Results

**1 - 4**of**4**### Directeur de recherche à l’IMFT, Toulouse

, 2009

"... Titre: Développement et validation du formalisme Euler-Lagrange dans un solveur parallèle et non-structuré pour la simulation aux grandes échelles J. RÉVEILLON ..."

Abstract
- Add to MetaCart

(Show Context)
Titre: Développement et validation du formalisme Euler-Lagrange dans un solveur parallèle et non-structuré pour la simulation aux grandes échelles J. RÉVEILLON

### unknown title

"... LES of steady spray flame and ignition sequences in aeronautical combustors ..."

Abstract
- Add to MetaCart

LES of steady spray flame and ignition sequences in aeronautical combustors

### de la thèse 142 CHAPTER 5. APPLICATION TO A POLYDISPERSE TWO-PHASE FLOW OF A CONFINED BLUFF BODY

"... 5.5 Results for two-phase flow polydisperse case In this section, the downstream evolution of the air and particulate flow fields at a moderate mass loading (Mj = 22%) for a polydisperse test case is presented and discussed. Numerical results of the AVBP-EL and CDP solvers are compared to experiment ..."

Abstract
- Add to MetaCart

(Show Context)
5.5 Results for two-phase flow polydisperse case In this section, the downstream evolution of the air and particulate flow fields at a moderate mass loading (Mj = 22%) for a polydisperse test case is presented and discussed. Numerical results of the AVBP-EL and CDP solvers are compared to experiments. Axial and radial profiles of the gaseous and dispersed phases are presented in Subsections 5.5.1-5.5.3. Subsection 5.5.4 discusses the influence of the number of samples on the axial and radial velocity profiles. Particle-dispersion characteristics are analysed in Subsection 5.5.5, focusing on the dependence of particle trajectories and the slip velocities upon particle sizes. Figure 5.32 shows the initial particle number distribution used by both solvers at the corre-sponding injection plane. Levels are quite similar to the experimental ones (see Fig. 5.4 (b)) except for the two smallest classes (dp = 20 and 30 µm) but this is assumed to have minor effects in the simulation due to their negligible contribution to the overall mass distribution (see Fig. 5.4 (a)). Both solvers use the same particle injection parameters in order to make easier the comparison of particles profiles. Note however, that the injection planes are not the same (see Fig. 5.14). For the sake of clarity, only 4 classes are analysed in the following: dp = 20, 40, 60 and 80 µm.

### Evaluation of numerical strategies for Large Eddy Simulation of particulate two-phase recirculating flows

"... Predicting particle dispersion in recirculating two-phase flows is a key issue for re-acting flows and a potential application of Large Eddy Simulation (LES) methods. In this study, Euler/Euler and Euler/Lagrange LES approaches are compared in the bluff body configuration from Borée et al. [1] where ..."

Abstract
- Add to MetaCart

(Show Context)
Predicting particle dispersion in recirculating two-phase flows is a key issue for re-acting flows and a potential application of Large Eddy Simulation (LES) methods. In this study, Euler/Euler and Euler/Lagrange LES approaches are compared in the bluff body configuration from Borée et al. [1] where glass beads are injected into a complex recirculating flow. These tests are performed for non-reacting, non-evaporating sprays but are mandatory validations before computing realistic com-bustion chambers. Two different codes (one explicit and compressible and the other implicit and incompressible) are also tested on the same configuration. Results show that the gas flow is well predicted by both codes. The dispersed phase is also well predicted by both codes but the Lagrangian approach predicts root-mean-square values more accurately than the Eulerian approach. The effects of mesh, solvers and numerical schemes are discussed for each method.