The role of third-body collision efficiency in autoignition of hydrogen–air mixtures

Cover Page

Cite item

Full Text

Open Access Open Access
Restricted Access Access granted
Restricted Access Subscription Access

Abstract

Numerical simulations of autoignition of lean (6% H2), stoichiometric, and rich (90% H2) hydrogen–air mixtures have been performed to examine the influence of third-body efficiency (chaperon efficiency, CE) on the value of ignition delay, τ. The temperature ranges explored in the computations are 850–1000 K for P0 = 1 bar and 1000–1200 K for P0 = 6 bar. By using a detailed kinetic mechanism, it has been found that the sensitivity of ignition delay to CE is the highest for the reaction step H + O2 + M = HO2 + M, which can lead to a variation in τ by a factor of 2 to 3. A pressure increase or deviation from stoichiometry reduces the sensitivity. The influence of CE is qualitatively different and weaker for the reaction step OH + OH + M = H2O2 + M.

Full Text

Restricted Access

About the authors

A. M. Tereza

Semenov Federal Research Center for Chemical Physics, Russian Academy of Sciences

Author for correspondence.
Email: tereza@chph.ras.ru
Russian Federation, Moscow

G. L. Agafonov

Semenov Federal Research Center for Chemical Physics, Russian Academy of Sciences

Email: tereza@chph.ras.ru
Russian Federation, Moscow

E. K. Anderzhanov

Semenov Federal Research Center for Chemical Physics, Russian Academy of Sciences

Email: tereza@chph.ras.ru
Russian Federation, Moscow

A. S. Betev

Semenov Federal Research Center for Chemical Physics, Russian Academy of Sciences

Email: tereza@chph.ras.ru
Russian Federation, Moscow

S. P. Medvedev

Semenov Federal Research Center for Chemical Physics, Russian Academy of Sciences

Email: tereza@chph.ras.ru
Russian Federation, Moscow

V. N. Mikhalkin

Semenov Federal Research Center for Chemical Physics, Russian Academy of Sciences; Academy of State Fire Service of EMERCOM of Russia

Email: tereza@chph.ras.ru
Russian Federation, Moscow; Moscow

S. V. Khomik

Semenov Federal Research Center for Chemical Physics, Russian Academy of Sciences

Email: tereza@chph.ras.ru
Russian Federation, Moscow

T. T. Cherepanova

Semenov Federal Research Center for Chemical Physics, Russian Academy of Sciences

