Experimental and Numerical Study on Oxidation Deposition

Subscriber access provided by Kaohsiung Medical University

Fossil Fuels

Experimental and numerical study on oxidation deposition properties of aviation kerosene Xinyan Pei, Lingyun Hou, and William L. Roberts Energy Fuels, Just Accepted Manuscript • DOI: 10.1021/acs.energyfuels.8b01250 • Publication Date (Web): 08 Jun 2018 Downloaded from http://pubs.acs.org on June 8, 2018

Just Accepted “Just Accepted” manuscripts have been peer-reviewed and accepted for publication. They are posted online prior to technical editing, formatting for publication and author proofing. The American Chemical Society provides “Just Accepted” as a service to the research community to expedite the dissemination of scientific material as soon as possible after acceptance. “Just Accepted” manuscripts appear in full in PDF format accompanied by an HTML abstract. “Just Accepted” manuscripts have been fully peer reviewed, but should not be considered the official version of record. They are citable by the Digital Object Identifier (DOI®). “Just Accepted” is an optional service offered to authors. Therefore, the “Just Accepted” Web site may not include all articles that will be published in the journal. After a manuscript is technically edited and formatted, it will be removed from the “Just Accepted” Web site and published as an ASAP article. Note that technical editing may introduce minor changes to the manuscript text and/or graphics which could affect content, and all legal disclaimers and ethical guidelines that apply to the journal pertain. ACS cannot be held responsible for errors or consequences arising from the use of information contained in these “Just Accepted” manuscripts.

is published by the American Chemical Society. 1155 Sixteenth Street N.W., Washington, DC 20036 Published by American Chemical Society. Copyright © American Chemical Society. However, no copyright claim is made to original U.S. Government works, or works produced by employees of any Commonwealth realm Crown government in the course of their duties.

Page 1 of 33 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Energy & Fuels

1

Experimental and Numerical Study on Oxidation Deposition

2

Properties of Aviation Kerosene

3

Xinyan Peia†, Lingyun Hou*b‡, William L. Robertsa†

4 5

a

Clean Combustion Research Center, King Abdullah University of Science and Technology Thuwal 23955-6900, Saudi Arabic b

6 7 8 9

School of Aerospace Engineering, Tsinghua University Beijing 100084, China

Tel.+86-10-62772157. E-mail: [email protected]. Abstract

10

In the fuel cooling system of the engine, the heating of aviation kerosene exhibits complicated,

11

unsteady physicochemical processes and forms the undesirable coke deposition. To understand

12

these processes better, we investigated the coupling relationship between turbulent flow, heat

13

transfer, autoxidation, and deposition reactions of fuel in a cooling heat exchanger. The experiments

14

were performed to investigate the whole process within 105 min, separated into five continuous

15

phases of 20 min, 40 min, 60 min, 80 min and 105 min, with a heat flux of 38.6 kW/m2. Based on

16

the experimental results, we established a three-dimensional model to study the influence of

17

kerosene’s heat-transfer process on oxidation deposition in a long, straight, horizontal pipe under

18

supercritical pressure condition. A modified six-step, pseudo-detailed chemical kinetic and global

19

deposition mechanism has been incorporated into the numerical model with particular attention to

20

temperature variation. The model was validated based on the quantity of deposition and dissolved

21

oxygen consumption rate under different experimental temperatures and heating times. We then

1 ACS Paragon Plus Environment

Energy & Fuels 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Page 2 of 33

22

analyzed the fluid dynamics profiles and physical parameters of density, specific heat, viscosity and

23

Reynold number, species, and deposition rates along the reactor, micrographs and surface elements

24

of deposition at various temperatures to understand the coupling effect between heat transfer and

25

coke deposition. Results indicated that supercritical characteristics of both the fuel and deposition

26

affect the local heat-transfer characteristics, resulting in some instabilities in the wall temperature

27

distribution. The fuel temperature determines the regime of the chemical reactions in the flow and

28

that the flow conditions and wall temperature determine the deposition rate at the local position of

29

the inner surface.

30

Nomenclature Pre-exponential factor A Specific heat at constant pressure Cp d E

Diameter Activation energy for the reaction

r Ji

Diffusion flux of species i

p

Effective conductivity Pressure

Qr

Heat of the surface reaction

R

Universal gas constant

SE

Heat source term

Si

Species source term

T x

Temperature Axial coordinate

Yi

Mass fraction of species i

r v

Velocity vector

ke

__

Pa

J/kmol∙°C

°C m

m/s

τ

Stress tensor

ρ

Density Temperature exponent

β

J/kg∙°C m J/kmol

kg/m3


Page 3 of 33 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Energy & Fuels

ω& r ,s 31

Rate of the surface reaction

1．．Introduction

32

With advances in the power of aircraft, gas turbine engines must now operate at a higher

33

compression ratio and higher turbine inlet temperatures. Aircraft engines therefore experience

34

greater heat load and operate in complex thermal environments that include heat effects from the

35

combustion system, aerodynamics, hydraulics, and electronics. These engines require elaborate

