170 C O M B U S T I O N A N D F L A M E 9 5 : 1 7 0 - 1 8 2 (1993)

Numerical Modeling of Two-Dimensional

Smoldering Processes
M. K A R I M M O A L L E M I , * H U I Z H A N G , and S U N I L K U M A R
Department of MechanicalEngineering,Polytechnic University, Six Metro Tech Center, Brooklyn, NY 11201

A mathematical model along with a numerical solution procedure is presented for the simulation of flameless
combustion (smoldering) of a solid in a stream of air. By assuming a global single-step combustion reaction,
the problem is formulated via conservation equations of mass, species, linear momentum, and energy.
Conservation equations are developed by volume averaging the microscopic conservation equations of the
constituent phases (i.e., gaseous mixture, solid fuel, and ash). The model accounts for conduction in the solid,
thermal radiation from the solid, and forced and natural convection flow and heat transfer in the gas stream.
Also included in the problem formulation are the effects of transport processes such as
the heatup and ignition of the solid sample, the smoldering of the solid, the motion of the burning front,
and the formation of ash and transport of gas and heat in it. The transient two-dimensional governing
equations of the problem, in terms of primitive variables, are discretized over nonuniform control-volumes
and solved by an iterative numerical procedure. Different aspects of the model and solution procedure are
also discussed. As a test problem, the smoldering of standard samples of charcoal (wood-coal) in a limiting
oxygen index (LOI) flammability test apparatus is modeled. The results of the smoldering simulations are
presented in terms of the field variations of velocity, composition, and temperature of the gas in the test
chamber, the temperature distribution in the solid and ash, and the temporal position and velocity of the
smoldering/burning front. The calculated transient burning rates are compared with the experimental data
obtained in a LOI apparatus.

NOMENCLATURE u velocity vector

V volume
Ap p r e e x p o n e n t coefficient in Eq. 2 x axial c o o r d i n a t e
B i n e r t i a coefficient, Eq. 5 Y mass fraction
Cp specific heat at c o n s t a n t p r e s s u r e
dm m e a n d i a m e t e r of particle
D mass diffusion coefficient Greek Symbols
E activation e n e r g y
f m i x t u r e mass fraction a m o l e c u l a r mass ratio
g gravitational a c c e l e r a t i o n E porosity
AH heat of pyrolysis tz viscosity
k t h e r m a l conductivity p density
K permeability
M mass
q" heat flux Subscripts
r radial c o o r d i n a t e
R~, universal gas c o n s t a n t eft effective
t time f fluid
T temperature g gas
igni ignition
rad radiation
*Author to whom correspondence should be addressed. s solid
Copyright © 1993 by The Combustion Institute
0010-2180/93/$6.00 Published by Elsevier Science Publishing Co., Inc
MODELING OF TWO-DIMENSIONAL SMOLDERING
INTRODUCTION
"During the last few decades, there has been a
steady increase in introduction and use of
manmade materials such as composites, syn-
thetic polymers, textiles, and others, for a broad
range of applications (e.g., construction materi-
als for buildings and furniture, clothings, etc.).
"With this, there has been a growing need for a
fundamental and phenomenological under-
standing of the performance of these materials
in fire environments and their contribution to
the spreading hazard of fires. Many experi-
mental and theoretical studies have been
'performed by researchers from different dis-
ciplines of science and engineering to cha-
racterize the behavior of various materials
under different fire conditions (e.g., ignition,
smoldering, flaming, and flame spreading).
Thorough reviews of fire modeling, in general,
and solid combustion, in particular, are pre-
sented recently by Thomas [1], and Ohlemiller
[2], respectively. However, more work is needed
to establish a comprehensive and predictive
knowledge base that could be used by chemists
and materials scientists to design materials with
specific behaviors under different fire con-
.ditions. At present, a realistic analytical or
numerical model capable of using the intrinsic
thermochemical properties of materials to pre-
dict different aspects of their fire performance
(flammability, heat release, smoke generation,
toxicity, etc.) is not available.
