Downloaded from http://iranpaper.

ir
http://www.itrans24.com/landing1.html

Computational Fluid Dynamics

Haytham Sayah1
e-mail: haytham.sayah@mines-paristech.fr
Maroun Nemer
Mines ParisTech, CEP,
CNRS FRE 2861,
60 Boulevard Saint-Michel,
F-75272 Paris, CEDEX 06, France
Wassim Nehmé
EDF R&D, EPI- Eco-Efficacité et
Procédés Industriels,
Avenue des Renardières-Ecuelles,
77818 Moret sur Loing, France
Denis Clodic
Mines ParisTech, CEP,
CNRS FRE 2861,
60 Boulevard Saint-Michel,
F-75272 Paris, CEDEX 06, France
Modeling of a Self-Recuperative
Burner and Development of a
Simplified Equivalent Radiative
Model
The solution for dynamic modeling of reheating furnaces requires a burner model, which
is simultaneously accurate and fast. Based on the fact that radiative heat transfer is the
most dominant heat transfer mode in high-temperature processes, the present study
develops a simplified flame representation model that can be used for dynamic simulation
of heat transfer in reheating furnaces. The first part of the paper investigates, experimen-
tally and computationally, gas combustion in an industrial burner. Experiments aim at
establishing an experimental database of the burner characteristics. This database is
compared with numerical simulations in order to establish a numerical model for the
burner. The numerical burner model was solved using a commercial computational fluid
dynamics (CFD) software (FLUENT 6.3.26). A selection of results is presented, highlighting
the usefulness of CFD as a modeling tool for industrial scale burners. In the second part
of the paper, a new approach called the “emissive volume approach” is established. This
approach consists of replacing the burner flame by a number of emissive volumes that
replicates the radiative effect of the flame. Comparisons with CFD results show a
difference smaller than 1% is achieved with the emissive volume approach, while
computational time is divided by 40. [DOI: 10.1115/1.4003756]

Keywords: zonal method, finite volume method, emissive volume approach, burner
modeling

1 Introduction These models can therefore save time and costs associated with
experimental tests, especially for the design of heating furnaces,
As part of the work covering the dynamic modeling of steel
where the dimensions of the enclosure and the distribution of
reheating furnaces, an original approach is developed based on the
energy play an important role in energy efficiency mostly because
integration of simplified models of burners in a dynamic model of
changes are very expensive once the furnace is built. In addition,
steel reheating furnaces.
modeling offers an understanding of various physical parameters
Industrial reheating furnaces are insulated enclosures designed
at specific locations inside the furnace and of the furnace products.
to deliver heat to loads. In the steel industry, the regulatory envi-
Furthermore, modeling results constitute input data of physically
ronment in terms of pollution emissions, energy consumption, and
based control systems in order to obtain the required product
the rapidly increasing quality level of products encourage manu-
quality with minimal energy consumption.
facturers to improve thermal equipment along the entire chain of
Baukal et al. [1] used a CFD model of a reheating furnace in
steel manufacturing. The steel reheating furnace is a major energy
order to study the energy savings, according to the enrichment of
consumer in this chain. This process raises the steel temperature
air with oxygen. The model solves the equations of continuity,
from room temperature to about 1200  C. Energy is delivered to
energy, momentum, and species. Radiation is introduced as a
the furnace mainly through gas burners. The type of gas burners
source term in the equation of energy, and is represented by the
determines largely the performance of the furnace in terms of
radiative flux. The latter is calculated by solving the radiative trans-
emission levels and heating quality. Three types of burners are
fer equation by the discrete ordinates method (DOM). The absorp-
mostly used: the regenerative burners, the recuperative burners,
tion coefficients are calculated from gas by the method of weighted
and the single-flame regenerative burners.
sum of gray gases (WSGG). To reduce the size of the model and
Modeling burners used in steel reheating furnaces consists in
therefore computation time, a 2D representation was adopted.
reproducing their operation using mathematical tools. Mathemati-
Ishii et al. [2] and Zhang et al. [3] also modeled a reheating
cal models based on the principles of thermodynamics, fluid
furnace with regenerative burners using CFD. A comparison of
mechanics, and heat transfer are very useful for predicting the
the temperature field near the burner is made with experimental
energy performance of various thermal systems. Computer models
measurements on the same furnace. The study shows the capabil-
offer the possibility to design or calculate burners performance
ity of CFD tools to provide information on temperature gradients
quickly and at relatively low cost. The user can modify the char-
and the velocity fields at specific locations in the furnace.
acteristics of a given system to improve its energy efficiency.
Yang and Balsiak [4] modeled a regenerative burner working
1
on liquid propane gas using CFD. Flame properties were computed
Corresponding author.
Contributed by the Heat Transfer Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL
and attention was focused on both the size and shape of the flame.
OF HEAT TRANSFER. Manuscript received January 13, 2010; final manuscript received The comparisons between CFD results and experimental results
January 18, 2011; published online October 5, 2012. Assoc. Editor: He-Ping Tan. show that CFD could accurately predict the burner operation.

Journal of Heat Transfer Copyright V

C 2012 by ASME DECEMBER 2012, Vol. 134 / 121201-1

Downloaded From: http://heattransfer.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/28/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 Downloaded from http://iranpaper.ir
http://www.itrans24.com/landing1.html

Fig. 2 Burner scheme

Fig. 1 Configurations of the furnace. Showing the cooling

includes combustion performance (temperature and species) and
pipes and the burner positions.
will be compared with CFD results.

The phenomena to be taken into account when modeling burn- 2.1 Furnace Configuration. The furnace selected for meas-
ers are particularly complex turbulent flows, combustion, and urements is a semi-industrial test furnace built in 1999 at the
thermal radiation. In this study, a literature review was performed Royal institute of technology (KTH industrial engineering and
to find the adequate closure models combination for modeling the management) under division of Energy and Furnace. The inner
burner operation. After selecting the adequate models, it is neces- dimensions of the furnace are 2.9  1.6  16 m3. The furnace
sary to compare the computed results with an experimental data- body is insulated with 0.3-m thick layer of ceramic fiber material.
base. A self-recuperative burner was selected. All experimental Four pipes of 0.1 m external diameters are used to carry out the
tests and measurements have been performed in KTH (Kungliga heat load from the furnace and to control the temperature of walls.
R
Tekniska Högskolan (Royal Institute of Technology)) industrial Those pipes are made of temperature resistant KanthalV alloy.
Engineering and Management facilities in Sweden. The CFD Cooling air is forced into those pipes by a fan and the air flow is
model has been validated through a comparison of temperature, measured by a mass flow meter. The amount of air is adjusted by
CO, O2, and CO2 concentrations between the computed results a butterfly valve regulated by computer interface. The test cell
and the measured results. dimensions, the cooling pipes, and the burner positions are shown
CFD modeling is mainly applied for static modeling, mostly in Fig. 1.
because the computational time required to accomplish a numeri-
cal simulation for unsteady state regimes of industrial burners is 2.2 Burner Description
very long; as a result dynamic modeling is not practical based on
CFD models. In high-temperature processes such as industrial 2.2.1 REKUMAT CX 200. The REKUMAT CX 200 is a self-
reheating furnaces, radiation is the most dominant phenomenon recuperative burner. It can be used in both flame and flameless
and rapid computation modeling strategies of radiative transfer modes and has a maximum capacity of 100 kW. The burner is
have to be developed for fast simulations. In this work, a new equipped with a pipe-in-pipe heat exchanger used to increase the
approach is developed for radiative modeling of burners; this inlet air temperature. Photo 1 shows the different nozzles of the
approach is called the emissive volume approach. Its main objec- burner. Figure 2 shows a schematic view of the burner.
tive is to represent the burner in a simplified way making the The burner encloses three different kinds of nozzles. In flame-
dynamic study of a multiburner furnace feasible. The emissive less mode, fuel is supplied through nozzle O1 (cf. Photo 1, Fig. 2),
volume approach is based on replacing the flame and the combus-
tion product in the furnace by a number of emitting volumes
encased one in the other. Each volume is characterized by its vol-
ume (V), its temperature (T), and its position (X, Y, and Z). The
radiative heat flux emitted by the new representation of the flame
and the walls absorbed by the product are modeled. A flux com-
parison between the CFD approach and the emissive volume
approach show a difference smaller than 1%.
R
The new approach uses MODRAYV as a simulation code,
which allows the calculation of exchange factors in an enclosure
R
containing plane surfaces with obstructions. MODRAYV is a cal-
culation tool of direct and total exchange factors, developed by
the Center for Energy and Processes of MINES ParisTech [5–7].

