Proceedings of ASME Turbo Expo 2012

GT2012
June 11-15, 2012, Copenhagen, Denmark

GT2012-68761

DESIGN AND PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS OF A GAS TURBINE FLAMELESS COMBUSTOR

USING CFD SIMULATIONS

Levy, Y.*1, Christo, F.C.**, Gaissinski, I.*, Erenburg, V.*, Sherbaum V*.
1
corresponding author, e-mail: levyy@aerodyne.technion.ac.il
*
Faculty of Aerospace Engineering
Technion Israel Institute of Technology
Haifa Israel
**
Barbara Hardy Institute
University of South Australia
Adelaide - Australia

ABSTRACT

This study investigates the performance and the conditions
under which flameless oxidation can be achieved for a given
annular adiabatic combustor. Numerical modelling of velocity,
temperature and species fields are performed for different flow
configurations of air and methane streams injected into a
proposed design of a gas-turbine combustor. Parametric
analysis was performed by systematically varying several
parameters: radius of a recirculation zone, radius of the
combustor, location of air and fuel ports, air and fuel velocities
magnitudes and injection angles. The analysis was performed
initially using a three-step global chemistry model to identify a
design (geometry and operating conditions) that yield
flameless combustion regime. The selected design was then
modelled using a skeletal (46 reactions) and a detailed (309
reactions) chemical kinetics mechanism. The k turbulence
model was used in the most calculations. Overall, similar
qualitative flow, temperature, and species patterns were
predicted by both kinetics models; however the detailed
mechanism provides quantitatively more realistic predictions.
An optimal flow configuration was achieved with exhaust NOx
emissions of < 7.5 ppm, CO < 35ppm, and a pressure-drop <
5%, hence meeting the design criteria for gas turbine engines.
This study demonstrates the feasibility of achieving ultra-low
NOx and CO emissions utilising a flameless oxidation regime.

Keywords: flameless oxidation, CFD, kinetics, pollution,

pressure drop, gas turbine engine.

NOMENCLATURE

dAir diameter of air injector (mm)

dCH4 diameter of fuel port (mm)
FOGT flameless oxidation gas turbine
L0 distance between centre of combustor cavity and fuel inlets
l0 distance between centres of the fuel and air injection inlets (mm)
Lch length of the combustor (mm)
mair mass flow rate of air ( g/s)
Nholes number of holes for fuel (and air) injection
P pressure (bar)
Rch radius of the combustors cavity (mm)
RMod (RM) radius of the combustor (mm)
T temperature (K)
equivalence ratio