The performance of real materials in dif-
ferent fire conditions has been studied in the
past via chemical as well as thermal models
[1-3]. Due to the complexity of the chemical
reactions involved, however, chemical models
have been developed and used only to describe
,simple cases such as ignition, inhibition, and
extinction of combustible solids, as well as
effectiveness of retardants. For more compli-
cated situations simplified chemical kinetics are
used to investigate the fire performance of
materials. Depending on the fire scenarios
studied, two simplifying approaches have been
adopted by the previous investigators; namely,
effectiue property models [3-7], and global reac-
tion models [8-10]. These models have served
the purposes for which they have been histori-
cally developed [1], namely to provide engi-
171
neering estimates for fire safety assessment.
However, they have serious shortcomings that
are briefly highlighted here.
Most of the available thermal models of
materials performance in a fire may be catego-
rized as "effective property" models [3-7].
These models are based on simplified formula-
tions of the transport mechanisms involved,
and use various experimental measurements as
inputs to predict effective properties a n d / o r
parameters that reflect the overall fire perfor-
mance of the materials. These models, which
have been used to study solid ignition and
flame spread, are based on the assumption that
pyrolysis occurs instantaneously at a fixed
pyrolysis temperature Tp that is treated as
a property of the material. The couplings
between the chemical reactions and heat and
mass transfer mechanisms are either neglected
or oversimplified and treated empirically [7,
11]. A net surface heat flux, also referred to as
the rate of heat release, is introduced as an
independent parameter of the problem and
includes the combined effects of the chemical
energy generation or consumption as well as
radiative and convective heat transfer rates.
Other effective properties defined in the ther-
mal models are thermal inertia and thermal
response parameter.
Ideally, the effective fire properties are sup-
posed to remain constant over an appropriate
range of fire conditions, and one should be
able to measure them directly (at least via
standard tests). The properties defined in the
thermal models, however, are not only !func-
tions of the intrinsic properties of the materi-
als, but depend on the fire conditions asi well.
The effective properties and the correlation(s)
among them are known to be affected by the
orientation of the solid fuel with respect to the
directions of flow and gravitational accelera-
tion [4-7, 11], and the flow characteristics (e.g.,
laminar or turbulent flow [11, 12], concurrent
or opposed-flow spread [12, 13], etc.). Several
new (standard) apparatus and measurement
techniques (e.g, cone calorimeter [14] an d heat
release rate apparatus [15]) have been degigned
and used for the actual measurements 0f the
effective fire properties. However, similarity
between the standard tests and actual fire con-
ditions is not easy to fulfill [6, 16] due to the
172
multiplicity of transport processes with differ-
ent length scales and scaling relationships. The
effective thermal models, therefore, have lim-
ited application for assessment of fire hazards,
mainly because (1) they are geometry/
configuration dependent, (2) they require input
data that cannot be easily made apparatus
independent, and (3) their use is questionable
due to the scaling issues mentioned above.
Smoldering is another important mode of
solid combustion that has motivated exten-
sive experimental and analytical research in
the context of fire safety. Defined as a self-
sustaining exothermic heterogeneous oxidation
of the solid, smoldering combustion has been
modeled more explicitly in terms of the intrin-
sic properties of the solid, as compared with
flame spread models. Using simplified kinetic
models, referred to as "global kinetics," initia-
tion of smoldering process has been studied
quite extensively from the thermophysical point
of view [8-10]. These studies are based on
one-dimensional models of solid degradation
in which the heat and mass transfer effects in
the gas phase are either neglected or treated
empirically [10]. Propagation of the smoldering
front subsequent to ignition is considerably
more complex, and much less studied analyti-
cally. Experimental results of Ohlemiller [17,
18] indicate the importance of gas-phase trans-
port processes in the smoldering of permeable
fuel layers [17] and in forward and reversed
smoldering in the presence of a forced flow
[18]. The available analytical/numerical mod-
els [9, 10, 19, 20] cannot describe these effects
quantitatively. The transition from smoldering
to flaming is still more complex, and has not
been modeled in any detail. The additional
complexity stems from the simultaneous pres-
ence of heterogeneous and homogeneous reac-
tions, which makes the couplings between the
chemical reaction and heat generation, and
transport of heat and gaseous species more
intertwined. Therefore, a realistic descrip-
tion of transition from smoldering to flaming
would require consideration of the thermo-
physical and chemical processes present, and
the coupling between them.
