b
) :
r
~
Q = rQ =
_1
0
rQ

P(c)dc = ar
u

Q
u
1br
b

Q
b
(167)
D. Veynante, L. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 227
Fig. 17. The Reynolds average c of the progress variable cis plotted as a function of the Favre average ~ c for various values of the heat release
factor t, assuming a bimodal distribution (c = 0 or c = 1) of c (Eq. (165)).
using Eqs. (142) and (143):
~
Q = (1 2 ~ c)

Q
u
1 ~ c

Q
b
(168)
where

Q
u
and

Q
b
are de®ned as:

Q
u
=
_11
21
Q

P
c
(Quc = 0)dQ

Q
b
=
_11
21
Q

P
c
(Quc = 1)dQ

P
c
(Quc) is the pdf of Q for the given value c of the progress
variable (conditional pdf, see Section 6.4.1).
The components ~ u
k
of the mean velocity vector ~ u may be
written as a linear combination of their conditional fresh and
burnt gases averages:
~ u
i
= (1 2 ~ c) u
u
i
1 ~ c u
b
i
(169)
Then:
r
¯
u
//
i
c
//
= r( ¯ u
i
c 2 ~ u
i
~ c) = r( ~ c u
b
i
2 ~ u
i
~ c) = r ~ c(1 2 ~ c)( u
b
i
2 u
u
i
)
(170)
which is the scalar turbulent ¯ux, generally modeled using a
gradient assumption:
r
¯
u
//
i
c
//
= 2
m
t
S
c
2~ c
2x
i
_ _
(171)
The two expressions (170) and (171) may describe opposite
¯uxes: consider a left-traveling one dimensional turbulent
¯ame, because of thermal expansion the conditional velo-
city in the burnt gases, u
b
i
; is expected to be larger than the
conditional velocity in the fresh gases, u
u
i
: According to Eq.
(170), the turbulent ¯ux,
¯
u
//
i
c
//
is expected to be positive. On
the other hand, as the mean progress variable gradient is also
positive, Eq. (171) leads to a negative value of
¯
u
//
i
c
//
: This
situation, called `counter-gradient turbulent transport', is a
key point of the BML analysis and will be further discussed
in Section 8.
The Reynolds stresses
¯
u
//
i
u
//
j
may also be decomposed
using the same formalism:
¯
u
//
i
u
//
j
= (1 2 ~ c)u
/
i
u
/
j
u
1 ~ cu
/
i
u
/
j
b
1 ~ c(1 2 ~ c)( u
b
i
2 u
u
i
)( u
b
j
2 u
u
j
)
............,,............
intermittency
(172)
where one may note a weighted mean between the Reynolds
stresses in the fresh
_
u
/
i
u
/
j
u
_
and in the burnt gases
_
u
/
i
u
/
j
b
_
representative of turbulent motions. The additional term
represents the intermittency between fresh and burnt gases.
7.3.6. Extensions to partially premixed combustion
Some attempts have been made to extend BML modeling
concepts to partially premixed combustion, i.e. when reac-
tants are not perfectly premixed before burning [118]. Two
dif®culties are then encountered. First, in the de®nition of
the progress variable c (Eq. (35)), unburnt and burnt gas
temperatures and fuel mass fractions T
u
, T
b
, Y
u
F
and Y
b
F
are
no longer constant and depend on local equivalence ratio. A
balance equation may be still derived (see, for example, Ref.
[119]) but it incorporates additional terms and is not obvious
to close, especially when rich and lean zones coexist in the
same ¯ow ®eld. Mixing should also be taken into account
through a mixture fraction Z. The challenge is then to model
the joint probability density function

P(c
p
; Z
p
; x; t): Lahjaily
et al. [118] write:

P(c
p
; Z
p
; x; t)
= a(x; t)d(c
p
)

P
u
(Z
p
; x; t) 1b(x; t)d(1 2c
p
)

P
b
(Z
p
; x; t)
1g(x; t)F(c
p
; Z
p
; x; t)H(Z
p
2Z
min
)
..............,,..............
burning zones
1g
m
(x; t)F
m
(c
p
; Z
p
; x; t)[1 2H(Z
p
2Z
min
)]
...................,,...................
mixing without burning
(173)
where

P
u
(Z
p
; x; t) and

P
b
(Z
p
; x; t) represent the mixture frac-
tion distributions in fresh and burnt gases respectively. F
and F
m
are the distributions within the reaction zones,
D. Veynante, L. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 228
Fig. 18. Correlation 2r
/
c
/
= r as a function of the Favre averaged progress variable ~ c for various values of the heat release factor t, assuming a
bimodal distribution (c = 0 or c = 1) of c (Eq. (166)).
assuming to be ¯amelets, and within the non-reactive
mixing zone between fresh and burnt gases. Combustion
is supposed to occur when Z
p
$ Z
min
(H is the Heaviside
function verifying H(z , 0) = 0 and H(z $ 0) = 1). Under
BML assumptions, the two last contributions are neglected
(g p1 and g
m
p1) and dilution effects are incorporated
through

P
u
(Z
p
; x; t) and

P
b
(Z
p
; x; t):
7.4. Models based on the ¯ame surface area estimation
7.4.1. Introduction
Several ¯ame surface density models are now discussed.
Their derivation and their histories differ, but theyare all based
on similar concepts, described in Section 6.3.2. These models
assume that the chemical reaction occurs in thin layers
separating fresh gases from fully burnt ones (high Dam-
koÈhler number limit). The reaction zone may then be viewed
as a collection of laminar ¯ame elements called ¯amelets.
The ¯ame surface density is here introduced at the light of
experimental data from Refs. [120,121]. The experimental
burner is displayed on Fig. 19. A turbulent premixed
propane/air ¯ame is stabilized behind a small cylinder
(blockage ratio of 6%). Flow rates are about 35±100 g/s,
corresponding to inlet velocities between 10 and 30 m/s
(turbulence levels from 5 to 10%). Equivalence ratios f
are in the range 0.7±1.1. Velocity (laser Doppler veloci-
metry), CH and C
2
radical emission (reaction rate estima-
tion) and high-speed laser tomography (¯ame front
characteristics) measurements have been performed and
are described in Refs. [120±123].
In Fig. 20 (half burner), ¯ame surface density pro®les are
plotted as a function of the transverse coordinate for various
downstream locations and for two equivalence ratios.
7.4.2. Algebraic expressions for the ¯ame surface density S
Assuming intermittency between fresh and burnt gases
D. Veynante, L. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 229
Fig. 19. Experimental burner. A propane/air premixed ¯ow is
injected in a rectangular burner through a grid. The turbulent
¯ame is stabilized behind a small cylinder (blockage ratio of 6%)
[120,121].
Fig. 20. Transverse ¯ame surface density (S) pro®les (m
21
) plotted as a function of the transverse location for various downstream locations
(mm downstream the rod). (a) f = 0:78; (b) f = 0:9: Flow rate: 35 g/s [121].
(Section 7.3), Bray, Moss, Libby and their coworkers have
proposed to describe the mean reaction rate

_ v as the product
of a ¯ame crossing frequency n and a local reaction rate per
¯ame crossing, w
F
:

_ v = w
F
n (174)
Because c(t) may be viewed as a telegraphic signal (Fig. 16),
this crossing frequency is derived from a statistical analysis
of the telegraph equation, leading to:
n =
2 c(1 2 c)
^
T
(175)
where
^
T is time scale for the ¯uctuations of c.
This analysis is attractive because the crossing frequency
n may be easily obtained in experiments, for example from
time-resolved local temperature measurements (thermo-
couple). On the other hand, the ¯ame surface density S
and the local reaction rate per ¯ame crossing (w
F
) are not
obvious to estimate. Eq. (175) is generally closed estimating
^
T from a characteristic turbulent time t
t
. The reaction rate
per crossing ¯ame, w
F
(Eq. (174)), is usually modeled as:
w
F
=
r
0
S
L
d
t
=t
t
(176)
where r
0
is the unburnt gases density, S
L
and d
l
are respec-
tively the speed and the thickness of the laminar ¯ame. The
¯ame transit time t
t
measures the averaged time spend by a
point in the ¯ow to cross a ¯ame front and corresponds to the
mean transition time between c = 0 and c = 1 levels of the
progress variable, as shown in Fig. 21 (in practice, the c-
signal is not exactly bimodal).
This model has been latter rewritten in term of ¯ame
surface density, leading to the algebraic expression [124]
S = g
c(1 2 c)
s
y
L
y
=
g
s
y
L
y
1 1t
(1 1t~ c)
2
~ c(1 2 ~ c) (177)
where g is a constant of order unity. s
y
is a ¯amelet orienta-
tion factor measuring the mean angle of the instantaneous
¯ame front with the c surface and assumed to be an universal
model constant (s
y
< 0:5): L
y
is a ¯ame front wrinkling
length scale and Eq. (165) has been used to replace c as a
function of ~ c: A submodel is required to describe the wrink-
ling length scale L
y
, generally assumed to be proportional to
the integral length scale l
t
:
L
y
= C
l
l
t
S
L
u
/
_ _
n
(178)
where C
l
and n are two constants of the order of unity [75].
According to Gouldin [125,126], the ¯amelet orientation
factor s
y
is directly linked to the vectors normal to the
instantaneous ¯ame front, n, and to the mean ¯ame brush,
n
p
(see Section 6.3.3):
1
s
y
=
1
un
p
´nu
_ _
s
(179)
Despite of the same normal vectors n and n
p
involved, the
¯amelet orientation factor s
y
(Eq. (179)) and the ¯ame
surface wrinkling factor J (Eq. (97)) are different quanti-
ties. These relations, combined with Eqs. (100) and (177),
may relate the wrinkling length scale L
y
to the thickness d
B
of the mean ¯ame brush, under the assumption of a in®nitely
thin ¯ame front:
S = g
c(1 2 c)
s
y
L
y
= Ju7 cu < aJ
c(1 2 c)
d
B
(180)
where a is a model constant of the order of unity. Then:
L
y
<
g
a
_ _
1
un
p
´nu
_ _
s
n
p
´ n ( )
s
d
B
(181)
Assuming that a, g and s
y
are constant, d
B
/J measures the
wrinkling length scale L
y
of the ¯ame front.
The agreement between this BML model and the exper-
imental data is very good, as displayed on Fig. 22 where the
ratio S=[ c(1 2 c)]; corresponding to g=s
y
L
y
and assumed to
be constant, is displayed. Nevertheless, a submodel is
required for the wrinkling length scale which increases
with the downstream location in our experiment.
Estimating the local reaction rate per unit ¯ame area
_
V
c
from the laminar ¯ame speed S
L
(
_
V
c
= r
0
S
L
where r
0
is the
fresh gases density) the mean reaction rate becomes, when
n = 1 :

_ v = r
0
g
s
y
C
l
u
/
l
t
c(1 2 c) = r
0
g
s
y
C
l
u
/
l
t
(1 1t) ~ c(1 2 ~ c)
(1 1t~ c)
2
(182)
As t
t
= l
t
=u
/
is a turbulence characteristic time scale, the
mean reaction rate

_ v is proportional to the intermittency
between fresh and burnt gases, determined from ~ c(1 2 ~ c)
or c(1 2 c); and inversely proportional to t
t
. The physical
analysis leading to the Eddy-Break-Up model is recovered
and a similar expression for the reaction rate is found. The
previous expression is slightly different than the one
proposed in Section 7.3.3. The discrepancies are easily
explained by the crude model used for the scalar dissipation
of the progress variable to derive Eq. (162).
In Eq. (182), u
/
=l
t
is generally modeled from the
D. Veynante, L. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 230
Fig. 21. De®nition of the ¯ame transit time t
t
is the ¯ame crossing
frequency BML model.
turbulence k±1 model as 1=k: The ITNFS ef®ciency function
G
k
[127] may be introduced in the turbulent time scale to
account for the reduced ability of small turbulent structures
to wrinkle the ¯ame front. ITNFS is one of the closure
schemes for the ¯ame surface density balance equation
(see Section 7.4.3 and Table 5). The mean reaction rate is
then [118,128,129]:

_ v = ar
0
G
k
l
t
d
t
;
u
/
S
L
_ _
1
k
c(1 2 c) (183)
where a is a model constant and the ef®ciency function G
K
depends on the length scale (l
t
/d
l
) and the velocity (u
/
=S
l
)
ratio comparing the turbulence and the laminar ¯ame char-
acteristics. The ef®ciency function has been ®tted from DNS
data [127,130]:
log
10
(G
k
) = 2
1
s 10:4
exp[2(s 10:4)]
1
_
1 2exp[2(s 10:4)]) s
1
u
/
S
L
_ _
s 20:11
_ _
(184)
where
s = log
10
l
t
d
l
_ _
and
s
1
u
/
S
L
_ _
=
2
3
1 2
1
2
exp 2
u
/
S
L
_ _
1=3
_ _ _ _ (185)
When the length scale ratio l
t
/d
t
tends towards zero, G
K
also
decreases, reducing the effective ¯ame strain rate, as
displayed on Fig. 23. G
K
only slightly depends on the vel-
ocity ratio u
/
=S
L
: The ef®ciency function does not reach a
constant level when l
t
/d
l
increases since increasing l
t
/d
l
,
keeping u
/
=S
L
constant, corresponds to an implicit increase
of the turbulent Reynolds number Re.
Because the ef®ciency function G
K
tends to counter-
balance the known trend of Eddy-Break-Up modeling to
overestimate the mean reaction rate in highly strained
regions, this simple approach improves the accuracy of the
numerical predictions.
The BML model proposes a simple algebraic expression
to estimate the ¯ame surface density s and the correspond-
ing reaction rate, but Bray, Moss, Champion and Libby
have mainly focused their attention on a careful description
of the turbulent ¯uxes using the balance equations for the
D. Veynante, L. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 231
Fig. 22. S=( c(1 2 c)) transverse pro®les in mm
21
corresponding to g=(s
y
L
y
) in the Bray, Champion, Libby model (Eq. (177)), plotted as the
function of the mean progress variable c for several locations downstream from the rod: (a) f = 0:78; (b) f = 0:9 [121].
Reynolds stresses r
¯
u
//
i
u
//
j
and the scalar ¯uxes r
¯
u
//
i
c
//
to take
into account the possible occurrence of counter-gradient
transport and ¯ame turbulence generation [131,132].
The ¯ame surface density may also be derived from frac-
tal theories, leading to [133]
S =
1
L
outer
L
outer
L
inner
_ _
D22
(186)
where L
inner
and L
outer
are respectively the inner and outer
cut-off length scales (the ¯ame surface is assumed to be
fractal between these two scales). D is the fractal dimension
of the ¯ame surface. The cut-off scales are generally esti-
mated from the turbulence Kolmogorov l
k
and the integral l
t
length scales.
7.4.3. Flame surface density balance equation closures
The previously described balance equations for S (Eqs.
(89) and (90)) are unclosed and require modeling. In Table
5, various closures found in the literature are compared
where S
1
is the strain rate acting on the surface and induced
by the mean ¯ow ®eld. S
2
is the strain rate due to the turbu-
lent motions (Eq. (94)) and the third source term, S
3
, occurs
only in the derivation proposed in Ref. [117]. D describes
the consumption of ¯ame area. The modeled balance equa-
tion is rewritten as:
2S
2t
17´(
~
US) = 7´
n
t
s
S
7S
_ _
1S
1
1S
2
1S
3
2D (187)
In this expression, the turbulent ¯ux of ¯ame surface
density is expressed using a classical gradient assumption,
n
t
is the turbulent viscosity and s
S
a ¯ame surface turbulent
Schmidt number. Five main closures are summarized:
² The CPB model [134] is derived from the exact transport
equation for the ¯ame surface density. The strain rate due
to the turbulent ¯uctuations is estimated from the time
scale

n=1
_
of the Kolmogorov structures. The turbulent
strain rate is probably overestimated. Despite the fact that
the Kolmogorov structures contain the highest energy,
their lifetime is too short (because of viscous effects) to
actually affect the ¯ame front [65].
² The coherent ¯ame model (CFM), developed by Candel
and his coworkers following the initial work of Marble of
Broadwell [84]. Three versions are presented in Table 5.
In the initial version (CFM1), the strain rate due to the
turbulent ¯uctuations is estimated from the character-
istic time of the integral length scale (k/1). In the two
D. Veynante, L. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 232
Table 5
Comparison of source (S
i
) and consumption (D) terms in the ¯ame surface density balance equation in different turbulent premixed combustion
models (details in text). k and 1 denote, respectively, the turbulent kinetic energy and its dissipation. Re is the turbulent Reynolds number. a
0
,
b
0
, g, l, C
A
, a, d, C, E and K are model constants, G
k
is the ef®ciency function in the ITNFS model [127] and depends on the length scale (l
t
/d
l
)
and the velocity (u
/
/S
L
) ratios comparing the turbulence and the laminar ¯ame characteristics. In the Choi model (CH) [137], u
/
denotes the rms
turbulent velocity and l
tc
is an arbitrary length scale introduced for dimensional consistency and combined to a
0
as a single arbitrary constant
Model S
1
= k
m
S S
2
= k
t
S S
3
D
CPB [134] A
ik
2 u
k
2x
i
S a
0
C
A
_
1
n
_
1=2
S a
0
S
L
2 1e
2aR
3(1 2 c)
S
2
R =
(1 2 c)1
SS
L
k
CFM1 A
ik
2 u
k
2x
i
S a
0
1
k
S b
0
S
L
1C

k
_
1 2 c
S
2
CFM2-a A
ik
2 u
k
2x
i
S a
0
G
K
1
k
S b
0
S
L
1C

k
_
1 2 c
S
2
CFM2-b [130] A
ik
2 u
k
2x
i
S a
0
G
K
1
k
S b
0
S
L
1C

k
_
c(1 2 c)
S
2
MB [117] E
u
/
i
u
/
k
k
2 u
k
2x
i
S a
0

Re
_
1
k
S
F
S
L
1
k
u
/
i
c
/
2 c
2x
i
b
0
S
L

Re
_
c(1 2 c)
_
1 1d
S
L

k
_
_
2g
S
2
CD [136] a
0
l
1
k
S for k
t
# a
0
K
S
L
d
L
b
0
S
L
1 2 c
S
2
CH1 a
0
_
1
15n
_
1=2
S b
0
S
L
c(1 2 c)
S
2
CH2 [137] a
0
u
/
l
tc
S b
0
S
L
c(1 2 c)
S
2
succeeding formulations (CFM2), the expression of the
turbulent strain rate acting on the ¯ame front is improved
from direct numerical simulations and multi-fractal
analysis (ITNFS model, Eq. (184) [127]). The destruction
term differs in these two last formulations (CFM2a and
CFM2b).
² The MB model [117] is based on an exact equation for the
scalar dissipation rate x :
r ~ x = rD
2c
//
2x
i
2c
//
2x
i
(188)
assuming a constant density r. The transport equation is
rewritten as a ¯ame surface density transport equation
under the ¯amelet assumption (see Section 6.5, Eq.
(116)). This approach leads to a different expression for
the source term S
1
and an additional source term S
3
is
found. In a ®rst analysis, this term S
3
, which does not
depend on the available ¯ame surface density S; might
be viewed as an ignition term [135] involving a gradient
of the mean fuel mass fraction or of the mean temperature
(i.e. fresh gases are ignited by heat transfers). However,
this analysis does not hold because the ¯ame surface
density balance equation is derived assuming an
established ¯ame surface. In fact, as shown below, S
3
corresponds to an anisotropic contribution of the tur-
bulent strain rate a
T
(see Eq. (205)). S
3
seems to be negli-
gible in practical simulations, at least to describe the
¯ame front propagation in a homogeneous and isotropic
turbulent ¯ow ®eld.
² The CD model [136] is similar to the ®rst version of the
coherent ¯ame model (CFM1). An additional term is
proposed to take into account ¯ame extinction under
excessively high strain rates. Such a term was tested in
the coherent ¯ame model but the choice of the critical
strain rate is somewhat arbitrary. Moreover, this critical
strain rate cannot be deduced from planar strained
laminar ¯ame studies because, due to curvature and
unsteady effects, a ¯ame is able to sustain higher strain
rates than expected.
² The CH model [137] has been devised for spark-ignited
engines to recover experimental data obtained in a closed
vessel [138]. The consumption term D is similar to the
one proposed in CFM2-b model whereas two formula-
tions of the strain rate induced by turbulent motions are
proposed. The ®rst expression (CH1) corresponds to the
closure in CPB model, based on the Kolmogorov turbu-
lent time scale. In CH2, the strain rate is only propor-
tional to the turbulence intensity u
/
and an arbitrary
length scale, l
tc
, is incorporated in the model constant.
Despite these comments, all these closures exhibit strong
similarities. For example, the consumption term D is always
proportional to S
2
. A comparison between these models to
predict turbulent ¯ame speed S
T
may be found in Ref. [130].
In the case of a statistically one-dimensional turbulent ¯ame
propagating in a frozen turbulence, a KPP (Kolmogorov±
Petroski±Piskunov) analysis was used to analytically deter-
mine the turbulent ¯ame speed S
T
as a function of the model
parameters.It was found that only the CFM-2 formulation is
able to predict the so-called bending phenomenon, where
the turbulent ¯ame speed decreases before the occurrence of
¯ame extinction when the turbulence level increases, as
experimentally evidenced [110].
A recent work, [135] has compared CPB, CFM1, MB and
CD models to predict a turbulent premixed jet ¯ame. The
CD predicts extremely high temperatures whereas CFM1,
MB and CPB provide reasonable predictions of mean vel-
ocities and temperatures. A slight overestimate (respectively
underestimate) of temperature is pointed out for CPB
(respectively MB) and is probably due to the expression
for the strain rate. The MB closure [117] is found to be
more sensitive to the inlet turbulent quantities than CFM1
but CFM2 models, incorporating an ef®ciency function
D. Veynante, L. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 233
Fig. 23. ITNFS ef®ciency function G
K
(Eq. (184)) as a function of the length scale ratio l
t
/d
l
for several values of the velocity ratio u
/
/S
L
(0.1;
1.0; 10; 11).
including the inability of small vortices to wrinkle the ¯ame
surface, have not been tested. Flame surface density models
are extended to non-isenthalpic ¯ows (premixed reactants
injected in a co-¯ow of air [139]). A pioneering work has
been ®rst conducted [118] extending the algebraic ¯ame
surface density BML model to non-isenthalpic ¯ows,
using similar concepts. A presumed pdf for a mixture frac-
tion Z, determined from mean and rms values of Z, is
incorporated to account for dilution phenomena.
7.4.4. Analysis of the ¯ame surface density balance equation
Following the description of the exact balance equation
for the ¯ame surface density S (Section 6.3.2) and the
summary of the most popular closures (Section 7.4.3), the
aim of this section is to carefully analyze this balance
equation. This analysis may be based on direct numerical
simulations [17] or on experimental data [120,121].
Starting from the `propagative' form (Eq. (90)):
2S
2t
17´( ~ uS) 17´(ku
//
l
s
S)
= (7´ ~ u 2knnl
s
: 7 u)
........,,........
A
T
S 1k 7´u
//
2nn : 7u
//
l
s
........,,........
a
T
S
27´[kwnl
s
S]
....,,....
propagation
1kw7´nl
s
S
....,,....
curvature
(189)
each unclosed term may be investigated as follows:
7.4.4.1. Turbulent transport. The turbulent ¯ux of ¯ame
surface density is generally expressed using gradient
transport:
ku
//
l
s
S = 2
n
t
s
S
7S (190)
Bidaux and Bray (1994, unpublished work, see for example
[75,140]) have shown from a simple BML-type approach
that the turbulent ¯uxes of the mean progress variable ( ~ c)
and of the ¯ame surface density (S) are closely related.
Assuming that the conditional velocity on the ¯ame
surface, k ~ ul
s
is a linear function of the conditional fresh
( u
u
) and burnt gases velocities:
k ~ ul
s
= u
u
1c
p
( u
b
2 u
u
) (191)
where c
p
denotes the c-level chosen to de®ne the ¯ame front.
The BML relation (Eq. (169)):
~ u = (1 2 ~ c) u
u
1 ~ c u
b
(192)
leads to:
ku
//
l
s
= kul
s
2 ~ u = (c
p
2 ~ c)( u
b
2 u
u
) (193)
From Eq. (170) the ¯ame surface density turbulent ¯ux
becomes:
k
¯
u
//
l
s
S =
(c
p
2 ~ c)
~ c(1 2 ~ c)
¯
u
//
c
//
S (194)
This relation, con®rmed by direct numerical simulations
[140], shows that turbulent ¯uxes of ~ c and S are closely
related. A counter-gradient turbulent transport will be
observed simultaneously for these two scalar ®elds.
7.4.4.2. Strain rate induced by the mean ¯ow ®eld, A
T
. The
only unclosed quantities in the strain rate due to the mean
¯ow ®eld, A
T
, are the orientation factors knnl
s
. Following
[134], the vector normal to the ¯ame front, n may be split
into a mean component, M, and a ¯uctuation, m:
n = M1m with knl
s
= M and kml
s
= 0 (195)
Then, the orientation factors become:
knnl
s
= MM1kmml
s
(196)
Using the de®nition nu7cu = 27c and assuming an
in®nitely thin ¯ame front leads after averaging to [134,141]:
knl
s
S = MS = 27 c (197)
where c and ~ c are related using the BML relation r ~ c = r
b
c
(Eq. (138)). Then, only the ¯uctuation cross products kmml
s
remain unclosed. Several closure schemes have been
proposed:
² In Ref. [134] one assumes an isotropic distribution of the
¯uctuating components of the normal vector n:
km
i
m
j
l
s
=
d
ij
3
(1 2M
k
M
k
) (198)
² In Ref. [117], a relation between orientation factors and
Reynolds stresses is indirectly proposed:
kn
i
n
j
l
s
=
¯
u
//
i
u
//
j
2k
(199)
where k is the turbulent kinetic energy.
² From experimental data [120], a much more complicated
model is proposed that will not be described here because
its practical implementation is probably not so easy.
These authors have also shown that the isotropic
assumption made in Ref. [134] is clearly wrong for the
turbulent ¯ame stabilized downstream a small rod. On the
other hand, a slight modi®cation of Ref. [117] leads to
very good results [121]:
kn
i
n
i
l
s
=

k±i
¯
u
//
k
2
4k
; kn
i
n
j±i
l
s
=
¯
u
//
i
u
//
j
2k
(200)
These orientation factors have very important effects and
may lead to surprising results. In the ¯ame-holder stabilized
turbulent ¯ame investigated in Ref. [121], the main velocity
gradient is the transverse gradient of the mean axial velocity,
corresponding to the mixing layer shear stress. But, because of
the low value of the corresponding orientation factor, its
contribution to the strain rate A
T
induced by the mean ¯ow
®eld is not that important. The strain rate A
T
is dominated by
D. Veynante, L. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 234
the axial gradient of the mean axial velocity, induced by the
thermal expansion due to the combustion heat release, as
illustrated in Fig. 24. Notice also that the strain rate A
T
cannot be reduced to the simpli®ed expression ®rstly
proposed [84]:
A
T
= u7
~
Uu (201)
Recent works [142] have shown that u7
~
Uu may probably be
viewed as a model for the total strain rate A
T
1a
T
and not only
for the strain rate A
T
due to the mean ¯ow. This ®nding
explains why, in previous versions of the coherent ¯ame
model where the orientation factors kn
i
n
j
l
s
were not
incorporated, the mean strain rate A
T
was not included
because the simple expression (201) clearly overestimates A
T
.
7.4.4.3. Strain rate a
T
due to turbulent motions. The source
term due to the strain rate a
T
is:
a
T
S = k7´u
//
2nn : 7u
//
l
s
S = d
ij
2u
//
i
2x
j
2n
i
n
j
2u
//
i
2x
j
_ _
s
S
(202)
In most models, this term is generally assumed to be
proportional to the inverse of a turbulent time scale, either
the Kolmogorov time scale (CPB model) or the integral time
scale 1/k (CFM, MB and CD models). This turbulent time
may corrected with the ef®ciency function, G
k
, of the ITNFS
closure (Eq. (184)). Nevertheless, a
T
is always modeled
being isotropic despite the orientation factors nn occurring
in expression (202).
Using the previous splitting of the normal vector to the
¯ame front, n, combined with the geometrical relation
(197), leads to:
a
T
S =
_
d
ij
2u
//
i
2x
j
_
s
S 2
1
S
_
2u
//
i
2x
j
_
s
2 c
2x
i
2 c
2x
j
1
_
m
j
2u
//
i
2x
j
_
s
2 c
2x
i
1
_
m
i
2u
//
i
2x
j
_
2 c
2x
j
2
_
m
i
m
j
2u
//
i
2x
j
_
s
S (203)
This interesting relation decomposes the source term due to
D. Veynante, L. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 235
Fig. 24. (a) Transverse pro®les of the mean velocity gradients and the corresponding strain rate A
T
. (b) Components of the source term A
T
S due
to the strain rate induced by the mean ¯ow ®eld. Data are plotted as a function of the transverse coordinate y for x = 80 mm and f = 0:9 [121].
the strain rate induced by turbulent motions, a
T
S, into two
parts: a contribution depending only on turbulent character-
istics that may be assumed to be isotropic (®rst and last
terms) and an anisotropic contribution, where the mean
¯ame surface orientation occurs through the gradient of
the mean progress variable (second, third and fourth
terms). A priori, this last part is not proportional to the
available ¯ame surface density S.
When velocity and normal vector ¯uctuations are
supposed uncorrelated (this assumption is well veri®ed in
direct numerical simulation data), the previous expression
may be reduced using:
m
j
2u
//
i
2x
j
_ _
s
= km
j
l
s
2u
//
i
2x
j
_ _
s
= 0 (204)
from the m
j
de®nition. Then:
a
T
S = d
ij
2u
//
i
2x
j
_ _
s
S 2 m
i
m
j
2u
//
i
2x
j
_ _
s
S2
...............,,...............
isotropic contribution
1
S
2u
//
i
2x
j
_ _
s
2 c
2x
i
2 c
2x
j
........,,........
anisotropic contribution
(205)
This simple analysis explains the third source term, S
3
found
in Ref. [117] from the derivation of a balance equation for
the scalar dissipation rate ~ x of the progress variable c. This
term S
3
corresponds to an anisotropic contribution depend-
ing on 7 c and on the strain rate due to turbulent motions.
Assuming a gradient type closure for the turbulent transport
of the fresh gases, S
3
is proportional to 7 c´7 c and appears as
a model for the anisotropic contribution of the turbulent
strain rate. Nonetheless, Mantel and Borghi [117] have
shown that this term is negligible in numerical simulations
of a ¯ame propagating in an homogeneous and isotropic
turbulent ¯ow ®eld. This ®nding is probably questionable
in other con®gurations and further investigations are
required.
7.4.4.4. Propagation and curvature terms. These two terms
are analyzed together because they derive from the laminar
¯ame propagation and are related to the ¯ame front
displacement speed w. The modeling of these terms
requires the description of the displacement speed w that
may have values far from the laminar ¯ame speed S
L
[78].
This stands as the main dif®culty of the propagative
approach for the ¯ame surface density balance equation
because various effects are incorporated in w (strain rate,
curvature effects, etc.).
Assuming a constant displacement speed w equal to the
laminar ¯ame speed S
L
, the normal propagation term
becomes:
7´[kwnl
s
S] = S
L
7´[knl
s
S] = S
L
7´[27 c] = 2S
L
7
2
c (206)
where the geometrical relation (197) is used.
This term is generally neglected in models (see Table 5).
Experimental data from Refs. [120,121] in a V-shape turbu-
lent ¯ame show that it is not always negligible and is of the
same order as the curvature term.
The propagation/curvature term becomes:
kw7´nl
s
S = S
L
k7´nl
s
S (207)
where the only unknown is the mean ¯ame front curvature
k7´nl
s
The curvature is positive when the ¯ame front is
convex towards the fresh gases, which is, a priori, the case
when the mean progress variable c is close to zero (see Fig.
25). On the other hand, curvatures are probably negative
(¯ame convex towards the burnt gases) when c < 1: As-
suming that the mean curvature is of the order of the inverse
of the wrinkling length scale L
y
, we have:
lim
c-0
k7´nl
s
=
1
L
y
and lim
c-1
k7´nl
s
= 2
1
L
y
Then, a simple linear model may be proposed:
k7´nl
s
<
c
p
2 c
L
y
(208)
Replacing L
y
by its value as a function of the ¯ame surface
density S from BML modeling (Eq. (177)) leads to the
following model for the curvature term in the S-equation:
kw7´nl
s
S < bS
L
c
p
2 c
c(1 2 c)
S
2
(209)
where b is a model constant.
This term is positive in the fresh gas side of the turbulent
¯ame brush and becomes negative in the burnt gas side. This
trend is in agreement with the ®ndings of direct numerical
simulations [17] and experimental measurements [120,121],
as displayed in Fig. 26. The expression differs from classical
closure where kw7´nl
s
is always negative (term D in
Table 5).
A linear relaxation is retained to model the mean curva-
ture k7´nl
s
(Eq. (208)). This type of closure is common in
turbulent reacting ¯ows and possesses similarities with the
relaxation model used for the scalar dissipation rate (Section
9.2) or for the pdf balance equation (Section 9.8.2). The
links between these closures are further discussed in Section
9.8.5.
The previous analysis was based on both a theoretical
analysis of the exact S-balance equation and experimental
D. Veynante, L. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 236
Fig. 25. Flame front curvature analysis.
data [120,121]. An improved version of the closed balance
equation may be proposed:
2S
2t
17´( ~ uS) 17´(ku
//
l
s
S)
= (7´ ~ u 2knnl
s
: 7~ u)S 1G
k
u
/
S
L
;
l
t
d
l
_ _
1
k
S 1S
L
7
2
c
1bS
L
(c
p
2 c)
S
2
c(1 2 c)
(210)
where G
k
is the ITNFS ef®ciency function [127]. Orientation
factors, kn
i
n
j
l
s
may be described using a formulation
previously discussed. The turbulent ¯ux ku
//
l
s
S is described
using a classical gradient expression.
7.4.5. Flame stabilization modeling
The ¯ame surface density ®elds obtained from laser
tomography and the mean reaction rate estimated from
CH radical emission are compared in Fig. 27. According
to Eq. (85), reaction rate and ¯ame surface density are
roughly proportional, excepted close to the stabilization
rod, the ¯ame surface density S is high, whereas the mean
reaction rate remains low. In this zone, fresh and burnt gases
are separated by an interface (high surface densities) where
combustion has started but is not yet fully established. This
®nding displays one of the dif®culties of ¯ame surface
density models. In their present formulations, these models
are unable to describe the ¯ame stabilization because the S-
equation (Eq. (189)) is derived assuming that the ¯ame does
exist. All source terms in this equation are proportional to S
or to S
2
and the equation cannot generate ¯ame surface
when there is no initial ¯ame surface. In addition, an initia-
tion effect must also be incorporated to account for ignition
time delay in the local reaction rate per unit surface, V
Ç
i
(Eq.
(85)), to recover the observed results.
7.4.6. A related approach: G-equation
As described in Section 6.3.1, the premixed turbulent
¯ame may be described using a level set approach. Most
of the modeling issues discussed above are then recast in
terms of G-equation and modeling for the turbulent burning
velocity S
T
[89].
8. Turbulent transport in premixed combustion
8.1. Introduction
Turbulent ¯uxes of the progress variable c, r
¯
u
//
i
c
//
; are
generally modeled using a gradient transport hypothesis as
for inert scalars (Section 7):
r
¯
u
//
i
c
//
= 2
m
t
Sc
t
2~ c
2x
i
_ _
(211)
where m
t
is the turbulent viscosity given by the turbulence
model and Sc
t
is a turbulent Schmidt number. Theoretical
[143] and experimental studies [19,20] have evidenced in
some turbulent premixed ¯ames counter-gradient turbulent
transport where the turbulent ¯uxes r
¯
u
//
i
c
//
and the mean
progress variable ~ c gradient, 2~ c=2x
i
; have the same sign in
some regions and cannot be approximated with Eq. (211).
This phenomenon is known as counter-gradient turbulent
transport or counter-gradient turbulent diffusion.
This surprising ®nding was explained by the work of
Bray, Moss and Libby discussed in Section 7.3. In their
formulation, the turbulent ¯uxes of the progress variable c
are directly connected to the conditional mean velocities in
fresh ( u
u
i
) and burnt gases ( u
b
i
) (Eq. (170) Section 7.3.5):
r
¯
u
//
i
c
//
= r ~ c(1 2 ~ c) u
b
i
2 u
u
i
_ _
(212)
Even though conditional velocities are not obvious quanti-
ties, this expression is useful to explain counter-gradient
turbulent transport: Because of the thermal expansion due
to combustion heat release, the burnt gas conditional vel-
ocity, u
b
i
; is likely to be greater than the fresh gas conditional
velocity, u
u
i
: Then, in opposition with the modeled expres-
sion (Eq. (211)), the turbulent ¯uxes of the progress variable
c have the same sign as the mean gradient (2~ c=2x
i
): Counter-
gradient transport also increases when the heat release factor
t, de®ned by Eq. (141), increases [144].
D. Veynante, L. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 237
Fig. 26. Transverse pro®les of propagation (27´[knl
s
S]), curvature
(k7´nl
s
S) and combined (k7´nl
s
S 27´[knl
s
S]) terms (m
22
) in the
¯ame surface density balance equation plotted as a function of the
mean progress variable c: The consumption term modeled as 2S
2
/
(1 2 c) and the new proposed closure, 7
2
c 1b(c
p
2 c)S
2
= c(1 2 c)
where b = 0:4 and c
p
= 0:5 are also displayed. f = 0:90; x =
80 mm [121].
Fig. 27. Flame surface density (half top) and mean reaction rate,
estimated form CH radical emission (half bottom) ®elds are
compared for f = 0:90: Flame surface density data, extracted
from two different data sets, are not available from 30 to 70 mm
downstream the rod [121].
The various versions of this BML model propose an alge-
braic closure for the mean reaction rate of the progress
variable c, but focus attention on the scalar turbulent trans-
port (closure schemes for the turbulent ¯uxes r
¯
u
//
i
c
//
balance
equations), whereas other models may lead to more sophis-
ticated reaction rate formulations, retaining a simple gradi-
ent closure (Eq. (211)) for these ¯uxes.
The occurrence of counter-gradient turbulent transport
have been analyzed using direct numerical simulation
(DNS) [140]. The results demonstrate the power of DNS
to help in the modeling of turbulent combustion. This
section is devoted to these results, obtained from a direct
solution without any closure models, of the instantaneous
balance equations.
8.2. Direct numerical simulation analysis of turbulent
transport
8.2.1. Introduction
Gradient and counter-gradient turbulent scalar transport
was observed in DNS of premixed ¯ame/three-dimensional
turbulence interactions [145,146]. Then, simulations of two-
dimensional ¯ame/turbulence interactions were reported
[140]. The reduced costs of 2D simulations allow the inves-
tigation of a large range of ¯ame and turbulence parameters.
In these simulations, a planar laminar premixed ¯ame is
®rstly superimposed on a homogeneous isotropic turbulent
¯ow ®eld (Fig. 28). The ¯ame front is progressively
wrinkled by turbulent motions, and the turbulence decays
in time. After a time of the order of the eddy-turnover time
of the largest turbulence structures, the ¯ame may be
assumed to be in equilibrium with the turbulent ¯ow ®eld
and relevant modeling information is extracted from DNS.
As the numerical con®guration is statistically one-
dimensional in the propagating direction, quantities such
as mean progress variable or mean turbulent ¯uxes may
be extracted from averaging in the perpendicular direction.
8.2.2. Results
Turbulent ¯uxes ru
//
c
//
extracted from the direct numer-
ical simulations conducted by Trouve [145] (denoted CTR)
and Rutland [146] are displayed in Fig. 29. The ®rst data-
base clearly exhibits gradient turbulent transport, whereas
the second one corresponds to a counter-gradient situation.
The main discrepancy between the two databases lies in the
initial turbulence level which is higher in the CTR simula-
tion (u
/
0
=S
L
= 10) than in the Rutland database (u
/
0
=S
L
= 1):
Mean and conditional average velocities across the turbu-
lent ¯ame brush are displayed in Fig. 30 for the two DNS
simulations. These results lead to the following comments.
² As expected, in the Rutland database, the burnt gas con-
ditional velocity, u
b
; is higher than the fresh gas condi-
tional velocity, u
u
; leading to a counter-gradient turbulent
transport in agreement with expression (212).
² On the other hand, in the CTR database, the fresh gas
conditional velocity is higher than the burnt gas con-
ditional velocity. This result is ®rst surprising: u
b
is
expected to be larger than u
u
because of thermal expan-
sion due to the heat release. However, this observation is
D. Veynante, L. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 238
Fig. 28. Numerical con®guration. A plane laminar premixed ¯ame
is initially superimposed to an homogeneous and isotropic turbu-
lence.
Fig. 29. Turbulent ¯ux ru
//
c
//
displayed as a function of the mean progress variable ~ c (bold lines) in the tri-dimensional direct numerical
simulations from CTR (Ð) and Rutland (- - -). Positive (respectively negative) values of ru
//
c
//
denote a counter-gradient (respectively
gradient) turbulent transport. The corresponding turbulent ¯uxes estimated using the BML expression (Eq. (212)) are displayed for comparison
using thin lines. Velocities are made dimensionless using the laminar ¯ame speed S
L
[140].
in agreement with expression (212) and a gradient turbu-
lent transport. Note that Eq. (212) overestimates the
turbulent ¯ux
¯
u
//
c
//
(see Fig. 29) because, due to the
¯ame thickness that must be resolved in the numerical
simulation, the progress variable c is not fully bimodal
(c = 0 or c = 1). In both cases, the Bray±Moss±Libby
model remains able to predict the turbulent ¯ux type
(gradient or counter-gradient).
The two-dimensional simulations conducted in Ref.
[140], referenced as CRCT in Fig. 31 have been used to
analyze the occurrence of counter-gradient turbulent
transport. The gradient turbulent transport is clearly
enhanced by an increase in the turbulence level u
/
/S
L
and
decreasing values of the heat release factor t. The
`increase', in terms of velocity ratio u
/
/S
L
, of the line
delimiting gradient and counter-gradient turbulent transport
when l
t
/d
l
decreases is due to the reduced ability of small
scale turbulence motions to wrinkle the ¯ame front. This
phenomenon has already been discussed [65] and included
in the ITNFS model [127]. Three- and two-dimensional
direct numerical simulations lead to very similar results
for this problem.
8.3. Physical analysis
A simple physical analysis is now reported to derive a
criterion predicting the occurrence of counter-gradient
turbulent diffusion [140].
Following Bidaux and Bray (1994) (unpublished work
already presented in the BML model context Section
7.4.4), turbulent ¯uxes of the progress variable c,
¯
u
//
i
c
//
;
are directly connected to the surface-averaged ¯uctuating
velocity, ku
//
i
l
s
(Eq. (194)). Thus, a model for
¯
u
//
i
c
//
may be
deduced from a model for ku
//
i
l
s
involving the conditional
fresh and burnt gases mean velocities:
ku
//
i
l
s
= ku
i
l
s
2 ~ u
i
= (c
p
2 ~ c) u
b
i
2 u
u
i
_ _
(213)
In the following, the ¯ow ®eld is assumed to be statistically
one-dimensional and only the turbulent transport in the
propagating direction,
¯
u
//
c
//
will be described. Our analysis
is based on the two limiting cases pictured in Fig. 32:
Low turbulence level: The ¯ame front remains smooth
and the velocity jump between fresh and burnt gases, u
b
2
u
u
; is determined primarily by thermal expansion and its
D. Veynante, L. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 239
Fig. 30. Conditional velocities across the turbulent ¯ame brush displayed as a function of the mean progress variable ~ c in the Rutland (top) and
the CTR (bottom) databases. Favre averaged velocity, ~ u (Ð Ð
Ð), fresh gases conditional velocity, u
u
(´ ´ ´), burnt gases conditional velocity, u
b
(±)
and ¯ame front conditional velocity, kuls
(- - -). Velocities are made dimensionless using the laminar ¯ame speed S
L
[140].
value is close to the one obtained in a plane and laminar
¯ame ( u
b
2 u
u
< tS
L
): Eq. (213) becomes:
ku
//
l
s
= (c
p
2 ~ c)tS
L
(214)
High turbulence level: Due to strong viscous dissipation
of turbulent eddies in the hot burnt gas, the ¯ame front
motions are assumed to be dominated by the turbulence
properties taken upstream of the ¯ame.
² At the leading edge of the turbulent ¯ame (near ~ c = 0),
the ¯ame front is convected towards the fresh gas with a
mean velocity estimated by 2u
/
(see Fig. 32). Then,
u
b
2 u
u
< 2u
/
(215)
where u
/
denotes the rms velocity in the fresh gases.
² At the trailing edge of the ¯ame brush ( ~ c < 1); the ¯ame
front is convected by turbulent motions towards the burnt
D. Veynante, L. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 240
Fig. 31. Premixed turbulent combustion diagram. The DNS ¯ame-¯ow conditions are plotted as a function of the velocity ratio, u
/
/S
L
, and
length-scale ratio, l
t
/d
L
. The Classical Klimov±Williams criterion and the criterion from Ref. [65] are given to show the domain of validity of
¯amelet combustion. Also plotted are the DNS conditions of the Rutland (CR, t = 2:3) and CTR (t = 3) simulations. As the turbulence is
decaying in the CTR simulation, CTR conditions are displayed as an almost vertical line. The symbols W (t = 3) and A (t = 6) correspond to
the CRCT DNS. In 2D DNS, the turbulence decay is smaller and is not represented. Filled (open) symbols denote gradient (counter-gradient)
turbulent diffusion. The transition criterion, N
B
; ts
L
=2au
/
= 1 (Eq. (220)), separating CGD (below) from GD (above) is plotted for (t = 3)
and (t = 6) [140].
Fig. 32. Two limiting cases: counter-gradient transport promoted by thermal expansion (left); gradient transport due to turbulent motions
(right).
gases with a mean speed estimated by 1u
/
(see Fig. 32):
u
b
2 u
u
< 1u
/
(216)
leading to the simple linear model:
ku
//
l
s
= 22(c
p
2 ~ c)au
/
(217)
where a is an ef®ciency function, similar to the ITNFS
model [127], accounting for the weak ability of small
scale turbulent motions to wrinkle and convect the
¯ame front. a is expected to be of order unity for large
turbulent length scales and vanishes when turbulent
eddies are too small to affect the ¯ame front. The factor
2 has been introduced assuming c
p
< 0:5:
Then, modeling ku
//
l
s
as a sum of these two contributions
leads to:
ku
//
l
s
= (c
p
2 ~ c)(tS
L
22au
/
) (218)
and the turbulent ¯ux becomes:
¯
u
//
c
//
= ~ c(1 2 ~ c)(tS
L
22au
/
) (219)
This simple model is well veri®ed in direct numerical simu-
lations [140] and has also been recovered when applying a
second order modeling (i.e. balance equations for turbulent
scalar ¯uxes) to stagnating ¯ames in the limit of small turbu-
lence intensities [131]. The turbulent ¯ux may be viewed as
the sum of two contributions acting in opposite directions,
one induced by turbulent motions and the other by thermal
expansion. Then, the turbulent transport is analyzed as
follows: for a suf®ciently high turbulence level, the ¯ame
is unable to impose its own dynamics to the ¯ow ®eld and
the turbulent transport is of the gradient type, as for any
inert scalar. On the contrary, when the turbulence level
remains low, the thermal expansion due to heat release
dominates and the ¯ame is able to impose its own dynamics
leading to a counter-gradient turbulent transport. Counter-
gradient turbulent diffusion occurs when
¯
u
//
c
//
is positive
and expression (219) may be used to derive a criterion deli-
neating gradient and counter-gradient regimes. The Bray
number:
N
B
=
tS
L
2au
/
(220)
is greater (respectively lower) than unity when a counter-
gradient (respectively gradient) turbulent transport is
expected. This criterion is well veri®ed by direct numerical
simulation results, as shown in Fig. 31. The ef®ciency func-
tion a has been estimated from DNS (Fig. 33). Recent
experimental results [147] have con®rmed these ®ndings.
8.3.1. Comments
² Following Fig. 31 and criterion (220), in practical appli-
cations turbulent transport may be counter-gradient, or
close to the transition between gradient and counter-
gradient regimes. In many cases, the heat release factor
t is about 5±7 leading to a transition between gradient
and counter-gradient situations when u
/
=S
L
is of the order
of 3. Nevertheless, the possible occurrence of counter-
gradient transport is generally neglected in modeling.
² The mean progress variable gradient may be estimated
as:
2~ c
2x
<
~ c(1 2 ~ c)
d
b
(221)
where a length scale d
b
characterizing the ¯ame brush is
introduced. Then, the gradient type contribution in Eq.
(219) corresponds to a Prandt±Kolmogorov turbulence
modeling:
2~ c(1 2 ~ c)d
b
au
/
< 2ad
b

k
_
2~ c
2x
(222)
where k is the turbulent kinetic energy and u
/
=

k
_
.
² Recent works [148,149] have reported regimes, corre-
sponding to low turbulence levels, where combustion
instabilities occur and wrinkle the ¯ame front, acting in
D. Veynante, L. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 241
Fig. 33. DNS estimated ef®ciency function a (Eq. (21)) as a function of the length scale ratio l
t
/d
l
comparing the integral turbulent length scale
and the laminar ¯ame thickness [140].
an opposite direction than counter-gradient diffusion
reducing the ¯ame front wrinkling. These instabilities
should also be included in combustion models [150].
² Expression (219) has been derived to analyze the occur-
rence of counter-gradient transport, but is not suited for
numerical simulations. For instance, such a simpli®ed
formulation is unable to predict a gradient transport in
the vicinity of the leading edge ( ~ c < 0) always observed,
even in counter-gradient situations.
8.4. External pressure gradient effects
The previous analysis is completed by investigating the
effects of externally imposed pressure gradients on turbulent
premixed ¯ames. Counter-gradient turbulent transport was
®rst explained [19,151] by differential buoyancy effects of
pressure gradients on pockets of heavy and cold fresh gases
and on pockets of light and hot burnt gases. In many
combustion systems, ¯ames are ducted and submitted to
strong pressure gradients due to thermal expansion and lead-
ing to ¯ow accelerations. In Ref. [20], it is experimentally
shown that counter-gradient transports are enhanced in
ducted ¯ames.
In Refs. [148,152], the same type of DNS as [140] was
conducted, introducing an externally imposed pressure
gradient (in fact, due to technical reasons, a constant
acceleration). The main conclusions, displayed in Figs. 34
and 35, are:
² A favorable pressure gradient, i.e. a pressure decrease
from unburnt to burnt gases, is found to decrease the
¯ame wrinkling (see Fig. 34), the ¯ame brush thickness,
and the turbulent ¯ame speed S
T
(Fig. 35). It also
promotes counter-gradient turbulent transport.
² On the other hand, adverse pressure gradients tend to
increase the ¯ame brush thickness and turbulent ¯ame
speed (Fig. 35), and enhance classical gradient turbulent
transport. As proposed in Ref. [153], the turbulent ¯ame
speed is modi®ed by a buoyancy term linearly dependent
on both the imposed pressure gradient and the integral
length scale l
t
.
² A corrected Bray criterion (Eq. (220)) has been proposed
to account for the pressure gradient effects. We do not
give more details because this modi®ed criterion needs to
be validated and improved (length scale effects are not so
clear and various analyses are possible, see [152]).
All these results suggest that counter-gradient turbulent
transport should be expected in most ducted turbulent ¯ames
and some experimental observations are now reported.
8.5. Counter-gradient transportÐexperimental results
The V-shape turbulent ¯ame was described in Section
7.4.1. The thermal expansion modi®es the ¯ame dynamics
as is clearly apparent on high speed tomography ®lms
(scheme in Fig. 36, see also Ref. [121]): in the ®rst part
of the chamber (region 1), because of the rod wake, the
D. Veynante, L. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 242
Fig. 34. Superimposed instantaneous temperature and vorticity
®elds at the same time. (a) No imposed pressure gradient±gradient
turbulent transport; (b) favorable imposed pressure gradient±
counter-gradient turbulent transport. A planar laminar ¯ame
separating fresh gases (left) from burnt gases is initially super-
imposed to an homogeneous and isotropic turbulent ¯ow ®eld
(u
/
0
=S
L
= 5) [152].
Table 6
Geometrical analysis of the scalar turbulent transport in a V-shaped premixed ¯ame (see Fig. 36). G and CG denote, respectively, a gradient and
a counter-gradient turbulent diffusion
Zone u
b
2 u
u
2~ c
2x
¯
u
//
c
//
v
b
2 v
u
(when y .0)
2~ c
2y
(when y .0)
¯
v
//
c
//
1 ,0 .0 G .0 ,0 G
2 .0 .0 CG .0 ,0 G
coherent structures embedding the ¯ame front turn clock-
wise (counter-clockwise) in the upper (lower) ¯ame sheet,
as in classical Von KaÂrmaÂn vortex streets, except for
their symmetry due to pressure waves. When the center-
line velocity increases, because of thermal expansion in
burnt gases (region 2), the upper (lower) coherent struc-
tures start to turn counter-clockwise (clockwise). This
phenomenon may be recast in terms of turbulent trans-
port using a simple geometrical analysis based on the
Bray±Moss±Libby relation (212) and summarized in
Table 6. Accordingly, the transverse turbulent ¯ux
¯
v
//
c
//
is always of gradient type, but the change in rota-
tion of the coherent structures corresponds to a transi-
tion between gradient and counter-gradient transport for
the downstream turbulent ¯ux
¯
u
//
c
//
: The turbulent ¯uxes
are of gradient type just behind the rod, as expected to
ensure the stabilization of the ¯ame, and becomes of
counter-gradient type further downstream.
8.6. To include counter-gradient turbulent transport in
modeling
Except for the work of Bray, Moss, Libby and their
co-workers [19,128,129,132,151], very few works have
been devoted to the effective modeling of counter-
gradient transport. The approach of Bray et al. is mainly
based on second order modeling, using balance equations
for the turbulent ¯uxes
¯
u
//
i
c
//
: These equations are easily
D. Veynante, L. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 243
Fig. 35. Reduced turbulent ¯ame speed S
T
/S
L
plotted as a function of the reduced time t=t
f
= S
L
t=d
L
; where t
f
= d
L
=S
L
is a ¯ame time, for
different values of the externally imposed pressure gradient. (a) initial turbulent level u
/
0
=S
L
= 5; no pressure gradient (Ð) and increasing
favorable pressure gradient (´ ´ ´ and - - -); (b) initial turbulent level u
/
0
=S
L
= 2; no pressure gradient (Ð) and increasing adverse pressure
gradient (´ ´ ´ and - - -). Markers correspond to the Libby theory [152,153].
Fig. 36. A rough scheme of the coherent structures dynamics
observed using laser tomography [121].
derived from momentum and progress variable balance
equations:
2 r
¯
u
//
i
c
//
2t
...,,...
(I)
1
2 r ~ u
j
¯
u
//
i
c
//
2x
j
....,,....
(II)
= 2
2 r
¯
u
//
j
u
//
i
c
//
2x
j
....,,....
(III)
2 r
¯
u
//
i
u
//
j
2~ c
2x
j
....,,....
(IV)
2r
¯
u
//
j
c
//
2~ u
i
2x
j
....,,....
(V)
2 c
//
2 p
2x
i
..,,..
(VI)
2 c
//
2p
/
2x
i
..,,..
(VII)
2u
//
i
2J
k
2x
k
...,,...
(VIII)
c
//
2t
ik
2x
k
..,,..
(IX)
1 r
¯
u
//
i
_ v
..,,..
(X)
(223)
where the RHS terms correspond, respectively, to turbulent
transport of r
¯
u
//
i
c
//
(III), ~ c-gradient effects (IV), mean vel-
ocity gradient effects (V), the action of mean (VI) and ¯uc-
tuating (VII) pressure gradients, r
¯
u
//
i
c
//
turbulent dissipation
(VIII and IX) and reaction rate (X). This balance equation is,
of course, unclosed and each term may be extracted from
direct numerical simulations [132,140,152].
The discussion of the closure schemes for this equation is
beyond the scope of the present review and the reader may
®nd relevant information in Refs. [128,132,151]. Some
comments may be made:
² The
¯
u
//
i
c
//
turbulent transport (III) is generally modeled
using a classical gradient expression (gradient turbulent
transport at the third order).
² Mean progress variable gradient terms (IV) needs
Reynolds stress modeling for
¯
u
//
i
u
//
j
: Then, new balance
equations are derived, and closed, for these quantities
(second order turbulence model).
² The mean velocity gradient term (V) is closed because
turbulent ¯uxes
¯
u
//
j
c
//
are provided by their balance
equations.
² The mean pressure gradient term (VI) is easily known
under a BML assumption (Section 7.3). Making use of
Eq. (165) yields:
c
//
= c 2 ~ c = t
~ c(1 2 ~ c)
1 1t~ c
(224)
² The ¯uctuating pressure term (VII) is more dif®cult to
understand and to model. In Ref. [151], this term is
neglected, however this assumption is not supported by
DNS results [152]. The mean pressure term (VI) and the
¯uctuatingpressureterm(VII) probablyneedtobe modeled
together as c
//
2p=2x
i
: In Ref. [128], the pressure gradient
termclosure is carefullydiscussed. Recently, a model based
on a partitioning of each pressure ¯uctuation covariance
into contributions from reactants, products and thin ¯ame-
lets was proposed [132]. The comparison of this new
model with DNS results are encouraging and con®rm the
importance of the intermittency between the conditional
mean pressure gradients in reactants and products.
² Turbulent dissipation terms (VIII and IX) are generally
expressed together using small scale dissipation rate
assumptions [151].
Second order closures for turbulent ¯uxes and Reynolds
stresses require nine additional balance equations in 3D simu-
lations (three for progress variable ¯uxes,
¯
u
//
i
c
//
; and six for
Reynolds stresses,
¯
u
//
i
u
//
j
). Because of very high computa-
tional costs, model closures and implementation dif®culties,
very few simulations have been conducted using the second
order formulation. Recently [129], very promising results
were obtained, particularly in predicting experimental results
[20].
8.7. Towards a conditional turbulence modeling?
The BML formulation (Section 7.3.5) directly distin-
guishes between the properties of fresh and burnt gases,
D. Veynante, L. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 244
Fig. 37. Axial velocity u histograms for four transverse locations 80 mm downstream the rod in the V-shape turbulent ¯ame (Fig. 19): burnt
gases (y = 0 mm; -´-); reaction zone (y = 5 mm; ´ ´ ´ and y = 12 mm; Ð Ð
Ð); unburnt gases (y = 18 mm; Ð) [121].
this was achieved using conditional averaging (Eq. (168)).
This approach is very attractive because turbulence charac-
teristics may differ in fresh and in burnt gases as shown in
Fig. 37, where velocity histograms obtained using laser
Doppler velocimetry in the V-shape turbulent ¯ame
(Section 7.4.1) are displayed.
The velocity distribution is almost Gaussian in the
unburnt and the burnt gases, but becomes clearly bimodal
in the reaction zone denoting an intermittency between fresh
and burnt gases, according to Eq. (172). This bimodal distri-
bution does not correspond to the assumptions made in the
derivation of most turbulence models, such as k±1.
A conditional approach to determine the conditional
averages of a quantity Q in fresh (