2 Experimental Facilities
The aim of tests is to establish an experimental database of the
characteristics of the self-recuperative burner, the WS Wärmepro-
zesstechnik GmbH type REKUMAT CX200. This database Photo 1. Burner

121201-2 / Vol. 134, DECEMBER 2012 Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://heattransfer.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/28/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 Downloaded from http://iranpaper.ir
http://www.itrans24.com/landing1.html

Table 1 Experimental settings used on the burners type REKUMAT CX200

Burner capacity Flue gas leaving burner temperature

Case no. Excess air ratio (ë ) (kW) ( C) Furnace temperature (Tf) Mode

1 1.2 100 600 1100 Flameless

2 1.04 100 600 1100 Flameless
3 1.2 100 600 1100 Flame
4 1.2 100 600 950 Flame
5 1.3 100 600 1100 Flameless
6 1.2 100 600 950 Flameless
7 1.2 80 600 1100 Flameless

and through nozzle O2 2/3 of the inlet air is injected. At the
end of nozzle O2, the fuel, and the 2/3 of the air are mixed
before entering the combustion chamber. O3 represents one of
eight nozzles finishing directly in the combustion chamber
through which 1/3 of the inlet air is supplied in flame and flame-
less modes; O4 represents the flue gas inlet in the heat exchanger.
In flame mode, nozzle O1 is closed. The fuel and 2/3 of the inlet
air are premixed and enter the combustion chamber through
the pipe O2. The burner works in flameless mode if the furnace
temperature is above 850  C, and in flame mode below this
temperature.
2.3 Experimental Measurement. A suction pyrometer was
used for temperature measurement within the flame. The potential
advantage of suction pyrometer is that it measures temperature
without considering the radiation effect from the flame. An
S-type thermocouple is protected from chemical attack by a
ceramic pipe and this ceramic covering is protected from radiation
by a ceramic radiation shield. Hot gases drawn from the
combustion chamber pass over the ceramic shield to promote
convective heat transfer.
An ellipsoidal radiometer is used to measure the radiation heat
flux incident per unit area falling on a surface. This instrument is
used to measure the distribution and the magnitude of the radia-
tive heat transfer within the flame and near the boundary of the
combustion chamber. The incoming radiation enters from a small
orifice at the top of the probe and then reflected on the thermopile
by a mirror. To reduce the radiation loss by reflection, the mirror
is coated with a thin layer of a high reflecting metal; in this case
gold.
For the flue gas analysis, continuously working gas analyzers
were used. A water-cooled probe collects samples of flue gases
from inside of the combustion chamber. CO and CO2 concentra-
tions were measured in percentage using the nondispersive infra-
red method. For more accurate measurements, when the CO
concentration is below 1000 ppm (particle per million) the same
technique was used but with more precise instrumentation. O2

Fig. 3 The furnace measurement holes used to measure temperature and species
concentrations

Journal of Heat Transfer DECEMBER 2012, Vol. 134 / 121201-3

Downloaded From: http://heattransfer.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/28/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 Downloaded from http://iranpaper.ir
http://www.itrans24.com/landing1.html

concentration was measured with a paramagnetic detector. Before Table 2 Measurements points coordinates
every test, all gas analyzers were checked and calibrated using
calibration gas. Number Point X Y Z

1 H2 P000T 865 0 0
3 Turbulent Combustion Model 2 H2 P200T 865 200 0
The rapid advance in computer performances has inspired com- 3 H2 P400T 865 400 0
4 H3 P000T 238 0 0
putational techniques used to simulate the complex combustion 5 H4 P000T 1150 0  350
processes of industrial furnaces. CFD simulations have been used 6 H5 P000T 1150 0 350
as a tool to simulate numerically and analyze combustion, radia- 7 H6 P000T 7 0  470
tive heat transfer, and flow characteristics of industrial furnaces in 8 H6 P020T 7 20  470
order to improve energy efficiency and product quality, as well as 9 H6 P040T 7 40  470
reducing pollutant emissions. 10 H6 P060T 7 60  470
The Reynolds-averaged Navier–Stokes approach with the standard 11 H6 P080T 7 80  470
k-e model is used for CFD modeling. The radiative heat transfer is 12 H6 P087T 7 87  470
modeled by the discrete ordinates finite volume method (DO-FVM). 13 H6 P100T 7 100  470
14 H6 P120T 7 120  470
The radiative property of gases is modeled using the WSGG and for 15 H6 P141T 7 141  470
the combustion model the eddy breakup model was used. 16 H6 P150T 7 150  470
17 H6 P194T 7 194  470
3.1 Radiation Model. The basic equation describing the 18 H6 P200T 7 200  470
thermal radiation is the radiative transfer equation (RTE). It 19 H6 P700T 7 700  470
expresses mathematically the conservation principle applied to a 20 H7 P000T  12 0 480
ray traveling along a path through a defined medium. This differ- 21 H7 P020T  12 20 480
22 H7 P040T  12 40 480
ential equation gives the expression of the spectral radiation inten- 23 H7 P050T  12 50 480
sity Ik along a path s. The exact solution of the RTE is available 24 H7 P060T  12 60 480
only for very simple geometries. Approximate numerical methods 25 H7 P080T  12 80 480
have been developed. The development of means of calculations 26 H7 P100T  12 100 480
increasingly powerful helped implement more precise methods. 27 H7 P120T  12 120 480
Howell [8] lists the main qualities of a model resolution of the 28 H7 P150T  12 150 480
RTE. Difficulties may arise in the analysis of the RTE. First, the 29 H7 P200T  12 200 480
RTE is an integro-differential equation and an exact solution may 30 H7 P250T  12 250 480
only be obtained after simplifying assumptions, such as uniform 31 H7 P350T  12 350 480
32 H7 P450T  12 450 480
radiative properties of the medium and homogeneous boundary 33 H7 P550T  12 550 480
conditions. Main problems may be partially eliminated through 34 H7 P750T  12 750 480
the use of models capable, on one hand of simplifying the integro- 35 H8 P000T  648 0  450
differential equations that need to be solved, and, on the other 36 H9 P000T  715 0 0
hand, to predict the radiation properties of the combustion prod- 37 H10 P000T  655 0 500
ucts with a similar accuracy. 38 H11 P000T  1130 0  450
The zone method presented by Hottel and Cohen [9] and Hottel 39 H12 P000T 0 0 0
and Sarofim [10] is probably the most used method to predict radi- 40 H12 P020T 0 20 0
ative heat transfer in combustion chambers. The zone method has 41 H12 P040T 0 40 0
42 H12 P060T 0 60 0
several limitations. First, the essential flaw is the computational 43 H12 P080T 0 80 0
effort required to compute the exchange factors between the dif- 44 H12 P100T 0 100 0
ferent zones. With complex geometries, if the number of zones is 45 H12 P120T 0 120 0
large and the grid number is therefore even larger, the exchange 46 H12 P140T 0 140 0
factors between all zones must be calculated and this increases 47 H12 P160T 0 160 0
computational time. Second, it is difficult to couple the zonal 48 H12 P200T 0 200 0
method with the flow and energy equations because of the differ- 49 H13 P000T  1127 0 450
ent sizes of the control volume number. The zone method was 50 W1T 50 0 0  750
applied, for example by Steward and Cannon [11], Wu and 51 W2T 250 0 0  550
52 W3T 450 0 0  350
Fricker [12], Heap et al. [13], and Quinqueneau et al. [14] for 53 W4T 650 0 0  150
modeling burners. 54 W5T 850 0 0 50
The Monte Carlo method is a statistical method [15]. There is 55 W6T 1050 0 0 250
no unique method called Monte Carlo method, but there are sev- 56 W7T 1250 0 0 450
eral statistical approaches. It is based on selecting a number of 57 W8T 1350 0 0 550
photons from different locations in the combustion chamber, and 58 WW1 P000T 0 0 0
then the photons are tracked through the combustion chamber 59 WW1 P050T 50 0 0
from the point of their emission until their final absorption. The 60 WW1 P150T 150 0 0
photons are chosen randomly by a random number generator. 61 WW1 P200T 200 0 0
When the number of photons increases to infinity, Monte Carlo
method yields to an exact solution. This method is capable of
treating complex geometry, but as the photon path is chosen ran- sity in terms of spherical harmonics with truncation to N (N is the
domly, the method suffers from a statistical error and with the order of approximations) terms in the series and substitution into
increase of the photon number, the answer may not converge and the moments of the differential form of the equation of transfer. In
it is computationally uneconomic. Additionally to that, this general, the higher the value of N, the better the agreement with
method is not compatible with the method used to solve the flow exact solutions. Usually odd numbers are employed, especially P1
equation. and P3 going to P5. It was proved that for N ¼ 3, solutions were
The P-N method was first used to study radiative heat transfer sufficiently accurate for problems with one, two, or three dimen-
in the atmosphere [16]. It avoids the solution of the integro- sions. The P-N method is compatible with the grid requirements
differential RTE through the use of expansions of the local inten- for energy and flow equations. It has been implemented by Selçuk