A thermophysical model for smoldering
combustion propagation has been formulated
by Ohlemiller [2] that accounts for various
M. KARIM MOALLEMI ET AL.
transport mechanisms (e.g., diffusion and con-
vection of energy, oxygen, and volatiles) in the,
solid, char, ash, and gas. This model is based
on a continuum solid/gas hypothesis at the
subparticle scale of the solid fuel, but consid-
ers the simultaneous existence of species and
temperature gradients on the solid-particle
scale and on the reaction-front scale. The com-
plexity of the resulting equations has made the
general case intractable, and the model is not
solved. But by nondimensionalizing the govern-
ing equations, it is demonstrated that the
problem may be governed by as many as 55
dimensionless groups, and simplifications are
recommended for the limiting cases of small or
large values for certain dimensionless groups.
The present article is concerned with the
formulation of a phenomenological model and
the development of a two-dimensional numer-
ical solution procedure that relates the intrin-
sic thermophysical properties a solid fuel
to its behavior under smoldering condi-
tion. The chemical mechanisms are simplified
through the use of apparent kinetic parameters
(determined typically by the~xnal analysis, i.e.,
DSC and TGA). In addition to the continuum
solid/gas assumption of Ohlemiller [2], local
thermodynamic equilibrium is also assumed, so~
that one set of conservation equations for the
entire domain may be developed by volume
averaging the microscopic conservation equa-
tions of the constituent phases (i.e., gaseous
mixture, solid fuel, and ash). Included in this
formulation are the effects of transport pro -'
cesses such as heatup and ignition of the solid
sample, combustion of the solid via a heteroge-
neous exothermic reaction, motion of the
burning front, formation of ash and transport
of gas and heat in it, conduction in the solid,
thermal radiation from the solid surfaces;
and forced and natural convection flow and
heat transfer in the gas stream. The transient
two-dimensional governing equations of the
problem, in terms of primitive variables, are
discretized over nonuniform control-volumes
and solved by an iterative numerical proce-~
dure. The inputs of the numerical scheme are
the intrinsic thermophysical properties of the
material, its char and ash, as well as the exter-
nally imposed ignition and gas flow conditions.
The numerical scheme calculates the field vari-
MODELING OF TWO-DIMENSIONAL SMOLDERING
ations of gas velocity, temperature, and compo-
sition, the transient smoldering rate, and the
oxygen concentration limit for the sustaining
of the smoldering process.
The paper presents the results of the simula-
tion of smoldering of a cylindrical specimen of
wood-charcoal under limiting oxygen index
(LOI) test conditions [21, 22]. The model and
solution procedure are validated by comparing
results of these simulations with the corre-
sponding LOI measurements. Among the for-
malized tests, the LOI configuration is chosen
for its simplicity, and availability of the test
apparatus. The methodology is currently being
applied for simulations of more accepted fire
tests (e.g., cone calorimeter [14], and heat
release rate apparatus [15]), and the results
will be presented elsewhere [23].
The present article is the first to develop and
solve a general two-dimensional model for
smoldering combustion that considers all the
relevant transport processes in detail along
with the global chemical kinetics. This model,
which is a powerful and useful tool for engi-
neers and scientists to evaluate smoldering
combustion, forms the major contribution of
the work presented here. In contrast with pre-
vious models that use data from a given experi-
ment to develop correlations for the same
experiment [3-7, 11-13], the present model
uses intrinsic properties of the materials eval-
uated by different measurements and then
relates these properties of the solid fuels to
their smoldering behavior under different con-
ditions. Since the sole emphasis is on model
development and validation, parametric studies
are not presented here.
FORMULATION
In the smoldering of solids in air, complicated
interactions of a multitude of chemical and
thermophysical processes take place, both in
the condensed phases (solid, char, and ash)
and in the gas phase. The pyrolysis rate is
influenced by (1) degradation and combustion
of the solid, (2) release of volatiles and forma-
tion of char and ash, (3) diffusion and mixing
of gaseous reactants, oxidant, and combustion
products, and (4) different modes of heat
transfer in the solid, porous media, and gas.