Q
u
) and burnt (

Q
b
)
gases is probably a promising way leading to a straight-
forward description of turbulent transport (Eqs. (170) and
(172)). The objective is then to derive balance equations for
quantities such as:
rcQ = r ~ c

Q
b
; r(1 2c)Q = r(1 2 ~ c)

Q
u
which is easy from c and Q balance equations [141]. These
equations remain to be closed and a few attempts have been
conducted in this direction [91,148,154], but no clear
conclusions can be found in the literature.
All these works devoted to turbulent transport suggest
that turbulent combustion modeling might probably be
greatly improved by advancing the description of turbulent
transport itself. This point motivates large eddy simulation
(LES) for turbulent combustion modeling [155].
9. Reynolds averaged models for non-premixed
turbulent combustion
9.1. Introduction
Much work has been devoted to the numerical modeling
of non-premixed combustion systems, mainly assuming a
chemistry much faster than mixing and molecular diffusion.
This `mixed is burnt' regime is easily described from the
D. Veynante, L. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 245
Table 7
Modeling strategies for non-premixed turbulent ¯ames. Z is the mixture fraction, x = Du7Zu
2
its scalar dissipation rate,
~
P denotes pdfs, V
Ç
, an
integrated amount of heat release, S, the density of ¯ame surface and

Y
C
i
; a conditional moment. PaSR stands for partially stirred reactor,
turbulent micromixing was expressed with a linear relaxation (IEM-LMSE) D7
2
Y
i
< (
~
Y
i
2Y
i
)=t
t
, where t
t
< (k=1) is an eddy break-up mixing
time; other formulation exist [96] (from Ref. [55])
Major assumptions Flame structure in mixture
fraction space
Turbulent combustion model
In®nitely fast chemistry Species are function of Z:
Y
i
= Y
i
(Z
p
)
Presumed Pdf:
~
P(Z
p
) from
~
Z and
¯
Z
//2
Chemical equilibrium [35]

Y
i
=
_
Z
Y
i
(Z
p
)
~
P(Z
p
)dZ
p
1D strained reaction zones Species are functions of Z and x:
Y
i
= Y
i
(Z
p
; x
p
(t))
Flamelet modeling:
~
Y
i
=
_
Z
_
x
Y
i
(Z
p
; x
p
)
~
P(Z
p
; x
p
)dZ
p
dx
p
[165]
Diffusion balances chemistry
as in a 1D counter-¯ow ¯ame
Steady [63] or unsteady [177]
Single-step or complex
chemistry
Total heat release is a function of x:
_
V(x
st
) =
_
11
21
_ v
T
(j; x
st
)dj
Coherent ¯ame model:
Solve for the density of ¯ame surface S
Constant (Le
i
= 1) or
complex transport properties
(Le
i
± 1)
j coordinate across the ¯amelet [88]

_ v
T
=
_
V( x)S [84]
Diffusion is captured via
micromixing modelling
Solve for conditional moments:
Y
C
i
(Z
p
) =
_
Y
i
uZ = Z
p
_
Conditional moment closure:
presumed pdf

P(Z
p
) [102,103]
~
Y
i
=
_
1
0

Y
C
i
(Z
p
)
~
P(Z
p
)dZ
p
Simple transport properties
(Le
i
= 1)
Solve for representative PaSR:
dY
i
=dZ = (
~
Y
i
2Y
i
1t
t
_ v
PaSR
i
)=(
~
Z 2Z)
to get _ v
i
(Z; t
t
)
PaSR
Presumed pdf 1PaSR modelling:
MIL/PEUL [68,191]

_ v
i
=

k
_
Z
( _ v
PaSR
i
(Z
p
; t
p
t
))
k

P(Z
p
; t
p
t
)dZ
p
dt
t
Single-step or complex
chemistry
Solve for Monte-Carlo particles:
dY
k
i
=dt = (
~
Y
i
2Y
k
i
)=t
t
1 _ v
k
i
to get
~
P(Y
p
1
; ¼; Y
p
n
)
Pdf methods:
~
Y
i
=
_
Y
1
¼
_
Y
n
Y
p
i
~
P(Y
p
1
; ¼; Y
p
n
)dY
p
1
¼dY
p
n
[93]
Chemical source is closed
(only for pdf methods)
turbulent mixing of conserved scalars (Section 3.2) and
mixing problems have been the subject of many discussions
[156±158].
There exist strong motivations for improving non-premixed
and partially premixed turbulent combustion modeling:
² The development of new combustion technologies for
aircraft engines, and more generally for gas turbines
operating in the non-premixed regime, implies the accu-
rate determination of the position in the ¯ow where
combustion starts and the control of pollutants emission.
Crucial points which cannot be addressed using the in®-
nitely fast chemistry hypothesis.
² Many practical systems include liquid injection of the
fuel, followed by non-premixed and partially premixed
combustion.
² Even in burners operating in the premixed regime, the
premixing of the reactants is not always complete at the
molecular level and some partial premixing may be
observed. Sometimes, partial premixing is even desirable
to limit pollutant emissions (strati®ed charge engines).
As for premixed combustion (Sections 7 and 8), the
modeling of turbulent diffusion ¯ames relies on simplifying
assumptions for both chemistry and transport. Depending on
the simpli®cations made for these mechanisms, various
approaches for laminar ¯ames and models for turbulent
¯ames are obtained (see Table 7). Hypotheses formulated
to construct models for non-premixed turbulent ¯ames may
be organized into three major groups:
² Assumption of in®nitely fast chemistry (mixed is burnt).
² Finite rate chemistry assuming a local diffusive±reactive
budget similar to the one observed in laminar ¯ames
(¯amelet assumption).
² Finite rate chemistry with treatment of molecular and
heat transport separated from chemical reaction (CMC,
pdf method; Section 6). Diffusion is then addressed using
turbulent micromixing modeling, while chemical sources
can be dealt with in an exact and closed form (only for
pdf).
The proposed closures are all based on a particular
description of turbulent mixing, hence the basic concepts
useful to capture fuel/air turbulent mixing are ®rst
presented.
9.2. Fuel/air mixing modeling
9.2.1. Introduction
The mean value of the mixture fraction
~
Z gives an indica-
tion of the local mean fuel/air mixing in turbulent ¯ows. In
addition, the structure and the properties of the ¯ame depend
on
¯
Z
//2
; measuring the degree of mixing between reactants.
A simple description of turbulent mixing is thus obtained
from the two ®elds:
~
Z and
¯
Z
//2
: Introducing the classical
gradient transport closure for the turbulent ¯uxes (Section
6), one may write:
r
2
~
Z
2t
1 r ~ u´7
~
Z = rn
t
7
2
~
Z (225)
r
2
¯
Z
//2
2t
1 r ~ u´7
¯
Z
// 2
= rn
t
7
2 ¯
Z
//2
12 rn
t
u7
~
Zu
2
....,,....
Production
2 2 r ~ x
.,,.
Dissipation
(226)
The ®rst term on the RHS is the turbulent transport, the
second in Eq. (226) is the production of ¯uctuations by
the mean gradients, the last is the scalar dissipation rate ~ x
remaining unclosed. r ~ x = rDu7Zu
2
was discussed for
premixed turbulent ¯ames, in the EBU, BML and S models
(Section 7).
9.2.2. Balance equation and simple relaxation model for ~ x
A transport equation may be derived for ~ x from the Z
balance equation (Eq. (41)):
2 r ~ x
2t
1
2 r ~ u
j
~ x
2x
j
1
2
2x
j
rDu
//
j
2Z
//
2x
i
2Z
//
2x
i
_ _
= 22
2
2x
j
rDu
//
j
2Z
//
2x
i
2
~
Z
2x
i
_ _
.........,,.........
(I)
22
2
~
Z
2x
i
rD
2Z
//
2x
j
2u
//
j
2x
i
_ _
........,,........
(II)
22
2
~
Z
2x
j
rD
2Z
//
2x
i
2u
//
j
2x
i
_ _
........,,........
(III)
22
2~ u
j
2x
i
rD
2Z
//
2x
i
2Z
//
2x
j
_ _
.........,,.........
(IV)
22 rD
2u
//
j
2x
i
2Z
//
2x
i
2Z
//
2x
j
.......,,.......
(V)
22 D
2
r
2
2x
j
2Z
//
2x
i
_ _
2
2x
j
2Z
//
2x
i
_ _
............,,............
(VI)
2
2
r
D
2Z
2x
i
2r
2x
i
2
2x
j
rD
2Z
2x
j
_ _
...........,,...........
(VII)
(227)
The term (I) on the RHS describes curvature effects of the
mean mixture fraction ®eld, and as (II) and (III), contains
correlations between the Z ®eld and the velocity ®eld.
Compared to other terms, these correlations vanish for suf®-
ciently large Reynolds numbers. (IV) corresponds to the
correlations between mean ¯ow motion and ¯uctuations.
(V) is the strain rate of the scalar Z ®eld, already discussed
for ¯ame surface density modeling in premixed ¯ames
(Section 7.4.4). (VI) is the dissipation rate of the scalar
D. Veynante, L. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 246
dissipation rate and (VII) is negligible when density gradi-
ents are kept small.
To derive a linear relaxation closure for the scalar dissi-
pation rate, a homogeneous Z steady ®eld in equilibrium
(production = dissipation) is ®rst considered. Then,
Eq. (227) reduces to a balance between the straining rate
of Z and the dissipation rate of the scalar dissipation rate:
22rD
2u
//
j
2x
i
2Z
//
2x
i
2Z
//
2x
j
= 2D
2
r
2
2x
j
2Z
//
2x
i
_ _
2
2x
j
2Z
//
2x
i
_ _
(228)
the ¯uctuating velocity gradient is assumed to be of the
order of the inverse of the small scales characteristic time,
i.e. (2u
//
j
=2x
i
) , (1=t
k
) , (1=n)
1=2
: The remaining part of the
strain rate term is proportional to ~ x; then,
22rD
2u
//
j
2x
i
2Z
//
2x
i
2Z
//
2x
j
,
r ~ x
t
k
, R
l
r ~ x
(k=1)
where R
l
is a Reynolds number based on the Taylor
microscale. A quadratic behavior in ~ x; with a direct depen-
dence on (
¯
Z
//2
)
21
is anticipated for the dissipation rate of the
scalar dissipation rate:
2rD
2
2
2x
j
2Z
//
2x
i
_ _
2
2x
j
2Z
//
2x
i
_ _
, R
l
r ~ x
2
¯
Z
//2
The equilibrium condition (Eq. (228)) leads to:
~ x =
¯
Z
//2
(k=1)
(229)
recovering the widely used linear relaxation model.
Eq. (229) is a very simpli®ed description of micromixing.
The scalar dissipation rate depends on the detail of the char-
acteristics of the turbulence (velocity and scalar energetic
spectrum), the linear relaxation is thus a ®rst approximation
that may be improved, for instance, by solving a modeled
balanced equation for ~ x: Such a closed equation may be
found in Ref. [159].
The knowledge of
~
Z and
¯
Z
//2
from their closed transport
equation may be used to presume the pdf of Z,
~
P(Z
p
; x; t);
with a b-shape (see Section 6.4.2). Because the internal
structure of diffusion ¯ames is easily obtained from condi-
tional statistics as
_
Y
i
uZ = Z
p
_
(Section 3.2), many models
(¯amelet, CMC) incorporate a b-pdf to calculate means
quantities:
~
Y
i
(x; t) =
_1
0
(Y
i
uZ = Z
p
)
....,,....
Flame structure
~
P(Z
p
; x; t)
,........,
Mixing
dZ
p
(230)
The simplest of these models invokes the in®nitely fast
chemistry assumption.
9.3. Models assuming in®nitely fast chemistry
9.3.1. Eddy dissipation model
The eddy dissipation model (EDC) is a direct extension to
non-premixed ¯ame of the eddy break up (EBU) closure,
initially devoted to turbulent premixed combustion [160]
(Section 7.2). The fuel burning rate is calculated according
to:
r _ v
F
= a r
1
k
min
~
Y
F
;
~
Y
O
s
; b
~
Y
P
(1 1s)
_ _
(231)
where a and b are adjustable parameters of the closure. In
Eq. (231), the reaction rate is limited by a de®cient species.
To account for the existence of burnt gases bringing the
energy to ignite the fresh reactants, this species may be
the reaction products. A priori, this model does not respect
the response of diffusion combustion in mixture fraction
space and may generate mean fuel mass fraction values
lower than
~
Y
IFCM
F
: Actually, for large a, Eq. (231) is dif®cult
to justify.
9.3.2. Presumed pdf: in®nitely fast chemistry model
One of the ®rst descriptions of non-premixed combustion
was given in Ref. [35] which assumed an in®nitely fast
single step chemical reaction (Section 3.2). Considering
the piecewise relations (Fig. 5, Table 1):
Y
F
= Y
IFCM
F
(Z); Y
O
= Y
IFCM
O
(Z); T = T
IFCM
(Z) (232)
relating the fuel and oxidizer mass fractions, and the
temperature to the mixture fraction in the case of in®nitely
fast chemistry, mean quantities may be directly obtained
with a b-pdf (Section 6.4.2) and Eq. (230):
~
Y
IFCM
F
=
_1
0
Y
IFCM
F
(Z
p
)
~
P(Z
p
; x; t)dZ
p
(233)
~
Y
IFCM
O
=
_1
0
Y
IFCM
O
(Z
p
)
~
P(Z
p
; x; t)dZ
p
(234)
~
T
IFCM
=
_1
0
T
IFCM
(Z
p
)
~
P(Z
p
; x; t)dZ
p
(235)
The mean ¯ame structure is then known from an in®nitely
fast chemistry model (IFCM) without solving balance equa-
tions for mean thermochemical quantities. The inputs of this
`mixed is burnt' closure are
~
Z and
¯
Z
//2
determining the b-
pdf chosen to capture the detail of fuel/air mixing. IFCM is
therefore a two-equations model for non-premixed turbulent
combustion. It is very popular and is usually coupled with a
low Mach number solution of the turbulent ¯ow [161], so
that the thermodynamics of the ¯ow is fully known from Eq.
(235). IFCM is an interesting ®rst guess to provide the
global ¯ame structure for the maximum of heat that can
be released, a valuable result for certain aspects of design.
Note that the piecewise relations are exact when the chemi-
cal time is in®nitely small. Therefore, for very large
D. Veynante, L. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 247
DamkoÈhler numbers (Section 3.2), IFCM is an accurate
description of a turbulent diffusion ¯ame. Unfortunately
such a zero order model does not exist for premixed turbu-
lent combustion. To handle multi-step chemistry, in®nitely
fast chemistry may be replaced by a chemical equilibrium
condition [162].
This model lacks any prediction capacities when ignition,
quenching or even small ®nite rate chemistry effects exist.
9.4. Flamelet modeling
9.4.1. Introduction
Experiments in jets ¯ames and direct numerical simula-
tions suggest that there exist situations in burners where the
chemistry is fast, but not in®nitely fast (see for example
[163,164]). In these measurements and calculations, the
response of the ¯ame in mixture fraction space lies in the
vicinity of the curves given by Y
IFCM
i
(Fig. 38).
Models have been proposed for such ¯ames [63,165]. For
a given state of mixing in the turbulent ¯ow, thus given
values of Z and x, ¯amelet models are derived assuming
that the local balance between diffusion and reaction is
similar to the one found in a prototype laminar ¯ame for
the same values of Z and x. Flamelet models are therefore
constructed from an asymptotic view of diffusive-reaction
layers as given by Fig. 6. The two control parameters of
planar and steady laminar strained ¯ames are used: the
mixture fraction Z and its scalar dissipation rate x (Section
3.2). In a turbulent ¯ow, these two quantities ¯uctuate in
space and time, but when the joint pdf
~
P(Z
p
; x
p
; x; t) is
D. Veynante, L. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 248
Fig. 38. Scatter plots of major species mole fractions and temperature as functions of mixture fraction: (a) Data from three-dimensional direct
numerical simulations of Montgomery et al. [164]; (b) Raman scattering measurements of Barlow et al. [163] in H
2
/argon±air ¯ame. Solid lines
indicate chemical equilibrium.
known, the mean properties of the ¯ame may be calculated
as:
~
Y
i
=
_
Z
p
_
x
p
Y
SLFM
i
(Z
p
; x
p
)
~
P(Z
p
; x
p
; x; t)dx
p
dZ
p
(236)
Y
SLFM
i
(Z
p
; x
p
) is the local ¯ame structure in mixture fraction
space and
~
P(Z
p
; x
p
; x; t) captures the statistics of fuel/air
mixing. SLFM stands for steady laminar ¯amelet model.
This model may be viewed as a direct improvement of the
in®nitely fast chemistry model (IFCM), since it uses the
same formalism, but with an additional parameter: the scalar
dissipation rate x, thereby including ®nite rate chemistry
effects. For a given chemistry, and therefore a given chemi-
cal time t
c
, when the DamkoÈhler number Da
p
= (t
c
x
st
)
21
is
large, IFCM is recovered. An increase in x is followed by
®nite rate chemistry effects, or even quenching when x
becomes too large (Fig. 6), then, Y
SLFM
i
(Z
p
; x
p
) features
mixing without reaction (Fig. 5).
The inputs of SLFM are similar to those of IFCM:
~
Z;
¯
Z
//2
to which ~ x is added. Two issues emerge:
1. Y
SLFM
i
(Z
p
; x
p
) must be determined and tabulated under
particular hypothesis, choosing a given laminar ¯ame
prototype.
2.
~
P(Z
p
; x
p
; x; t) must be presumed using the mean values
available to quantify fuel/air mixing (i.e.
~
Z;
¯
Z
//2
and ~ x).
9.4.2. Flame structure in composition space, Y
SLFM
i
(Z
p
; x
p
)
Y
SLFM
i
(Z
p
; x
p
) may be tabulated from solutions of coun-
ter-¯ow diffusion ¯ames (Fig. 4 [63]), a ¯ame con®guration
widely studied experimentally [166,167]. Assuming within
the turbulent ¯ow thin quasi-one-dimensional structures
convected and stretched by the ¯uid motions, and neglecting
higher order terms, the equations for the species and
temperature become (Section 3.2):
2Y
i
2t
= _ v
i
1
x
Le
i
_ _
2
2
Y
i
2Z
2
_ _
2T
2t
= 2

N
n=1
h
n
_ v
n
C
p
1x
2
2
T
2Z
2
_ _
where x = (l=rC
p
)u7Zu
2
:
These equations were used to discuss laminar diffusion
¯ames (see Eqs. (47) and (50) and Section 3.2). Omitting the
time derivative (steady ¯amelet), for a given value of x
corresponding to local micromixing conditions, one has to
solve for:
_ v = 2
x
Le
i
2
2
Y
i
2Z
2
(237)
The solution of this equation for given concentrations and
temperatures boundary conditions, and various x provides a
Flamelet Library Y
i
(Z,x). A variety of techniques are avail-
able to build these libraries [168].
In SLFM, the characteristic time required to balance diffu-
sion and reaction is assumed to be much smaller than any
other ¯owtime scale of the problem. The hypotheses involved
in SLFM can be disputed, leading to various improvements:
² Eq. (237) has been obtained neglecting diffusion in the
direction tangential to the iso-Z
st
surface, arguing that
when the mixing element is suf®ciently thin and features
weak curvature, the gradients measured along the stoi-
chiometric surface are much smaller than those in the
perpendicular direction (Section 3.2). Thus, when using
Eq. (237) to describe a prototype ¯ame of turbulent
¯amelets, one supposes that the mixing ®eld may be
reduced to a steady one-dimensional structure. In conse-
quence, the validity of Eq. (237) in a turbulent ¯ow also
depends on the properties of micromixing, and up to now,
it is not obvious how to draw conclusions since one
would need to measure the scalar dissipation rate in
turbulent ¯ames. Some experimental results are available
[169], but more works are required to conclude on the
dimensionality of scalar micromixing in ¯ames.
² There are other issues related to the multi-dimensional
character of diffusion ¯ames. Straining cannot be
uniformly distributed along the ¯ame sheet, leading to
¯amelet interactions when the distribution of x is non-
uniform on the iso-Z
st
. This transverse loss or gain of heat
modi®es the structure of the ¯amelet in the normal direc-
tion to the stoichiometric surface [55].
² Reference states at in®nity used to tabulate the ¯amelets
may have to account for partial premixing [170,171].
Consider the simple case of a jet ¯ame, where close to
the nozzle inlet, pure fuel and pure air react to form
products. Moving downstream, turbulent diffusion
mixes these products with air, on the air side, and with
fuel, on the fuel side. Further downstream, the reactants
feeding the reaction zone are not likely to be either pure
fuel or pure air. This situation is strongly enhanced in
¯ows where recirculation zones are found to stabilize
combustion. In Ref. [171], this shortcoming of SLFM is
overcome introducing transient ¯amelets, for which
reference states at in®nity vary according to the value
of a progress variable ~ c:
² Flamelet libraries can be calculated in physical space or
in mixture fraction space. It is usually observed that
the decay of OH towards equilibrium is predicted by
the ¯amelet solution in mixture fraction space using the
scalar dissipation rate as a control parameter sensitive to
species boundary conditions, a trend that is not fully
reproduced by the ¯amelet solution in physical space
where the input parameter is the strain rate [171].
² Unsteadiness is also an important aspect. Time-depen-
dent ¯amelets have been used to include unsteady effects
[172±174]. As shown in Ref. [175], when a high value of
the scalar dissipation rate is imposed to the ¯ame for a
suf®ciently short period of time, extinction may not be
completed, with a limiting frequency at which the ¯ame
almost behaves like a steady state ¯ame. Unsteady ¯ame-
lets were used [176] to simulate extinction and re-ignition
D. Veynante, L. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 249
in a turbulent jet ¯ame, history effects were included
using a Lagrangian time measured along the stoichio-
metric line. This work was pursued [177] introducing
as an additional control parameter, the diffusion time
needed to exchange mass and energy over a distance
DZ in mixture fraction space.
This is more generally related to questions arising
concerning the determination of quenching limits along
with the accuracy of quenching predictions using ¯amelet
theory a problem which can be addressed numerically,
for instance by post-processing DNS databases to study
the reactive/diffusive layer in terms of ¯amelets
[70,74,178±181]. Numerical simulations of ¯ame/vortex
interaction, used to construct a combustion diagram
([70], Fig. 10), show that when strong unsteadiness
and/or curvature effects appear, the laminar ¯amelet
assumption does not always predict quenching (Fig.
10). Two critical DamkoÈhler numbers, Da
LFA
and Da
ext
,
are easily derived from the simulations to ®nd the limit
conditions where unsteady (Da
LFA
) and extinction (Da
ext
)
effects become important. These numbers are then
compared with Da
p
q
; the quenching DamkoÈhler derived
from asymptotic analysis [30]. It is found that
(Da
LFA
=Da
p
q
) < 2 while (Da
ext
=Da
p
q
) < 0:4: Therefore,
Eq. (237) is an interesting approximation for Da
p
larger
than Da
p
q
; twice the asymptotic quenching value in these
simulations. Below this value, even in the simple con®g-
uration of ¯ame/vortex interaction, the time evolution of
the reaction zone is fully dominated by unsteady effects.
² Another related point of interest in ¯amelet theory is the
response of the turbulent ¯ame when quenching zones
develop. In other words, one may discuss the assumption
that the occurrence of local extinction at some points
does not prevent the use of a ¯amelet model for the
remaining part of the turbulent ¯ame. Again using
DNS, constant density ¯ames near extinction were
studied [182]. A critical DamkoÈhler number at which
extinction occurs is determined as a function of a ¯ame
thickness parameter, de®ned as the ratio between the rms
mixture fraction and the reaction zone width in mixture
fraction space. As expected for these ¯ames featuring
strong unsteadiness effects, the value of the critical
extinction DamkoÈhler number was different from the
one predicted by laminar ¯ame theory. This observation
was explained by statistical variability. Consequently, an
extinction may be observed with DamkoÈhler numbers
larger or smaller than Da
p
q
: In this last study, the lower
value of Da
ext
differs from that of steady ¯amelets and
exceeds the value Da
p
q
given by ¯amelet theory.
Other DNS results have shown that the scalar dissipation
rate controlling the growth of the ¯ame hole is lower than
the one that should be applied to ®rst quench the ¯ame
[38]. In Fig. 39, a DNS database is further analyzed [53]
in which a diffusion ¯ame is pinched by a pair of vortices.
The value of x when the ¯ame extinguishes is in perfect
agreement with x
q
measured in a laminar ¯amelet library
D. Veynante, L. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 250
Fig. 39. Three successive times of two-dimensional unsteady quenching of a planar diffusion ¯ame pinched by a pair of vortices, con®guration
studied in Ref. [53]. Left, bold: iso-reaction rate, dotted: vorcity, zoom: region of the ¯ow where the centerline response of the ¯ame versus
inverse mixture fraction dissipation rate is plotted. Right, solid line: 1D ¯amelet library, diamond: top left 2D ¯ame, square: middle left 2D
¯ame, triangle: bottom left 2D ¯ame.
(Fig. 39, top). But once a hole exists in the ¯ame, the
scalar dissipation rate x
q
Ed
at the quenching location is
smaller than x
q
and varies depending on the structure of
the edge ¯ame. The ¯uxes of heat along the stoichio-
metric surface are responsible for this departure from
one-dimensional ¯amelet behavior. When the diffusion
¯ame and its extremity have reaction zones of the same
thickness, for x .x
q
the response of the reaction rate
follows the laminar ¯amelet one (Fig. 39, middle). Latter
after quenching, x
q
Ed
decreases and a partially premixed
front develops at the edge of the burning zone, then the
reaction rate reaches values above the laminar ¯amelet
behavior (Fig. 39, bottom). These values are representa-
tive of the existence of burning in a premixed regime at
the extremity of the diffusion ¯ame. Therefore, the
quenching scalar dissipation rate x
q
is the relevant quan-
tity to describe the quenching of a burning ¯amelet, but
diffusion ¯ame quenching leads to edge ¯ame combus-
tion (partially premixed ¯amelets).
² When partially premixed ¯amelets are expected in the
combustion system, for instance at the base of a lifted
turbulent jet-¯ame, it may be interesting in the modeling
to use premixed ¯amelets instead of diffusion ¯amelets.
Bradley and coworkers have proposed ¯amelet closures
along these lines where chemical sources are tabulated
using one-dimensional premixed ¯ames [183]. The
chemical sources are parametrized in terms of the
mixture fraction Z, that determines the equivalence
ratio of the ¯amelet whose progress of reaction is given
by a progress variable c. The mean burning rates are then
obtained by averaging the source terms with a presumed
form for the joint-pdf of Z and c.
Within the family of closures for non-premixed turbulent
¯ames, models based on Eq. (237) represent great progress
compared to the in®nitely fast chemistry hypothesis. When
the chemistry is fast enough with mixing elements featuring
sheet-like properties, they provide interesting results
(Fig. 40) and further re®nements of ¯amelet models are
under development [184]. It is also worthwhile to note
that with SLFM, the turbulent micromixing of chemical
species does not need any particular treatment, since diffu-
sion is directly included and coupled with chemistry in Eq.
(237).
9.4.3. Mixing modeling in SLFM
In steady laminar ¯amelet models (SLFM), the fuel/air
turbulent mixing is captured via the joint pdf
~
P(Z
p
; x
p
; x; t):
Most of the ¯amelet models explicitly suppose that the
mixture fraction and its dissipation rate are two uncorrelated
quantities:
~
P(Z
p
; x
p
; x; t) <
~
P(Z
p
; x; t)
~
P(x
p
; x; t)
A b-function is assumed to presume
~
P(Z
p
; x; t) (see Section
6.4.2) and a log-normal distribution is used for
~
P(x
p
; x; t)
[63]:
~
P(x
p
; x; t) =
1

2p
_
x
p
s(x; t)
exp 2
1
2s
2
(x; t)
(ln x
p
2g(x; t))
2
_ _
The two parameters s and g are provided by the ®rst and
second moments of the scalar dissipation rate:
~ x = exp g 1
s
2
2
_ _
and
¯
x
//2
= ~ x
2
(exp(s
2
) 21
In Ref. [63], s
2
= 2 is proposed.
Another alternative is to estimate a mean scalar dissipa-
tion rate under stoichiometric condition [89]. Starting from
the solution of a steady strained planar counter-¯ow ¯ame:
Z(h) =
1
2
erfc(h=

2
_
); where h(j) =

a
D
_
_j
0
r(j
p
)
r
0
dj
p
a is the strain rate, j the coordinate normal to the stoichio-
metric plane and the assumption r
2
D < cst = r
2
0
D
0
was
used. The corresponding scalar dissipation rate is given by:
x(Z) =
a
2p
exp(22[erfc
21
(2Z)]
2
)
= x
0
exp(22[erfc
21
(2Z)]
2
) = x
0
F(Z) (238)
erfc
21
denotes the reciprocal of the complementary error
function and x
0
is the maximum value of the scalar dissipa-
tion rate. Mean and conditional scalar dissipation rate are
then related by:
~ x
st
= ~ xF(
~
Z;
¯
Z
//2
) (239)
where F is given by:
F(
~
Z;
¯
Z
//2
) =
F(Z
st
)
_1
0
F(Z
p
)
~
P(Z
p
)dZ
p
(240)
and to retain in the ¯amelet library the pro®les
Y
SLFM
i
(Z
p
; ~ x
st
) for averaging with
~
P(Z
p
) (Eq. (236)).
D. Veynante, L. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 251
Fig. 40. Top: Favre-averages mean values of temperature and OH
mole fraction along the centerline of a jet ¯ame. Bottom: radial
pro®les of mean temperature and OH mole fraction. Comparison
between experiments and ¯amelet modeling [177].
Here again, the stumbling block is the estimation of the
mean scalar dissipation rate ~ x: The linear relaxation model
may be written (Eq. (229)):
~ x = C
x
¯
Z
//2
(k=1)
where C
x
is a constant depending on the topological and
spectral properties of the mixture fraction ®eld. More
recently, it was proposed to choose [33]:
~ x = C
x
(DZ
F
)
2
(k=1)
C
x
< 2; DZ
F
is the thickness of the reaction zone of these
laminar ¯ame measured in mixture fraction space. The reac-
tion zone is centered at the location Z = Z
st
: As the stoichio-
metric surface is close to the air side for hydrocarbon ¯ame
(Z
st
p1); one may write:
DZ
F
< 2Z
st
which provides an interesting approximation of this reaction
thickness. This last expression was successful to model
turbulent ¯ame lift-off [185].
9.4.4. Conclusion
The laminar ¯amelet model presumes the conditional
mean of species
_
rY
i
uZ = Z
p
_
averaging over the response
of laminar prototype ¯ames:
_
rY
i
uZ = Z
p
_
= r
_
x
p
Y
SLFM
i
(Z
p
; x
p
)
~
P(x
p
)dx
p
In our generic classi®cation of turbulent combustion model-
ing (Section 6) and Eq. (230), SLFM may be viewed as a
presumed pdf technique involving conditional mean values
determined from laminar ¯ame solutions. Another alterna-
tive is to build models where quantities are estimated intro-
ducing a direct treatment of micromixing and small scale
diffusion (see Sections 9.6±9.8).
9.5. Flame surface density modeling, coherent ¯ame model
Flame surface density concepts were ®rstly introduced for
the coherent ¯ame model (CFM) [84]. The balance equation
for the ¯ame surface density S was based on phenomeno-
logical considerations starting from balance equation for a
material surface where combustion effects have been in-
tuitively added [84,186]. Recent works [88,187,188] have
provided an exact balance equation, identifying the ¯ame
surface to the stoichiometric iso-surface Z = Z
st
: The ¯ame
surface density is then de®ned as:
S = u7Zud(Z 2Z
st
) =
_
u7ZuuZ = Z
st
_

P(Z
st
) (241)
where

P(Z
st
) denotes the probability of ®nding Z = Z
st
:
Starting from this de®nition and the balance equation for
the mixture fraction Z (Eq. (41)), an exact but unclosed,
balance equation for the ¯ame surface density S may be
derived (Section 6.3.2).
In ¯ame surface density models, under a ¯amelet assump-
tion, it is assumed that the interface between fuel and
oxidizer in non-premixed burners behaves, for any values
of Z, as S(Z
p
) < u7Zu = S (Section 6.3.2). The mean burn-
ing rate

_ v
i
is then expressed as the product of S by
_
V
i
the
local reaction rate per unit of ¯ame area. S accounts for
¯ame turbulence interaction and
_
V
i
for the chemistry.
According to Eq. (121)
_ v
i
=
_ v
i
u7Zu
_ _
s
u7Zu =
_
V
i
S (242)
The local burning rate
_
V
i
is estimated from a one-dimen-
sional laminar ¯ame as:
_
V
i
=
_ v
i
u7Zu
_ _
s
<
_1
0
_ v
i
u7Zu
dZ =
_11
21
_ v
i
dj (243)
where j is the coordinate along the normal to the ¯ame
front.
In diffusion ¯amelets, where _ v
i
depends on the mixture
fraction Z and the scalar dissipation x, expressions (96), (91)
and the relation:
_
_ v
i
uZ
p
_
=
_
x
_ v
i
(Z
p
; x
p
)

P
c
(x
p
uZ
p
)dx
p
(244)
lead to:
_
V
i
=
1
u7Zu
_1
0
_
x
_ v
i
(Z
p
; x
p
)

P
c
(x
p
uZ
p
)

P(Z
p
)dx
p
dZ
p
(245)
Then, using Eq. (243):
_
V
i
<
_11
21
_
x
_ v
i
(x
p
; j)

P
c
(x
p
uZ
p
)dx
p
dj
<
_
x
_11
21
_ v
i
(x
p
; j)dj
_ _
........,,........
_
V
i
(x
p
)

P(x
p
)dx
p
(246)
The reaction rate per unit of ¯ame area should, therefore, be
estimated from the integrated reaction rate of a ¯amelet
submitted to a scalar dissipation rate x with the distribution

P(x
p
): In practice,
_
V
i
is estimated as
_
V
i
=
_
V
i
( ~ x); where ~ x
is the averaged scalar dissipation rate. The coherent ¯ame
model, then, corresponds to a simpli®ed version of the
steady laminar ¯amelet model. The integrated burning rate
_
V
i
may also be expressed as a function of the species mol-
ecular ¯uxes, see Eq. (53) in Section 3.2.
The introduction of effects of unsteadiness was realized in
Ref. [186], following the analysis proposed in Ref. [172] in
the context of SLFM, a ¯ame time response is then intro-
duced when calculating
_
V
i:
D. Veynante, L. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 252
9.6. MIL model
MIL (`ModeÁle Intermittent Lagrangien' or Lagrangian
Intermittent Model) was proposed by Borghi in Ref. [68].
As in the steady laminar ¯amelet model (SLFM) and the
conditional moment closure (CMC), MIL incorporates the
¯ame structure in Z space. Arguing that mixing occurs with-
out reaction for large values of the scalar dissipation rate,
corresponding to fast mixing, the ¯ame structure is
constructed dynamically from two possibilities of diffusion
combustion: Mixing without reaction (before ignition) and
in®nitely fast chemistry (after ignition) (Fig. 41). The tran-
sition between mixing without combustion and a `mixed is
burnt' regime is controlled by the position of an ignition
time delay, t
ig
, within the distribution of fuel/air turbulent
mixing times t
k
, t
t
, 11, where t
k
. (n=1)
1=2
is the
Kolmogorov time.
The ignition delay t
ig
is associated to a scalar dissipation
rate x
ig
(t
ig
< x
21
ig
): The main objective of MIL is to account
for unsteadiness in the coupling between small scale diffu-
sion and chemistry, by means of the spectral distribution of
micromixing times. For a given value of t
ig
< x
21
ig
; mixing
times smaller than t
ig
(t
t
,t
ig
or x .x
ig
) prevent ignition
and contribute to pure mixing. Whereas for x ,x
ig
, corre-
sponding to t
t
.t
ig
, mixing is slower than chemistry and
combustion develops.
The inputs of MIL are:
1. A table of ignition delay times t
ig
depending on mixture
fraction, fuel mass fraction and mean temperature, t
ig
=
t
ig
(
~
T;
~
Y
F
; Z): This look-up table is easily derived from
partially stirred reactor (PaSR) calculations, where
~
T
and
~
Y
F
are the mean conditions in the PaSR. Detailed
chemistry can be used to construct such a t
ig
table
[189].
2. The pdf of turbulent mixing times

P(t
t
; x; t) (equiva-
lent to the pdf of the inverse of x).
3. The pdf of the mixture fraction
~
P(Z
p
; x; t):
4. The mean concentration of fuel
~
Y
F
:
The output is the mean burning rate
~
_ v
F
to calculate
new
~
Y
F
values, accounting for auto-ignition and transi-
ent burning in turbulent ¯ames. Assuming that combus-
tion occurs only when ignition is faster than turbulent
fuel/air mixing, the probability to ®nd ignition at a
particular location is:
a(Z; x; t) =
_11
t
ig
(Z;x;t)

P(t
t
; x; t)dt
t
where

P(t
t
; x; t) is the pdf of the micromixing times
having a mean value equal to the integral length scale
time (k/1). Since t
ig
depends on position in mixture
fraction space and mean temperature, a is also a func-
tion of Z and of the local ¯ow conditions through posi-
tion and time. Once

P(t
t
; x; t) and
~
P(Z
p
; x; t) are known,
the mean burning rate of fuel is estimated as:
~
_ v
F
(x; t) =
_1
0
_11
t
ig
(Z
p
;x;t)
_ v
MIL
F
(Z
p
; t
p
t
)
~
P(Z
p
; x; t)

P(t
p
t
; x; t)dt
p
t
dZ
p
(247)
A partially stirred reactor (PaSR), combining mixing
and chemical effects, is introduced to calculate
_ v
MIL
F
(Z
p
; t
p
t
) [68], leading to:
dY
p
F
dZ
=
(
~
Y
p
F
2Y
F
) 1t
p
t
_ v
MIL
F
(
~
Z 2Z
p
)
(248)
This technique is close to the one chosen in Ref. [190]
for modeling NO
x
production in turbulent jet ¯ames. Eq.
(248) describes a local ¯ame element, where molecular
diffusion, D7
2
Y
F
, is modeled as a linear relaxation term
(
~
Y
F
2Y
F
)=t
t
: Solving Eq. (248) with boundary condi-
tions similar to the ones of ¯amelet libraries provides
_ v
MIL
F
(Z
p
; t
p
t
):
A generic shape for

P(t
t
; x; t) was proposed [189,191]:

P(t
t
; x; t) = (q 21)
t
(q21)
t
q
k
exp 2
(q 21)
q
t
t
t
k
_ _
q
_ _
q(x; t) is determined so that
~
Y
MIL
F
calculated along the MIL
trajectory in mixture fraction space (Fig. 41), weighted by
the b-pdf, reproduces the mean
~
Y
F
:
Fig. 42 shows an example of numerical simulation of a
lean premixed prevaporized (LPP) combustion chamber
using MIL. The LPP system is divided into three parts:
®rst, liquid fuel is injected and vaporized (prevaporized
tube), then is mixed with air in the premixing tube before
entering the main combustion chamber. Combustion is
expected to reduce pollutant emission in a lean premixed
regime. The premixing tube operates for a large range of
inlet temperatures (from 300 to 800 K) and a large range of
pressures (from 1 to 40 bar). For the highest temperature and
pressure conditions, some undesirable effects, like auto-
ignition or ¯ashback, may be observed in the premixed
tube. These ®ndings are reproduced with turbulent combus-
tion closures like MIL describing strongly coupled micro-
mixing and ignition phenomena [191].
D. Veynante, L. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 253
Fig. 41. Sketch of MIL in mixture fraction space.
9.7. Conditional moment closure
In®nitely fast chemistry (IFCM), steady laminar ¯amelets
(SLFM), and MIL suggest that non-premixed turbulent
¯ames may be conveniently studied using conditional aver-
aging in the mixture fraction space. Instead of getting Q
i
=
_
rY
i
uZ = Z
p
_
=
_
ruZ = Z
p
_
from laminar ¯amelets, the CMC
approach proposes to solve a balance equation for Q
i
[102,103,105], which is written, neglecting two terms
(Eq. (114)):
_
ruZ = Z
p
_
2Q
i
2t
= 2
_
ru
i
uZ = Z
p
_
2Q
i
2x
i
.......,,.......
(I)
1
_
rxuZ = Z
p
_
2
2
Q
i
2Z
p2
........,,........
(II)
1
_
_ v
i
uZ = Z
p
_
.....,,.....
(III)
(249)
In addition to turbulent transport included in (I), micro-
mixing (II) and the chemical source (III) are unclosed. In
the simplest version of CMC, the ¯uctuations of chemical
source in mixture fraction space are neglected leading to:
_
_ v
i
uZ = Z
p
_
= _ v
i
__
Y
1
uZ = Z
p
_
; ¼;
_
Y
N
uZ = Z
p
__
(250)
As for any combustion models, the scalar dissipation rate is
unknown (II). With CMC, the conditional average
_
rxuZ = Z
p
_
needs closure. This conditional mean is an
important ingredient of the pdf transport equation and
micromixing models are available (Section 9.8.1). Simi-
larly, when the pdf is known via its presumed b-shape
(Section 6.4.2), the conditional value of x may be approxi-
mated from
~
P(Z
p
) to obtain
_
rxuZ = Z
p
_
[192].
CMC has been the subject of many works and re®nements
during the past years [105]. The following points have been
addressed:
² The approximation of the conditional chemical source
using Eq. (250) is much less restrictive than to write
~
_ v
i
<
_ v
i
(
~
Y
1
; ¼;
~
Y
N
) but implies a weak level of ¯uctuations for
a given value of Z. When calculating the chemical source,
the conditional pdf

P
c
(Y
i
uZ
p
) is approximated by a peak
located at
_
Y
i
uZ = Z
p
_
: Accordingly, this method is
expected to provide interesting results for conditions
not too far from in®nitely fast chemistry. The ¯uctuations
of species concentrations and temperature for a given
level of mixture fraction may be included in the condi-
tional burning rate by using second order CMC. This
leads to a variety of modeling re®nements where more
transport equations for conditional quantities are studied,
modeled and solved [105].
² The estimation of
_
rxuZ = Z
p
_
from a b-pdf is feasible
for simple shapes of
~
P(Z
p
); but as shown from the pdf
balance equation (Eq. (110)), the detail of
_
rxuZ = Z
p
_
is
linked to the detail of the shape of the pdf, that may not be
correctly captured with a presumed pdf.
² Within a homogeneous ®eld, the CMC equation reduces
to:
_
ruZ = Z
p
_
2Q
i
2t
=
_
rxuZ = Z
p
_
2
2
Q
i
2Z
p2
1
_
_ v
i
uZ = Z
p
_
(251)
This last formulation may be compared with the ¯amelet
equation (Eq. (237)) replacing Q
i
by Y
i
[107]. These two
turbulent combustion models have similarities in term of
their general formalism, but their underlying physical
assumptions strongly differ. CMC incorporates diffusion
as turbulent micromixing and decouples it from chemis-
try. On the other hand, the ¯amelet assumption deals with
a coupled representation of diffusion and reaction as in a
laminar ¯ame for a given value of x, and therefore, a
given thickness of the laminar diffusive zone.
Once the number M of conditional values required to
capture the conditional means of the N chemical species is
determined, CMC modeling requires the solution of N £ M
balance equations. CMC was also extended to reacting
particles [193].
9.8. Pdf modeling
In premixed turbulent combustion modeling, BML and
related closures assume a bimodal probability density func-
tion (pdf) of the progress variable. In non-premixed ¯ames,
using in®nitely fast chemistry (IFCM), steady laminar
¯amelet (SLFM), or conditional moment closure (CMC),
the pdf of the mixture fraction was assigned a b-shape.
The objective of PDF modeling is to relax all hypotheses
concerning the shape of pdfs. Once a methodology has been
developed to calculate pdfs, it is possible to construct turbu-
lent combustion closures in which all the values taken by
D. Veynante, L. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 254
Fig. 42. Snapshot of temperature in a TURBOMECA-ONERA LPP engine computed with MIL [191]. 1: Vaporized tube, 2: premixed tube,
3: ¯ame tube. Combustion starts in the premixed tube.
species and temperature in mixture fraction space may be
reached (Figs. 5 and 43). As in ¯amelet modeling and CMC,
a detailed description of chemistry may be incorporated in
the modeling. Differential diffusion is easily introduced in
SLFM when tabulating counter-¯ow ¯ames, these prefer-
ential diffusion effects may be more dif®cult to introduce
in CMC, in the context of pdfs, some works have been made
in this direction [194,195].
Two levels of complexity may be chosen:
² One may solve the balance equation for the joint pdf of
the thermochemical variables, species, temperature, etc.
(Eq. (111) in Section 6):
r
2
2t
~
P(Z
p
; x; t)
= 2 r

N
i=1
2
2Y
p
i
2u´7Y
i
uY(x; t) = Y
p
_ _
1 _ v
p
i
_ _
~
P(Z
p
; x; t)
_ _
2 r

N
i=1

N
j=1
2
2Y
p
i
2
2Y
p
j
D
2Y
i
2x
k
2Y
j
2x
k
_
_
_
_
Y(x; t) = Y
p
_ _
~
P(Z
p
; x; t)
_ _
(252)
² Velocity ®eld statistics may also be included into the pdf,
then the balance equation for the joint pdf of velocity and
species is resolved (Eq. (113)). Recent developments
have also included time scale information into the pdf
[196,197].
There are two major issues with pdf modeling:
² Models must be proposed for capturing micromixing and
pressure ¯uctuation and viscous effects (the latter only
when the velocity ®eld is incorporated into the pdf).
² A new numerical treatment is required and leads to the
decomposition of the pdf into a large number of com-
putational particles required to succeed in the computa-
tional implementation of pdf methods [93,198,199].
The chemical composition and velocities of these par-
ticles evolve according to simple differential equations,
resulting from a discrete Monte Carlo simulation of the
continuous pdf equation.
The main advantage of the pdf method lies in the
possibility of treating complex chemical sources directly
(Section 6).
9.8.1. Turbulent micromixing
From the discussion of fundamentals properties of ¯ames
and of turbulent combustion models, the scalar dissipation
rate appears as a key quantity in both premixed and non-
premixed turbulent systems. Using pdfs and CMC, one
needs to express the conditional mean value of the scalar
dissipation rate (or the conditional mean value of diffusion).
This term represents turbulent micromixing [95,96].
Using turbulence modeling, such as the k±1 closure, a
mean mechanical time t
t
< (k=1) and a microscale time
t
k
< (n=1)
1=2
may be estimated. A global picture of mixing
should therefore distinguish between macro and micro-
mixing [200]:
The macromixing is organized from a cascade mechanism
between large and small scales. The study of this cascade in
a fully developed turbulence shows that the mixing
frequency f
Z
is a function of the characteristic length l
Z
[201]:
f
Z
(l
Z
) ,
1
n
_ _
1=2
h
k
l
z
_ _
2=3
The speed at which Z is mixed increases when the charac-
teristic length l
Z
decreases, suggesting that the cascade
mechanism is limited by the mixing frequency f
Z
(l
Z
) of the
largest scales. When the Schmidt number of Z is greater than
unity (n .D
i
), the impact of the molecular dissipation is
less than the effect of viscous dissipation, then the smallest
scales of Z are smaller than the Kolmogorov scales. For
those small scales (l
Z
,h
k
) the mixing frequency is of the
order of a constant f
Z
(l
Z
) = (1=n)
1=2
: This cascade process
from large to small scale does not change the energy in the
system and therefore does not affect
¯
Z
//2
:
The molecular diffusion acting at smaller scales makes
D. Veynante, L. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 255
Fig. 43. Two-dimensional pdf of mixture fraction and reaction
progress variable for a round jet non-premixed ¯ame [104].
the gradients smoother and then induces the micromixing,
phenomenon required to put the reactants in contact with the
reaction zone. When n = D; this process starts at the
Kolmogorov scale, when n ± D; the Batchelor scale
becomes the relevant limiting length:
l
B
, (nD
2
=1)
1=4
= Sc
21=2
h
k
All these approximations are given for non-reactive ¯ows to
exactly quantify the effect of combustion is an arduous task.
This dif®culty is also encountered in ¯amelet or ¯ame
surface modeling, but appears in a different form.
In pdf modeling, the micromixing closure must estimate
the term
_
D7
2
Y
i
uY = Y
p
_
describing the molecular diffu-
sion of each chemical species, or mimic its impact on the
pdf. Various techniques have been proposed [95].
9.8.2. Linear relaxation model, IEM/LMSE
In b-pdf modeling (Section 9.2.2), the scalar dissipation
rate of the mixture fraction was expressed as ~ x = (
¯
Z
//2
=t
t
):
The extension of this linear relaxation to conditional diffu-
sion provides the linear mean square estimation (LMSE) or
interaction by exchange with the mean (IEM) model. First
proposed in the pdf context by Dopazo and O'Brien [202],
IEM was also developed and used in chemical engineering
applications by Villermaux [203].
Fig. 44 shows the conditional mean of the diffusive
budget of the mixture fraction Z measured in a DNS of a
mixing layer. A quasi-linear response is observed close to
the mean, with a slope that can be approximated using the
inverse of t
t
< (k=1): Since the gradient of Z must relax
to zero for Z = 0 and Z = 1; this quasi-linear response
is combined with the conditions
_
D7
2
ZuZ = 0
_
=
_
D7
2
ZuZ = 1
_
= 0: For a `Gaussian-type pdf' (no peaks
at Z = 0 and Z = 1), the behavior at the edges of the sample
space is not of prime importance to capture the major prop-
erties of micromixing, and a ®rst approximation is given by:
_
D7
2
ZuZ = Z
p
_
<

Z 2Z
p
t
t
_ _
<

Z 2Z
p
k=1
_ _
(253)
This simple model cannot capture the time evolution of the
pdf in homogeneous mixing problems and has many short-
comings, for instance it relaxes the ¯uctuations without
modifying the shape of the pdf [94±96,204].
9.8.3. GIEM model
An improvement of the IEM model was recently
discussed [205], a b-pdf is used to reproduce the correct
behavior of conditional diffusion. The mixture fraction is
chosen as a shadow ®eld to estimate micromixing, this
closure is also called a `Beta-Mapping-Closure'. In a homo-
geneous ®eld, the time evolution of the mixture fraction pdf
is:
2
~
P(Z
p
; x; t)
2t
= 2
2
2Z
p
__
D7
2
ZuZ = Z
p
_
~
P(Z
p
; x; t)
_
since
_
D7
2
ZuZ = 0
_
= 0; one may write:
_
D7
2
ZuZ = Z
p
_
= 2
1
~
P(Z
p
; x; t)
2
2t
_Z
p
0
~
P(Z
1
; x; t)dZ
1
_ _
(254)
When
~
P(Z
p
; x; t) is given by a b-function parameterized
with
~
Z and
¯
Z
//2
; this equation determines (D7
2
ZuZ = Z
p
).
D. Veynante, L. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 256
Fig. 44. Left: Scatter plot of D7
2
Y. Right: (D7
2
YuY(x; t) = Y
p
): These two terms were measured in DNS of an inert mixing layer [234].
The LMSE/IEM model leads to:
_
D7
2
ZuZ = Z
p
_
<
1
t
t
(
~
Z 2Z
p
) (255)
Making a direct analogy GIEM proposes:
_
D7
2
ZuZ = Z
p
_
< C(Z
p
; t)(B
Z
(t) 2Z
p
) (256)
where C(Z
p
, t) is a pseudo-mixing frequency depending both
on the position in mixture fraction space and time. It allows
for reproducing the correct behavior at the edges Z
p
= 0 and
Z
p
= 1 and its time dependence gives the correct behavior
during the relaxation of the pdf. B
Z
(t) denotes the point
where the diffusive ¯ux is zero, relaxing the constraint
B
Z
(t) =
~
Z of IEM, C(Z
p
, t) and B
Z
(t) are determined from
Eqs. (254) and (256).
The same treatment is applied to any reactive species Y
i
,
using the same pseudo-mixing frequency (an assumption
made in most micromixing models):
_
D7
2
Y
i
uY
i
= Y
p
i
; Z = Z
p
_
= C(Z
p
; t)(B
Y
i
(t) 2Y
p
i
)
The parameter B
Y
i
(t) is then estimated from the fact that
micromixing by itself should not change the mean:
2Y
i
2t
_ _
= (2D7
2
Y
i
) < 0 - B
Y
i
(t) =
C(Z; t)Y
i
C(Z; t)
This attractive model conserves the simplicity of linear
relaxation modeling, but overcomes some of its drawbacks.
As
¯
Z
//2
is an input of the closure, the mean scalar dissipation
rate ~ x should be previously modeled. This approach has
similarities with the estimation of the conditional values
of x in CMC using b-pdf [192] and is not a full closure
of micromixing per se.
9.8.4. Stochastic micromixing closures
Micromixing modeling may also be developed by choos-
ing an ad hoc stochastic process mimicking the relaxation of
pdfs due to small scale diffusion. These closures are usually
presented in the context of non-continuous interactions of
volumes of ¯uid. When only diffusion is acting, the generic
form of these models is written [94]:
2
~
P(Z
p
; t)
2t
=
2b
t
Z
_
__
~
P(Z
1
; t)
~
P(Z
11
; t)
×T(Z
1
; Z
11
- Z
p
)dZ
1
dZ
11
2
~
P(Z
p
)
_
b is a parameter of the model and T(Z
1
, Z
11
- Z
p
) is the
probability that a volume of concentration Z
1
interacts with
a volume at Z
11
to evolve into Z
p
. The dif®cult point lies in
the choice of the transition probability T. Multiple choices
are possible and have been made (see Ref. [95] for a
review), the simplest one consists of writing:
T(Z
1
; Z
11
- Z
p
) = d Z
p
2
Z
1
1Z
11
2
_ _
(257)
meaning that the two volumes interact to generate a volume
with Z
p
= (Z
1
1 Z
11
)=2: Eq. (257) was ®rst proposed by
Curl [206] to simulate the production of droplets of a given
diameter by coalescence of two droplets of various sizes and
re-dispersion of the two droplets.
These closures are clearly linked to a purely stochastic
view of micromixing and are well suited to Monte Carlo
simulations [93]. Their applications to ¯ames can be disputed
easilysince mixing described via stochastic processes does not
always account for the presence of reaction zones. However,
much work has been done to improve these models which
have then been quite successful in the calculation of jet
¯ames [97]. Fig. 45 shows pdfs of the temperature calcu-
lated from Eq. (110) [207] using the coalescence-dispersion
model [206] and the k±1 closure for the velocity ®eld [208].
For the same calculations, Fig. 46 illustrates the impact of
micromixing modeling on temperature and CO concentra-
tions predictions, the reduced chemical scheme of Ref.
[209] has been utilized with the LMSE (IEM) and Curl's
coalescence re-dispersion formulation.
Micromixing modeling is obviously one of the greatest
challenges of turbulent combustion modeling, and strong
efforts have been made in this direction. Many types of mixing
models were proposed, a full reviewis beyond the scope of this
paper. Detailed discussion of mixing models in the context
of pdfs may be found in the following list of references
[93,95±97,104,194,196,205,206,208,210±236].
9.8.5. Interlinks PDF/¯ame surface modeling
The unclosed molecular diffusion term in the pdf balance
Eq. (109) may be recast as:
1
r
(7´(rD7Z))uZ = Z
p
_ _
= 2
1
ru7Zu
2
2n
(rDu7Zu)u7ZuuZ = Z
p
_ _
2
_
D7´nu7ZuuZ = Z
p
_
= 2
1
ru7Zu
2
2n
(rDu7Zu)
_ _
s
1kD7´nl
s
_ _
_
u7ZuuZ = Z
p
_
= 2[kv
n
l
s
1kD7´nl
s
]
_
u7ZuuZ = Z
p
_
(258)
The molecular diffusion is decomposed into a normal contri-
bution, that may be expressed in terms of a normal displace-
ment speed w
n
and a curvature term D7´n; according to
Eq. (38). The diffusion coef®cient D is assumed constant
and kD7´nl
s
= Dk7´nl
s
: The ¯ame surface averaged curva-
ture may be modeled from geometrical considerations
D. Veynante, L. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 257
[88,121] as in Section 7.4.4 (Eq. (208)):
k7´nl
s
< 2