INTRODUCTION

Flue gas recirculation is an efficient method for off [1]. Nevertheless, it was also found experimentally
reducing NOx emissions. This technique however is by Wnning [2, 3] that for a specific range of
limited by the quantity of gas that can be recirculated recirculation rates of hot exhaust gases, a stable form of
because air vitiation may rapidly lead to a flame blow- combustion is possible. In this arrangement exhaust gas
1 Copyright 2012 by ASME
is recirculated into the air and fuel streams upstream the
mixing zone, to yield a stable combustion regime that is
now commonly referred to as flameless oxidation. In
this combustion regime the fuel is mixed with a highly
diluted hot air and/or combustion products. This creates
a distributed reaction zone, which in turn reduces
localized peak temperature creating a semi-uniform
temperature field. This uniformity in temperature leads
to higher radiation flux, and lowers the emission of
pollutants in comparison to conventional diffusion
flames. In contrast, the mixing of fuel and oxidant in
diffusion burners creates a thin reaction zone (a flame
sheet of a few millimetres thick), of a stoichiometric
flame temperature, which results in the formation of
higher NOx emission.
In comparison to classical and more recent combustor
designs, the proposed flameless oxidation gas turbine
(FOGT) is expected to deliver several advantages
without major modifications to the combustors
geometry or adding auxiliary equipment, such as
catalytic materials, or steam injection that may have
significant adverse effects on the combustor reliability
and lifetime. This technology can also use
advantageously the trend towards higher-pressure ratios
regimes. Indeed, higher combustor air inlet temperatures
should improve combustion stability in the flameless
oxidation GT combustor, and consequently also
contribute to further reduction in CO emission.
Compared to fuel-staging technology, which is
implemented in recent years in commercial systems,
and the variable geometry (air-staging) technology,
flameless oxidation GT design does not introduce
additional mechanical complexity or control problems.
In addition, its pollutant reduction potential is expected
to exceed any existing technology. Large amounts of
NOx is produced in the pilot diffusion flame of a staged
combustor whereas the flameless oxidation GT design
has only a single combustion zone with a uniform and
moderate temperature field, thus minimizing NOx
emissions. Also, current radial staged combustors
produce a temperature Pattern Factor at the turbine inlet
that is far from being uniform.
The proposed FOGT combustor design also avoids
most of the safety problems that associated with partial
pre-mixing used in the Lean Premixed Prevaporized
(LPP) technology. The LPP designs require a premixer
that may be damaged by flashback or auto-ignition of
the air-fuel mixture leading to dangerous situations.
Leakage of fuel or gases from the premixer into the hot
section may cause severe failures and could even lead
to explosions of the engine casing. These safety
problems may become worse when using liquid fuels
because of the longer time required for complete pre-
evaporation. In contrast, the fuel systems of
conventional diffusion burners, which have been proven
COMBUSTOR GEOMETRY
A schematic of the proposed FOGT combustor is shown
in Fig.1. A total of 30 holes for air and 30 holes for fuel
injection are positioned uniformly along the
circumference of the combustor (Fig. 1-b). The
dimensions of the combustor are based on calculations
2 Copyright 2012 by ASME
in commercial engines, can used also in flameless
oxidation GT technology; hence their safety and
reliability can be directly integrated into flameless
oxidation combustors.
Furthermore, when compared to the Rich-Quench-Lean
methods, the flameless oxidation GT design does not
require dividing the combustor into two physically
separated zones (rich and lean). It also does not require
a special form of cooling since it does not have a fuel-
rich combustion zone. With respect to geometrical
modifications in a FOGT design, only a slight increase
in combustor volume is required to accommodate the
recirculated burnt gases in the combustor. Fundamentals
of the thermodynamic cycle, combustion process, and
geometrical parameters for a FOGT design are
presented elsewhere [4-10] and are not repeated here.
The proposed combustor design presented here involves
only minor modifications to the original design [4-10].
It is a compact and robust design, and does not require
supplementary equipment or expensive manufacturing
techniques. This design is expected to offer a safe and
reliable operation without negative effects on
combustion performance. Therefore flameless oxidation
GT is expected to represent an ideal candidate for an
ultra-low NOx combustion system that can meet the
stringent emission regulations for industrial gas turbines
and aero-engines.
The ultimate goal of this project is to identify an
optimal design and operating parameters for a flameless
combustor for a gas turbine engine using CFD
modelling as a design tool. In this study Reynolds
Navier Stokes (RANS) models, the work-horse of
industrial CFD, are used. In RANS formulation only the
averaged governing equations is calculated. The
averaged flow variables can be represented on a much
coarser grid, thereby drastically reducing the
computational requirements, but turbulence equations
contain unclosed terms that must be modelled. For
flows where instabilities or transient effects are
important, time-dependent calculations (Unsteady
RANS) can resolve the large-scale eddies in the flow
but not the fine-scale eddies. These fine scales can be
resolved only by Direct Numerical Simulations (DNS)
or Large Eddy Simulations (LES) methods, both are too
computationally expensive to utilise at this stage of this
study.
The main objectives of the present parametric study are:
exploring the effect of various geometries and numerical
models (e.g. chemistry and combustion) on the predicted
velocity, temperature, and species fields; and identifying
and quantifying the performance optimal flameless
oxidation combustor design.
from the authors earlier studies [4-9], however its shape
was significantly modified. The air inlet is positioned at
a fixed location, but the direction of air injection was
modified (blue-green arrow). The flow recirculation is
achieved by modifying the position and orientation of
the primary and secondary air inlets and the fuel
(methane) injector. The position of these inlets and the
unique shape of the combustor create a large stable
recirculation zone, which enhances the mixing of the air
with the combustion products, rather than mixing the
fresh air and the fuel as in conventional diffusion
burners. The burning of the fuel in a hot vitiated air
environment plays a significant role reducing NOx
production while maintaining flame stability.

