Influence of Equivalence Ratio on Emissions in Meso-Scale Vortex

Combustor
Ali Houssein Asmayou 1, Mazlan Abdul Wahid 1, Mohammed Bashir Abdulrahman1

1
High-Speed Reacting Flow Laboratory, Faculty of Engineering, School of Mechanical Engineering, Universiti Teknologi
Malaysia, 81310 UTM Skudai, Johor, Malaysia.

. Corresponding author: a) alihasmayou@gmail.com

b)
mazlan@utm.my
c)
mobash2007@gmail.com

Abstract. This paper presents biogas' numerical flame characteristics (60% CH4 + 40% CO2) in an asymmetric mesoscale vortex combustor.
Lean limit is phi = 0.51 for all Re, the stable range is large at low Re (0.51<phi<1.86 at Re =2500), decreasing with increasing Re until
(0.51<phi<0.56) at Re =7840. A strong vortex forms a stable zone for the flame and demonstrates the high stability of biogas flame for the
mesoscale combustor. Flame stability in mesoscale vortex combustion has been due to two important effects; the strong tangential v ortex controls
the flame field and vortex influence. The rich equivalence ratio, Ø=1.86, recorded the highest peak temperature at 1 870 K. It produced the highest
value for CO and NOx gases emissions, at 5.65 e-04 ppm and 10.06 ppm, respectively. Meanwhile, the lean equivalence ratio, Ø=0.56, recorded
the lowest peak temperature at 1533 K but interestingly managed to produce the lowest value for CO and NOx gas emissions, at 1.43 e-07 ppm
and 1.2132 ppm, respectively. Thus, it concluded that the higher ratio of air in the fuel, the lower the temperature and emis sions.

Keywords: Meso scale combustion, Flame combustion, Non-Premixed, Biogas,

INTRODUCTION
Meso-scale combustion study has improved intensively for the past decad e due to several purposes such as micro-energy
production[1]. The needs for small-scale require energy devices with high-energy-density, portable, lightweight, and short periods
for recharge[2]. Its application allows portable electric units for independently controlled devices, for example, power generation
for remote sensors, robots, various communications stations, and micro air vehicle (MAV) system[3]. Thermo-photovoltaic (TPV)
and the thermoelectric generator (TEG)[4] have been combined with micro combustion to producing electricity[5]. When the energy
system reduces from the macro scale to the mesoscale, the challenges increase because the surface-area-to-volume ratio is high,
which leads to heat loss. Short residence time and heat loss are the main points of the combustion and ignition stability challenges
of liquid and gas fuels. Flame stabilization to maintain the combustion of fuels in the small combustor is essential for mesoscale
combustion appliances[6], a necessary component of a mesoscale power conversion[7]. In a mesoscale combustor, the length varies
from 1 mm to 10 cm, and the energy production from 10 watts to 1 kilowatt[6]. Additionally, in small-scale combustion, the short
residence time coupled with low turbulent flow conditions cause a large amount of heat loss[8] and hinder the chemical reaction[3];
it can quench reactions and lead the flame to become unstable[9]. Many gas-phase combustion investigations[10], combustion
behaviors [11] and flame structure[12] at a small scale were studied [13]. Biogas is considered a promising candidate for renewable
energ[14]. Biogas may produce from Olive Pomace[15] agricultural and animal products, or other raw materials[16]. It's composed
primarily of methane and carbon dioxide, with a little carbon monoxide (CO), hydrogen sulfide (H2S), and siloxanes[17]. Palm oil
mill effluent (POME) is a significant source of biogas in Malaysia[18]. Biogas' low calorific value (LCV) is about 30 MJ/kg,60%
CH4[19]. The high CO2 content in biogas reduces the methane-air mixture's low flame speed, approximately 40 cm/s. The methane
autoignition temperature is about 640 ◦C, while the biogas autoignition temperature is about 700 ◦C[14]. Because of these
considerations, biogas must be purified, or a better combustor design must be applied[20]. The advantages of an asymmetric vortex
configuration are stability and mixing, which can also overcome flame blow-off[21]. In this investigation, flows are studied as a
method of stabilizing non-premixed biogas flames in the asymmetric mesoscale vortex. The flame stabilization of the asymmetric
vortex was observed at the mesoscale combustion by tangential air entries.

COMBUSTOR CONFIGURATION
Fig. 1 displays a model of the asymmetric vortex mesoscale furnace. This design has four tangential ai r, four axial air inlets, and
three axial biogas inlets. The tangential air inlets' location, orthogonal to biogas inlets, would intensify swirl flow in the furnace.

