SAFE-H2, AN ERC ADVANCED GRANT 2025-2030

Fundamentals of Combustion Safety Scenarios for Hydrogen (IMFT and CERFACS): SAFE- H2

State-of-the-art and objectives

The future of energy production lies in the use of renewable sources. In this framework, hydrogen is viewed as a powerful energy vector to store the intermittent energy produced by these renewable sources in so-called Power2gas strategies where gases are used to store energy. Hydrogen can also be produced by nuclear power. Once hydrogen is available, it can replace fossil fuels in many areas such as high-temperature furnaces, chemical industry or heat production. It can also be used for transportation (aircraft, trains, cars…). Such a revolution is promising and underway in many European programs (HELMETH, STORE&GO, CLEAN-H2) but is conditioned by an important issue: safety.

Hydrogen can lead to dangerous scenarios, in which leaks of this highly combustible gas mix with air, ignite either immediately (leading to fires) or at later times (leading to explosions). While regulations exist worldwide to prescribe how to use hydrogen in multiple industry domains, the safety rules for new applications of this gas in fields such as transportation have to be re-visited and sometimes invented. One European example is the future hydrogen aircraft developed by AIRBUS where existing regulations are not adapted or non-existent. If a hydrogen leak occurs in a plane (or in a tank, a truck, a terminal, etc.), what could really happen and what must be done before (to avoid it) or after (if it occurs), when and how to ensure safety or mitigate effects is unclear today so that the regulations too, have to be reinvented. Accidental leaks are not the only scenario to consider: for cryogenic hydrogen tanks at 20 K as considered for aircraft, slow heating through the tank walls or thermal insulation failures can lead to increasing and unacceptable tank pressures. In this situation, hydrogen will have to be evacuated (‘vented’) outside to limit pressure rise, thereby deliberately creating a hydrogen jet to avoid a more dangerous event such as an explosion. However, if this hydrogen jet ignites and attaches a flame of 1 to 20 meters to a train, a plane or a building, consequences can also be catastrophic. In all these scenarios, making decisions during the design phases of hydrogen systems and elaborating processes in case of leaks as well as regulations can be done only when a proper understanding of all mechanisms is available.

Another illustration of the need for fundamental research in this field is the quest for the ‘worst’ case in explosions which are studied in WP3 of SAFE-H2. In safety approaches, regulations are usually based on this worst case because it allows to cover all possibilities, studying only one scenario: if the consequences of this worst scenario are acceptable, then all scenarios are acceptable. Unfortunately, for hydrogen, identifying the worst case is, is an impossible task in itself if the fundamental mechanisms controlling an hydrogen explosion are not fully known. Explosions can bifurcate from ‘not so dangerous’ to ‘lethal’ because of minute changes in geometry or composition. A small change in hydrogen spatial distribution near the spark or in the spark energy itself may lead to ignition or not. A small change of geometry (the number of obstacles in the flame path for example, or an open door limiting pressure rise by venting gases out) can change the flame propagation, make it accelerate but never go to detonation, thereby generating small, acceptable overpressures and preserving the building structure. Knowing a priori what the worst case might be, is an impossible task today for hydrogen even though the PI of this proposal faces requests from industry along this line every month.

Many combustion laboratories, together with industrial partners developing hydrogen solutions, are working on these issues today and have been for a while. The main issue is to imagine the safety systems which will allow us to avoid and control all these scenarios. This will lead to the elaboration of regulations. One essential difficulty which appears throughout this process is the lack of fundamental knowledge linked to hydrogen combustion in these new scenarios: when facing these events, combustion experts point out that we miss the basic scientific data to know what may happen and how to prevent it. In many cases, it is even difficult to predict whether combustion will begin or not, making uncertainties too large for any regulatory effort. Even though these topics have been studied for decades, scientific issues such as the structure of a flame interacting with turbulence and with shocks, the autoignition of a fuel jet at high speed, the flame acceleration and the transition to detonation or the interaction of flames with walls remain partly or largely unsolved problems in the combustion community. Hydrogen, because it leaks and ignites easily, exhibits high combustion speeds and specific instabilities, making these topics more complicated and calling for fundamental, best science.