121201-4 / Vol. 134, DECEMBER 2012 Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://heattransfer.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/28/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 Downloaded from http://iranpaper.ir
Fig. 4 (a) Temperature comparison, (b) CO2 comparison, (c) O2 comparison, and (d) CO comparison
et al. [17] and more recently by Piepers et al. [18], Ishii et al. [2],
Zhang et al. [3] for radiation modeling of a natural gas burner.
The DOM solves the RTE for a set of discrete directions span-
ning over the whole surrounding sphere (4p). The total solid angle
surrounding each point is subdivided into smaller solid angles,
which intensity direction is specified. The magnitude of the radia-
tive intensity in each direction is assumed uniform. This assump-
tion was made to separate the directional dependence of the
luminance from the spatial dependence. The RTE is written for
each discrete ordinate and the integral over the total solid angle
are replaced by a sum over each discrete ordinate.
The DO-FVM has many similarities with the discrete ordinates
method. The magnitude of radiation intensity is also assumed con-
stant in each discrete direction and the radiation transfer equation
is solved for a set of discrete directions spanning the 4p solid
angle. The FVM is based on the RTE integration over both a dis-
cretized control volume and a control angle that ensures the con-
servation of the radiative energy within each control volume and
control angle. This model has also been widely used because the
differential form of the resulting radiative heat transfer equations
makes them compatible with methods used for the flow and
energy equations. This method does have some drawbacks, mostly
false scattering and ray effect. False scattering is caused by spatial
discretization of the RTE. Ray effect caused by assuming the
n-discrete directions represent effectively the entire sphere.
Regarding processes using flameless oxidation, the DO-FVM
method was used by Magnussen and Hjertager [19] and Bollettini
et al. [20].
The discrete transfer method (DTM) from Launder and Spald-
ing [21] is hybrid because it combines features from several
classes of method. Its origin is in the flux model but also exhibits
Table 3 Mean and standard deviation of experiment 1
Case 1 chosen for radiative modeling. Several reasons support the choice
eT 18.50
rT 43.94
Journal of Heat Transfer
Downloaded From: http://heattransfer.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/28/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use
http://www.itrans24.com/landing1.html
features of zone method and Monte Carlo techniques. It was spe-
cially developed for predicting radiative heat transfer in combus-
tion chambers. Rays are fired from every possible position in the
enclosure. To this point, it is related to the Monte Carlo techni-
ques, but the ray directions are specified in advance as in the
DOM rather than being chosen randomly, and they are solved for
only along paths between the two boundary walls rather than
being partially reflected at walls and tracked to extinction. The
discrete transfer method is not conservative, which is a disadvant-
age when combining the method to a CFD code where the govern-
ing equations are often solved using a finite volume method that is
conservative. Wieringa [22] has applied the DTM to a glass fur-
nace but pointed at the possible errors in the event of misuse of
the model. Uede et al. [23] have simulated reheating furnaces
steel. Studies of the flameless oxidation using the DTM include
the work of Weber et al. [24], Pesenti et al. [25], and Coelho and
Peters [26].
Coelho and Carvalho [27] compared the DOM methods,
DO-FVM, and DTM in the case of 2D and 3D bodies. The authors
found the same precision, but lower computation time for the
DOM methods and DO-FVM. These considerations do not
allow a definite choice for a particular model. Ferrand [28] has
implemented a case of validation and found the following results:
• The P-1 method does not give satisfactory results for very
heterogeneous temperature.
• The DTM method gives satisfactory results regarding the net
flux exchanged but increases the number of directions to 64,
and the net flux exchanged by the furnace roof is not cor-
rectly calculated, even with 64 directions.
• The DO-FVM method with the discretization into 32 solid
angles gives similar results to the zonal method while acquir-
ing less computational time.
In the work presented in this paper, the DO-FVM method is
of this technique over the other methods in our case. First, the
computational times are less than those required by the Monte
Carlo technique, zonal method, and the higher order P-N approxi-
mations. Second, spatial discretization can be made compatible
DECEMBER 2012, Vol. 134 / 121201-5
 Downloaded from http://iranpaper.ir
Fig. 5 (a) CO2 comparison, (b) temperature comparison, (c) CO comparison, and (d) O2 comparison
with that required by the finite-difference solution for mass,
species, momentum, and energy conservation equations.
3.2 Radiative Property of Gas Model. Gases in combustion
processes do not scatter radiation considerably but some particles
are strong absorbers and emitters such as water vapor and carbon
dioxide. Their radiant participation depends on several parameters
of which irradiation temperatures, total and absorbing gas partial
pressures, and path lengths are the most important. Therefore, it is
important to account for the variation of their radiative properties
with the electromagnetic spectrum. The most accurate radiative
heat transfer calculation is the line-by-line (LBL) method. In this
method, the RTE is integrated over the molecular spectrum.
However, line-by-line calculations are not practical for rapid
calculations, it is generally used only for benchmark solutions. In
this study, the widely used WSGG is employed.
The WSGG model divides the spectrum into n regions where
the absorption coefficient j is constant. This model replaces the
combustion gas by N number of gases (3–5). The radiation
exchange is calculated separately for each gas, and then the total
flow is obtained simply by adding the flow of each gas weighted
by a weighting factor. The weighting factors are expressed in
terms of polynomial equations written in temperatures with asso-
ciated coefficients. Gray gas emissivities are expressed in terms of
a temperature independent gray gas absorption coefficient and the
product of the partial pressure of the absorbing gas and path
length. Total emissivity is then be evaluated.
The WSGG model accounts for the presence of windows in the
spectrum by the addition of a transparent gas. In the WSGG, the
total emissivity of a column of gas mixture at temperature T is
represented by
Table 4 Mean and standard deviation of experiment 2
Case 2 Taking the example of methane combustion in air, all elementary
eT 53.27
rT 69.69
121201-6 / Vol. 134, DECEMBER 2012
Downloaded From: http://heattransfer.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/28/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use
http://www.itrans24.com/landing1.html
X
n
l
T ðT; l; pa Þ ¼ ai ðTÞ½1  eji pa  (1)
i¼1
where pla is the partial pressure-path length product, n is the num-
ber of gray gas components, ji is the absorption coefficient of the
ith gray gas, and ai ðTÞ, whose variations account for the tempera-
ture dependence of the emissivity, are the emissivity weighting
factors for the ith gray gas.
The weighting factor, ai ðTÞ, may be physically interpreted as
the fractional amount of black body energy of the spectral regions
where the absorption coefficient is close to ji. In general, these
coefficients are obtained from fitted experimental data. The accu-
racy of this method lies in the choice of the weighting factors.
Several authors have proposed correlations for a range of compo-
sition and temperature. The most widely used correlations are
those of Smith et al. [29] and Soufiani and Djavdan [30].
3.3 Combustion Model. Most fuels are fast burning, and
turbulent mixing controls the overall rate of reaction. In non-
premixed flames, fuel and oxidizer are mixed slowly by
turbulence into the reaction zones, where they burn quickly. In
premixed flames, the turbulence slowly mixes cold reactant and
hot products into the combustion chamber, where reaction occurs
rapidly. Some burners combine the two flames: premixed and
non-premixed modes. For example, for the recovery burner type
REKUMAT CX 200, 2/3 of the inlet air is mixed with combustion
gas before entering the combustion chamber, while 1/3 is directly
injected.
The problem of mathematical modeling of turbulent combus-
tion is the problem of modeling turbulent flow and chemical
kinetics as well as the integration between the flow and the
chemical reactions and species.
The combustion is a result of overall exothermic reactions.
reactions involve several hundred species. The time constants of
these responses spread over a wide temporal range from picosec-
onds for the fastest reactions (between radicals) to the second, the
recombination of CO, for example. The complete kinetic scheme
Transactions of the ASME
 Downloaded from http://iranpaper.ir
Fig. 6 (a) Temperature comparison, (b) O2 comparison, (c) CO2 comparison, and (d) CO comparison
in a CFD calculation is possible only for dedicated studies of com-
bustion in a relatively small volume. The modeling of non-
premixed and premixed flames is still the subject of numerous
studies and gives rise to more sophisticated models. However, in
this study, the eddy breakup model was selected because state-of-
the-art methods still rely on it. Its popularity stems from the fact
that it leads to a fast and robust calculation. This model consists in
representing the combustion by one or more reactions. These reac-
tions involve a reasonable number of species N, N  1 conserva-
tion equations in partial derivatives are then added to the CFD
calculation. The dissipation rate or the production rate appears in
these equations. The eddy breakup (EBU) model of Mancini et al.
[31] has been developed assuming that the chemical reaction rates
are faster than mixing. Therefore, it can be assumed that the rate
of combustion will be determined by the rate of intermixing on a
molecular scale of fuel and oxygen eddies. For such a case, the
EBU can be written
 