Z 2Z
1
L
y
(259)
where L
y
is a wrinkling length scale of the ¯ame surface
and Z
1
is the

Z level where mean curvatures are equal
to zero. Mean curvatures are supposed positive (i.e.
convex toward

Z = 0 region) and negative for

Z = 1.
The comparison of Eqs. (258) and (259) shows that
the geometrical assumption used to model the mean
curvature corresponds to an LMSE±IEM model of the
molecular diffusion, when neglecting the normal displace-
ment speed kw
n
l
s
(Section 9.8.2):
2
1
r
(7´(rD7Z))uZ = Z
p
_ _
=

Z 2Z
p
t
t
(260)
It was shown in (Section 9.8.2) that for a non-reacting
scalar, the IEM model provides an interesting estimation
of the micromixing term around

Z = Z
p
when the turbulent
mixing time is correctly calculated [234] but becomes de®-
cient when Z
p
tends towards 0 or 1, where u7Zu is expected to
relax to zero. This shortcoming is attenuated in the ¯ame
surface density context where the surface averaged curva-
ture k7´nl
s
is multiplied by the ¯ame surface density (Eq.
(90)), ensuring zero values at either side of the ¯ame brush.
The turbulent mixing time t
t
and the ¯ame wrinkling length
scale, L
y
, are then related as L
y
< D
_
u7ZuuZ = Z
p
_
t
t
; where
_
u7ZuuZ = Z
p
_
characterizes laminar ¯ame elements.
Expressing the mixing time from linear relaxation hypo-
thesis, t
t
<
¯
Z
//2
= ~ x and using Eq. (116) under a ¯amelet
assumption yields L
y
<
¯
Z
//2
=u7Zu: Wrinkling length scales
depend on scalar ¯uctuations given by Eq. (226), eviden-
cing, once again, the need for modeling scalar dissipation
rates.
9.8.6. Joint velocity/concentrations pdf modeling
When the joint pdf of velocity and species enters the
problem, one needs to model additional viscous and
pressure terms related to velocity ¯uctuations (see Eq.
(113)). In turbulent non-reactive ¯ows, experiments have
D. Veynante, L. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 258
Fig. 45. Comparison between measurements (left) and numerical predictions (right) of unweighted temperature pdf at different locations in the
Masri et al. [207] `L' jet ¯ame (location x=D = 20). Pdf calculations by Jones and Kakhi [208] using the Curl mixing model [206].
2
In non-premixed turbulent ¯ames, the mean normal displace-
ment speed kw
n
l
s
is expected to be negligible against curvature
effects [88] because such ¯ames are unable to propagate. This is
not the case in premixed combustion, where the IEM±LMSE model
requires a correction to account for kw
n
l
s
that is of the order of the
laminar ¯ame speed [237].
shown that the velocity ¯uctuations have pdfs that may be
approximated with Gaussian functions. Closures for the
velocity pdf may then be obtained using a Langevin type
model, a simple stochastic model reproducing this velocity
distribution, as done in Ref. [238].
Basic properties of stochastic methods [239] show that an
equation with a diffusive term for a pdf

P:
2

P(Z
p
)
2t
= 2
2
2Z
p
(A(Z
p
; t)

P(Z
p
)) 1
1
2
2
2
2
2
Z
p
(B(Z
p
; t)

P(Z
p
))
is well reproduced by a stochastic process, Z(t), similar to
the Langevin process:
dZ(t) = A(Z(t); t)dt 1

B(Z(t); t)
_
dW(t)
where dW(t) is a white noise (Wiener process). Using this
equivalence, the Langevin model [238] for the pressure and
viscous unclosed terms of Eq. (113) may be written:
__
1
r
2p
/
2x
i
uu = u
p
; Z = Z
p
_
2
_
n7
2
u
/
i
uu = u
p
; Z = Z
p
_
_

P(u
p
; Z
p
; x; t)
= G
ij
(u
p
j
2 u
j
)

P(u
p
; Z
p
; x; t) 1C
0
1
2
2u
p
i
[

P(u
p
; Z
p
; x; t)]
(261)
The physical properties of this closureare includedinthe tensor
G
ij
. The simplest model considers a linear relaxation for the
velocity ®eld, then G
ij
= (1=2 13C
0
=4)(1=k)d
ij
; where C
0
is a
constant. More sophisticated methods have been proposed
[240], where a parallel is drawn between Reynolds stress
closures (modeled equations for u
/
i
u
/
j
) and the tensor G
ij
[241].
As already indicated, a numerical solution for the pdf
implies the development of accurate Monte Carlo solutions
[93]. The pdf ®eld is decomposed into a set of stochastic
particles whose evolution simulates the turbulent ¯ame.
When a Lagrangian context is adopted [242], each particle
D. Veynante, L. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 259
Fig. 46. Radial pro®les of CO mass fraction and temperature at different locations in Masri et al. [207] `B' jet ¯ame, pdf calculations [208]. Two
mixing models have been used: ®lled circles: measurements; solid line: coalescence±dispersion micromixing Curl model [206]; dashed line:
LMSE micromixing model (IEM). Reduced chemical scheme of Jones and Lindstedt [209].
n is characterized by its position x
p
n
(t); its velocity u
p
n
(t) and
concentration(s) Y
p
n
(t): The Langevin model given in Eq.
(261) corresponds to the system for the discrete particles:
dx
in
dt
= u
in
du
in
dt
= 2
1
r
2 p
2x
i
_ _
1n
2
2
u
i
2x
j
2x
j
_ _
1G
ij
(u
j
n
2 u
j
) 1(C
0
1)
1=2
dW
i
dt
_ _
dY
p
i
dt
=
(
~
Y
i
2Y
p
i
)
(k=1)
1 _ v
i
(Y
p
i
)
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
(262)
The last dif®culty is the determination of the mean pressure
®eld (2 p=2x
i
): Methods have been proposed to calculate it
from Monte Carlo simulations [101]. In most of Monte
Carlo simulations, the Lagrangian simulation is coupled
with Eulerian calculations of means values providing
the mean pressure ®eld and the dissipation rate of the
velocity ¯uctuations. However, full pdf methods includ-
ing a model for the turbulent frequency following a
¯uid particle have also been developed with success [197].
Fully detailed reviews on pdf methods may be found in
Refs. [93±95].
10. Conclusion
Modeling turbulent combustion is a challenging task. In
turbulent ¯ames, various dif®culties (strong heat release,
complex chemistry, large range of time and length scales,
etc.) are added to the complexity of constant-density turbu-
lent ¯ows.
A review of the most classical Reynolds (or Favre) aver-
aged Navier±Stokes (RANS) models has been proposed.
Three main ingredients must be modeled:
² Reynolds stresses: ¯ u
i
u
j
2 ~ u
i
~ u
j
:
² Turbulent transport of species mass fractions:
¯
u
i
Y
k
2 ~ u
i
~
Y
k
:
² Mean reaction rate of species:

_ v
k
:
Most works have focus on re®ned descriptions of the
mean reaction rate

_ v
k
: To provide this reaction rate, tools
have been proposed, which are based on a pure statistical or
more oriented geometrical view of turbulent ¯ames. All
these various models are related via a scalar dissipation
rate, a key quantity representing micromixing of the reac-
tants occurring at the small scales where chemical reactions
develop. The links and the similarities between combustion
models have been demonstrated here. The precise knowl-
edge of these relations may be useful to understand the exact
implications of the underlying physical hypothesis. Major
models are then directly derived from the proposed expres-
sions, which illuminate unexpected links between well-
known closure schemes.
Few studies have focussed on species turbulent transport,
generally modeled using a gradient expression, whereas
counter-gradient turbulent transport is known to appear in
some situations. Reynolds stresses are generally described
from well established turbulent models (mostly k, 1), simply
re-written in terms of Favre averaged quantities. So far,
combustion effects on the ¯ow (¯ame induced turbulence
generation, higher viscous dissipation, etc.) are not inten-
tionally included in the calculations.
There are many open questions and challenges left. One
of them is the understanding of the coupling between spray
and combustion including detailed chemistry. DNS with a
two-way coupling between a dilute spray and a carrier phase
were recently performed to progress in this direction [243]
and closures exist [243±245], but more work is needed to
reach a level where liquid atomization, vaporization
together with ¯ames are properly described.
RANS combustion models will remain useful for the next
few years. However, large eddy simulations (LES) stands as
very promising technique for turbulent combustion:
² Combustion ¯ow ®elds generally exhibit large scale
motions [26].
² LES appear as a promising tool to capture combustion
instabilities.
² Flames are mainly driven by mixing. LES is a good
candidate to capture unsteady turbulent mixing.
² LES may directly provide part of the description of turbu-
lence/combustion interactions because zones of fresh and
burnt gases, having different turbulence characteristics, are
instantaneously identi®ed at the level of the resolved grid.
LES is at a very early stage for combustion applications and
only few works have been done in this direction, mainly
devoted to feasibility tests (two-dimensional simulations,
constant density ¯ows, etc.). Nonetheless, the results of these
preliminary tests suggest that LES will rapidly become a
complementary way to carefully simulate and understand
turbulent combustion systems. So far LES modeling is essen-
tially based on the same modeling strategies as the ones
described here for RANS turbulent combustion modeling.
References
[1] LinÄaÂn A, Williams FA. Fundamental aspects of combustion.
Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1993.
[2] Clavin P. Premixed combustion and gasdynamics. Annu Rev
Fluid Mech 1994;26:321±52.
[3] Buckmaster J, Ludford G. Theory of laminar ¯ames.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993.
[4] Clavin P. Dynamics of combustion fronts in premixed gases:
from ¯ames to detonations. Proc Comb Inst 2000;28:569±85.
[5] Roberts WL, Driscoll JF. A laminar vortex interacting with a
premixed ¯ame: measured formation of pockets of reactants.
Combust Flame 1991;87:245±56.
[6] Mueller CJ, Driscoll JF, Reuss DL, Drake MC, Rosalik ME.
Vorticity generation and attenuation as vortices convect
through a premixed ¯ame. Combust Flame 1998;112:342±58.
[7] Smooke MD, Mitchel RE, Keyes DE. Numerical solution of
two-dimensional axisymmetric laminar diffusion ¯ames.
Combust Sci Technol 1989;67:85±122.
D. Veynante, L. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 260
[8] Givi P. Model free simulations of turbulent reactive ¯ows.
Prog Energy Combust Sci 1989;15:1±107.
[9] Poinsot T. Using direct numerical simulations to understand
premixed turbulent combustion. Twenty-Sixth Symposium
(International) on Combustion. Pittsburgh: The Combustion
Institute, 1996 p. 219±32.
[10] Baritaud T, Poinsot T, Baum M. Direct numerical simulation
for turbulent reacting ¯ows. Paris: Editions Technip, 1996.
[11] Poinsot T, Trouve A, Candel S. Applications of direct
numerical simulations of premixed turbulent combustion.
Prog Energy Combust Sci 1996;21:531±76.
[12] Vervisch L, Poinsot T. Direct numerical simulation of non-
premixed turbulent ¯ame. Annu Rev Fluid Mech
1998;30:655±92.
[13] BarreÁre M, Prud'homme R. Equations fondamentales de
l'aeÂrothermochimie. Paris: Masson, 1973.
[14] Williams FE. Combustion theory. 2nd ed. Reading, MA:
Addison-Wesley, 1985.
[15] Kuo KK. Principles of combustion. New York: Wiley, 1986.
[16] Poinsot T, Veynante D. Theoretical and numerical combus-
tion. Philadelphia, PA: Edwards, 2001.
[17] Trouve A, Poinsot T. The evolution equation for the ¯ame
surface density. J Fluid Mech 1994;278:1±31.
[18] Favre A. Statistical equations of turbulent gases. In: SIAM,
editor. Problems of hydrodynamics and continuum
mechanics. Philadelphia: SIAM, 1969. p. 231±66.
[19] Bray KNC, Libby PA, Masuya G, Moss JB. Turbulence
production in premixed turbulent ¯ames. Combust Sci Tech-
nol 1981;25:127±40.
[20] Shepherd IG, Moss JB, Bray KNC. Turbulent transport in
con®ned premixed ¯ame. 19th Symposium(International) on
Combustion. Pittsburgh: The Combustion Institute, 1982.
p. 423±31.
[21] Piomelli U, Chasnov JR. Large eddy simulations: theory and
applications. In: HallbaÈck H, Henningson DS, Johansson
AV, Alfredsson PH, editors. Turbulence and transition
modelling, Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1996.
p. 269±336.
[22] Ferziger J. Large eddy simulation: an introduction and
perspective. In: MeÂtais O, Ferziger J, editors. New tools in
turbulence modelling. Berlin: Les Editions de PhysiqueÐ
Springer, 1997. p. 29±47.
[23] Lesieur M. Recent approaches in large-eddy simulations of
turbulence. In: MeÂtais O, Ferziger J, editors. New tools in
turbulence modelling. Berlin: Les Editions de PhysiqueÐ
Springer, 1997. p. 1±28.
[24] Lesieur M, MeÂtais O. New trends in large-eddy simulations
of turbulence. Annu Rev Fluid Mech 1996;28:45±82.
[25] Veynante D, Poinsot T. Reynolds averaged and large
eddy simulation modeling for turbulent combustion. In:
MeÂtais O, Ferziger J, editors. New Tools in Turbulence
Modelling. Berlin: Les Editions de PhysiqueÐSpringer, 1997.
p. 105±40.
[26] Coats CM. Coherent structures in combustion. Prog Energy
Combust Sci 1996;22:427±509.
[27] Menon S, Jou WH. Large eddy simulations of combustion
instability in an axisymmetric ramjet combustor. Combust
Sci Technol 1991;75(1±3):53±72.
[28] Ghosal S, Moin P. The basic equations for the large eddy
simulation of turbulent ¯ows in complex geometry. J Comp
Phys 1995;118:24±37.
[29] Peters N. The turbulent burning velocity for large-scale and
small-scale turbulence. J Fluid Mech 1999;384:107±32.
[30] LinÄaÂn A. The asymptotic structure of counter¯ow diffusion
¯ames for large activation energies. Acta Astronaut
1974;1007(1).
[31] LinÄaÂn A, Orlandi P, Verzicco R, Higuera FJ. Effects of non-
unity Lewis numbers in diffusion ¯ames. Studying turbulence
using numerical databasesÐV. In: Moin P, Reynolds WC,
1994. Stanford, CA: CTR, Stanford University. p. 5±18.
[32] Barlow RS, Fiechtner GJ, Carter CD, Chen J-Y. Experiments
on the scalar structure of turbulent CO/H
2
/N
2
jet ¯ames.
Combust Flame 2000;120(4):549±69.
[33] Bray KNC, Peters N. Laminar ¯amelets in turbulent ¯ames.
In: Libby PA, Williams FA, editors. Turbulent reacting
¯ows. London: Academic Press, 1994. p. 63±113.
[34] Cuenot B, Poinsot TJ. Asymptotic and numerical study of
diffusion ¯ames with variable Lewis number and ®nite rate
chemistry. Combust Flame 1996;104(1):111±37.
[35] Burke SP, Schumann TEW. Diffusion ¯ames. Ind Engng
Chem 1928;20:998±1004.
[36] Kim JS, Williams FA. Extinction of diffusion ¯ames with
nonunity Lewis numbers. J Engng Math 1997;31:101±18.
[37] Clavin P, LinÄaÂn A. Theory of gaseous combustion. An intro-
ductive course. In: Verlarde MG, editor. Non equilibrium
cooperative phenomena in physics and related ®elds. New
York: Plenum Press, 1983.
[38] Favier V, Vervisch L. Edge ¯ames and partially premixed
combustion in diffusion ¯ame quenching. Combust Flame
2001;125(1/2):788±803.
[39] LinÄaÂn A. Ignition and ¯ame spread in laminar mixing layer.
In: Buckmaster J, Jackson TL, Kumar A, editors. Combus-
tion in high speed ¯ows. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic
Publishers, 1994. p. 461.
[40] Phillips H. Flame in a buoyant methane layer. Tenth Sym-
posium (International) on Combustion. Pittsburgh: The
Combustion Institute, 1965.
[41] Kioni PN, Rogg B, Bray KNC, LinÄaÂn A. Flame spread in
laminar mixing layers: the triple ¯ame. Combust Flame
1993;95:276.
[42] Plessing T, Terhoeven P, Peters N, Mansour MS. An exper-
imental and numerical study on a laminar triple ¯ame.
Combust Flame 1998;115(3):335±53.
[43] Kioni PN, Bray KNC, Greenhalgh DA, Rogg B. Experimen-
tal and numerical studies of a triple ¯ame. Combust Flame
1998;116:192±206.
[44] Dold JW. Flame propagation in a nonuniform mixture:
analysis of a slowly varying triple ¯ame. Combust Flame
1989;76:71±88.
[45] Hartley LJ, Dold JW. Flame propagation in a nonuniform
mixture: analysis of a propagating triple-¯ame. Combust
Sci Technol 1991;80:23±46.
[46] Buckmaster J. Edge-¯ames and their stability. Combust Sci
Technol 1996;115:41±68.
[47] Ghosal S, Vervisch L. Theoretical and numerical investiga-
tion of a symmetrical triple ¯ame using a parabolic ¯ame tip
approximation. J Fluid Mech 2000;415:227±60.
[48] Bourlioux A, Cuenot B, Poinsot T. Asymptotic and nu-
merical study of the stabilization of diffusion ¯ames by hot
gas. Combust Flame 2000;120(1/2).
[49] Ruetsch GR, Vervisch L, LinÄaÂn A. Effects of heat release on
triple ¯ame. Phys Fluids 1995;6(7):1447±54.
D. Veynante, L. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 261
[50] Domingo P, Vervisch L. Triple ¯ames and partially premixed
combustion in autoignition of nonpremixed mixtures. Twenty-
Sixth Symposium (International) on Combustion. Pittsburgh:
The Combustion Institute, 1996. p. 233±40.
[51] Plessing T, Terhoven P, Peters N, Mansour MS. An experi-
mental and numerical study on a laminar triple ¯ame.
Combust Flame 1998;115(3):335±53.
[52] Echekki T, Chen JH. Structure and propagation of methanol±
air triple ¯ames. Combust Flame 1998;114(1/2):231±45.
[53] Favier V, Vervisch L. Effects of unsteadiness in edge-¯ames
and liftoff in non-premixed turbulent combustion. Twenty-
Seventh Symposium (International) on Combustion. Pitts-
burgh: The Combustion Institute, 1998. p. 1239±45.
[54] Ghosal S, Vervisch L. Stability diagram for lift-off and blow-
out of a round jet laminar diffusion ¯ame. Combust Flame
2001;124(4)646±55.
[55] Vervisch L. Using numerics to help understanding of nonpre-
mixed turbulent ¯ames. Proc Combust Inst 2000;28:11±24.
[56] Borghi R. ReÂactions chimiques en milieu turbulent. PhD
Thesis. Universite Pierre et Marie Curie, Paris 6, 1978.
[57] Villasenor R, Pitz RW, Chen JY. Interaction between chemi-
cal reaction and turbulence in supersonic non-premixed
H
2
±air combustion. In: 29th Aerospace Science Meeting,
Reno (Nevada), AIAA paper 91-0375, 1991.
[58] Nieuwstadt FTM, Meeder JP. Large-eddy simulation of air
pollution dispersion: a review. In: Metais O, Ferziger J,
editors. New tools in turbulence modelling. Berlin: Les
Editions de PhysiqueÐSpringer, 1997. p. 264±80.
[59] Meeder JP, Nieuwstadt FTM. Subgrid-scale segregation of
chemically reactive species in a neutral boundary layer. In:
Chollet JP, Voke PR, Kleiser L, editors. Direct and large
eddy simulation II. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers,
1997. p. 301±10.
[60] Bray KNC. Turbulent ¯ows with premixed reactants in
turbulent reacting ¯ows. In: Libby PA, Williams FA, editors.
Topics in applied physics, vol. 44. New York: Springer,
1980. p. 115.
[61] Borghi R. On the structure and morphology of turbulent
premixed ¯ames. Rec Adv Aerosp Sci 1985:117±38.
[62] Borghi R, Destriau M. Combustion and ¯ames, chemical and
physical principles. Paris: Editions Technip, 1998.
[63] Peters N. Laminar ¯amelet concepts in turbulent combustion.
Twenty-First Symposium (International) on Combustion.
Pittsburgh: The Combustion Institute, 1986. p. 1231±50.
[64] Tennekes H, Lumley JL. A ®rst course in turbulence.
Cambridge: MIT Press, 1972.
[65] Poinsot T, Veynante D, Candel S. Quenching processes and
premixed turbulent combustion diagrams. J Fluid Mech
1991;228:561±606.
[66] Roberts WL, Driscoll JF, Drake MC, Goss LP. Images of the
quenching of a ¯ame by a vortex: to quantify regimes of
turbulent combustion. Combust Flame 1993;94:58±69.
[67] Bilger RW. The structure of turbulent non premixed ¯ames.
Twenty-Second Symposium (International) on Combustion.
Pittsburgh: The Combustion Institute, 1988.
[68] Borghi R. Turbulent combustion modelling. Prog Energy
Combust Sci 1988;14:245±92.
[69] Y.Y. Lee, Nonpremixed reacting ¯ows near extinction. PhD
Thesis. Cornell University, 1994.
[70] Cuenot B, Poinsot TJ. Effects of curvature and unsteadiness
in diffusion ¯ames, implications for turbulent diffusion
combustion. Twenty-Fifth Symposium (International) on
Combustion. Pittsburgh: The Combustion Institute, 1994.
[71] Cook A, Riley JJ. Direct numerical simulation of a turbulent
reactive plume on a parallel computer. J Comp Phys
1996;129(2):263±83.
[72] Libby PA, Williams FA. Turbulent combustion: fundamental
aspects and a review. In: Libby PA, Williams FA, editors.
Turbulent reacting ¯ows. London: Academic Press, 1994.
p. 2±61.
[73] Cuenot B, Egolfopoulos FN, Poinsot T. An unsteady laminar
¯amelet model for nonpremixed combustion. Combust
Theor Model 2000;4(1):77.
[74] Mahalingam S, Chen JH, Vervisch L. Finite-rate chemistry
and transient effects in direct numerical simulations of turbu-
lent nonpremixed ¯ames. Combust Flame 1995;102(3):285±
97.
[75] Bray KNC. The challenge of turbulent combustion. Twenty-
Sixth Symposium (International) on Combustion. Pittsburgh:
The Combustion Institute, 1996.
[76] Williams FA. Turbulent combustion. In: Buckmaster JD,
editor. The mathematics of combustion. Philadelphia:
SIAM, 1985. p. 116±51.
[77] Kerstein AR, Ashurst W, Williams FA. Field equation for
interface propagation in an unsteady homogeneous ¯ow
®eld. Phys Rev A 1988;37(7):2728±31.
[78] Poinsot T, Echekki T, Mungal MG. A study of the laminar
¯ame tip and implications for premixed turbulent combus-
tion. Combust Sci Technol 1991;81(1±3):45.
[79] Smiljanovski V, Moser V, Klein R. A capturing±tracking
hybrid scheme for de¯agration discontinuities. Combust
Theor Model 1997;1(2):183±215.
[80] Bourlioux A, Moser V, Klein R. Large eddy simulations of
turbulent premixed ¯ames using a capturing/tracking hybrid
approach. Sixth International Conference on Numerical
Combustion, New Orleans, Louisiana 1996.
[81] Kim W-W, Menon S, Mongia HC. Large-eddy simulation of
a gas turbine combustor ¯ow. Combust Sci Technol
1999;143:25±62.
[82] Piana J, Veynante D, Candel S, Poinsot T. Direct numerical
simulation analysis of the G-equation in premixed combus-
tion. In: Chollet JP, Voke PR, Kleiser L, editors. Direct and
large eddy simulation II. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic
Publishers, 1997. p. 321±30.
[83] Fichot F, Lacas F, Veynante D, Candel S. One-dimensional
propagation of a premixed turbulent ¯ame with a balance
equation for the ¯ame surface density. Combust Sci Technol
1993:90.
[84] Marble FE, Broadwell JE. The coherent ¯ame model of non-
premixed turbulent combustion. Project Squid TRW-9-PU,
Project Squid Headquarters, Chaffee Hall, Purdue Univer-
sity, 1977.
[85] Candel S, Poinsot T. Flame stretch and the balance equation
for the ¯ame area. Combust Sci Technol 1990;70:1±15.
[86] Pope SB. The evolution of surfaces in turbulence. Int J
Engng Sci 1988;26(5):445±69.
[87] Vervisch L, Bidaux E, Bray KNC, Kollmann W. Surface
density function in premixed turbulent combustion model-
ing, similarities between probability density function and
¯ame surface approach. Phys Fluids A 1995;7(10):2496±
503.
[88] Van Kalmthout E, Veynante D. Direct numerical simulations
D. Veynante, L. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 262
analysis of ¯ame surface density models for non premixed
turbulent combustion. Phys Fluids A 1998;10(9):2347±68.
[89] Peters N. Turbulent combustion. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 2000.
[90] Weller HG, Marooney CJ, Gosman AD. A new spectral
method for calculation of the time-varying area of a laminar
¯ame in homogeneous turbulence. 23rd Symposium (Inter-
national) on Combustion. Pittsburgh: The Combustion
Institute, 1990. p. 629±36.
[91] Weller HG. The development of a new ¯ame area combus-
tion model using conditional averaging. Thermo-Fluids
Section Report TF/9307. Imperial College of Science Tech-
nology and Medicine, 1993.
[92] O'Brien EE. The probability density function (pdf) approach
to reacting turbulent ¯ows. In: Williams FA, Libby PA,
editors. Turbulent reacting ¯ows. London: Academic Press,
1980. p. 185.
[93] Pope SB. Pdf method for turbulent reacting ¯ows. Prog
Energy Combust Sci 1985;11:119±95.
[94] Kollmann W. The pdf approach to turbulent ¯ow. Theor
Comp Fluid Dynam 1990;1:285±349.
[95] Dopazo C. Recent developments in pdf methods. In: Libby
PA, Williams FA, editors. Turbulent reacting ¯ows. London:
Academic Press, 1994. p. 375±474.
[96] Dopazo C, Valino L, Fuego F. Statistical description of the
turbulent mixing of scalar ®elds. Int J Mod Phys B
1997;11(25).
[97] Chen JY, Kollmann W. Pdf modeling of chemical nonequi-
librium effects in turbulent non-premixed hydrocarbon
¯ames. Twenty-Second Symposium (International) on
Combustion. Pittsburgh: The Combustion Institute, 1988.
[98] Abramowitz M, Stegun IA. Handbook of mathematical func-
tions. NY, USA: Dover, 1970.
[99] Bradley D, Lawes M, Scott MJ. Combust Flame
1994;99:581±90.
[100] Lundgren TS. Distribution function in the statistical theory of
turbulence. Phys Fluids 1967;10(5):969±75.
[101] Pope SB. Computations of turbulent combustion: progress
and challenges. Twenty-Third Symposium (International)
on Combustion. Pittsburgh: The Combustion Institute, 1990.
[102] Klimenko AY. Fluid Dynam 1990;25:327.
[103] Bilger RW. Conditional moment closure for turbulent react-
ing ¯ow. Phys Fluids 1993;5(2):327±34.
[104] Chen J-Y, Kollmann W. Comparison of prediction and
measurement in non-premixed turbulent ¯ames. In: Libby
PA, Williams FA, editors. Turbulent reacting ¯ows. London:
Academic Press, 1994. p. 213±308.
[105] Klimenko AY, Bilger RW. Prog Energy Combust Sci
1999;25(6):595±687.
[106] Smith NSA. Conditional moment closure of mixing and reac-
tion in turbulent nonpremixed combustion. In: Moin P,
Reynolds WC, editors. Annual research briefs. Stanford,
CA: CTR, Stanford University, 1996. p. 85±99.
[107] Swaminathan N, Bilger RW. Assessment of combustion
submodels for turbulent nonpremixed hydrocarbon ¯ames.
Combust Flame 1999;116(4):519±45.
[108] Borghi R. Turbulent premixed combustion: further discus-
sions on the scales of ¯uctuations. Combust Flame
1990;80:304±12.
[109] Abdel-Gayed RG, Bradley D, Hamid MN, Lawes M. Lewis
number effects on turbulent burning velocity. 20th Sympo-
sium (International) on Combustion. Pittsburgh: The
Combustion Institute, 1984. p. 505±12.
[110] Abdel-Gayed RG, Bradley D. Combustion regimes and the
straining of turbulent premixed ¯ames. Combust Flame
1989;76:213±8.
[111] Yakhot V, Orszag CG, Thangam S, Gatski TB, Speziale
CG. Development of turbulence models for shear ¯ows by
a double expansion technique. Phys Fluids 1992;4(7):
1510.
[112] Gouldin FC. Combustion intensity and burning rate integral
of premixed ¯ames. Twenty-Sixth Symposium (Interna-
tional) on Combustion. Pittsburgh: The Combustion Insti-
tute, 1996. p. 381±8.
[113] Im HG, Lund TS, Ferziger JH. Large eddy simulation of
turbulent front propagation with dynamic subgrid models.
Phys Fluids A 1997;9(12):3826±33.
[114] Spalding DB. Mixing and chemical reaction in steady
con®ned turbulent ¯ames. 13th Symposium (International)
on Combustion. Pittsburgh: The Combustion Institute,
1971. p. 649±57.
[115] Said R, Borghi R. A simulation with a cellular automaton for
turbulent combustion modelling, Twenty-Second Sym-
posium (International) on Combustion. Pittsburgh: The
Combustion Institute, 1988 p. 569±77.
[116] Moss JB, Bray KNC. A uni®ed statistical model of the
premixed turbulent ¯ame. Acta Astronaut 1977;4:291±319.
[117] Mantel T, Borghi R. A new model of premixed wrinkled
¯ame propagation based on a scalar dissipation equation.
Combust Flame 1994;96(4):443.
[118] Lahjaily H, Champion M, Karmed D, Bruel P. Introduction
of dilution in the BML model: application to a stagnating
turbulent ¯ame. Combust Sci Technol 1998;135:153±73.
[119] Poinsot T, Veynante D, Trouve A, Ruetsch G. Turbulent
¯ame propagation in partially premixed ¯ames. Proceedings
of the 1996 Summer Program. Center for Turbulence
Research, 1996. p. 111±36.
[120] Veynante D, Duclos JM, Piana J. Experimental analysis of
¯amelet models for premixed turbulent combustion, Twenty-
Fifth Symposium (International) on Combustion. Pittsburgh:
The Combustion Institute, 1994.
[121] Veynante D, Piana J, Duclos JM, Martel C. Experimental
analysis of ¯ame surface density model for premixed turbu-
lent combustion. Twenty-Sixth Symposium (International)
on Combustion. Pittsburgh: The Combustion Institute,
1996. p. 413±20.
[122] Duclos JM. Etude theÂorique et expeÂrimentale d'une ¯amme
turbulente stabiliseÂe par un barreau cylindrique. PhD Thesis.
Ecole Centrale Paris, 1997.
[123] Martel C. Etude expeÂrimentale de la combustion turbulente
preÂmeÂlangeÂe. Analyse de modeÁles. PhD Thesis. Ecole
Centrale Paris, 1998.
[124] Bray KNC, Champion M, Libby PA. The interaction
between turbulence and chemistry in premixed turbulent
¯ames. In: Borghi R, Murphy SN, editors. Turbulent reacting
¯ows, Lecture Notes in Engineering, vol. 40. Berlin:
Springer, 1989. p. 541±63.
[125] Gouldin FC. Review of closure models for the ¯amelet
regime of premixed turbulent combustion. Joint Meeting of
the British and German Sections of the Combustion Institute,
Queens' College, Cambridge, UK, 1993. p. 52±5.
[126] Gouldin FC, Miles PC. Chemical closure and burning rates in
D. Veynante, L. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 263
premixed turbulent ¯ames. Combust Flame 1995;100(1/
2):201.
[127] Meneveau C, Poinsot T. Stretching and quenching of ¯ame-
lets in premixed turbulent combustion. Combust Flame
1991;86:311±32.
[128] Bailly P. Contribution l'eÂtude de l'interaction turbulenceÐ
combustion dans les ¯ammes turbulentes de preÂmeÂlange aÁ
l'aide de modeÁles du second ordre. PhD Thesis. Universite de
Poitiers, 1996.
[129] Bailly P, GarreÂton D, Simonin O, Bruel P, Champion M,
Deshaies B, Duplantier S, Sanquer S. Experimental and
numerical study of a premixed ¯ame stabilized by a rectan-
gular section cylinder, Twenty-Sixth Symposium (Interna-
tional) on Combustion. Pittsburgh: The Combustion
Institute, 1996. p. 923±30.
[130] Duclos JM, Veynante D, Poinsot T. A comparison of ¯amelet
models for premixed turbulent combustion. Combust Flame
1993;95(1/2):101±18.
[131] Bray KNC, Champion M, Libby PA. Premixed ¯ames in
stagnating turbulence part iv: a new theory for the Reynolds
stresses and Reynolds ¯uxes applied to impinging ¯ows.
Combust Flame 2000;120(1/2):1±18.
[132] Domingo P, Bray KNC. Laminar ¯amelet expressions for
pressure ¯uctuation terms in second moment models of
premixed turbulent combustion. Combust Flame
2000;121(4):555±74.
[133] Gouldin FC, Bray KNC, Chen JY. Chemical closure model
for fractal ¯amelets. Combust Flame 1989;77:241±59.
[134] Cant RS, Pope SB, Bray KNC. Modelling of ¯amelet surface
to volume ratio in turbulent premixed combustion. 23rd
Symposium (International) on Combustion, Orleans. Pitts-
burgh: The Combustion Institute, 1990. p. 809±15.
[135] Prasad ROS, Gore JP. An evaluation of ¯ame surface density
models for turbulent premixed jet ¯ames. Combust Flame
1999;116(1±2):1±14.
[136] Cheng WK, Diringer JA. Numerical modelling of SI engine
combustion with a ¯ame sheet model. SAE paper 910268.
International Congress and Exposition, Detroit, 1991.
[137] Choi CR, Huh KY. Development of a coherent ¯amelet
model for a spark ignited turbulent premixed ¯ame in a
closed vessel. Combust Flame 1998;114(3/4):336±48.
[138] Checkel MD, Thomas A. Turbulent combustion of premixed
¯ames in closed vessels. Combust Flame 1994;96(4):351±
70.
[139] Prasad ROS, Paul RN, Sivathanu YR, Gore JP. An evaluation
of combined ¯ame surface density and mixture fraction
models for nonisenthalpic premixed turbulent ¯ames.
Combust Flame 1999;117(3):514±28.
[140] Veynante D, Trouve A, Bray KNC, Mantel T. Gradient and
counter-gradient scalar transport in turbulent premixed
¯ames. J Fluid Mech 1997;332:263±93.
[141] Dopazo C. On conditioned averages for intermittent turbu-
lent ¯ows. J Fluid Mech 1977;81:433±8.
[142] Trouve A. The production of premixed ¯ame surface area in
turbulent shear ¯ow. Combust Flame 1994;99:687±96.
[143] Libby PA, Bray KNC. Countergradient diffusion in premixed
turbulent ¯ames. AIAA J 1981;19:205±13.
[144] Masuya G, Libby P. Non gradient theory for oblique turbulent
¯ame with premixed reactants. AIAA J 1981;19:205±13.
[145] Trouve A, Veynante D, Bray KNC, Mantel T. The coupling
between ¯ame surface dynamics and species mass conserva-
tion in premixed turbulent combustion. In: Center for Turbu-
lence Research, editor. Proceedings of the Summer Program,
Stanford, Stanford: Center for Turbulence Research, 1994.
p. 95±124.
[146] Rutland C, Cant RS. Turbulent transport in premixed ¯ames.
In: Moin P, Reynolds WC, editors. Studying turbulence
using numerical databasesÐV. Stanford, CA: CTR, Stan-
ford University, 1994. p. 75±94.
[147] Kalt PAM. Experimenal investigation of turbulent scalar ¯ux
in premixed ¯ames. PhD Thesis. University of Sydney, 1999.
[148] Boughanem H. Evaluation des termes de transport et de
dissipation de surface de ¯amme par simulation numeÂrique
directe de la combustion turbulente. PhD Thesis. University
of Rouen, France, 1998.
[149] Boughanem H, Trouve A. The occurence of ¯ame instabil-
ities in turbulent premixed combustion. 27th Symposium
International on Combustion 1998.
[150] Paul RN, Bray KNC. Study of premixed turbulent combus-
tion including Landau±Darrieus instability effects. Twenty-
Sixth Symposium (International) on Combustion. Pittsburgh:
The Combustion Institute, 1996. p. 259±66.
[151] Bray KNC, Moss JB, Libby PA. Turbulent transport in
premixed turbulent ¯ames. In: Zierep J, Oertel H, editors.
Convective transport and instability phenomena. Germany:
University of Karlsuhe, 1982.
[152] Veynante D, Poinsot T. Effects of pressure gradients on
turbulent premixed ¯ames. J Fluid Mech 1997;353:83±114.
[153] Libby PA. Theoretical analysis of the effect of gravity on
premixed turbulent ¯ames. Combust Sci Technol
1989;68:15±33.
[154] Chen JY, Lumley JL, Gouldin FC. Modeling of wrinkled
laminar ¯ames with intermittency and conditional statistics.
21st Symposium (International) on Combustion. Pittsburgh:
The Combustion Institute, 1986. p. 1483±91.
[155] Boger M, Veynante D. Large eddy simulations of a turbulent
premixed V-shape ¯ame. Eighth European Turbulence
Conference, Barcelona 2000.
[156] Koochesfahani MM, Dimotakis PE. Mixing and chemical
reactions in turbulent liquid mixing layer. J Fluid Mech
1986;170:83±112.
[157] McMurty PA, Riley JJ, Metcalfe RW. Effects of heat release
on the large-scale structure in turbulent mixing layer. J Fluid
Mech 1989;199:297±332.
[158] Hermanson JC, Dimotakis PE. Effects of heat release in
turbulent, reacting shear layer. J Fluid Mech 1989;199:
333±75.
[159] Jones WP. Turbulence modelling and numerical solution
methods for variable density and combusting ¯ows. In:
Libby PA, Williams FA, editors. Turbulent reacting ¯ows,
London: Academic Press, 1994. p. 309±68.
[160] Magnussen BF, Hjertager BH. On the mathematical model-
ing of turbulent combustion with special emphasis on soot
formation and combustion. Sixteenth Symposium (Interna-
tional) on Combustion. Pittsburgh: The Combustion Insti-
tute, 1976. p. 719±29.
[161] Ferziger JH, Peric M. Computational methods for ¯uid
dynamics. Berlin: Springer, 1996.
[162] Coupland J, Priddin CH. Modelling of ¯ow and combustion
in a production gas turbine combustor. In: Durst F, Launder
BE, Lumley JL, Schmidt FW, Whitelaw JH, editors. Turbu-
lent shear ¯ows 5th. Berlin: Springer, 1987. p. 310±23.
D. Veynante, L. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 264
[163] BarlowRS, Dibble RW, Chen JY, Lucht RP. Combust Flame
1990(82).
[164] Montgomery CJ, Kosaly G, Riley JJ. Direct numerical simu-
lation of turbulent H
2
±O
2
combustion using reduced chem-
istry. In: AIAA Paper 93-0248. 31st Aerospace Sciences
Meeting and Exhibit, Reno, NV, 1993. p. 1±10.
[165] Peters N. Prog Energy Combust Sci page 1984:319.
[166] Sun CJ, Sung CJ, Wang H, Law CK. On the structure of
nonsooting counter¯ow ethylene and acetylene diffusion
¯ames. Combust Flame 1996;107(4):321±35.
[167] Sung CJ, Liu JB, Law CK. Structural response of counter-
¯ow diffusion ¯ames to strain rate variations. Combust
Flame 1995;102:481±92.
[168] Rogg B. The Cambridge universal laminar ¯amelet computer
code. In: Peters N, Rogg B, editors. Reduced kinetic mechan-
isms for applications in combustion systems, Appendix C.
Berlin: Springer, 1993.
[169] Nandula SP, Brown TM, Pitz RW. Measurements of scalar
dissipation in the reaction zones of turbulent nonpremixed
H
2
±air ¯ames. Combust Flame 1994;99:775±83.
[170] Bish ES, Dahm WJA. A strained dissipation and reaction
layer formulation for turbulent diffusion ¯ames. Western
States Section Fall Meeting. Pittsburgh: The Combustion
Institute, 1993.
[171] Ferreira JC. Flamelet modelling of stabilization in turbulent
non-premixed combustion. PhD Thesis. Swiss Federal Insti-
tute of Technology, ETH, Zurich, 1996.
[172] Haworth DC, Drake MC, Pope SB, Blint RJ. The importance
of time-dependent ¯ame structures in stretched laminar
¯amelet models for turbulent jet diffusion ¯ames. Twenty-
Second Symposium (International) on Combustion. Pitts-
burgh: The Combustion Institute, 1988. p. 589±97.
[173] Pitsch H, Wan YP, Peters N. SAE Paper, 952357, 1995.
[174] Zhang Y, Rogg B, Bray KNC. 2-d Simulation of turbulent
autoignition with transient laminar ¯amelet source term
closure. Combust Sci Technol 1995;105:211±27.
[175] Darabiha N. Transient behaviour of laminar counter¯ow
hydrogen±air diffusion ¯ames with complex chemistry.
Combust Sci Technol 1992;86:163±81.
[176] Mauss F, Keller D, Peters N. Alagrangian simulation of ¯ame-
let extinction and re-ignition in turbulent jet diffusion ¯ames.
Twenty-Third Symposium (International) on Combustion.
Pittsburgh: The Combustion Institute, 1990. p. 693±8.
[177] Pitsh H, Chen M, Peters N. Unsteady ¯amelet modeling of
turbulent hydrogen±air diffusion ¯ames. Twenty-Seventh
Symposium (International) on Combustion. Pittsburgh: The
Combustion Institute, 1998. p. 1057±64.
[178] Mell WE, Nilsen VN, KosaÂly G, Riley JJ. Direct numerical
simulation investigation of the conditional moment closure
model for nonpremixed turbulent reacting ¯ows. Combust
Sci Technol 1991;91:179±86.
[179] Delhaye B. Etude des ¯ammes de diffusion turbulentes.
Simulations directes et modeÂlisation. PhD Thesis. Ecole
Centrale Paris, 1994.
[180] Delhaye B, Veynante D, Candel S. Simulation and modeling
of reactive shear layers. Theoret Comput Fluid Dynam
1994;6:67±87.
[181] Chang CHH, Dahm WJA, Trygvason G. Lagrangian model
simulations of molecular mixing, including ®nite rate chemi-
cal reactions, in a temporally developing shear layer. Phys
Fluid 1991;3(5):1300±11.
[182] Lee YY, Pope SB. Nonpremixed turbulent reacting ¯ow near
extinction. Combust Flame 1995;101:501±28.
[183] Bradley D, Gaskell PH, Gu XJ. The mathematical modeling
of liftoff and blowoff of turbulent non-premixed methane jet
¯ames at high strain rate. Proc Combust Inst 1998;27:1199±
206.
[184] Cuenot B, Egolfopoulos FN, Poinsot T. An unsteady laminar
¯amelet model for non-premixed combustion. Combust
Theor Mod 2000;4:77±97.
[185] MuÈller CM, Breitbach H, Peters N. Partially premixed turbu-
lent ¯ame propagation in jets ¯ames. Twenty-Fifth Sympo-
sium (International) on Combustion. Pittsburgh: The
Combustion Institute, 1994. p. 1099±106.
[186] Fichot F, Delhaye B, Veynante D, Candel S. Strain rate
modelling for a ¯ame surface density equation with applica-
tion to non-premixed turbulent combustion, 25th Symposium
(International) on Combustion. Pittsburgh: The Combustion
Institute, 1994.
[187] van Kalmthout E, Veynante D, Candel S. Direct numerical
simulation analysis of ¯ame surface density equation in non-
premixed turbulent combustion, Twenty-Sixth Symposium
(International) on Combustion. Pittsburgh: The Combustion
Institute, 1996.
[188] Van Kalmthout E, Veynante D. Analysis of ¯ame surface
density concepts in non-premixed turbulent combustion
using direct numerical simulation. Eleventh Symposium on
Turbulent Shear Flows, Grenoble, France 1997.
[189] Obounou M, Gonzalez M, Borghi R. A lagrangian model for
predicting turbulent diffusion ¯ames with chemical kinetic
effects. Twenty-Fifth Symposium (International) on Combus-
tion. Pittsburgh: The Combustion Institute, 1994. p. 1107±13.
[190] Broadwell JE, Lutz A. Aturbulent jet chemical reaction model:
NO
x
production in jet ¯ames. Combust Flame 1998:114.
[191] Ravet F, Vervisch L. Modeling non-premixed turbulent
combustion in aeronautical engines using pdf-generator.
36th Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit AIAA paper
98-1027, Reno, NV 1998.
[192] Girimaji SS. Phys Fluids 1992;4:2529.
[193] Smith NSA, Ruetsch GR, Oefelein J, Ferziger JH. Simulation
and modeling of reactive particles in turbulent nonpremixed
combustion. In: Moin P, Reynolds WC, editors. Studying
turbulence using numerical databasesÐVII. Stanford, CA:
CTR, Stanford University, 1998. p. 39±60.
[194] Kerstein AR. A linear-eddy model for turbulent scalar trans-
port and mixing. Combust Sci Technol 1988;60:391±421.
[195] Fox RO. The lagrangian spectral relaxation model for differ-
ential diffusion in homogeneous turbulence. Phys Fluids
1999;11(6):1550±71.
[196] Fox RO. The spectral relaxation model of the scalar dissipa-
tion rate in homogeneous turbulence. Phys Fluids
1995;7(5):1082±94.
[197] Van Slooten Jayesh PR, Pope SB. Advances in pdf modeling
for inhomogeneous turbulent ¯ows. Phys Fluids 1998;10(1):
246±65.
[198] Spielman LA, Levenspiel O. A Monte Carlo treatment for
reacting and coalescing dispersed phase systems. Chem
Engng Sci 1965;20:247±54.
[199] Valino L. A®eld Monte Carlo formulation for calculating the
probability density function of a single scalar in turbulent
¯ow. Flow Turb Combust 1998;60(2):157±72.
[200] Fox RO. Computational methods for turbulent reacting ¯ows
D. Veynante, L. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 265
in the chemical process industry. Revue de L'Institut Fran-
cËais du PeÂtrole 1996;51(2).
[201] Corrsin S. The isotropic turbulent mixer. Part II. Arbitrary
Schmidt number. AIChE J 1964;10:870±7.
[202] Dopazo C. Non-isothermal turbulent reactive ¯ows: stochas-
tic approaches. PhD Thesis. University of New York, Stony
Brook, 1973.
[203] Villermaux J. Micromixing phenomena in stirred reactors.
Encycl Fluid Mech 1986:707.
[204] Eswaran V, Pope SB. Direct numerical simulation of the
turbulent mixing of a passive scalar. Phys Fluids
1988;31(3):506±20.
[205] Tsai K, Fox RO. The bmc/giem model for micromixing in
non-premixed turbulent reacting ¯ows. Ind Engng Chem Res
1998:6.
[206] Curl RI. Dispersed phase mixing. Theory and effects in
simple reactors. AIChE J 1963;175(9).
[207] Masri AR, Bilger RW, Dibble RW. Turbulent non-premixed
¯ames of methane near extinction. Combust Flame
1988;73:261±8.
[208] Jones WP, Kakhi M. Pdf modeling of ®nite rate chemistry
effects in turbulent nonpremixed jet ¯ames. Combust Flame
1998;115(1/2):210±29.
[209] Jones WP, Lindstedt RP. Global reaction schemes for hydro-
carbon combustion. Combust Flame 1988;73:233±49.
[210] Dopazo C. Relaxation of initial probability density functions
in the turbulent convection of scalar ®elds. Phys Fluids
1979;22(20).
[211] Janicka J, Kolbe W, Kollmann W. Closure of the transport
equation for the probability density function of turbulent
scalar ®elds. J Non-Equilib Thermodyn 1979;4(47).
[212] Pope SB. An improved turbulent mixing model. Combust Sci
Technol 1982;28:131±5.
[213] Pope SB. Consistent modeling of scalars in turbulent ¯ows.
Phys Fluids 1982;26:404±8.
[214] Leonard A, Hill J. Direct numerical simulation of turbulent
¯ows with chemical reaction. J Scient Comput
1988;3(1):25±43.
[215] Kraichnan RH. Closures for probability distributions. Bull
Am Phys Soc 1989;34:2298.
[216] Dutta A, Tarbell JM. Closure models for turbulent reacting
¯ows. AIChE J 1989;35(12).
[217] Gao F. An analytical solution for the scalar probability
density function in homogeneous turbulence. Phys Fluids
1991;3(4):511±3.
[218] Valino L, Dopazo C. A binomial sampling model for scalar
turbulent mixing. Phys Fluids A 1990;2(7):1204±12.
[219] Norris AT, Pope SB. Turbulent mixing model based on
ordered pairing. Combust Flame 1991;83:27±42.
[220] Valino L, Dopazo C. A binomial langevin model for turbu-
lent mixing. Phys Fluids A 1991;3(12):3034±7.
[221] Valino L, Ros J, Dopazo C. Monte Carlo implementation and
analytic solution of an inert-scalar turbulent-mixing test
problem using mapping closure. Phys Fluids A
1991;3(9):2191±8.
[222] Pope SB. Mapping closure for turbulent mixing and reaction.
Theoret Comput Fluid Dynam 1991;2:255±70.
[223] Gao F. Mapping closure and non-gaussianity of the scalar
probability density functions in isotropic turbulence. Phys
Fluids A 1991;3(10):2438±44.
[224] Gao F, O'Brien EE. Joint probability density function of a
scalar and its gradient in isotropic turbulence. Phys Fluids
1991;3(6).
[225] Gao F, O'Brien EE. A mapping closure for multispecies
®ckian diffusion. Phys Fluids 1991;3(3).
[226] Kerstein AR. Linear-eddy modelling of turbulent transport.
Part 6. Microstructure of diffusive scalar mixing ®elds. J
Fluid Mech 1991;231:361±94.
[227] Chen J-Y, Kollmann W. Pdf modeling and analysis of ther-
mal NO formation in turbulent nonpremixed hydrogen±air
jet ¯ames. Combust Flame 1992;88:397±412.
[228] Jiang T-L, Givi P, Gao F. Binary and trinary scalar mixing by
Fickian diffusionÐsome mapping closure results. Phys
Fluids A 1992;4(5):1028±35.
[229] Kerstein AR. Linear-eddy modelling of turbulent transport.
Part 7. Finite rate chemistry and multi-stream mixing. J Fluid
Mech 1992;240:289±313.
[230] Fox RO. Improved Fokker±Planck model for the joint scalar,
scalar gradient pdf. Phys Fluids 1994;1(6):334±48.
[231] Masri AR, Subramaniam S, Pope SB. A mixing model to
improve the pdf simulation of turbulent diffusion ¯ames.
Twenty-Sixth Symposium (International) on Combustion.
Pittsburgh: The Combustion Institute, 1996.
[232] Fox RO. On velocity-conditioned scalar mixing in homo-
geneous turbulence. Phys Fluids 1996;8(10):2678±91.
[233] Fox RO. On the relationship between lagrangian micromix-
ing models and computational ¯uid dynamics. Chem Engng
Process 1998;37:521±35.
[234] ReÂveillon J, Vervisch L. Subgrid mixing modeling: a
dynamic approach. AIAA J 1998;36(3):336±41.
[235] Subramaniam S, Pope SB. A mixing model for turbulent
reactive ¯ows based on Euclidean minimum spanning
trees. Combust Flame 1998;115(4):487±514.
[236] Subramaniam S, Pope SB. Comparison of mixing model
performance for nonpremixed turbulent reacting ¯ows.
Combust Flame 1998;117(4):732±54.
[237] Anand MS, Pope SB. Calculations of premixed turbulent
¯ames by pdf methods. Combust Flame 1987:67.
[238] Haworth DC, Pope SB. A generalized Langevin model for
turbulent ¯ows. Phys Fluids 1986;29:208±28.
[239] Gardiner CW. Handbook of stochastic methods. Berlin:
Springer, 1997.
[240] Pope SB. On the relationship between stochastic Lagrangian
models of turbulence and second-moment closures. Phys
Fluids 1994;6:973±85.
[241] Wouters HA, Peeters TWJ, Roekaerts D. On the existence of
a stochastic Lagrangian model representation for second-
moment closures. Phys Fluids 1996;8(7):1702±4.
[242] Pope SB. Lagrangian pdf methods for turbulent ¯ows. Annu
Rev Fluid Mech 1994;26:23.
[243] ReÂveillon J, Vervisch L. Spray vaporization in non-premixed
turbulent ¯ames: a single droplet model. Combust Flame
2001;121(1/2):75±90.
[244] Hollmann C, Gutheil E. Modeling of turbulent spray diffu-
sion ¯ames including detailed chemistry. Twenty-Sixth
Symposium (International) on Combustion. Pittsburgh: The
Combustion Institute, 1996. p. 1731±8.
[245] Calimez X. Simulation aÁ petite eÂchelle par une meÂthode VOF
d'eÂcoulement diphasiques reÂactifs. PhD Thesis. Ecole
Centrale Paris, 1998.
D. Veynante, L. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 266

194

D. Veynante, L. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266

6. Tools for turbulent combustion modeling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.2. Scalar dissipation rate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.3. Geometrical description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.3.1. G-®eld equation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.3.2. Flame surface density description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.3.3. Flame wrinkling description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.4. Statistical approaches: probability density function . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.4.1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.4.2. Presumed probability density functions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.4.3. Pdf balance equation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.4.4. Joint velocity/concentrations pdf . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.4.5. Conditional moment closure (CMC) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.5. Similarities and links between the tools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7. Reynolds-averaged models for turbulent premixed combustion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.1. Turbulent ¯ame speed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.2. Eddy-break-up model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.3. Bray±Moss±Libby model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.3.1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.3.2. BML model analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.3.3. Recovering mean reaction rate from tools relations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.3.4. Reynolds and Favre averaging . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.3.5. Conditional averagingÐcounter-gradient turbulent transport . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.3.6. Extensions to partially premixed combustion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.4. Models based on the ¯ame surface area estimation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.4.1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.4.2. Algebraic expressions for the ¯ame surface density S . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.4.3. Flame surface density balance equation closures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.4.4. Analysis of the ¯ame surface density balance equation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.4.4.1. Turbulent transport. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.4.4.2. Strain rate induced by the mean ¯ow ®eld, AT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.4.4.3. Strain rate aT due to turbulent motions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.4.4.4. Propagation and curvature terms. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.4.5. Flame stabilization modeling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.4.6. A related approach: G-equation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8. Turbulent transport in premixed combustion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8.1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8.2. Direct numerical simulation analysis of turbulent transport . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8.2.1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8.2.2. Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8.3. Physical analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8.3.1. Comments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8.4. External pressure gradient effects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8.5. Counter-gradient transportÐexperimental results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8.6. To include counter-gradient turbulent transport in modeling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8.7. Towards a conditional turbulence modeling? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9. Reynolds averaged models for non-premixed turbulent combustion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.2. Fuel/air mixing modeling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.2.1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ~ 9.2.2. Balance equation and simple relaxation model for x . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.3. Models assuming in®nitely fast chemistry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.3.1. Eddy dissipation model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.3.2. Presumed pdf: in®nitely fast chemistry model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.4. Flamelet modeling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.4.1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

212 212 214 214 214 216 218 218 218 219 219 221 221 221 223 223 223 224 224 225 226 227 227 228 229 229 229 232 234 234 234 235 236 237 237 237 237 238 238 238 239 241 242 242 243 244 245 245 246 246 246 247 247 247 248 248

D. Veynante, L. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266

195

9.4.2. Flame structure in composition space, ................... 9.4.3. Mixing modeling in SLFM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.4.4. Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.5. Flame surface density modeling, coherent ¯ame model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.6. MIL model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.7. Conditional moment closure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.8. Pdf modeling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.8.1. Turbulent micromixing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.8.2. Linear relaxation model, IEM/LMSE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.8.3. GIEM model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.8.4. Stochastic micromixing closures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.8.5. Interlinks PDF/¯ame surface modeling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.8.6. Joint velocity/concentrations pdf modeling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10. Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Y iSLFM …Z p ; xp †

249 251 252 252 253 254 254 255 256 256 257 257 258 260 260

1. Introduction The number of combustion systems used in power generation and transportation industries is growing rapidly. This induces pollution and environmental problems to become critical factors in our societies. The accurate control of turbulent ¯ames therefore appears as a real challenge. Computing is now truly on par with experiment and theory as a research tool to produce multi-scale information that is not available by using any other technique. Computational ¯uid dynamics (CFD) is ef®ciently used to improve the design of aerodynamical systems, and today no real progress in design can be made without using CFD. With the same objectives, much work has been devoted to turbulent combustion modeling, following a variety of approaches and distinct modeling strategies. This paper is intended to provide a generic review of these numerical models. A wide range of coupled problems are involved in turbulent ¯ames: ² The ¯uid mechanical properties of the combustion system must be well known to carefully describe the mixing between reactants and, more generally, all transfer phenomena occurring in turbulent ¯ames (heat transfer, molecular diffusion, convection, turbulent transport, etc.). ² Detailed chemical reaction schemes are necessary to estimate the consumption rate of the fuel, the formation of combustion products and pollutant species. A precise knowledge of the chemistry is absolutely required to predict ignition, stabilization or extinction of reaction zones together with pollution. ² Two (liquid fuel) and three (solid fuel) phase systems may be encountered. Liquid fuel injection is a common procedure and the three-dimensional spatial distribution of gaseous reactants depends on complex interactions

between the breakdown of the liquid sheets, the vaporization of the liquid, turbulent mixing, and droplet combustion. ² Radiative heat transfer is generated within the ¯ame by some species and carbon particles resulting from soot formation and transported by the ¯ow motion. In furnaces, walls also interact with combustion through radiative transfer. Turbulent combustion modeling is therefore a very broad subject. All the aspects of the problem are not addressed in the present review. We will only focus on the closure schemes developed and used to understand and calculate turbulent transport and mean burning rates in turbulent ¯ames. The detail of chemistry, its reduction, tabulation, etc. are not considered. However, the links existing between the models are identi®ed, showing similarities which are sometimes much stronger than is usually thought. Numerical modeling of ¯ames is developed from the following steps (Fig. 1): ² Under assumptions such as the high activation energy limit, asymptotic analysis [1±4] allows the analytical determination of ¯ame properties in well-de®ned model problems (ignition, propagation of ¯ame front, instabilities and acoustics, etc.). This approach, limited to simpli®ed situations, leads to analytical results exhibiting helpful scale factors (dimensionless numbers) and major ¯ame behaviors. Asymptotic analysis is particularly well suited to perform quantitative comparison between various phenomena. ² Simpli®ed experiments are useful to understand the basic properties of combustion (laminar ¯ames, ¯ame/vortex interactions, etc.) [5,6]. These experiments are accompanied by numerical simulations of laminar ¯ames incorporating complex chemistry and multi-species transports along with radiative heat losses [7].