In SAFE-H2, a subset of these fundamental questions is targeted, using high-precision experiments and high-fidelity CFD (Computational Fluid Dynamics) simulations of turbulent compressible reacting flows of hydrogen-air flames. SAFE-H2 will provide fundamental studies of hydrogen combustion safety scenarios in terms of theory, experiments and simulations, using a joint effort at two Toulouse laboratories:

IMFT will lead the project, develop theoretical tools, perform part of the CFD work and operate two experimental platforms (one in its own center at IMFT and one on the new technocampus for hydrogen installed in Francazal, near Toulouse). Operating experimental platforms burning hydrogen in safe conditions requires experienced teams and expensive infrastructures which are now available at IMFT and will be soon on the technocampus. WP1 and 2 will use an existing bench developed during the SCIROCCO and SELECT-H ERC advanced grants on the IMFT campus (limited power < 40 kW). WP 3 will be used to develop a fully new bench on the technocampus (up to 300 kW) and require most of the funding dedicated to experimental developments in SAFE-H2.

Fig. 1: the three work packages of SAFE-H2

CERFACS will provide all simulation tools and mainly the 3D compressible solver AVBP which will be the unique CFD solver used in the project, to develop the subgrid scale models required for LES (Large Eddy Simulation) of hydrogen flames which will be distributed outside of the project. CERFACS will ensure the development and maintenance of AVBP and therefore be associated to all work packages.

The specific scientific questions (SQ) addressed in SAFE-H2 are listed below. They do not cover all issues linked to hydrogen combustion safety (for example leaks of cryogenic hydrogen are not studied. However, they cover the most urgent ones:

SQ 1: HYDROGEN FLAMES IGNITION, AUTOIGNITION AND PLATE IGNITION

SQ 2: HYDROGEN FLAMES STABILIZATION AND QUENCHING

SQ 3: HYDROGEN -AIR FLAME-WALL INTERACTION

SQ 4: EFFECTS OF TURBULENCE ON FLAME-WALL INTERACTION

SQ 5: EXPLOSIONS IN MOVING TURBULENT FLOWS

SQ 6: MITIGATION OF EXPLOSIONS

SQ 1 to 2 focus on cases where a hydrogen leak may ignite and lead to a flame attached to the leaking hole. SQ 3 to 4 study the interactions of hydrogen jet flames with surrounding walls. SQ 5 to 6 target cases called ‘explosions’ where hydrogen leaks for a long time into a vessel or in open space, and is ignited later, leading to an accelerating flame and to detonations in the most extreme cases.

Methodology

The approach used for SAFE-H2 is typical of both past and present aerospace research but is more original for safety. SAFE-H2 will not try to multiply experiments in all possible configurations. Instead, it will focus on the individual knowledge bricks needed to understand and analyze mechanisms.

This can be done by applying two main guidelines to choose experimental configurations:

Choose simple, small-scale experiments where detailed diagnostics can be used. For example, instead of studying only the flame position and the over pressure in an explosion, SAFE-H2 experiments will be built to have full optical access, monitor multiple radicals in 2D planes, measure the flow velocity in these planes, wall surface temperatures, etc. These detailed measurements are crucial to question the results of the CFD codes by comparing a complete set of multidimensional results and not only one indicator such as the pressure curve versus time, for example.
Perform simulations for all experiments without exception. These simulations will be either DNS (Direct Numerical Simulations) for small Reynolds number cases (in WP1 and 2 for example) or LES (Large Eddy Simulations) for other cases (WP3 typically). In addition to an efficient DNS/LES solver, SAFE-H2 will also need a 0D/1D solver to prepare chemical schemes. Even if hydrogen is a ‘simple’ fuel, a software able to test chemical schemes in zero and one-dimensional flames is required and we will use CANTERA. This will be important to model chemistry at low temperatures for autoignition studies (in WP1) and for flame-wall interactions (in WP2).

Mastering the safety of hydrogen combustion requires two ingredients: (1) a deeper understanding of the physics of these events and (2) modern CFD tools which can simulate safety scenarios without having to perform all corresponding experiments. SAFE-H2 will focus on these two objectives: (1) by providing new insights into the fundamental mechanisms controlling combustion when hydrogen leaks through any type of hole, ignites or explodes and (2) by building and distributing subgrid-scale models for Large Eddy Simulations of hydrogen flames which will be applicable in all simulation codes.