173
Among the independent parameters of the
problem are the solid geometry and its thermo-
physical properties, its chemical kinetics, and
the temperature, velocity, and composition of
the free stream gas. Obviously, not all of ]these
mechanisms and parameters are expected to
have significant influence on combustion ]char-
acteristics of different solid materials 9 n d e r
various fire conditions. In the context c/f this
work, smoldering combustion is referred to
heterogeneous oxidation of a solid fuel by
direct attack of oxygen on the fuel surface.
Moallemi et al. [23] provide a more detailed
and generalized formulation that accOunts
for the presence of both heterogeneou! and
homogeneous reactions, and has broader
applications.
The smoldering of a cylindrical solid sample
placed axisymmetrically in an upright position
on a support at the center of a cylindrical
chamber is considered, see Figs. 1 and 2. The
problem is transient and two-dimensiona! (r -
x) due to angular symmetry. The comPuta-
tional domain, as shown in Fig. 2, is heteroge-
neous and consists of solid, fluid (vap0r/gas
mixture or liquid), and fluid saturated porous
media (i.e., the ash and char). For numerical
convenience it is desirable to cast the gOvern-
ing equations of the problem in different
regions of the domain into a similar form. To
I
I~ Outlet Diameter
1
I
i
i
I
Glass Chamber
I
Chamber I
Height Sample
L
Suppo~
Scr
:reen
I'- Inlet Diameter ~1
Fig. 1. Schematicof the setup.
174
x ~/ax-O.
v-O.
u-v.O.
T-T.
A / e l Coe / ~ r-O.
ii
II
II
I
I I
u., Tm. Golt.iR
Fig. 2. Computationaldomain and grid system.
do so, the computational domain is taken to be
porous media, with varying porosities and
properties. This requires introducing of a new
field variable, namely, the porosity of the media
which defines amount of each phase (solid or
fluid) present at any point in the computa-
tional domain, e = Vf/V, where Vf is the vol-
ume of the fluid (vapor/gas or liquid) in a
small volume element V. For the unburned
solid, porosity is a prescribed positive constant
es, whereas in fluid region, the porosity is set
to be unity. In the char and ash, porosity
E(r, x, t) is defined by the burning process. In
developing the governing transport equations,
the following assumptions are made:
1. The fluid flow, and heat and mass transfer
are transient, two-dimensional ( r - x), and
laminar.
2. The thermophysical properties of the con-
densed phase and fluid are homogeneous
and isotropic.
3. The porous matrix is saturated with fluid
and the phases present in any small volume
element are in thermal equilibrium.
4. The porous matrix is rigid (i.e., u s = 0) and
incompressible, while volumetric change due
to change of phase and chemical reaction is
permitted.
5. For the smoldering of the solid fuel, hetero-
geneous oxidation (by direct attack of oxy-
gen on the fuel surface) via a single-step
M. KARIM MOALLEMI ET AL.
reaction is assumed,
C(s ) + O 2 ( g ) -'-> C O 2 ( g ).
6. Radiation is assumed to be a surface phe-
nomenon for the condensed phases, and
the gas is taken to be nonparticipating
(transparent).
The governing equations of the problem are
expressions for conservation of mass, momen-
tum, energy, and species which are written
for each phase. The overall conservation equa-
tions in this variable porosity medium are
developed by adopting the volumetric averag-
ing technique [24, 25]. In this technique, the
microscopic equations, valid for each phase are
integrated over the small volume element V
which is in general composed of the fluid Vf
and the porous solid matrix Vs. The volumetric
averaging of the microscopic conservation
equations for each constituent is described
in details by Cheng [25] and Georgiadis and
Catton [26] and is not repeated here. Based on
the above assumption, the volume averaged
mass and momentum conservation equations
are expressed as follows. The conservation of
mass is given by
+ v. = (1)
The source term in the continuity equation,
.~:/g (kg/m 3 s), is related to the solid smolder-
ing rate by a single first-order reaction with an
Arrhenius temperature dependency [27],
0
= - t[(1 - =
= pgAp(Eas h - e)Yo2 e x p ( - E / R T ) . (2)
The conservation of momentum is expressed as
0
+ v.