RM

R
dCH 4
= 1.2mm
M
dCH 4
= 1.5mm
L
dCH 4
= 1.2mm
(a)
l0

(b) (c)
Figure 1: A schematic of the combustor; (a) Frontal view, I, II, III optional CH4 inlet locations fuel holes shown here are not the
optimal dimensions; (b) 3-D view of the proposed combustor. Red arrows fuel inlet, blue arrows air inlet; (c) chosen
optimal scheme with equal number of fuel and air holes

NUMERICAL MODEL predictions of the mean velocity, temperature and

Initial calculations were performed using a three-step
global methane mechanism [11], and the eddy break-up
(EBU) combustion model. Thermal NOx, formed by
high temperature oxidation of atmospheric nitrogen, was
modelled using the extended Zeldovich mechanism in a
post-processing model. That is, computed temperature
and chemical species from converged solutions are used
to compute NOx concentration. This approach (i.e. using
global chemistry, EBU, and post-processing NOx
models) offer a compromise between the accuracy of the
3 Copyright 2012 by ASME
turbulence fields on one hand, and computational
requirements on the other. It is a fast and reasonably
accurate method for performing parametric analysis.
Once a suitable design and flow conditions were
identified, the calculations were then repeated using
more sophisticated chemistry and combustion models.
This included using a multistep kinetics mechanism,
such as Smookes 46-reaction chemistry model [12] for
methane oxidation. This chemistry model when used
together with the eddy-dissipation concept (EDC)
combustion model, was proven to yield accurate
predictions in modelling flameless combustion, as
demonstrated by Christo & Dally [13]. Their numerical
model has been validated against high-quality
experimental data in non-premixed methane/hydrogen
(1/1 by volume) flames issuing from a jet in hot co-flow
[14]. The results were also confirmed by study [16] for
the combustion of methane using Smooke's mechanism
and the study [17] where two combustion mechanisms
including Smooke's one were compared with
experimental data and both cases showed close results.
Hence we adopted this model with confidence. In
addition, calculations were performed using a detailed
kinetics with 309 reactions (a variant of GRI 3.0
mechanism that excludes C2 and higher reactions). This
mechanism includes a set of N-O reactions, which
intrinsically improve the accuracy in predicting NOx
emissions. The k turbulence model was used in
most of the calculations; the results were also verified
using k model.
A 12-degree segment of the full combustor was
modelled. Periodic conditions were defined for the sides
of the segment. A zero azimuthal pressure gradient was
assumed across the periodic boundaries. A second-order
discretisation scheme was used for all equations. For
each cell, a total of seven governing equations (mass,
three momentum, two turbulence quantities, and
energy), and 46 (or 309 depending which kinetics model
is being used) species transport equations, were solved
iteratively. For initialisation of the flow field, a section
Figure 2: Surface polyhedral mesh of the combustor showing the fine clustering of cells at the fuel and air inlets, gradually growing to
ensure adequate spatial aspect ratio and angular skewness of the cells.
Steady-state calculations were performed using the
ANSYS-Fluent package [15]. A summary of the design
and inlet parameters used in the calculations are
tabulated below. The PISO solver was used and 2-nd
order accuracy was applied for all variables.
L0 50 mm
lo 10 mm
LCh 200 mm
Rch 30 mm
Nholes 30
0.6
TCH4 (inlet) 298K
TAir (inlet) 420K
PCH4 (inlet), PAir (inlet) 3bar
RMod, dAir,, dCH4 , mair Variables
4 Copyright 2012 by ASME
of the cavity of the combustor was assigned a high
temperature of 2000K, which acts as a numerical
ignition source to initiate chemical reactions. Solution
convergence is determined by ensuring that the energy
and mass imbalance is less than 0.5% and that residuals
of all equations do not vary with iterations.
A high-quality three-dimensional polyhedral mesh was
constructed for the proposed combustor design (Fig. 2).
The quality of the mesh is a critical requirement for
achieving numerical convergence and ensuring the
prediction accuracy of the solution. Accordingly, a mesh
was built with a sufficiently fine grid resolution at the air
and fuel inlets, growing gradually to maintain all the
cells aspect ratio and angular skewness to a below 5 and
0.8, respectively. A grid-independence analysis was
first performed using three grid sizes of 428,000,
618,000 and 936,000 polyhedral cells. Comparing the
predictions of the flow and species properties (e.g. static
temperature, velocity magnitude, NOx), showed a
difference of < 3% between the first and second grid and
less than 1% between the second and third grid. In the
first and second grid, each component of the flow and of
the principal species was compared and the maximum
difference was found to be less than 3%. Moreover, all
species were compared at the exit cross section and
again, the maximum difference was less than 3%. Hence
the grid with 618,000 cells was selected for all
subsequent calculations.
Air inlet
Fuel inlet
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The inlet pressure of the air and the fuel streams is set to