3): 2ruj ui 2tij 2rui 2p 1 ˆ2 1 1 Fi 2xi 2t 2xj 2xj …2† …1† . the ultimate step is the simulation of a real combustion device.196 D. a ®rst part is devoted to a brief description of laminar ¯ames (Section 3). ² For given chemistry and transport model. Because of the large number of degrees of freedom involved in turbulent combustion. Once the models have been implemented in numerical codes. understand ¯ames and improve models. These instantaneous local balance equations are. The next three sections are devoted to combustion modeling in the context of Reynolds Averaged Navier±Stokes (RANS) equations.2. implementation of these models into CFD. and to isolate some speci®c phenomena (heat release. Lewis number¼) [8±12]. 2. Following a short presentation of the balance equations for reactive ¯ows (Section 2). using the classical lettering [13±15]: ² Mass: 2ruj 2r ˆ0 1 2t 2xj ² Momentum (i ˆ 1. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 Fig. Then. a full DNS of a practical system cannot be performed and averaging techniques leading to unclosed equations are necessary. 1 is quite formal. validation procedures are required. species and energy transport equations. we review the available closures for the mean reaction rate (Section 7) and turbulent transport (Section 8). the physical analysis leading to turbulent combustion diagrams is developed (Section 5). For premixed turbulent combustion. in direct numerical simulation (DNS) all the scales of the turbulence (time and length) are calculated without resorting to closures for turbulent ¯uxes and mean burning rate. Veynante.1. Turbulent ¯ames are analyzed in simple con®gurations to extract data impossible to measure in experiments. Con®gurations as close as possible to actual industrial systems are chosen for these tests. Instantaneous balance equations The basic set of balance equations comprises the classical Navier±Stokes. Balance equations 2. L. Models for turbulent ¯ames are then developed: closure techniques are proposed for unknown terms found in exact averaged balance equations. the modeling of the mean burning rate in non-premixed turbulent ¯ames is addressed. modeling tools available to derive turbulent combustion models are described and the relations between a priori quite different formalisms are established (Section 6). experimental measurements and comparison between these experimental data and the numerical results. After a presentation of the unsuccessful Taylor's expansion for closing the mean burning rate (Section 4). The decomposition discussed in Fig. Combustion modeling steps. Turbulent combustion modeling is actually a continuous ring between theoretical studies to analyze combustion. Then. 1. The numerical modeling is validated against measurements obtained from experiments. In a subsequent section (Section 9).

Reynolds and Favre averaging Unfortunately. In practical situations.e. brings unclosed correlations such as u H Q H that are unknown and must be modeled. One direct consequence of these instabilities is an increase of the premixed ¯ame area and of the global reaction rate [14. Averaging the mass balance equation leads to:  2r  2  1 rui 1 r H u Hi ˆ 0 2t 2xi …12† where the velocity/density ¯uctuations correlation r H u Hi appears. the full numerical solution of the instantaneous balance equations is limited to very simpli®ed cases (DNS [9. and Reynolds averaging induces some additional dif®culties. The numerical procedure is called Reynolds Averaged Navier±Stokes (RANS) modeling.17]. ¯uctuations of density are observed because of the thermal heat release. ui tij and ui Fj are negligible (low Mach number assumption) [16].12]). ~ a Favre (mass weighted) [18] average Q is introduced and ~ any quantity is then decomposed into Q ˆ Q 1 Q HH : rQ ~ Qˆ . d ij is the Kronecker symbol. Veynante. Species molecular diffusivities are generally described using the Fick law. i. where the number of time and length scales present in the ¯ow is not too great. ² Species (N species with k ˆ 1. Soret effect (species diffusion under temperature gradients) and molecular transport due to pressure gradients are usually neglected. the enthalpy diffusive ¯ux (Eq. the viscous tensor is given by the Newton law: 2 3   2uj 2ui 2 2uk 2 ml dij tij ˆ ml 1 …5† 3 2xj 2xi 2xk where the molecular viscosity ml depending on the ¯uid properties is introduced. ¼.D. These equations are closed by expressions for the species molecular ¯uxes and the viscous forces. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 197 where t ij denotes the viscous force tensor and Fi a body force. the Lewis number Lek of the species k. Nevertheless. ² Total enthalpy ht ˆ h 1 ui ui =2 : 2ruj ht 2rht 2p 2 1 1 ˆ …Jh 1 ui tij † 1 uj Fj 2t 2xj j 2t 2xj …4† where ui tij and ui Fj denote respectively the power due to viscous and body forces.11.2. More complex expressions may be used to describe multispecies molecular diffusion. assuming a major species: Jk ˆ 2 j ml 2Yk Sck 2xj …6† Sck is the Schmidt number of the species k. 2. To avoid the explicit modeling of such correlations. de®ned as: ml …7† Sck ˆ rDk Dk is the molecular diffusivity of the species k relative to the major species. In turbulent ¯ames. Each quantity Q is split into a  mean Q and a deviation from the mean denoted by Q H :  Q ˆ Q 1 QH with  QH ˆ 0 …11† where Jk is the molecular diffusive ¯ux of the species k j and v k the mass reaction rate of this species per unit _ volume. widely used in non-reacting ¯uid mechanics. radiative heat transfer and Dufour effect (enthalpy diffusion under mass fraction gradients) are neglected. an additional step is introduced by averaging the balance equations to describe only the mean ¯ow ®eld (local ¯uctuations and turbulent structures are integrated in mean quantities and these structures have no longer to be described in the simulation). L. r  À Á ~ HH f ˆ r Q2Q ˆ0 Q r  …13† . The Prandtl number is written as a function of the thermal diffusivity l and the constant pressure speci®c heat Cp :   mi Cp Pr ˆ …9† l Then. This assumption is generally made to simplify turbulent ¯ame modeling. Enthalpy diffusion is described according to the Fourier law: 4 5  N ˆ  Pr ml 2h 2Yk h Jj ˆ 2 …8† 1 2 1 hk Sck Pr 2xj 2xj kˆ1 The Prandtl number Pr compares the diffusive transport of momentum (viscous forces) and temperature. thermo-diffusive instabilities occur in premixed systems when the Lewis number is lower than unity (for example for hydrogen). N): 2ruj Yk 2Jk 2rYk j 1 ˆ2 1 vk _ 2t 2xj 2xj …3† Then. (8)) is simpli®ed and mass fraction and enthalpy balance equations are formally identical if 2P=2t. In the previous expressions. all ¯uids are assumed to be Newtonian. comparing thermal and mass diffusivities is introduced: 3   2 Sck l Lek ˆ …10† ˆ Pr rCp Dk Under the assumption of unity Lewis number. To overcome this dif®culty. the previous instantaneous balance equations may be ensemble averaged to derive transport equations for the  mean quantity Q: This classical Reynolds averaging technique. especially in premixed ¯ames when species mass fractions and temperature are assumed to be equivalent variables.

and Sckt a turbulent Schmidt number for the species k. HH Y g ² Species …ugHH † and temperature …u HH T† turbulent ¯uxes. and the knowledge of steady statistical means is indeed not always suf®cient to describe turbulent combustion. On the contrary. etc. 17). Veynante. however. while the effects of the smaller one are modeled. However. are usually small j j compared to turbulent transport.3. averages. Most experimental techniques determine  ~ Reynolds averaged data Q and differences between Q and  Q may be signi®cant (Section 7. ¼. etc. see Sections 7. Jh . most combustion works are based on turbulence modeling developed for nonreacting ¯ows. assuming a suf®ciently large turbulence level (large Reynolds numbers limit). energy. Q and  ~  Reynolds.5 and 8). with experimental results are not obvious. L. LES is widely studied in the context of non-reactive ¯ows [21± 24]. Accordingly. These equations. k ˆ 1. such as: g ² Reynolds stresses u HH u HH : The turbulence model provides i j . Nonetheless. resulting from the rolling up of shear layers. 2.e. that may differ from the instantaneous ones. the complex coupling between micromixing and chemical reactions occurring at unresolved scales needs models. A relation between Q and Q requires the knowledge of density ¯uctuations correlations r H Q H remaining hidden in Favre averaging (see Section 7. The closure may be done directly or by deriving balance equations for these Reynolds stresses. allow only for the determination of mean quantities. such as k±1.3.  ² Species chemical reaction rates v k : Turbulent combus_ tion modeling generally focuses on the closure of these mean burning rates. smaller scales feature more universal properties. ² Laminar diffusive ¯uxes Jk . Nevertheless. simply rewritten in terms of Favre averaging. This result is true for any balance equations (momentum. providing ~ Favre averaged quantities Q. theoretical and experimental works have demonstrated that this assumption may be wrong in some premixed turbulent ¯ames and counter-gradient turbulent transport may be observed [19. 2. Filtering and Large Eddy Simulation The objective of Large Eddy Simulation (LES) is to explicitly compute the largest structures of the ¯ow (typically the structures larger than the computational mesh size).198 D.20] (i. in an opposite direction compared to the one predicted by Eq.3.4. As in RANS. …19† The objective of turbulent combustion modeling is to propose closures for the unknown quantities appearing in the averaged balance equations. An alternative is to use large eddy simulation (LES). j k j These ¯uxes are usually closed using a gradient transport hypothesis:  HH Y k r ugHH ˆ 2 j ~ mt 2Y k Sckt 2xj …20† ² Comparisons between numerical simulations. mass fractions. Favre averaging is only a mathematical formalism: ~ ² There is no simple relation between Favre. are observed in turbulent ¯ames.). estimated from the turbulence model. Strong unsteady mixing effects. turbulence models may be more ef®cient when they have to describe only the smallest structures. Favre averaged balance equations Averaging instantaneous balance equations yields: ² Mass: 2r uj ~ 2r  1 ˆ0 2t 2xj ² Momentum (i ˆ 1.2. N): 2r ugHH  HH Y k 2Jk 2r uj Y k ~ ~ 2r Y k ~ j j  1 ˆ2 2 1 vk _ 2t 2xj 2xj 2xj ~ ² Total enthalpy ht : 2r uj ht ~ ~ 2r ht ~ 1 2t 2xj  2r u HH h HH  gt  2p 2  h j ˆ2 1 Jj 1 ui tij 1 uj Fj 1 2xj 2t 2xj …18† …16† where m t is the turbulent viscosity.4):  r Q ˆ r Q 1 r HQ H ~ …15† an approximation for this term. LES possesses some attractive properties: ² Large structures in turbulent ¯ows generally depend on the geometry of the system. Q.3. (20). Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 The Favre averaged continuity equation: 2r  2r ui ~ 1 ˆ0 2t 2xi …14† is then formally identical to the Reynolds averaged continuity equation for constant density ¯ows.3): 2r u HH u HH  gj 2r uj ui ~ ~ 2t ij   2r ui ~ 2p i  1 ˆ2 2 1 1 F i …17† 2xi 2t 2xj 2xj 2xj ² Chemical species (for N species.4 and Fig. closed with appropriate models. and heat release effects on the Reynolds stresses are generally not explicitly included. its application to combustion modeling is still at an early stage [25].

2. large heat transfers and. the relevant quantities Q are ®ltered in the spectral space (components greater than a given cut-off frequency are suppressed) or in the physical space (weighted averaging in a given volume). Standard ®lters are: ² A cut-off ®lter in the spectral space: (  F…k† ˆ 1 if k # p=D 0 otherwise …22† To summarize: f Q HH ± 0 …29† ~ ~ ~ f  Q H ˆ 0. according  1 Q H : But. ² With LES. dx3 ˆ 1 21 21 21 …25† In combusting ¯ows. the destruction of the device. for example. The derivation of balance equations for the ®ltered quan ~ tities Q or Q requires the exchange of ®ltering and differentiation operators. i ˆ 1. with different turbulence characteristics (Section 8. the uncertainties due to this operator exchange are neglected and assumed to be incorporated in subgrid scale modeling. In LES. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 199 ² Turbulent mixing controls most of the global ¯ame properties. instead of being averaged.D. Filtering the instantaneous balance equations leads to equations formally similar to the Reynolds averaged balance equations given in Section 2. where k is the spatial wave number. x2 . L. x3 † ˆ 1=D3 0 if uxi u # D=2. Q ˆ Q. Favre ®ltering. Veynante. Q H may be nonzero: À Á  Q H …x† ˆ Q…xp † 2 Q…xp † F…x 2 xp †dxp ˆ  Q…xp †F…x 2 xp †dxp 2   Q…xp †F…x 2 xp †dxp …27†  ˆ Q…x† 2 Q…x† where Q…x† ˆ ˆ    ! Q…x1 †F…xp 2 x1 †dx1 F…x 2 xp †dxp  Q…x1 †F…xp 2 x1 †F…x 2 xp †dx1 dxp ± Q…x† …28† where F is the LES ®lter. x2 . are true when a cut-off ®lter in the spectral space is chosen (Eq. 3 otherwise …23† where …x1 . ² mass: …24† 2r uj ~ 2r  1 ˆ0 2t 2xj …30† ~ ~ ~ Q ± Q. the hydrodynamic ¯ow ®eld and acoustic waves. when the ®lter size varies (®lter size corresponding to the mesh size. In LES. This ®lter corresponds to an averaging of the quantity Q over a box of size D . x3 † are the spatial coordinates of the location x. ² Most reacting ¯ows exhibit large scale coherent structures [26]. This exchange is theoretically valid only under restrictive assumptions and is wrong. x2 . unsteady large scale mixing (between fresh and burnt gases in premixed ¯ames or between fuel and oxidizer in non-premixed burners) is simulated. which are also especially observed when combustion instabilities occur. This point has been carefully investigated [28]. dx2 . ² A Gaussian ®lter in the physical space: F…x† ˆ F…x1 . x2 . is introduced as:  r Q…x† ˆ rQ…xp †F…x 2 xp †dxp …26† ~ Instantaneous balance equations (Section 2) may be ®ltered  to derived balance equations for the ®ltered quantities Q or ~ Q: This derivation should be carefully conducted: Any quantity Q may be decomposed into a ®ltered  component Q and a `¯uctuating' component Q H . x3 † dx1 . all the frequency components greater than a cut-off wave number kc ˆ p=D vanish.LES may be a powerful tool to predict the occurrence of such instabilities [27] and consequently improve passive or active control systems. Q HH ˆ 0 The relations used in RANS Q ˆ Q. (22)). depending on the spatial location). In most simulations. They need to be avoided because they induce noise variations of the main properties of the system. Q H ± 0. This ®lter preserves the length scales greater than the cut-off length scale 2D: ² A box ®lter in the physical space: ( F…x† ˆ F…x1 . in disagreement with classical to: Q ˆ Q Reynolds averaging (ensemble average). These instabilities result from the coupling between heat release. a mass-weighted. even in some extreme cases. This may help to describe some properties of the ¯ame/turbulence interaction. Then. large structures are explicitly computed and instantaneous fresh and burnt gases zones. x3 †  ˆ 6 pD2 3=2 ! 6  exp 2 2 x2 1 x2 1 x2 1 2 3 D . The ®ltered operation is de®ned by:  Q…x† ˆ  Q…xp †F…x 2 xp † dxp …21† All these ®lters are normalized: 1 1 1 1 1 1 F…x1 .7) are clearly identi®ed.3:  Q ± Q.

The local imbalance between diffusion of heat and chemical consumption leads to the propagation of the front.200 D. are about 0. part of the information contained in the unresolved scales is lost (and should be modeled). from the Zeldovich/Frank-Kamenetskii (ZFK) theory [14. This progress variable may be de®ned as a reduced temperature or a reduced mass fraction: cˆ T 2 Tu Tb 2 Tu or cˆ u YF 2 YF b u YF 2 YF …35† . Compared to RANS. SL and the kinematic viscosity of the fresh gases. The propagation speed SL of a laminar ¯ame depends on various parameters (fuel and oxidizer compositions. for example. Laminar premixed ¯ames Fig. ¼. 2. Ref. 3. n : Ref ˆ dl SL <4 n …34†  ~ where Q and Q denote LES ®ltered quantities instead of ensemble means. The unknown quantities are: À Á g ~ ~ ² Unresolved Reynolds stresses ui uj 2 ui uj . the laminar ¯ame speed. This relation. d l. requiring a subgrid scale turbulence model. Compared to direct numerical simulations (DNS). Major properties of premixed. Structure of a laminar plane premixed ¯ame. The scope of this review is limited to RANS. is then almost constant. 2. À Á g ~ ~ ² Unresolved species ¯uxes uj Yk 2 uj Y k and enthalpy À Á g ~ ~ ¯uxes uj ht 2 uj ht : ² Filtered laminar diffusion ¯uxes Jk . non-premixed and partially premixed ¯ames 3.1±1 m/s. such as c ˆ 0 in the fresh gases and c ˆ 1 in the fully burnt ones.) and is about 0. etc. 3): 2r uj ui ~ ~ 2r ui ~ 1 2t 2xj ˆ2 i 2t ij   2 h  2p  r ui uj 2 ui uj 2  g ~ ~ 1 1 Fi 2xj 2xi 2xj …31† ² Chemical species (N species. A strong temperature gradient is observed (typical ratios between burnt and fresh gases temperatures are about 5±7). Either using RANS or LES. N): i 2r Y j ~ 2r uj Y k ~ ~ 2 h g  ~ ~ 1 ˆ2 r uj Yk 2 uj Y k 1 v k …32†  _ 2xj 2t 2xj ² Total enthalpy ht ˆ h 1 ui ui =2 i 2p 2r uj ht ~ ~ 2r ht ~ 2 h g  ~ ~ 1 ˆ2 r uj ht 2 uj ht 1  2t 2xj 2xj 2t 1  2  h Jj 1 ui tij 1 uj Fj 2xj …33† The structure of a laminar premixed ¯ame is displayed in Fig. the basic tools and formalism of turbulent combustion modeling are somehow the same for both techniques.15] is often implicitly used in theoretical derivation of models for premixed turbulent combustion. There is an interesting relation between the thermal ¯ame thickness. LES provides valuable information on the large resolved motions. coupled to subgrid scale models may be numerically solved to simulate the unsteady where the thermal thickness d l corresponds to a temperature jump of 98% of the temperature difference between fresh and fully burnt products. L. fresh gases are preheated and then start to burn. fresh gases temperature. d l. Another characteristic of a premixed ¯ame is its ability to propagate towards the fresh gases. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 behavior of the ®ltered ®elds. Fresh gases (fuel and oxidizer mixed at the molecular level) and burnt gases (combustion products) are separated by a thin reaction zone (typical thermal ¯ame thicknesses. ² momentum (for i ˆ 1. For a simple one-step irreversible chemical scheme: reactants 3 products the ¯ame is described using a progress variable c. The ¯ame Reynolds number.1. k ˆ 1. Jh : j j  ² Filtered chemical reaction rate v k : _ These ®ltered balance equations. combustion occurs at the unresolved scales of the computations. Because of the temperature gradient and the corresponding thermal ¯uxes. Then. Veynante.1±1 mm). 2. Most of the RANS combustion models can be modi®ed and adapted to LES modeling. derived.

introducing the displacement speed v of the iso-c surface: À Á ! _ 2c 1 7´ rD7c 1 v 1 u´7c ˆ …37† j7cj ˆ wu7cu 2t r u7cu |‚‚‚‚‚‚‚ ‚{z‚‚‚‚‚‚‚ ‚} displacement speed Eq. Tu and Tb are respectively the local. wˆ2 where T. Generic structure of a laminar diffusion ¯ame. YF. The structure of a steady diffusion ¯ame therefore depends on ratios between characteristic times representative of molecular diffusion and chemistry [30]. the unburnt gas u b and the burnt gas temperatures. whereas wc incorporates wrinkling surface effects and may be expressed using Markstein lengths [29]. wr is due to the reaction rate _ v : In a ®rst approximation. 4. YF is non-zero for a rich combustion (fuel in excess). In a counter-¯owing fuel and oxidizer ¯ame (Fig. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 201 progress variable: À Á À Á 2rc 1 7´ ruc ˆ 7´ rD7c 1 v _ 2t …36† The previous Eq. Sketch of a counter-¯owing fuel and oxidizer diffusion ¯ame. (36) may be recast in a propagative form.2.D. YF and YF are respectively the local. Increasing the jet velocity. In opposition with premixed ¯ames: Fig. w n 1 wr may be modeled with the laminar ¯ame speed. unburnt gas and burnt gas fuel mass fracb tions. L. A steady planar diffusion ¯ame with determined thickness may be observed in the vicinity of the stagnation point. fuel and oxidizer are on both sides of a reaction zone where the heat is released. The thicknesses of the mixing zone and of the reaction zone vary with these characteristic times. 3 and 4). [2] and references therein. 3. the displacement speed may be split into three contributions: wˆ À Á 1 1 v nn : 7 rD7c 2 D7´n 1 _ rj7cj rj7cj Á 1 2 À 1 rDu7cu 2 D7´n 1 v _ ru7cu 2n ru7cu |‚{z‚} |‚ ‚} ‚{z‚ |‚‚‚‚‚‚ {z‚‚‚‚‚‚ } ‚ ‚ wn wc wr …38† Fig. The burning rate is controlled by the molecular diffusion of the reactants toward the reaction zone (Figs. (36) then describes the displacement of an iso-c surface with the displacement speed w measured relative to the ¯ow. but are mainly mixing controlled. Introducing the vector n normal to the iso-c surface and pointing towards fresh gases …n ˆ 27c=u7cu†. the amount of heat transported away from the reaction zone is exactly balanced by the heat released by combustion. For a unity Lewis number (same molecular and thermal diffusivities). without heat losses (adiabatic combustion) and compressibility effects. the two de®nitions (35) are equivalent and mass and low Mach number energy balance equations reduce to a single balance equation for the where 2=2n ˆ n´7 denotes a normal derivative. 4). The propagation of reactive fronts has been the subject of various developments and more discussion may be found in Ref. 3. wn corresponds to molecular diffusion normal to the iso-c surface. ² Diffusion ¯ames do not bene®t from a self-induced propagation mechanism. Laminar diffusion ¯ames In laminar diffusion ¯ames. wc is related to the curvature 7´n of this surface and corresponds to tangential diffusion. . quenching occurs when the heat ¯uxes leaving the reaction zone are greater than the chemical heat production. SL. Veynante.

ZL ˆ Z: In experiments or in simulations involving complex chemistry. n i are the stoichiometric molar coef®cients of the reaction. d YO and d YP are the variations of fuel. oxidizer and product mass fractions. Z evolves through the diffusive layer from zero (oxidizer) to unity (fuel): Y Y f F 2 O 11 YF. the mixture fraction is de®ned from mass fractions of atomic elements [32]. The mixture fraction and these additional conserved scalars are linearly related and one may write: Y O …x.o YO. A local orthogonal coordinate system attached to the surface of stoichiometric mixture is introduced and the derivatives in the stoichiometric plane are denoted '. Wi denotes the species molar weight and v is the reaction rate. YO. [33]). The internal structure of diffusion ¯ames is usually discussed using the extent of mixing between fuel and oxidizer.o YO. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 ² The thickness of a diffusion ¯ame is not constant. t†…TF. T ) (conserved scalars) may be derived by combining the variables (YF. Let us consider the irreversible single step chemical reaction between fuel and oxidizer: F 1 sO 3 …1 1 s†P where s is the mass stoichiometric coef®cient.o 2 T…x. T ). t† ˆ YO. f is the chemical equivalence ratio: fˆ sYF.o …40† The mixture fraction follows the balance equation: 2rZ 1 7´…ruZ† ˆ 7´…rD7Z† 2t …41† where Lei is the Lewis number of the species i.e. The relations between Z and ZL are given in Table 1.202 D. but depends on the local ¯ow properties. t† |‚‚ {z‚‚ } ‚ ‚ Mixing 1 Cp ‰Z…x. but an additional mixture fraction: F ZL ˆ YF Y 2 O 11 YF. with the mass stoichiometric coef®cient s ˆ …nO WO =nF WF †: The mixture fraction Z is then de®ned by normalizing w using values in the fuel and oxidizer streams.o † 1 …TO. DF ˆ DO ˆ D). Similarly. t† ˆ YF. For unity Lewis number and using Eq.o 2 TO.o is the fuel mass fraction in the fuel feeding stream.o and TF. (41).o F11 …44† should be introduced. the diffusion ¯ame is fully determined when the mixture fraction Z and any one of T. T ) and (YO. When LeO ˆ LeF . In term of mass fraction.o …1 2 Z…x.23). YO. t†† |‚‚‚‚‚ {z‚‚‚‚‚ } ‚ ‚ Mixing nP dYP ˆ nF dYF 1 no dYo where d YF.o Zˆ f11 …39† 1  nO WO Cp ‰Z…x. satisfying [31]: r 2 3 DZ 1 l ˆ 7´ 7Z L Dt L Cp …45† where: L ˆ LeO …1 1 f†=…1 1 F† with F ˆ …Le O =LeF †f …46† YF.o YO.o is the oxidizer mass fraction in the oxidizer stream (for instance. [14] or Ref. Mass fractions and temperature balance equations may be reorganized into a new frame where Z is one of the coordinates (see for instance Ref. Using these algebraic relations.o 2 TO. It is ®rst assumed that fuel and oxidizer molecular diffusivities are equal (i. t††Š Q |‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚ {z‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚ } ‚ ‚ Combustion …43† where TO.o Z…x. in air. Veynante. this chemical reaction may be written: Other Schwab±Zeldovitch variables w (YF. T ) and w (YO.o 2 T…x. YO † ˆ YF 2 YO =s is introduced. YF. L.o † 1 …TO. a Schwab±Zeldovitch variable) w…YF . the species transport equation . or YO is known. The balance equations _ for mass fractions and temperature are necessary to identify the properties of the ¯ame: 2rYF 1 7´…ruY F † ˆ 7´…rD F 7Y F † 2 nF WF v _ 2t 2rYO 1 7´…ruY O † ˆ 7´…rD O 7Y O † 2 nO WO v _ 2t 2 3   2rT l Q _ 7T 1 n F WF v 1 7´…ruT† ˆ 7´ CP 2t Cp The molecular diffusion is expressed using the Fick law. a conserved scalar (quantity that is not in¯uenced by the chemical reaction.o < 0.o are the temperatures of the fuel and oxidizer streams respectively. the chemical rate of fuel and oxidizer are respectively v F ˆ _ nF WF v and v O ˆ nO WO v : Q is the amount of heat released _ _ _ by the combustion of an unit mass of fuel. Combining the transport equation for YF and YO. t††Š nF WF Q |‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚{z‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚} Combustion  …42† YF …x. The conserved scalar approach may still be useful when fuel and oxidizer molecular diffusivities differ. t†…TF.

the time derivative vanishes and for unity Lewis numbers.of 1 YF. x†.o †Z…f 1 1† 1 TO. (47).D. 5. x is the scalar dissipation rate of the mixture fraction Z: 2 3 2Z 2Z ˆ Du7Zu 2 xˆD …48† 2xj 2xj measuring the inverse of a diffusive time tx ˆ x21 : As this time decreases. summarized in Table 1. The counter¯ow diffusion ¯ame (Fig. When iso-Z surface curvatures are not too strong. When the chemistry is in®nitely fast. and more generally when large velocity gradients are found. species mass fractions and temperature.o …Z…1 1 f† 2 1†=f T ˆ …TF. ZLst Z ˆ ZL …1 1 F†=…1 1 f† YF ˆ 0 YO ˆ YO. or solving Eq. ZLst Z ˆ …f…Z L …1 1 F† 2 1†=F 1 1†=…1 1 f† YO ˆ 0 YF ˆ YF. A coordinate j is de®ned across the one-dimensional ¯amelet such as: dZ ˆ 2n Z ´7Z ˆ u7Zu dj …51† where nZ denotes the normal vector to the iso-Z surfaces. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 203 Table 1 Piecewise relations for in®nitely fast chemistry including non-unity Lewis number. A diffusive time tx < x21 ˆ st …Du7Zu 2 †21 st and a chemical time t c are combined to build a ZˆZ È Damkohler number Dap ˆ …tx =tc † < …tc xst †21 : The response .o Tf ˆ 11f Q Cp r 2Yi 22 Y ˆ rx 2i 1 v i _ 2t 2Z …49† Neglecting unsteady effects. Zst ˆ 1=…1 1 f† and ZLst ˆ 1=…1 1 F† (see Eq. Then. the temperature depends on mixing through Z. the in®nitely fast chemistry hypothesis cannot be invoked everywhere. 5). pointing towards Z ˆ 0: The reaction rate may be integrated In many combustion systems. Veynante.34.o 1 TO.o Fuel side Z . the balance equation for the mass fractions reduces to: rDu7Zu 2 2 Yi dZ 2Z 2 …52† Assuming that r . but not on the rate of mixing x [35]. Diffusion combustion is limited by two regimes corresponding to pure mixing of the reactants and in®nitely fast chemistry (Fig. The subscript o denotes a quantity measured in pure fuel or oxidizer. the diffusion ¯ame is completely determined as a function of the mixture fraction Z and the scalar dissipation rate x (or 7Z): Y i ˆ Yi …Z.t) and full solutions for various laminar ¯ames may be derived from asymptotic developments [30.34]. Eq. piecewise relationships exist between Z. Zst and ZL .o …1 2 Z…1 1 f†† T ˆ …Tf 2 TO.o 2 Tf †…Z…f 1 1† 2 1†=f 1 Tf may be written: r 2Yi 22 Y 1 ru' ´7 ' Yi ˆ rx 2i 1 7 ' ´…rD7 ' Yi † 2t 2Z _ 2 rD7 ' …lnu7Zu†´7 ' Yi 1 v i …47† in the direction j through the ¯ame. the gradients measured along the stoichiometric surface are smaller than the gradients in the direction Z perpendicular to the stoichiometric surface. Z st and ZL . x† An expression for x (Z. using Eq. ZL. D and u7Zu do not vary across the ¯ame (this is typical of a ¯amelet assumption used in turbulent combustion modeling where the ¯ame is assumed very _ thin). Under these hypothesis. The characterization of diffusion ¯ames from the in®nitely fast chemistry situation to the quenching limit is therefore of fundamental interest for turbulent combustion. T ˆ T…Z. 4) is a generic con®guration well suited to reproduce and to understand the structure and the extinction of laminar diffusion ¯ames. (46)).36]. (43) provides the maximum ¯ame temperature Tf obtained when YF ˆ YO ˆ 0 and Z ˆ Zst ˆ 1=…1 1 f† TF. mass and heat transfers through the stoichiometric surface are enhanced. (50) leading to Fig. the ¯ame structure is fully described by: rx 22 Yi 1 vi ˆ 0 _ 2Z 2 and rx 22 T 1 vT ˆ 0 _ 2Z 2 …50† showing that the chemical reaction rate is directly related to the function T(Z. x ). Tf is the ¯ame temperature Oxidizer side Z . V i becomes: ! ! 2Y i Zˆ1 2Y Zˆ1 _ V i < 2rDu7Zu ˆ 2 rD i …53† 2Z Zˆ0 2j Zˆ0 This last relation illustrates how the integrated reaction rate of a species i is directly related to the molecular diffusion ¯ux of that species through the ¯ame. For example in ignition problems or in the vicinity of stabilization zones. L. These extinction phenomena have been theoretically described using asymptotic developments [30. (50): 1 1 1 v …x. Z† _i _ Vi ˆ v i …j†dj ˆ _ dZ u7Zu 21 0 ˆ2 1 0 In Eq.

T ) (Fig. oxidizer and temperature lies between the in®nitely fast chemistry limit and the pure mixing case. T(Z) is replaced by the mean temperature calculated for a given value of Z. when the ¯ow is turbulent. extinction develops. L. The value of È the Damkohler Dap at the extinction point may be estimated q by quantifying the leakage of fuel (or oxidizer) through the stoichiometric surface [37]. Starting from a situation where the chemistry is fast. as observed in a . Fig.e. whereas the characteristic thickness of the reaction zone lr depends on both ld and the Damkohler number [12]. 6) [14].e. for a given state in the mixing between fuel and oxidizer. some partial premixing of the reactants may exist before the reaction zone develops. These cases delineate the domain where ¯ames may develop in planes (Z. Two limit cases are thus important for non-premixed turbulent combustion modeling: pure mixing without combustion (Da p 3 0) and in®nitely fast chemistry (Da p 3 1). decreasing Da p (increasing x ) makes the burning rate and transport through the stoichiometric surface greater.3. YO) and (Z. 5). Then. Inner structure of non-premixed ¯ames. Partially premixed ¯ames In non-premixed combustion. until chemistry cannot keep up with the large heat ¯uxes. YF).204 D. Many turbulent combustion models are based on this description of diffusion ¯ame. Veynante. by traveling along the normal to the stoichiometric surface. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 Fig. Then. The distribution in mixture fraction space of fuel. 5). The thickness of the diffusive zone ld is estimated from the scalar dissipation rate x at È the stoichiometric surface. 5. (Z. of the burning rate to variations of Da p leads to the so-called `S' curve (Fig. for a given location within a diffusion ¯ame. T(Z) can be constructed and characterizes the combustion regime (i. Moreover. fast or slow chemistry. i. 3. the pure diffusive/reactive layer.

Dap and Dap are the critical values of Dap ˆ …tc xst †21 at quenching and ignition. oxidizer. while a lean partially premixed ¯ame develops on the air side (Fig. further downstream [39].D. many ¯ames in burners are stabilized by the recirculation of burnt gases. 6. The overall structure. The resulting premixed kernel tends to propagate towards fresh gases and contributes to the stabilization of the trailing diffusion ¯ame. more recent experiments have con®rmed the existence of triple ¯ames in laminar ¯ows [41±43]. The mixtures feeding the reaction zone are then not always pure fuel and pure oxidizer. Theoretical studies [44±48] and numerical simulations [49±53] have been devoted to triple ¯ames. This de¯ection also induces a decrease of the mixture fraction gradient in the trailing diffusion ¯ame. These two premixed ¯ames are curved because their respective propagation velocities decrease when moving away from the stoichiometric condition. Triple ¯ame velocity response to variations of scalar dissipation rate may be derived by approximating the ¯ame tip by a parabolic pro®le and using results from expansions in parabolic-cylinder coordinates. combustion starts in a region where fuel and oxidizer have been mixed in stoichiometric proportion. respectively. leading to stabilization mechanisms controlled by the mixing between fuel. In a mixing layer con®guration. This analysis was used by Ghosal and Vervisch to include small but ®nite heat release and gas expansion. and burnt gases. increasing with the scalar dissipation rate imposed in front of the ¯ame. Generic response of the heat released by a one-dimensional strained diffusion ¯ame versus Damkholer number. where the reactants can be mixed before auto-ignition occurs. a diffusion ¯ame may be stabilized at the splitter plate by the combination of heat losses with viscous ¯ow effects. ² Laminar or turbulent ¯ame stabilization. t cis a given chemical q i time and xst ˆ Du7Zu2 st is the scalar dissipation rate under stoichiometric conditions. is usually called `triple ¯ame'. L. or. The propagation speed of triple ¯ames is controlled by two parameters: the curvature of the partially premixed front. may not be the unique relevant model problem. and the amount of heat release. In this latter case. Furthermore. ² After quenching of the reaction zone. The triple ¯ame is an interesting model problem to approach partially premixed combustion. ZˆZ laminar diffusion ¯ame. Veynante. There are situations where partial premixing is clearly important: ² Auto-ignition in a non-homogeneous distribution of fuel and oxidizer. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 205 È Fig. Since this pioneer work. the reactants may mix leading to possibility of re-ignition and combustion in a partially premixed regime [38]. composed of two premixed ¯ames and of a diffusion ¯ame. 7). making the triple ¯ame speed greater than the propagation speed of a planar stoichiometric ¯ame. when combustion does not start at the very ®rst interface between fuel and oxidizer in the vicinity of burner exit. the triple ¯ame velocity UTF may be written [47]: s  b l p …54† xst UTF < SL …1 1 a† 2 Zst …1 1 a† 4nF 2 2 rCp where a ˆ …Tburnt 2 Tfresh †=Tburnt is de®ned from the . In a laminar shear layer where the mixing between cold fuel and oxidizer develops. the stoichiometric premixed kernel evolves to a rich partially premixed ¯ame in the direction of the fuel stream. The triple ¯ame velocity decreases when increasing the scalar dissipation rate at the ¯ame tip. so that fuel and oxidizer may mix without burning. Such triple ¯ames have been ®rstly experimentally observed by Phillips [40]. The dashed line denotes in®nitely fast chemistry. The effect of heat release is to de¯ect the ¯ow upstream of the triple ¯ame.

Consider a simple irreversible reaction between fuel (F) and oxidizer (O): F 1 sO 3 …1 1 s†P where the fuel mass reaction rate v F is expressed from the _ Qn T ~ Tn HHn 3 …56† where Pn and Qn are given by: Pn ˆ n ˆ kˆ1 …21†n2k …n 2 1†! …n 2 k†!‰…k 2 1†!Š2 k  TA ~ T k . values of x st. illustrates the dif®culties arising from the non-linear character of chemical sources. b ˆ a…TA =Tburnt † is the Zeldovitch number [14]. This simple formalism. and TA is the activation temperature. temperatures on both sides of a stoichiometric premixed ¯ame for the same mixture. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 Fig. L. Schematic of a freely propagation triple ¯ame. (54) may be combined with Landau±Squire solution for non-reacting laminar round jet to construct a stability diagram for lift-off and blowout of jet laminar diffusion ¯ames [54]. the averaged  reaction rate v F cannot be easily expressed as a function _ ~ ~ of the mean mass fractions Y F and YO the mean density r  ~ and the mean temperature T: The ®rst simple idea is to  expand the mean reaction rate v F as a Taylor series: _ T exp 2 A ~ T 2 ~ Tb ˆ Tb 1 1   3  2 11 ˆ T HHn TA Pn n . based on series expansion. As the reaction rate is highly non-linear. n F the stoichiometric coef®cient of the fuel and x st is measured far upstream in the mixing layer where the triple ¯ame propagates. A variety of studies suggest that ®nite rate chemistry and quenching in non-premixed combustion are somehow linked to partially premixed combustion [55]. but non-zero. The value of the scalar dissipation rate at the triple point is of the order of xst =…1 1 a†2 [47]. The triple ¯ame velocity given by Eq. 7. A direct analysis: Taylor's expansion A direct approach to describe turbulent combustion is ®rst discussed in this section. …57† Qn ˆ b…b 1 1†¼…b 1 n 2 1† n! .206 D. Veynante. Arrhenius law as:   T _ v F ˆ 2Ar2 T b YF YO exp 2 A T …55† where A is the pre-exponential constant. ˆ exp 2 11 ~ ~ T T nˆ1 11 ˆ nˆ1 4. TA is the activation temperature. These relations are valid for small values of a and moderate.

(58) leads to various dif®culties. (58). Because of non-linearities.). First. etc. Turbulent premixed combustion regimes as identi®ed by Borghi and Destriau [62]: (a) ¯amelet (thin wrinkled ¯ame).D. . new quantities HH T HHn such as Yg have to be closed using algebraic expressions k or transport equations. v F becomes [56]: _ 3 2 ~ ~ ~  F ˆ 2Ar 2 T b Y F Y O exp 2 TA v  _ ~ T 3 2 HH HH HH YgHH YgHH YgHH FY O FT OT 1 1 …P1 1 Q1 †  11 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Y FY O Y FT Y OT 5 3 2 HH HH T T YgHH 2 YgHH 2 1 …P2 1 Q2 1 P1 Q1 † F 2 1 O 2 1 ¼ ~ ~ ~ ~ Y FT Y OT 4 …58† Eq. Expression (58) is quite complicated. Fig. 8. Veynante. but is only valid for a simple irreversible reaction and cannot be easily extended to realistic chemical schemes (at least 9 species and 19 reactions for hydrogen combustion. reaction rate closures in turbulent combustion are not based on Eq. For these reasons. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 207  The mean reaction rate. and (c) thickened ¯ame regime. (b) thickened wrinkled ¯ame regime. several hundred species and several thousand reactions for hydrocarbon combustion. L. large errors exist when only few terms of the series expansion are retained.

60± 62]. is then introduced: 2 3 HH Y YgHH Yg F YO F O …59† aFO ˆ 2 ˆ2 12 ~ ~ ~ ~ Y FY O Y FY O to characterize the mixing between the reactants F and O. If they are perfectly separated Yg ˆ 0 and aFO ˆ 21: On F YO HH Y the other hand.1. Nevertheless. This time may also be viewed as a diffusive time scale. as long as quenching does not occur. These diagrams could be a support to the selection and development of the relevant combustion model for a given situation. most practical situations correspond to high or medium È values of the Damkohler numbers. the ¯ame front is thin and its inner structure is not affected by turbulence motions which only wrinkle the ¯ame surface. 5. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 Models are rather derived from physical analysis as discuss below. The turbulent ¯ow is characterized by a Reynolds number comparing turbulent transport to viscous forces: Re ˆ u H lt v …61† mixed by turbulent structures before reaction. a low Damkohler number …Da p 1† corresponds to a slow chemical reaction. For turbulent premixed ¯ames. 1 Estimating the turbulent time from turbulent integral scale characteristics È …tt ˆ lt =u H †. This ¯amelet regime or thin wrinkled ¯ame regime (Fig. t c. velocity and time scales describing turbulent ¯ow ®eld and chemical reactions. [59] in a large eddy simulation context). a perfect mixing …YgHH ˆ 0† leads to aFO ˆ F O 0: This segregation factor may be either postulated or provided by a balance equation (see Ref. may be estimated as the ratio of the thickness d l and the propagation speed SL of the laminar ¯ame.2. Then. 5. This transition is described in term of the Karlovitz number Ka: Ka ˆ where u H is the velocity rms (related to the square root of the turbulent kinetic energy k). the Kolmogorov scales). The internal structure of the ¯ame is not strongly affected by turbulence and may be described as a laminar ¯ame element called a `¯amelet'. Turbulent combustion involves various lengths. The turbulent structures wrinkle and strain the ¯ame surface.23. Introduction The objective is to analyze premixed turbulent combustion regimes by comparing turbulence and chemical characteristic length and time scales.62] is retained here. È The Damkohler number compares the turbulent (t t) and the chemical (t c) time scales: t Da ˆ t …62† tc È In the limit of high Damkohler numbers …Da q 1†.2. It is worth noting that various chemical time scales may be encountered: fuel oxidation generally corresponds to short chemical time scales …Da q 1† whereas pollutant production or destruction such as CO oxidation or NO formation are slower.2. using Eq. the chemical time is short compared to the turbulent one. this approach is used in some simulations of supersonic reacting ¯ows [57] or to describe reaction in atmospheric boundary layer where the temperature T may be roughly assumed to be constant [58]. On the È other hand. a FO. only the ®rst two terms in the series expansion are kept. Scales and diagrams for turbulent combustion 5. L. have a turbulent time t k larger than t c (turbulent motions are too slow to affect the ¯ame structure). In these situations. In this perfectly stirred reactor limit. A formalism combining recent analysis [29. lt is the turbulence integral length scale and n the kinematic viscosity of the ¯ow. The physical analysis is mainly based on comparison between these scales. the Damkohler number becomes: Da ˆ tt l S ˆ t L tc dl u H …63† where a velocity ratio (u H /SL) and a length scale ratio (lt/d l) are evidenced. the chemical time scale.e. A segregation factor. Combustion regimes È For large values of the Damkohler number …Da q 1†. the mean reaction rate may be expressed from Arrhenius laws using mean mass fractions and temperature. In turbulent ¯ames. 8a) occurs when the smallest turbulence scales (i. This analysis leads to combustion diagrams where various regimes are presented as function of various dimensionless numbers [14. corresponding to the ®rst term of the Taylor's expansion (58). Reactants and products are tc d u ˆ l k tk lk SL …64† 1 This chemical time t c corresponds to the time required for the ¯ame to propagate over a distance equal to its own thickness.29. (34) tc ˆ dl =SL ˆ …1=Ref †…d2 =n†: l .2. Veynante.1. corresponding to a thin reaction zone distorted and convected by the ¯ow ®eld. a physical approach is required to derive models for turbulent combustion. the mean reaction rate becomes:   T  _ v ˆ 2A…1 1 aFO †r 2 T b Y F Y O exp 2 A  ~ ~ ~ …60† ~ T 5. Turbulent premixed combustion diagram 5.208 D. Introduction  _ As the mean burning rate v cannot be found from an averaging of Arrhenius laws.

9). Damkohler. turbulent motions become able to affect the ¯ame inner structure but not necessarily the reaction zone.D. Da. lt/d l. 1: wrinkled ¯ame. For example. the following turbulent premixed ¯ame regimes are proposed [29]: ² Ka . results recovered experimentally [66]. Turbulent premixed combustion diagrams were analyzed using direct numerical simulations of ¯ame/vortex interactions [65]. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 209 The size lk and the velocity uk of Kolmogorov structures are given by [64]: 2 3 31=4 v lk ˆ . 9. but cannot modify the reaction zone which remains thin and close to a laminar reaction zone (Fig. In this case. 8b). [65]. L. corresponding to a unity ¯ame Reynolds number Ref (Eq. ² Ka . The laminar propagation is predominant and turbulence/combustion interactions remain limited. the ¯ame thickness d l may be based on the thermal thickness or on the diffusive thickness.2. Comments This analysis. 1: Flamelet regime or thin wrinkled ¯ame regime (Fig. have small lifetimes because of viscous dissipation and therefore only limited effects on combustion. . has a thickness d r much lower that the thermal thickness d l of the ¯ame …dr < 0:1dl †: The Karlovitz number based on this reaction thickness is:  2  2   2   dr dr dl 1 dl 2 Ka …70† Kar ˆ ˆ < < 100 lk 100 lk dl lk Then. turbulent motions are able to affect and to thicken the ¯ame preheat zone. for Karlovitz numbers larger than unity …Ka . H and a set of two parameters (Re. Results show that the ¯amelet regime seems to extend above the Klimov±Williams criterion (see Fig. and the distributed combustion regime where the ¯ame inner structure is strongly modi®ed by turbulence motions. leading to a rough classi®cation of combustion regimes as a function of characteristic numbers. In this situation. As u H may be viewed as the rotation speed of the larger turbulent motions. This reaction zone. The integral length scale lt may be written: 2 H3 3 u lt ˆ …66† 1 using v ˆ dl SL . Following this classi®cation. such analyses are only qualitative and should be used with great care. 100 (Kar . Ka. Ka # 100 …Kar . The Karlovitz number also compares the ¯ame and the Kolmogorov length scales according to:  2 dl Ka ˆ …69† lk The Karlovitz number is used to de®ne the Klimov± Williams criterion. previously described. similar to the one presented on Fig. DNS has revealed that small turbulent scales. rather than Ka ˆ 1: ² Various effects are not taken into account. Ka) are necessary to discuss regimes in the case of premixed reactants. and Karlovitz. uk ˆ …v1†1=4 …65† 1 where 1 is the dissipation rate of the turbulent kinetic energy k. 1: wrinkled ¯ame with pockets (`corrugated ¯ames'). ² 1 . which is not the case in combustion systems. Unsteady and curvature effects play an important role neglected here. Da). has been developed as a support to derive and choose turbulent combustion models. 5. A recent analysis [29] has shown that. Two subdivisions may be proposed depending on the velocity ratio u H /SL: Ð(u H /SL) . most practical applications correspond to ¯amelet or thickened wrinkled ¯ame regimes. 1†. Peters [29] shows that the criterion Ka ˆ 100 (i.e. lt/d l). Kar ˆ 1† is in quite good agreement with the transition proposed in Ref. yields 2 H 33=2   u lt 21=2 …67† Ka ˆ SL dl È Reynolds. which are supposed in classical theories to have the strongest effects on ¯ames. 1†. 8c). These various regimes are generally displayed on a logarithmic diagram (u H /SL. at least when the length scale ratio. 1† : Thickened wrinkled ¯ame regime or thin reaction zone. Accordingly. This criterion was ®rst interpreted as the transition between the ¯amelet regime …Ka . ² Some quantities used are not clearly de®ned. (34)). Nevertheless. (Re. is suf®ciently large. ² All regime limits are based on order of magnitude estimations and not on precise derivations. In this situation. For example. the limits between the various regimes may noticeably change. 8a). A diagram such as the one displayed on Fig. turbulent structures are unable to wrinkle the ¯ame surface up to ¯ame front interactions. the ¯amelet regime limit could correspond to a Karlovitz number Ka ˆ 0:1 or Ka ˆ 10. Veynante. Ka) or (Da. larger structures become able to induce ¯ame front interactions leading to pockets. 1): Thickened ¯ame regime or wellstirred reactor. 9 cannot be readily used to determine the combustion regime of a practical system from (u H /SL) and (d l/lt) ratios: ² The analysis is based on the assumption of a homogeneous and isotropic turbulence unaffected by heat release.3. Re. corresponding to Ka ˆ 1. preheat and reaction zones are strongly affected by turbulent motions and no laminar ¯ame structure may be identi®ed (Fig. numbers are related as: Re ˆ Da2 Ka2 …68† Ð(u /SL) . where heat is released. delineating between two combustion regimes.