-- + v-
__ I.tg epgB ]
e [l k + lull
+ ge( Pref - Pg). (3)
In the above equations, pg and p~ are intrin-
sic densities of the gaseous mixture and
the solid, respectively, Ug is the void aver-
MODELING OF TWO-DIMENSIONAL SMOLDERING
aged gas velocity vector, and e ug is the
Darcian gas velocity. The equations are
expressed in terms of void averaged gas veloc-
ity to permit their use in all regions by varying
the value of porosity. The second term on the
right-hand side of Eq. 3 is often called
Brinkman's extension, and accounts for the
macroscopic viscous shear in the liquid. The
value of the effective viscosity in Brinkman's
extension is taken equal to the fluid viscosity
[26]. The third and fourth terms on the right-
hand side of the momentum equation are
Darcy's term and Forchheimer's expression,
respectively [25, 26]. These are empirical
expressions to account for the first- and
second-order drag forces, respectively, between
the fluid and the solid matrix. The permeability
of the porous medium K is calculated from
the Kozeny-Carman equation [25],
d2e 3
K(E) - 1 7 5 ( 1 - e) 2' (4)
where d is the mean diameter of the parti-
cles constituting the porous media. For the
"inertia" coefficient B in Forchheimer's exten-
sion, the value given by Ergun [25] is employed:
1.92
B (175E3),/2. (5)
The volume averaged energy equation at any
point in the computational domain can be writ-
ten as
cgt[(,pgCpg + (1 - e)psCp,)T]
+ V " (f.pgUgCpgT)
= v . ( k o f f w ) + 6/-/Mg
+ V" q'(gni- V " qrad"
" (6)
In the above equation, cp is the specific heat,
and keff is the effective thermal conductivity of
the porous medium. Since the thermal conduc-
tivities of the solid and fluid are not too dif-
ferent, following Kansa et al. [19], the effective
thermal conductivity of the medium is modeled
by
kef f = Ekg + (1 - E)k s. (7)
175
Both radial and axial conduction are
accounted for in all regions and all phases; but
convective heat and mass transfer are via
gas/fluid only, since the velocity of the solid is
assumed to be zero. The preheating and igni-
tion is modeled by imposing a constant radia-
tive heat flux q'i'gni at the top surface of the
solid for a prescribed ignition period. The
radiative heat loss q'r'a~t is the energy exchange
between the solid surface and the chamber
wall at T~, since the gas is assumed to be
nonparticipating. Therefore, the heat flux ierms
vanish everywhere except on the surfaces of
the solid and ash. In the numerical manipula-
tion of Eq. 6, the heat flux terms are converted
into volumetric heat sources or sinks by !divid-
ing them by the appropriate control volume
sides in the solid or ash.
The equation governing the transport of
species 0 2 and CO2 can be written as
0
-7(EO Yo2) + v" (,pgUyo )
= V.(EpgDeffVYo2 ) -- 0/1/~g, (8)
0--~(EpgYco2) + V" ( ¢augYco2)
= V'(¢pgDeffVYco2) + 0/211~Ig, (9)
where Yo2 and Yco2 are mass fractions of 0 2
and C O 2 , respectively, Deff is the effective
species diffusion coefficient which is assumed
to be the same for all the species in the gaseous
mixture, and 0/1 = 32/12 and 0/2 = 44/!12 are
molecular mass ratios. The coupling between
Eqs. 8 and 9 may cause numerical oscillation.
To accelerate numerical convergence, instead
of solving Eq. 9, a solution for a mixturb mass
fraction,
0/9
f = Yo~ + --~Yc%, (10)
0/1
is sought. The conservation equation for f is
derived by combining Eqs. 8 and 9,
c~
--~(Epgf) + V . ( e a u g f ) = V.(epgD~ffVf).