36

cooling systems to deal with the heat load. Fuel-cooled technologies can be used in an indirect

37

cooling system, such as a cooling cooled air (CCA) system,1 the cooled air takes the heat from the

38

hot parts, passes it to the fuel and then cools other thermal components. In comparison with air-

39

cooling systems, fuel-cooled cooling systems are more efficient due to the supercritical

40

characteristic of aviation kerosene and the heated fuel from the fuel-cooled system can also return

41

thermal energy to the engine’s thermodynamic cycle after being burnt in the combustor. However,

42

when hydrocarbon fuel is heated, it experiences deposition reactions that form insoluble particles on

43

surfaces, which can decrease the heat transfer and even block the cooling passage. Hydrocarbon

44

fuels follow two processes during thermal decomposition, including autoxidation and pyrolysis.

45

Autoxidation reactions require dissolved oxygen in the fuel and occur at or above 150°C. When the

46

temperature increases above 450°C, pyrolysis reactions dominate, involving the breakdown and

47

recombination of hydrocarbon chains.2, 3

48

Many experimental

4-6

and numerical investigations

7-10

have been performed with the aim of


Energy & Fuels 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Page 4 of 33

49

understanding the deposit formation and oxidation processes of hydrocarbon fuels. The formation

50

of deposition coke in fuel during the heat-transfer. In general, amount of dissolved oxygen,11, 12

51

cooling channel geometries,13-15 operational conditions,16,

52

transfer characteristics,19 additives,6 heating time,5,

53

characteristics of a system. In a limited oxidation deposition mechanism study, a nine-step model

54

was developed by Katta et al.22. Ervin et al.23 modified this model by focusing on surface

55

deposition in the cooled regions. Zabarnick et al.24 and Ervin et al.25 further extended the model to a

56

17-step, pseudo-detailed mechanism by considering the effects of oxygen consumption on

57

deposition. To improve dissolved-oxygen consumption predictions, Doungthip et al.26 calculated

58

catalytic deposition reactions into the mechanism. Kuprowicz et al.27 refined the model to include

59

21 steps by including reactions of sulfur species, phenols, hydroperoxides and dissolved metals.

20

17

fluid dynamics,13 buoyancy,18 heat

and temperature,4,

21

affect coking

60

Most studies, including mechanisms investigation, of the thermal stability of hydrocarbon fuels

61

are conducted under isothermal conditions. However, the fuel coolant passes through various

62

geometries and thermal conditions in the fuel supply and cooling system. Under conditions of

63

incomplete oxygen consumption and non-thermal equilibrium, the interactions among the

64

consumed dissolved oxygen, heat transfer and deposition rate are complex but knowledge of these

65

interactions, especially when coupled with temperature, is necessary to design fuel cooling systems.

66

Therefore experimentally and numerically studies were conducted to investigate the coupling

67

effects between heat transfer process and autoxidation in the coke deposition formation under


Page 5 of 33 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Energy & Fuels

68

different heating times and temperatures. In the experimental study, these processes were

69

investigated coupling fluid flow dynamics, heat transmission, autoxidation chemical reactions, and

70

oxidation deposition over 105 min. Then, our experimental results were used to compute a three-

71

dimensional simulation of the fluid dynamics and heat-transfer characteristics of fuel in a circular

72

tube under supercritical pressure condition. The global autoxidation mechanism and the kinetic

73

deposition model were developed to simulate the oxidation deposition process of aviation kerosene.

74

2. Experimental Apparatus

75

In Table 1, Chinese No. 3 aviation kerosene (RP-3) was used as the fuel in our experiments.28

76

A small-scale test rig was designed to heat the fuel through a heat-exchanger under different

77

temperatures and heating times, which was to stimulate the heat transfer process in the cooling

78

passage.

79

In Figure 1, the present experimental system includes a fuel supply subsystem with a fuel

80

container and a plunger metering pump, a heating subsystem, a parameter control and measurement

81

subsystem, and an online sampling analysis subsystem. The detailed experimental parameters are

82

given in Table 2.The inlet mass flow rate was kept constant at 1 g/s for all conditions. The SS316

83

tube (the inner diameter of 2 mm, the wall thickness of 0.5 mm, the total length of 450 mm) was

84

applied as the heat exchanger and reaction section in the experiment. The tube was prepared to be

85

flushed by the water and N2 and dried before the experiment to clean manufacturing residues. The

86

test tube was in the horizontal arrangement, and an indirect electrical heater simulated the heat flux. 5 ACS Paragon Plus Environment

Energy & Fuels 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

87

The following fuel pressure was monitored by two pressure gauges at inlet and outlet of the test

88

section and maintained using a pressure damper and a backpressure regulator at 3 MPa under the

89

supercritical pressure condition. The outer-wall temperatures of the pipe were measured using 18 K-

90

type thermocouples spot-welded at 2.5 cm intervals along the tube. The fuel temperatures of inlet

91

and outlet were measured using K-type thermocouples inserted into the center of the tube. The

92

dissolved oxygen concentration was measured and monitored before and after the tests via two

93

continuous oxygen sensors (InPro 6850i) based on the polarographic method with the accuracy of

94

±1 % +6 ppb.11, 29 The oxygen sensor was separated from the sample by a membrane, which was

95

only permeable to oxygen but prevented detrimental components from affecting the measurement.