e co
R ¼ A min cf ; 2 ½kg  m3  s1  (2)
j rf
 
e cP
R¼AB ½kg  m3  s1  (3)
j 1 þ rf
where cf is the local mean-time fuel concentration (kg m3), CO2
is the local time-mean oxygen concentration, cP is the local time-
mean concentration of reaction product, rf is the stochiometric
oxygen requirement to burn 1 kg of fuel, e is the rate of dissipation
of turbulent kinetic energy, and j is the turbulent kinetic energy.
Table 5 Mean and average deviation of experiment 3
Case 3 e standard model has been used in the studies of Wünning and
et 73.75
rT 76.14
Journal of Heat Transfer
Downloaded From: http://heattransfer.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/28/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use
http://www.itrans24.com/landing1.html
A and B are experimentally determined constants of the model,
as explained by Brizuela and Bilger [32]. The choice of these
coefficients is difficult and is not universal because they depend
on the flow. It is therefore ideal to validate the choice of these
coefficients by experimental data for each type of burner.
Regarding the modeling of flameless oxidation burner available
in the literature, there is no unanimity as to superiority of a com-
bustion model over another. Wünning and Wünning [33] imple-
mented a model for one global reaction and validated the obtained
temperatures in the axis of a 200-kW burner using the experimen-
tal measurements. In the same way, Piepers et al. [18] and Ishii
et al. [2] implemented the PDF model and successfully validated
it by temperature measurements. On the other hand, Magnussen
and Hjertager [19] achieved satisfactory results with both the PDF
and EBU models. Finally, Lockwood and Shah [34] tested six
combustion models and compared the results with the measure-
ments of velocity, temperature, and chemical species in the flame
of a 580-kW burner. The authors obtained the best results with the
two equations EBU model. Consequently, in the present study,
two equations EBU model have been chosen for turbulent
combustion modeling.
The recuperative burner used in this work, where 2/3 of the
inlet air is premixed and the other 1/3 is directly injected in the
combustion zone, has never been modeled before and therefore
the coefficients A and B found in the literature cannot be used.
For that reason, various numerical simulations were conducted
and as a result A and B are found to be
For flameless mode A ¼ 0.4, B ¼ 0.045; A ¼ 1.7, B ¼ 5
For flame mode A ¼ 0.4, B ¼ 1; A ¼ 1, B ¼ 1
3.4 Turbulent Model. In the literature, the most used model
for numerical computation of turbulent flows is the k-e model
described by Jones and Launder [35] and Zhang et al. [36]. The k-
Wünning [33], Lockwood and Shah [34], Pesenti et al. [25],
Piepers et al. [18], Ishii et al. [2], Coelho and Peters [26], and
Magnussen and Hjertager [19] for the simulations of burners oper-
ating on the principle of flameless oxidation. Nevertheless, some
DECEMBER 2012, Vol. 134 / 121201-7
 Downloaded from http://iranpaper.ir
http://www.itrans24.com/landing1.html

Fig. 7 (a) Temperature comparison, (b) O2 comparison, (c) CO2 comparison, and (d) CO comparison

authors propose the usage an alternative turbulence model to comparable with other models, while requiring less computational
improve the accuracy of recirculation modeling. The k-e standard time and ease of the calculation convergence.
model has some limitations when used for modeling flows where
turbulence anisotropy is strong such as for swirl burners. For this
purpose, more sophisticated models have been implanted and vali- 4 Results and Discussions
dated successfully, such as k-e “RNG” (renormalization group) or
The results of the experiment made at KTH and used in this
RSM model (Reynolds stress model). The latter introduces PDEs
study were interpreted as well by different writers in their devel-
on each component of the Reynolds stress tensor which theoreti-
opments. For example, Zang et al. [36] studied the relationship
cally produces better results for highly anisotropic turbulent
between the oxidation mixture ratio and flame radiation and they
flows.
developed a simplified correlation to predict radiative heat trans-
Ferrand [28] confronted the three turbulence models mentioned
fer flux at a given position inside the furnace. Biswas et al. [37]
above with experimental results. The comparison showed that the
investigated the effect of the flame Froude number on nitrous ox-
models give similar results in terms of
ide emissions. They studied as well the heat transfer inside the fur-
• field of average speed in areas of recirculation nace at different locations and the relation between the flame
• interaction between different pulse jests (the confluence of oxidation ratio and heat transfer.
streams, flows driven by ambient guide jets) In this study, the test results will be used to validate a CFD
model of the burner. The experiments were performed with two
He concluded that taking the model of turbulence k-e standard
recuperative burners manufactured by the German company War-
as reference (this choice is arbitrary, since none of the compared
meprozesstechnik GmbH type REKUMAT CX200. Table 1 shows
methods is an exact solution to the problem) shows that the differ-
the experimental settings for tests.
ences between the turbulence models are low. The predictions are
The first test was made for standard operating conditions. Burners
very good as regards to the development of jets. The results are
worked in flameless mode with maximum heat recovery and design
worse in areas of recirculation, where the difference with the ex-
capacity. In the other tests, one parameter was changed at a time.
perience can be significant. Moving to a large eddy simulation
In the second test, oxygen concentration was lower in the flue
might give better results, but its implementation is not feasible
gases by decreasing the combustion air stream.
now because calculation time is still very long and the coupling
The third test was performed with flame, 2/3 of the inlet air is
with the combustion model is not very mature. This leads us to
directly premixed with the gas.
choose the k-e standard model in this study because it gives results
The fourth test was performed under low furnace temperature
and with flame combustion.
During the fifth test, oxygen concentration was higher in the
flue gas by increasing the combustion air stream. The furnace tem-
Table 6 Mean and standard deviation of experiment 4
perature in the sixth experiment was decreased to 950  C.
Case 4 The last experiment was performed under a low burner
capacity. The capacity of the burner was decreased by reducing
eT 63.69 the fuel flow to 80% of the nominal capacity.
rT 72.88 CFD techniques, incorporating CAD style definition of the ge-
ometry to enable complex mesh generation, were employed to

121201-8 / Vol. 134, DECEMBER 2012 Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://heattransfer.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/28/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 Downloaded from http://iranpaper.ir
http://www.itrans24.com/landing1.html

simulate the burner operation. To take into account, the small var-
iation of temperatures and concentrations of species in the flame,
a refined mesh (about 1  106 tetrahedral nodes) was applied in
front of the burners.
Measurements are made at 13 fixed locations on the horizontal
plane. Figure 3 shows the 13 different holes used to install the
measurement sensors. The reference is in the center of the furnace
at the burner level in Fig. 3. Additionally, the temperature meas-
urements of flue gases are performed in seven horizontal planes
along the furnace depth direction (Z direction cf. “Fig. 3”). The
measurement points are numbered and displayed in Table 2.
Validation of the computational model was performed using the
detailed experimental database of the studied recuperative burner.
As it is well known, temperatures measured by thermocouples
present uncertainties. A calibration procedure has been followed
using an inverse method consisting of imposing inside flue gas
temperature and computing the temperature of the thermocouple
Fig. 8 System representation in the finite volume method (measurement) and then evaluate the difference between the