A laminar diffusion ¯ame is fully determined from a È Damkohler number Dap ˆ …tc xst †21 . Introduction Two numbers. Turbulent premixed combustion diagram [29. where various characteristic scales have been retained depending on the authors [33. the ¯ame is thinner than any turbulent scale. For example. 5. On the other hand. the CO2 formation from carbon monoxide (CO) and OH radical in the burnt gases is much slower with a chemical time of the same order as turbulent times. The Klimov±Williams criterion …Ka ˆ 1† corresponds to a ¯ame thickness d l equal to the Kolmogorov scale lk. the fresh and the burnt gases temperature (see Section 8). d r. [65] from direct numerical simulations is also displayed. therefore.67±71]. is thinner than any turbulent scale and is not affected by turbulent motions (the criterion is plotted assuming dr < 0:1dl ).2) and no ®xed reference length scale can be easily identi®ed for diffusion ¯ames. to characterize the size of the smaller vortex able to affect the ¯ame front was used [63]. a length ratio and a velocity ratio. [140] to delineate between gradient (above) and counter-gradient (below) turbulent transport is displayed assuming a heat release factor t ˆ Tb =Tu 2 1 ˆ 6 where Tu and Tb are. Below the line delineating the Peters criterion (Ka ˆ 100 or Kar ˆ 1). Additional lengths have also been introduced. For instance the Gibson scale lG. 9. whereas a Damkohler number is chosen for the reaction zone [72].62]. L. respectively. ² A velocity ratio (turbulence intensity to premixed laminar ¯ame speed) and a length ratio (integral scale to premixed laminar ¯ame thickness) may be constructed [68] to delineate between regimes. Combustion regimes are identi®ed using the length scale …lt =dl † and the velocity …u H =SL † ratios. The criterion proposed in Ref. the reaction zone thickness. the thickness of the ¯ame depends on the aero- dynamics controlling the thickness of the local mixing layers developing between fuel and oxidizer (Section 3.3. Non-premixed turbulent combustion diagram 5. This dif®culty is well illustrated in the literature. Below this line. using for instance thicknesses of pro®les in mixture fraction space [67]. In actual turbulent combustion. This length was de®ned as the size of the vortex having the same velocity as the laminar ¯ame speed SL. where the value of the chemical time t c depends on the fuel chemistry [30] . The ¯amelet regime limit devised by Poinsot et al. In addition. ² All these analyses are implicitly based on a single step irreversible reaction. ² Additional length scales have been introduced in the literature. These reactions may correspond to a large range of chemical time scales.1.3. These classi®cations of non-premixed turbulent ¯ames may be organized in three major groups: ² The turbulent ¯ow regime is characterized by a Reynolds È number. exhibit no intrinsic characteristic speed. a large number of chemical species and reactions are involved (several hundred species and several thousand reactions for propane burning in air). Veynante.210 D. ² The mixture fraction ®eld is retained to describe the f È turbulent mixing using Z HH2 and a Damkohler number (ratio of Kolmogorov to chemical time) characterizes the ¯ame [33]. have been used to identify premixed turbulent combustion regimes. The problem is more dif®cult in non-premixed turbulent combustion because diffusion ¯ames do not propagate and. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 Fig. the propane oxidation may assumed to be fast compared to turbulent time scale.

² For ®nite rate chemistry. DaLFA). where a is the order of a global one-step reaction. 1†Š 3 v i _ …71† Summarizing these effects in a generic diagram is an arduous task. t is a chemical time and r the characteristic size of the vortices. In this diagram presented on Fig. however. when Dap # Daext . Veynante. In this number. a characteristic mixing length.2). 11): 2 3=2 3 ~ 21 < lt < k …72† lz < u7Zu 1 Turbulent small scale mixing mainly depends both on velocity ¯uctuations. transporting the iso-Z surfaces (stirring). DaLFA and Daext. ld ˆ …D=xst †1=2 : According to asymptotic developments [30]. the reaction zone thickness is of the order of lr < ld …Dap †21=…a11† . a departure from laminar ¯amelet is expected. u H is the level of velocity ¯uctuations. A diagram for laminar ¯ames submitted to curvature associated to a time varying strain rate was obtained by Cuenot and Poinsot from DNS results of ¯ame/vortex interaction [70]. This diagram delineates the steady laminar ¯amelet assumption (LFA) validity regions. the ¯ame thickness is d i < ld. the burning rate does not immediately follow variations of x st. strong unsteadiness effects are observed. On the other hand. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 211 Fig. Da p . xst ˆ Du7Zu st . a main dif®culty arises when effects of unsteadiness need to be quanti®ed. Also. leading to a distribution of x st for given rates of strain. This È analysis identi®es two limiting Damkohler numbers. Because diffusion ¯ames do not feature a ®xed reference length. 10. di ˆ ld is the ¯ame thickness (ld < u7Zu 21 ). Daext . and diffusion between these iso-surfaces that compose the mixing layer of thickness ld. ¯ame extinction occurs. the reaction zones develop within a mean mixing zone whose thickness lz is of the order of the turbulent integral length scale lt (Fig. st and. modifying the burning rate (Eq. with   D 1=2 ld < …73† ~ x st where x st denotes the conditional mean value of the scalar ~ dissipation rate x for Z ˆ Zst : When transport of species and heat by velocity ¯uctuations is faster than transfer in the diffusion ¯ame. whereas r and u H denote respectively the characteristic size and velocity of the vortex pair.D.e. the inner . unsteadiness in diffusion ¯ames develops at two levels [73]: ² The mixture fraction ®eld Z does not immediately respond to velocity ¯uctuations. In a non-premixed turbulent ¯ame. when the velocity ®eld ¯uctuates. (Section 3. Because a strong correlation exists between x st and velocity gradients taken along the stoichiometric line [74]. leading to a second level of unsteadiness. 10. u H 3 ‰Unsteadiness in mixingŠ 3 xs 3 ‰Burning rate unsteadiness…for Dap . In a steady laminar ¯ame the local rate of strain is directly related to x st (and to a ¯ame thickness). the ¯ame front may be viewed as a steady laminar ¯ame element and its inner structure is not affected by vortices. L. In the È intermediate Damkohler number range (i. this effect is not the dominant one when ®nite rate chemistry occurs. the scalar dissipation rate 2 under stoichiometric condition …Z ˆ Zst †. when the Kolmogorov scale lk is of the order of the ¯ame thickness. When Da p is larger than DaLFA. tx ˆ x21 . measures at the same time a mechanical time. the quenching limits and the zone where unsteady and curvature effects are important during ¯ame vortex interaction. (71)). Non-premixed ¯ame/vortex interaction regimes by Cuenot and Poinsot [70].

when Dap # Daext ). When the Damkohler number Da ˆ tt =tc .212 D. lr the reaction zone thickness. 12. The basic ingredients to describe turbulent ¯ames remain the quantities introduced for laminar ¯ame analysis: the progress variable c for premixed combustion (c ˆ 0 in fresh gases and c ˆ 1 in burnt gases. structure of the reaction zone may be modi®ed by the turbulence. or. described in .1. The ¯ame position would correspond to values of the progress variable c lying between 0 and 1.e. In a practical combustion devices. the reaction rate is limited by turbulent mixing. This condition may be simply expressed as Dap $ DaLFA On the other hand. 13: The burning rate may be quanti®ed in terms of turbulent È mixing. the ¯ame is expected to have a laminar ¯ame structure. or even quenching. one may write: a ~ ld < a1 lk and x st < 2 …74† tk where a1 $ 1 and a2 # 1 (the maximum local strain rate would correspond to ld pk ). It is then concluded that the non-linear character of the problem requires the introduction of new tools. see Section 3. a 1 and a 2 would evolve in space and time according to ¯ow ¯uctuations. (58)). As the classi®cation of premixed turbulent ¯ames. In a given burner. 6. it is likely that one may observe at different locations ¯amelet behavior and strong unsteadiness. Tools for turbulent combustion modeling 6.2). the Damkohler number comparing turbulent ¯ame scale and chemical ¯ame scale is recast as: p t t t t a2 Da ˆ t ˆ t k < t < a2 Re Dap …75† ~ tc tk tc tk x st tc È Constant Damkohler numbers Da p correspond to lines of slope 1/2 in a log±log (Da. 12. to Z taking on values in the vicinity of Z ˆ Zst : Three main types of approaches are summarized in Fig. Veynante. The simplest and most direct approach is to develop the chemical rate in Taylor series as a function of species mass fractions and temperature (Eq. for large chemical times (i. ˆ l È Then using tt =tk ˆ Re. Sketch of a non-premixed turbulent ¯ame. Z is the mixture fraction. velocity and scalar energetic spectra. Re) diagram. 11. These new tools must be designed to describe turbulent ¯ames and have to provide an estimation of mean production or consumption rates of chemical species. Schematic of non-premixed turbulent combustion regimes È as function of the Damkohler number Da ˆ tt =tc (constructed from the turbulent integral time scale t t and chemical time t c) and Re the turbulent Reynolds number. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 Fig. L. practical interest that should be approximated by turbulent combustion models. comparing turbulent (t t) and chemical (t c) characteristic times. for example) or on quantities that may be easily modeled or obtained from closed balance equations. extinction occurs. This analysis is limited by its low accuracy and by the rapidly growing complexity of the chemistry (Section 4). a generic description of the main concepts used to model turbulent combustion is proposed. is large (a common assumption in combustion modeling). When the chemistry is suf®ciently fast (large Da values). and. Laminar ¯ames are encountered for low Reynolds numbers …Re . the mixture fraction Z for non-premixed ¯ames (Z is a passive scalar. Introduction The mean heat release rate is one of the main quantities of Fig. these considerations are limited by the numerous hypothesis necessary to derive the regimes.2). ld the diffusive thickness. In this section. Relations between the various approaches are also emphasized. They also need to be based on known quantities (mean ¯ow characteristics. but the discussion of the closure strategy is postponed to subsequent sections. lt the turbulence integral length scale. As diffusion ¯ame scales strongly depend on the local ¯ow motions. see Section 3. with Z ˆ 0 in pure oxidizer and Z ˆ 1 in pure fuel. 1†: Results are summarized in Fig.

The density of ¯ame surface area per unit volume is also useful to estimate the burning rate. accordingly. Following this view. In the geometrical analysis. Three types of analysis of premixed or non-premixed turbulent ¯ames. plays a dominant role in combustion modeling. terms of scalar dissipation rates [75]. L. A ¯ame normal analysis is derived by focusing the attention on the structure of the reacting ¯ow along the normal to the ¯ame surface. even for ®nite rate chemistry. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 213 Fig. The ¯ame is then envisioned as an interface between fuel and oxidizer (non-premixed) or between fresh and burnt gases (premixed). . The small scale dissipation rate of species controls the mixing of the reactants and. 13. the ¯ame is described as a geometrical surface. this approach is usually linked to a ¯amelet assumption (the ¯ame is thin compared to all ¯ow scales).D. scalar ®elds (c or Z) are studied in terms of dynamics and physical properties of iso- value surfaces de®ned as ¯ame surfaces (iso-c p or iso-Zst). This leads to ¯amelet modeling when this structure is compared to one-dimensional laminar ¯ames. Veynante.

the f variance c HH2 is de®ned as: ~ ~ f r c HH2 ˆ r …c 2 c†2 ˆ r …c HH2 2 c2 † ˆ rc2 2 r c2  f ~ …76† gradient). r x is the dissipation rate of the ¯uctuations of the ~ scalar ®eld. The determination of these pdfs leads to pdf modeling. these ¯uctuations characterize non-homogeneities and intermittencies. viewed as an interface between fresh and burnt gases in premixed combustion or as an interface between fuel and oxidizer in non-premixed situations. Geometrical description The ¯ame front is here described as a geometrical entity. One may then expect a very strong coupling between mixing phenomena and g chemical reaction. Since the burning rate depends on the contact between the reactants. 6. when mean gradients are neglected: ~ r x < rD7c HH ´7c HH …78† Then. This preliminary analysis shows that dissipation rate of scalars is a very key concept of turbulent combustion and. Mean values and correlations are then extracted via the knowledge of one-point probability density functions (pdf). A one-point statistical analysis restricted to a particular value of the scalar ®eld is related to the study of conditional statistics. the mean burning rate is proportional to the scalar dissipation rate of Z or c. 6. This analysis is generally linked to the assumption of a suf®ciently thin ¯ame. the exact transport equation f for c HH2 reads: 2r c HH2 f 1 7…r uc HH 2 † 1 7…r ug 2 † ˆ  ~g  HH c HH 2t ~ 7´…rD7c HH 2 † 1 2c HH 7´…rD7c† 2v c HH _ 22r u HH c HH ´7c 2 2rD7c HH ´7c HH 1 |‚{z‚} g ~ |‚‚‚‚{z‚‚‚‚} |‚‚‚‚{z‚‚‚‚} Production Dissipation Source …77† In addition to the two diffusive terms 7´…rD7c HH 2 † and ~ 2c HH 7´…rD7c†. turbulent mixing occurs between fresh and burnt gases. x appears in any tools used to model ¯ames. G-®eld equation The balance equation for the progress variable may Starting from the balance equation for the progress vari~ able (Eq. then the new equation is multiplied by c HH and averaged. Scalar dissipation rate f f In a ®rst step.214 D. fresh fuel and fresh oxidizer have to be mixed at the molecular level for reacting and the ¯ame is mainly controlled by turbulent mixing occurring between the fresh gases. Two formalisms have been proposed: ®eld equation or ¯ame surface density concept.1. In the literature. (36)). Hereafter: ~ ~ ~ ~ r x ˆ rD7c´7c ˆ rD7c´7c 1 2rD7c HH ´7c 1 rD7c HH ´7c HH leading to. This is observed in the equation for c HH 2 ~ where. In consequence. After straightforward manipulations. L. when assuming very fast chemistry and a combustion limited by mixing. the transport equation for c HH2 or Z HH2 is derived. For instance. In a non-premixed ¯ame. x and the chemical source v c HH are _ involved.2. In the case of the progress variable. Within a premixed system. various expressions have been associated to the terminology scalar dissipation rate (in laminar ¯ame theory. ~ ~ In the simpli®ed case of homogeneous ¯ames (no c or Z . which are non-zero. the scalar dissipation rate enters directly or indirectly the expression for the mean burning rate. in any models. directly or indirectly. c is decomposed into c ˆ c 1 c HH . Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 The statistical properties of scalar ®elds may be collected and analyzed for any location within the ¯ow. there f is no chemical source acting on the evolution of Z HH2 : The mixture fraction Z is sensitive to chemistry only via density change. Veynante.3. Conditional statistics which are obviously linked to the geometrical analysis and to ¯ame surfaces when the conditioning value is c p or Zst. The main stumbling block in turbulent combustion modeling and bridges between the various modeling concepts emerge through the scalar dissipation rate. making the coupling between chemistry and mixing different than in the case of premixed combustion. 6. it actually quanti®es a diffusion speed. a factor 2 and be written in term of instantaneous (c) or ¯uctuating (c HH ) values of the concentration species. Section 3.3. It may include the density r . the time evolution of the scalar variances are governed by: Premixed combustion: 2r c HH 2 g _ ˆ 22rD7c HH ´7c HH 1 2v c HH dt Non-premixed combustion: 2r Z HH 2 g ˆ 22rD7Z HH ´7Z HH dt These equations have important implications: The scalar dissipation rate directly measures the decaying speed of ¯uctuations via turbulent micromixing. two important terms are found: The ¯uctuating part of the scalar dissipation rate 2rD7c HH ´7c HH and a correlation v c HH _ involving the chemical source. but expected small for large Reynolds number ¯ows (especially the second one).2). at the same time.

Each G iso-surface is then related to a ¯ame front. Averaging the progress variable Eq. pointing toward the fresh gases. was introduced to simulate the propagation of fronts [76]. The reactant consumption and the heat release rate are controlled by the consumption speed Sc: 1 ru Sc ˆ v dj _ …82† 21 where Tu is the temperature of unburnt gases. a model has to be where r u is the fresh gases density and j the spatial coordinate along the normal direction to the ¯ame front. especially in high ¯ame front curvature zones [78]. This velocity is easily decomposed into the ¯ow velocity u and w the relative velocity of the iso-c surface measured with respect to the ¯ow. The `G-equation' may be written: 2G 2G 1 uc ´7G ˆ 0 or 1 u´7G ˆ wu7Gu 2t 2t …80† w and Sc are related but may be quite different. generally much thicker than the ¯ame front. has to be modeled. (79) leads to: P Q ~ 2c ru R 27´…r u HH c HH † 1 rwu7cu S g ~ ~ ~ u7cu …84† 1 u´7c ˆ r 2t  ~ u7cu |‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚{z‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚} ‚ ‚ ST where the turbulent ¯ame speed. The G-equation becomes: ~ 2G ru ~ ~ ~ 1 u´7G ˆ S u7Gu 2t  r T The mean turbulent ¯ame brush is then located at the ~ points where G ˆ G 0 : The G-equation does not required thin ¯ame elements per se. Usually. This formalism may be extended to turbulent ¯ames. even in the case of a steady laminar ¯ame propagating at the constant laminar ¯ame speed SL. a G-®eld whose level G ˆ G 0 represents the ¯ame surface. ST.D. this technique is well suited to two dimensional simulations. The G-equation provides a kinematic description of the ¯ame front and involves its displacement speed w. leading to u c ˆ u 1 wn. de®ned relatively to the unburnt gases. The displacement speed w may also be quite different from the laminar ¯ame speed SL. Three approaches have been proposed to overcome this dif®culty: ² Flame front tracking technique: The displacement of the ¯ame front is evaluated from the displacement speed w. the displacement speed w of the G-iso-surface is affected by thermal expansion and should be corrected for density variations. In laminar ¯ames. In non-constant density ¯ows where thermal heat release is included. Only the G-®eld. L. any other effects (heat losses. . A more dif®cult point is the coupling required between the G-equation and the species or energy balance equations. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 215 be written: 2c 1 1 u´7c ˆ …7´…rD7c† 1 v † ˆ wu7cu _ 2t r 2c or 1 u c ´7c ˆ 0 2t …79† where uc is the absolute propagation velocity of the progress variable ®eld. Q the reaction heat release and H denotes the Heaviside function (the Heaviside function is smoothed on the mesh of the simulation). ² Under the assumption of constant density (thermodiffusive assumption). Based on a purely geometric approach. (37). needs to be resolved. but its extension to 3D cases may not be straightforward. Of course. the G-equation may be used for low cost direct numerical simulations. ² Temperature (or energy) reconstruction: The temperature ®eld is directly estimated from the G-®eld as [81]: T ˆ Tu 1 Q H…G 2 Gp † Cp …83† This kinematic description of premixed combustion possesses some attractive aspects: ² The internal ¯ame front structure does not need to be resolved on the computational mesh. where n ˆ 2…7c=u7cu† is the local normal vector to the iso-c surface.80]. Accordingly. The overall turbulent ¯ame is only viewed as a propagating surface without solving for the internal ¯ame structure. This formalism is therefore a good candidate for the numerical simulation of large systems where the knowledge of the internal structure of the ¯ame brush is not required [79]. This correction is: r w ˆ u wu …81† r where wu is the ¯ame displacement speed relative to the unburnt gases of density r u. The coupling between the consumption speed Sc and the displacement speed w is a very key point in G-®eld modeling. Nevertheless. and one may argue that a single simulation corresponds to the computation of several ¯ames. compressibility) may be included. leading to an estimation of the volume of burnt gases produced along with the thermal heat release [79. This approach does not require a balance equation for the energy but is not applicable when heat losses or compressibility effects (for example in an internal combustion engines) occur. The relative displacement speed w is given by Eq. ² Estimation of the heat release rate from the G-®eld: The G-®eld is used to estimate the heat release rate to be incorporated in the balance energy equation from a formulation similar to Eq. (83) [82]. Veynante. G…x† is de®ned as the distance of the given location x to the ¯ame front [77].

a laminar ¯ame where curvature effects have been introduced. x. submitted or not to a steady strain. the ¯ame surface density S of the iso-c p surface is estimated from the conditional gradient of the progress variable c [86]:    S…c p † ˆ u7cud…c 2 c p † ˆ u7cuuc ˆ c p P…cp † …86† where d…c 2 cp † is a local measure of the probability (see   Section 6. Ç V i is related to the properties of the local ¯ame front and is generally estimated from a prototype laminar ¯ame. Two equivalent forms of the progress variable equation may be used: ² A classical reaction/diffusion formulation: 2c 1 _ 1 u´7c ˆ ‰7´…rD7c† 1 v Š r 2t …87† Ç where V i is the mean local burning rate per unit of ¯ame area integrated along the normal direction to the ¯ame surface. is to decouple the chemical description (V i) from the ¯ame/turbulence interaction (S ). . L.33]. 2. In premixed combustion. supplied for ST. incorporating more or less complexity. More rigorous derivations were obtained from geometrical considerations [17. Derivation of an equation for u7cu from the equation for the instantaneous progress variable c. details are not given here. turbulent transport and propagation may be separated to carefully model the effect of turbulence on w. 14. Averaging the u7cu d …c 2 c† p balance equation leading to an exact equation for the ¯ame surface density S ˆ u7cud…c 2 c p †: This derivation is valid for any iso-scalar surface (c p can take any values between zero and unity) and S…c p . 3.4. S measures the available ¯ame area d A per unit volume d V. u7cuuc ˆ c p is the conditional average of  u7cu for c ˆ c p and P…cp † is the probability to ®nd c ˆ cp at the given location. From this de®nition and the balance equation for the progress variable c. an exact equation for the ¯ame surface density S may be derived according to the following steps [87]: 1. Using a phenomenological analysis. 14. or even a laminar unsteady strained and curved ¯ame. curved and strained by the velocity ®eld [17.3. For instance.3). diffused. The ¯ame surface density S may be estimated either from algebraic relations (see Section 7.4. when doing so. the derivation of its balance equation is quite tedious [87] and similar to the derivation of a balance equation for the probability density function (Section 6.2. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 Fig. summarized Ç on Fig. the instantaneous displacement speed of the premixed front [29. t† is also called a surface density function. Flame surface density description The ¯ame is identi®ed as a surface and the ¯ame surface density S is introduced. The ¯ame surface is convected.4. Flame surface density modeling. Veynante.85] and from a statistical description [86±88] leading to an exact. The mean burning rate of a species i is then modeled as: _  _ v i ˆ V iS …85† balance equation. Derivation of an equation for u7cu d…c 2 c† p by conditioning the previous u7cu balance equation. one may consider a planar laminar ¯ame. The derivation using statistical tools is now brie¯y summarized.216 D. but unclosed. this balance equation was ®rst proposed by Marble and Broadwell [84] for non-premixed turbulent combustion. 6.3).83]. The main advantage of this formulation.2) or as a solution of a balance equation.

These two formulations of the S balance equation induce the following comments: ² The two balance Eqs. The last two terms in Eq. Veynante. (89) and (90) correspond to unsteady effects and to the ¯ame surface convection. many effects are incorporated in the ¯ame front propagation speed. Integrating Eq. 2/2c p is a derivative in the sample space c p. a ¯ux term in the sample space is found in the reaction/diffusion derivation. Eq.1). the local burning zone is not in®nitely thin and the ¯ame front. In the propagative form (Eq. identi®ed as the location of the maximum reaction. (37)). ² The derivation of the balance Eqs. This is a priori true when the ¯ame is in®nitely thin. (86) across iso-surface levels leads to:  1  1  S…c p †dcp ˆ u7cuuc ˆ c p P…cp †dcp ˆ u7cu …95† 0 0 . The last two terms in the RHS of the propagative Eq. ² In combustion modeling. and kQls is a function of c p. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 217 ² A propagative form: 2c 1 u´7c ˆ wu7cu 2t …88† where the displacement speed w of the ¯ame front relatively to the ¯ow was introduced (Eq. describes whether the ¯ame is actually burning or not. (89) and (90) implicitly forgets some mathematical singularities that may become important in particular situations. w. The propagative formulation is often written in term of p total stretch Ac of the iso-c p surface   1 2S 1 7´…ku 1 wnl s S† ˆ A c p S 2t z‚}|‚{ ˆ k |‚‚‚‚ nn : 7u 1 w7´n l s 7´u 2 ‚{z‚‚‚‚ ‚} tangential strain rate Curvature ² The strain rate term is also split into a contribution due to the mean ¯ow and a contribution due to turbulent velocity ¯uctuations: ~ ~ k7´u 2 nn : 7ul s S ˆ …7´u 2 knnl s : 7ul s S |‚‚‚‚‚‚‚{z‚‚‚‚‚‚‚} AT …92† ~ 1 k7´u HH 2 nn : 7u†S |‚‚‚‚‚‚ ‚{z‚‚‚‚‚‚ ‚} aT …94† The LHS terms in the two balance Eqs. This equation corresponds to the G-equation [77] (Section 6. This may be for instance the case when analyzing data of direct numerical simulations where the ¯ame front has to be resolved on the computational grid. This may not be the case when two close ¯ame fronts interacts. (90)). In Eq. The surface average of Q. the normal vector n is assumed to be well de®ned and having a ®nite derivative. For example. is de®ned as:   Qu7cujc ˆ c p Qu7cud…c 2 c p †  ˆ  …91† kQl s ˆ u7cud…c 2 c p † u7cujc ˆ c p Here the notation kQls implicitly indicates that the mean is taken for c ˆ cp . Two different types of equation for S are associated to these two formulations of the progress variable balance equation. assuming that the Ç local reaction rate per unit ¯ame area. V i. However in real turbulent ¯ames. L.3. ~ ² Using the Favre decomposition …u ˆ u 1 u HH †. The ®rst term in the RHS expresses the action of the tangential strain rate on the ¯ame surface. the convection ¯ux term may be decomposed into mean and turbulent components: ~ kul s S ˆ uS 1 ku HH l s S …93† …89†  à ˆ k7´u 2 nn : 7ul s S 2 7´ kwnl s S 1 kw7´nl s S where n is the unit vector normal to the c ˆ c p surface and pointing towards the fresh gases …n ˆ 27c=u7cu†: 7´n corresponds to the ¯ame front curvature. that may differ from the laminar ¯ame speed SL [78]. (89) describe respectively reaction/diffusion effects All these de®nitions may be extended to ¯ame fronts which are not in®nitely thin. (89) and (90) are mathematically strictly equivalent but the problem is not expressed in the same way. a single iso-c p surface is assumed to correspond to the ¯ame front. (90) the imbalance between diffusion and reaction is cast in the form of the propagation velocity w. (89) recalls that transfer phenomena between iso-surfaces are involved in this propagation. may differ from the c p iso-surface. kQls.D. ² A reaction/diffusion formulation: 2S 1 7´…kul s S† ˆ k7´u 2 nn : 7ul s S 2t B 2 3C 1 2 1 2 ‰7´…rD7c† 1 v Š _ S u7cu 2n r s C 5 4B 2 1 2 ‰7´…rD7c† 1 v Š S _ 2c p r s ² A propagative formulation: 2S 1 7´…kul s S† 2t …90† along the ¯ame normal direction and ¯uxes in the sample space c p. On the other hand. 2=2n ˆ n´7 is a derivative normal to the ¯ame front. (90) correspond to front convection due to a normal propagation and combined propagation/curvature effects.

One needs to develop closures for the turbulent ¯ux of ¯ame surface. t†DY [92±96].218 D. t† quanti®es the probability to ®nd. Consider a non-premixed ¯ame where the chemistry is reduced to a single step reaction. This approach has been explored by Weller et al. but the wrinkling factor may be more convenient for  initial and/or boundary conditions (J $ 1 everywhere). for example. t† where n and np are the unit vectors normal to the instantaneous ¯ame front and to the mean propagating direction respectively. velocity. the ¯ame surface is assumed to behave such as S…c p † < u7cu ˆ S: All balance equations remain formally the same but have to be closed. n p ˆ 2    u7cu  7cuc ˆ c p  Then:   u7cuuc ˆ c p S…c p †  ˆ   J…c p † ˆ       7cuc ˆ c p   7cuc ˆ c p P…cp † where Y p is the sample space variable corresponding to the random variable Y. u7cu follows a balance equation similar to the S (c p) balance Eq. The pdf satis®es the following simple relations:      P…Y p . or pollutants like CO.3. (90). and where radiative heat losses are neglected.4. a generalized ¯ame surface wrinkling. In probability density function methods. for any values of c p. require the description of the ¯ame front internal structure. L. [90.3. x. x. a joint probability density p  p function P…Y1 . x.3.The conditional pdf Pc …YF uZ p . etc. Statistical approaches: probability density function 6.  The probability density function (pdf) P…Y p . x. t†: For such ¯ames. x. they are initially based on a geometrical view describing the ¯ame as a thin interface. ¼. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 that is a direct estimation of the inverse of the mean local ¯ame thickness d …d ˆ …1=u7cu† 21 † and may be viewed as a `generalized ¯ame surface density'. The basic idea is to introduce the ratio J (c p) of the ¯ame surface to its projection in the direction of propagation np:    u7cuuc ˆ c p P…cp † S…c p † p   ˆ J…c † ˆ np ´…nu7cud…c 2 c p †† np ´ nu7cud…c 2 c p †   u7cuuc ˆ c p 1   ˆ ˆ np ´knls np ´ nu7cuuc ˆ c p …97† closely related. When more than one variable is required to capture the ¯ame structure. temperature. 6.3. ¼. t† is introduced As in Section 6.  J . Veynante. Flame wrinkling description The previous formalism may be recast in term of ¯ame surface wrinkling. The turbulent ¯ame is then fully described by the joint pdf of mixture fraction and fuel mass fraction. J…c p † ˆ J for any c p value. x. where surface averages kQl s are replaced by `generalized surface averages' kQls which do not depend on c p: 1 1 kQls ˆ kQl s S…c p †dcp …96† u7cu 0 In ¯ame surface density models. t†dY p ˆ 1 P…Y p . t†dY p ˆ Y…x. YN . under a ¯amelet assumption. is introduced: 1 S…c p †dcp  u7cu S 0  ˆ J ˆ …100† ˆ  1  u7cu  u7cu     7cuc ˆ c p P…cp †dcp 0  For an in®nitely thin ¯ame front. 5). ¼. Flame surface density and ¯ame wrinkling factor are . t† is introduced [97]. The mean burning rate (or any mean quantity) is then estimated as: v Y1 …x. 6. x.4. for a given location x and a time t. Introduction Predictions of radicals and intermediate species such as OH. Balance equations may also be derived  and closed for J (c p) or J : These equations are considerably more complicated than ¯ame surface density balance equations. x. a variable Y (mass fraction. these conditional means are also useful in a pdf context. as well as for the effects of curvature and strain rate. Y p 1 DY=2Š: This probability  is equal to P…Y p . t†dY p ˆ Y H2 …x. Even though G-®eld and density of ¯ame surface S need some statistical treatments. one wishes to relax this assumption by focussing on the statistical properties of intermediate states within the ¯ame front. t† _ ˆ  Y1 ¼  YN p p  p p p p v Y1 …Y1 . it is interesting to focus on the statistical properties of the fuel mass fraction YF for a given value of the mixture fraction Z (Section 3.2.  p P…YF . YN . These vectors are chosen pointing towards the fresh gases and are given by:   7cuc ˆ c p 7c  nˆ2 …98† . The same modeling issues emerge using the Gequation formalism [89]. Z p .91]. YN †P…Y1 . for the propagation velocity of the surface. for intermediate states between fresh and burnt gases in premixed ¯ames or between fuel and oxidizer in non-premixed ¯ames.2 and  p Fig. Laminar combustion would be parameterized with two variables.2). t†dY1 ¼dYN _ …101† …99† Conditional statistics have been used to de®ned the ¯ame surface density (Section 6. fuel mass fraction YF and mixture fraction Z (see Section 3.2).) within the range ‰Y p 2 DY=2. t† Y Y  Y   …Y p 2 Y†2 P…Y p . x.1.

D. usually with a Beta function [72]: À Áb21 À Á …Z p †a21 1 2 Z p ~ P Z p . t† ‰d…cp 2 c…x.3). t†P…Z p . x. t†† ˆ 0 By de®nition: otherwise  In this decomposition. P…Z p . Because the probability to ®nd all the possible values is constant and equal to unity: 1  P…cp . x. Z HH2 vanishes when reactants are perfectly mixed and reaches its maxiÀ Á ~ ~ mum value. 0 f Z HH2 ˆ 1 À 0 Á À Á ~ 2~ Z p 2 Z P Z p . t† describes the statistical  p properties of fuel/air mixing. t dZ p 0 ˆ a…a 1 1†¼…a 1 …n 2 1†† …a 1 b†…a 1 b 1 1†¼…a 1 b 1 …n 2 1†† where C can either be time or any spatial coordinates. t†† satis®es: 2 2 2c…x. t†  (105) 2C This presumed pdf should reproduce the mean of the f ~ mixture fraction Z and its variance Z HH2 : 1 À Á ~ ~ Z ˆ Z p P Z p . This ¯ux is driven by a velocity equal to the conditional mean of the time evolution of the progress variable c. t† ˆ cp P…cp . t† is given by: 2c 1 _ ˆ 2u´7c 1 ‰7´…rD7c…x. x. when fuel and oxidizer are completely segregated (Section 5. whereas Pc …YF uZ p . (106) shows that the time evolution of the pdf is controlled by a ¯ux in the sample space c p.3. x. x. Eq. x. then the pdf takes the form of a double peak function. useful to obtain all equations discussed in this section. x. t† 2t 2c 2t …106† where conditional averaging    Q…c†d…cp 2 c…x. x. (102) are key relations. After simple manipulations combining Eqs. The time evolution of a probability density function is easily derived by expressing the pdf as the average of a function d…cp 2 c…x. x. c . ² To solve a balance equation for the pdf. t††Š ‰d…c p 2 c…x. t†.4. x. (102) and (103) with Eq. In other words. L. t†† …102† The time evolution of the reactive species c…x. t† 22 p 1 p2 ‰d…cp 2 c…x. t†dYF 0 p variable c. t†† ˆ Q…c†uc…x. t††Š 2C 2 ˆ2 2 22 c…x. t†=2t† is non-zero for the value c ˆ cp . t† p  p ‰P…c . t dZ p . Z 1 2 Z . x. Pdf balance equation The pdf balance equation is ®rst written for the progress . the probability of ®nding the occurrence c ˆ cp is modi®ed. t† is introduced. t† ˆ 1=Dcp if cp 2 Dcp =2 . Presumed probability density functions The simplest approach to the mixing between fuel and oxidizer in a non-premixed ¯ame is to presume the shape ~ of the pdf P…Z p . t ˆ 1 À Áb21 1 …Z 1 †a21 1 2 Z 1 dZ 0  P…cp . when the mean of …2c…x.2). (104) the transport equation for the pdf may be written: 42 5 3 2  p 2 2c…x.4. t†† de®ned as [100]: À Á d cp 2 c…x. x. t††Š ˆ 2C 2c 2C ˆ2 2 2c…x. t†† 1 v Š r 2t and d…c p 2 c…x. x. Z p . 6. t†Š ˆ 2 p uc…x. t† ˆ Pc …YF uZ p . t† ‰d…cp 2 c…x. t††Š p ‰d…c 2 c…x. t† ˆ Z are linked to the internal structure of the ¯ame front. t† ˆ Z p ˆ YF Pc …YF uZ p . cp 1 Dcp =2 d…cp 2 c…x. t††Š 2c p 2C …104† …103† 22 ‰d…cp 2 c…x. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 219 and de®ned for a given value of Z as:  p   p P…YF . bˆa 21 $0 aˆZ ~ f Z Z HH2 This technique requires the solving of a balance equation for f the mean and the variance of Z (Section 9. Veynante. with peaks located at Z ˆ 0 and Z ˆ 1: This approach is also used in premixed ¯ames replacing the mixture fraction Z by the progress variable c [99]. t dZ p and using the relation [98]: 1 À Á ~ …Z p †n P Z p . Two main directions may be chosen to built numerical models from pdf: ² To presume the pdf shape from available mean quantities. x. 6. x. t† The conditional mean is readily de®ned from:  1  p p p YF uZ…x. t† and   p YF uZ…x. These relations (104) and (105) and Eq. x. t† ˆ c P…c . t†dcp ˆ 1 0 The two-parameters a and b are determined as: 2 3   ~ ~ 1 ~ Z…1 2 Z† 2 1 $ 0. t††Š 2 2c 2c 2C 32 2 2c…x.2. t† ˆ d…cp 2 c…x.

t†dcp 0 42 D 2r  2Yi 2Yj uY…x. t† ˆ cp P…cp . t† is usually negligible compared to the transport due to velocity ¯uctuations. x. x. t† 2t 2   ˆ nt 7P…c p . ¼. x. t†Š 2t  i  2 h  ˆ2 p 2u´7cuc…x. x. ¼. YN †d…Y1 2 Y1 †¼d…YN 2 YN † ‰93Š: ~ p r  2 ~ p p P…Y1 . t† ˆ r…cp †d…c…x. the ¯uctuating part becomes:  2nt 7P…c p . ¼. x. t† ˆ cp P…cp . L. x. This term insures that the density of probability is transported from point to point in the sample space c p in a conservative manner. x. t† ˆ cp ˆ v …cp † _ _ The main advantage of pdfs in turbulent combustion lies in this availability to deal with chemistry. t† ˆ c r named the micromixing term and remaining unclosed (as any term involving spatial derivatives). x. t† leading to the pdf balance equation: 2  p   ‰P…c . the pdf balance equation is derived using the same formalism with p p p p r P…Y1 . t† ˆ cp P…cp . ¼YN . x. The ¯ux depends on the conditional mean of the time evolution of the progress variable given by Eq. x. The total dissipation rate. x. D7 2 P…cp . t† ˆ Y p 2xk 2xk 3 Using diffusion or scalar dissipation rate. ¼. t† _ 2c  i 22 h  2 p2 xuc…x. t† _ ² In terms of scalar dissipation rate: 2  p ‰P…c . x. YN † ˆ r…Y1 . x. t† 1 p2 xuc…x. YN . t††Šuc…x. (107). t†Š _ 2c  i 22 h  2 p2 xuc…x. t†=2t also includes a conditional diffusive term: 2 3 1 p …108† …7´…rD7c††uc…x. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 an increase or a decrease of the density of probability for c ˆ cp . t† 2 cp † ˆ r…cp †P…cp . using Eq. t† and ¯uctuating components. t† ˆ cp P…cp .220 D. x. (105) and assuming rD < cst :  i 2 h  D7 2 cuc…x. t† When more than one species is taken into account. x is recovered as:   xˆ  1   xuc…x. x. t†Š 1 u´7P…c p . averages are also introduced in pdfs. for instance when r ˆ r…c† :  ~ r P…cp . t N N ˆˆ 2 2 2Yip 2Yjp iˆ1 jˆ1  The ®rst term in the RHS. t (111) . t† 2t ˆ 2r  N   ˆ 2 h 2u´7Y i uY…x. (103): 2 3 2c uc…x. x. Nonetheless. x. x. t† …110† 2c Weighted. t† ˆ c 1 v uc…x. the probability density function balance equation may be organized in two different forms: 5   p ~ p  P Y1 . and the conditional mean of 2c…x. t† ˆ c p 2 1 3   1 p ‰7´…rD7c…x. x. t† ˆ Y p 1 v p _i 2Yip iˆ1 i  p ~ p  P Y1 . or Favre. YN . implies a modi®cation of this density for other values of c p. t†Š 2t 422 3 2 1 2u´7c 1 7´…rD7c†uc…x. x ˆ Du7cu 2 . (102) with Eq. t† 2cp  i 2 h   ˆ 2D7 2 P…cp . t† ˆ cp P…cp . t† ˆ c p ˆ2 p 2c r 5 3  (109) 1 v …cp † P…cp . t† 2c The convective term may be split into mean. this advantage is offset by the fact that reactants are brought to the reaction zone by diffusion. t† ˆ cp 2t   ˆ 2u´7cuc…x. x. t† ˆ cp _ r …107† In Eq. t† 2c 2 ² In terms of molecular diffusion: 2  p ‰P…c . any term de®ned in one-point (as chemical source) is closed. t† 2 p ‰v …cp †P…cp . the conditional value of the source term is a function of c de®ned in one-point and is exactly known since:   v …c†uc…x. Using an eddy viscosity model.   u´7P…c p . This micromixing term may be rewritten with the scalar dissipation rate. Veynante. x. x. t† ˆ c p 1 v …cp † P…cp . justifying the convective term in sample space.

The unclosed terms (RHS) are the pressure ¯uctuations. EQi appears from molecular diffusion along with differential diffusion effects across the iso-c surface. On the other hand. All these phenomena remain to be closed. convection of the pdf in velocity space. the convective term in physical space can be decomposed into mean and ¯uctuating parts. between fuel and oxidizer in nonpremixed combustion. t† ˆ c p †. turbulence models. but also for the conditional value of the chemical source of Yi.  ² The pdf of the progress variable P…c p . c . x. Conditional moment closure (CMC) Conditional moment closure modeling was ®rst proposed in Refs. One equation has to be solved for each value of c p retained. c ˆ cp P…up .c ˆ c 2ui r 2xi  |‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚{z‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚} Pressure fluctuations ~ In premixed ¯ames. x. L.4. The transport equation for this joint composition/velocity pdf is given below for the progress variable c. the probability density function entering expression (113). such as k± 1 .5. The number of these values is determined from the accuracy required to estimate both the mean from Eq. x. whereas for non-premixed combustion. and ®nally the closed chemical source. micromixing (x enters this term) and chemical source. the joint velocity/ concentration pdf is introduced. t†Š 1 up ´7P…u p . In premixed ¯ames. we consider the case of a turbulent premixed ¯ame represented with a progress variable c. Without loss of the generic character of the discussion. À Á any conditional quantity rYi uc ˆ cp corresponding to the conditional average of Yi along the iso-surface c ˆ cp : 6.105]:   2Q   2Q   22 Q i i i ˆ 2 rui uc ˆ cp ruc ˆ cp 1 rxuc ˆ cp 2t 2xi 2cp2   1 v i uc ˆ cp 1 EQi 1 EYi _ (114) The two last terms of Eq. EYi represents the effects of turbulent ¯uctuations on the deviation from the conditional mean. no longer required for the mean ¯ow. calculated for a given value of the progress variable c p or the mixture fraction Z.4. Closures for the conditional values of the scalar dissipation rate. …u H ´7cuc…x. 6. the mean value.e. three quantities are useful: ² The scalar dissipation rate of the progress variable ~ r x ˆ rD7c´7c. However. x. cp . x. t† 2t    1 2p 2  p p  ‰P…u .103]. a priori. cp .4. c . The three ®rst terms on the right hand side are unclosed. t†:  ² The ¯ame surface density S or the mean ®eld G: Simple links exist between these quantities: ² The conditional value of the scalar dissipation rate enters i  2 h  2 p n7 2 u Hi uu ˆ up . t† is presumed. t†Š _ 2cp 42 5 3  2 1 2p H   p p P…up . Once this joint pdf is known.  P…cp . cp . [102. c ˆ cp P…up . the ¯uctuating part of the viscous dissipation and micromixing. x. cp . convection in physical space by the random velocity ®eld (incorporating turbulent transport). x. x. (110). are. . the conditional quantity is the progress variable c. t†dcp …113† 0 One may solve a balance equation for the conditional quantities Qi(c p) de®ned as:   rYi uc ˆ cp  Qi …cp † ˆ  ruc ˆ cp This balance equation is [104. here the convective velocity is the mean of the viscous dissipation and the mean pressure gradient. they describe convective transport. CMC may also be viewed as a multi-surface description. t† 2ui |‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚ ‚{z‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚} Viscous dissipation 2 i  2 h  D7 2 cuu ˆ up . (113) and the second order derivative in the sample space (i. cp . (114). the mixture fraction is used. As was done in Eq. 6. t† ˆ p u ˆ u .107]. As with the pdf. To describe this turbulent ¯ame. here only conditional moments …rYi uc ˆ cp † are considered. except when the frequency of mixing is also included in the joint pdf [101]. Similarities and links between the tools Major links between the tools used in turbulent combustion modeling are now developed.D. Y i of Yi may be estimated as:  1   ~ rYi ˆ rYi uc ˆ cp P…cp . x. t† 2cp |‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚ ‚{z‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚ ‚} Molecular diffusion …112† The LHS terms are closed and represent respectively accumulation. are required [106. 2  p p  ‰P…u . and micromixing. Veynante.5. However. where the RHS contains the unclosed terms. Joint velocity/concentrations pdf To avoid the gradient transport assumption for the turbulent ¯ux. (114) are usually neglected. t†Š 1 n7 2 ui 2  r 2xi 2up i 1 2  ‰v …cp †P…up . 2 2/2c p2) found in Eq. x. an equation for 1 is still needed to estimate a characteristic mixing time. or. the idea is to focus on particular states between fresh gases and fully burnt product in premixed ¯ames. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 221 The same terms are identi®ed on the RHS: convection by the conditional velocity and by the chemical source.

x . In premixed combustion. (96). cp †dY1 .222 D. Yi and a sampling scalar c:  vˆ _ ˆ  Y1 …116† where the generalized surface average kQl s is de®ned by Eq. YN . t†.c†ucˆcp _ …122† p  p decomposing the joint-pdf as P…Y1 .…Y1 . ¼. ¼. based . S ˆ    u7cuuc ˆ c p P…cp † (Eq. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 Table 2  Exact relations between mean scalar dissipation rate. YN ucp †dY1 . The CMC formalism (see Section 6. the ¯ame surface S . x. Since x is proportional to u7cu. x . of iso-surface c ˆ c p and ~ generalized ¯ame surface density S ˆ u7cu: Connections with the G-equation are readily obtained with Eq. c is the conditional variable (progress variable in premixed ¯ames. the mean c-scalar dissipation rate is also a function of surface densities: 1 ~ r x ˆ rDu7cu 2 ˆ krDu7cul s S…c p †dcp ˆ krDu7cul s u7cu 0 where the conditional mean Qi …cp † may be written:   rYi uc ˆ cp krYi =u7cul s p  ˆ Qi …c † ˆ  kr=u7cul s ruc ˆ cp …119† and appears as directly related to c ˆ cp surface averaged quantities. (91) with Eq. the  ~ pdf P…c p † and the dissipation rate x are very strongly related. Relations between ¯ame surface densities and scalar dissipation rates were anticipated by Borghi [108]. (86)). temperature. kQl s is a surface average (Eq.5) may be reorganized in term of ¯ame surface density:  1  1 ( rY ) i  ~ rYi ˆ rYi uc ˆ cp P…cp . The ¯ame surface density is then:    S…G 0 † ˆ u7GuuG ˆ G 0 P…G0 † …117† Hence. the ¯ame surface density may be written: 2r 3 x  uc ˆ cp P…cp . YN ucp †P…cp †: Note that such a relation may be used when in premixed ¯ames the progress variable. ¯ame surface density function and generalized ¯ame surface density are then related via the scalar dissipation rate. t†dcp ˆ S…c p †dcp 0 0 u7cu s …118† ¼  YN 1 0 p p p p  p v i …Y1 . cp † ˆ p   p Pc …Y1 . (117).YN . ¼. ¼. YN . dYN P…cp †dcp _ p Y1 YN |‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚{z‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚} À Á ¼  v . x. x. t†dxp ˆ …115† D x p and characteristic length scales dc ˆ D=x of the iso-c p distribution are embedded within S (c ). t† ˆ D s   xp  p p P…c . P…cp †. ¼.¼. The mean burning rate is given by:  vˆ _ 1 0  v …cp †P…cp †dcp _ …120† Using relations (86) and (91) and Eq. is related to the pdf via the conditional value of u7cu. or surface density.4. x. ¼. x. the ¯ame front is identi®ed to a given level G ˆ G0 [29]. conditional means. dYN dcp _ p 1  0 ! p p p p   p v i …Y1 . When the local reaction rate is a function of various quantities (species mass fractions. (86) and Eq. t† S…c p .). ¼. cp †Pc …Y1 . Veynante. Using the joint pdf of c and x . L. (96). cp †P…Y1 . probability density function. YN . previous relations may be recast in terms of the Gequation. ¼. this expression becomes:  1  1 ( v ) _   vˆ v uc ˆ cp P…cp †dcp ˆ _ S…c p †dcp _ 0 0 u7cu s ( ) ( ) ( ) v _ v _ 1 v _ ˆ u7cu ˆ p S ˆ rx ~ x=D s u7cu s krDu7cul s u7cu s …121† Models based on probability density functions. t† and x : ² The surface density function S…c p . therefore there is a  ~ direct connection between P…c p . mixture fraction in non-premixed combustion) Scalar dissipation rate r x ~ Probability density function  P…cp † 1  0 Flame surface density S…c p † 1 0 rx ~  P…cp † S ˆ u7cu ±   xuc ˆ cp via PDF Eq: rx ~ krDu7cul s   rDu7cu 2 uc ˆ cp P…cp †dcp   u7cuuc p P…cp †dcp ± 1  0 krDu7cul s S…c p †dcp   S…c p †= u7cuuc ˆ c p 1 S…c p †dcp 0 the pdf transport equation (Eq. These expressions are extended to burning rate depending on many species using multi-dimensional pdfs and conditional averaging. The links between the combustion modeling tools are summarized in Table 2. (116). YN . kQls corresponds to generalized surface average and is de®ned in Eq. etc. (110)). (96). (91)). S (c p). x. or ¯ame surface. Combining Eq. using a G-®eld equation.

etc.113]. etc. S (c p) of iso-surface c ˆ c p : Connections with the G-equation are readily obtained with Eq. x. [114]. 7. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 Table 3 Tools for turbulent combustion modeling Description Geometrical Tools G-®eld with G ˆ Gp at the ¯ame ~ ~ ~ ~  2G=2t 1 u´7G ˆ …r u =r †ST u7Gu Flame surface S Algebraic closure or transport equation Small scales Statistical Scalar dissipation rate. From experimental data [109.). x . t† ˆ Z p ˆ 1 YF Pc …YF uZ p . Z p . (91)). t† (1) Presumed 1 ¯amelets (1) Strategy to generate the pdf ~ (2) Transport equation (2) Solve 2P=2t ˆ ¼ Conditional mean. P…cp † or surface density. u' is the turbulent velocity (i. Turbulent ¯ame speed Turbulent premixed ¯ames may be described in terms of a global turbulent ¯ame speed ST.D. but at the light of these relations. Eddy-Break-Up model Devised in Ref. Unfortunately. The previous relations may be used to carefully compare the proposed closure schemes and Table 3 summarizes the tools and their related modeling issues. Veynante. kQls corresponds to generalized surface average and is de®ned in Eq. t† ˆ u7cuuc ˆ c p P…cp . ¯ow geometry. many closures are essentially equivalent.e the RMS velocity). probability density function. The fundamentals of turbulent combustion modeling clearly rely on pdf. non-unity Lewis numbers. G-®eld and scalar dissipation rate concepts. Experimental data exhibit a large scatter because they depend on various parameters (chemistry characteristics. While this global approach is not particularly well suited to close Favre averaged transport equations.1. it may be of interest in the context of Large Eddy Simulation [79. (96) Tools Averaged reaction rate  v  ‚1  v  _ _ S…c p †dcp 0 u7cu s u7cu s r ‚1 x ˆr ~  x ~  p p krDu7cul s 0 krDu7cul s S…c †dc ‚1 0 Scalar dissipation Probability density function Flame surface density  v …cp †P…cp †dcp _  v  ‚1  v  _ _ S…c p †dcp ˆ u7cu 0 u7cu s u7cu s . Various expressions for mean reaction rates are displayed in Table 4. the following expression has been proposed: 2 H 3n ST u ˆ11a …123† SL SL where a and n are two model constants of the order of unity. CMC. (117). Major differences between the various approaches only appear when closing the unknown quantities. and the temperature are independent (compressibility effects. heat losses. kQls is a surface average (Eq. 7. ¯ame surface density. x. L. this model is based on a phenomenological analysis of turbulent combustion assuming high Table 4  ~ Exact expressions for the averaged reaction rate as a function of the mean scalar dissipation. t†dYF 0    ~ Fundamental links: S…x. x. the turbulent ¯ame speed ST is not a fully well de®ned quantity [112]. Reynolds-averaged models for turbulent premixed combustion 7. turbulence scales.110] or theoretical analysis (Renormalization group theory [111]).). r x ˆ rDu7Yu 2 ~ Algebraic closure or transport equation Modeling issues Propagation speed ST  _ v i ˆ Combustion S Total stretch ˆ curvature 1 strain rate ~ Fast chemistry v < x _ ~ Provide the rate of micromixing _ Vi Turbulence 223 Probability density function p ~ Micromixing P…YF . presumed PDF Micromixing and conditional source   ‚ p p p  YF uZ…x.2. t† and r x ˆ krDu7cul s u7cu on reactant mass fractions.

d…cp † and d…1 2 cp † are respectively the Dirac delta functions corresponding to fresh gases …c ˆ 0† and fully burnt ones …c ˆ 1†: Normalization of the probability density function: 1 0  P…cp . especially in highly strained regions. (124) and (125) but. as described in Section 3. as: q f c HH2  v ˆ 2CEBU r  …125† _ tt f Mass fraction ¯uctuations Y HH2 (or progress variable ¯uctuaF f ) must be modeled and may be estimated from a HH2 tions c balance equation (see Eq. t†f …cp . this model. x. Bray. or. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 È Reynolds …Re @ 1† and Damkohler …Da @ 1† numbers. The reaction zone is viewed as a collection of fresh and burnt gases pockets. assuming excess of oxidizer. irreversible chemical reaction between two reacting species. walls. etc. fully burnt and burning gases contributions (Fig. t t is estimated from the turbulence kinetic energy k and its dissipation rate 1 according to: chemical features [115]. the mean reaction rate is mainly controlled by the turbulent mixing time t t. c HH2 is easily estimated because c2 ˆ c : ~ ~ ~ r c HH2 ˆ r…c 2 c†2 ˆ r …c2 2 c2 † ˆ r c…1 2 c†  e ~ f …126† The square root has been introduced for dimensional reasons in Eqs. 15):  P…cp . c. constant chemical properties. private communication). x.). the mean reaction rate is expressed as: q  f Y HH2 F  _ v F ˆ 2CEBU r  …124† tt where Y HH denotes the fuel mass fraction ¯uctuations and F CEBU is a model constant of the order of unity. fresh gases (R) and combustion products (P) is considered: R3P Classical assumptions are made to simplify the formulation: perfect gases. 7. The presentation is mainly limited here to basic concepts of the Bray± Moss±Libby (BML) formulation.1. t†d…1 2 cp † |‚‚‚{z‚‚‚} |‚‚‚‚‚{z‚‚‚‚‚} fresh gases burnt gases tt ˆ k 1 as an approximation of the characteristic time of the integral length scales of the turbulent ¯ow ®eld. A one-step. Eqs. Introduction Known under the initials of its authors. incompressible ¯ows. where the ratio 1 /k is large (¯ame-holder wakes.1. t† as a sum of fresh. Eddy-Break-Up modeling tends to overestimate the reaction rate. t†d…cp † 1 b…x. Bray±Moss±Libby model 7.224 D. c. burnt gases and reacting mixture. BiModal Limit. t† ˆ a…x. _ 1999. When oxidizer is in excess. Moss and Libby. c ˆ 0 or c ˆ 1).e. of the chemical reaction is introduced where c ˆ 0 in fresh gases and c ˆ 1 in fully burnt gases.3.3. t†. Champion and Libby). Veynante. t† |‚‚‚‚ ‚{z‚‚‚‚ ‚} burning gases …129† …128† 0 where YF is the initial fuel mass fraction in the reactant stream. fresh gases. _  ~ ~ ~ d v =d c. The turbulent mixing time. A progress variable. L. at location …x.). in terms of fuel mass fraction: 2 3 ~ ~ 1 YF YF  v F ˆ 2CEBU r  12 0 _ 0 k YF YF 1 g…x. turbulence leads to a break down of fresh gases structures. and then by Bray. Moss and Libby. etc. Following the Kolmogorov cascade. unity Lewis numbers. is in®nite both when c ˆ 0 and when c ˆ 1 (Borghi. Some adjustments of the model constant CEBU have been proposed to mimic where a . (77)). Accordingly. is used for practical simulations: 1  ~ _ v ˆ CEBU r c…1 2 c†  ~ …127† k or. Then. Assuming an in®nitely thin f ¯ame front (i. ®rst proposed in 1977 [116]. (125) and  ~ (126) lead to inconsistencies because the c derivative of v . a corrected version of the Eddy-Break-Up model. unfortunately. this model has evidenced some special features of turbulent premixed combustion (counter-gradient turbulent transport. from the involved physical hypothesis. Combining a statistical approach using probability density functions and a physical analysis. The EBU model was found attractive because the reaction rate is simply written as a function of known quantities without any additional transport equation and is available in most commercial CFD codes. has been the subject of a large amount of work leading to many improvements (see papers by Bray. The basic idea of the BML formulation is to presume the probability density function of the progress variable c at a given location …x. t†dcp ˆ 1 …130† leads to the following relations: a1b1gˆ1 …131† . etc. without the square root. The modeled reaction rate does not depend on chemical characteristics and assumes a homogeneous and isotropic turbulence. The reaction rate may be recast in terms of progress variable. x. ¯ame turbulence generation. b and g respectively denote the probability to have.

t†dcp ˆ 1 …132† with f …0† ˆ f …1† ˆ 0: The balance equation for the progress variable c may be written: 2rc 1 7´…ruc† ˆ 7´…rD7c† 1 v _ 2t …133† function of the Favre average progress variable c : ~ 1  ~ ~ r c ˆ r c ˆ rcp P…cp †dcp ˆ rb b 0 …138† where r b is the burnt gases density. (135)). assuming a constant pressure P. In this situation. (129)). t† ˆ a…x.3. x. t†dcp _ …134† _ 0 rc ~ rc ~ and a ˆ 1 2 rb rb …139† The mean density r may be written:  2 3 1 c c  p †dcp ˆ aru 1 brb ˆ 1 2 re ru 1 re rb r ˆ rP…c  rb rb 0 …140† One may also introduce the reaction heat release factor t . t . which is ®xed for a given chemical reaction). Accordingly. x. a @ g and b @ g ). This signal also satis®es:  c2 ˆ c 1 O…1=Da† and c…1 2 c† ˆ O…1=Da† …137† tˆ ru T 21ˆ b 21 rb Tu …141† leading to: ~ ru ˆ …1 1 t†rb ˆ r …1 1 tc†  …142† corresponding to the perfect gases state law. L. at the location …x. t† ˆ v …c p †P…cp . t† v …cp †f …cp . BML model analysis This model is developed under the assumption that Re @ Da @ 1.D. t† is: 1   v …x.2. we will focus only on the case where Re @ Da @ 1. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 225 Fig. 7. Then at the point …x. t†d…1 2 cp † 1 O…1=Da† …136† È which is `quasi-bimodal' for large Damkohler numbers. (129): 1  v …x. t† ˆ g…x. t† inside the reaction zone. g and the probability density function f. c looks as a telegraphic signal as displayed in Fig. The BML model involves a presumed pdf (Eq. corresponding to g ! 1. comparing turbulence and chemical time scales. 16. f …cp . de®ned as: leading to Eq. Intermittency between fresh and fully burnt gases at a given location in the reaction zone. This signal corresponds to a bimodal (c ˆ 0 and c ˆ 1) probability density function. the turbulent Reynolds number Re. È Using the Damkohler number. 15. a and b are easily determined as a . and. Probability density function in premixed turbulent combustion.e. t†d…cp † 1 b…x. The objective is now to determine the unknown functions a . g ! 1 (i. Starting from the conservative and non-conservative forms of the progress variable c balance equations: 2rc 1 7´…ruc† ˆ 7´…rD7c† 1 v _ 2t r 2c _ 1 ru´7c ˆ 7´…rD7c† 1 v 2t and multiplying by c and adding these equations: 2rc 2 1 7´…ruc 2 † ˆ 7´…rD7c 2 † 2 2rD7c´7c 1 2cv …144† _ 2t Under this assumption. Da. 16. bˆ This equation is averaged and the mean reaction rate. the combustion is controlled by the turbulent transport and the reaction zone may be assumed to be in®nitely thin. At a given location in the ¯ow. x. Then. Veynante. the probabilities a and b become: aˆ ~ 12c . an intermittency between fresh gases …c ˆ 0† and fully burnt ones …c ˆ 1† is observed and the probability density function of the progress variable c reduces to:  P…cp . ~ 1 1 tc bˆ ~ …1 1 t†c ~ 1 1 tc …143†  The probability density function P…c† is determined and ~ depends only on the mean progress variable c (and on the heat release factor. b . t†dcp _ _ 0 …135† All studies devoted to this line of models are based on such a formulation. x. the mean reaction rate cannot be calculated from the pdf since g was neglected in Eq. 1 0 Fig. however.