The IMFT/CERFACS group has a long experience in achieving both objectives. In terms of developing a better understanding of the basic combustion physics, the PI’s group has contributed to fundamental advances in multiple fields: explosions [1,2,63], battery fires [62], swirled combustion [9,27], combustion instabilities [28], turbulent flames [13], flame-wall interaction [58-60], two-phase flow combustion [7], combustion noise [42,43], flame inhibition [20,22,64]. In terms of disseminating physical and numerical models to be used by the whole community, CERFACS probably has one of the best recent records: the numerical method used to specify boundary conditions in a compressible CFD solver, called NSCBC, is used worldwide by virtually all CFD groups developing DNS and LES, with or without combustion, including commercial software companies, with a baseline paper [1] cited more than 4000 times and numerous evolutions [34-36]. Similarly, the TFLES (Thickened Flame LES) model for flame - turbulence interaction, developed by CERFACS in the 90’s [17,37] has become the standard tool for most LES codes in the world. The models of CERFACS for turbulence subgrid scale stresses such as WALE or SIGMA [38,39] have also become standard models in the LES community. The textbook ‘Theoretical and Numerical Combustion’ is a classic one, worldwide in most universities and companies involved in CFD of combustion, with more than 4000 copies sold in English and a Chinese version to appear in 2023. This book makes most of CERFACS expertise in CFD of unsteady flames available to the community. Even if AVBP itself, the CFD code of CERFACS, remains a proprietary code, almost all its ingredients are made available, a system which is of clear interest for other groups: many of them actually use CERFACS subgrid models and numerical methods. During SAFE-H2, CERFACS and IMFT will strive to diffuse both the physics learned on hydrogen combustion safety through publications and outreach but also the corresponding subgrid scale models so that other groups can directly benefit from those advances by integrating these models into their own CFD solvers.

Fully instrumented and CFD friendly configurations

The strategy pursued in SAFE-H2 targets simple, canonical flames because they are the building blocks of real cases and contain all the physics controlling real systems. Obviously, such a strategy also induces constraints: only small-scale configurations can be tested; since multidimensional diagnostics are needed, optical access must be guaranteed and experimental campaigns limited in terms of operating conditions; not all experiments are ‘CFD-friendly’ and determining which topics are both accessible with detailed experiments AND compatible with the validation needs of an unsteady high-fidelity CFD code is a key question in itself. The experiments planned in SAFE-H2 in WP1, 2 and 3 have been specifically designed to be computed with modern DNS and LES solvers. They will provide full detailed validations through detailed comparisons between CFD and experimental results, leading to real model improvements.

Table 1: experimental diagnostics deployed in SAFE-H2 to make all configurations ‘CFD friendly’ and guarantee that the experimental data will allow to thoroughly check and improve the CFD code.

The diagnostics used in SAFE-H2 experiment and the reasons why they are needed are detailed in Table 1. The use of these diagnostics to validate high-performance simulations comes from IMFT and CERFACS experience in the field of High Performance Computing for aerospace engines design [9,17,27]. In this field, experiments have reached a high level of maturity and experts know that the validation of CFD codes require a multi-angle set of cross-validations to be tested, validated and truly predictive: comparing only one set of data is insufficient because CFD solvers and models contain hundreds of adjustable parameters. By tuning a few of these model parameters, these CFD solvers are excellent to ‘postdict’ any limited set of experimental results, i.e. to reproduce one set of experimental data (such as the temperature at an outlet or the flame position or a pressure profile versus time) once measurements have been performed. However, when the CFD code is applied to another case where results are unknown, it usually fails because the models have only been tuned on one case and have no general value. To really make CFD codes ‘predictive’ tools, the only solution is to build models with strong theoretical basis, confront them to many experimental fields at the same time and ask them to reproduce velocity, temperature, species fields at least in two-dimensional cuts. When this is the target, codes and models suffer much more so that they also get much better and become really predictive. This cannot be obtained without specific and costly experimental validations.

The simulations of SAFE-H2 require an efficient and validated, massively parallel, three-dimensional CFD tool for reacting, compressible flows which will be used for all experiments of IMFT. All SAFE-H2 simulations will be performed with the AVBP solver of CERFACS which is a world standard in the field, developed thanks to 500 man-years of work at CERFACS and associated laboratories in Europe. AVBP will be used for high-fidelity DNS as well as for LES.

AVBP is a three-dimensional, high-order, multispecies, finite volume, time-dependent, compressible solver, widely used in the combustion community. It incorporates sophisticated methods for boundary conditions [14,34,36], advanced reduced chemical schemes [56], flame-turbulence thickened flame models to describe the interaction between flame and turbulence [37,42-45]. AVBP can be used for LES as well as for DNS of turbulent flames as needed in SAFE-H2 where low Reynolds number flames will be considered in WP1 and WP2 (allowing DNS) while higher Reynolds number flows (and therefore LES) will be considered for WP3.

