Comparative analysis of methods for heat losses in turbulent premixed flames using physically-derived reduced-order manifolds

Heat losses have the potential to substantially modify turbulent combustion processes, especially the formation of pollutants such as nitrogen oxides. The chemistry governing these species is strongly temperature sensitive, making heat losses critical for an accurate prediction. To account for the effects of heat loss in large eddy simulation (LES) using a precomputed reduced-order manifold approach, thermochemical states must be precomputed not only for adiabatic conditions but also over a range of reduced enthalpy states. However, there are a number of methods for producing reduced enthalpy states, which invoke different implicit assumptions. In this work, a set of a priori and a posteriori LES studies have been performed for turbulent premixed flames considering heat losses within a precomputed reduced-order manifold approach to determine the sensitivity to the method by which reduced enthalpy states are generated. Two general approaches are explored for generating these reduced enthalpy states and are compared in detail to assess any effects on turbulent flame structure and emissions. In the first approach, the enthalpy is reduced at the boundary of the one-dimensional (1D) premixed flame solution, resulting in a single enthalpy deficit for a single premixed flame solution. In the second approach, a variable heat loss source term is introduced into the 1D flame solutions by mimicking a real heat loss to reduce the post-flame enthalpy. The two approaches are compared in methane–air piloted turbulent premixed planar jet flames with different diluents that maintain a constant adiabatic flame temperature but experience different radiation heat losses. Both a priori and a posteriori results, as well as a chemical pathway analysis, indicate that the manner by which the heat loss is accounted for in the manifold is of secondary importance compared to other model uncertainties such as the chemical mechanism, except in situations where heat loss is unphysically fast compared to the flame time scale. A new theoretical framework to explain this insensitivity is also proposed, and its validity is briefly assessed.