Fig. 9 (a) Total heat flux distribution (kW/m2) y 5 0 at the burners level, case 1 and (b) convec-
tion flux distribution (kW/m2) y 5 0 at the burner s’ level, case 1

Journal of Heat Transfer DECEMBER 2012, Vol. 134 / 121201-9

Downloaded From: http://heattransfer.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/28/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 Downloaded from http://iranpaper.ir
Fig. 10 Emissive volumes in MODRAY interface
displayed thermocouple temperature and the actual temperature,
so as to correct all temperatures. This necessary correction is
related to the radiative heat fluxes coming from the flame and the
furnace walls. Four computed cases were compared with experi-
mental results, two flameless cases (cases 1 and 2), and two flame
cases (cases 3 and 4) with different experimental settings.
4.1 Experiment 1—Validation Flameless Mode, Tf 5 1100  C,
k 5 1.2. Figure 4(a) shows the temperature comparison between
computed and measured results. At almost all points, the temper-
ature is correctly predicted, but at points 21, 24, and 27 (mea-
surement points are conducted at hole 7 (cf. Fig. 3), a large
difference is noted between calculated and measured values. Fig-
ure 4(c) shows at points 21, 22, and 23 an O2 percentage excess
in the experimental results. Figure 4(b) shows at the same points
(21, 22, and 23) a shortage in CO2 and CO in the experimental
results.
These differences are cause by the measuring probe and the
way it measures the temperature by sucking the gas at high veloc-
ity. Since the probe is close to the inlet combustion air, the
absorbed gas contains some ambient air and that is the reason why
the O2% is high and the CO2% and CO% are low. It explains as
well the low temperatures measured at points 21 and 24 (cf.
Table 2) where air infiltrations are also suspected. Except for these
few points, the temperatures and the species concentrations are
accurately predicted and errors are minor.
Table 3 shows the mean deviation and the standard deviation of
temperatures.
4.2 Experiment 2—Validation, Flameless Mode, Tf 5 1100  C,
k 5 1.04. Figure 5(a) shows a comparison between computed and
experimental temperatures for several points in the furnace. The
explanation is similar to points 21, 22, 24, and 27 of the first case.
The suction pyrometer is absorbing ambient air instead of com-
bustion products only. These measurement points are taken at
Table 7 Emissive volume number required for replacing the flame
Plan Standard Mean deviation
distant (mm) Volume Nb deviation (W/m2) (W/ m2)
300 1 2312 2395
300 2 1453 713
300 3 1003  432
300 5 1097  1652
300 9 1132  1906
121201-10 / Vol. 134, DECEMBER 2012
Downloaded From: http://heattransfer.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/28/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use
http://www.itrans24.com/landing1.html
hole 7 (cf. Fig. 3). Figures 5(b)–5(d) show comparisons of com-
puted and measured concentrations of CO2, O2, and CO. The
species concentrations show an underestimation of the O2 concen-
tration at points 21 and 22 and an over estimation for CO2 and
CO concentrations at the same points. Table 4 shows the
standard deviation and the mean deviation of the temperature of
experiment 2.
Based on this evaluation of CFD predictions, we can conclude
that the chosen models could be used as a mathematical represen-
tative of the burner in flameless mode, because temperature and
concentrations are accurately predicted. A ¼ 0. 4 and B ¼ 0.045
are the empirical constants used in the EBU combustion
model. These two constants are validated through the comparison
between CFD and test results shown above.
4.3 Experiment 3—Validation, Flame Mode, Tf 5 1100  C,
k 5 1.2. Figure 6(a) shows a comparison between computed and
experimental temperatures. Figures 6(b)–6(d) show a comparison
between computed and measured CO2, O2, and CO concentra-
tions. The species concentrations are accurately predicted as
shown in Figs. 6(b)–6(d). The deviation seen in experiments 1 and
2 is not presented here because this is a flame case and almost all
chemical reactions occur at the burner outlet. Regarding the
temperature, the lowest and the peek temperatures are precisely
predicted; the difference at points 22–26 is caused by the mea-
surement uncertainties and the large temperature gradient, as
experiment 3 is flame case and the measurement points are located
in the flame at hole 7 (cf. Fig. 3). Table 5 shows the standard devi-
ation and the mean deviation of case 3. A comparison with the
flameless mode shows that the deviation is slightly larger. This is
caused by the high temperature gradient concentrated in the
flame.
4.4 Experiment 4—Validation, Flame Mode, Tf 5 950  C,
k 5 1.2. Figure 6(a) shows a comparison between computed and
experimental temperatures. Figures 7(b)–7(d) show a comparison
of CO2, O2, and CO computed and measured concentrations. The
concentrations of species are accurately predicted.
Table 6 shows the standard and the mean temperature
deviations.
Based on this evaluation of CFD predictions, we can conclude
that the chosen models used are the adequate one for the burner in
flame mode because temperatures and concentrations are accu-
rately predicted. A ¼ 0.4 and B ¼ 1 are the empirical constants
used in the EBU combustion model. These two constants are vali-
dated through the comparison between CFD and test results
shown above.
The experimental validation showed that the models selected
can be used to predict the burner operation since the comparison
between computed and experimental results gives only a small
error, mostly caused by experimental uncertainties. The computa-
tional time needed by the CFD code to converge was high in each
case and it should be noted that it was only for steady state model-
ing. For dynamic modeling, another approach seems necessary to
save computational time. This is why the emissive volume
approach is developed.
CFD min CFD max MODRAY min MODRAY max
flux (W/ m2) flux (W/ m2) flux (W/m2) flux (W/m2)
202,301 212,020 203,074 214,989
202,301 212,020 202,629 213,127
202,301 212,020 202,267 211,062
202,301 212,020 202,056 209,510
202,301 212,020 202,030 208,994
Transactions of the ASME
 Downloaded from http://iranpaper.ir
http://www.itrans24.com/landing1.html

zones. Each zone is then divided into isothermal nodes where the
heat balance is computed at each time step. These nodes are
placed on the furnace inner walls, roof, the inner volume of the
furnace, and the slabs faces. Accuracy can be increased by split-
ting each volume into several isothermal nodes in order to deliver
better information on temperature differences between each
volume.
Establishing the system is not just dividing the furnace into
zones and isothermal nodes but also specifying the thermal prop-
erties of each element and where the heat diffusion occurs. For the
representation of the wall and slab thicknesses, two isothermal
nodes are connected by a branch with one-dimension conduction.
Subsequently, the system is modeled by nodes (0D) or 1D
conduction elements (succession of 0D nodes with conduction re-
sistance ties).
When all elements of the thermal system are defined as nodes
or branches, the heat exchange relations between the different ele-
ments are defined. Figure 8 shows the various components and
relations in the finite volume method. The energy conservation
balance is calculated at each node through the resolution of an
algebraic-differential equation and the output is the temperature at
each node.
The flame is considered as the hot flue gases resulting from
combustion. The flame emissive volume approach consists of
dividing the flame into concentric isothermal volumes.

5.2 Emissive Volume Approach (EVA). Modeling the

Fig. 11 (a) Absorbed radiation flux using the emissive volume
approach (W/m2), (b) absorbed radiation flux using the CFD
code (W/m2), and (c) absorbed radiation flux comparison
(W/m2)
5 Flame Emissive Volume Approach: FVM for
Industrial Gas Furnace
The modeling of a reheating furnace in a simplified approach is
achieved through a finite volume method discussed by several
authors [5,6,28]. This method is accurate and computationally
economic and very practical for dynamic simulations.
5.1 FVM for Industrial Gas Furnace. The finite volume
method consists of dividing the furnace volume into several
burner flame using the emissive volume approach (EVA) is a key
part of the dynamic modeling of reheating furnaces.
In order to compare CFD and EVA results, a reference cell is
created. Its dimensions are taken from an existing tube furnace
15-m long, 2.2-m wide, 4-m depth, and containing 24 burners.
Each burner is surrounded by a parallelepiped having the follow-
ing dimensions: 0.6 m long, 1.6 m wide, and 4 m depth. Figure
9(a) shows the total heat flux distribution in experiment 1 in
kW/m2 at the burners’ level (for y ¼ 0, cf. Fig. 9(a)). It also shows
that the flame effect of this burner is taking place in a 1100-mm
diameter cylinder. Based on this result, the modified cell will have
the following dimensions: 1.6-m long, 1.6-m wide, and 4-m long.
These dimensions were adopted to take into account all the effects
of one burner. After modeling, one burner by the emissive volume
approach, several burners are grouped together in order to simu-
late the dynamic operation of an equivalent industrial reheating
furnace.