1
The experimental asymmetric vortex furnace's dimensions were designed in the High -speed Reacting Flow (HIREF) laboratory,
consisting of asymmetric distance = 2.88 mm, R =10 mm, and L= 40 mm. Both air and fuel spouts are circular cross -sections and
have a diameter of 1.5 mm. The thickness of 35 mm formed a refractory castable cement cylinder to reduce heat loss to the
surroundings while maintaining temperatures inside the chamber greater than the fuel's auto-ignition. A stainless-steel lid surfaced
from the outside with a thickness of 15 mm. They vary the air inlets flow rate and biogas inlets flow rate to control the equivalence
ratio.

(a)

(b)

FIGURE 1. Schematic of the asymmetric Meso-Scale combustion

NUMERICAL METHODOLOGY
ANSYS workbench fluent 19.0, based on the finite element method with a three-dimensional solver, was used to discretize the
flow domain using a second-order upwind technique. Used the SIMPLE method to calculate the mass conservation between the
pressure and velocity components in the discretized momentum equation. The chemical reaction was identified as a volumetric
reaction and used the Eddy Dissipation Model (EDM) method to model turbulence chemistry interactions. Numerical investigation
was performed to gain insight into the flow and flame development in the meso -scale vortex furnace[22]. The turbulence model
applied in this investigation is the realizable k–ε model[23]. The 3D finite volume method was applied to predict the three-
dimensional fluid flows by a first-order upwind scheme, generating a tetrahedral mesh. The SIMPLE algorithm was applied to
achieve the continuity equation between the velocity and pressure conditions. The simulation conditions for both temperature and
pressure have been set to 300 K and 100 KPa, respectively. Table 1 shows biogas operation conditions at several equivalence ratio.

Table 1. Operation conditions for biogas (60% CH4 + 40% CO2) at several phi and Reynolds numbers.
Phi Re Biogas Air mass
mass flow rate flow rate (Kg/S)
(Kg/S)
1.86 2,400 5.3667E-06 5.1133E-05
1.55 2,950 5.3667E-06 6.2933E-05
1.02 4,340 5.3667E-06 9.263E-05
0.76 5,810 5.3667E-06 0.0001239
0.56 7,843 5.3667E-06 0.000167167

2
 TABLE 2. Boundary condition of simulation
Turbulence Model Realizable K-epsilon
Reaction Model Volumetric reaction, Eddy Dissipation of turbulence chemistry model, methane air
two step

Air Inlet Velocity(m/sec) various

Temperature 300 K
Concentration (mole fraction) O2 =21%, N2 = 79%
Inlet and Boundary
Conditions Fuel Inlet Velocity(m/sec) fixed
Temperature 300 K
Biogas Concentration 60% CH4, 40%CO2
Material steel
Wall Ambient temperature 300 K

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

To comprehend the influences of tangential air inlets configurations on the biogas flame combustion characteristics, investigated
six aspects to illustrate the features of flame combustion as follows: a) Flame Stability Limits, b) The Photography of Vortex Flame
shape, c) Flame Height, d) Temperature Profile, e). Tangential Velocity and Flow Field. In mesoscale combustion, the stability and
structure of burner flames achieved several equivalence ratios for biogas fuel (60% CH4 + 40% CO2). The experimentally obtained
flame stability limits of an asymmetric vortex in mesoscale combustion are shown in Fig. 2. The flames can be maintained within
upper and lower limits within a limited scope of equivalence ratio for a set Reynolds number, as shown in this figure. The graph
shows the blow-out, stable flame, and blow-off zones separately. At a particular Reynolds number and combustion equivalence ratio,
the lower limit intimates the flame is blow off, and the upper limit intimates the flame is blow out. Flame blow-off occurs for all
Reynolds numbers if Ø < 0.51. However, the flame blow-off at a higher equivalence ratio beginning at Reynolds number 7,840.
Residence time for the reactants and heat loss through the wall are two factors that influence the flame quenching[24].

Fig. 2: The flame stability limits in biogas meso-scale combustion.