96

The oxygen was electrochemically measured as a current to calculate the oxygen partial pressure at

97

the cathode. The current output is proportional to the concentration of oxygen. A polarization

98

voltage was applied between the anode and the cathode to obtain the entirely linear relationship

99

over the whole measurement range from 0 to 100% oxygen concentrations.

100

After heating, the fuel was cooled using a counter-flow water-fuel exchanger and collected for

101

GC/MS analysis. The tube was blown by nitrogen to clean the residual fuel in all pipes before

102

drying. After each experiment, the tube of the reaction part was cut into 11 equal sections by a wire-

103

electrode cutting for weighing the deposition. The repeatability test and the more detailed

104

experimental setup information can be referred to our previous work.11, 15

105

In the heat-transfer experiments, the fuel reached thermal equilibrium after some time.


Page 6 of 33

Page 7 of 33 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Energy & Fuels

106

Therefore, five heating times was performed at different times to guarantee the flow to heat balance

107

and sufficient deposit sample for the test. For the investigation of the effect of heat transfer process

108

on the deposition process, five heating times, i.e., 0-20 min, 0-40 min, 0-60 min, 0-80 min and 0-

109

105 min, were conducted in our experiments. The selection of heating time was based on our

110

previous heat transfer experiments that the fuel comes to be thermal equilibrium after 105 min

111

under the same conditions in Table 2.30

112

For all the experiments, the inlet mass flow rate was set at 1 g/s; the initial fuel temperature

113

was 20°C; the dissolved oxygen concentration was 10 ppm; the heat flux was 38.6 kW/m2. These

114

parameters remained the same under the supercritical pressure of 3 MPa for all heating times. In

115

this way, each heating time corresponded to a specific outlet fuel temperature listed in Table 2. We

116

used a scanning electron microscope (SEM, FEICO95-001) to study the deposition microstructure

117

morphologies of samples from each experiment, and an X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS,

118

Thermo Fisher ESCALAB 250Xi) to measure the surface elements of the coke deposits, and gas

119

chromatography/mass spectrometry (GC/MS, Agilent 7890B–5975A) to determine the composition

120

of the residual fuel. Results of the error analysis on the measured parameters and transfer formula

121

are presented in Table 3.

122

3. Numerical Methods

123

The Ansys Fluent package 31 was used in conjunction with a user-defined function to simulate

124

the fluid-thermal-solid interactions coupled with chemical reactions. The governing equation in the

125

fluid region is： 7 ACS Paragon Plus Environment

Energy & Fuels 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Page 8 of 33

126

r ∂ ( ρφ ) (1) + div(ρ uφ )=div(Γφ gradφ )+Sφ ∂t where φ are generalized variables, which can stand for a variety of physical quantities, such as

127

velocity, enthalpy, and turbulence parameters. Γφ is the generalized diffusion coefficient and a

128

representation for the transport properties such as viscosity or conductivity. And Sφ is the

129

generalized source term such as heat generation in a fluid, production of a chemical species in a

130

reaction, and the generation of turbulence kinetic energy.32 In the solid region, the thermal

131

conduction equation is solved as ∇⋅ (λ∇T ) = 0 . The surface boundary conditions of the species and

132

energy equations are set as follows: ρ Di

λs

∂Yi ∂n

∂T ∂n

= Wi ∑ (bir − air )ω& r ,s

(2)

= ∑ Qrω& r ,s

(3)

r

w

w

r

133

The temperature-dependent thermal properties of the fuel were defined by the three-component

134

surrogate model,28, 30 including density, specific heat (Cp), viscosity and thermal conductivity. The

135

convection terms were discretized in a second-order upwind scheme. The RNG k-ε model,33 was

136

used for simulation of the turbulent flow, which predicted the convective heat transfer under

137

supercritical conditions well.34, 35 In Figure 2a, the inner diameter of the circular reactor tube is 2

138

mm with a wall thickness of 0.5 mm and the total length of the tube is 450 mm. The outer wall

139

temperature profiles obtained from the experiments were used as the outer surface boundary

140

condition along the tube, and the inner surface was set as a no-slip wall. The mesh of the cross-

141

section is shown in Figure 2b with the compressed mesh in the solid region, as the oxidation

142

deposition is produced on the inner surface of the tube. The total number of the mesh cells is

143

488,920 and the boundary layer of the inter-surface between solid and liquid zone uses 100,076 8 ACS Paragon Plus Environment

Page 9 of 33 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Energy & Fuels

144

cells. Steady simulation results at different times were used to describe the whole heat-transfer and

145

deposition process. The residence time and the heat-transfer process indicated by thermal

146

conductivity of the tube wall in the experiments are given in Figure 3. The thermal conductivities