Note that, during SAFE-H2, no RANS (Reynolds Averaged Navier Stokes) simulations will be used: these methods lack the precision needed for SAFE-H2 so that most laboratories, as well as many companies move now to LES for combustion which has a better potential to predict turbulent, unsteady, reacting flows. The drawback of LES or DNS is of course their cost, orders of magnitude larger than RANS. Being able to refine the mesh in regions of interest and keep CPU costs at reasonable levels has become a key issue for LES. In AVBP, both static and dynamic mesh refinement will be used. Typically, in WP1 and 2 where flames are essentially burning in a localized zone of the whole domain, static remeshing is used two or three times during the simulation, to automatically improve the mesh where the solution shows that this is needed [57]. In WP3, we will track fast explosions where the flame moves rapidly across the domain: here, the mesh has to change hundreds of times to follow the flame front. We will use dynamic AMR (Adaptive Mesh Refinement) where the mesh is changed on the fly when the flame moves.

AVBP offers massively parallel possibilities up to 200 000 processors on CPU architectures. It has been used in multiple PRACE and EUROHPC grants as well as INCITE in the USA. A GPU version is also available for all cases of WP1 and WP2 and should be ready for WP3 (which requires specific developments to perform Automatic Mesh Refinement on GHUs) in 2024 when the project would start.

CERFACS will provide the codes and the assistance to all SAFE-H2 users at CERFACS and IMFT. It will also ensure the integration of SAFE-H2 models into AVBP for all AVBP users. Indeed, AVBP is used in multiple laboratories worldwide (TU Munich, TU Berlin, CentraleSupelec, Centrale Lyon, NTNU Trondheim, ETH Zurich, Un. Melbourne, Un. Sherbrooke) and for many companies (AIRBUS, TOTALENERGIES, SAFRAN, ALSTOM, AIR LIQUIDE, EDF, GRTGAZ).

SAFE-H2 will combine advanced optical diagnostics for flames (coming from aerospace research) and High-Performance computing (using a world leading CFD solver for turbulent reacting flows) to elucidate the physics of three important phenomena for hydrogen combustion safety:

flames stabilized on hydrogen jets issuing from holes, at low or high speeds, up to supersonic, underexpanded jets
hydrogen flames interacting with walls at all speeds
explosions of hydrogen-air mixtures with stratification and initial flow motion (ventilation).

Impact on the community

SAFE-H2 will have impacts in many fields:

Fundamental science:

The key topics of SAFE-H2 have been haunting the combustion community for decades: autoignition, flame-turbulence interaction, flame-wall interaction, transition to detonation, thermodiffusive instabilities in lean hydrogen flames. SAFE-H2 will provide the best environment to target these topics again in a coordinated experiment – simulation effort where the best recent diagnostics for flames will be combined with a leading simulation code. The publications which will be produced will shed light on the physics of these phenomena for hydrogen combustion but also describe which subgrid models must be used to correctly capture these phenomena using 3D CFD codes which are now standard tools in this field. By focusing the efforts of SAFE-H2 on safety only and on three subtopics only, SAFE-H2 will target efficiency first and make the state-of-the-art knowledge progress for everyone.

Societal impact and outreach:

Because of its societal impact, it is expected that the results of SAFE-H2 will attract attention from different external entities. It will first find direct use in companies and in agencies as hydrogen use grows. CERFACS and IMFT already have multiple contacts with AIRBUS, TOTALENERGIES, SAFRAN, ALSTOM, AIR LIQUIDE, EDF, GRTGAZ to study combustion safety. These contacts actually are the reason for SAFE-H2: while these companies stress the need for understanding and regulation of hydrogen combustion safety, coming back to fundamentals in a coordinated effort is difficult for them. SAFE-H2 will provide a data base of fundamental results as well as subgrid scale models which these companies will be able to exploit right away, using the AVBP solver of SAFE-H2 or using the subgrid scale models described in SAFE-H2 papers. This societal impact will be growing very rapidly: in Toulouse, for example, 500 engineers are working on the hydrogen planes and many of them face safety questions which require these ingredients as soon as possible. Beyond companies and agencies involved in hydrogen safety, it is also expected that communications to a wider audience will also occur, through the French academy of Sciences where the PI has already lead various working groups on hydrogen or through journalist papers such as L’humanité in 2021 [61].