Temperature Profile
The result, in Fig. 5 displays the temperature profile for various equivalence ratios along the central axis into the combustor length.
It is clearly shown the temperatures range from around 1870 K to 1533 K along the axial center. This is due to the declining rates
of the fuel/air equivalence ratio. The peak temperature occurs at the stoichiometric ratio and is observed to be 1870 K. This
temperature value is the highest level of temperature achieved, which is less than the methane adiabatic temperature. The curve
begins to gradually decrease, due to decreasing the flame front, reaching values ranging from 1410 K to 760 K. However, there is
no big difference in peak temperature between various equivalence ratios except at Ø = 0.56 which was a little bit low about 1533
K due to the lean combustion condition.

3
 Fig. 5: Meso-scale central axis temperature profile for biogas with 60% CH4 composition at various equivalent ratios.

Emissions
The results show in figure 6 the emissions of NOx and CO at exhaust location of biogas mesoscale combustion. The investigation
observed that the highest peak temperature was 1870 K, with a rich equivalence ratio of=1.86. It had the highest CO and NOx g as
emissions, with 5.65 e-04 ppm and 10.06 ppm, respectively. While, the lean equivalence ratio, equal to 0.56, performed the lowest
peak temperature of 1533 K and producing the lowest CO and NOx gas emissions of 1.43 e-07 ppm and 1.2132 ppm, respectively.
NOx generation was considerably reduced when the percentage of equivalence ratio moves from rich to lean increases, as seen in
Fig. 6 since the peak temperature was below the thermal NOx creation temperature. As a conclusion, it was observed that the rich
level of equivalence ratio has a larger temperature and emissions than the lean level.

12 10.06
10 8.75
NOx (ppm)

8 6.36
6
3.75
4
2 1.2131

0
Ø = 1.86 Ø = 1.56 Ø = 1.02 Ø = 0.76 Ø = 0.56
(a)
5.65E-04
6.00E-04
5.00E-04
4.00E-04 3.01E-04
CO (ppm)

3.00E-04
2.00E-04
1.00E-04 4.88E-05
6.99E-09 1.43E-07
0.00E+00
Ø = 1.86 Ø = 1.56 Ø = 1.02 Ø = 0.76 Ø = 0.56
(b)

Fig. 6 : (a) NOx gas emission, and (b) CO gas emission

CONCLUSION
The mesoscale design of asymmetric vortex combustion was already effectively studied and illustrated its flame stability.
Numerical studies have been done using biogas, which consists of (60 %CH4 + 40%CO2). Several Reynolds numbers and
equivalence ratios have been studied to identify the effect of equivalence ratio on the emissions of biogas vortex combustion. The
asymmetric mesoscale combustor has a large region in flame stability. The stable flame zone has a large equivalence ratio range of
1.86 > Ø > 0.56 and Reynolds number of 2400 < Re < 7840. CO and NOx gas emissions are the lowest, with 1.43 e -07 ppm and
1.2132 ppm, respectively. When the equivalency ratio converts from rich to lean, NOx production was significantly reduced.