147

were calculated from the experimental data such as fuel and wall temperatures and heat flux. Then

148

the calculated thermal conductivities were utilized in the setting of the boundary conditions of the

149

tube interface for the heat-transfer simulation between the inner surface and the fuel. In Figure 3,

150

the residence time of the fuel in the tube gradually decreases as the temperature increases. The

151

density of the fuel decreases as the fuel temperature increases, which increases the velocity of the

152

fuel in the tube. In addition, the residence time is also affected by the thickness of the deposition

153

layer increasing with the heating time due to the change of the inner diameter. But the effects of the

154

deposits on the flow were neglected since the thickness of the deposition layer were very thin,

155

which was observed in the morphological investigation on deposition.13, 19 The difference in the

156

wall thermal conductivity between the ideal condition of Stainless Steel 316 and that at the end of

157

the experiment indicates the accumulated effect of deposition on heat transfer.

158

The composition of the kerosene is very complicated, and the detailed reaction process is not

159

very clear at present. The modified pseudo-detailed deposition mechanism model of supercritical

160

RP-3, based on our previous mechanism,9 is given in Table 4, where fuel, precursor, bulk solubles,

161

bulk insolubles, and deposition represent five pseudo components. Dissolved oxygen (O2)

162

stimulates the oxidation chain reactions. The detailed kinetic parameters of the model are listed in


Energy & Fuels 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

163

Table 4. The main modification is focused on the temperature exponent. The reaction rate constant

164

is based on the Arrhenius expression of k = AT β exp( - E ) at each component step, and β is the

165

temperature exponent.

RT

166

During the heat-transfer process, the fluid fuel experiences a range of different liquid and wall

167

temperatures. Thus, the model in this study was developed with particular focus on temperature by

168

adding the temperature exponent in the reaction-rate expression comparing to the previous model.

169

The mechanism was divided into three bulk fuel reactions that occur in the liquid phase and three

170

surface reactions at the wall. The total deposition rate was calculated by adding the three wall

171

reactions together.

172

4. Results and Discussion

173

The numerical simulation model is verified by assessing the experimental results capturing the

174

total mass of the deposition and the dissolved oxygen concentration at the outlet in relation to the

175

variation in fuel temperature in Figure 4. The numerical results based on the reaction mechanism

176

described here are compared with a previous model. In comparison with the previous model, the

177

modified model focuses on temperature by adding the temperature exponent in the reaction-rate

178

expressions. In this way, we found that the consumption of dissolved oxygen is sensitive to changes

179

in temperature in the modified model. The predicted results with the modified model follow the

180

same trend as the experimental data. The total mass of the deposition follows a nonlinear increasing

181

trend with increasing fuel temperature in both the measured and predicted results. The dissolved 10 ACS Paragon Plus Environment

Page 10 of 33

Page 11 of 33 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Energy & Fuels

182

oxygen concentration in the fuel follows a decreasing trend with increasing fuel temperature due to

183

continued consumption during deposition reactions. This oxygen consumption profile means that

184

the increased oxygen consumption rate enhances the rate of autoxidation reactions in the liquid

185

phase. Nearly 70% of dissolved oxygen is consumed when heating time lasts 105 min. The

186

concentration of oxygen stimulates the chain-reaction oxidation processes. The fuel molecules react

187

with dissolved oxygen to form alkyl-peroxides, and in turn, these alkyl-peroxides develop into

188

deposition precursor species. Ultimately the precursor grows into particles that form deposits. The

189

deposition rate and oxygen consumption both sharply increase above 300°C at 60 min due to the

190

effects of temperature and the supercritical properties of the fuel as it will be discussed later while

191

looking on the computed fuel properties.

192

Temperature is a critical factor in the autoxidation process including both fuel and wall

193

temperatures, which in turn affect oxidation deposition reactions. However, the influence of

194

temperature on the deposition process is very complicated because the temperature simultaneously

195

affects the flow conditions and the fuel’s properties and compositions. There is a strong coupling

196

relationship between oxidation deposition and convection heat transfer in the presence of chemical

197

reactions. Profiles of the wall and fuel temperatures along the reactor in relation to heating time are

198

given in Figure 5 to demonstrate the influence of temperature on deposition during the heat-transfer

199

process. The simulated fuel temperatures at the outlet at different times are in acceptable agreement

200

with the measured data within about 1% error. The centerline fuel temperatures are almost identical


Energy & Fuels 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

201

to the bulk average temperatures of the cross-section of the tube and are significantly lower than the

202

measured wall temperatures. This result indicates the different heat-transfer characteristics of the

203

fluid in different locations. The wall temperatures rapidly increase within 50 mm from the inlet.

204

However, the fuel temperature remains relatively low. At 150 mm from the inlet, the outer wall

205

temperatures increase only a little along the axis of the test section in all cases, but the fuel

206

temperature continuously increases along the tube and follows a similar trend in each case. The only

207

difference is the rate of increase over time. Wall temperatures along the tube rise gradually to the

208

thermal equilibrium in relation to the heating time. The supercritical characteristics of the fuel and

209

deposition affect the local heat-transfer characteristics, resulting in some fluctuation in the

210

distribution of the wall temperature.11 Therefore, the fuel temperature defines the regime of the

211

chemical reactions in the flow and the flow conditions and wall temperature define the deposition

212

rate at a specific location at the inner surface of the tube.