Email: tereza@chph.ras.ru
Russian Federation, Moscow

References

  1. S. Yakovenko, I. S. Medvedkov, and A. D. Kiverin, Russ. J. Phys. Chem. B 16, 294 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1134/S1990793122020142
  2. Yakovenko, and A. Kiverin, Fire 6, 239 (2023). https://doi.org/10.3390/fire6060239
  3. A. D. Kiverin, I. S. Medvedkov, and I. S. Yakovenko, Russ. J. Phys. Chem. B 16, 1075 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1134/S1990793122060057
  4. V. F. Nikitin, E. V. Mikhalchenko, L. I. Stamov, V. V. Tyurenkova, and N. N. Smirnov, Acta Astronautica 213, 156 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actaastro.2023.08.036
  5. N. N. Smirnov, V. V. Azatyan, V. F. Nikitin et al., Intern. J. Hydrogen Energy B 49, 1315 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2023.11.085
  6. N. N. Smirnov, V. F. Nikitin, E. V. Mikhalchenko, L. I. Stamov, V. V. Tyurenkova, Intern. J. Hydrogen Energy B 49, 495 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2023.08.184
  7. P. Saxena, and F. A. Williams, Combust. Flame 145, 316 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.combustflame.2005.10.004
  8. A. A. Konnov, Combust. Flame 152 (4), 507 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.combustflame.2007.10.024
  9. Z. Hong, D. F. Davidson, and R. K. Hanson, Combust. Flame 158 (4), 633 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.combustflame.2010.10.002
  10. A. Keromnes, W.K. Metcalfe, K.A. Heufer et al., Combust. Flame 160, 995 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.combustflame.2013.01.001
  11. A. Schönborn, P. Sayad, A.A. Konnov, and J. Klingmann J., Intern. J. Hydrogen Energy 39 (23), 12166 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2014.05.157
  12. H. Hashemi, J. M. Christensen, S. Gersen, and P. Glarborg, Proc. Combust. Inst. 35, 553 (2015). http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.proci.2014.05.101
  13. G. P. Smith, Y. Tao, and H. Wang, Foundational Fuel Chemistry Model Version 1.0 (FFCM-1) (2016). https://web.stanford.edu/group/haiwanglab/FFCM1/pages/download.html
  14. P. A. Vlasov, V. N. Smirnov, and A. M. Tereza, Russ. J. Phys. Chem. B 10 (3), 456 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1134/S1990793116030283
  15. S. Jin, B. Shu, X. He, R. Fernandes, and L. Li, Fuel 303, 121291 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2021.121291
  16. Y. Zhang, J. Fu, M. Xie, and J. Liu, Intern. J. Hydrogen Energy, 46 (7) 5799 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2020.11.083
  17. A. M. Tereza, G. L. Agafonov, E. K. Anderzhanov, et al., Russ. J. Phys. Chem. B 16, 686 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1134/S1990793122040297
  18. C. Olm, I. G. Zsély, R. Pálvölgyi, et al., Combust. Flame 161 (9), 2219 (2014). http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.combustflame.2014.03.006
  19. A.A. Konnov, Combust. Flame 203, 14 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.combustflame.2019.01.032
  20. T. Weydahl, M. Poyyapakkam, M. Seljeskog, and N.E.L. Haugen, Intern. J. Hydrogen Energy 36 (18), 12025 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2011.06.063
  21. O. V. Skrebkov, S. S. Kostenko, and A. L. Smirnov, Intern. J. Hydrogen Energy 45, 3251 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2019.11.168
  22. N.M. Kuznetsov, The Kinetics of Monomolecular Reactions (Nauka, Moscow 1982) [in Russian]
  23. D. L. Baulch, C. T. Bowman, C. J. Cobos, et al., J. Phys. Chem. Ref. Data 34 (3), 757 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1748524
  24. A. L. Sánchez, and F. A. Williams, Progr. Energy Combust. Sci. 41, 1 (2014). http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pecs.2013.10.002
  25. A. M. Tereza, G. L. Agafonov, E. K. Anderzhanov, et al., Russ. J. Phys. Chem. B 17 (2), 425 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1134/S1990793123020173
  26. E. Ranzi, A. Frassoldati, R. Grana, et al., Progr. Energy Combust. Sci. 38 (4), 468 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pecs.2012.03.004
  27. P. A. Vlasov, N. M. Kusnetsov, Y. P. Petrov and S. V. Turetskii, Proc. 24th ICDERS, Paper 153 (2013). http://www.icders.org/ICDERS2013/abstracts/ICDERS2013-0153.pdf
  28. CHEMKIN-Pro, Reaction Design, San Diego, 15112. CK-TUT-10112-1112-UG-1, 2011.
  29. J. Grune, K. Sempert, H. Haberstroh, M. Kuznetsov, and T. Jordan, J. Loss Prevent. Proc. Industries 26, 317 (2013). http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jlp.2013.09.008

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML
Download
2. Fig. 1. Dependence of the deviation ∆ when using different sets of CE values ​​for reaction (1) (symbols) and (6) (lines) for a lean mixture (6% H2) at P0 = 1 (a) and 6 atm (b). Symbols and lines correspond to calculations with CE values ​​from [24] (1, 6), [16] (2, 7), [13] (3, 8), [10] (4, 9), [14] (5, 10).

Download (267KB)
Indexing metadata
3. Fig. 2. The same as in Fig. 1, for a stoichiometric mixture.

Download (282KB)
Indexing metadata
4. Fig. 3. The same as in Fig. 1, for a rich mixture (90% H2).

Download (276KB)
Indexing metadata

Copyright (c) 2024 Russian Academy of Sciences