3 bars, and the inlet temperatures of the air and the fuel
are set to 420K, and 298K, respectively. Several
geometry and flow configurations were investigated.
The equivalence ratio was kept constant at 0.6. This
equivalence ratio was selected to ensure that the average
exit temperature does not exceed 1800K. To maintain an
acceptable pressure-drop across the combustor, the air
and fuel injector diameters, and mass flow rates were
varied.
Initial simulations (not shown here due to space
limitation) showed that a counter-flow injection of air
and methane is significantly less effective than a co-flow
configuration; hence only results for co-directional
air/fuel streams are presented here. It was also found that
injecting the air and fuel jets at an angle of 58.6 and
52.5, respectively (off the radial direction of the
combustor) yields an optimal mixing pattern. A distribution (Fig. 6). The global mechanism predicts
summary of the modelled cases (configurations 1-10)
using a global chemistry model is listed in Table 1. As
an independent reference a premixed combustion model
was also simulated. The ultra-low NOx value < 1ppm
represents the lowest possible limit for the given
equivalence ratio. However, the pressure-drop (~9%) for
this configuration is unacceptable for practical
applications. The results for configurations 1-5 indicates
that it is possible to achieve a low NOx value of < 6ppm,
but the heat density for these configurations is low. The
diameters of the inlet holes were therefore increased, and
the calculations were repeated. Out of all the modelled
cases, configuration 10 achieved a semi-optimal
performance in terms of low NOx < 5ppm, and a low
pressure-drop of <5%, while maintaining an exit
temperature below 1800K, hence meeting the design
criteria. For this configuration, the air and fuel
diameters are 9.0 and 2.0mm, respectively, and the fuel
is injected only from the middle hole (see Fig. 1 - a).
The preferred design (Configuration 10) was then
modelled using the skeletal (46 reactions) and the
detailed (309 reactions) kinetics mechanisms. The
results (Table 2) show that the three chemistry models
predict similar peak and exit temperatures, and pressure-
drop. The similar results were obtained using k
turbulent model. Temperature distribution, general view
and at longitudinal centreline section are shown in Figs.
3 and 4 respectively. Figure 3 shows a similar prediction
of temperature distributions by the global and skeletal
mechanisms. However, larger high-temperature (1400
K-1800K) regions are predicted by the global
mechanism in comparison to the skeletal kinetics. This
outcome is due to the absence of radical species in the
global mechanism. Within the main recirculation zone,
the skeletal mechanism shows lower temperatures (Fig.
4), however similar flow patterns are predicted by both
chemistry models (Fig. 5).
The flow structure is determined mainly by the geometry
of the combustor, turbulence, and heat-release due to
CH4 Inlet Air Inlet
(a)
Figure 3: Static temperature (K) as predicted by (a) global 3-step chemistry, and (b) skeletal 46-step kinetics.
5 Copyright 2012 by ASME
chemical reactions, which were predicted similarly by
all three chemistry models. The main difference between
the predictions of the chemistry models is the CO
significantly lower peak CO concentrations within the
recirculation zone, than the skeletal mechanism. At the
exit of the combustor, 37.5ppm CO is predicted by the
skeletal mechanism, whereas negligible CO
concentration is predicted by the global mechanism.
This difference is seen more clearly in Fig. 7, where
radial distribution of CO is presented for the centreline
cross section along the centre of the recirculation zone.
It shows that the global chemistry model under predicts
the peak CO value or its location, and also did not
capture the shape of the shape.
The prediction of CO by the global mechanism is far
less reliable than the skeletal and detailed kinetics; with
the latter being the most accurate considering its
elaborate reactions pathways. An exit CO emission of <
30ppm as predicted by the detailed kinetics model,
meets the emission constraint on GT engines, yet our
expectation is that flameless oxidation has the potential
to achieve further CO reduction.
Contours of NOx distribution (Fig. 8) shows that its
maximum concentration does not necessarily coincident
with the spatial location of the peak temperature (see
Fig. 4). A possible explanation is that a presence of
excess air causing a rapid dilution of NOx concentration.
A more plausible explanation is that additional NOx is
formed by the prompt NOx mechanism, which prevails
in low-temperature or fuel-rich conditions or where
residence times are short. However, investigating this
observation is outside the scope of this paper.
The skeletal mechanism predicts a higher (by 37%) NOx
concentration than the global chemistry model (Table 2).
However, a comparable NOx level is predicted by the
skeletal and detailed kinetics mechanisms. Worth
remembering that a post-processing NOx model was
used with the skeletal model, while a detailed N-O
reactions were employed in the detailed kinetics.
CH4 Inlet Air Inlet
(b)
 CH4 Inlet Air Inlet CH4 Inlet Air Inlet