213

As discussed above, the consumption of dissolved oxygen can reflect changes in autoxidation

214

and deposition processes. In addition, the precursor is critical to the formation of deposits10. The

215

profiles of oxygen and the deposition precursor are shown in Figure 6a. It is noted that by

216

comparing Figure 4 and Figure 6a that the oxygen consumption rate is not directly correlated with

217

the temperature. Low oxygen consumption rates near the inlet (within 150 mm) are reasonable since

218

temperatures in this location are lower than the autoxidation temperature range for all cases. The

219

low oxygen consumption rate and the low precursor production rate at 20 min corresponding to the


Page 12 of 33

Page 13 of 33 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Energy & Fuels

220

outlet fuel temperature at 160°C are expected because the temperature is at an initial temperature of

221

the autoxidation regime. The consumption of oxygen gradually becomes evident after 40 min. The

222

autoxidation reaction rate depends on both amounts of the radical species and temperature. Rapid

223

oxidation occurs as the number of radical species becomes substantial. These results indicate that

224

the oxygen concentration and the amount of precursor are in a trend of a slow reaction rate followed

225

by a gradually fast oxidation rate along the axial direction of the tube. The oxygen is consumed with

226

an increase in the precursor. The deposition precursor is believed to form solubles at higher

227

temperatures and only starts to precipitate from the bulk fuel onto the wall as it reaches a specific

228

temperature. The profile of precursor at 105 min become gradual after 350 mm at the axial of the

229

tube.

230

The physical properties of fuel under supercritical pressure determine the distribution of species

231

and affect the deposition. The properties of the supercritical fluid are sensitive to temperature,

232

especially in the pseudo-critical region. In Figure 6b, the specific heat of the fuel increases at 105

233

min and the fuel temperature increases to the pseudo-critical temperature zone. The heat transfer of

234

the flow increases significantly after 350°C. The Reynolds number was mainly defined by the basis

235

of the viscosity coefficient and density with the variation of fuel temperature in Figure 5. As

236

presented in Figure 6c, the viscosity profiles decrease and the Reynold numbers of the flow increase

237

along the axial of the tube for all cases with increasing temperature. The flow is laminar within 60

238

mm of the axial of the tube. After 20 min, the flow is fully developed and mainly turbulent as the


Energy & Fuels 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

239

heating process. The Reynold number at 105 min increases sharply at 300 mm of the tube and

240

reaches more than 40,000 at the exit of the tube with significant changes in the density and viscosity

241

because the fuel temperature reaches the pseudo-critical value.

242

After each experiment, the residual fuel was collected at the outlet of the tube. And

243

compositions of the residual fuel samples, analyzed by GC/MS, at different temperatures are given

244

in Figure 7. The composition of original RP-3 can be divided into four typical classes as straight-

245

chain alkanes (54.4 wt%), cycloalkanes (21.3 wt%), aromatic hydrocarbons (21.5 wt%) and others

246

(2.7 wt%). As the fuel temperature increases into autoxidation-reaction range, the amount of straight

247

chain alkanes decreases by nearly 50% in all cases. There are no significant changes in the

248

proportion of aromatic hydrocarbons, cycloalkanes, and olefins with different fuel temperatures. In

249

general, naphthenic compounds have higher thermal stability compared with other components.

250

Moreover, hydrogen donors such as naphthalene compounds are considered as high-temperature

251

thermal stabilizers in jet fuel. There is a significant increase in oxygen-containing compounds in all

252

cases in comparison with the original RP-3. Most of the straight chain alkanes are transformed into

253

oxygen-containing compounds. In the detailed classification of components, these oxygen-

254

containing compounds consist of acid esters, alcohols and ketones. In the autoxidation process,

255

oxygen-containing compounds are critical in chain-propagation reactions and forming precursor

256

species. In addition, it should be noted that fuel degeneration reactions do not influence deposit

257

formation. Autoxidation and pyrolysis reactions occur in the liquid phase of fuel. Only a relatively


Page 14 of 33

Page 15 of 33 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

258

Energy & Fuels

small quantity of fuel involves in oxidation reactions that finally form insoluble and solid deposits.

259

In Figure 8, the deposition rates in all locations of the test section increase with heating time.

260

The higher amounts of deposition near the inlet are ascribed to the entrance effect that is determined

261

by the temperature gradient and boundary layer.11 In the surface elemental analysis by XPS in

262

Figure 9, there are relatively high levels of carbon and oxygen, which account for 70-80% and 20-

263

30%, respectively. The proportions of other elements are tiny and do not change much respecting

264

temperature. Furthermore, there are similar apparent changes from 310°C to 360°C in the residual

265

fuel composition as indicated in the SEM analysis during deposition due to the supercritical

266

properties of the fuel.