4
 References
1. H. Saputro, H. Juwantono, H. Bugis, D.S. Wijayanto, L. Fitriana, V.L. Perdana, A. Purwanto, E.D. Arianto, M. Bima, Y. Pratama,
R. Muslim, and T. Firdani, “Numerical simulation of flame stabilization in meso-scale vortex combustion,” MATEC Web Conf.,
197 1–5 (2018). doi:10.1051/matecconf/201819708005.
2. J. Li, J. Huang, D. Zhao, J. Zhao, M. Yan, and N. Wang, “Diffusion combustion of liquid Heptane in a small tube with and
without heat recirculating,” 2012. doi:10.1080/00102202.2012.690673.
3. F. Cozzi, A. Coghe, Y.D. Angelo, B. Renou, and M. Boukhalfa, “Experimental study of performances and internal flow field of
a meso-scale vortex- combustor,” 2009.
4. A. Fan, J. Wan, K. Maruta, H. Nakamura, H. Yao, and W. Liu, “Flame dynamics in a heated meso-scale radial channel,” The
Combustion Institute, 2013. doi:10.1016/j.proci.2012.06.083.
5. E. Sher, and D. Levinzon, “Scaling-down of miniature internal combustion engines: limitations and challenges,” Heat Transf.
Eng., 26 (8) 1–4 (2005). doi:10.1080/01457630591004780.
6. X. Huang, and S. Li, “Ignition and combustion characteristics of jet fuel liquid film containing graphene powders at meso-
scale,” Elsevier Ltd, 2016. doi:10.1016/j.fuel.2016.03.004.
7. Y. Gan, Y. Tong, Y. Ju, X. Zhang, H. Li, and X. Chen, “Experimental study on electro-spraying and combustion characteristics
in meso-scale combustors,” Elsevier Ltd, 2017. doi:10.1016/j.enconman.2016.11.015.
8. P. Benard, V. Moureau, G. Lartigue, and Y. D’Angelo, “Large-eddy simulation of a hydrogen enriched methane/air meso-scale
combustor,” Int. J. Hydrogen Energy, 42 (4) 2397–2410 (2017). doi:10.1016/j.ijhydene.2016.11.206.
9. S.E. Hosseini, E. Owens, J. Krohn, and J. Leylek, “Experimental investigation into the effects of thermal recuperation on the
combustion characteristics of a non-premixed meso-scale vortex combustor,” 2018. doi:10.3390/en11123390.
10. T.T. Leach, and C.P. Cadou, “The role of structural heat exchange and heat loss in the design of efficient silicon micro-
combustors,” Proc. Combust. Inst., 30 II (2) 2437–2444 (2005). doi:10.1016/j.proci.2004.08.229.
11. Y. Ju, and B. Xu, “Theoretical and experimental studies on mesoscale flame propagation and extinction,” Proc. Combust. Inst.,
30 II 2445–2453 (2005). doi:10.1016/j.proci.2004.08.234.
12. L. Aljerf, and N. AlMasri, “Flame propagation model and combustion phenomena: observations, characteristics, investigations,
technical indicators, and mechanisms,” J. Energy Conserv., 1 (1) 31–40 (2018). doi:10.14302/issn.2642-3146.jec-18-2232.
13. G.A. Boyarko, C.J. Sung, and S.J. Schneider, “Catalyzed combustion of hydrogen-oxygen in platinum tubes for micro-
propulsion applications,” Proc. Combust. Inst., 30 (2) 2481–2488 (2005). doi:10.1016/j.proci.2004.08.203.
14. M.M. Sies, and M.A. Wahid, “Numerical investigation of the asymmetrical vortex combustor running on biogas,” J. Adv. Res.
Fluid Mech. Therm. Sci., 74 (1) 1–18 (2020). doi:10.37934/ARFMTS.74.1.118.
15. M. Ayadi, S. Ahou, S. Awad, M. Abderrabba, and Y. Andres, “Production of biogas from olive pomace,” Evergreen, 7 (2) 228–
233 (2020). doi:10.5109/4055224.
16. G. Prayitno, A.N. Hakim, and C. Meidiana, “Factors influencing the willingness to join cbo biogas self-help group in mulyorejo
urban village and karangnongko village in malang, indonesia,” Evergreen, 7 (4) 468–480 (2020). doi:10.5109/4150466.
17. E.I. Ohimain, and S.C. Izah, “A review of biogas production from palm oil mill effluents using different configurations of
bioreactors,” Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev., 70 (December 2014) 242–253 (2017). doi:10.1016/j.rser.2016.11.221.
18) M.Z. Alam, and N.A. Hanid, “Development of indigenous biofilm for enhanced biogas production from palm oil mill effluent,”
J. Adv. Res. Fluid Mech. Therm. Sci., 39 (1) 1–8 (2017).
19. A. Noyola, J.M. Morgan-Sagastume, and J.E. López-Hernández, “Treatment of biogas produced in anaerobic reactors for
domestic wastewater: odor control and energy/resource recovery,” Rev. Environ. Sci. Biotechnol., 5 (1) 93–114 (2006).
doi:10.1007/s11157-005-2754-6.
20. M. Persson, O. Jonsson, and A. Wellinger, “Biogas upgrading to vehicle fuel standards and grid,” IEA Bioenergy, 1–32 (2007).
21. A. Dairobi G, M. A. Wahid, M. A. Mazlan, and M. H. Azeman, “Early assessment of asymmetric vortex small rotating
detonation engine,” Evergreen, 8 (1) 182–186 (2021). doi:10.5109/4372276.
22. Fluent Thoery Guide, “Ansys fluent theory guide,” ANSYS Inc., USA, 15317 (November) 724–746 (2013).
23. K.M. Saqr, M.M. Sies, and M.A. Wahid, “Numerical investigation of the turbulence–combustion interaction in non-premixed
ch 4-air flames,” Int. J. Appl. Math. Mech., 5 (8) 69–79 (2009).
24. V. Vijayan, and A.K. Gupta, “Combustion and heat transfer at meso-scale with thermal recuperation,” Appl. Energy, 87 (8)
2628–2639 (2010). doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2010.03.011.