(ll)
176
The effective diffusion coefficient in the
porous medium, D~ff, is related to the gaseous
diffusion as follows [26]
Oeff=Do2~(n-l), (12)
where n = 1.0-1.5. In the present study, n =
1.5 is chosen and
Do2 = 3.1 × 10 -3 e x p ( - 2 7 6 8 / T ) , (13)
where T is in K. The density of gas can be
obtained from the following relation
(14)
Pg= R u T / [ ~ +--~ + 28 i'
with
YNa = 1.0 - Yo= - Yco~. (15)
The governing equations for the problem as
developed above are valid for all regions of
fluid, solid, and fluid saturated porous media.
In the gas region, for example, the Darcy's and
Forchheimer's terms in the momentum equa-
tion, Eq. 3, vanish since ~ = 1.0 and K = 0%
and the equations for conservation of mass and
species, Eqs. 1 and 8, have zero source terms.
In the solid support, velocity and porosity are
zero, and Eq. 6 reduces to the conduction form
of energy equation which is suitable for this
region.
The problem as formulated is two-
dimensional and transient. The boundary con-
ditions of the problem, as shown in Fig. 2a,
include (a) symmetry condition on the center-
line of the domain, (b) fully developed velocity,
temperature, and species profiles at the outlet,
and (c) no-slip velocity condition over the test
chamber wall, which is taken to be adiabatic
and impermeable. Velocity, temperature, and
oxygen mass fraction of the incoming gas are
known constants. For the initial condition,
steady state velocity, and temperature distribu-
tions and uniform oxygen mass fraction in the
chamber with the solid unignited are assumed.
At time t = 0, the preheating and ignition is
started by imposing a constant radiative heat
flux o f qi'gni at the top surface of the specimen
for a preselected period.
M. KARIM MOALLEMI ET AL.
METHOD OF SOLUTION
The governing equations of the problem, the
continuity, momentum, energy and species
equations, were solved numerically utilizing the
iterative SIMPLER algorithm [28]. A non-
uniformly distributed mesh of 42 × 64 compu-
tational nodes was used in the r - x
computational domain, Fig. 2. The nodes are
placed such that the faces of control volumes
correspond to the lines across which material
changes occur. The grids are more clustered in
the regions of rapid change of the dependent
variables and properties, especially e. This
facilitates the implementation of discontinuity
in the thermophysical properties in the compu-
tational domain. The total number of nodes
selected was a compromise between computa-
tional cost and the desired resolution, and was
decided upon after performing a series of grid
sensitivity simulations.
A time step of 0.2 s was employed during the
ignition period and in the time period follow-
ing that when the change in temperature of
the solid was rapid. Consequently, the time
step was gradually increased up to maximum of
2 s. At any time step, the solution was consid-
ered converged if
]~O.+a(i,j ) _ g,n(i,j)]
( 10 - 3 , (16)
maxl g,"+a(i, j)l
where n is the iteration loop counter and ~0 is
velocity, temperature, and species. Numerical
sensitivity tests were performed and revealed
that the grid size, time steps, and the conver-
gence criteria were sufficient to yield stable
and converged solutions.
RESULTS
In view of the objectives of this study, that is,
to develop the general model and validate it
using experimental data, a series of smoldering
experiments were performed on wood-charcoal
samples in a standard LOI tests apparatus [20,
29]. The numerical procedure was then utilized
to simulate these tests, and the predictions of
the numerical simulations were used for opti-
mizing the model formulation and parameters.
Wood-charcoal was chosen as the test material
MODELING OF TWO-DIMENSIONAL SMOLDERING 177

TABLE 1 ignition heat flux was provided by a small elec-

Apparatus Parameters and Operating Conditions tric heater, and the reported value is corrected
of the LOI Test for the heat losses by radiation (reflection) and
Specimen initial height 14 cm convection. The thermophysical properties pre-
Specimen initial diameter 0.45 cm sented in Table 2 are taken from published
Test chamber height 30 cm data [30, 31]. Properties of stainless steel at
Test chamber inlet diameter 9.5 cm 300 K are used for the support [30] and air
Test chamber outlet diameter 5.0 cm properties at 500 K are used for the gaseous
Specimen support height 10 cm
Specimen support diameter 1.25 cm mixture [30], with the exception of the density
Inlet gas flowrate 0.3 × 10-3 m3/s which is calculated at the local temperature
Radiative ignition heat 5.64 × 10 4 J/m 2 • s from the ideal gas law. The reported properties
flUX, a q~'gni for the solid are those pertaining to the solid
Ignition duration 10 s particles constituting the porous matrix of
" Corrected for radiative and convectivelosses. charcoal and ash [31], and properties of the
porous media are calculated using Eq. 7 for
thermal conductivity and similar relatioOships
due to its simple combustion model since the
for density and specific heat. The porosities of
intent here is to demonstrate the soundness of
charcoal and ash, and diameter of the charcoal
the approach and accuracy of the predictions.