267

SEM micrographs of deposition samples at the same position of the test section (x=325 mm from

268

the inlet) corresponding to different heating times are presented in Figure 10. The inner surface of

269

the experiment at 0 min exhibits random ravines and embossments. The complicated structures

270

enlarge the contact surface area and promote deposition from the fuel. The deposition at 20 min and

271

40 min is not recognizable in the SEM images. The deposit obtained from a long heating time is

272

denser than that from a short one. After 60 min, deposits significantly increase in the micrographs

273

and are composed of amorphous and flocculent particles. Similar fluffy, cauliflower-like deposits

274

were also observed by Ervin25 and Tao36. The deposition rate visibly accelerates from 60 min to 80

275

min. The significant increases in the deposition rate and oxygen consumption after 60 min in Figure

276

4 correspond to the slight increase in the oxygen-containing compounds with the decrease in the


Energy & Fuels 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

277

straight-chain alkanes in the residual fuel at 360°C. These results indicate that the morphology of

278

deposited carbon is strongly affected by the operating temperature.

279

5．．Conclusions

280

Detailed experimental and numerical studies of the oxidation deposition characteristics of

281

aviation kerosene during the heat-transfer process were conducted to evaluate the critical effects of

282

the temperature and heating time. The CFD model with a modified six-step autoxidation deposition

283

mechanism, considering flow dynamics, heat-transfer process, chemical reactions of the fuel and

284

the heat conduction in the tube wall, was used to obtain detailed information about the flow field

285

and species distribution along the tube. The predicted fuel temperatures, total amount of deposits,

286

and dissolved oxygen consumption during the heat-transfer process are conforming to the

287

experimental results. The wall thermal conductivity and Reynolds number of the flow are

288

significantly increased above a temperature of 360°C at 80 min due to the coke deposition and the

289

properties of the supercritical fuel. Both the deposition rate and oxygen consumption rate sharply

290

increase above a temperature of 300°C at 60 min. An apparent turning point is found in the

291

micrographs and surface elements of deposition. Although the wall temperatures after 60 min are

292

out of the range of oxidation reactions, the deposition process falls in oxidation deposition reaction

293

regime, which is demonstrated by the SEM micrographs of the deposition and residual fuel

294

components. Therefore, the regime of the chemical reactions in the flow depends on the fuel’s

295

temperature. The flow conditions and wall temperature determine the deposition rate at specific


Page 16 of 33

Page 17 of 33 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Energy & Fuels

296

locations.

297

Acknowledgment

298

This research described in this paper was supported by King Abdullah University of Science

299

and Technology (KAUST). In addition, financial assistance provided by the National Natural

300

Science Foundation of China (91641114) is gratefully acknowledged.

301

References

302

1. Walker, A. D.; Bharat, K.; Liang, G.; Peter, B.; Marco, Z., Impact of a Cooled Cooling Air System on the

303 304

External Aerodynamics of a Gas Turbine Combustion System. J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power 2017, 139, (5),

305

2. Hou, L. Y.; Dong, N.; Sun, D. P., Heat transfer and thermal cracking behavior of hydrocarbon fuel. Fuel

306 307

2013, 103, (Supplement C), 1132-1137.

308 309

Reforming for Hydrocarbon Fuel. J. Propul. Power 2012, 28, (3), 453-457.

310 311

Propul. Power 1992, 8, (6), 1152-1156.

312 313

Thermal and Oxidative Stability. J. Propul. Power 1993, 9, (1), 5-9.

314 315

Propul. Power 2008, 24, (2), 206-212.

316

Algorithm Optimization of a Chemistry Mechanism for Oxidation of Liquid Hydrocarbons. AIAA Journal

317 318

2005, 43, (10), 2259-2261.

319

a Range of Temperatures and Dissolved Oxygen Concentrations with Pseudo-Detailed Chemical Kinetics.

320 321

Fuel 2004, 83, (13), 1795-1801.

322 323

Energy & Fuels 2017, 31, (2), 1399-1405.

324

Nozzle Sections within Autoxidation Temperature Regime. University of Toronto , Toronto, Ontario, Canada,

325

2014.

326

11. Pei, X. Y.; Hou, L. Y., Effect of Dissolved Oxygen Concentration on Coke Deposition of Kerosene. Fuel

327 328

Process. Technol. 2016, 142, 86-91.

329

Spectra of Thermally Stressed Commercial Jet A-1 Aviation Fuel in the Autoxidative Regime. Energy &

330

Fuels 2012, 26, (4), 2191-2197.

051504-13.