(a) (b)
Figure 4: Temperature (K) contours at a centreline cross-section as predicted by (a) global chemistry, and (b) skeletal mechanism.

CH4 Inlet Air Inlet CH4 Inlet Air Inlet

(a) (b)
Figure 5: Velocity (m/s) field in general view: (a) global chemistry, and (b) skeletal kinetics mechanism.

CH4 Inlet Air Inlet

CH4 Inlet Air Inlet

(a) (b)
Figure 6: CO mass fraction contours as predicted by: (a) global mechanism, (b) skeletal mechanism.

(a) (b)

Radial position from engine axis [m] Radial position from engine axis [m]
Figure 7: Radial distribution of CO mass fraction along the central cross section of the recirculation zone (see cross section A-A in
figure #1c); (a) global mechanism, and (b) skeletal mechanism

6 Copyright 2012 by ASME

 CH4 Inlet Air Inlet
CH4 Inlet Air Inlet

(b)
(a)

Figure 8: NOx concentration distribution, central cross-section; (a) global mechanism, and (b) skeletal mechanism.

The flame sheet in conventional diffusion burners is
characterised by a thin (a few millimetres thick) reaction
zone. In a flameless oxidation regime however, the
reaction zone is distributed across the combustor, rather
than being confined to a narrow zone. Radical species
(e.g. OH, HO2, O, H, etc) are commonly used as markers
to identify regions with significant chemical reactions
(flame sheet). These radicals exist (and reach their
peak values), only within the reaction zone. Contours of
OH radicals as predicted by skeletal and detailed
kinetics are shown in Fig. 9. An OH mass fraction
values in the range 110-3 310-3 indicates significant
chemical reactions. Accordingly, Fig. 9 implies that the
reactions are distributed across the cavity of the
combustor. The skeletal mechanism suggests that the
reactions continue also in the outlet duct, but the
predictions of the detailed kinetics show weaker
reactions in the duct, which is a more plausible scenario.
The flow pattern (Fig. 10) shows that fuel oxidation
occurs within the primary recirculation region. The
temperature is distributed almost uniformly within the
cavity. Overall, a low NOx (< 7ppm) emission, and
semi-uniform distributions of temperature and OH,
suggests that a flameless oxidation regime has been
achieved.

CH4 Inlet Air Inlet CH4 Inlet Air Inlet

(a) (b)

Figure 9: OH mass fraction as predicted by: (a) skeletal mechanism, (b) detailed kinetics

Primary recirculation
zone

Secondary recirculation
zone
(a) (b)

Figure 10: Streamlines coloured by (a) OH mass fraction, and (b) temperature (K).