Table 8 CFD MODRAY comparison, experiment 1

Standard Mean CFD min flux CFD max EVA min EVA max
Plan distant (mm) Volume Nb deviation (W/m2) deviation (W/m2) (W/m2) flux (W/m2) flux (W/m2) flux (W/m2)

300 3 1003(0.4%)  432(0.2%) 202,301 212,020 202,267 211,625

400 3 983(0.4%)  713(0.3%) 202,022 210,368 202,581 209,739
500 3 832(0.4%)  630(0.3%) 201,877 208,959 202,349 207,950
600 3 802(0.4%)  576(0.2%) 201,932 208,059 202,522 206,562
700 3 816(0.4%)  785(0.3%) 201,895 206,881 202,489 205,566

Table 9 CFD and EVA comparison of all cases (300 mm)

Case 2 3 4 5 6 7
2
CFD min (W/m ) 210,141 201,789 127,243 202,050 131,741 209,660
CDF max (W/m2) 220,936 205,950 131,250 210,083 139,751 214,426
2
MODRAY min (W/m ) 210,324 200,156 126,938 202,062 131,797 209,758
2
MODRAY max (W/m ) 221,724 205,211 129,996 209,414 139,418 214,887
Standard (W/m2) deviation 1641 941 977 953 1170 1079
Mean deviation (W/m2) 901  845  693  586  398 50

Journal of Heat Transfer DECEMBER 2012, Vol. 134 / 121201-11

Downloaded From: http://heattransfer.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/28/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 Downloaded from http://iranpaper.ir
http://www.itrans24.com/landing1.html

Table 10 CFD and EVA comparison of all cases (700 mm)

Case 2 3 4 5 6 7
2
CFD min (W/m ) 201,734 201,649 127,108 201,585 127,286 201,745
CDF max (W/m2) 204,204 203,839 128,965 205,358 131,666 205,098
2
MODRAY min (W/m ) 201,525 201,545 126,952 202,155 129,047 202,152
2
MODRAY max (W/m ) 202,094 202,688 127,834 204,216 130,769 203,698
Standard deviation (W/m2) 757 587 689 794 989 760
Mean deviation (W/m2)  1347  835  1196  613  33  788

Table 11 Volumes of emissive volumes according to each experimental setting

k Tf ( C) Burner capacity (kW) Mode V1 (m3) V2 (m3) V3 (m3)

1.2 1100 100 Flameless 0.0119652 0.0674376 0.322864

1.04 1100 100 Flameless 0.0124253 0.0593096 0.528740
1.2 1100 100 Flame 0.0007376 0.0092827 0.137951
1.2 950 100 Flame 0.0008323 0.0094956 0.124555
1.3 1100 100 Flameless 0.0113841 0.06033290 0.285592
1.2 950 100 Flameless 0.0111084 0.0731775 0.433335
1.2 1100 80 Flameless 0.0110065 0.0508077 0.186657

Table 12 Absorption coefficient of the emissive volumes according to each experimental setting

k Tf ( C) Burner capacity (kW) Mode j1 (m1) j2 (m1) j3 (m1)

1.2 1100 100 Flameless 0.228186 0.255726 0.270343

1.04 1100 100 Flameless 0.231048 0.261533 0.279534
1.2 1100 100 Flame 0.194070 0.224211 0.242056
1.2 950 100 Flame 0.208212 0.243777 0.263667
1.3 1100 100 Flameless 0.221172 0.242948 0.254795
1.2 950 100 Flameless 0.241501 0.268621 0.282049
1.2 1100 80 Flameless 0.218086 0.237091 0.248014

Table 13 Temperature of the emissive volumes according to each experimental setting


k Tf ( C) Burner capacity (kW) Mode T1 (k) T2 (k) T3 (k)

1.2 1100 100 Flameless 1659 1510 1429

1.04 1100 100 Flameless 1683 1521 1423
1.2 1100 100 Flame 1823 1603 1429
1.2 950 100 Flame 1828 1606 1454
1.3 1100 100 Flameless 1611 1510 1425
1.2 950 100 Flameless 1569 1481 1426
1.2 1100 80 Flameless 1614 1509 1423

Taking into account, the cell symmetry, the chamber is divided
in two along the length to reduce computational time. In industrial
furnaces, the distance between the burner and the product varies
from 300 mm to 700 mm. Five planes are created to simulate the
product position displacements. Based on the fact that radiative
heat transfer is the dominant heat transfer mechanism in high tem-
perature processes, CFD and EVA results are compared based on
the absorbed radiation flux by the slabs.
In areas away from the flame, the radiative heat flux represents
about 90% of the total flux. Figure 9(b) shows the convective flux
distribution in case 1 for y ¼ 0 and it can be verified that the con-
vective flux can be neglected outside the flame. The product will
be mainly affected by the radiative heat flux. The emissive vol-
ume approach is aimed at correctly reproducing the radiative
effect of the flame on the load plan. The computational time for
the fast method is 40 times less than the computational time
needed by a CFD code, while a good accuracy is to be preserved.
The emissive volume approach consists in replacing the flame
in the furnace by several volumes implemented one in the other
each characterized by its volume, its position, and its temperature.
A user defined function (UDF) file is compiled and executed in
the CFD software. In this file, the temperature interval [Tmin;
Tmax] is decomposed into “n” intervals [Tmin; T1], [T1; T2]… [Ti ;
Tiþ1]… [Tn1; Tmax], where Tmax is the highest temperature
reached in the furnace, Tmin is a temperature slightly above wall
temperature, and “n” is the volume number that will replace the
CFD flame grid in the emissive volume approach. After the inter-
val decomposition, coordinates of the highest and the lowest tem-
peratures in the interval are calculated. In the interval [Ti; Tiþ1] it
calculates Xmin  Ti , Xmax  Ti, Ymin  Ti , Ymax  Ti, Zmin  Ti,
Zmax  Ti, Xmin  Tiþ1, Xmax  Tiþ1, Ymin  Tiþ1, Ymax  Tiþ1,
Zmin  Ti, Zmax  Ti, and the absorption coefficient. Every cell in
the mesh has its volume, its temperature, and its position (X, Y,
and Z). The UDF scans all the cells and calculates for each tem-
perature interval, [Ti; Tiþ1], the sum of the cells volume Vi having
a temperature “T” included in the interval [Ti; Tiþ 1]. The coordi-
nate Z is set to zero; the volumes are centered at the burner noz-
zle. The UDF computes Xmin  Ti and Xmax  Ti. Having the
volume V, Xmin  Ti and XmaxTi the cylinder radius is then cal-
culated. The average temperature and the volume set for each