3. Hou, L. Y.; Jia, Z.; Gong, J. S.; Zhou, Y. F.; Piao, Y., Heat Sink and Conversion of Catalytic Steam 4. Chin, J. S.; Lefebvre, A. H., Experimental Techniques for the Assessment of Fuel Thermal Stability. J. 5. Heneghan, S. P.; Locklear, S. L.; Geiger, D. L. I.; Anderson, S. D.; Schulz, W. D., Static Tests of Jet Fuel 6. Brown, S. P.; Frederick, R. A., Laboratory-Scale Thermal Stability Experiments on RP-1 and RP-2. J. 7. Wade, A. S.; Kyne, A. G.; Mera, N. S.; Pourkashanian, M.; Ingham, D. B.; Whittaker, S., Genetic-

8. Kuprowicz, N. J.; Ervin, J. S.; Zabarnick, S., Modeling the Liquid-Phase Oxidation of Hydrocarbons over

9. Pei, X.; Hou, L.; Ren, Z., Kinetic Modeling of Thermal Oxidation and Coking Deposition in Aviation Fuel. 10. Liu, Z. J. Chemical Kinetic and Thermal Numerical Simulation of Coking Process of Jet Fuels in Thin

12. Commodo, M.; Fabris, I.; Wong, O.; Groth, C. P. T.; Gülder, Ö. L., Three-Dimensional Fluorescence


Energy & Fuels 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

331

13. Hua, J.; Ervin, J. S.; Zabarnick, S.; West, Z., Effects of flow passage expansion or contraction on jet-fuel

332 333

surface deposition. J. Propul. Power 2012, 28, (4), 694-706.

334

pressure in helical tubes. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2018, 128, (Supplement C), 1186-1195.

335 336

15. Pei, X. Y.; Hou, L. Y., Secondary flow and oxidation coking deposition of aviation fuel. Fuel 2016, 167,

337

16. Chin, J. S.; Lefebvre, A. H., Influence of Flow Conditions on Deposits from Heated Hydrocarbon Fuels.

338 339

J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power 1993, 115, (3), 433-438.

340 341

Kerosene. Energy & Fuels 2015, 29, (9), 6088-6094.

342 343

J. Thermophys. Heat Transf. 1995, 9, (1), 159-168.

344 345

Oxidation of Jet Fuel. J. Thermophys. Heat Transf. 2013, 27, (4), 668-678.

346 347

Temperature. J. Propul. Power 1986, 2, (5), 450-456.

348 349

Turbines Power 1992, 114, (2), 353-358.

350 351

Sci. Technol 1998, 139, (1-6), 75-111.

352 353

Regions in a Flowing System. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 1996, 35, (11), 4028-4036.

354 355

oxygen, and temperature effects. J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power 1996, 118, (2), 271-277.

356 357

1996, 35, (3), 899-904.

358 359

catalysis on the thermal oxidation of jet fuel. Energy & Fuels 2004, 18, (2), 425-437.

360

with chemical kinetic modeling for the prediction of autoxidation and deposition of jet fuels. Energy & Fuels

361 362

2007, 21, (2), 530-544.

363 364

Journal of Tsinghua University (Science and Technology) 2017, 57, (7), 774-779.

365

coefficient and oxygen uptake rate in a stirred tank reactor for uranium ore bioleaching. Annals of Nuclear

366 367

Energy 2013, 53, 280-287.

368 369

Aviation Kerosene. J. Aerospace Power 2015, 30, (9), 2122-2128.

14. Fu, Y.; Xu, G.; Wen, J.; Huang, H., Thermal oxidation coking of aviation kerosene RP-3 at supercritical

68-74.

17. Pei, X. Y.; Hou, L. Y.; Ren, Z. Y., Flow Pattern Effects on the Oxidation Deposition Rate of Aviation 18. Katta, V. R.; Blust, J.; Williams, T. F.; Martel, C. R., Role of Buoyancy in Fuel-Thermal-Stability Studies. 19. Jiang, H.; Ervin, J.; West, Z.; Zabarnick, S., Turbulent Flow, Heat Transfer Deterioration, and Thermal 20. Giovanetti, A. J.; Szetela, E. J., Long-Term Deposit Formation in Aviation Turbine Fuel at Elevated 21. Chin, J. S.; Lefebvre, A. H.; Sun, F. T. Y., Temperature effects on fuel thermal stability. J. Eng. Gas 22. Katta, V. R.; Jones, E. G.; Roquemore, W. M., Modeling of deposition process in liquid fuels. Combust. 23. Ervin, J. S.; Williams, T. F.; Katta, V. R., Global Kinetic Modeling of Aviation Fuel Fouling in Cooled 24. Zabarnick, S.; Zelesnik, P.; Grinstead, R. R., Jet fuel deposition and oxidation: dilution, materials, 25. Ervin, J. S.; Williams, T. F., Dissolved oxygen concentration and jet fuel deposition. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 26. Doungthip, T.; Ervin, J. S.; Zabarnick, S.; Williams, T. F., Simulation of the effect of metal-surface 27. Kuprowicz, N. J.; Zabarnick, S.; West, Z. J.; Ervin, J. S., Use of measured species class concentrations

28. Pei, X. Y.; Hou, L. Y., Effect of different species on physical properties for the surrogate of aviation fuel. 29. Zokaei-Kadijani, S.; Safdari, J.; Mousavian, M. A.; Rashidi, A., Study of oxygen mass transfer

30. Pei, X. Y.; Hou, L. Y.; Mo, C. K.; Dong, N., Thermo-physical Properties for Surrogate Models of 31. Ansys, Fluent 14.0 Theory Guide. In ANSYS inc, ANSYS inc: Canonsburg, USA., 2011; pp 390-391.