7 Copyright 2012 by ASME

CONCLUSIONS
An annular flameless combustor was designed and
investigated using CFD as a design tool. The
performance of the combustor (in terms of temperature
distribution, CO and NOx emissions, and pressure-drop),
is evaluated for different design parameters: radius of
the recirculation zone, location and diameters of fuel and
inlet holes, combustor diameter, and air and gas
injection velocities. Calculations were performed for a
constant global equivalence ratio of 0.6. The
performance of global, skeletal and details chemical
kinetics models were investigated. A global mechanism
is computationally fast and is recommended as a first-
order model for the parametric analysis. Predictions of
CO concentrations using the global mechanism are
unrealistically low, compared to the skeletal and detailed
mechanisms. Overall, the skeletal and detailed kinetics
model achieved similar realistic spatial predictions of all
variables, including minor and radical species. However,
the detailed kinetics should be used for optimisation
purposes and the predictions of pollutants such as CO
and NOx. The optimal combustor design achieved exit
NOx < 7.5 ppm, CO < 35 ppm, and a pressure-drop <
5% across the combustor.
This study has successfully demonstrated the feasibility
of achieving ultra-low NOx and a low CO emission, and
a low pressure-drop in a flameless oxidation GT
combustor. Further investigation of the optimal
configuration is recommended to include thermal
radiation effects. Predicting the variances of velocity,
temperature and species fields is also important. This
can be achieved for example by modelling the
combustor using a hybrid CFD-Composition PDF
approach, which does not rely on RANS formulation.
ACKNOWLEGEMENT
The authors wish to acknowledge the generous support
from the Israeli Science Foundation that made this
research project possible.

Table 1: Summary of predictions for various flow configurations. Exit CO concentration is negligible (less than 10-3ppm for all
simulations with global mechanism configurations 1-10). Air and fuel injection angles (off the radial direction of the combustor
pointing towards the cavity) are 52.5 and 58.6, respectively.

dCH4, dAir P/Pref Tmax Tout NOmax <NOout>av

Configuration (#) [mm] [%] [K] [K] [ppm] [ppm]

(1) Fuel holes Downstream

RM = 200mm , m& air = 182g/s 1.5, 6.0 9.3 2350 1749 12.0 6.0
(2) Fuel holes Upstream
RM = 200mm , m & air = 182g/s 2402
1.5, 6.0 9.3 1747 16.2 1.5
(3)Middle hole
RM = 130mm , m & air = 182g/s 1.5, 6.0 9.3 2402 1746 14.6 1.0
L Right
(4) Left & Right Holes m
& fuel = m& fuel

RM = 130mm , m
& air = 182g/s 1.2, 6.0 9.3 2395 1746 41.9 6.2

(5) Middle Hole

RM = 100mm , m & air = 182g/s 1.5, 6.0 10.4 2402 1746 10.7 0.98
L Right
(6) Left & Right Holes m
& fuel = m& fuel

RM = 100mm , m
& air = 182g/s 1.2, 6.0 9.3 2398 1746 104.0 11.6
(7) Middle Hole
RM = 100mm , m & air = 182g/s 1.2, 9.0 2.0 2416 1760 438 87.7
(8) Middle Hole
RM = 100mm , m & air = 182g/s 2.0, 9.0 2.1 2405 1752 22.3 5.2
(9) Middle Hole
RM = 100mm , m & air = 218g/s 2.0, 9.0 2.8 2405 1752 18.2 4.4
(10) Middle Hole
RM = 100mm , m & air = 273g/s 2.0, 9.0 4.4 2365 1770 14.5 4.6
(R) RM = 200mm m
& air = 182g/s
Premixed combustion 6.0 9.3 1782 1777 0.98 0.95

8 Copyright 2012 by ASME

 Table 2: Effect of the chemistry model on the predictions of various flow properties (extension of Table 1)

Configuration (#) P/Pref Tmax Tmax COmax <COout>av NOmax <NOout>av

[%] [K] [K] [ppm] [ppm] [ppm] [ppm]
[corrected to
15%O2 dry basis
ppmv]
(10)
-5 * *
RM = 100mm , m& air = 273g/s 4.4% 2365 1770 10,000 1.7x10 14.5 4.6
3-step chemical reactions [4.2]
k turbulence model
(11)
* *
RM = 100mm , m& air = 273g/s 4.4% 2385 1770 20,000 37.5 28.5 5.9
46-step chemical reactions [6.5]
k turbulence model
(12)
** **
RM = 100mm , m
& air = 273g/s 4.5% 2450 1789 16,000 26.5 28.0 7.1
309-step chemical reactions [6.5]
k turbulence model
(13)
* *
RM = 100mm , m& air = 273g/s 4.4% 2370 1782 56,000 78.9 32.5 7.4
46-step chemical reactions [6.7]
k turbulence model
(*) NOx is calculated by post-processing using the 46-step reactions mechanism (at 8.9% O2 dry volume basis)
(**) NOx is computed using N-O reactions incorporated into the 309-reactions kinetics mechanism (at 8.9% O2 dry volume basis).
[NOx - ppmv] values are corrected to 15% O2 dry volume basis.