226

D. Veynante, L. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266

Subtracting the balance equation for c 2 (Eq. (144)) to the balance equation for the progress variable c (Eq. (133)) leads to a balance equation for c…1 2 c† : 2 ‰rc…1 2 c†Š 1 7´‰ruc…1 2 c†Š 2t _ _ ˆ 7´…rD7‰c…1 2 c†Š† 1 2rD7c´7c 2 2cv 1 v …145†

linking mean reaction rate and scalar dissipation may also be recovered from the general relations between modeling tools (Eq. (121)):  _ vˆ 1 krDu7cul s (

v _ u7cu

)

rx ~
s

…153†

Under the assumption of the BML model, the progress variable c is equal to zero or to unity. Accordingly, c…1 2 c† ˆ 0 and the balance Eq. (145) reduces to: _ _ 2rD7c´7c ˆ 2cv 2 v leading to, after averaging:  2rD7c´7c ˆ …2c m 2 1†v _ where a progress variable cm, de®ned as: 1 cv f …c†dc _ 0 c m ˆ 1 v f …c†dc _
0

…146† …147†

To link mean reaction rate and scalar dissipation rate using the ¯amelet analysis, Eq. (153) requires estimates for v =u7cu _ and rDu7cu; averaging of these quantities along iso-surface c ˆ c p and integration over all the possible c p values. Assuming that in®nitely thin ¯ame elements may be viewed as one-dimensional, steady state, premixed laminar ¯ame propagating at a given laminar ¯ame speed SL, the balance equation for the progress variable c in this 1D ¯ame is:

r 0 SL 7´c ˆ 7´…rD7c† 1 v _
…148†

…154†

where r 0 denotes the density in the fresh gases. Integrating Eq. (154) across all the ¯ame front from fresh gases to burnt gases …21 # x # 11† and up to a given location x0, corresponding to a progress variable c0 …21 # x # x 0 †; leads to:

has been introduced and characterizes the chemical reaction.  The mean reaction rate v becomes: _  vˆ2 _

r0 SL ˆ

1 1
21

v dx ˆ _

rx 2cm 2 1

1 v _ dc 0 u7cu x0
21

…155†

…149† …rD7c† x0 ˆ r0 SL c0 2 ˆ

where rx is the scalar dissipation rate of the progress variable c. e rx ˆ rx ˆ rD7c´7c ˆ rD 2c 2c 2x i 2xi …150†

v dx _
…156†

! c0 v 1 v _ _ dc c 0 2 dc 0 u7cu 0 u7cu 

The mean reaction rate v is then related to the dissipation _ ~ rate x ; describing the turbulent mixing, and to cm, characterizing the chemical reaction. A transport equation for the scalar dissipation rate may be written and solved [117], or one may postulate a linear relaxation of the ¯uctuations generated by micromixing (Section 9.2.2), leading to:

As the ¯ame front is supposed to be thin and planar, all c p iso-surfaces have the same surface and all quantities are constant along these surfaces, moreover the ¯ame is supposed locally one-dimensional and u7cu ˆ 7c: Then: 1 1
0 0

kv =u7cul s dcp _ krDu7cul s dcp

1
0 ˆ 1 0

v =u7cudc _ rDu7cudc v dx _
0 0

rx ˆ

rc HH2 tt

…151†

where a turbulent time scale, t t is introduced. Assuming an intermittency between fresh and burnt gases (c ˆ 0 or f c ˆ 1), c HH2 is given by Eq. (126). Then: ~ 2 r c…1 2 c† ~  _ vˆ tt 2cm 2 1 …152†

1 1 ˆ 1 1
21

v dx _
2

1
0

21

c dc 2

1  c 0

…v =u7cu†dc dc 0 _

The Eddy-Break-Up model expression (Eq. (127)) is recovered (Section 7.2). The BML model may then be viewed as a theoretical derivation, where the assumptions made are clearly stated, of the Eddy-Break-Up (EBU) model, initially based on a phenomenological approach. 7.3.3. Recovering mean reaction rate from tools relations The analysis developed in Section 7.3.2 is the usual derivation of the BML model. However, expression (149)

ˆ

v dx _ 2 ˆ 1 1 1 1 2cm 2 1 2 cv dx 2 _ v dx _
21 21 21

1 1

…157†

where cm is de®ned as: cv dx _ 2 cm ˆ 11 1 v dx _
21

1 1

…158†

D. Veynante, L. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266

227

~ Fig. 17. The Reynolds average c of the progress variable cis plotted as a function of the Favre average c for various values of the heat release factor t , assuming a bimodal distribution (c ˆ 0 or c ˆ 1) of c (Eq. (165)).

Then, from Eq. (153):  v ˆ2 _

rx 2cm 2 1

…159†

of the progress variable c, which may be recast in terms of ¯ame surface density, exhibiting simple links between modeling tools. 7.3.4. Reynolds and Favre averaging Assuming a bimodal distribution of the progress variable  ~ c, Reynolds …c† and Favre …c† averages are easily related. From: 1   c ˆ cP…c†dc ˆ b …163†
0

recovering Eq. (149). This second analysis leads to the following comments: ² The de®nition of cm is slightly different in Eqs. (149) and (159). In the ®rst one, the integration is performed over all possible values of the progress variable c at a given location …x; t†: In the second analysis, the integration is performed along a normal direction to the ¯ame front, assumed to be a laminar one-dimensional premixed ¯ame. The expressions (148) and (158) are identical when:   1 dc 21 f …c† ˆ …160† dl dx f where …dc=dx†f describes the inner structure of the ¯amelet. ² This second derivation clearly exhibits how a ¯amelet model works (the turbulent ¯ame is viewed as a collection of thin laminar ¯ame elements). The cm parameter is related to the inner structure of the ¯ame front and to the properties of the chemical reaction. ² Making use of the ¯ame surface density S as de®ned by Eq. (116), the expression for the mean burning rate becomes:  _ v ˆ r 0 SL S where …161†

rc ˆ r c ˆ ~

1
0 

 rcP…c†dc ˆ rb b ˆ rb c

…164†

together with expressions (142) and (143), one easily obtains:  cˆ ~ …1 1 t†c ~ 1 1 tc …165†

corresponding to a model for the density/progress variable correlations (Eq. (15)):

r H c H ˆ 2r 

~ ~ tc…1 2 c† ~ 1 1 tc

…166† 

~ Reynolds …c† and Favre …c† averages of the instantaneous progress variable c are compared on Fig. 17 for various values of the heat release factor t . The discrepancy between the two quantities strongly increases with t . r H c H is plotted ~ as a function of c on Fig. 18. 7.3.5. Conditional averagingÐcounter-gradient turbulent transport The analysis of intermittency between fresh gases …c ˆ 0† and fully burnt gases …c ˆ 1† leads to the introduction of ~ conditional averaging. The Favre average Q of any quantity Q may be expressed as a function of the conditional   averages for fresh gases …Qu † and fully burnt products …Qb † : 1    r Q ˆ rQ ˆ rQP…c†dc ˆ aru Qu 1 brb Qb …167† ~
0

~ ~ c…1 2 c† 2 1 2 1 rx < ~ r  tt 2c m 2 1 r0 SL 2cm 2 1 r0 SL …162†

² The BML model has been developed starting from a statistical analysis (two peaks pdf), the mean reaction rate was written in terms of the scalar dissipation rate

228

D. Veynante, L. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266

~ Fig. 18. Correlation 2r H c H =r as a function of the Favre averaged progress variable c for various values of the heat release factor t , assuming a  bimodal distribution (c ˆ 0 or c ˆ 1) of c (Eq. (166)).

using Eqs. (142) and (143): ~ ~ ~ Q ˆ …1 2 c†Q 1 cQ u b …168†   where Qu and Qb are de®ned as: 1 1   Qu ˆ QPc …Quc ˆ 0†dQ
21

using the same formalism:
u b g ~ ~ ~ ~ i i j j u HH u HH ˆ …1 2 c†u Hi u Hj 1 cu Hi u Hj 1 c…1 2 c†…ub 2 uu †…ub 2 uu † i j |‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚ {z‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚ } ‚ ‚ intermittency

…172† where one may note a weighted mean between the Reynolds À À uÁ bÁ stresses in the fresh u Hi u Hj and in the burnt gases u Hi u Hj representative of turbulent motions. The additional term represents the intermittency between fresh and burnt gases. 7.3.6. Extensions to partially premixed combustion Some attempts have been made to extend BML modeling concepts to partially premixed combustion, i.e. when reactants are not perfectly premixed before burning [118]. Two dif®culties are then encountered. First, in the de®nition of the progress variable c (Eq. (35)), unburnt and burnt gas u b temperatures and fuel mass fractions Tu, Tb, YF and YF are no longer constant and depend on local equivalence ratio. A balance equation may be still derived (see, for example, Ref. [119]) but it incorporates additional terms and is not obvious to close, especially when rich and lean zones coexist in the same ¯ow ®eld. Mixing should also be taken into account through a mixture fraction Z. The challenge is then to model  the joint probability density function P…cp ; Z p ; x; t†: Lahjaily et al. [118] write:  P…cp ; Z p ; x; t†   ˆ a…x; t†d…cp †Pu …Z p ; x; t† 1 b…x; t†d…1 2 cp †Pb …Z p ; x; t† 1 g…x; t†F…cp ; Z p ; x; t†H…Z p 2 Zmin † |‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚{z‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚}
burning zones 

Qb ˆ

1 1
21 

QPc …Quc ˆ 1†dQ 

Pc …Quc† is the pdf of Q for the given value c of the progress variable (conditional pdf, see Section 6.4.1). ~ The components uk of the mean velocity vector u may be ~ written as a linear combination of their conditional fresh and burnt gases averages: ~ ~ i ~ i ui ˆ …1 2 c†uu 1 cub Then: ~ i ~~ ~~ i  ~ i ~ r u HH c HH ˆ r …ui c 2 ui c† ˆ r …cub 2 ui c† ˆ r c…1 2 c†…ub 2 uu †  f g i …170† which is the scalar turbulent ¯ux, generally modeled using a gradient assumption:   ~ m 2c r u HH c HH ˆ 2 t g …171† i Sc 2xi The two expressions (170) and (171) may describe opposite ¯uxes: consider a left-traveling one dimensional turbulent ¯ame, because of thermal expansion the conditional veloi city in the burnt gases, ub ; is expected to be larger than the i conditional velocity in the fresh gases, uu : According to Eq. g (170), the turbulent ¯ux, u HH c HH is expected to be positive. On i the other hand, as the mean progress variable gradient is also g positive, Eq. (171) leads to a negative value of u HH c HH : This i situation, called `counter-gradient turbulent transport', is a key point of the BML analysis and will be further discussed in Section 8. g The Reynolds stresses u HH u HH may also be decomposed i j …169†

1 gm …x; t†Fm …cp ; Z p ; x; t†‰1 2 H…Z p 2 Zmin †Š |‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚{z‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚} ‚ ‚
mixing without burning

(173) 

 where Pu …Z p ; x; t† and Pb …Z p ; x; t† represent the mixture fraction distributions in fresh and burnt gases respectively. F and Fm are the distributions within the reaction zones,

Algebraic expressions for the ¯ame surface density S Assuming intermittency between fresh and burnt gases Fig. Combustion is supposed to occur when Z p $ Zmin (H is the Heaviside function verifying H…z . Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 229 Fig. Experimental burner. 7. A propane/air premixed ¯ow is injected in a rectangular burner through a grid.2.121].4. 19. Equivalence ratios f are in the range 0. Models based on the ¯ame surface area estimation 7. Their derivation and their histories differ. The ¯ame surface density is here introduced at the light of experimental data from Refs.1. (b) f ˆ 0:9: Flow rate: 35 g/s [121]. L. t†: 7. ¯ame surface density pro®les are plotted as a function of the transverse coordinate for various downstream locations and for two equivalence ratios. The turbulent ¯ame is stabilized behind a small cylinder (blockage ratio of 6%) [120. .4. A turbulent premixed propane/air ¯ame is stabilized behind a small cylinder (blockage ratio of 6%). These models assume that the chemical reaction occurs in thin layers separating fresh gases from fully burnt ones (high DamÈ kohler number limit). [120. 20.4. Introduction Several ¯ame surface density models are now discussed. Veynante. 0† ˆ 0 and H…z $ 0† ˆ 1). t† and Pb …Z p . Under BML assumptions. corresponding to inlet velocities between 10 and 30 m/s (turbulence levels from 5 to 10%). described in Section 6.3. Flow rates are about 35±100 g/s. [120±123]. (a) f ˆ 0:78. the two last contributions are neglected (g p 1 and gm p 1) and dilution effects are incorporated   through Pu …Z p . assuming to be ¯amelets. CH and C2 radical emission (reaction rate estimation) and high-speed laser tomography (¯ame front characteristics) measurements have been performed and are described in Refs. The experimental burner is displayed on Fig. Velocity (laser Doppler velocimetry). Transverse ¯ame surface density (S ) pro®les (m 21) plotted as a function of the transverse location for various downstream locations (mm downstream the rod).1.7±1. 20 (half burner). x. and within the non-reactive mixing zone between fresh and burnt gases.2. In Fig. but they are all based on similar concepts. 19. The reaction zone may then be viewed as a collection of laminar ¯ame elements called ¯amelets. x.121].D.

a submodel is required for the wrinkling length scale which increases with the downstream location in our experiment. The reaction rate per crossing ¯ame. The discrepancies are easily explained by the crude model used for the scalar dissipation of the progress variable to derive Eq. the  mean reaction rate v is proportional to the intermittency _ between fresh and burnt gases. may relate the wrinkling length scale Ly to the thickness d B of the mean ¯ame brush. Then: C  B g 1 n ´hni d …181† Ly < a unp ´nu s p s B Assuming that a . According to Gouldin [125. wF (Eq. np (see Section 6. (182). 16).3). On the other hand. the ¯amelet orientation factor s y (Eq. In Eq. (179)) and the ¯ame surface wrinkling factor J (Eq.3): B C 1 1 ˆ …179† sy unp ´nu s Despite of the same normal vectors n and np involved. 22 where the   ratio S=‰c…1 2 c†Š. the ¯amelet orientation factor s y is directly linked to the vectors normal to the instantaneous ¯ame front. Veynante. (174)). d B/J measures the wrinkling length scale Ly of the ¯ame front. and inversely proportional to t t.3. the csignal is not exactly bimodal). (100) and (177). (162). SL and d l are respectively the speed and the thickness of the laminar ¯ame.230 D. n.126]. _ Estimating the local reaction rate per unit ¯ame area V c _ c ˆ r0 SL where r 0 is the from the laminar ¯ame speed SL (V fresh gases density) the mean reaction rate becomes. the ¯ame surface density S and the local reaction rate per ¯ame crossing (wF) are not obvious to estimate. determined from c…1 2 c† ~ ~   or c…1 2 c†. for example from time-resolved local temperature measurements (thermocouple). Moss. leading to: Sˆg     c…1 2 c† c…1 2 c†  ˆ Ju7cu < aJ s y Ly dB …180† nˆ   2c…1 2 c† ^ T …175† ^ where T is time scale for the ¯uctuations of c. as displayed on Fig. This analysis is attractive because the crossing frequency n may be easily obtained in experiments. Libby and their coworkers have  proposed to describe the mean reaction rate v as the product _ of a ¯ame crossing frequency n and a local reaction rate per ¯ame crossing. L. generally assumed to be proportional to the integral length scale lt:  n S …178† Ly ˆ Cl lt L uH where Cl and n are two constants of the order of unity [75]. leading to the algebraic expression [124] Sˆg   c…1 2 c† g 11t ~ ~ c…1 2 c† ˆ s y Ly s y Ly …1 1 tc†2 ~ …177† where g is a constant of order unity. Nevertheless.3. The previous expression is slightly different than the one proposed in Section 7. under the assumption of a in®nitely thin ¯ame front: Fig. combined with Eqs. when nˆ1: ~ ~ g uH g u H …1 1 t†c…1 2 c†    c…1 2 c† ˆ r0 v ˆ r0 _ s y Cl lt s y Cl lt ~ …1 1 tc†2 …182† As tt ˆ lt =u H is a turbulence characteristic time scale. u H =lt is generally modeled from the r0 SL dt =tt …176† where r 0 is the unburnt gases density. and to the mean ¯ame brush. is displayed. 21. (Section 7. wF:  v ˆ wFn _ …174† Because c(t) may be viewed as a telegraphic signal (Fig. 21 (in practice. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 ~ function of c: A submodel is required to describe the wrinkling length scale Ly. (165) has been used to replace c as a . g and s y are constant.3. This model has been latter rewritten in term of ¯ame surface density. (97)) are different quantities. is usually modeled as: wF ˆ where a is a model constant of the order of unity. Eq. De®nition of the ¯ame transit time tt is the ¯ame crossing frequency BML model. as shown in Fig. s y is a ¯amelet orientation factor measuring the mean angle of the instantaneous  ¯ame front with the c surface and assumed to be an universal model constant …s y < 0:5†: Ly is a ¯ame front wrinkling  length scale and Eq. The physical analysis leading to the Eddy-Break-Up model is recovered and a similar expression for the reaction rate is found. These relations. (175) is generally closed estimating ^ T from a characteristic turbulent time t t. The agreement between this BML model and the experimental data is very good. this crossing frequency is derived from a statistical analysis of the telegraph equation. Bray. The ¯ame transit time tt measures the averaged time spend by a point in the ¯ow to cross a ¯ame front and corresponds to the mean transition time between c ˆ 0 and c ˆ 1 levels of the progress variable. corresponding to g=s y Ly and assumed to be constant.

D. ITNFS is one of the closure schemes for the ¯ame surface density balance equation (see Section 7. Champion. 23. Moss. reducing the effective ¯ame strain rate. (b) f ˆ 0:9 [121]. G K only slightly depends on the velocity ratio u H =S L : The ef®ciency function does not reach a constant level when lt/d l increases since increasing lt/d l. The mean reaction rate is then [118. Because the ef®ciency function G K tends to counterbalance the known trend of Eddy-Break-Up modeling to overestimate the mean reaction rate in highly strained regions. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 231   Fig. plotted as the function of the mean progress variable c for several locations downstream from the rod: (a) f ˆ 0:78. Veynante. S=…c…1 2 c†† transverse pro®les in mm 21 corresponding to g=…s y Ly † in the Bray. The BML model proposes a simple algebraic expression to estimate the ¯ame surface density s and the corresponding reaction rate. as displayed on Fig. G K also decreases. (177)). dt SL 3 where s ˆ log10 2  3 s1 uH SL 2 4 2 H 31=3 53 2 1 u 1 2 exp 2 ˆ 3 2 SL lt dl  and …185† 1   c…1 2 c† k …183† where a is a model constant and the ef®ciency function G K depends on the length scale (lt/d l) and the velocity …u H =S l † ratio comparing the turbulence and the laminar ¯ame characteristics. corresponds to an implicit increase of the turbulent Reynolds number Re. this simple approach improves the accuracy of the numerical predictions. but Bray.128. L. 22.129]: 2  _ v ˆ ar 0 G k lt u H .3 and Table 5). The ef®ciency function has been ®tted from DNS data [127. Libby model (Eq.4.  turbulence k± 1 model as 1=k: The ITNFS ef®ciency function G k [127] may be introduced in the turbulent time scale to account for the reduced ability of small turbulent structures to wrinkle the ¯ame front.130]: log10 …G k † ˆ 2 1 exp‰2…s 1 0:4†Š s 1 0:4 2 2 2 3 3 uH s 2 0:11 SL …184† 1 1 2 exp‰2…s 1 0:4†Š† s 1 When the length scale ratio lt/d t tends towards zero. Champion and Libby have mainly focused their attention on a careful description of the turbulent ¯uxes using the balance equations for the . keeping u H =SL constant.

232 D. CA. S3. The turbulent strain rate is probably overestimated. Veynante. E and K are model constants. The strain rate due to thep turbulent ¯uctuations is estimated from the time scale n=1 of the Kolmogorov structures.3. (89) and (90)) are unclosed and require modeling.132]. a. Flame surface density balance equation closures The previously described balance equations for S (Eqs. n t is the turbulent viscosity and s S a ¯ame surface turbulent Schmidt number. 7. S2 is the strain rate due to the turbulent motions (Eq. D describes the consumption of ¯ame area. the turbulent kinetic energy and its dissipation. Three versions are presented in Table 5. respectively. developed by Candel and his coworkers following the initial work of Marble of Broadwell [84]. Re is the turbulent Reynolds number. the turbulent ¯ux of ¯ame surface density is expressed using a classical gradient assumption. d. Despite the fact that the Kolmogorov structures contain the highest energy. C. [117]. D is the fractal dimension of the ¯ame surface.4. (94)) and the third source term. The ¯ame surface density may also be derived from fractal theories. l . In the Choi model (CH) [137]. The cut-off scales are generally estimated from the turbulence Kolmogorov lk and the integral lt length scales. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 Table 5 Comparison of source (Si) and consumption (D) terms in the ¯ame surface density balance equation in different turbulent premixed combustion models (details in text). In Table 5. leading to [133]   1 Louter D22 Sˆ …186† L outer Linner where Linner and Louter are respectively the inner and outer cut-off length scales (the ¯ame surface is assumed to be fractal between these two scales). g . b 0. In the two . occurs only in the derivation proposed in Ref. u H denotes the rms turbulent velocity and ltc is an arbitrary length scale introduced for dimensional consistency and combined to a 0 as a single arbitrary constant Model CPB [134] S 1 ˆ km S A ik  2uk S 2xi S 2 ˆ kt S S3 D a 0 CA  1=2 1 S n a 0 SL Rˆ 2 1 e2aR 2 S  3…1 2 c† CFM1 CFM2-a CFM2-b [130] MB [117] Aik Aik Aik E 2uk  S 2xi  2uk S 2xi  2uk S 2xi 1 a0 S k 1 a0GK S k 1 a0GK S k p 1  a 0 Re S k F 1 H H 2c  uc S L k i 2xi u Hi u Hk 2uk  S k 2xi CD [136] CH1 CH2 [137] 1 S a0 l S for k t # a0 K L k dL   1 1=2 a0 S 15n a0 uH S ltc  …1 2 c†1 SS L k p S 1C k 2 b0 L S 12c  p S 1C k 2 b0 L S  12c p S 1C k 2 b0 L S   c…1 2 c† p  SL Re b0   S2 S 2g    c…1 2 c† 1 1 d pL k S b0 L S 2  12c b0 b0 SL S2 c…1 2 c†   SL S2   c…1 2 c† Reynolds stresses r u HH u HH and the scalar ¯uxes r u HH c HH to take  gj g i i into account the possible occurrence of counter-gradient transport and ¯ame turbulence generation [131. a 0. G k is the ef®ciency function in the ITNFS model [127] and depends on the length scale (lt/d l) and the velocity (u H /SL) ratios comparing the turbulence and the laminar ¯ame characteristics. Five main closures are summarized: ² The CPB model [134] is derived from the exact transport equation for the ¯ame surface density. various closures found in the literature are compared where S1 is the strain rate acting on the surface and induced by the mean ¯ow ®eld. the strain rate due to the turbulent ¯uctuations is estimated from the characteristic time of the integral length scale (k/1 ). their lifetime is too short (because of viscous effects) to actually affect the ¯ame front [65]. In the initial version (CFM1). The modeled balance equation is rewritten as:   2S n ~ 1 7´…U S† ˆ 7´ t 7S 1 S 1 1 S2 1 S3 2 D …187† 2t sS In this expression. ² The coherent ¯ame model (CFM). k and 1 denote. L.

ltc. (184) [127]). at least to describe the ¯ame front propagation in a homogeneous and isotropic turbulent ¯ow ®eld. (205)). 1. the expression of the turbulent strain rate acting on the ¯ame front is improved from direct numerical simulations and multi-fractal analysis (ITNFS model. [135] has compared CPB. Veynante. this term S3.It was found that only the CFM-2 formulation is able to predict the so-called bending phenomenon. However. 10. A slight overestimate (respectively underestimate) of temperature is pointed out for CPB (respectively MB) and is probably due to the expression for the strain rate. (184)) as a function of the length scale ratio lt/d l for several values of the velocity ratio u H /SL (0. where the turbulent ¯ame speed decreases before the occurrence of ¯ame extinction when the turbulence level increases. Eq. as shown below. a ¯ame is able to sustain higher strain rates than expected. Such a term was tested in the coherent ¯ame model but the choice of the critical strain rate is somewhat arbitrary. based on the Kolmogorov turbulent time scale. L. ITNFS ef®ciency function G K (Eq. In the case of a statistically one-dimensional turbulent ¯ame propagating in a frozen turbulence. 11). The MB closure [117] is found to be more sensitive to the inlet turbulent quantities than CFM1 but CFM2 models. all these closures exhibit strong similarities. CFM1. Moreover. The transport equation is rewritten as a ¯ame surface density transport equation under the ¯amelet assumption (see Section 6. A comparison between these models to predict turbulent ¯ame speed ST may be found in Ref. the strain rate is only proportional to the turbulence intensity u H and an arbitrary length scale. as experimentally evidenced [110]. MB and CPB provide reasonable predictions of mean velocities and temperatures. ² The CH model [137] has been devised for spark-ignited engines to recover experimental data obtained in a closed vessel [138]. In CH2. In a ®rst analysis. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 233 Fig. In fact.5. (116)). succeeding formulations (CFM2). incorporating an ef®ciency function . This approach leads to a different expression for the source term S1 and an additional source term S3 is found. this critical strain rate cannot be deduced from planar strained laminar ¯ame studies because. the consumption term D is always proportional to S 2.e. A recent work. The CD predicts extremely high temperatures whereas CFM1. is incorporated in the model constant. The ®rst expression (CH1) corresponds to the closure in CPB model. ² The MB model [117] is based on an exact equation for the  scalar dissipation rate x : r x ˆ rD ~ 2c HH 2c HH 2x i 2xi …188† assuming a constant density r . S3 corresponds to an anisotropic contribution of the turbulent strain rate aT (see Eq. For example. The destruction term differs in these two last formulations (CFM2a and CFM2b). a KPP (Kolmogorov± Petroski±Piskunov) analysis was used to analytically determine the turbulent ¯ame speed ST as a function of the model parameters.1.D. which does not depend on the available ¯ame surface density S. this analysis does not hold because the ¯ame surface density balance equation is derived assuming an established ¯ame surface. Eq. [130]. The consumption term D is similar to the one proposed in CFM2-b model whereas two formulations of the strain rate induced by turbulent motions are proposed. An additional term is proposed to take into account ¯ame extinction under excessively high strain rates.0. S3 seems to be negligible in practical simulations. MB and CD models to predict a turbulent premixed jet ¯ame. due to curvature and unsteady effects. might be viewed as an ignition term [135] involving a gradient of the mean fuel mass fraction or of the mean temperature (i. 23. ² The CD model [136] is similar to the ®rst version of the coherent ¯ame model (CFM1). fresh gases are ignited by heat transfers). Despite these comments.

On the other hand.141]:  knl s S ˆ MS ˆ 27c …197†   ~ where c and c are related using the BML relation r c ˆ r b c ~ (Eq. (90)): 2S ~ 1 7´…uS† 1 7´…ku HH l s S† 2t ~  ˆ …7´u 2 knnl s : 7u† S 1 k 7´u HH 2 nn : 7u HH l s S |‚‚‚‚‚‚ ‚{z‚‚‚‚‚‚ ‚} |‚‚‚‚‚‚ ‚{z‚‚‚‚‚‚ ‚} AT aT This relation. see for example [75.4.2. AT. Assuming that the conditional velocity on the ¯ame ~ surface. These authors have also shown that the isotropic assumption made in Ref. Strain rate induced by the mean ¯ow ®eld. M. AT. Veynante. a relation between orientation factors and Reynolds stresses is indirectly proposed: kni nj ls ˆ g u HH u HH i j 2k …199† …191† where c denotes the c-level chosen to de®ne the ¯ame front.2) and the summary of the most popular closures (Section 7. (169)): ~ ~  ~ u ˆ …1 2 c†uu 1 cub leads to: ~  ~  ku HH ls ˆ kuls 2 u ˆ …cp 2 c†…ub 2 uu † …193† …192† where k is the turbulent kinetic energy. Flame surface density models are extended to non-isenthalpic ¯ows (premixed reactants injected in a co-¯ow of air [139]). the aim of this section is to carefully analyze this balance equation.3.121]. its contribution to the strain rate AT induced by the mean ¯ow ®eld is not that important.140]) have shown from a simple BML-type approach ~ that the turbulent ¯uxes of the mean progress variable …c† and of the ¯ame surface density (S ) are closely related. corresponding to the mixing layer shear stress. In the ¯ame-holder stabilized turbulent ¯ame investigated in Ref. The BML relation (Eq. 7.4. have not been tested. the orientation factors become: knnls ˆ MM 1 kmmls …196† Using the de®nition nu7cu ˆ 27c and assuming an in®nitely thin ¯ame front leads after averaging to [134.4. A counter-gradient turbulent transport will be observed simultaneously for these two scalar ®elds. Then. [134] is clearly wrong for the turbulent ¯ame stabilized downstream a small rod. The only unclosed quantities in the strain rate due to the mean ¯ow ®eld. A pioneering work has been ®rst conducted [118] extending the algebraic ¯ame surface density BML model to non-isenthalpic ¯ows. L. [117] leads to very good results [121]: ˆ 2 f u HH k g u HH u HH i j k±i kni ni ls ˆ . kul s is a linear function of the conditional fresh  …uu † and burnt gases velocities:   ~  kuls ˆ uu 1 cp …ub 2 uu † p dij …1 2 Mk Mk † 3 …198† ² In Ref. (138)). Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 including the inability of small vortices to wrinkle the ¯ame surface. a much more complicated model is proposed that will not be described here because its practical implementation is probably not so easy. is incorporated to account for dilution phenomena. The turbulent ¯ux of ¯ame surface density is generally expressed using gradient transport: n …190† ku HH l s S ˆ 2 t 7S sS Bidaux and Bray (1994.4.4. Analysis of the ¯ame surface density balance equation Following the description of the exact balance equation for the ¯ame surface density S (Section 6. Turbulent transport. [134] one assumes an isotropic distribution of the ¯uctuating components of the normal vector n: kmi mj ls ˆ each unclosed term may be investigated as follows: 7. (170) the ¯ame surface density turbulent ¯ux becomes: f ku HH ls S ˆ ~ HH …c p 2 c† gHH u c S ~ ~ c…1 2 c† …194† . A presumed pdf for a mixture fraction Z. ² From experimental data [120]. kni nj±i ls ˆ …200† 4k 2k These orientation factors have very important effects and may lead to surprising results. m: n ˆ M 1 m with knl s ˆ M and kmls ˆ 0 Then. because of the low value of the corresponding orientation factor. Following [134]. determined from mean and rms values of Z. the vector normal to the ¯ame front.4. are the orientation factors knnls. n may be split into a mean component. using similar concepts.1. [117]. This analysis may be based on direct numerical simulations [17] or on experimental data [120. Several closure schemes have been proposed: …195† 2 7´‰kwnl s SŠ 1 kw7´nl s S |‚‚‚{z‚‚‚} |‚‚{z‚‚ } ‚ ‚ propagation curvature …189† ² In Ref. and a ¯uctuation.234 D. con®rmed by direct numerical simulations ~ [140]. unpublished work.3). shows that turbulent ¯uxes of c and S are closely related. Starting from the `propagative' form (Eq. only the ¯uctuation cross products kmmls remain unclosed.4. [121]. a slight modi®cation of Ref. But. 7. the main velocity gradient is the transverse gradient of the mean axial velocity. The strain rate AT is dominated by From Eq.

This ®nding explains why. this term is generally assumed to be proportional to the inverse of a turbulent time scale. aT is always modeled being isotropic despite the orientation factors nn occurring in expression (202). 7. n. either the Kolmogorov time scale (CPB model) or the integral time scale 1 /k (CFM. G k.D. 24. (b) Components of the source term ATS due to the strain rate induced by the mean ¯ow ®eld. (184)). as illustrated in Fig. The source term due to the strain rate aT is: B a T S ˆ k7´u HH 2 nn : 7u HH l s S ˆ d ij 2u HH 2u HH i 2 ni nj i 2xj 2xj C S s In most models. Notice also that the strain rate AT cannot be reduced to the simpli®ed expression ®rstly proposed [84]: ~ AT ˆ u7Uu …201† ~ Recent works [142] have shown that u7Uu may probably be viewed as a model for the total strain rate AT 1 aT and not only for the strain rate AT due to the mean ¯ow. Using the previous splitting of the normal vector to the ¯ame front. Nevertheless. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 235 Fig. the axial gradient of the mean axial velocity. L. combined with the geometrical relation (197). the mean strain rate AT was not included because the simple expression (201) clearly overestimates AT. Veynante. Strain rate aT due to turbulent motions. This turbulent time may corrected with the ef®ciency function. in previous versions of the coherent ¯ame model where the orientation factors kninjls were not incorporated.3. of the ITNFS closure (Eq. Data are plotted as a function of the transverse coordinate y for x ˆ 80 mm and f ˆ 0:9 [121].4. induced by the thermal expansion due to the combustion heat release. 24. MB and CD models). leads to: B C B C 2u HH 1 2u HH 2c 2c   i a T S ˆ d ij i S 2 2xj s S 2xj s 2xi 2xj B B C C   2u HH 2c 2u HH 2c i i 1 mj 1 mi 2xj s 2xi 2xj 2xj B C 2u HH i 2 mi mj S …203† 2xj s This interesting relation decomposes the source term due to …202† .4. (a) Transverse pro®les of the mean velocity gradients and the corresponding strain rate AT.

The previous analysis was based on both a theoretical analysis of the exact S -balance equation and experimental . as displayed in Fig. Mantel and Borghi [117] have shown that this term is negligible in numerical simulations of a ¯ame propagating in an homogeneous and isotropic turbulent ¯ow ®eld. the case  when the mean progress variable c is close to zero (see Fig.8. A priori. the previous expression may be reduced using: B C B HH C 2u HH 2u i i mj ˆ kmj ls ˆ0 …204† 2xj s 2xj s from the mj de®nition. The links between these closures are further discussed in Section 9. [117] from the derivation of a balance equation for ~ the scalar dissipation rate x of the progress variable c. Propagation and curvature terms. this last part is not proportional to the available ¯ame surface density S . The propagation/curvature term becomes: kw7´nl s S ˆ S L k7´nl s S …207† where the only unknown is the mean ¯ame front curvature k7´nls The curvature is positive when the ¯ame front is convex towards the fresh gases. a priori.121] in a V-shape turbulent ¯ame show that it is not always negligible and is of the same order as the curvature term. 25). On the other hand.2). etc. the strain rate induced by turbulent motions. the normal propagation term becomes:   7´‰kwnl s SŠ ˆ S L 7´‰knl s SŠ ˆ S L 7´‰27cŠ ˆ 2S L 7 2 c …206† where the geometrical relation (197) is used. This term S3 corresponds to an anisotropic contribution depend ing on 7c and on the strain rate due to turbulent motions.4. a simple linear model may be proposed: k7´nl s <  cp 2 c Ly …208† …205† This simple analysis explains the third source term. curvature effects. Replacing Ly by its value as a function of the ¯ame surface density S from BML modeling (Eq. These two terms are analyzed together because they derive from the laminar ¯ame propagation and are related to the ¯ame front displacement speed w. curvatures are probably negative  (¯ame convex towards the burnt gases) when c < 1: Assuming that the mean curvature is of the order of the inverse of the wrinkling length scale Ly. Nonetheless. Veynante. into two parts: a contribution depending only on turbulent characteristics that may be assumed to be isotropic (®rst and last terms) and an anisotropic contribution. which is. [120.). S3 found in Ref. we have: lim k7´nl s ˆ  c30 Fig. (208)). Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 This stands as the main dif®culty of the propagative approach for the ¯ame surface density balance equation because various effects are incorporated in w (strain rate. Assuming a constant displacement speed w equal to the laminar ¯ame speed SL. 26. The modeling of these terms requires the description of the displacement speed w that may have values far from the laminar ¯ame speed SL [78]. This term is positive in the fresh gas side of the turbulent ¯ame brush and becomes negative in the burnt gas side. aTS .2) or for the pdf balance equation (Section 9. third and fourth terms). The expression differs from classical closure where kw7´nls is always negative (term D in Table 5).4.236 D. This term is generally neglected in models (see Table 5). where the mean ¯ame surface orientation occurs through the gradient of the mean progress variable (second. Flame front curvature analysis. 7.121].4. L. A linear relaxation is retained to model the mean curvature k7´nls (Eq.8. Assuming a gradient type closure for the turbulent transport   of the fresh gases. This type of closure is common in turbulent reacting ¯ows and possesses similarities with the relaxation model used for the scalar dissipation rate (Section 9. Then: B C B C B C   2u HH 2u HH 1 2u HH 2c 2c i i i aT S ˆ d ij S 2 m i mj S2 2xj s 2xj s S 2xj s 2xi 2xj |‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚{z‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚ } |‚‚‚‚‚‚‚{z‚‚‚‚‚‚‚} ‚ ‚ isotropic contribution anisotropic contribution 1 Ly and lim k7´nl s ˆ 2  c31 1 Ly Then. 25. When velocity and normal vector ¯uctuations are supposed uncorrelated (this assumption is well veri®ed in direct numerical simulation data). This ®nding is probably questionable in other con®gurations and further investigations are required. (177)) leads to the following model for the curvature term in the S -equation: kw7´nl s S < bS L  cp 2 c 2 S   c…1 2 c† …209† where b is a model constant. S3 is proportional to 7c´7c and appears as a model for the anisotropic contribution of the turbulent strain rate.5. Experimental data from Refs. This trend is in agreement with the ®ndings of direct numerical simulations [17] and experimental measurements [120.

27. (141). increases [144].3. these models are unable to describe the ¯ame stabilization because the S equation (Eq. 26. where G k is the ITNFS ef®ciency function [127]. Flame surface density (half top) and mean reaction rate. In their formulation.5. (85). L. to recover the observed results. de®ned by Eq. have the same sign in some regions and cannot be approximated with Eq. this expression is useful to explain counter-gradient turbulent transport: Because of the thermal expansion due to combustion heat release. (170) Section 7. This surprising ®nding was explained by the work of Bray.5):   ~ i i g r u HH c HH ˆ r c…1 2 c† ub 2 uu ~ …212† i Even though conditional velocities are not obvious quantities. 2c=2xi . whereas the mean reaction rate remains low. Transverse pro®les of propagation (27´[knlsS ]). This ®nding displays one of the dif®culties of ¯ame surface density models. A related approach: G-equation As described in Section 6. 7.3. Turbulent transport in premixed combustion 8. Orientation factors.D. fresh and burnt gases are separated by an interface (high surface densities) where Fig. In this zone. the burnt gas conditional velocity. x ˆ 80 mm [121]. 7. (211)). the premixed turbulent ¯ame may be described using a level set approach. The turbulent ¯ux ku HH ls S is described using a classical gradient expression. (85)). An improved version of the closed balance equation may be proposed: 2S ~ 1 7´…uS† 1 7´…ku HH l s S† 2t ~ ~ ˆ …7´u 2 knnl s : 7u†S 1 G k  1 bSL …cp 2 c† 2 u H lt .4.1. 7 2 c 1 b…cp 2 c†S 2 =c…1 2 c† where b ˆ 0:4 and cp ˆ 0:5 are also displayed.6.121]. extracted from two different data sets. 8. the turbulent ¯uxes of the progress variable ~ c have the same sign as the mean gradient …2c=2xi †: Countergradient transport also increases when the heat release factor t . Moss and Libby discussed in Section 7. in opposition with the modeled expression (Eq. 27. In addition. reaction rate and ¯ame surface density are roughly proportional. is likely to be greater than the fresh gas conditional i i velocity.1.3. . the turbulent ¯uxes of the progress variable c are directly connected to the conditional mean velocities in i i fresh …uu † and burnt gases …ub † (Eq. (211). All source terms in this equation are proportional to S or to S 2 and the equation cannot generate ¯ame surface when there is no initial ¯ame surface. an initiation effect must also be incorporated to account for ignition Ç time delay in the local reaction rate per unit surface. excepted close to the stabilization rod.4. estimated form CH radical emission (half bottom) ®elds are compared for f ˆ 0:90: Flame surface density data. Introduction data [120. In their present formulations. curvature (k7´nlsS ) and combined (k7´nlsS 2 7´[knlsS ]) terms (m 22) in the ¯ame surface density balance equation plotted as a function of the  mean progress variable c: The consumption term modeled as 2S 2/      (1 2 c) and the new proposed closure. V i (Eq.20] have evidenced in some turbulent premixed ¯ames counter-gradient turbulent transport where the turbulent ¯uxes r u HH c HH and the mean g i ~ ~ progress variable c gradient. kninjls may be described using a formulation previously discussed. This phenomenon is known as counter-gradient turbulent transport or counter-gradient turbulent diffusion. ub . are g i generally modeled using a gradient transport hypothesis as for inert scalars (Section 7):   ~ m 2c g r u HH c HH ˆ 2 t …211† i Sct 2xi where mt is the turbulent viscosity given by the turbulence model and Sct is a turbulent Schmidt number. According to Eq. Flame stabilization modeling The ¯ame surface density ®elds obtained from laser tomography and the mean reaction rate estimated from CH radical emission are compared in Fig. r u HH c HH . Theoretical [143] and experimental studies [19. the ¯ame surface density S is high. are not available from 30 to 70 mm downstream the rod [121]. SL dl 3 1  S 1 SL7 2c k (210) S2   c…1 2 c† Turbulent ¯uxes of the progress variable c. f ˆ 0:90. Most of the modeling issues discussed above are then recast in terms of G-equation and modeling for the turbulent burning velocity ST [89]. (189)) is derived assuming that the ¯ame does exist. uu : Then. combustion has started but is not yet fully established. Veynante. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 237 Fig.

2. whereas the second one corresponds to a counter-gradient situation.146]. 8. 29. The ¯ame front is progressively wrinkled by turbulent motions. leading to a counter-gradient turbulent transport in agreement with expression (212). . simulations of twodimensional ¯ame/turbulence interactions were reported [140]. of the instantaneous balance equations. in the Rutland database. the burnt gas con ditional velocity. a planar laminar premixed ¯ame is ®rstly superimposed on a homogeneous isotropic turbulent ¯ow ®eld (Fig. Positive (respectively negative) values of ru HH c HH denote a counter-gradient (respectively gradient) turbulent transport. This result is ®rst surprising: ub is  expected to be larger than uu because of thermal expansion due to the heat release. 30 for the two DNS simulations. Turbulent ¯ux ru HH c HH displayed as a function of the mean progress variable c (bold lines) in the tri-dimensional direct numerical ~ simulations from CTR (Ð) and Rutland (. L.2. The corresponding turbulent ¯uxes estimated using the BML expression (Eq. The main discrepancy between the two databases lies in the initial turbulence level which is higher in the CTR simulation …u H0 =SL ˆ 10† than in the Rutland database …u H0 =SL ˆ 1†: Mean and conditional average velocities across the turbulent ¯ame brush are displayed in Fig. This section is devoted to these results.2. is higher than the fresh gas condi tional velocity.. in the CTR database. (211)) for these ¯uxes. (212)) are displayed for comparison using thin lines. this observation is Fig. and the turbulence decays in time. Introduction Gradient and counter-gradient turbulent scalar transport was observed in DNS of premixed ¯ame/three-dimensional turbulence interactions [145.-). Numerical con®guration. obtained from a direct solution without any closure models. However. The reduced costs of 2D simulations allow the investigation of a large range of ¯ame and turbulence parameters. These results lead to the following comments.238 D. Results Turbulent ¯uxes ru HH c HH extracted from the direct numer ical simulations conducted by Trouve [145] (denoted CTR) and Rutland [146] are displayed in Fig. retaining a simple gradient closure (Eq. 8. Velocities are made dimensionless using the laminar ¯ame speed SL [140]. The various versions of this BML model propose an algebraic closure for the mean reaction rate of the progress variable c. uu .2. Direct numerical simulation analysis of turbulent transport 8. A plane laminar premixed ¯ame is initially superimposed to an homogeneous and isotropic turbulence. 29. As the numerical con®guration is statistically onedimensional in the propagating direction. 28). ² On the other hand. The ®rst database clearly exhibits gradient turbulent transport. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 Fig. The results demonstrate the power of DNS to help in the modeling of turbulent combustion. In these simulations. 28. whereas other models may lead to more sophisticated reaction rate formulations. the fresh gas conditional velocity is higher than the burnt gas con ditional velocity. ub . the ¯ame may be assumed to be in equilibrium with the turbulent ¯ow ®eld and relevant modeling information is extracted from DNS. quantities such as mean progress variable or mean turbulent ¯uxes may be extracted from averaging in the perpendicular direction. The occurrence of counter-gradient turbulent transport have been analyzed using direct numerical simulation (DNS) [140]. Then. ² As expected. After a time of the order of the eddy-turnover time of the largest turbulence structures.1. Veynante. but focus attention on the scalar turbulent transport (closure schemes for the turbulent ¯uxes r u HH c HH balance g i equations).

ub 2  uu . (194)).-). 30. Note that Eq. fresh gases conditional velocity. L.4. the progress variable c is not fully bimodal (c ˆ 0 or c ˆ 1).4).D. Physical analysis A simple physical analysis is now reported to derive a criterion predicting the occurrence of counter-gradient turbulent diffusion [140]. Conditional velocities across the turbulent ¯ame brush displayed as a function of the mean progress variable c in the Rutland (top) and the CTR (bottom) databases. i are directly connected to the surface-averaged ¯uctuating g velocity. Thus. ku HH ls (Eq. is determined primarily by thermal expansion and its .and two-dimensional direct numerical simulations lead to very similar results for this problem. The two-dimensional simulations conducted in Ref. The `increase'. the ¯ow ®eld is assumed to be statistically one-dimensional and only the turbulent transport in the g propagating direction. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 239 ~ Fig. in agreement with expression (212) and a gradient turbulent transport. [140]. Favre averaged velocity. u HH c HH . In both cases. u (Ð ). 31 have been used to analyze the occurrence of counter-gradient turbulent transport. uu (´´´). referenced as CRCT in Fig. 32: Low turbulence level: The ¯ame front remains smooth  and the velocity jump between fresh and burnt gases. The gradient turbulent transport is clearly enhanced by an increase in the turbulence level u H /SL and decreasing values of the heat release factor t . kuls (.3. of the line delimiting gradient and counter-gradient turbulent transport when lt/d l decreases is due to the reduced ability of small scale turbulence motions to wrinkle the ¯ame front. u HH c HH will be described.. a model for u HH c HH may be i i deduced from a model for ku HH ls involving the conditional i fresh and burnt gases mean velocities:   ~ ~ i i ku HH ls ˆ kui ls 2 ui ˆ …cp 2 c† ub 2 uu i …213† In the following. 29) because. ub (±) ~ Ð   and ¯ame front conditional velocity. in terms of velocity ratio u H /SL. turbulent ¯uxes of the progress variable c. (212) overestimates the g turbulent ¯ux u HH c HH (see Fig. due to the ¯ame thickness that must be resolved in the numerical simulation. Following Bidaux and Bray (1994) (unpublished work already presented in the BML model context Section g 7. the Bray±Moss±Libby model remains able to predict the turbulent ¯ux type (gradient or counter-gradient). Velocities are made dimensionless using the laminar ¯ame speed SL [140]. Three. Our analysis is based on the two limiting cases pictured in Fig. 8. This phenomenon has already been discussed [65] and included in the ITNFS model [127]. Veynante. burnt gases conditional velocity.

Also plotted are the DNS conditions of the Rutland (CR. Then. (213) becomes: ~ ku HH ls ˆ …cp 2 c†tSL …214† ~ ² At the leading edge of the turbulent ¯ame (near c ˆ 0). and length-scale ratio. Premixed turbulent combustion diagram. value is close to the one obtained in a plane and laminar   ¯ame …ub 2 uu < tSL †: Eq. the ¯ame front motions are assumed to be dominated by the turbulence properties taken upstream of the ¯ame. Two limiting cases: counter-gradient transport promoted by thermal expansion (left). ² At the trailing edge of the ¯ame brush …c < 1†. In 2D DNS. The Classical Klimov±Williams criterion and the criterion from Ref. lt/d L. Veynante. the ¯ame ~ front is convected by turbulent motions towards the burnt Fig. gradient transport due to turbulent motions (right).   ub 2 uu < 2u H …215† High turbulence level: Due to strong viscous dissipation of turbulent eddies in the hot burnt gas. . NB . As the turbulence is decaying in the CTR simulation. tsL =2au H ˆ 1 (Eq. u H /SL.240 D. 32. where u H denotes the rms velocity in the fresh gases. The transition criterion. CTR conditions are displayed as an almost vertical line. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 Fig. The symbols W …t ˆ 3† and A …t ˆ 6† correspond to the CRCT DNS. 31. the turbulence decay is smaller and is not represented. 32). the ¯ame front is convected towards the fresh gas with a mean velocity estimated by 2u H (see Fig. L. The DNS ¯ame-¯ow conditions are plotted as a function of the velocity ratio. separating CGD (below) from GD (above) is plotted for …t ˆ 3† and …t ˆ 6† [140]. Filled (open) symbols denote gradient (counter-gradient) turbulent diffusion. (220)). t ˆ 2:3) and CTR …t ˆ 3† simulations. [65] are given to show the domain of validity of ¯amelet combustion.

the thermal expansion due to heat release dominates and the ¯ame is able to impose its own dynamics leading to a counter-gradient turbulent transport.1. modeling ku ls as a sum of these two contributions leads to: ~ ku HH ls ˆ …cp 2 c†…tSL 2 2au H † and the turbulent ¯ux becomes: g ~ ~ u HH c HH ˆ c…1 2 c†…tSL 2 2au H † …219† …218† HH …216† and expression (219) may be used to derive a criterion delineating gradient and counter-gradient regimes. balance equations for turbulent scalar ¯uxes) to stagnating ¯ames in the limit of small turbulence intensities [131]. the possible occurrence of countergradient transport is generally neglected in modeling. Then. 33). ² The mean progress variable gradient may be estimated as: ~ ~ ~ c…1 2 c† 2c < db 2x …221† This simple model is well veri®ed in direct numerical simulations [140] and has also been recovered when applying a second order modeling (i. the gradient type contribution in Eq. or close to the transition between gradient and countergradient regimes. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 241 Fig. The factor 2 has been introduced assuming cp < 0:5: Then. in practical applications turbulent transport may be counter-gradient. the turbulent transport is analyzed as follows: for a suf®ciently high turbulence level. (21)) as a function of the length scale ratio lt/d l comparing the integral turbulent length scale and the laminar ¯ame thickness [140]. a is expected to be of order unity for large turbulent length scales and vanishes when turbulent eddies are too small to affect the ¯ame front. 31. the heat release factor t is about 5±7 leading to a transition between gradient and counter-gradient situations when u H =SL is of the order of 3. as shown in Fig. where combustion instabilities occur and wrinkle the ¯ame front. Nevertheless. similar to the ITNFS model [127]. L. the ¯ame is unable to impose its own dynamics to the ¯ow ®eld and the turbulent transport is of the gradient type.D. Veynante.149] have reported regimes. (219) corresponds to a Prandt±Kolmogorov turbulence modeling: p 2c ~ ~ ~ 2c…1 2 c†db au H < 2adb k 2x …222† p  where k is the turbulent kinetic energy and u H ˆ k. This criterion is well veri®ed by direct numerical simulation results. 8. The turbulent ¯ux may be viewed as the sum of two contributions acting in opposite directions. Recent experimental results [147] have con®rmed these ®ndings. Counterg gradient turbulent diffusion occurs when u HH c HH is positive where a length scale d b characterizing the ¯ame brush is introduced. DNS estimated ef®ciency function a (Eq.3. as for any inert scalar. The ef®ciency function a has been estimated from DNS (Fig. Comments ² Following Fig. 31 and criterion (220). corresponding to low turbulence levels. gases with a mean speed estimated by 1u H (see Fig. one induced by turbulent motions and the other by thermal expansion. 33. Then. 32):   ub 2 uu < 1u H leading to the simple linear model: ~ ku HH ls ˆ 22…cp 2 c†au H …217† where a is an ef®ciency function. ² Recent works [148. acting in . In many cases. On the contrary. The Bray number: NB ˆ tSL 2au H …220† is greater (respectively lower) than unity when a countergradient (respectively gradient) turbulent transport is expected.e. when the turbulence level remains low. accounting for the weak ability of small scale turbulent motions to wrinkle and convect the ¯ame front.