121201-12 / Vol. 134, DECEMBER 2012 Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://heattransfer.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/28/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 Downloaded from http://iranpaper.ir
Table 14 Distance between the burner and the emissive volumes according to each experimental setting
k Tf ( C) Burner capacity (kW)
1.2 1100 100
1.04 1100 100
1.2 1100 100
1.2 950 100
1.3 1100 100
1.2 950 100
1.2 1100 80
cylinder depends on “n”, consequently, the radiative heat flux gen-
erated by the volumes. Therefore, choosing “n” is very critical for
the modeling accuracy because it is decomposing a large tempera-
ture interval into “n” temperatures.
For each volume (i ¼ 1 to n), temperature intervals [Ti; Tiþ 1]
are calculated by the following equations:
DT ¼ Tmax  Tmin (4)
Tð1Þmax ¼ Tmax (5)
TðiÞmin ¼ TðiÞmax  Ri  DT (6)
Tðiþ1Þmax ¼ TðiÞmin (7)
i sequently, in this context of high temperature furnaces where radi-
with Ri ¼ (8)
nðn þ 1Þ=2
This decomposition assumes a better distribution of the radiative
heat flux coming from the equivalent volumes. For example, in
case 1, by choosing three volumesl (n ¼ 3), radiative flux coming
from each volume (i.e., ð1  eji pa ÞrT 4 Þ was distributed as: 42%
from V1, 32% from V2, and 26% for V3.
The EVA decomposition is automatically implemented in
MODRAYV R where the direct and total exchange factors are
calculated using a file script. Neither the combustion nor the tur-
bulence models are required to be solved; only the radiative heat
transfers are modeled due to their dominance. The absorption and
the emission of flame for each volume are considered by the
model with an equivalent labsorption coefficient (ji ) and a emis-
sive coefficient (1  eji pa Þ balanced using Hottel factors, with
temperature and species concentration dependency. Figure 10
shows the three volumes representation of the burner in MODRAY
interface.
6 Comparison
Several simulations were made to find out the equivalent vol-
ume number using the boundary conditions of experiment 1.
Results are shown in Table 7.
The mean deviation is decreasing from 2395 W/m2 for a single
cylinder to  432 W/m2 for three cylinders meaning that the dif-
ference between CFD and EVA approaches is decreasing, espe-
cially when the standard deviation is decreasing as well. When the
number of volumes is increased, the error varies in a small inter-
val. It can be seen from the comparisons that the maximum and
the minimum fluxes are accurately predicted. The 3-cylinder num-
ber for replacing the CFD flame model seems to be the best com-
promise in terms of accuracy and computing time. Nevertheless,
further work is necessary to fully justify this result.
Figure 11(a) shows the radiative flux on the product surface at
300 mm from the flame computed by a CFD code. Figure 11(b)
shows the radiation flux on the product surface at 300 mm from
the flame computed by MODRAY. From the comparison between the
two flux mappings, we can conclude that the peek is well pre-
dicted in terms of value and position and the lowest values as
well. Figure 11(c) shows the difference between the two flux
Journal of Heat Transfer
Downloaded From: http://heattransfer.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/28/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use
http://www.itrans24.com/landing1.html
Mode X1 (m) X2 (m) X3 (m)
Flameless 1.056 0.897 0.093
Flameless 1.063 0.905 0.081
Flame 0 0 0
Flame 0.002 0 0
Flameless 1.074 0.978 0.093
Flameless 1.034 0.880 0.093
Flameless 1.043 0.885 0.093
mappings for 360,000 points. The maximum difference lies at the
burner side where the inlet air enters at temperature below the
furnace temperature.
After determining the required number of volumes, it is essen-
tial to compute the error when the product is getting farther from
the burner. If the error varies randomly, then the approach is not
reliable. Several planes were created to compute the error while
getting farther from the burner in experiment 1, always with the
3 emissive volume number. Table 8 shows the comparison
between CFD and EVA results.
The difference between CFD and EVA results is at its maxi-
mum at the closest surface of the burner and then it decreases.
Results in Table 8 shows that the error between the two
approaches decreases while getting farther from the burner. Con-
ative heat transfer is dominant, the EVA can be used for a simple
modeling of the flame volume in order to determine the radiative
fluxes in the furnace. In addition, all other cases were also vali-
dated, but instead performing a separate validation for each plane,
only the closest and the farthest planes were considered. Based on
Table 8, planes 300 and 700 were chosen for validation.
Table 9 shows the comparison between EVA and CFD results
for all the cases on the load plan at 300 mm from the burner.
Table 10 shows a comparison between the emissive volume
approach and the CFD for all cases on the load plan at 700 mm
from the burner. As shown in Tables 9 and 11, the differences
between the CFD and EVA results are less than 1% for all the
studied cases.
Tables 12–14 show, respectively, the volumes, the absorption
coefficient, the temperature, and the distance from the burner noz-
zle for each emissive volume computed by the CFD software and
used by the emissive volume approach to place the emissive
volumes.
7 Conclusion
After validating the selected models used in the CFD code by
comparing the computed results to the experimental database of
the self-recuperative burner REKUMAT CX200, it is then possi-
ble to state that the k-e model along with the other assumptions
considered during modeling represent fairly well the actual opera-
tion of this burner in flame and in flameless modes.
On the other hand, the EVA is a promising approach for high
temperature furnaces as it gives almost the same results as the
CFD in a significant shorter computational time. The EV approach
replaces the detailed CFD grid volumes by a number of emissive
macrovolumes defined by an average temperature T, a volume V,
and a position (X, Y, and Z). One possible shortcoming of the EV
approach may arise when the slab (or thinner product) is close
enough to the burner where a direct contact with the flame is pos-
sible which will cause a flow modification. In that case, the con-
vective heat flux cannot be neglected as it is the main flux
absorbed by the slabs. It is, therefore, essential to return to the
CFD code and start the process all over again. In addition, this
method does not solve the combustion equations. Consequently,
the concentrations of species could not be measured nor turbu-
lence evolution inside the combustion chamber.
DECEMBER 2012, Vol. 134 / 121201-13
 Downloaded from http://iranpaper.ir
http://www.itrans24.com/landing1.html