REFERENCES
[1] Wulff A. and Hournouziadis J., 1997, Technology Review
of Aero-engine Pollutant Emissions, Journal of Aerospace
Science and Technology, N. 8, 557-572
[2] Wunning J. A., 1991, Flamelelose Oxidation von Brenstoff
(German), Thesis, Aachen
[3] Wunning J. A., Wunning, J.G., Flameless Oxidation to
Reduce Thermal NO Formation, Progress in Energy and
Combustion Sciences, 1997, Vol. 23, 81-94
[4] Levy Y. and Arfi P., Novel Design of Adiabatic
Combustor, 2002, US Patent No. 6,826,912 B2, Dec, 2004
[5] Levy, Y., Sherbaum, V., Arfi, P., 2004, Basic
thermodynamics of FLOXCOM, the low-NOX gas turbine
adiabatic combustor", 2004, Applied Thermal Engineering,
Vol. 24, 1593-1605
[6] Low NOx Flameless Oxidation Combustor for High
Efficiency Gas Turbine, 2004, FLOXCOM Contract No:
ENK5 - CT 2000 - 00114, Final Technical Report
[7] Levy Y., Olchanski E. Sherbaum V., Erenburg V., and
Burcat A. 2006, Shock Tube and Modeling Ignition Study of
Methane in Air and Recirculating Gases Mixtures", AIAA
Journal of Propulsion and Power, 2006, Vol. 22, N. 3, 669-676
[8] Y. Levy, V. Sherbaum, V. Erenburg, The Role of the
Recirculating Gases in the Mild Combustion Regime
Formation, Proceedings of ASME Turbo Expo 2006, Power
for Land, Sea and Air, Nevada, GT 2006-90707
[9] Y. Levy, V. Sherbaum, V. Erenburg, Fundamentals of
Low-NOx Gas Turbine Adiabatic Combustor,
Proceedings of ASME Turbo Expo 2005, Power for Land, Sea
and Air, Nevada, GT 2005-68321
[10] Y. Levy and P. Arfi, Design of Adiabatic Combustor, US
Patent No. 6,826,912 B2, 2004
[11] Andersen J., Rasmussen C.L., Giselsson T., and Glarborg
P., Global combustion mechanisms for use in CFD modeling,
Combustion and Flame, 2009, Vol. 99, 617625.
[12] Smooke, M. D. Lecture Notes in Physics, M.D. Smooke
(ed.), Reduced Kinetics Mechanisms and Asymptotic
Approximation for Methane-Air Flames, volume 384.
Springer-Verlag, 1991.
[13] Christo F.C. and Dally B.B., Modeling turbulent reacting
jets issuing into a hot and diluted coflow" Combustion and
Flame, 2005, Vol. 142, 117129.
[14] B.B. Dally, A.N. Karpetis, R.S. Barlow, Structure of
Turbulent Nonpremixed Jet Flames in a Diluted Hot Coflow,
Proceedings of the Combustion Institute, Proc. of the
Combustion Institute, Volume 29, 2002/ pp.1147-1154
[15] FLUENT6 User Guide, 2003.
[16] B. Danon, E.-S. Cho W. de Jong, D.J.E.M. Roekaerts,
Numerical investigation of burner positioning effects in a
multi-burner flameless combustion furnace Applied Thermal
Engineering 31 (2011) 3885-3896.
[17] Mouna Lamnaouer,Implementation of Laws 19 Species
Methane Reduced Mechanism in FLUENT. UTSR Gas
Industrial Turbine Fellowship Program May -July 2008,
University of Central Florida, Orlando, FL 32826

9 Copyright 2012 by ASME