Formation of high level experts in Europe

Combustion will continue to be a major actor in the field of energy for a long time, either as a source (as today where it contributes to 85 % of the world’s energy) or as a vector of energy (for hydrogen for example). Europe needs experts to handle the challenges raised by combustion, especially in the field of safety which will be critical for hydrogen. Note that the methods developed for safety scenarios in SAFE-H2 apply as well to other fields of combustion. SAFE-H2 will provide training for eight young researchers on top level experiments, theory and simulation tools (5 PhDs and 2 or 3 postdocs). The experience of IMFT and CERFACS over the last twenty years is that Europe badly misses combustion experts: all doctors mastering combustion find permanent positions immediately after their PhD. Similarly, the publication records of the project senior scientists show that IMFT and CERFACS will disseminate SAFE-H2 and results through their publications very efficiently, leading to other similar research actions in Europe: IMFT and CERFACS are present in all famous conferences dedicated to combustion: biannual Symp. (Int.) Comb., AIAA conferences, ASME meetings, Numerical Combustion, ICDERS. They also publish in the best journals (Comb. Flame, J. Fluid Mech., J. Comp. Physics, Phys. Fluids, Ann. Rev. Fl. Mech, Pr. En. Comb. Sci.).

Dissemination of SAFE-H2 results

IMFT and CERFACS maintain an open distribution policy of their results in three ways.

First, the CFD tool AVBP, which they develop and will be the baseline tool of SAFE-H2, is distributed worldwide: TU Munich, TU Berlin, CentraleSupelec, Centrale Lyon, NTNU Trondheim, ETH Zurich, Un. Melbourne, Un. Sherbrooke use AVBP on a daily basis for their research. This will be continued and the new versions of AVBP produced within SAFE-H2 will be made available for groups interested in similar research. Companies which use AVBP (AIRBUS, TOTALENERGIES, SAFRAN, ALSTOM, AIR LIQUIDE, EDF, GRTGAZ) will also have access very rapidly to all AVBP versions including hydrogen developments. Second, the subgrid-scale models developed within SAFE-H2 will be published and made available to all researchers worldwide. Like many other subgrid scale models produced by CERFACS [14,34-39], these models can be implemented in other CFD solvers, another flexible method to disseminate the results of the project because many groups in laboratories or companies rely on their own solver, do not use AVBP but would be interested in testing our models as already done for many other physical parts.Finally, IMFT will make all experimental results available for the community through the TNF (Turbulent Non premixed Flame) workshop which is a collegial web site repository initiated by Dr Barlow at Sandia National Labs. The results of the advanced grant SCIROCCO lead by CERFACS and IMFT are already available on this TNF site and computed by multiple groups worldwide through an initiative lead by the CLEAN-AVIATION program of the EU. ERC SCIROCCO, multiple hydrogen flame benches have been developed and installed in a dedicated hydrogen laboratory with a complete experimental environment for safety at IMFT (adapted to the french ATEX norms for explosive environment). This allows to operate two or three simultaneous experiments for WP1 and WP2 up to 30 kW. The technocampus itself which will host the high-power experiments of WP3 (up to 300 kW), is a huge center (15,000 m2), funded by the city of Toulouse, the Occitanie region and multiple companies. This campus is dedicated to hydrogen and its infrastructure will constitute an enormous asset for the project by removing most of the contingency issues associated to high power hydrogen experiments: storage, safety, adapted experimental environment.

IMFT and CERFACS have a long experience in the field of reacting flows, using theory, experiments and simulations. The teams are large (more than 25 researchers on combustion at IMFT and 50 at CERFACS) and mature. The PI has a long experience in the coordination of large projects and IMFT is used to lead ERC grants: a new ERC coordinated by Pr Schuller (SELECT-H) will actually start in 2023 and some of the hardware of SELECT-H will be used as a basis for certain tasks of SAFE-H2 (for WP1 and 2). IMFT has a long experience on combustion theory and experiments. Even if all objectives of SAFE-H2 are not fully reached, there is little doubt that the teams will produce interesting research on hydrogen safety.

In terms of management, the PI of SAFE-H2 has a long experience and has organized and coordinated multiple European projects through FP5, 6 and 7. Recently he was the PI of two ERC ADG grants INTECOCIS (on combustion instabilities, ended in 2018) and SCIROCCO (on hydrogen combustion for propulsion, ending in 2024). He organized the first CFD for Combustion Safety international conference in March 2023. All senior scientists involved in SAFE-H2 have already worked together many times and they have a long experience in joint projects, national as well as European (IT, ERC). The WP1/WP2 rig will be based on existing experimental rooms and systems and the risk of failure there is almost nonexistent. WP3 is more ambitious: the design and the construction of the WP3 rig will be organized with a specialized company outside of IMFT to minimize risks of delay. This will be set up ahead of the project starting date. More details are given with the cost description of the project.

REFERENCES. Bold references correspond to the PIs group work.