0 . ² A corrected Bray criterion (Eq. such a simpli®ed formulation is unable to predict a gradient transport in ~ the vicinity of the leading edge …c < 0† always observed.4.5.0 g v HH c HH G G . ² Expression (219) has been derived to analyze the occurrence of counter-gradient transport. 34). 0) 2y . External pressure gradient effects The previous analysis is completed by investigating the effects of externally imposed pressure gradients on turbulent premixed ¯ames. In Refs.0 g u HH c HH G CG vb 2 vu (when y .e. 34 and 35. it is experimentally shown that counter-gradient transports are enhanced in ducted ¯ames. 36. (b) favorable imposed pressure gradient± counter-gradient turbulent transport. L.151] by differential buoyancy effects of pressure gradients on pockets of heavy and cold fresh gases and on pockets of light and hot burnt gases. even in counter-gradient situations. the same type of DNS as [140] was conducted. [20]. a gradient and a counter-gradient turbulent diffusion Zone 1 2  ub 2 uu  . [121]): in the ®rst part of the chamber (region 1). and the turbulent ¯ame speed ST (Fig. In many combustion systems. the Fig. These instabilities should also be included in combustion models [150]. a pressure decrease from unburnt to burnt gases. [148.0 ~ 2c 2x . The thermal expansion modi®es the ¯ame dynamics as is clearly apparent on high speed tomography ®lms (scheme in Fig. an opposite direction than counter-gradient diffusion reducing the ¯ame front wrinkling. and enhance classical gradient turbulent transport. [153]. the turbulent ¯ame speed is modi®ed by a buoyancy term linearly dependent on both the imposed pressure gradient and the integral length scale lt. For instance. As proposed in Ref.0 ~ 2c (when y .0 . Counter-gradient transportÐexperimental results The V-shape turbulent ¯ame was described in Section 7. 34. 36). i. respectively. ¯ames are ducted and submitted to strong pressure gradients due to thermal expansion and leading to ¯ow accelerations. Counter-gradient turbulent transport was ®rst explained [19. introducing an externally imposed pressure gradient (in fact.0 . The main conclusions. 8.1. see [152]). (a) No imposed pressure gradient±gradient turbulent transport. A planar laminar ¯ame separating fresh gases (left) from burnt gases is initially superimposed to an homogeneous and isotropic turbulent ¯ow ®eld …u H0 =SL ˆ 5† [152]. 35). All these results suggest that counter-gradient turbulent transport should be expected in most ducted turbulent ¯ames and some experimental observations are now reported. ² On the other hand.4. In Ref. displayed in Figs. 0)   . 35). due to technical reasons. but is not suited for numerical simulations. the ¯ame brush thickness.0 .242 D. We do not give more details because this modi®ed criterion needs to be validated and improved (length scale effects are not so clear and various analyses are possible. It also promotes counter-gradient turbulent transport. Veynante. is found to decrease the ¯ame wrinkling (see Fig. Table 6 Geometrical analysis of the scalar turbulent transport in a V-shaped premixed ¯ame (see Fig. (220)) has been proposed to account for the pressure gradient effects. see also Ref. Superimposed instantaneous temperature and vorticity ®elds at the same time. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 8. G and CG denote. because of the rod wake. are: ² A favorable pressure gradient. a constant acceleration).152]. adverse pressure gradients tend to increase the ¯ame brush thickness and turbulent ¯ame speed (Fig.

-). Reduced turbulent ¯ame speed ST/SL plotted as a function of the reduced time t=tf ˆ SL t=dL . (a) initial turbulent level u H0 =SL ˆ 5. no pressure gradient (Ð) and increasing favorable pressure gradient (´´´ and . To include counter-gradient turbulent transport in modeling Except for the work of Bray. Libby and their co-workers [19. The approach of Bray et al. but the change in rotation of the coherent structures corresponds to a transition between gradient and counter-gradient transport for g the downstream turbulent ¯ux u HH c HH : The turbulent ¯uxes are of gradient type just behind the rod.129. very few works have been devoted to the effective modeling of countergradient transport.D. .. 8. except for their symmetry due to pressure waves. is mainly based on second order modeling. coherent structures embedding the ¯ame front turn clockwise (counter-clockwise) in the upper (lower) ¯ame sheet. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 243 Fig. Moss.-). 35. using balance equations g for the turbulent ¯uxes u HH c HH : These equations are easily i Fig. L. Veynante. Markers correspond to the Libby theory [152. 36. no pressure gradient (Ð) and increasing adverse pressure gradient (´´´ and . the upper (lower) coherent structures start to turn counter-clockwise (clockwise).   as in classical Von Karman vortex streets. because of thermal expansion in burnt gases (region 2). When the centerline velocity increases. (b) initial turbulent level u H0 =SL ˆ 2. for different values of the externally imposed pressure gradient. as expected to ensure the stabilization of the ¯ame.. Accordingly. the transverse turbulent ¯ux g v HH c HH is always of gradient type. and becomes of counter-gradient type further downstream.151].6. This phenomenon may be recast in terms of turbulent transport using a simple geometrical analysis based on the Bray±Moss±Libby relation (212) and summarized in Table 6. where tf ˆ dL =SL is a ¯ame time.132.128.153]. A rough scheme of the coherent structures dynamics observed using laser tomography [121].

8. ² Mean progress variable gradient terms (IV) needs g Reynolds stress modeling for u HH u HH : Then. model closures and implementation dif®culties. ´ ´´ and y ˆ 12 mm. Some comments may be made: g ² The u HH c HH turbulent transport (III) is generally modeled i using a classical gradient expression (gradient turbulent transport at the third order). however this assumption is not supported by DNS results [152]. 37. very promising results were obtained. Axial velocity u histograms for four transverse locations 80 mm downstream the rod in the V-shape turbulent ¯ame (Fig.244 D. and closed. [128]. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 derived from momentum and progress variable balance equations: 2r uj u HH c HH ~ g 2r u HH c HH g i i 1 2t 2xj |‚‚{z‚‚} |‚‚ ‚{z‚‚ ‚} …I† …II† ² The mean pressure gradient term (VI) is easily known under a BML assumption (Section 7. new balance i j equations are derived. This balance equation is.151]. reaction zone (y ˆ 5 mm. unburnt gases (y ˆ 18 mm. u HH c HH . ² The mean velocity gradient term (V) is closed because g turbulent ¯uxes u HH c HH are provided by their balance j equations. ² The ¯uctuating pressure term (VII) is more dif®cult to understand and to model.3). this term is neglected. the action of mean (VI) and ¯uctuating (VII) pressure gradients. Recently. -´-).7. Ð ). c-gradient effects (IV). [151]. Veynante. [128. to turbulent ~ transport of r u HH c HH (III). The mean pressure term (VI) and the ¯uctuating pressure term (VII) probably need to be modeled together as c HH 2p=2xi : In Ref. and six for i HH u gHH ). products and thin ¯amelets was proposed [132]. particularly in predicting experimental results [20]. a model based on a partitioning of each pressure ¯uctuation covariance into contributions from reactants. The comparison of this new model with DNS results are encouraging and con®rm the importance of the intermittency between the conditional mean pressure gradients in reactants and products. mean velg i ocity gradient effects (V).152]. Making use of Eq. Fig. 19): burnt gases (y ˆ 0 mm. ² Turbulent dissipation terms (VIII and IX) are generally expressed together using small scale dissipation rate assumptions [151]. for these quantities (second order turbulence model). Towards a conditional turbulence modeling? The BML formulation (Section 7.132.3. r u HH c HH turbulent dissipation g i (VIII and IX) and reaction rate (X). L. very few simulations have been conducted using the second order formulation. respectively. unclosed and each term may be extracted from direct numerical simulations [132. the pressure gradient term closure is carefully discussed.5) directly distinguishes between the properties of fresh and burnt gases. (165) yields:  ~ c HH ˆ c 2 c ˆ t ~ ~ c…1 2 c† ~ 1 1 tc …224† ˆ2 2r u HH u HH c HH f ~ ~  2c 2p j i g 2u 2 r u HH u HH  gj 2 ru HH c HH i 2 c HH i j 2xj 2xi 2xj 2xj |‚{z‚} |‚‚‚{z‚‚‚} |‚‚ ‚{z‚‚ ‚} |‚‚ ‚{z‚‚ ‚} …III† …IV† …V† …VI† 2p H 2Jk HH 2tik 2 c HH 2 u HH c 1 r u HH v g i i _ |‚{z‚} 2xi 2x 2xk |‚{z‚} |‚ ‚} |‚{z‚} ‚{z‚k …X† …VII† …VIII† …IX† (223) where the RHS terms correspond. . The discussion of the closure schemes for this equation is beyond the scope of the present review and the reader may ®nd relevant information in Refs. Because of very high computaReynolds stresses.140. of course. In Ref. Ð) [121]. u i j tional costs. Recently [129]. Second order closures for turbulent ¯uxes and Reynolds stresses require nine additional balance equations in 3D simug lations (three for progress variable ¯uxes.

Yn † Single-step or complex chemistry Chemical source is closed (only for pdf methods) this was achieved using conditional averaging (Eq. (170) and (172)). Veynante. [55]) Major assumptions In®nitely fast chemistry Chemical equilibrium 1D strained reaction zones Diffusion balances chemistry as in a 1D counter-¯ow ¯ame Single-step or complex chemistry Constant …Le i ˆ 1† or complex transport properties …Lei ± 1† Diffusion is captured via micromixing modelling Flame structure in mixture fraction space Species are function of Z: Yi ˆ Yi …Z p † [35] Species are functions of Z and x : Yi ˆ Yi …Z p . The velocity distribution is almost Gaussian in the unburnt and the burnt gases.148. according to Eq. L. tt †PaSR _ Solve for Monte-Carlo particles: ~ dYik =dt ˆ …Y i 2 Yik †=tt 1 v k _i p ~ p to get P…Y1 . This approach is very attractive because turbulence characteristics may differ in fresh and in burnt gases as shown in Fig. (168)).191] € ‚   _ v i ˆ k Z …v PaSR …Z p .103] ‚ ~ ~  Y i ˆ 1 Y C …Z p †P…Z p †dZ p 0 i Presumed pdf 1 PaSR modelling: MIL/PEUL [68. an  integrated amount of heat release. x ˆ Du7Zu 2 its scalar dissipation rate. ¼. tp †dZ p dtt _i t t Pdf methods: ‚ ‚ p p p ~ ~ p Y i ˆ Y1 ¼ Yn Yip P…Y1 . This bimodal distribution does not correspond to the assumptions made in the derivation of most turbulence models. ¼. PaSR stands for partially stirred reactor. (172).1. Z is the mixture fraction. but becomes clearly bimodal in the reaction zone denoting an intermittency between fresh and burnt gases. x st †dj 21 _ j coordinate across the ¯amelet [88] Turbulent combustion model Presumed Pdf: f ~ ~ P…Z p †‚ from Z and Z HH2  ~ Y i ˆ Z Yi …Z p †P…Z p †dZ p Flamelet ‚ ‚ modeling: ~ ~ Y i ˆ Z x Yi …Z p . A conditional approach to determine the conditional   averages of a quantity Q in fresh …Qu † and burnt …Qb † gases is probably a promising way leading to a straightforward description of turbulent transport (Eqs. P denotes pdfs. Introduction Much work has been devoted to the numerical modeling of non-premixed combustion systems. Reynolds averaged models for non-premixed turbulent combustion 9.154]. where tt < …k=1† is an eddy break-up mixing time. xp †P…Z p . The objective is then to derive balance equations for quantities such as: ~  rcQ ˆ r cQb . tp ††k P…Z p . a conditional moment. r…1 2 c†Q ˆ r …1 2 c†Qu ~   which is easy from c and Q balance equations [141]. but no clear conclusions can be found in the literature. 37. Yn †dY1 ¼dYn [93] Simple transport properties …Lei ˆ 1† Solve for representative PaSR: ~ ~ dYi =dZ ˆ …Y i 2 Yi 1 tt v PaSR †=…Z 2 Z† _i to get v i …Z. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 245 Table 7 Ç ~ Modeling strategies for non-premixed turbulent ¯ames. mainly assuming a chemistry much faster than mixing and molecular diffusion. V . This `mixed is burnt' regime is easily described from the . S . such as k± 1 . All these works devoted to turbulent transport suggest that turbulent combustion modeling might probably be greatly improved by advancing the description of turbulent transport itself. This point motivates large eddy simulation (LES) for turbulent combustion modeling [155].1) are displayed.4. where velocity histograms obtained using laser Doppler velocimetry in the V-shape turbulent ¯ame (Section 7. ~ turbulent micromixing was expressed with a linear relaxation (IEM-LMSE) D7 2 Yi < …Y i 2 Yi †=tt . These equations remain to be closed and a few attempts have been conducted in this direction [91.D. 9. other formulation exist [96] (from Ref. xp …t†† Steady [63] or unsteady [177] Total heat‚ release is a function of x : _ V …x st † ˆ 1 1 v T …j. the density of ¯ame surface and Y iC . xp †dZ p dxp [165] Coherent ¯ame model: Solve for the density of ¯ame surface S _   v T ˆ V …x †S [84] _ Solve for conditional  moments:  Y iC …Z p † ˆ Yi uZ ˆ Z p Conditional moment closure:  presumed pdf P…Z p † [102.

Fuel/air mixing modeling 9. the premixing of the reactants is not always complete at the molecular level and some partial premixing may be observed. pdf method. A simple description of turbulent mixing is thus obtained f ~ from the two ®elds: Z and Z HH2 : Introducing the classical gradient transport closure for the turbulent ¯uxes (Section 6). followed by non-premixed and partially premixed combustion. and as (II) and (III). Diffusion is then addressed using turbulent micromixing modeling. 9. (41)): 2 3 HH HH 2r u j x ~ ~ 2r x ~ 2 HH 2Z 2Z 1 1 rDu j 2t 2xj 2xi 2xi 2xj ˆ 22 2 3 2 3 ~ ~ 2 2Z HH 2Z 2Z 2Z HH 2u HH j rDu HH 22 rD j 2xj 2xi 2xi 2xi 2xj 2xi |‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚{z‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚} |‚‚‚‚‚‚‚{z‚‚‚‚‚‚‚} …I† …II† 22 3 ~ ~ 2uj 2Z 2Z HH 2u j 2Z HH 2Z HH rD 22 rD 2xj 2xi 2xi 2xi 2xi 2xj |‚‚‚‚‚‚‚{z‚‚‚‚‚‚‚} |‚‚‚‚‚‚‚{z‚‚‚‚‚‚‚ } ‚ ‚ …III† …IV† 2 3 HH 2 2u HH 2Z HH 2Z HH j 2 2 rD 2xi 2xi 2xj |‚‚‚‚‚‚{z‚‚‚‚‚‚} …V† 2 3 2 3 2 2Z HH 2 2Z HH 2 2 D2 r 2xj 2xi 2xj 2xi |‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚{z‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚} …VI† 2 2 3 2 2Z 2r 2 2Z D rD 2xj r 2xi 2xi 2xj |‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚{z‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚} …VII† (227) The term (I) on the RHS describes curvature effects of the mean mixture fraction ®eld. Sometimes. Depending on the simpli®cations made for these mechanisms. L. Veynante. As for premixed combustion (Sections 7 and 8).4. r x ˆ rDu7Zu 2 was discussed for ~ premixed turbulent ¯ames. ~ 9.1. ² Even in burners operating in the premixed regime.4). (VI) is the dissipation rate of the scalar . various approaches for laminar ¯ames and models for turbulent ¯ames are obtained (see Table 7). the structure and the properties of the ¯ame depend f on Z HH2 . BML and S models (Section 7). the second in Eq. implies the accurate determination of the position in the ¯ow where combustion starts and the control of pollutants emission. ² Finite rate chemistry assuming a local diffusive±reactive budget similar to the one observed in laminar ¯ames (¯amelet assumption). (226) is the production of ¯uctuations by ~ the mean gradients. in the EBU. Section 6). and more generally for gas turbines operating in the non-premixed regime. contains correlations between the Z ®eld and the velocity ®eld.246 D. these correlations vanish for suf®ciently large Reynolds numbers. There exist strong motivations for improving non-premixed and partially premixed turbulent combustion modeling: ² The development of new combustion technologies for aircraft engines. Introduction ~ The mean value of the mixture fraction Z gives an indication of the local mean fuel/air mixing in turbulent ¯ows. Hypotheses formulated to construct models for non-premixed turbulent ¯ames may be organized into three major groups: ² Assumption of in®nitely fast chemistry (mixed is burnt). The proposed closures are all based on a particular description of turbulent mixing. while chemical sources can be dealt with in an exact and closed form (only for pdf). Balance equation and simple relaxation model for x ~ A transport equation may be derived for x from the Z balance equation (Eq. (V) is the strain rate of the scalar Z ®eld. measuring the degree of mixing between reactants. the last is the scalar dissipation rate x remaining unclosed. the modeling of turbulent diffusion ¯ames relies on simplifying assumptions for both chemistry and transport.2.2.2) and mixing problems have been the subject of many discussions [156±158]. In addition. already discussed for ¯ame surface density modeling in premixed ¯ames (Section 7. Compared to other terms.2. partial premixing is even desirable to limit pollutant emissions (strati®ed charge engines). Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 turbulent mixing of conserved scalars (Section 3. hence the basic concepts useful to capture fuel/air turbulent mixing are ®rst presented. (IV) corresponds to the correlations between mean ¯ow motion and ¯uctuations.2. ² Finite rate chemistry with treatment of molecular and heat transport separated from chemical reaction (CMC. one may write:  r ~ 2Z ~ 1 r u´7Z ˆ rn t 7 2 Z ~ ~  2t …225† r  f 2Z HH2 f ~ 1 r u´7Z HH 2 ˆ rnt 7 2 Z HH2 1 2rnt u7Zu 2 2 2r x ~ g   ~ |{z} |‚‚ ‚{z‚‚ ‚} 2t Production Dissipation …226† The ®rst term on the RHS is the turbulent transport. Crucial points which cannot be addressed using the in®nitely fast chemistry hypothesis. ² Many practical systems include liquid injection of the fuel.

(231) is dif®cult to justify.D. IFCM is an interesting ®rst guess to provide the global ¯ame structure for the maximum of heat that can be released. Veynante.2). a valuable result for certain aspects of design. Table 1): IFCM IFCM YF ˆ YF …Z†. It is very popular and is usually coupled with a low Mach number solution of the turbulent ¯ow [161]. Eddy dissipation model The eddy dissipation model (EDC) is a direct extension to non-premixed ¯ame of the eddy break up (EBU) closure. …1=tk † . t†dZ p …233† 0 ~O Y IFCM ˆ ~ T IFCM ˆ 1 0 IFCM ~ YO …Z p †P…Z p . for very large . Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 247 dissipation rate and (VII) is negligible when density gradients are kept small. f ~ The knowledge of Z and Z HH2 from their closed transport ~ equation may be used to presume the pdf of Z. x. for instance. The mean ¯ame structure is then known from an in®nitely fast chemistry model (IFCM) without solving balance equations for mean thermochemical quantities. for large a . (231). x. then. Note that the piecewise relations are exact when the chemical time is in®nitely small. this species may be the reaction products. this model does not respect the response of diffusion combustion in mixture fraction space and may generate mean fuel mass fraction values ~F lower than Y IFCM : Actually. (229) is a very simpli®ed description of micromixing. L. Because the internal structure of diffusion ¯ames is easily obtained from condi  tional statistics as Yi uZ ˆ Z p (Section 3. Rl 2xi 2xi 2xj …k=1† tk where Rl is a Reynolds number based on the Taylor ~ microscale. [159]. Then. x. Eq. i. the linear relaxation is thus a ®rst approximation that may be improved. x. with a direct depenf dence on …Z HH2 †21 is anticipated for the dissipation rate of the scalar dissipation rate: 2rD2 2 2xj 2 2Z HH 2xi 3 2 2xj 2 2Z HH 2xi 3 .4.e. Considering the piecewise relations (Fig. so that the thermodynamics of the ¯ow is fully known from Eq. Eq. t† dZ p |‚‚‚{z‚‚‚} p Flame structure Mixing …230† The simplest of these models invokes the in®nitely fast chemistry assumption. To account for the existence of burnt gases bringing the energy to ignite the fresh reactants. The fuel burning rate is calculated according to: 2 3 ~ ~ 1 YO YP ~ .2. . Rl rx2 ~ f Z HH2 …232† The equilibrium condition (Eq. …1=n†1=2 : The remaining part of the j ~ strain rate term is proportional to x .3. YO ˆ YO …Z†. 9. t†dZ p z‚‚ }|‚‚ { ‚ ‚ ~ …Yi uZ ˆ Z † P…Z p . t† ˆ 1 0 relating the fuel and oxidizer mass fractions. Therefore. [35] which assumed an in®nitely fast single step chemical reaction (Section 3. A quadratic behavior in x .3. with a b -shape (see Section 6. Presumed pdf: in®nitely fast chemistry model One of the ®rst descriptions of non-premixed combustion was given in Ref.2). x. P…Z p . _  k s …1 1 s† where a and b are adjustable parameters of the closure. T ˆ T IFCM …Z† …228† the ¯uctuating velocity gradient is assumed to be of the order of the inverse of the small scales characteristic time.1. To derive a linear relaxation closure for the scalar dissipation rate. many models (¯amelet.3. mean quantities may be directly obtained with a b -pdf (Section 6. IFCM is therefore a two-equations model for non-premixed turbulent combustion. a homogeneous Z steady ®eld in equilibrium (production ˆ dissipation) is ®rst considered. 22rD 2u HH 2Z HH 2Z HH rx ~ rx ~ j . A priori. In Eq.2). 5. (230): 1 IFCM ~F ~ Y IFCM ˆ YF …Z p †P…Z p . …2u HH =2xi † . t†dZ p …234† …235† 1 0 ~ T IFCM …Z p †P…Z p . t†.b …231† rv F ˆ ar min Y F . the reaction rate is limited by a de®cient species. The scalar dissipation rate depends on the detail of the characteristics of the turbulence (velocity and scalar energetic spectrum). The inputs of this f ~ `mixed is burnt' closure are Z and Z HH2 determining the b pdf chosen to capture the detail of fuel/air mixing. (228)) leads to: ~ xˆ f Z HH2 …k=1† …229† recovering the widely used linear relaxation model.2) and Eq.2).4. by solving a modeled balanced equation for x : Such a closed equation may be ~ found in Ref. Eq. CMC) incorporate a b -pdf to calculate means quantities: ~ Y i …x. and the temperature to the mixture fraction in the case of in®nitely fast chemistry. (227) reduces to a balance between the straining rate of Z and the dissipation rate of the scalar dissipation rate: 22rD 2u HH 2Z HH 2Z HH 2 j ˆ 2D2 r 2xi 2xi 2xj 2xj 2 2Z HH 2xi 3 2 2xj 2 2Z HH 2xi 3 9. Models assuming in®nitely fast chemistry 9. initially devoted to turbulent premixed combustion [160] (Section 7. (235).

Flamelet models are therefore constructed from an asymptotic view of diffusive-reaction layers as given by Fig. but when the joint pdf P…Z p .4. in®nitely fast chemistry may be replaced by a chemical equilibrium condition [162]. 38).2). x. In these measurements and calculations. IFCM is an accurate description of a turbulent diffusion ¯ame. t† is . Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 Fig. [164]. ¯amelet models are derived assuming that the local balance between diffusion and reaction is similar to the one found in a prototype laminar ¯ame for the same values of Z and x . quenching or even small ®nite rate chemistry effects exist. To handle multi-step chemistry. [163] in H2/argon±air ¯ame.165]. 9. but not in®nitely fast (see for example [163. (b) Raman scattering measurements of Barlow et al. The two control parameters of planar and steady laminar strained ¯ames are used: the mixture fraction Z and its scalar dissipation rate x (Section 3. For a given state of mixing in the turbulent ¯ow. 6. È Damkohler numbers (Section 3. thus given values of Z and x .1. these two quantities ¯uctuate in ~ space and time.4. Solid lines indicate chemical equilibrium. Introduction Experiments in jets ¯ames and direct numerical simulations suggest that there exist situations in burners where the chemistry is fast. Models have been proposed for such ¯ames [63. the response of the ¯ame in mixture fraction space lies in the vicinity of the curves given by YiIFCM (Fig.248 D. L. 38. xp . Scatter plots of major species mole fractions and temperature as functions of mixture fraction: (a) Data from three-dimensional direct numerical simulations of Montgomery et al. This model lacks any prediction capacities when ignition. Unfortunately such a zero order model does not exist for premixed turbulent combustion. Flamelet modeling 9. Veynante.164]). In a turbulent ¯ow.2).

x.e. Z HH2 ~ to which x is added. YiSLFM …Z p . xp . then. Consider the simple case of a jet ¯ame. since it uses the same formalism. extinction may not be completed.4. on the air side. Two issues emerge: 1. for a given value of x corresponding to local micromixing conditions. As shown in Ref. and various x provides a Flamelet Library Yi(Z. turbulent diffusion mixes these products with air. on the fuel side. SLFM stands for steady laminar ¯amelet model. a trend that is not fully reproduced by the ¯amelet solution in physical space where the input parameter is the strain rate [171]. YiSLFM …Z p . ² There are other issues related to the multi-dimensional character of diffusion ¯ames. it is not obvious how to draw conclusions since one would need to measure the scalar dissipation rate in turbulent ¯ames. one supposes that the mixing ®eld may be reduced to a steady one-dimensional structure. This transverse loss or gain of heat modi®es the structure of the ¯amelet in the normal direction to the stoichiometric surface [55]. when the Damkohler number Dap ˆ …tc xst †21 is large. Moving downstream. Z. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 249 known. IFCM is recovered. choosing a given laminar ¯ame prototype. the mean properties of the ¯ame may be calculated as:   ~ ~ YiSLFM …Z p . Veynante. Z HH2 and x ). t† must be presumed using the mean values ~ f ~ available to quantify fuel/air mixing (i. Time-dependent ¯amelets have been used to include unsteady effects [172±174]. The hypotheses involved in SLFM can be disputed. xp † is the local ¯ame structure in mixture fraction ~ space and P…Z p .2):  2 2 3 2Yi x 2 Yi ˆ vi 1 _ 2t Lei 2Z 2 2 2 3 N ˆ hn v n 2T _ 2 T ˆ2 1x 2t Cp 2Z 2 nˆ1 where x ˆ …l=rCp †u7Zu 2 : These equations were used to discuss laminar diffusion ¯ames (see Eqs.2. (237) has been obtained neglecting diffusion in the direction tangential to the iso-Zst surface. with a limiting frequency at which the ¯ame almost behaves like a steady state ¯ame.D.x ). xp † YiSLFM …Z p .167]. For a given chemistry. leading to ¯amelet interactions when the distribution of x is nonuniform on the iso-Zst. x. ~ f The inputs of SLFM are similar to those of IFCM: Z. xp † features mixing without reaction (Fig. xp † must be determined and tabulated under particular hypothesis. 4 [63]). or even quenching when x becomes too large (Fig. and with fuel. Further downstream. This situation is strongly enhanced in ¯ows where recirculation zones are found to stabilize combustion. This model may be viewed as a direct improvement of the in®nitely fast chemistry model (IFCM). Flame structure in composition space. the gradients measured along the stoichiometric surface are much smaller than those in the perpendicular direction (Section 3. one has to solve for: v ˆ2 _ x 22 Yi Lei 2Z 2 …237† The solution of this equation for given concentrations and temperatures boundary conditions. 9.2). a ¯ame con®guration widely studied experimentally [166. Thus. xp . It is usually observed that the decay of OH towards equilibrium is predicted by the ¯amelet solution in mixture fraction space using the scalar dissipation rate as a control parameter sensitive to species boundary conditions.171]. ² Reference states at in®nity used to tabulate the ¯amelets may have to account for partial premixing [170. and up to now. the validity of Eq. P…Z p . but more works are required to conclude on the dimensionality of scalar micromixing in ¯ames. when a high value of the scalar dissipation rate is imposed to the ¯ame for a suf®ciently short period of time. YiSLFM …Z p . Assuming within the turbulent ¯ow thin quasi-one-dimensional structures convected and stretched by the ¯uid motions. 6). ~ 2. (47) and (50) and Section 3. t† captures the statistics of fuel/air mixing.2). x. xp . this shortcoming of SLFM is overcome introducing transient ¯amelets. the reactants feeding the reaction zone are not likely to be either pure fuel or pure air. where close to the nozzle inlet. [171]. when using Eq. arguing that when the mixing element is suf®ciently thin and features weak curvature. and neglecting higher order terms. [175]. the characteristic time required to balance diffusion and reaction is assumed to be much smaller than any . 5). Straining cannot be uniformly distributed along the ¯ame sheet. A variety of techniques are available to build these libraries [168]. In SLFM. Some experimental results are available [169]. thereby including ®nite rate chemistry effects. In Ref. L. An increase in x is followed by ®nite rate chemistry effects. In consequence. but with an additional parameter: the scalar dissipation rate x . (237) to describe a prototype ¯ame of turbulent ¯amelets. the equations for the species and temperature become (Section 3. xp †P…Z p . pure fuel and pure air react to form products. t†dxp dZ p …236† Yi ˆ Zp other ¯ow time scale of the problem. leading to various improvements: ² Eq. Omitting the time derivative (steady ¯amelet). Unsteady ¯amelets were used [176] to simulate extinction and re-ignition xp YiSLFM …Z p . ² Unsteadiness is also an important aspect. xp † may be tabulated from solutions of counter-¯ow diffusion ¯ames (Fig. (237) in a turbulent ¯ow also depends on the properties of micromixing. for which reference states at in®nity vary according to the value ~ of a progress variable c: ² Flamelet libraries can be calculated in physical space or in mixture fraction space. and therefore a given chemiÈ cal time t c.

178±181]. These numbers are then È compared with Dap . Again using DNS. This work was pursued [177] introducing as an additional control parameter. This is more generally related to questions arising concerning the determination of quenching limits along with the accuracy of quenching predictions using ¯amelet theory a problem which can be addressed numerically. As expected for these ¯ames featuring strong unsteadiness effects. A critical Damkohler number at which extinction occurs is determined as a function of a ¯ame thickness parameter.250 D. Left. Below this value. de®ned as the ratio between the rms mixture fraction and the reaction zone width in mixture fraction space. bold: iso-reaction rate. Right. ² Another related point of interest in ¯amelet theory is the response of the turbulent ¯ame when quenching zones develop. Fig. triangle: bottom left 2D ¯ame. L. The value of x when the ¯ame extinguishes is in perfect agreement with x q measured in a laminar ¯amelet library . In Fig. even in the simple con®guration of ¯ame/vortex interaction. the quenching Damkohler derived q from asymptotic analysis [30]. Three successive times of two-dimensional unsteady quenching of a planar diffusion ¯ame pinched by a pair of vortices. This observation was explained by statistical variability. the diffusion time needed to exchange mass and energy over a distance DZ in mixture fraction space. Consequently. show that when strong unsteadiness and/or curvature effects appear. history effects were included using a Lagrangian time measured along the stoichiometric line. 39. q q Eq. q Other DNS results have shown that the scalar dissipation rate controlling the growth of the ¯ame hole is lower than the one that should be applied to ®rst quench the ¯ame [38]. used to construct a combustion diagram ([70]. are easily derived from the simulations to ®nd the limit conditions where unsteady (DaLFA) and extinction (Daext) effects become important. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 Fig. one may discuss the assumption that the occurrence of local extinction at some points does not prevent the use of a ¯amelet model for the remaining part of the turbulent ¯ame. Two critical Damkohler numbers. dotted: vorcity. in a turbulent jet ¯ame. Numerical simulations of ¯ame/vortex interaction. 39. constant density ¯ames near extinction were È studied [182]. In other words. an È extinction may be observed with Damkohler numbers larger or smaller than Dap : In this last study. for instance by post-processing DNS databases to study the reactive/diffusive layer in terms of ¯amelets [70. Veynante. con®guration studied in Ref. twice the asymptotic quenching value in these q simulations. the lower q value of Daext differs from that of steady ¯amelets and exceeds the value Dap given by ¯amelet theory.74. a DNS database is further analyzed [53] in which a diffusion ¯ame is pinched by a pair of vortices. the time evolution of the reaction zone is fully dominated by unsteady effects. diamond: top left 2D ¯ame. [53]. solid line: 1D ¯amelet library. the laminar ¯amelet assumption does not always predict quenching (Fig. square: middle left 2D ¯ame. zoom: region of the ¯ow where the centerline response of the ¯ame versus inverse mixture fraction dissipation rate is plotted. It is found that …DaLFA =Dap † < 2 while …Daext =Dap † < 0:4: Therefore. DaLFA and Daext. (237) is an interesting approximation for Da p larger than Dap . È 10). the value of the critical È extinction Damkohler number was different from the one predicted by laminar ¯ame theory. 10).

x. xp . t† [63]:   1 1 ~ P…xp . (Fig. the scalar dissipation rate xqEd at the quenching location is smaller than x q and varies depending on the structure of the edge ¯ame. These values are representative of the existence of burning in a premixed regime at the extremity of the diffusion ¯ame. Comparison between experiments and ¯amelet modeling [177]. xqEd decreases and a partially premixed front develops at the edge of the burning zone.4. ² When partially premixed ¯amelets are expected in the combustion system. t†P…xp . Therefore. since diffusion is directly included and coupled with chemistry in Eq. t†: Most of the ¯amelet models explicitly suppose that the mixture fraction and its dissipation rate are two uncorrelated quantities: ~ ~ ~ P…Z p . When the chemistry is fast enough with mixing elements featuring …238† erfc denotes the reciprocal of the complementary error function and x 0 is the maximum value of the scalar dissipation rate. t††2 2s …x. . x. that determines the equivalence ratio of the ¯amelet whose progress of reaction is given by a progress variable c. top). Mean and conditional scalar dissipation rate are then related by: ~ f ~ ~ x st ˆ x F…Z. Veynante. 40) and further re®nements of ¯amelet models are under development [184]. Bottom: radial pro®les of mean temperature and OH mole fraction. L. x. t† (see Section ~ 6. the turbulent micromixing of chemical species does not need any particular treatment. It is also worthwhile to note that with SLFM. But once a hole exists in the ¯ame. Top: Favre-averages mean values of temperature and OH mole fraction along the centerline of a jet ¯ame. Another alternative is to estimate a mean scalar dissipation rate under stoichiometric condition [89]. Starting from the solution of a steady strained planar counter-¯ow ¯ame: r j p 1 a r…j p † p Z…h† ˆ erfc…h= 2†. the fuel/air ~ turbulent mixing is captured via the joint pdf P…Z p . 39. x. xp . Z HH2 † where F is given by: ~ f F…Z. t† 2px s…x. for x . models based on Eq. t† ˆ p p exp 2 2 …ln xp 2 g…x. t† < P…Z p .4. the quenching scalar dissipation rate x q is the relevant quantity to describe the quenching of a burning ¯amelet. j the coordinate normal to the stoichiometric plane and the assumption r 2 D < cst ˆ r2 D0 was 0 used.2) and a log-normal distribution is used for P…xp . The corresponding scalar dissipation rate is given by: a exp…22‰erfc21 …2Z†Š2 † x…Z† ˆ 2p ˆ x0 exp…22‰erfc21 …2Z†Š2 † ˆ x0 F…Z† 21 Fig. 40. (237). middle). Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 251 sheet-like properties. x. Bradley and coworkers have proposed ¯amelet closures along these lines where chemical sources are tabulated using one-dimensional premixed ¯ames [183]. The chemical sources are parametrized in terms of the mixture fraction Z. Z HH2 † ˆ 1 0 …239† F…Zst † ~ F…Z p †P…Z p †dZ p …240† and to retain in the ¯amelet library the pro®les ~ ~ YiSLFM …Z p . [63]. x. s 2 ˆ 2 is proposed. Within the family of closures for non-premixed turbulent ¯ames. (236)). for instance at the base of a lifted turbulent jet-¯ame. x. Latter after quenching. where h…j† ˆ dj 2 D 0 r0 a is the strain rate. 39. 39.3. x st † for averaging with P…Z p † (Eq. (237) represent great progress compared to the in®nitely fast chemistry hypothesis.D. it may be interesting in the modeling to use premixed ¯amelets instead of diffusion ¯amelets. Mixing modeling in SLFM In steady laminar ¯amelet models (SLFM). bottom). 9. then the reaction rate reaches values above the laminar ¯amelet behavior (Fig. The mean burning rates are then obtained by averaging the source terms with a presumed form for the joint-pdf of Z and c. When the diffusion ¯ame and its extremity have reaction zones of the same thickness. t† The two parameters s and g are provided by the ®rst and second moments of the scalar dissipation rate: 2 3 s2 f ~ ~ and x ˆ exp g 1 x HH2 ˆ x 2 …exp…s 2 † 2 1 2 In Ref. they provide interesting results (Fig. The ¯uxes of heat along the stoichiometric surface are responsible for this departure from one-dimensional ¯amelet behavior. x q the response of the reaction rate follows the laminar ¯amelet one (Fig. but diffusion ¯ame quenching leads to edge ¯ame combustion (partially premixed ¯amelets). t† ~ A b -function is assumed to presume P…Z p .

In ¯ame surface density models. an exact but unclosed. The balance equation for the ¯ame surface density S was based on phenomenological considerations starting from balance equation for a material surface where combustion effects have been intuitively added [84.187. The integrated burning rate _ V i may also be expressed as a function of the species molecular ¯uxes. where x is the averaged scalar dissipation rate. V i is estimated as V i ˆ V i …x †. (53) in Section 3. one may write: DZF < 2Zst which provides an interesting approximation of this reaction thickness. The introduction of effects of unsteadiness was realized in Ref. j†dj P…xp †dxp _ 21 |‚‚‚‚‚‚ ‚{z‚‚‚‚‚‚ ‚} 1 1 _ V i …xp † The reaction rate per unit of ¯ame area should. Conclusion The laminar ¯amelet model presumes the conditional   mean of species rYi uZ ˆ Z p averaging over the response of laminar prototype ¯ames:    ~ rYi uZ ˆ Z p ˆ r YiSLFM …Z p .2). (229)): ~ x ˆ Cx f Z HH2 …k=1† where Cx is a constant depending on the topological and spectral properties of the mixture fraction ®eld. identifying the ¯ame surface to the stoichiometric iso-surface Z ˆ Z st : The ¯ame surface density is then de®ned as:    S ˆ u7Zud…Z 2 Z st † ˆ u7ZuuZ ˆ Z st P…Zst † …241†  where P…Zst † denotes the probability of ®nding Z ˆ Zst : Starting from this de®nition and the balance equation for the mixture fraction Z (Eq. The mean burn_  ing rate v i is then expressed as the product of S by V i the _ local reaction rate per unit of ¯ame area. [172] in the context of SLFM.4.5. j†P c …xp uZ p †dxp dj _ …246†  x !  v i …xp . therefore. 9. be estimated from the integrated reaction rate of a ¯amelet submitted to a scalar dissipation rate x with the distribution _ _ _ ~  ~ P…xp †: In practice.4. xp †Pc …xp uZ p †dxp _ x …244† lead to: _ Vi ˆ 1 1  u7Zu 0 In our generic classi®cation of turbulent combustion modeling (Section 6) and Eq. under a ¯amelet assumption. SLFM may be viewed as a presumed pdf technique involving conditional mean values determined from laminar ¯ame solutions. 9. the stumbling block is the estimation of the ~ mean scalar dissipation rate x : The linear relaxation model may be written (Eq. This last expression was successful to model turbulent ¯ame lift-off [185]. using Eq. Another alternative is to build models where quantities are estimated introducing a direct treatment of micromixing and small scale diffusion (see Sections 9. According to Eq.2. The coherent ¯ame model. (121) ( vi ˆ _ Cx < 2. x   v i …Z p . (243): _ Vi < < 1 1  21 x  v i …xp . Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 Here again. In diffusion ¯amelets.188] have provided an exact balance equation. xp †P…xp †dxp  xp vi _ u7Zu ) s _ u7Zu ˆ V i S …242† _ The local burning rate V i is estimated from a one-dimensional laminar ¯ame as: _ Vi ˆ ( vi _ u7Zu ) s < 1 v 1 1 _i v i dj _ dZ ˆ 0 u7Zu 21 …243† where j is the coordinate along the normal to the ¯ame front.186]. L. More recently.8). coherent ¯ame model Flame surface density concepts were ®rstly introduced for the coherent ¯ame model (CFM) [84]. Veynante. a ¯ame time response is then intro_ duced when calculating V i: . S accounts for _ ¯ame turbulence interaction and V i for the chemistry. (230). xp †Pc …xp uZ p †P…Z p †dxp dZ p …245† _ Then. (41)). then. Flame surface density modeling. The reaction zone is centered at the location Z ˆ Zst : As the stoichiometric surface is close to the air side for hydrocarbon ¯ame …Zst p 1†. (91) and the relation:     v i uZ p ˆ _ v i …Z p . it was proposed to choose [33]: ~ x ˆ Cx …DZF †2 …k=1† balance equation for the ¯ame surface density S may be derived (Section 6. Recent works [88. it is assumed that the interface between fuel and oxidizer in non-premixed burners behaves. where v i depends on the mixture _ fraction Z and the scalar dissipation x . corresponds to a simpli®ed version of the steady laminar ¯amelet model. for any values of Z. [186].3. expressions (96).3.252 D.6±9. see Eq.2). following the analysis proposed in Ref. as S…Z p † < u7Zu ˆ S (Section 6. DZF is the thickness of the reaction zone of these laminar ¯ame measured in mixture fraction space.

…n=1†1=2 is the Kolmogorov time. t† ˆ 1 1 1 0 tig …Z p . x. t ig or x . Eq. t† are known. x. (248) describes a local ¯ame element. 42 shows an example of numerical simulation of a lean premixed prevaporized (LPP) combustion chamber using MIL. t† ˆ 1 1 tig …Z. . The pdf of the mixture fraction P…Z p . Since t ig depends on position in mixture fraction space and mean temperature. The transition between mixing without combustion and a `mixed is burnt' regime is controlled by the position of an ignition time delay. 41). t† is determined so that Y MIL calculated along the MIL trajectory in mixture fraction space (Fig. Y F . may be observed in the premixed tube.x. Sketch of MIL in mixture fraction space. MIL model Á MIL (`Modele Intermittent Lagrangien' or Lagrangian Intermittent Model) was proposed by Borghi in Ref. The LPP system is divided into three parts: ®rst. weighted by ~ the b -pdf. x ig) prevent ignition and contribute to pure mixing. Z†: This look-up table is easily derived from ~ partially stirred reactor (PaSR) calculations. t† ˆ …q 2 1† …q21† tq k     …q 2 1† tt q exp 2 q tk ~F q…x. For the highest temperature and pressure conditions. [68]. Veynante.x. tp †P…Z p . t ig. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 253 tion occurs only when ignition is faster than turbulent fuel/air mixing. like autoignition or ¯ashback. t† is the pdf of the micromixing times having a mean value equal to the integral length scale time (k/1 ). within the distribution of fuel/air turbulent mixing times tk . L. liquid fuel is injected and vaporized (prevaporized tube). corresponding to t t . x. the mean burning rate of fuel is estimated as: ~ _ v F …x. t†: ~ 4. The pdf of turbulent mixing times P…tt . x. corresponding to fast mixing. 41). is introduced to calculate _F v MIL …Z p . For a given value of tig < x21 . x. x. Arguing that mixing occurs without reaction for large values of the scalar dissipation rate. t† was proposed [189. x. reproduces the mean Y F : Fig. combining mixing and chemical effects. where molecular diffusion. 41. leading to: t p ~ dYF …Y p 2 YF † 1 tp v MIL t _F ˆ F ~ dZ …Z 2 Z p † …248† This technique is close to the one chosen in Ref. where T ~ and Y F are the mean conditions in the PaSR. t†dtt Fig. some undesirable effects. the ¯ame structure is constructed dynamically from two possibilities of diffusion combustion: Mixing without reaction (before ignition) and in®nitely fast chemistry (after ignition) (Fig. tp † [68]. The ignition delay t ig is associated to a scalar dissipation rate xig …tig < x21 †: The main objective of MIL is to account ig for unsteadiness in the coupling between small scale diffusion and chemistry. t† (equivalent to the pdf of the inverse of x ).  2. where tk . x.t†  P…tt .191]: t  P…tt . Whereas for x . Detailed chemistry can be used to construct such a t ig table [189]. tt . x ig. accounting for auto-ignition and transient burning in turbulent ¯ames. Combustion is expected to reduce pollutant emission in a lean premixed regime. ~ 3. D7 2YF. a is also a function of Z and of the local ¯ow conditions through posi ~ tion and time. then is mixed with air in the premixing tube before entering the main combustion chamber. 11.t† ~  t v MIL …Z p . is modeled as a linear relaxation term ~ …Y F 2 YF †=tt : Solving Eq. Assuming that combus-  where P…tt . 9. fuel mass fraction and mean temperature. Once P…tt . t† and P…Z p . tp †: _F t  A generic shape for P…tt . These ®ndings are reproduced with turbulent combustion closures like MIL describing strongly coupled micromixing and ignition phenomena [191]. t†dtp dZ p _F t t …247† A partially stirred reactor (PaSR). [190] for modeling NOx production in turbulent jet ¯ames. The mean concentration of fuel Y F : ~ The output is the mean burning rate v F to calculate _ ~ new Y F values. t†P…tp .6. mixing is slower than chemistry and combustion develops. by means of the spectral distribution of micromixing times. mixing ig times smaller than t ig (t t . t ig. MIL incorporates the ¯ame structure in Z space. x. x. tig ˆ ~ ~ tig …T.D. the probability to ®nd ignition at a particular location is: a…Z. The inputs of MIL are: 1. The premixing tube operates for a large range of inlet temperatures (from 300 to 800 K) and a large range of pressures (from 1 to 40 bar). As in the steady laminar ¯amelet model (SLFM) and the conditional moment closure (CMC). A table of ignition delay times t ig depending on mixture fraction. (248) with boundary conditions similar to the ones of ¯amelet libraries provides v MIL …Z p . x.

but as shown from the pdf   balance equation (Eq. 1: Vaporized tube.7. the pdf of the mixture fraction was assigned a b -shape. the conditional average   rxuZ ˆ Z p needs closure. In non-premixed ¯ames. 9. The ¯uctuations .103.8. ² Within a homogeneous ®eld.8. Instead of getting Qi ˆ   rYi uZ ˆ Z p = ruZ ˆ Z p from laminar ¯amelets. Similarly. and therefore. The following points have been addressed: ² The approximation of the conditional chemical source ~ using Eq. This conditional mean is an important ingredient of the pdf transport equation and micromixing models are available (Section 9. or conditional moment closure (CMC). neglecting two terms (Eq.105]. (237)) replacing Qi by Yi [107]. These two turbulent combustion models have similarities in term of their general formalism. the CMC equation reduces to:     2Q  22 Q  i i ˆ rxuZ ˆ Z p ruZ ˆ Z p 1 v i uZ ˆ Z p _ p2 2t 2Z …251† This last formulation may be compared with the ¯amelet equation (Eq. and MIL suggest that non-premixed turbulent ¯ames may be conveniently studied using conditional averaging in the   mixture fraction space. Once the number M of conditional values required to capture the conditional means of the N chemical species is determined. the ¯amelet assumption deals with a coupled representation of diffusion and reaction as in a laminar ¯ame for a given value of x . the CMC approach proposes to solve a balance equation for Qi [102. this method is expected to provide interesting results for conditions not too far from in®nitely fast chemistry. (110)). Conditional moment closure In®nitely fast chemistry (IFCM). (114)):   2Q  2Q  i i ˆ 2 rui uZ ˆ Z p ruZ ˆ Z p 2t 2xi |‚‚‚‚‚‚{z‚‚‚‚‚‚} …I† of species concentrations and temperature for a given level of mixture fraction may be included in the conditional burning rate by using second order CMC.4. Y N † but implies a weak level of ¯uctuations for a given value of Z. that may not be correctly captured with a presumed pdf. YN uZ ˆ Z p _ _ …250† As for any combustion models. the conditional value of  may be approxix  ~ mated from P…Z p † to obtain rxuZ ˆ Z p [192]. L. 9. When calculating the chemical source. but their underlying physical assumptions strongly differ. the detail of rxuZ ˆ Z p is linked to the detail of the shape of the pdf. 42.  the conditional pdf Pc …Yi uZ p † is approximated by a peak   located at Yi uZ ˆ Z p : Accordingly. using in®nitely fast chemistry (IFCM).2). The objective of PDF modeling is to relax all hypotheses concerning the shape of pdfs. Once a methodology has been developed to calculate pdfs. CMC incorporates diffusion as turbulent micromixing and decouples it from chemistry. ¼. the scalar dissipation rate is unknown (II). Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 Fig. 3: ¯ame tube. when the pdf is known via its presumed b -shape (Section 6. BML and related closures assume a bimodal probability density function (pdf) of the progress variable.   ² The estimation of rxuZ ˆ Z p from a b -pdf is feasible ~ for simple shapes of P…Z p †.1). Combustion starts in the premixed tube.254 D. CMC modeling requires the solution of N £ M balance equations. ¼. (250) is much less restrictive than to write v i < _ ~ _ ~ v i …Y 1 . In the simplest version of CMC. modeled and solved [105]. a given thickness of the laminar diffusive zone. micromixing (II) and the chemical source (III) are unclosed. steady laminar ¯amelet (SLFM). This leads to a variety of modeling re®nements where more transport equations for conditional quantities are studied. On the other hand. which is written. Veynante. steady laminar ¯amelets (SLFM). 2: premixed tube. Snapshot of temperature in a TURBOMECA-ONERA LPP engine computed with MIL [191]. CMC has been the subject of many works and re®nements during the past years [105]. it is possible to construct turbulent combustion closures in which all the values taken by    22 Q  i 1 rxuZ ˆ Z p 1 v i uZ ˆ Z p _ p2 2Z ‚ |‚‚‚ ‚{z‚‚‚ ‚} |‚‚‚‚‚‚ {z‚‚‚‚‚‚ } ‚ …II† …III† …249† In addition to turbulent transport included in (I). CMC was also extended to reacting particles [193]. With CMC. Pdf modeling In premixed turbulent combustion modeling. the ¯uctuations of chemical source in mixture fraction space are neglected leading to:       v i uZ ˆ Z p ˆ v i Y1 uZ ˆ Z p .

Differential diffusion is easily introduced in SLFM when tabulating counter-¯ow ¯ames. Using pdfs and CMC. (Eq. these preferential diffusion effects may be more dif®cult to introduce in CMC. This term represents turbulent micromixing [95. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 255 species is resolved (Eq.199]. the impact of the molecular dissipation is less than the effect of viscous dissipation. Veynante. some works have been made in this direction [194. resulting from a discrete Monte Carlo simulation of the continuous pdf equation. t† ˆ Y p 1 v p P…Z p .195]. (111) in Section 6): r  2 ~ p P…Z . 5 and 43). When the Schmidt number of Z is greater than unity (n . For those small scales (lZ . Two levels of complexity may be chosen: ² One may solve the balance equation for the joint pdf of the thermochemical variables.1. 43. 9.198. temperature.D. L. x. then the balance equation for the joint pdf of velocity and . The main advantage of the pdf method lies in the possibility of treating complex chemical sources directly (Section 6). suggesting that the cascade mechanism is limited by the mixing frequency fZ(lZ) of the largest scales. t† 2t N   i ˆ 2 h 2u´7Y i uY…x.96].8. Two-dimensional pdf of mixture fraction and reaction progress variable for a round jet non-premixed ¯ame [104]. ² A new numerical treatment is required and leads to the decomposition of the pdf into a large number of computational particles required to succeed in the computational implementation of pdf methods [93. x. There are two major issues with pdf modeling: ² Models must be proposed for capturing micromixing and pressure ¯uctuation and viscous effects (the latter only when the velocity ®eld is incorporated into the pdf). then the smallest scales of Z are smaller than the Kolmogorov scales. the scalar dissipation rate appears as a key quantity in both premixed and nonpremixed turbulent systems. one needs to express the conditional mean value of the scalar dissipation rate (or the conditional mean value of diffusion). etc. The chemical composition and velocities of these particles evolve according to simple differential equations. species and temperature in mixture fraction space may be reached (Figs. Using turbulence modeling. Turbulent micromixing From the discussion of fundamentals properties of ¯ames and of turbulent combustion models. t† ˆ Y p P…Z p . As in ¯amelet modeling and CMC. A global picture of mixing should therefore distinguish between macro and micromixing [200]: The macromixing is organized from a cascade mechanism between large and small scales. Recent developments have also included time scale information into the pdf [196. t† 2xk 2xk  …252† ² Velocity ®eld statistics may also be included into the pdf. a mean mechanical time tt < …k=1† and a microscale time tk < …n=1†1=2 may be estimated. Di). t† _i ~ 2Yip iˆ1 N N ˆˆ 2 2 2Yip 2Yjp iˆ1 jˆ1 ˆ 2r  42 D 2r  5 3  2Yi 2Yj  ~ Y…x. (113)).197]. species. x. such as the k± 1 closure. in the context of pdfs. The study of this cascade in a fully developed turbulence shows that the mixing frequency fZ is a function of the characteristic length lZ [201]:  1=2 2 32=3 1 hk fZ …lZ † . h k) the mixing frequency is of the order of a constant fZ …lZ † ˆ …1=n†1=2 : This cascade process from large to small scale does not change the energy in the f system and therefore does not affect Z HH2 : The molecular diffusion acting at smaller scales makes Fig. lz n The speed at which Z is mixed increases when the characteristic length lZ decreases. a detailed description of chemistry may be incorporated in the modeling.

t† 2t 0 …254† ~ When P…Z p .2. The mixture fraction is chosen as a shadow ®eld to estimate micromixing. t† 2 h ~ ˆ 2 p D7 2 ZuZ ˆ Z p P…Z p . this process starts at the Kolmogorov scale. 44 shows the conditional mean of the diffusive budget of the mixture fraction Z measured in a DNS of a mixing layer. …nD2 =1†1=4 ˆ Sc21=2 hk All these approximations are given for non-reactive ¯ows to exactly quantify the effect of combustion is an arduous task. with Z The extension of this linear relaxation to conditional diffusion provides the linear mean square estimation (LMSE) or interaction by exchange with the mean (IEM) model. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 Fig. a b -pdf is used to reproduce the correct behavior of conditional diffusion. and a ®rst approximation is given by: 2 3 2 3     Z 2 Zp Z 2 Zp 2 ZuZ ˆ Z p < < …253† D7 tt k=1 This simple model cannot capture the time evolution of the pdf in homogeneous mixing problems and has many shortcomings. the scalar dissipation f ~ rate of the mixture fraction was expressed as x ˆ …Z HH2 =t †: t at Z ˆ 0 and Z ˆ 1). This dif®culty is also encountered in ¯amelet or ¯ame surface modeling. with a slope that can be approximated using the inverse of tt < …k=1†: Since the gradient of Z must relax to zero for Z ˆ 0 and Z ˆ 1. the gradients smoother and then induces the micromixing. Fig.204].8. this closure is also called a `Beta-Mapping-Closure'. x.2. this equation determines …D7 2 ZuZ ˆ Z p †. Various techniques have been proposed [95]. phenomenon required to put the reactants in contact with the reaction zone. x. 9. the Batchelor scale becomes the relevant limiting length: lB . Left: Scatter plot of D7 2Y. for instance it relaxes the ¯uctuations without modifying the shape of the pdf [94±96. A quasi-linear response is observed close to the mean. Veynante. Right: …D7 2 YuY…x. the behavior at the edges of the sample space is not of prime importance to capture the major properties of micromixing. When n ˆ D. GIEM model An improvement of the IEM model was recently discussed [205]. t† ˆ Y p †: These two terms were measured in DNS of an inert mixing layer [234]. this quasi-linear response   is combined with the conditions D7 2 ZuZ ˆ 0 ˆ  D7 2 ZuZ ˆ 1 ˆ 0: For a `Gaussian-type pdf' (no peaks . x. when n ± D. 44. t† 2t 2Z   since D7 2 ZuZ ˆ 0 ˆ 0.256 D. IEM was also developed and used in chemical engineering applications by Villermaux [203].8. In pdf modeling. but appears in a different form. Linear relaxation model. In a homogeneous ®eld.3. First proposed in the pdf context by Dopazo and O'Brien [202]. x.2). one may write: 2 p 3   1 2 Z ~ 1 1 2 ZuZ ˆ Z p ˆ 2 D7 P…Z . t† is given by a b -function parameterized f ~ and Z HH2 . x. the time evolution of the mixture fraction pdf is:  i ~ 2P…Z p . or mimic its impact on the pdf. the micromixing closure must estimate   the term D7 2 Yi uY ˆ Y p describing the molecular diffusion of each chemical species. L. 9. t†dZ ~ P…Z p . IEM/LMSE In b -pdf modeling (Section 9.

that may be expressed in terms of a normal displacement speed wn and a curvature term D7´n. 9. Fig.208. (109) may be recast as: 2 3 1 …7´…rD7Z††uZ ˆ Z p r 2 3 1 2 p ˆ2 …rDu7Zu†u7ZuuZ ˆ Z ru7Zu 2n   2 D7´nu7ZuuZ ˆ Z p ) !  1 2 …rDu7Zu† 1kD7´nl s u7ZuuZ ˆ Z p ru7Zu 2n s   ˆ 2‰kvn ls 1 kD7´nl s Š u7ZuuZ ˆ Z p ˆ2 …258† The molecular diffusion is decomposed into a normal contribution.205. Interlinks PDF/¯ame surface modeling The unclosed molecular diffusion term in the pdf balance Eq.95±97. but overcomes some of its drawbacks. (38). Their applications to ¯ames can be disputed easily since mixing described via stochastic processes does not always account for the presence of reaction zones.D.196. 46 illustrates the impact of micromixing modeling on temperature and CO concentrations predictions. t†Yi ˆ …2D7 2 Yi † < 0 3 BYi …t† ˆ 2t C…Z. and strong efforts have been made in this direction. much work has been done to improve these models which have then been quite successful in the calculation of jet ¯ames [97]. The dif®cult point lies in the choice of the transition probability T.5. (254) and (256). Z 11 3 Z p † ˆ d Z p 2 2 …257† …256† where C(Z p. a full review is beyond the scope of this paper. For the same calculations. 45 shows pdfs of the temperature calculated from Eq. C(Z p. relaxing the constraint ~ BZ …t† ˆ Z of IEM. Fig. t†P…Z . Z 11 3 Z p) is the probability that a volume of concentration Z 1 interacts with a volume at Z 11 to evolve into Z p. Z 11 3 Z p †dZ 1 dZ 11 2 P…Z p † meaning that the two volumes interact to generate a volume with Z p ˆ …Z 1 1 Z 11 †=2: Eq. Z ˆ Z p ˆ C…Z p . It allows for reproducing the correct behavior at the edges Z p ˆ 0 and Z p ˆ 1 and its time dependence gives the correct behavior during the relaxation of the pdf. t) is a pseudo-mixing frequency depending both on the position in mixture fraction space and time.4. (110) [207] using the coalescence-dispersion model [206] and the k±1 closure for the velocity ®eld [208]. f As Z HH2 is an input of the closure. the reduced chemical scheme of Ref. using the same pseudo-mixing frequency (an assumption made in most micromixing models):   D7 2 Yi uYi ˆ Yip .210±236]. However. t† 2b   ~ 1 ~ 11 ˆ P…Z . t† 2t tZ 3 ~  T…Z 1 . Detailed discussion of mixing models in the context of pdfs may be found in the following list of references [93. These closures are clearly linked to a purely stochastic view of micromixing and are well suited to Monte Carlo simulations [93]. Many types of mixing models were proposed. The diffusion coef®cient D is assumed constant and kD7´nl s ˆ Dk7´nl s : The ¯ame surface averaged curvature may be modeled from geometrical considerations ( b is a parameter of the model and T(Z 1. When only diffusion is acting. BZ(t) denotes the point where the diffusive ¯ux is zero. t† This attractive model conserves the simplicity of linear relaxation modeling. Multiple choices are possible and have been made (see Ref. The same treatment is applied to any reactive species Yi. the simplest one consists of writing: 2 3 Z 1 1 Z 11 T…Z 1 . the generic form of these models is written [94]: 2 ~ 2P…Z p . L. 9. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 257 The LMSE/IEM model leads to:   1 ~ D7 2 ZuZ ˆ Z p < …Z 2 Z p † tt Making a direct analogy GIEM proposes:   D7 2 ZuZ ˆ Z p < C…Z p .206.194. [95] for a . t) and BZ(t) are determined from Eqs. (257) was ®rst proposed by Curl [206] to simulate the production of droplets of a given diameter by coalescence of two droplets of various sizes and re-dispersion of the two droplets. Micromixing modeling is obviously one of the greatest challenges of turbulent combustion modeling.8. These closures are usually presented in the context of non-continuous interactions of volumes of ¯uid. This approach has similarities with the estimation of the conditional values of x in CMC using b -pdf [192] and is not a full closure of micromixing per se. t†…BZ …t† 2 Z p † …255† review). Veynante.8. the mean scalar dissipation ~ rate x should be previously modeled. Stochastic micromixing closures Micromixing modeling may also be developed by choosing an ad hoc stochastic process mimicking the relaxation of pdfs due to small scale diffusion. t†…BYi …t† 2 Yip † The parameter BYi …t† is then estimated from the fact that micromixing by itself should not change the mean: 2 3 2Yi C…Z. [209] has been utilized with the LMSE (IEM) and Curl's coalescence re-dispersion formulation. according to Eq.104.