The CFD solve the turbulence, the combustion and the radiative SNB ¼ statistical narrow band
equations, and present a significant amount of information regard- WSGG ¼ weighted sum of grey gas
ing the flow speed and the concentrations of species. But dynamic
simulation is not practicable since the computation time is long.
The emissive volume approach does not solve the turbulence and
the combustion equations but solves the most influential phenom- References
ena and creates a simplified model capable of being implemented [1] Baukal, C. E., Jr., and Gershtein, V. Y., and Li, X., eds., 2001, Computational
Fluid Dynamics in Industrial Combustion, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, p. 630.
in a dynamic simulation. [2] Ishii, T., Zhang, C., and Sugiyama, S., 1998, “Numerical Simulations of Highly
Preheated Air Combustion in an Industrial Furnace,” ASME J. Energy Resour.
Technol., 120, pp. 276–284.
8 Perspectives [3] Zhang, C., Ishii, T., Hino, Y., and Sugiyama, S., 2000, “The Numerical and Ex-
perimental Study of Non-Premixed Combustion Flames in Regenerative
The EV approach is a simplified approach that makes dynamic Furnaces,” ASME J. Heat Transfer, 122, pp. 287–293.
modeling feasible. It does not solve neither the Navier–Stokes [4] Yang, W., and Blasiak, W., 2005, “Numerical Simulation of Properties
equations nor the combustion equations, but these phenomena of a LPG Flame With High-Temperature Air,” Int. J. Therm. Sci., pp.
973–985.
are taken into account through a temperature/flux zonal model. [5] Abdo, D., 2006, “Modélisation dynamique et supervision des fours de
This is possible in high temperature furnaces (T > 900  C) réchauffage continues de la siderurgie,” Ph.D. thesis, Ecole des Mines de Paris,
because the radiative heat fluxes are the dominant heat flux, rep- Paris.
resenting up to 90%. In this study, the EV approach is applied [6] El Hitti, G., Nemer, M., and El Khoury, K., 2010, “Transient Radiation and
Conduction Heat Transfer in Glass Sheets by the Thin Approximation,” ASME
and validated using a recuperative burner type REKUMAT J. Heat Transfer, 132, p. 023506.
CX200 manufactured by WS Wärmeprozesstchnik GmbH. The [7] El Hitti, G., Nemer, M., El Khoury, K., and Clodic, D., 2010, “The Re-Plating
extension of the method will be studied in further work to char- Algorithm for Radiation Total Exchange Area Calculation,” Numer. Heat
acterize several burners used in the steel industry, two other Transfer, Part B, 57(2), pp. 110–125.
[8] Howell, H. C., 1988, “Thermal Radiation in Participating Media: The Past,
burners were chosen: a regenerative burner type HRS-DF1 man- the Present, and Some Possible Future,” ASME J. Heat Transfer, 110, pp.
ufactured by NFK and a single flame regenerative burner type 1220–1229.
REGEMAT M350 manufactured also by WS Wärmeprozesstch- [9] Hottel, H. C., and Cohen, E. S., 1958, “Radiant Heat Exchange in a Gas Filled
nik GmbH. Enclosure: Allowance for Non-Uniformity in Temperature,” Am. Inst. Chem.
Eng. J., 4, pp. 3–14.
Later, for each burner, a parametrical study of the influence of [10] Hottel, H. C., and Sarofim, A. F., 1967, Radiative Transfer, McGraw-Hill,
the wall temperature and the excess air ratio on each subvolumes New York.
characteristic will be performed and a general mathematical corre- [11] Steward, F. R., and Cannon, P., 1971, “The Calculation of Radiative Heat Flux
lation made to obtain volumes characteristics for each burner in in a Cylindrical Furnace Using the Monte Carlo Model,” Int. J. Heat Mass
Transfer, 14, pp. 245–262.
flameless mode with wall temperature (900  C–1100  C) and [12] Wu, H. L., and Fricker, N., 1971, “An Investigation of the Behavior Swirling
excess air ratio (5–35%) variation. Jet Flames in a Narrow Cylindrical Furnace,” 2nd Members Conference Indus-
trial Flames Research Foundation, Ijmuiden, The Netherlands.
[13] Heap, M. P., Bartelds, H., Lowes, T. M., Michelfelder, S., and Pai, B. R., 1974,
Acknowledgment “Prediction of Radiant Heat Flux Distribution,” Heat Transfer in Flames, N. H.
Afgan and J. M. Beer, eds., Scripta Book Co, Washington, DC.
The authors gratefully acknowledge the support and the [14] Quinqueneau, A. F., Minquel, P. M., Dearden, L., Pourkashnian, M., Spence,
fruitful collaboration with ECLEER—European Centre and Labo- G. T., Williams, A., and Wills, B. J., 1998, “Experimental and Theoretical
ratories for Energy Efficiency Research from EDF “Electricité de Investigation of a Low-Nox High Temperature Industrial Burner,” International
France.” Gas Research Conference, pp. 225–236.
[15] Howell, J. R., and Perlmutter, M., 1964, “Monte Carlo Solution of Thermal
Transfer Through Radiant Media Between Gray Walls,” ASME J. Heat Trans-
Nomenclature fer, 86, pp. 116–122.
[16] Jeans, J. H., 1917, “The Equations of Radiative Transfer of Energy,” Mon. Not.
A, B ¼ EBU combustion model coefficient R. Astrom. Soc., 78, pp. 28–36.
c¼ concentration, kg m3 [17] Selçuk, N., Siddal, R. G., and Beer, J. M., 1976, “A Comparison of Mathemati-
F¼ mixture fraction cal Models of the Radiative Behavior of a Large-Scale Experimental Furnace,”
k¼ turbulent kinetic energy, m2 s2 16th Symp. International on Combustion, p. 53
[18] Piepers, O., Breithaup, P. P., and Van Beelen, A. B. N., 2001, “Stability of
L¼ path length, m Flames Close to Auto-Ignition Temperatures Generated by Extreme Separated
m_ ¼ mass flow, kg s1 Gas-Air Inlets,” ASME J. Energy Resour. Technol., 123, pp. 50–58.
pa ¼ partial pressure, Pa [19] Magnussen, B. F., and Hjertager, B. H., 1977, “On Mathematical Modelling of
rf ¼ stocheometric coefficient Turbulent Combustion With Special Emphasis on Soot Formation and
Combustion,” 16th Symposium (Int) on Combustion, The Combustion Institute,
T¼ temperature,  C pp. 719–729.
Tf ¼ furnace temperature,  C [20] Bollettini, U., Mancini, M., Orsino, S., and Weber. F., 2001, “Simulation
X¼ cylinder distance from the burner’s nozzle, m of Natural Gas Combustion in High Temperature Air for an Industrial
Burner,” 4th Symposium on High Temperature Air Combustion and Gasifica-
tion, Rome.
Greek Symbols [21] Launder, B. E., and Spalding, D. B., 1974, “The Numerical Computation of
Turbulent Flows,” Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng., 3(2), pp. 269–289.
ë ¼ excess air ratio [22] Wieringa, J. A., 1992, “Spectral Radiative Heat Transfer is Gas-Fired
ê ¼ absorption coefficient, m1 Furnaces,” Doctoral thesis, Delft University of Technologie, Delft, South Hol-
e ¼ rate of dissipation of turbulent kinetic energy, land, The Netherlands, p. 183.
N s1m2 [23] Uede, M., Shimada, T., and Imada, M., 1999, “Simulation of Regenerative
Burner System and Its Application to Walking Beam Reheat Furnaces,” Iron
Steel Eng., 76, pp. 68–71.
[24] Weber, R., Orsino, S., Lallemant, N., and Verlaan, A. D., 2000, “Combustion
Abbreviations of Natural Gas With High-Temperature Air and Large Quantities of Flue Gas,”
DO ¼ discrete ordinates 28th Symposium International on Combustion, the Combustion Institute, pp.
DO-FVM ¼ discrete ordinates finite volume method 1315–1321.
[25] Pesenti, B., Evrard, P., and Lybaert, P., 2001, “NOx Production and
DTM ¼ discrete transfer method Radiative Heat Transfer From an Autoregenerative Flameless Oxidation
EBU ¼ eddy breakup Burner,” 4th Symposium on High Temperature Air Combustion and Gasifica-
LBL ¼ line by line tion, Rome.
PDF ¼ probability density function [26] Coelho, P. J., and Peters, N., 2001, “Numerical Simulation of a Mild Combus-
tion Burner,” Combust. Flame, 124, pp. 503–518.
RNG ¼ renormalization group [27] Coelho, P. J., and Carvalho, M. G., 1997, “A Conservation Formulation of the
RSM ¼ Reynolds stress model Discrete Transfer Method,” ASME J. Heat Transfer, 119, pp. 118–128.

121201-14 / Vol. 134, DECEMBER 2012 Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://heattransfer.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/28/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 Downloaded from http://iranpaper.ir
[28] Ferrand, L., 2003, “Modélisation et expérimentation des fours de réchauffage
sidérurgiques équipés de brûleur régénératifs à Oxydation sans Flamme,” Ph.D.
thesis, Ecole des Mines de Paris, Paris.
[29] Smith, T. F., Shen, Z. F., and Friedman, J. N., 1982, “Evaluation of Coefficients
for the Weighted Sum of Gray Gases Model,” ASME J. Heat Transfer, 104, pp.
602–608.
[30] Soufiani A., and Djavdan, E., 1994, “A Comparison Between Weighted Sum of
Grey Gases and Statistical Narrow-Band Radiation Models for Combustion
Applications,” Combust. Flame, 97, pp. 240–250.
[31] Mancini, M., Weber, R., and Bollettini, U., 2001, “Mathematical Models
Development for Design of HTAC Systems,” 4th Symposium on High Temper-
ature Air Combustion and Gasification, Rome.
[32] Brizuela, E. A., and Bilger, R. W., 1996, “On the Eddy Break-Up Coefficient,”
Combust. Flame, 104, pp. 208–212.
Journal of Heat Transfer
Downloaded From: http://heattransfer.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/28/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use
http://www.itrans24.com/landing1.html
[33] Wünning, J. A., and Wünning, J. G., 1997, “Flameless Oxidation to Reduce
Thermal NO-Formation,” Prog. Energy Combust. Sci., 23(1), pp. 81–94.
[34] Lockwood, F. C., and Shah, N. G., 1981, “A New Radiation Solution Method
for Incorporation in General Combustion Prediction Procedures,” 18th Sympo-
sium International on Combustion, The Combustion Institute, pp. 1405–1414.
[35] Jones, W. P., and Launder, B. E., 1972, “The Prediction of Laminarization With a
Two-Equation Model of Turbulence,” Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer, 15, pp. 301–314.
[36] Zhang, L., Swinderski, A., Nehme, W., Yang, W., and Blasiak, W., 2009,
“Experimental Study of Radiative Heat Transfer and Temperature in High Tem-
perature Air Combustion,” 10th Conference on Energy for Clean Environment.
[37] Biswas, A. K., Zhang, L., Swiderski, A., Nehme, W., and Yang, W., 2009,
“Experimental Investigation of Nitrogen Oxides Emission and Heat Transfer
for High Temperature Air Combustion,” 10th Conference on Energy for Clean
Environment.
DECEMBER 2012, Vol. 134 / 121201-15