P. Quillatre, O. Vermorel, T. Poinsot and Ph. Ricoux. Large Eddy Simulation of Vented Deflagration. Ind. & Eng. Chem. Res, 52, 33, 11414-11423, 2013.
O. Vermorel, P. Quillatre and T. Poinsot and Ph. Ricoux. LES of explosions in venting chamber: a test case for premixed turbulent combustion models. Comb. Flame. 2017, 183, 207-224.
G. Chamberlain, A. Pekalski, E.S. Oran. Detonations in industrial vapour cloud explosions. J Loss Prevent Process Indus, 62 (2019), p. 103918.
E.S. Oran, G. Chamberlain, A. Pekalski, Mechanisms and occurrence of detonations in vapor cloud explosions, Prog. En. Comb. Sci., 77, 2020, 100804.
M. West, A. Al-Douri, K. Hartmann, W. Buttner, K. M. Groth, Critical review and analysis of hydrogen safety data collection tools, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 47, 40, 2022, 17845-17858.
N. Kitabayashi, Y. Wada, T. Mogi, T. Saburi, A.K. Hayashi, Experimental study on high pressure hydrogen jets coming out of tubes of 0.1–4.2 m in length, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 38 (2013) 8100-8107.
M. Sanjose, J-M Senoner, F. Jaegle, B.Cuenot; S. Moreau and Thierry Poinsot, “Fuel Injection Model for Euler-Euler and Euler-Lagrange Large-Eddy Simulations of an evaporating spray inside an aeronautical combustor”, Int. J. Heat Multiphase Flow 37, 514-529, 2011.
B. Xu, J. Wen, S. Dembele, V. Tam, S. Hawksworth, The effect of pressure boundary rupture rate on spontaneous ignition of pressurized hydrogen release, J. Loss. Prevent. Proc. 22 (2009) 279-287.
Sengissen A., Van Kampen, J.F ., Huls R., Stoffels G., Kok, J.B.W. and Poinsot T. “LES and experimental studies of cold and reacting flows in a swirled partially premixed burner with and without fuel modulation ”, Comb. Flame 150, 40-53 (2007).
W. Kaneko, K. Ishii, Effects of diaphragm rupturing conditions on self-ignition of high-pressure hydrogen, Int. J. Hydrogen. Energy 41 (2016) 10969-10975.
M. Asahara, T. Saburi, T. Ando, Y. Takahashi, T. Miyasaka, S. Kubota, Self-ignited flame behavior of high- pressure hydrogen release by rupture disk through a long tube, Int. J. Hyd. Energy 46 (2021) 13484-13500.
S. Golovastov, V. Bocharnikov, The influence of diaphragm rupture rate on spontaneous self-ignition of pressurized hydrogen: Experimental investigation, Int. J. Hydrogen. Energy 37 (2012) 10956-10962.
Vervisch, L. and Poinsot T. (1998) “Direct Numerical Simulation of non-premixed turbulent combustion”, Annual Review of Fluid Mechanics30, 655-692.
Schmidt M., Ding CP., Peterson B. et al. Near-Wall Flame and Flow Measurements in an Optically Accessible SI Engine. Flow Turb. Comb. 106, 597–611 (2021)
Jainski C., Rissmann M., Mann M., Dreizler A. (2017). Flame-Flow Interaction in Premixed Turbulent Flames During Transient Head-On Quenching. Flow Turb. and Comb. 98. 1-14. 10.1007/s10494-016-9795-5.
T. Poinsot and D. Veynante. “Theoretical and numerical combustion.“.ISBN9782746639904. Amazon.
Lindstedt, R. P. and Sakthitharan, V. Time Resolved Velocity and Turbulence Measurements in Turbulent Gaseous Explosions. Comb. Flame 114, 469–483 (1998).
Li A., Hampp F. and Lindstedt P. The impact of hydrogen enrichment on the flow field evolution in turbulent explosions, Comb. Flame, 203, 2019, 105-119.
O. Dounia, O. Vermorel, T. Jaravel and T. Poinsot, Time scale analysis of the homogeneous flame inhibition by alkali metals, Proc. Comb. Inst. 2020, 1540-7489.
Pagliaro, J. L., Linteris, G. T., Sunderland, P. B., Baker, P. T. Combustion inhibition and enhancement of premixed methane-air flames by halon replacements. Comb. Flame, 162, 41–49 (2015).
O. Dounia, O. Vermorel and T. Poinsot. Theoretical analysis and simulation of methane/air flame inhibition with sodium bicarbonate particles. Comb. Flame, 193, 313-326, 2018.
R. Friedman, J.B. Levy. Inhibition of opposed jet methane-air diffusion flames. The effects of alkali metal vapours and organic halides. Comb. Flame, 7, 1963, 195-201.
