A Comparison of Flame Spread Characteristics over Solids in Concurrent Flow Using Two Different Pyrolysis Models

Two solid pyrolysis models are employed in a concurrent-flow flame spread model to compare the flame structure and spreading characteristics. The first is a zeroth-order surface pyrolysis, and the second is a first-order in-depth pyrolysis. Comparisons are made for samples when the spread rate reach...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Ya-Ting Tseng, James S. T'ien
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Wiley 2011-01-01
Series:Journal of Combustion
Online Access:http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2011/250391
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1832550427830255616
author Ya-Ting Tseng
James S. T'ien
author_facet Ya-Ting Tseng
James S. T'ien
author_sort Ya-Ting Tseng
collection DOAJ
description Two solid pyrolysis models are employed in a concurrent-flow flame spread model to compare the flame structure and spreading characteristics. The first is a zeroth-order surface pyrolysis, and the second is a first-order in-depth pyrolysis. Comparisons are made for samples when the spread rate reaches a steady value and the flame reaches a constant length. The computed results show (1) the mass burning rate distributions at the solid surface are qualitatively different near the flame (pyrolysis base region), (2) the first-order pyrolysis model shows that the propagating flame leaves unburnt solid fuel, and (3) the flame length and spread rate dependence on sample thickness are different for the two cases.
format Article
id doaj-art-78cb67c6b992417cbde46ed8c833ac12
institution Kabale University
issn 2090-1968
2090-1976
language English
publishDate 2011-01-01
publisher Wiley
record_format Article
series Journal of Combustion
spelling doaj-art-78cb67c6b992417cbde46ed8c833ac122025-02-03T06:06:50ZengWileyJournal of Combustion2090-19682090-19762011-01-01201110.1155/2011/250391250391A Comparison of Flame Spread Characteristics over Solids in Concurrent Flow Using Two Different Pyrolysis ModelsYa-Ting Tseng0James S. T'ien1Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Case Western Reserve University, 10900 Euclid Avenue, 418 Glennan Building, Cleveland, OH 44106, USADepartment of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Case Western Reserve University, 10900 Euclid Avenue, 418 Glennan Building, Cleveland, OH 44106, USATwo solid pyrolysis models are employed in a concurrent-flow flame spread model to compare the flame structure and spreading characteristics. The first is a zeroth-order surface pyrolysis, and the second is a first-order in-depth pyrolysis. Comparisons are made for samples when the spread rate reaches a steady value and the flame reaches a constant length. The computed results show (1) the mass burning rate distributions at the solid surface are qualitatively different near the flame (pyrolysis base region), (2) the first-order pyrolysis model shows that the propagating flame leaves unburnt solid fuel, and (3) the flame length and spread rate dependence on sample thickness are different for the two cases.http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2011/250391
spellingShingle Ya-Ting Tseng
James S. T'ien
A Comparison of Flame Spread Characteristics over Solids in Concurrent Flow Using Two Different Pyrolysis Models
Journal of Combustion
title A Comparison of Flame Spread Characteristics over Solids in Concurrent Flow Using Two Different Pyrolysis Models
title_full A Comparison of Flame Spread Characteristics over Solids in Concurrent Flow Using Two Different Pyrolysis Models
title_fullStr A Comparison of Flame Spread Characteristics over Solids in Concurrent Flow Using Two Different Pyrolysis Models
title_full_unstemmed A Comparison of Flame Spread Characteristics over Solids in Concurrent Flow Using Two Different Pyrolysis Models
title_short A Comparison of Flame Spread Characteristics over Solids in Concurrent Flow Using Two Different Pyrolysis Models
title_sort comparison of flame spread characteristics over solids in concurrent flow using two different pyrolysis models
url http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2011/250391
work_keys_str_mv AT yatingtseng acomparisonofflamespreadcharacteristicsoversolidsinconcurrentflowusingtwodifferentpyrolysismodels
AT jamesstien acomparisonofflamespreadcharacteristicsoversolidsinconcurrentflowusingtwodifferentpyrolysismodels
AT yatingtseng comparisonofflamespreadcharacteristicsoversolidsinconcurrentflowusingtwodifferentpyrolysismodels
AT jamesstien comparisonofflamespreadcharacteristicsoversolidsinconcurrentflowusingtwodifferentpyrolysismodels