A paradigm shift in the interaction of experiments and computations in combustion research

Abstract A different approach to comparing experimental data and numerical simulation data is presented. Traditionally, when making comparisons with simulations, experimentalists have sought to measure the same fundamental quantities (e.g., mole fractions) that are output by numerical simulations. This approach often requires measurement of many variables to arrive at the desired quantity, and uncertainty may accumulate with each additional measurement. Because recent advances in computational resources have led to more detailed numerical models, more complete information is available within simulations. This allows for the possibility of using simulation results to derive predictions of measured signals (i.e., “computed signals”) rather than measuring many quantities to derive a single fundamental quantity. Three examples of comparing measured and computed signals are presented: NO laser-induced fluorescence (LIF) images in both non-sooting and sooting diffusion flames, and luminosity images of sooting diffusion flames. For illustration, the non-sooting LIF data is treated both by the traditional method of comparing fundamental quantities and by comparing measured and computed signals. In each example, the comparison of measured and computed signals yields quantitative information similar to that obtainable through comparison of traditional quantities, along with reduced noise in the experimental data.

[1]  V. Manta,et al.  Two-dimensional two-wavelength emission technique for soot diagnostics. , 2001, Applied optics.

[2]  Marshall B. Long,et al.  Soot formation in laminar diffusion flames , 2005 .

[3]  M. Long,et al.  Effect of light-collection geometry on reconstruction errors in Abel inversions. , 2000, Optics letters.

[4]  G. G. Stokes "J." , 1890, The New Yale Book of Quotations.

[5]  A. Gomez,et al.  Comprehensive study of the evolution of an annular edge flame during extinction and reignition of a counterflow diffusion flame perturbed by vortices , 2007 .

[6]  Andrew G. Glen,et al.  APPL , 2001 .

[7]  D. L. Urban,et al.  Extinction and Scattering Properties of Soot Emitted from Buoyant Turbulent Diffusion Flames. Appendix D , 2001 .

[8]  B. Bennett,et al.  Local rectangular refinement with application to axisymmetric laminar flames , 1998 .

[9]  D. Bone,et al.  Computational fluid dynamics validation using multiple interferometric views of a hypersonic flowfield , 1996 .

[10]  A. Gomez,et al.  Computational and experimental study of standing methane edge flames in the two-dimensional axisymmetric counterflow geometry , 2006 .

[11]  C. Dasch,et al.  One-dimensional tomography: a comparison of Abel, onion-peeling, and filtered backprojection methods. , 1992, Applied optics.

[12]  Yiannis A. Levendis,et al.  Development of multicolor pyrometers to monitor the transient response of burning carbonaceous particles , 1992 .

[13]  R. Pitz,et al.  Computational and experimental study of oxygen-enhanced axisymmetric laminar methane flames , 2008 .

[14]  M. Smooke,et al.  EXPERIMENTAL AND COMPUTATIONAL STUDY OF TEMPERATURE, SPECIES, AND SOOT IN BUOYANT AND NON-BUOYANT COFLOW LAMINAR DIFFUSION FLAMES , 2000 .

[15]  J. L. Durant,et al.  A model for temperature-dependent collisional quenching of NO A2 Σ+ , 1993 .

[16]  N. Mudford,et al.  Fluorescence imaging of mixing flowfields and comparisons with computational fluid dynamic simulations , 2002 .

[17]  C. McEnally,et al.  Investigation of the transition from lightly sooting towards heavily sooting co-flow ethylene diffusion flames , 2004 .

[18]  Peter Glarborg,et al.  Detailed modeling and laser-induced fluorescence imaging of nitric oxide in a NH(i)-seeded non-premixed methane/air flame , 2002 .

[19]  Marshall B. Long,et al.  Experimental and computational study of CH, CH*, and OH* in an axisymmetric laminar diffusion flame , 1998 .

[20]  R. Boyce,et al.  Numerical Simulation of Laser-Induced Fluorescence Imaging in Shock-Layer Flows , 1999 .

[21]  C. McEnally,et al.  Characterization of a coflowing methane/air non-premixed flame with computer modeling, rayleigh-raman imaging, and on-line mass spectrometry , 2000 .

[22]  C. McEnally,et al.  Computational and experimental study of soot formation in a coflow, laminar ethylene diffusion flame , 1998 .

[23]  A. Gomez,et al.  Computational and experimental study of steady axisymmetric non-premixed methane counterflow flames , 2007 .

[24]  Rahima K. Mohammed,et al.  Computational and experimental study of no in an axisymmetric laminar diffusion flame , 1996 .

[25]  G. Faeth,et al.  Optical Properties in the Visible of Overfire Soot in Large Buoyant Turbulent Diffusion Flames , 2000 .

[26]  T. Settersten,et al.  Temperature- and species-dependent quenching of CO B probed by two-photon laser-induced fluorescence using a picosecond laser , 2002 .

[27]  M. Smooke,et al.  Computational and experimental investigation of the interaction of soot and NO in coflow diffusion flames , 2009 .