V. Babushok, G. Linteris, P. Hoorelbeke, D. Roosendans, K. van Wingerden (2017)Flame Inhibition by Potassium-Containing Compounds, Combustion Science and Technology, 189:12,2039-2055.
V.Molkov, R.Dobashi, M.Suzuki and T.Hirano.Venting of deflagrations:hydrocarbon-air and hydrogen-air systems. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 13(3-5):397–409, 2000. National Fire Protection Association. Technical Committee on Explosion Protection Systems. NFPA 68, Standard on Explosion Protection by Deflagration Venting. National Fire Protection Association, 2007.
L.Y.M. Gicquel, G. Staffelbach and T. Poinsot, “Large Eddy Simulation of Gaseous Flames in Gas Turbine Combustion Chambers”, Prog. En. Comb. Sci. 38, 782-817. 2012.
T. Poinsot.Prediction and control of combustion instabilities in real engines. Hottel plenary lecture. Proc. Comb. Inst. 36, 1-28, 2017, dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.proci.2016.05.007.
Berger, L., Attili, A. & Pitsch, H. Synergistic interactions of thermodiffusive instabilities and turbulence in lean hydrogen flames. Comb. Flame 244, 112254 (2022).
Falkenstein T. Rezchikova A., Langer R., Bode M, Kang S. and Pitsch H. The role of differential diffusion during early flame kernel development under engine conditions - part I: Analysis of the heat-release-rate response. Comb. Flame 221, 502–515 (2020).
Berger, L., Attili, A. & Pitsch, H. Intrinsic instabilities in premixed hydrogen flames: Parametric variation of pressure, equivalence ratio, and temperature. Part 1 - Dispersion relations in the linear regime. Combust Flame 111935 (2022).
Lipatnikov, A. N. & Chomiak, J. Molecular transport effects on turbulent flame propagation and structure. Prog Energ Combust 31, 1–73 (2005).
Aniello A., Laera D., Berger L., Attili A. and Poinsot T. Introducing thermodiffusive effects in LES of turbulent combustion for lean hydrogen - air flames. 2022. Proc. Summer Pr. Center for Turbulence Research. Stanford.
Baum M., Thevenin D. et Poinsot T. (1994) “Accurate boundary conditions formultispecies reacting flows”, J. Comp. Physics, 116, 247-261.
N. Guezennec et T. Poinsot, “Acoustically nonreflecting and reflecting boundary conditions for vorticity injection in compressible solvers”, AIAA J. 47, 1709-1722, 2009.
G. Daviller, G. Oztarlik, T. Poinsot.A generalized non-reflecting inlet boundary condition for steady and forced compressible flows with injection of vortical and acoustic waves, Comp. & Fluids, 190, 2019, 503-513.
Colin, O., Ducros, F., Veynante, D. et Poinsot T. (2000) “A thickened flame model for large eddy simulations of turbulent premixed combustion”, Phys. Fluids12, 7, 1843-1863.
Nicoud, F., Baya Toda, H., Cabrit, O., Bose, S. and Lee, J. (2011) Using singular values to build a subgrid-scale model for Large Eddy Simulations, Physics of Fluids, 23 (085106), pp. 1-12.
Nicoud, F. and Ducros, F. (1999) Subgrid-scale stress modelling based on the square of the velocity gradient tensor, Flow Turbulence and Combustion, 62 (3), pp. 183-200.
Turbulent Non premixed Flame Workshop. A community platform to study non premixed flames. https://tnfworkshop.org.
H. Pitsch. Large Eddy Simulation of turbulent combustion. Annual Review of Fluid Mechanics 2006 38:1, 453-482
.M. Leyko, I. Duran, S. Moreau, F. Nicoud and T. Poinsot. Simulation and modelling of the waves transmission and generation in a stator blade row in a combustion-noise framework. J. Sound Vibration.33, 23-24, 6090-6106, 2014.
M. Miguel Brebion, D. Mejia, P. Xavier, F. Duchaine, B. Bedat, L. Selle and T. Poinsot (2016). Joint experimental and numerical study of the influence of flame holder temperature on the stabilization of a laminar flame on a cylinder. Comb. Flame. 172, 153-161.
C. Kraus, L. Selle and T. Poinsot (2018). Coupling heat transfer and large eddy simulation for combustion instability prediction in a swirl burner.Comb. Flame 191, 239-251.
P. Xavier, L. Selle, G. Oztarlik and T. Poinsot (2018). Phosphor Thermometry on a rotating flame-holder for combustion applications. Exp. Fluids 59, 2.