Joint velocity/concentrations pdf modeling When the joint pdf of velocity and species enters the problem. Ly. [88.258 D. Expressing the mixing time from linear relaxation hypof ~ thesis. Pdf calculations by Jones and Kakhi [208] using the Curl mixing model [206]. where u7Zu is expected to relax to zero. Veynante. . the need for modeling scalar dissipation rates. where   u7ZuuZ ˆ Z p characterizes laminar ¯ame elements. the IEM model provides an interesting estimation  of the micromixing term around Z ˆ Z p when the turbulent mixing time is correctly calculated [234] but becomes de®cient when Z p tends towards 0 or 1. [207] `L' jet ¯ame (location x=D ˆ 20). experiments have 2 In non-premixed turbulent ¯ames. L. when neglecting the normal displacement speed kwn ls (Section 9. tt < Z HH2 =x and using Eq.2): 2 2 3  1 Z 2 Zp …7´…rD7Z††uZ ˆ Z p ˆ r tt …260† It was shown in (Section 9. Mean curvatures are supposed positive (i. evidencing. This is not the case in premixed combustion.   convex toward Z ˆ 0 region) and negative for Z ˆ 1. one needs to model additional viscous and pressure terms related to velocity ¯uctuations (see Eq. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 Fig. ensuring zero values at either side of the ¯ame brush.4. where the IEM±LMSE model requires a correction to account for kwn ls that is of the order of the laminar ¯ame speed [237]. (258) and (259) shows that the geometrical assumption used to model the mean curvature corresponds to an LMSE±IEM model of the molecular diffusion.121] as in Section 7. This shortcoming is attenuated in the ¯ame surface density context where the surface averaged curvature k7´nl s is multiplied by the ¯ame surface density (Eq.8. (116) under a ¯amelet f assumption yields Ly < Z HH2 =u7Zu: Wrinkling length scales depend on scalar ¯uctuations given by Eq.2) that for a non-reacting scalar. (90)). (208)): k7´nl s < 2  Z 2 Z1 Ly …259† where Ly is a wrinkling length scale of the ¯ame surface  and Z 1 is the Z level where mean curvatures are equal to zero. In turbulent non-reactive ¯ows. are then related as Ly < D u7ZuuZ ˆ Z p tt . (226).e. (113)). Comparison between measurements (left) and numerical predictions (right) of unweighted temperature pdf at different locations in the Masri et al. 9. 45.4 (Eq. once again.6.8. the mean normal displacement speed kwn ls is expected to be negligible against curvature effects [88] because such ¯ames are unable to propagate. The turbulent mixing time t t and the ¯ame wrinkling length   scale.8. The comparison of Eqs.

t†P…Z p †† ˆ 2 p …A…Z p . Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 259 Fig. solid line: coalescence±dispersion micromixing Curl model [206]. t†Š 2up i …261† The physical properties of this closure are included in the tensor Gij. the Langevin model [238] for the pressure and viscous unclosed terms of Eq. As already indicated. Veynante. [207] `B' jet ¯ame. Z p . Z ˆ Z r 2xi 5    2 n7 2 u Hi uu ˆ up . Radial pro®les of CO mass fraction and temperature at different locations in Masri et al. L. The pdf ®eld is decomposed into a set of stochastic particles whose evolution simulates the turbulent ¯ame. The simplest model considers a linear relaxation for the velocity ®eld. x. Using this equivalence. dashed line: LMSE micromixing model (IEM). t†P…Z p †† 1 2t 2Z 2 22 Z p is well reproduced by a stochastic process. each particle . (113) may be written: 42 3 1 2p H p p uu ˆ u . Basic properties of stochastic methods [239] show that an  equation with a diffusive term for a pdf P:  2P…Z p † 2 1 22   …B…Z p . as done in Ref. Z ˆ Z p P…up . t†dW…t† where dW…t† is a white noise (Wiener process). t†   ˆ Gij …up 2 uj †P…up . t†dt 1 B…Z…t†.D. Z . a numerical solution for the pdf implies the development of accurate Monte Carlo solutions [93]. then Gij ˆ …1=2 1 3C0 =4†…1=k†dij . pdf calculations [208]. Reduced chemical scheme of Jones and Lindstedt [209]. More sophisticated methods have been proposed [240]. Closures for the velocity pdf may then be obtained using a Langevin type model. x. shown that the velocity ¯uctuations have pdfs that may be approximated with Gaussian functions. where C0 is a constant. Z p . [238]. x. 46. where a parallel is drawn between Reynolds stress closures (modeled equations for u Hi u Hj ) and the tensor Gij [241]. Z(t). When a Lagrangian context is adopted [242]. similar to the Langevin process: p dZ…t† ˆ A…Z…t†. Two mixing models have been used: ®lled circles: measurements. t† 1 C0 1 j 2  p p ‰P…u . a simple stochastic model reproducing this velocity distribution.

There are many open questions and challenges left. Keyes DE. [5] Roberts WL. [7] Smooke MD. Driscoll JF. are instantaneously identi®ed at the level of the resolved grid.) are added to the complexity of constant-density turbulent ¯ows. [6] Mueller CJ. In most of Monte Carlo simulations. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 n is characterized by its position xp …t†. Vorticity generation and attenuation as vortices convect through a premixed ¯ame. a key quantity representing micromixing of the reactants occurring at the small scales where chemical reactions develop. mainly devoted to feasibility tests (two-dimensional simulations. simply re-written in terms of Favre averaged quantities.67:85±122.) are not intentionally included in the calculations. So far LES modeling is essentially based on the same modeling strategies as the ones described here for RANS turbulent combustion modeling. Numerical solution of two-dimensional axisymmetric laminar diffusion ¯ames. 10. whereas counter-gradient turbulent transport is known to appear in some situations. (261) corresponds to the system for the discrete particles: V b dxin ˆ u b b in b dt b b 2 2 3 b     b ` duin   1 2p 2 ui dWi  ˆ2 1 Gij …ujn 2 uj † 1 …C0 1†1=2 1n r 2xi 2xj 2xj dt b dt b b b b b dY p ~ i 2 Yip † …Y b i b X ˆ 1 v i …Yip † _ …k=1† dt …262† The last dif®culty is the determination of the mean pressure  ®eld …2p=2xi †: Methods have been proposed to calculate it from Monte Carlo simulations [101]. [93±95]. A laminar vortex interacting with a premixed ¯ame: measured formation of pockets of reactants. Reuss DL. Dynamics of combustion fronts in premixed gases: from ¯ames to detonations. Reynolds stresses are generally described from well established turbulent models (mostly k. All these various models are related via a scalar dissipation rate.26:321±52. Premixed combustion and gasdynamics. which illuminate unexpected links between wellknown closure schemes. Few studies have focussed on species turbulent transport. etc. Driscoll JF. 1993. Williams FA. various dif®culties (strong heat release. Fundamental aspects of combustion. Annu Rev Fluid Mech 1994. Ludford G. its velocity up …t† and n n p concentration(s) Yn …t†: The Langevin model given in Eq. 1 ). Conclusion Modeling turbulent combustion is a challenging task. References Ä [1] Linan A. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Combust Sci Technol 1989. LES is at a very early stage for combustion applications and only few works have been done in this direction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. etc. ² LES may directly provide part of the description of turbulence/combustion interactions because zones of fresh and burnt gases. However. the results of these preliminary tests suggest that LES will rapidly become a complementary way to carefully simulate and understand turbulent combustion systems. generally modeled using a gradient expression. but more work is needed to reach a level where liquid atomization. vaporization together with ¯ames are properly described.87:245±56. having different turbulence characteristics. [2] Clavin P. Three main ingredients must be modeled: g ~ ~ ² Reynolds stresses: ui uj 2 ui uj : g ~ ~ ² Turbulent transport of species mass fractions: ui Yk 2 ui Y k :  ² Mean reaction rate of species: v k : _ Most works have focus on re®ned descriptions of the  mean reaction rate v k : To provide this reaction rate. Veynante. 1993.260 D. In turbulent ¯ames. Proc Comb Inst 2000. Theory of laminar ¯ames. [4] Clavin P. Mitchel RE. etc. However. large range of time and length scales. Drake MC. A review of the most classical Reynolds (or Favre) averaged Navier±Stokes (RANS) models has been proposed. which are based on a pure statistical or more oriented geometrical view of turbulent ¯ames. the Lagrangian simulation is coupled with Eulerian calculations of means values providing the mean pressure ®eld and the dissipation rate of the velocity ¯uctuations. ² LES appear as a promising tool to capture combustion instabilities. Rosalik ME. Major models are then directly derived from the proposed expressions.). The precise knowledge of these relations may be useful to understand the exact implications of the underlying physical hypothesis. L. So far. Fully detailed reviews on pdf methods may be found in Refs. ² Flames are mainly driven by mixing. tools _ have been proposed. Combust Flame 1991. DNS with a two-way coupling between a dilute spray and a carrier phase were recently performed to progress in this direction [243] and closures exist [243±245]. combustion effects on the ¯ow (¯ame induced turbulence generation. [3] Buckmaster J. constant density ¯ows. complex chemistry. full pdf methods including a model for the turbulent frequency following a ¯uid particle have also been developed with success [197]. Combust Flame 1998. Nonetheless. One of them is the understanding of the coupling between spray and combustion including detailed chemistry. LES is a good candidate to capture unsteady turbulent mixing. . higher viscous dissipation.112:342±58. RANS combustion models will remain useful for the next few years. large eddy simulations (LES) stands as very promising technique for turbulent combustion: ² Combustion ¯ow ®elds generally exhibit large scale motions [26]. The links and the similarities between combustion models have been demonstrated here.28:569±85.

Ind Engng Chem 1928. Experiments on the scalar structure of turbulent CO/H2/N2 jet ¯ames. Linan A.20:998±1004. Philadelphia: SIAM. [45] Hartley LJ. Prog Energy Combust Sci 1996. editors.21:531±76. [46] Buckmaster J. Mansour MS. Vervisch L. [36] Kim JS. Chen J-Y. p.  [24] Lesieur M. [40] Phillips H. Pittsburgh: The Combustion Institute. Jou WH. editor. Verzicco R.75(1±3):53±72. 1996 p. Moss JB. New Tools in Turbulence Modelling. In: Metais O. Ä [37] Clavin P. Fiechtner GJ. Berlin: Les Editions de PhysiqueÐSpringer. editors. Ferziger J. [16] Poinsot T. Laminar ¯amelets in turbulent ¯ames. Ä [30] Linan A. Combust Flame 2001. Rogg B. [42] Plessing T. 1997. editors. Veynante D. Turbulent reacting ¯ows. Twenty-Sixth Symposium (International) on Combustion.415:227±60.25:127±40. 1969. Annu Rev Fluid Mech 1998. [43] Kioni PN.28:45±82. PA: Edwards. Bray KNC. Large eddy simulations of combustion instability in an axisymmetric ramjet combustor. Combust Sci Technol 1991. Asymptotic and numerical study of diffusion ¯ames with variable Lewis number and ®nite rate chemistry. J Fluid Mech 1994. Effects of heat release on triple ¯ame.116:192±206.80:23±46. Edge-¯ames and their stability. Principles of combustion. 1982. 105±40. Peters N. 1996. [15] Kuo KK. Trouve A. Combust Flame 1998. 1986. The evolution equation for the ¯ame surface density.6(7):1447±54. Direct numerical simulation of nonpremixed turbulent ¯ame. Veynante. [34] Cuenot B. In: Moin P. Direct numerical simulation for turbulent reacting ¯ows. New York: Plenum Press. 2nd ed.384:107±32. [21] Piomelli U. Equations fondamentales de  l'aerothermochimie. p. Greenhalgh DA. An introductive course. Ä [31] Linan A. Reading. Poinsot T. [25] Veynante D. Flame spread in laminar mixing layers: the triple ¯ame. p. Poinsot T. Experimental and numerical studies of a triple ¯ame. Poinsot TJ. 5±18. Stanford University. 269±336. [9] Poinsot T. Paris: Editions Technip.104(1):111±37.22:427±509. Prog Energy Combust Sci 1989. Chasnov JR. Williams FA. Acta Astronaut 1974. Theoretical and numerical investigation of a symmetrical triple ¯ame using a parabolic ¯ame tip approximation. Higuera FJ. 1985. [32] Barlow RS. Kumar A. Flame propagation in a nonuniform mixture: analysis of a slowly varying triple ¯ame. Berlin: Les Editions de PhysiqueÐ Springer. 2001. editors. Bray KNC. In: Libby PA. [12] Vervisch L. In:  Metais O. Baum M. Orlandi P. Metais O. Poinsot T. Vervisch L. 423±31. Moin P. [18] Favre A. New trends in large-eddy simulations of turbulence. 63±113. Combustion in high speed ¯ows. 1983. Ä [41] Kioni PN. Large eddy simulation: an introduction and  perspective. Pittsburgh: The Combustion Institute. 219±32. 1994. [22] Ferziger J. Tenth Symposium (International) on Combustion. Combust Sci Technol 1981. [28] Ghosal S. J Comp Phys 1995. Prud'homme R. The turbulent burning velocity for large-scale and small-scale turbulence. p. In: Verlarde MG. Applications of direct numerical simulations of premixed turbulent combustion. Vervisch L. Using direct numerical simulations to understand premixed turbulent combustion. 1997. Combust Flame 1993. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Coherent structures in combustion. Candel S. 1965. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 [8] Givi P. In: SIAM. Effects of nonunity Lewis numbers in diffusion ¯ames. Henningson DS. Ferziger J. [23] Lesieur M. . Combust Flame 2000. Schumann TEW. Flame propagation in a nonuniform mixture: analysis of a propagating triple-¯ame. Combust Flame 1989. Á [13] Barrere M. 1994. Theoretical and numerical combustion. Annu Rev Fluid Mech 1996. Moss JB. Masuya G. Combust Flame 1996. editor. Model free simulations of turbulent reactive ¯ows.D. Theory of gaseous combustion. Reynolds WC.118:24±37. Berlin: Les Editions de PhysiqueÐ Springer. [33] Bray KNC. Large eddy simulations: theory and È applications. Jackson TL. Prog Energy Combust Sci 1996. Recent approaches in large-eddy simulations of  turbulence. The asymptotic structure of counter¯ow diffusion ¯ames for large activation energies. Ignition and ¯ame spread in laminar mixing layer.95:276. Rogg B. Ferziger J. Turbulence and transition modelling. New tools in turbulence modelling. Combust Flame 1998.  [11] Poinsot T. Combust Flame 2000. In: Metais O. [48] Bourlioux A. p. 1973. Terhoeven P. Combust Sci Technol 1991.76:71±88. editors. Turbulent transport in con®ned premixed ¯ame. p. Edge ¯ames and partially premixed combustion in diffusion ¯ame quenching. 19th Symposium (International) on Combustion. Statistical equations of turbulent gases.115(3):335±53.  [17] Trouve A.1007(1). [27] Menon S. [14] Williams FE. The basic equations for the large eddy simulation of turbulent ¯ows in complex geometry. Poinsot T. MA: Addison-Wesley. [44] Dold JW. [20] Shepherd IG. 231±66. 1996. Combust Sci Technol 1996. Diffusion ¯ames. J Fluid Mech 2000. [19] Bray KNC. Paris: Masson. Alfredsson PH. [10] Baritaud T. London: Academic Press. Extinction of diffusion ¯ames with nonunity Lewis numbers. Asymptotic and numerical study of the stabilization of diffusion ¯ames by hot gas. 1994. 461. 1997. Philadelphia. Ä [39] Linan A.31:101±18.278:1±31. 1±28. Stanford. 29±47. Bray KNC. New tools in turbulence modelling. p. Linan A. [26] Coats CM. Dold JW. An experimental and numerical study on a laminar triple ¯ame. J Engng Math 1997.115:41±68. L. Pittsburgh: The Combustion Institute. New York: Wiley. CA: CTR.15:1±107. Reynolds averaged and large eddy simulation modeling for turbulent combustion. [47] Ghosal S. Turbulence production in premixed turbulent ¯ames. [38] Favier V.120(1/2). [35] Burke SP. Problems of hydrodynamics and continuum mechanics. J Fluid Mech 1999. Peters N. editors. Carter CD. p. Libby PA. In: Hallback H.30:655±92. 261 [29] Peters N. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Cuenot B.125(1/2):788±803. p. Phys Fluids 1995. Johansson AV. Poinsot T. Combustion theory. Non equilibrium cooperative phenomena in physics and related ®elds. Studying turbulence using numerical databasesÐV. Ä [49] Ruetsch GR. Linan A. Williams FA. In: Buckmaster J.120(4):549±69. Flame in a buoyant methane layer.

A capturing±tracking hybrid scheme for de¯agration discontinuities. 1996. 1978. J Fluid Mech 1991. [58] Nieuwstadt FTM. Veynante D. [55] Vervisch L. editors. Lee. 1231±50. Combust Flame 1995. One-dimensional propagation of a premixed turbulent ¯ame with a balance equation for the ¯ame surface density. Veynante D. Nieuwstadt FTM. [64] Tennekes H. 233±40. Van Kalmthout E.70:1±15. An experimental and numerical study on a laminar triple ¯ame. Kleiser L. Combust Theor Model 2000. p. Cook A. Laminar ¯amelet concepts in turbulent combustion.102(3):285± 97. Twenty-First Symposium (International) on Combustion. Field equation for interface propagation in an unsteady homogeneous ¯ow ®eld. Mahalingam S. Echekki T. [53] Favier V. Pittsburgh: The Combustion Institute. Combust Sci Technol 1993:90. Williams FA.37(7):2728±31. 1994. Mansour MS. p. chemical and physical principles. p. Poinsot TJ. 115. Int J Engng Sci 1988. A ®rst course in turbulence. Candel S. Pittsburgh: The Combustion Institute. [70] Cuenot B. Bray KNC. Proc Combust Inst 2000. Paris 6. Veynante D. Nonpremixed reacting ¯ows near extinction. The evolution of surfaces in turbulence. Moser V. Direct and large eddy simulation II. 1972. Combust Sci Technol 1991. 1239±45. [63] Peters N. Chen JH. 1988. p. New York: Springer. Large-eddy simulation of air pollution dispersion: a review. Williams FA.14:245±92. [59] Meeder JP. Subgrid-scale segregation of chemically reactive species in a neutral boundary layer. Piana J. [66] Roberts WL. 1997. Using numerics to help understanding of nonpremixed turbulent ¯ames. Chaffee Hall. Veynante. Finite-rate chemistry and transient effects in direct numerical simulations of turbulent nonpremixed ¯ames. Goss LP. 1997. p. Â [56] Borghi R. Chen JH. Turbulent reacting ¯ows. Smiljanovski V. In: 29th Aerospace Science Meeting. Poinsot T. [68] Borghi R. J Comp Phys 1996. Large eddy simulations of turbulent premixed ¯ames using a capturing/tracking hybrid approach. 1991. Poinsot T. Twenty-Second Symposium (International) on Combustion. Direct and large eddy simulation II. 1997.129(2):263±83. 301±10. Pitz RW. Pittsburgh: The Combustion Institute. [61] Borghi R. Cambridge: MIT Press. Libby PA.114(1/2):231±45.262 D.143:25±62. Candel S. Candel S. In: Buckmaster JD. In: Metais O.228:561±606. 1998. Combust Theor Model 1997.26(5):445±69. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 combustion. Turbulent combustion: fundamental aspects and a review. Philadelphia: SIAM. Direct numerical simulation of a turbulent reactive plume on a parallel computer. Kollmann W. Kerstein AR. Louisiana 1996. [57] Villasenor R. Veynante D.28:11±24.115(3):335±53. TwentySixth Symposium (International) on Combustion. 2±61. 1986. 44. New Orleans. Meeder JP. Voke PR. Combust Sci Technol 1990. Williams FA. Interaction between chemical reaction and turbulence in supersonic non-premixed H2 ±air combustion. Project Squid Headquarters. p. Peters N. Cuenot B. Broadwell JE.7(10):2496± 503. Driscoll JF. Pittsburgh: The Combustion Institute. Vervisch L. TwentySixth Symposium (International) on Combustion. Kleiser L. Vervisch L. Lumley JL. In: Chollet JP.94:58±69. 1998. Mongia HC. [60] Bray KNC. Pittsburgh: The Combustion Institute. Terhoven P. Fichot F. Phys Fluids A 1995. editors. editor. In: Libby PA. [62] Borghi R. p. [67] Bilger RW. [69] Y. Bourlioux A. Combust Flame 1998. Vervisch L.4(1):77. The mathematics of combustion. Purdue University. Surface density function in premixed turbulent combustion modeling. 1977. [51] Plessing T. 1994. Phys Rev A 1988. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. 1996. Effects of unsteadiness in edge-¯ames and liftoff in non-premixed turbulent combustion. Effects of curvature and unsteadiness in diffusion ¯ames. Combust Flame 1998. PhD Thesis. Kim W-W. Ashurst W. PhD Â Thesis.124(4)646±55. Klein R. Turbulent combustion. Williams FA. vol.81(1±3):45. Sixth International Conference on Numerical Combustion. Destriau M. Combust Flame 1993. L. 1980. p. Structure and propagation of methanol± air triple ¯ames. Project Squid TRW-9-PU. Topics in applied physics. Williams FA. Flame stretch and the balance equation for the ¯ame area. Pope SB. In: Libby PA. Stability diagram for lift-off and blowout of a round jet laminar diffusion ¯ame. Quenching processes and premixed turbulent combustion diagrams. Twenty-Fifth Symposium (International) on Combustion. [52] Echekki T. Lacas F.1(2):183±215. In: Chollet JP. Paris: Editions Technip. The challenge of turbulent combustion. Egolfopoulos FN. Moser V. The coherent ¯ame model of nonpremixed turbulent combustion. Combust Flame 2001. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Poinsot T. editors. Reno (Nevada). [65] Poinsot T. Ferziger J. Klein R. Drake MC. similarities between probability density function and ¯ame surface approach. Combust Sci Technol 1999. Marble FE. Candel S. 264±80. Bray KNC. On the structure and morphology of turbulent premixed ¯ames. Universite Pierre et Marie Curie. Berlin: Les Editions de PhysiqueÐSpringer. editors. Riley JJ. Cornell University. Reactions chimiques en milieu turbulent. New tools in turbulence modelling. Bidaux E. AIAA paper 91-0375. [54] Ghosal S. 1985. p. implications for turbulent diffusion [71] [72] [73] [74] [75] [76] [77] [78] [79] [80] [81] [82] [83] [84] [85] [86] [87] [88] . Mungal MG. Images of the quenching of a ¯ame by a vortex: to quantify regimes of turbulent combustion. Menon S. 1994. Pittsburgh: The Combustion Institute. Triple ¯ames and partially premixed combustion in autoignition of nonpremixed mixtures. Turbulent ¯ows with premixed reactants in turbulent reacting ¯ows. Rec Adv Aerosp Sci 1985:117±38. Vervisch L. Direct numerical simulation analysis of the G-equation in premixed combustion. TwentySeventh Symposium (International) on Combustion.Y. A study of the laminar ¯ame tip and implications for premixed turbulent combustion. editors. Chen JY. 321±30. Vervisch L. Prog Energy Combust Sci 1988. Direct numerical simulations [50] Domingo P. An unsteady laminar ¯amelet model for nonpremixed combustion. London: Academic Press. 116±51. Combustion and ¯ames. Turbulent combustion modelling. Poinsot T. Voke PR. The structure of turbulent non premixed ¯ames. Large-eddy simulation of a gas turbine combustor ¯ow.

Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 analysis of ¯ame surface density models for non premixed turbulent combustion. Abramowitz M. Spalding DB. Veynante D. Experimental analysis of ¯ame surface density model for premixed turbulent combustion. Gouldin FC. 111±36.5(2):327±34. Pdf method for turbulent reacting ¯ows. Etude theorique et experimentale d'une ¯amme  turbulente stabilisee par un barreau cylindrique. Conditional moment closure of mixing and reaction in turbulent nonpremixed combustion. Prog Energy Combust Sci 1999. Pittsburgh: The Combustion Institute. 1997. Twenty-Second Symposium (International) on Combustion. p. Ecole Centrale Paris. Pittsburgh: The Combustion Institute.  Poinsot T. 541±63.D. Abdel-Gayed RG. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Proceedings of the 1996 Summer Program. Phys Fluids A 1997. 40. Twenty-Third Symposium (International) on Combustion. The pdf approach to turbulent ¯ow. A uni®ed statistical model of the premixed turbulent ¯ame. Kollmann W. Stanford. Williams FA. Lundgren TS. Pope SB. Said R. p. Turbulent reacting ¯ows. Lecture Notes in Engineering. Analyse de modeles. Yakhot V. Phys Fluids 1993. Chemical closure and burning rates in . Orszag CG. 1984. 569±77. 1990.80:304±12. In: Libby PA. Im HG. L. Veynante D.   Duclos JM. Gouldin FC. London: Academic Press.116(4):519±45. Duclos JM. Twenty-Sixth Symposium (International) on Combustion. Mantel T. 505±12. Annual research briefs.99:581±90. Libby PA. 52±5. p. The development of a new ¯ame area combustion model using conditional averaging. Ecole Centrale Paris. Imperial College of Science Technology and Medicine. Bilger RW. USA: Dover. Piana J. Development of turbulence models for shear ¯ows by a double expansion technique. Twenty-Sixth Symposium (International) on Combustion. editors. Pittsburgh: The Combustion Institute. Duclos JM. 185. 1988 p. Borghi R.9(12):3826±33. Pittsburgh: The Combustion Institute. Murphy SN. Turbulent reacting ¯ows. Computations of turbulent combustion: progress and challenges. Combust Flame 1994. 1998. Prog Energy Combust Sci 1985. Stegun IA. Williams FA. 649±57. Experimental analysis of ¯amelet models for premixed turbulent combustion. 1996. 213±308. Berlin: Springer. Turbulent combustion. editors. Weller HG. Scott MJ. Fluid Dynam 1990. Comparison of prediction and measurement in non-premixed turbulent ¯ames. Borghi R.10(9):2347±68. Peters N. p. 1996. Lewis number effects on turbulent burning velocity. Statistical description of the turbulent mixing of scalar ®elds. Piana J. 1994. Ruetsch G. 23rd Symposium (International) on Combustion. Marooney CJ. Martel C. Acta Astronaut 1977. p. 1990. Valino L. A simulation with a cellular automaton for turbulent combustion modelling.10(5):969±75.4(7): 1510. 2000. 20th Sympo- 263 [89] [90] [110] [111] [91] [112] [92] [113] [114] [93] [94] [95] [96] [97] [115] [116] [117] [118] [119] [98] [99] [100] [101] [102] [103] [104] [120] [121] [122] [123] [124] [105] [106] [107] [108] [109] [125] [126] sium (International) on Combustion. Phys Fluids 1967. The interaction between turbulence and chemistry in premixed turbulent ¯ames. Reynolds WC. Recent developments in pdf methods. Fuego F. Bray KNC. vol. UK. Hamid MN.25(6):595±687. Klimenko AY. PhD Thesis. Gosman AD. Center for Turbulence Research.76:213±8. Libby PA. A new model of premixed wrinkled ¯ame propagation based on a scalar dissipation equation. 1996. 1988. 85±99. NY. Bradley D. 1994. Twenty-Second Symposium (International) on Combustion. Lawes M. Conditional moment closure for turbulent reacting ¯ow. Turbulent ¯ame propagation in partially premixed ¯ames. In: Williams FA. Veynante D. Turbulent reacting ¯ows. p. Veynante. The probability density function (pdf) approach to reacting turbulent ¯ows.135:153±73. 375±474.  Martel C. Mixing and chemical reaction in steady con®ned turbulent ¯ames. Int J Mod Phys B 1997. Pittsburgh: The Combustion Institute. editors. Bradley D. p. Weller HG. editors. Smith NSA. p. CA: CTR. editors. 1993. Gouldin FC. Assessment of combustion submodels for turbulent nonpremixed hydrocarbon ¯ames. Etude experimentale de la combustion turbulente    Á premelangee. Phys Fluids A 1998. 381±8. Turbulent reacting ¯ows.4:291±319. Phys Fluids 1992. Combust Flame 1999. Chen JY. Lawes M. Large eddy simulation of turbulent front propagation with dynamic subgrid models. Ferziger JH. Pittsburgh: The Combustion Institute. Dopazo C. 1993. TwentyFifth Symposium (International) on Combustion. Combustion regimes and the straining of turbulent premixed ¯ames. Turbulent premixed combustion: further discussions on the scales of ¯uctuations. Stanford University.25:327. 13th Symposium (International) on Combustion. Pdf modeling of chemical nonequilibrium effects in turbulent non-premixed hydrocarbon ¯ames.11:119±95. Pope SB. Miles PC. p. Thangam S. Moss JB. Swaminathan N. Combust Flame 1989. A new spectral method for calculation of the time-varying area of a laminar ¯ame in homogeneous turbulence.96(4):443. Trouve A.11(25). Champion M. 1980. p. London: Academic Press. 1989. 413±20. Bradley D. Bruel P.1:285±349. London: Academic Press. Pittsburgh: The Combustion Institute. Combustion intensity and burning rate integral of premixed ¯ames. Joint Meeting of the British and German Sections of the Combustion Institute. Combust Flame 1990. Pittsburgh: The Combustion Institute. O'Brien EE. Theor Comp Fluid Dynam 1990. Chen J-Y. Gatski TB. Kollmann W. Lahjaily H. Bilger RW. Combust Sci Technol 1998. Bray KNC. Pittsburgh: The Combustion Institute. Review of closure models for the ¯amelet regime of premixed turbulent combustion. Queens' College. Distribution function in the statistical theory of turbulence. Combust Flame 1994. In: Moin P. PhD Thesis. In: Libby PA. In: Borghi R. Speziale CG. p. Borghi R. Dopazo C. Introduction of dilution in the BML model: application to a stagnating turbulent ¯ame. Kollmann W. Handbook of mathematical functions. 1996. Abdel-Gayed RG. Thermo-Fluids Section Report TF/9307. p. 1970. Cambridge. Bilger RW. Karmed D. Lund TS. Klimenko AY. Champion M. 629±36. 1994. 1971.

Poinsot T. 719±29. Bray KNC. Gore JP. 27th Symposium International on Combustion 1998. Kalt PAM.96(4):351± 70.99:687±96. 1986. Modelling of ¯amelet surface to volume ratio in turbulent premixed combustion. AIAA J 1981. Stanford. Effects of heat release in turbulent. Dimotakis PE.120(1/2):1±18. J Fluid Mech 1997.  Bailly P.117(3):514±28. 95±124. Bruel P. Domingo P. Combust Flame 1999. Garreton D. Combust Flame 1998. In: Moin P. In: Center for Turbulence Research. Turbulent transport in premixed ¯ames. Non gradient theory for oblique turbulent ¯ame with premixed reactants. 1998. Libby PA. editor. Gradient and counter-gradient scalar transport in turbulent premixed ¯ames. CA: CTR. In: Zierep J. Bray KNC. Proceedings of the Summer Program. Choi CR.114(3/4):336±48. Premixed ¯ames in stagnating turbulence part iv: a new theory for the Reynolds stresses and Reynolds ¯uxes applied to impinging ¯ows. Evaluation des termes de transport et de  dissipation de surface de ¯amme par simulation numerique directe de la combustion turbulente. J Fluid Mech 1997. 809±15. Combust Sci Technol 1989. Pittsburgh: The Combustion Institute. 1994. Poinsot T. Computational methods for ¯uid dynamics. Sixteenth Symposium (International) on Combustion.  Ferziger JH. L.68:15±33. Combust Flame 2000. PhD Thesis. London: Academic Press. Dopazo C. 1996.121(4):555±74. Turbulent transport in premixed turbulent ¯ames. Chemical closure model for fractal ¯amelets. Theoretical analysis of the effect of gravity on premixed turbulent ¯ames. Trouve A. Priddin CH. Poinsot T. Experimenal investigation of turbulent scalar ¯ux in premixed ¯ames. Sivathanu YR. Sanquer S. [127] [128] [146] [129] [147] [148] [130] [131] [149] [150] [132] [151] [133] [134] [152] [153] [154] [135] [136] [137] [138] [139] [155] [156] [157] [158] [159] [140] [141] [142] [143] [144] [145] [160] [161] [162] . 1996. Pittsburgh: The Combustion Institute. Turbulent combustion of premixed ¯ames in closed vessels. Bray KNC. Libby PA. A comparison of ¯amelet models for premixed turbulent combustion. Cheng WK. Pope SB. Bray KNC. Effects of pressure gradients on turbulent premixed ¯ames. Chen JY. Coupland J. Deshaies B. Boger M. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 premixed turbulent ¯ames. Study of premixed turbulent combustion including Landau±Darrieus instability effects. In: Durst F. Studying turbulence using numerical databasesÐV.  Bailly P. Meneveau C.116(1±2):1±14. Stanford University. Mixing and chemical reactions in turbulent liquid mixing layer. Hermanson JC. University of Sydney. Gouldin FC.199:297±332. Boughanem H. Pittsburgh: The Combustion Institute. Combust Flame 1995.19:205±13.264 D. Jones WP. 23rd Symposium (International) on Combustion. Development of a coherent ¯amelet model for a spark ignited turbulent premixed ¯ame in a closed vessel. TwentySixth Symposium (International) on Combustion. Turbulent reacting ¯ows. p. p. Contribution l'etude de l'interaction turbulenceÐ Â Â Á combustion dans les ¯ammes turbulentes de premelange a Á  l'aide de modeles du second ordre. Dimotakis PE. On the mathematical modeling of turbulent combustion with special emphasis on soot formation and combustion. Stanford. The production of premixed ¯ame surface area in turbulent shear ¯ow. p.199: 333±75. Bray KNC. 1483±91. An evaluation of ¯ame surface density models for turbulent premixed jet ¯ames. International Congress and Exposition. PhD Thesis. J Fluid Mech 1986. An evaluation of combined ¯ame surface density and mixture fraction models for nonisenthalpic premixed turbulent ¯ames. Trouve A. Prasad ROS. Modeling of wrinkled laminar ¯ames with intermittency and conditional statistics. Veynante.81:433±8. Bray KNC. Countergradient diffusion in premixed turbulent ¯ames. Moss JB. editors.77:241±59. Combust Flame 2000. Pittsburgh: The Combustion Institute. p. Masuya G. Berlin: Springer. Huh KY. p. Combust Flame 1993. p. 1982. Bray KNC. The coupling between ¯ame surface dynamics and species mass conservation in premixed turbulent combustion. Mantel T.  Trouve A. Schmidt FW. Eighth European Turbulence Conference.170:83±112. Stretching and quenching of ¯amelets in premixed turbulent combustion.86:311±32. Modelling of ¯ow and combustion in a production gas turbine combustor. Veynante D. Combust Flame 1994. 1996. Libby PA. Lumley JL. Lumley JL. Duplantier S. editors. Veynante D. Paul RN. Gore JP. Combust Flame 1994. J Fluid Mech 1989. Champion M. Bray KNC. Combust Flame 1989. Reynolds WC. Germany: University of Karlsuhe. Libby P. On conditioned averages for intermittent turbulent ¯ows. Detroit. 1999.332:263±93. Barcelona 2000. Checkel MD. 1976. 1994. Peric M. p. Williams FA. Laminar ¯amelet expressions for pressure ¯uctuation terms in second moment models of premixed turbulent combustion. reacting shear layer. 1994. Rutland C.  Trouve A. Experimental and numerical study of a premixed ¯ame stabilized by a rectangular section cylinder. Bray KNC. 1990. 1996. Convective transport and instability phenomena. The occurence of ¯ame instabilities in turbulent premixed combustion. Orleans. Champion M.19:205±13. J Fluid Mech 1977. Universite de Poitiers. Twenty-Sixth Symposium (International) on Combustion. Diringer JA.  Boughanem H. Thomas A. Stanford: Center for Turbulence Research. Effects of heat release on the large-scale structure in turbulent mixing layer. Combust Flame 1999. Oertel H. 75±94. Gouldin FC. Mantel T. Whitelaw JH.100(1/ 2):201. 923±30. Turbulence modelling and numerical solution methods for variable density and combusting ¯ows. 1987. Launder BE. Combust Flame 1991. Pittsburgh: The Combustion Institute. In: Libby PA. SAE paper 910268. J Fluid Mech 1989. McMurty PA. editors. Veynante D. 1991. Koochesfahani MM. p. Magnussen BF. Cant RS. Turbulent shear ¯ows 5th. Veynante D. AIAA J 1981. Riley JJ. 21st Symposium (International) on Combustion. PhD Thesis. Paul RN. Duclos JM.  Veynante D. Berlin: Springer.353:83±114. Metcalfe RW. 259±66. Cant RS. France.95(1/2):101±18. Libby PA. Large eddy simulations of a turbulent premixed V-shape ¯ame. p. editors. 309±68. Prasad ROS. 310±23. Numerical modelling of SI engine combustion with a ¯ame sheet model. University of Rouen. Chen JY. Simonin O. Hjertager BH.

[168] Rogg B. [188] Van Kalmthout E. Peters N. Combust Sci Technol 1988. A linear-eddy model for turbulent scalar transport and mixing. Grenoble. Appendix C. Borghi R. NV. [183] Bradley D. Pope SB. Pope SB. A Monte Carlo treatment for reacting and coalescing dispersed phase systems. Wang H. Stanford University. Reno.6:67±87. Berlin: Springer. Trygvason G. Chen JY. 1995. in a temporally developing shear layer. 1996. [192] Girimaji SS. Ruetsch GR. Pittsburgh: The Combustion Institute. Kosaly G. 1998. 1057±64.11(6):1550±71. Dahm WJA. An unsteady laminar ¯amelet model for non-premixed combustion. On the structure of nonsooting counter¯ow ethylene and acetylene diffusion ¯ames. 1099±106. CA: CTR. Veynante D. Dahm WJA. Ferziger JH. In: AIAA Paper 93-0248. Candel S. Law CK. p. [170] Bish ES.27:1199± 206. Lagrangian model simulations of molecular mixing. Peters N. p. Rogg B. Pittsburgh: The Combustion Institute. Studying turbulence using numerical databasesÐVII. [186] Fichot F. Twenty-Fifth Symposium (International) on Combustion. [197] Van Slooten Jayesh PR. 39±60. Combust Flame 1994. [167] Sung CJ. [184] Cuenot B.7(5):1082±94. Chen M. France 1997. Combust Sci Technol 1995.102:481±92. 1994. p. Measurements of scalar dissipation in the reaction zones of turbulent nonpremixed H2 ±air ¯ames. 1994. Pittsburgh: The Combustion Institute. A ®eld Monte Carlo formulation for calculating the probability density function of a single scalar in turbulent ¯ow. Peters N. Gonzalez M. Pope SB. Nilsen VN. Combust Sci Technol 1991. A lagrangian simulation of ¯amelet extinction and re-ignition in turbulent jet diffusion ¯ames. Ecole Centrale Paris. Nonpremixed turbulent reacting ¯ow near extinction. Chem Engng Sci 1965. Gu XJ. Combust Sci Technol 1992. Stanford.3(5):1300±11. The Cambridge universal laminar ¯amelet computer code. Reduced kinetic mechanisms for applications in combustion systems. Blint RJ. [191] Ravet F. 1993. Brown TM. Peters N.101:501±28. [177] Pitsh H. TwentySecond Symposium (International) on Combustion. Combust Flame 1998:114. Poinsot T. Simulation and modeling of reactive particles in turbulent nonpremixed combustion. Strain rate modelling for a ¯ame surface density equation with application to non-premixed turbulent combustion. Veynante D. [199] Valino L. p. Structural response of counter¯ow diffusion ¯ames to strain rate variations.91:179±86. p. 952357. Pittsburgh: The Combustion Institute. Zurich. Riley JJ.4:77±97. Breitbach H. [189] Obounou M. Bray KNC.60:391±421. 1988. 1±10.99:775±83.10(1): 246±65. Combust Theor Mod 2000. Phys Fluid 1991.4:2529. NV 1998. È [185] Muller CM. Reno. SAE Paper. [200] Fox RO. Flamelet modelling of stabilization in turbulent non-premixed combustion. [166] Sun CJ. Law CK. Swiss Federal Institute of Technology. [171] Ferreira JC. Combust Flame 1990(82). 1993. Combust Flame 1995. PhD Thesis. Vervisch L. PhD Thesis. The spectral relaxation model of the scalar dissipation rate in homogeneous turbulence. Oefelein J. ETH. Phys Fluids 1992. 36th Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit AIAA paper 98-1027. 1998. Western States Section Fall Meeting. 589±97. [195] Fox RO. Flow Turb Combust 1998. [179] Delhaye B. Kosaly G. 25th Symposium (International) on Combustion. Reynolds WC.105:211±27. Levenspiel O. Advances in pdf modeling for inhomogeneous turbulent ¯ows. [187] van Kalmthout E. Analysis of ¯ame surface density concepts in non-premixed turbulent combustion using direct numerical simulation. Simulation and modeling of reactive shear layers. Phys Fluids 1995. 1990. Pittsburgh: The Combustion Institute. Lucht RP. Combust Flame 1995. [190] Broadwell JE. p. A lagrangian model for predicting turbulent diffusion ¯ames with chemical kinetic effects. [164] Montgomery CJ. p. Â [178] Mell WE. The lagrangian spectral relaxation model for differential diffusion in homogeneous turbulence. Sung CJ. 1107±13. Twenty-Fifth Symposium (International) on Combustion. Veynante D. Prog Energy Combust Sci page 1984:319. Etude des ¯ammes de diffusion turbulentes. Rogg B. Proc Combust Inst 1998. 693±8. Gaskell PH. A strained dissipation and reaction layer formulation for turbulent diffusion ¯ames. Dibble RW. In: Peters N. [198] Spielman LA. Pitz RW. Veynante D. Direct numerical simulation investigation of the conditional moment closure model for nonpremixed turbulent reacting ¯ows. [180] Delhaye B. Unsteady ¯amelet modeling of turbulent hydrogen±air diffusion ¯ames. editors. Theoret Comput Fluid Dynam 1994. [173] Pitsch H. including ®nite rate chemical reactions. Lutz A. Eleventh Symposium on Turbulent Shear Flows. [175] Darabiha N. [165] Peters N. 2-d Simulation of turbulent autoignition with transient laminar ¯amelet source term closure. [174] Zhang Y. Pittsburgh: The Combustion Institute. Phys Fluids 1998. Keller D. editors. Computational methods for turbulent reacting ¯ows . 1994. L.107(4):321±35. Phys Fluids 1999. [181] Chang CHH. Delhaye B. Wan YP. Partially premixed turbulent ¯ame propagation in jets ¯ames. [193] Smith NSA. Pittsburgh: The Combustion Institute. Â Simulations directes et modelisation. Candel S. 1994. Candel S. The importance of time-dependent ¯ame structures in stretched laminar ¯amelet models for turbulent jet diffusion ¯ames. A turbulent jet chemical reaction model: NOx production in jet ¯ames. Combust Flame 1996. [169] Nandula SP. Riley JJ. 265 [182] Lee YY. Direct numerical simulation analysis of ¯ame surface density equation in nonpremixed turbulent combustion.60(2):157±72. Twenty-Sixth Symposium (International) on Combustion.20:247±54. Direct numerical simulation of turbulent H2 ±O2 combustion using reduced chemistry.D. Drake MC. Transient behaviour of laminar counter¯ow hydrogen±air diffusion ¯ames with complex chemistry. [196] Fox RO. [172] Haworth DC. 1993. The mathematical modeling of liftoff and blowoff of turbulent non-premixed methane jet ¯ames at high strain rate.86:163±81. In: Moin P. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 [163] Barlow RS. Modeling non-premixed turbulent combustion in aeronautical engines using pdf-generator. Twenty-Third Symposium (International) on Combustion. Veynante. Twenty-Seventh Symposium (International) on Combustion. [194] Kerstein AR. 1996. Egolfopoulos FN. [176] Mauss F. Pittsburgh: The Combustion Institute. 31st Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit. Liu JB.

Part 7. Pdf modeling of ®nite rate chemistry effects in turbulent nonpremixed jet ¯ames. AIChE J 1989. Phys Fluids A 1991. Improved Fokker±Planck model for the joint scalar. Ros J.231:361±94. Dutta A. Phys Fluids 1991. Vervisch L. Kollmann W. Dopazo C.115(1/2):210±29. Gao F.73:233±49. Linear-eddy modelling of turbulent transport. Norris AT. Phys Fluids A 1991. Part 6. Mapping closure and non-gaussianity of the scalar probability density functions in isotropic turbulence. Monte Carlo implementation and analytic solution of an inert-scalar turbulent-mixing test problem using mapping closure. Valino L. Revue de L'Institut Fran cais du Petrole 1996. On velocity-conditioned scalar mixing in homogeneous turbulence. Bilger RW. Pope SB. A binomial sampling model for scalar turbulent mixing.51(2).1(6):334±48. Phys Fluids 1979.  [234] Reveillon J. Global reaction schemes for hydrocarbon combustion.3(9):2191±8. Jones WP. Pdf modeling and analysis of thermal NO formation in turbulent nonpremixed hydrogen±air jet ¯ames. L. J Scient Comput 1988. Pope SB. [231] Masri AR. Combust Flame 1998. Closure of the transport equation for the probability density function of turbulent scalar ®elds. Dopazo C.37:521±35. Ecole Centrale Paris. Phys Fluids 1994. [232] Fox RO.26:23. Handbook of stochastic methods. Combust Flame 1992.4(5):1028±35. Calculations of premixed turbulent ¯ames by pdf methods. Theory and effects in simple reactors. Direct numerical simulation of the turbulent mixing of a passive scalar. 1731±8. Phys Fluids 1991. An analytical solution for the scalar probability density function in homogeneous turbulence. [201] [202] [203] [204] [205] [206] [207] [208] [209] [210] [211] [212] [213] [214] [215] [216] [217] [218] [219] [220] [221] [222] [223] .4(47). A generalized Langevin model for turbulent ¯ows. p. Vervisch L. [244] Hollmann C. University of New York. Combust Flame 1991. AIChE J 1964. 1998. Pope SB. Janicka J. Finite rate chemistry and multi-stream mixing.35(12). Combust Flame 1987:67. Kollmann W.  [243] Reveillon J. Turbulent non-premixed ¯ames of methane near extinction. [239] Gardiner CW.36(3):336±41. Theoret Comput Fluid Dynam 1991. Closures for probability distributions. On the existence of a stochastic Lagrangian model representation for secondmoment closures. Combust Flame 1998.31(3):506±20.3(6). Micromixing phenomena in stirred reactors. Masri AR. Bull Am Phys Soc 1989. Twenty-Sixth Symposium (International) on Combustion. Chem Engng Process 1998. Stony Brook. AIAA J 1998.29:208±28. A mapping closure for multispecies ®ckian diffusion. Spray vaporization in non-premixed turbulent ¯ames: a single droplet model. [236] Subramaniam S. Dopazo C. Eswaran V. Subramaniam S.34:2298.3(10):2438±44. Microstructure of diffusive scalar mixing ®elds. [240] Pope SB. Phys Fluids A 1991. Phys Fluids 1994. Annu Rev Fluid Mech 1994.83:27±42. Villermaux J. 1997. Ind Engng Chem Res 1998:6. [225] Gao F. Combust Sci Technol 1982. A binomial langevin model for turbulent mixing. Phys Fluids 1986.2:255±70. PhD Thesis. Combust Flame 2001. Linear-eddy modelling of turbulent transport. A mixing model for turbulent reactive ¯ows based on Euclidean minimum spanning trees. Curl RI.3(4):511±3. Berlin: Springer. Dopazo C. [235] Subramaniam S.240:289±313. On the relationship between lagrangian micromixing models and computational ¯uid dynamics. AIChE J 1963. Non-isothermal turbulent reactive ¯ows: stochastic approaches. scalar gradient pdf. Pope SB.175(9). 1996. Pope SB. Ë Corrsin S. Pittsburgh: The Combustion Institute. Pope SB. J Fluid Mech 1991.10:870±7.6:973±85.3(1):25±43.28:131±5. [228] Jiang T-L. Turbulent mixing model based on ordered pairing. Leonard A.117(4):732±54. Arbitrary Schmidt number. [233] Fox RO. Phys Fluids 1996. Lindstedt RP. Hill J. Part II.88:397±412. Mapping closure for turbulent mixing and reaction. J Fluid Mech 1992.22(20). The bmc/giem model for micromixing in non-premixed turbulent reacting ¯ows.121(1/2):75±90. Valino L. 1973.73:261±8. A mixing model to improve the pdf simulation of turbulent diffusion ¯ames. Closure models for turbulent reacting ¯ows. [242] Pope SB. Phys Fluids 1982. Combust Flame 1988. Valino L. Encycl Fluid Mech 1986:707. PhD Thesis. Givi P. Combust Flame 1998.8(7):1702±4.266 D. Gao F. Phys Fluids A 1992. [238] Haworth DC. An improved turbulent mixing model. [230] Fox RO.8(10):2678±91. Binary and trinary scalar mixing by Fickian diffusionÐsome mapping closure results. Relaxation of initial probability density functions in the turbulent convection of scalar ®elds. Pittsburgh: The Combustion Institute. Á   [245] Calimez X. [229] Kerstein AR. [237] Anand MS. Direct numerical simulation of turbulent ¯ows with chemical reaction.115(4):487±514. Joint probability density function of a scalar and its gradient in isotropic turbulence. Dispersed phase mixing. Consistent modeling of scalars in turbulent ¯ows. Kakhi M. Peeters TWJ. Tarbell JM. Roekaerts D. 1996. [227] Chen J-Y. Kraichnan RH. Phys Fluids 1988. On the relationship between stochastic Lagrangian models of turbulence and second-moment closures. Fox RO. Modeling of turbulent spray diffusion ¯ames including detailed chemistry. The isotropic turbulent mixer. [241] Wouters HA.2(7):1204±12. Gutheil E. Tsai K. Kolbe W. Vervisch / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 28 (2002) 193±266 in the chemical process industry. Pope SB. Combust Flame 1988. Gao F. [224] Gao F. Simulation a petite echelle par une methode VOF   d'ecoulement diphasiques reactifs.3(3).3(12):3034±7. Phys Fluids A 1990. Phys Fluids 1991. Twenty-Sixth Symposium (International) on Combustion. Pope SB. Veynante. [226] Kerstein AR. Dibble RW.26:404±8. Pope SB. Pope SB. J Non-Equilib Thermodyn 1979. Jones WP. Dopazo C. O'Brien EE. Comparison of mixing model performance for nonpremixed turbulent reacting ¯ows. Phys Fluids 1996. O'Brien EE. Lagrangian pdf methods for turbulent ¯ows. Subgrid mixing modeling: a dynamic approach.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful