Modeling the effects of surface roughness is an area of concern in many practical engineering applications. Many current roughness models to this point have involved the use of empirical 'constants' and equivalent sand grain roughness. These underdeveloped concepts have little direct relationship to realistic roughness and cannot predict accurately and consistently the flow characteristics for different roughness shapes. In order to aid in the development of turbulence models, the present research is centered around the experimental investigation of seven various shaped single roughness elements and their effects on turbulence quantities in a two-dimensional turbulent boundary layer. The elements under scrutiny are as follows: cone, cone with spatial variations equal to the smallest sublayer structure length scale, cone with spatial variations equal to 2.5 times the smallest sublayer structure length scale, Gaussian-shaped element, hemisphere, cube aligned perpendicular to the flow (cube at 90°), and a cube rotated 45° relative to the flow. The roughness element heights, k+, non-dimensionalized by the friction velocity (U_tau) of the approaching turbulent boundary layer, are 145, 145, 145, 145, 80, 98, and 98 respectively. Analysis of a three-dimensional fetch of the same Gaussian-shaped elements described previously was also undertaken. In order to analyze the complex flow fields, detailed measurements were obtained using a fine-measurement-volume (50 micron diameter) three-velocity component laser-Doppler velocimetry (LDV) system. The data reveals the formation of a horseshoe vortex in front of the element, which induces the downwash of higher momentum fluid toward the wall. This 'sweep' motion not only creates high Reynolds stresses (v^2, w^2, -uv) downstream of the element, but also leads to higher skin-friction drag. Triple products were also found to be very significant near the height of the element. These parameters are important in regards to the contribution of the production and diffusion of the turbulent kinetic energy in the flow. The 'peakiness' of the roughness element was found to have a direct correlation to the production of circulation, whereas the spatial smoothing does not have an immense effect on this parameter. The peaked elements were found to have a similar trend in the decay of circulation in the streamwise direction. These elements tend to show a decay proportional to (x/d)^-1.12, whereas the cube elements and the hemisphere do not have a common trend. A model equation is proposed for a drag correlation common to all roughness elements. This equation takes into account the viscous drag and pressure drag terms in the calculation of the actual drag due to the roughness elements presence in the boundary layer. The size, shape, frontal and wetted surface areas of the roughness elements are related to one another via this model equation. Flow drawings related to each element are presented which gives rise to a deeper understanding of the physics of the flow associated with each roughness element. / Master of Science

The design and optimization of entrained flow gasifiers is conducted more and more via computational fluid dynamics (CFD). A detailed resolution of single coal particles within such simulations is nowadays not possible due to computational limitations. Therefore the coal particle conversion is often represented by simple 0-D models. For an optimization of such 0-D models a precise understanding of the physical processes at the boundary layer and within the particle is necessary. In real gasifiers the particles experience Reynolds numbers up to 10000. However in the literature the conversion of coal particles is mainly regarded under quiescent conditions. Therefore an analysis of the conversion of single particles is needed. Thereto the computational fluid dynamics can be used. For the detailed analysis of single reacting particles under flow conditions a CFD model is presented. Practice-oriented parameters as well as features of the CFD model result from CFD simulations of a Siemens 200MWentrained flow gasifier. The CFD model is validated against an analytical model as well as two experimental data-sets taken from the literature. In all cases good agreement between the CFD and the analytics/experiments is shown. The numerical model is used to study single moving solid particles under combustion conditions. The analyzed parameters are namely the Reynolds number, the ambient temperature, the particle size, the operating pressure, the particle shape, the coal type and the composition of the gas. It is shown that for a wide range of the analyzed parameter range no complete flame exists around moving particles. This is in contrast to observations made by other authors for particles in quiescent atmospheres. For high operating pressures, low Reynolds numbers, large particle diameters and high ambient temperatures a flame exists in the wake of the particle. The impact of such a flame on the conversion of the particle is low. For high steam concentrations in the gas a flame appears, which interacts with the particle and influences its conversion. Furthermore the impact of the Stefan-flow on the boundary layer of the particle is studied. It is demonstrated that the Stefan-flow can reduce the drag coefficient and the Nusselt number for several orders of magnitude. On basis of the CFD results two new correlations are presented for the drag coefficient and the Nusselt number. The comparison between the correlations and the CFD shows a significant improvement of the new correlations in comparison to archived correlations. The CFD-model is further used to study moving single porous particles under gasifying conditions. Therefore a 2-D axis-symmetric system of non-touching tori as well as a complex 3-D geometry based on the an inverted settlement of monodisperse spheres is utilized. With these geometries the influence of the Reynolds number, the ambient temperature, the porosity, the intrinsic surface and the size of the radiating surface is analyzed. The studies show, that the influence of the flow on the particle conversion is moderate. In particular the impact of the flow on the intrinsic transport and conversion processes is mainly negligible. The size of the radiating surface has a similar impact on the conversion as the flow in the regarded parameter range. On basis of the CFD calculations two 0-D models for the combustion and gasification of moving particles are presented. These models can reproduce the results predicted by the CFD sufficiently for a wide parameter range.

The design and optimization of entrained flow gasifiers is conducted more and more via computational fluid dynamics (CFD). A detailed resolution of single coal particles within such simulations is nowadays not possible due to computational limitations. Therefore the coal particle conversion is often represented by simple 0-D models. For an optimization of such 0-D models a precise understanding of the physical processes at the boundary layer and within the particle is necessary. In real gasifiers the particles experience Reynolds numbers up to 10000. However in the literature the conversion of coal particles is mainly regarded under quiescent conditions. Therefore an analysis of the conversion of single particles is needed. Thereto the computational fluid dynamics can be used. For the detailed analysis of single reacting particles under flow conditions a CFD model is presented. Practice-oriented parameters as well as features of the CFD model result from CFD simulations of a Siemens 200MWentrained flow gasifier. The CFD model is validated against an analytical model as well as two experimental data-sets taken from the literature. In all cases good agreement between the CFD and the analytics/experiments is shown. The numerical model is used to study single moving solid particles under combustion conditions. The analyzed parameters are namely the Reynolds number, the ambient temperature, the particle size, the operating pressure, the particle shape, the coal type and the composition of the gas. It is shown that for a wide range of the analyzed parameter range no complete flame exists around moving particles. This is in contrast to observations made by other authors for particles in quiescent atmospheres. For high operating pressures, low Reynolds numbers, large particle diameters and high ambient temperatures a flame exists in the wake of the particle. The impact of such a flame on the conversion of the particle is low. For high steam concentrations in the gas a flame appears, which interacts with the particle and influences its conversion. Furthermore the impact of the Stefan-flow on the boundary layer of the particle is studied. It is demonstrated that the Stefan-flow can reduce the drag coefficient and the Nusselt number for several orders of magnitude. On basis of the CFD results two new correlations are presented for the drag coefficient and the Nusselt number. The comparison between the correlations and the CFD shows a significant improvement of the new correlations in comparison to archived correlations. The CFD-model is further used to study moving single porous particles under gasifying conditions. Therefore a 2-D axis-symmetric system of non-touching tori as well as a complex 3-D geometry based on the an inverted settlement of monodisperse spheres is utilized. With these geometries the influence of the Reynolds number, the ambient temperature, the porosity, the intrinsic surface and the size of the radiating surface is analyzed. The studies show, that the influence of the flow on the particle conversion is moderate. In particular the impact of the flow on the intrinsic transport and conversion processes is mainly negligible. The size of the radiating surface has a similar impact on the conversion as the flow in the regarded parameter range. On basis of the CFD calculations two 0-D models for the combustion and gasification of moving particles are presented. These models can reproduce the results predicted by the CFD sufficiently for a wide parameter range.:List of Figures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . IX List of Tables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .XIII Nomenclature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . XV Abstract . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . XIX 1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 1.1 State of the Art in Carbon Conversion Modeling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1.1.1 Combustion of Solid Particles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1.1.2 Gasification of Porous Particles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 1.2 Classification of the Present Work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7 1.3 Overview of the Work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7 2 Basic Theory and Model Formulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 2.1 Geometry and Length Scales of Coal Particles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9 2.2 Conditions in a Siemens Like 200 MW Entrained Flow Gasifier . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 2.2.1 Velocity Field . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12 2.2.2 Temperature Distribution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 2.2.3 Particle Volume Fraction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .19 2.3 Time Scales of the Physical Processes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 2.4 Basic Assumptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .21 2.5 Conservation Equations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 2.6 Gas Properties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .26 2.7 Boundary Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 2.8 Numerics and Solution Strategy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .30 2.9 Mesh and Domain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .31 3 CFD-based Oxidation Modeling of a Non-Porous Carbon Particle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .37 3.1 Chemical Reaction System for Combustion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .37 3.1.1 Heterogeneous Reactions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .37 3.1.2 Homogeneous Reactions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .40 3.1.3 Comparison of the Semi-Global vs. Reduced Reaction Mechanisms for the Gas Phase . .41 3.2 Validation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .43 3.2.1 Validation Against an Analytical Solution of the Two-Film Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .43 3.2.2 Validation Against Experiments I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 3.2.3 Validation Against Experiments II . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .49 3.3 Influence of Ambient Temperature and Reynolds Number . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .51 3.4 Influence of Heterogeneous Kinetics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 3.5 Influence of Atmosphere . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .61 3.6 Influence of Operating Pressure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .66 3.7 Influence of Particle Diameter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .70 3.8 The influence of Particle Shape . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73 3.9 Impact of Stefan Flow on the Boundary Layer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80 3.9.1 Impact of Stefan Flow on the Drag Coefficient . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .83 3.9.2 Impact of Stefan Flow on the Nusselt and Sherwood Number . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .85 3.10 Single-Film Sub-Model vs. CFD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90 3.11 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96 4 CFD-based Numerical Modeling of Partial Oxidation of a Porous Carbon Particle . . . . . . . . . .99 4.1 Chemical Reaction System for Gasification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 4.1.1 Heterogeneous Chemistry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .100 4.1.2 Homogeneous Chemistry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101 4.2 Two-Dimensional Simulations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106 4.2.1 Geometry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106 4.2.2 Influence of Reynolds Number and Ambient Temperature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .109 4.2.3 Influence of Porosity and Internal Surface . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120 4.3 Comparative Three-Dimensional Simulations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126 4.3.1 Geometry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .126 4.3.2 Results of the 3-D Calculations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127 4.4 Extended Sub-Model for Gasification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .133 4.5 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .138 5 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . .141 5.1 Summary of This Work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .141 5.2 Recommendations for Future Works . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143 Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .145 6 Appendix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157 6.1 Appendix I: Properties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157 6.2 Appendix II: Two-Film Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158 6.3 Appendix III: Sub-Model for the Combustion of Solid Particles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 160 6.4 Appendix IV: Sub-Model for the Gasification of Porous Particles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 161