Owston, R., Magi, V. & Abraham, J. Interactions of hydrogen flames with walls: Influence of wall temperature, pressure, equivalence ratio, and diluents. Int J Hydrogen Energ 32, 2094–2104 (2007).
S.R. Gubba, S.S. Ibrahim, W. Malalasekera, A.R. Masri, An assessment of large eddy simulations of premixed flames propagating past repeated obstacles, Combust. Theor. Model. 13 (3) (2009) 513–540.
S.R. Gubba, S.S. Ibrahim, W. Malalasekera, A.R. Masri, Measurements and LES calculations of turbulent premixed flame propagation past repeated obstacles, Combust. Flame 158 (12) (2011) 2465–2481.
V.Di Sarli, A.D. Benedetto, G. Russo, Using large eddy simulation for under- standing vented gas explosions in the presence of obstacles, J. Hazard. Mater. 169 (1–3) (2009) 435–442.
V.Di Sarli, A.D. Benedetto, G. Russo, Large eddy simulation of transient pre- mixed flame-vortex interactions in gas explosions, Chem. Eng. Sci. 71 (2012) 539–551.
G. Lacaze, E. Richardson and T. Poinsot, “Large Eddy Simulation of spark ignition in a turbulent methane jet”, Combustion and Flame 156, 6, 1993, 2009.
M. Boileau , G., StaffelbachB. Cuenot ,T. Poinsot and C. Bérat, “LES of an ignition sequencein a gas turbine engine”, Combustion and Flame 154, 1-2, 2-22 (2008).
B. Enaux, V. Granet, O. Vermorel, C. Lacour, L. Thobois, V. Dugué, and T. Poinsot, “Large Eddy Simulation of a motored single-cylinder piston engine : numerical strategies and validation”, Flow, Turb. Comb., 86, 2, 153-177, 2010
G. Lacaze, B. Cuenot, T. Poinsot and M. Oschwald, “Large Eddy Simulation of Laser ignition and compressible reacting flow in a rocket-like configuration”, Comb. Flame 156, 6, 1166-1180, 2009.
Felden, A., Esclapez, L., Riber, E., Cuenot, B. and Wang, H. (2018) Including real fuel chemistry in LES of turbulent spray combustion, Comb. Flame, 193 (July 2018), pp. 397–416G.
Daviller, M. Brebion, P. Xavier, G. Staffelbach, J. D. Müller and T. Poinsot. A Mesh Adaptation Strategy to Predict Pressure Losses in LES of Swirled Flows. Flow Turb. and Comb. 99, 1, 93-118, 2017.
F. Jaegle, O. Cabrit, S. Mendez, and T. Poinsot, “Implementation methods of wall functions in cell-vertex numerical solvers”,Flow, Turb. and Comb.85, 2, 245-272,2010.
Popp, P. and M. Baum (1997) “An analysis of wall heat fluxes, reaction mechanisms and unburnt hydrocarbons during the head-on quenching of a laminar methane flame”, Comb. Flame 108(3) : 327 - 348.
T. Poinsot (2021) ‘L’avion du futur volera d’abord dans nos ordinateurs’. L’Humanité Dimanche. Du 27 mai au 2 juin 2021.
A. Cellier, F. Duchaine, T. Poinsot, G. Okyay, M. Leyko, M. Pallud. An analytically reduced chemistry scheme for large eddy simulation of lithium-ion battery fires. Comb. Flame 2023.
Dounia, O., Vermorel, O., Misdariis, A., Poinsot, T., Influence of kinetics on DDT, Comb. Flame 200, 2019, 1-14.Dounia, O., Jaravel, T., Vermorel, O., On the controlling parameters of the thermal decomposition of inhibiting particles: a theoretical and numerical study, Comb. Flame 240, 2022, 111991.
Hok, J., Dounia O., Vermorel, O., Jaravel, T., Effect of flame front thermo-diffusive instability on flame acceleration in a tube, ICDERS 28 (2022).
J. W. Reinhardt, Behavior of bromotrifluoropropene and pentafluoroethane when subjected to a simulated aerosol can explosion, Tech. rep., DOT/FAA/AR-TN04/4, Federal Aviation Administration (2004).
W. Rosser, S. Inami, H. Wise, The effect of metal salts on premixed hydrocarbon-air flames, Comb. Flame 7 (1963) 107–119.
A. R. Masri, A. Al-Harbi, S. Meares, and S. S. Ibrahim. A comparative study of turbulent premixed flames propagating past repeated obstacles. Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research,2012.
S. Ibrahim and A. R. Masri. The effects of obstructions on overpressure resulting from premixed flame deflagration. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries,14(3): 213–221,2001.

Published on September 25th, 2024