Page 18 of 33

Page 19 of 33 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Energy & Fuels

370

32. Johnson, R. W., Handbook of fluid dynamics. Crc Press: 2016.

371

33. Yakhot, V.; Orszag, S. A., Renormalization group analysis of turbulence. I. Basic theory. J. Sci. Comput.

372 373

1986, 1, (1), 3-51.

374 375

characteristics of China RP-3 aviation kerosene at supercritical pressure. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2011, 31, (14-

376

35. Wang, N.; Pan, Y.; Bao, H.; Zhou, J., Numerical investigation on supercritical heat transfer of RP-3

377 378

kerosene flowing inside a cooling channel of scramjet. Adv. Mech. Eng. 2014, 6, 11.

379

3 surface coke deposition under stable and vibration conditions. Energy & Fuels 2015, 29, (3), 2006-2013.

34. Li, X. F.; Huai, X. L.; Cai, J.; Zhong, F. Q.; Xuejun, F.; Zhixiong, G., Convective heat transfer 15), 2360-2366.

36. Tao, Z.; Fu, Y. C.; Xu, G. Q.; Deng, H. W.; Jia, Z. X., Thermal and element analyses for supercritical RP-


Energy & Fuels 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Page 20 of 33

Table 1 Properties of Aviation Kerosene.28

380

Properties Critical pressure Critical temperature Density Values

2.39 MPa

372.5°C

Flash point Distillation range Relative molecular weight

0.7913 g/cm3(20°C)

50°C

381 382


163-212°C

148.33 g/mol

Page 21 of 33 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Energy & Fuels

383

Table 2 Experimental Parameters. Heating Time (min)

Outlet Fuel Operation Heat Flux Mass Flow Temperature (°C) Pressure (MPa) (kW/m2) Rate (1g/s)

Inlet Dissolved Oxygen (ppm)

20 40 60 80 105

160 260 310 360 410

10

3

38.6

1

384 385


Inlet Fuel Temperature (°C)

20

Energy & Fuels 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

386

Table 3 Error Analysis. Items Error (%) Heat Flux 5.1 Temperature Difference 7.1 Mass Flow Rate 0.2 Pressure 1 Deposition Rate 6.6

387 388


Page 22 of 33

Page 23 of 33 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

389

Energy & Fuels

Table 4 Kinetic Parameters of the Oxidation Deposition Reactions of RP-3. Reaction No. Pre-Exponential A Activation Energy E Reaction Order α Bulk Fuel Reactions Wall Reactions

3

k1

1.8e-05

5e+07

[T] [F][O2]

k2 k3 k4

500 2 2e-11

4.1861e+07 8.4e+06 8.6e+06

[P] [P] [F][dT/dX]

k5

10

5e+07

[T]

k6

480

8.5e+07

[T]

0.04

[IN]

0.015

[P]

390 391


0.7

Energy & Fuels 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

392 393

Figure1. Schematic Diagram of the Experiment.

394 395


Page 24 of 33

Page 25 of 33 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

396 397 398 399

Energy & Fuels

Figure 2. (a) Computational Configuration of Convection Heat Transfer with Oxidation Deposition of RP-3 (Left) and (b) Cross-Section of the Grid (Right).

400 401


Energy & Fuels 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

402 403

Figure 3. Residence Time and Thermal Conductivity of the Tube in Relation to Temperature.

404 405


Page 26 of 33

Page 27 of 33 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Energy & Fuels

406 407 408

Figure 4. Comparison between Experimental and Numerical Results of the Total Mass of Deposition and Dissolved Oxygen Concentration.

409 410


Energy & Fuels 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

411 412

Figure 5. Comparison of Experimentally and Numerically Derived Wall and Fuel Temperatures.

413 414


Page 28 of 33

Page 29 of 33 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Energy & Fuels

415

416

417 418 419

Figure 6. Profiles of Simulation Results along the Axial of the Tube with Time: (a) Precursor and O2; (b) Cp and Density; (c) Viscosity and Re.

420 29 ACS Paragon Plus Environment

Energy & Fuels 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

421

422 423 424

Figure 7. Variation in Residual Fuel Components in Relation to Temperatures Determined by GC/MS.

425 426


Page 30 of 33

Page 31 of 33 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

427 428 429

Energy & Fuels

Figure 8. Experimental Deposition Rates along the Axial in Relation to Time and Temperature.

430 431


Energy & Fuels 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

432 433 434

Figure 9. Surface Deposition of Coke Elements Variation in Relation to Temperature.

435 436


Page 32 of 33

Page 33 of 33 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Energy & Fuels

0 min

437 438 439

20 min

40 min

60 min 80 min 105 min Figure 10. SEM Micrographs at Different Heating times.


Experimental and Numerical Study on Oxidation Deposition

Recommend Documents