particles are estimated values. The vallaes of
Applicability of the approach to smoldering of
AH, E, and Ap which characterize the ~hemi-
other materials with more complex combustion
cal kinetics and exothermic heat of combhstion
kinetics is provided by Moallemi et al. [23].
have the highest levels of uncertainty [31].
The solid smoldering problem as formulated
Therefore, they were varied and the values
above is a function of thermophysical proper-
reported are those that provided th e best
ties of the solid, the chemical kinetics, and
match between the model predictions and the
several parameters defined by the LOI appara-
experimental results.
tus and test conditions. The governing equa-
tions were solved in the dimensional form and
numerical simulations were performed for the E x p e r i m e n t a l R e s u l t s and V a l i d a t i o n
parameters and values presented in Tables 1
The smoldering experiments and their nUmeri-
and 2. Table 1 presents the geometrical param-
cal simulations were performed for different
eters of the LOI test apparatus [29], and the
values of oxygen mass fraction at thel inlet,
wood charcoal samples, as well as the fixed
ranging from 10% to 73%. If the oxygen mass
operating conditions of the tests. The radiative
fraction was more than the LOI during a typi-
cal experimental run, the vertical position of
TABLE 2 the ash-line (the distinct line formed between
the unburned solid and its ash on the Surface
Thermophysicalproperties of the sample
of the sample) is measured at differenti times
ku 0.041 W/InK with a cathetometer with 0.05-mm reso!ution.
k~ 0.37 W/mK The instantaneous smoldering r a t e / s p e e d of
k~upport 15.2 W/mK
cpg 1030 J/kgK the solid is evaluated from these measure-
cp~ 1250 J/kgK ments by graphical differentiation. To ~educe
Cp support 477 J/kgK the effects of the heat conduction losses ito the
l°s 1360 kg/m 3 solid support and the thermal contactl resis-
Psupport 7870 kg/m 3 tance, the experiment was terminated fat the
v~ 3.8 × 10-5 m2/s
d 10-4 m time that ash-line was about one centimeter
E~. 0.30 above the support. To terminate the experi-
~sh 0.90 ment, the oxygen valve is closed and the~ nitro-
AH 3.28 X 10 7 J/kg gen valve is completely opened to halt the
E 8.4 × 107 J/kg mol smoldering process quickly. The extinguished
Ap 4.4 × 101° 1/s
cold samples were removed from tile test
178 M. KARIM MOALLEMI ET AL.

chamber for examination of the ash and the The predictions of the numerical simulations
profile of the remaining charcoal. are also shown in Fig. 3 for comparison. These
The smoldering experiments revealed that results were generated for the set of parame-
the limiting oxygen index was 13.5% for the ters and properties listed in Tables 1 and 2.
specific wood-charcoal sample used. For lower Numerical simulations were performed for the
oxygen contents, the smoldering process could range of oxygen concentration that solid com-
not be sustained far after the time that the bustion was flameless. These were obtained
solid was ignited. The smoldering rate, evalu- after some adjustments in the heat of pyrolysis
ated from the instantaneous measurements of (2 x 10 7 < AH < 6 X 10 7 J/kg), activation
the ash-line, attained steady state values soon energy (8.0 x 107 < E < 9.0 X 10 7 J/kg-mol),
after the initial transient caused by the ignition and preexponent coefficient ( 1 0 9 _< Ap < 101l
and heat-up of the solid. During the smolder- s-l). The numerical predictions are in excel-
ing process, the ash always remained intact on lent agreement with the experimental results
top of the unburned solid, but occupied for the reaction parameters shown in Table 2.
80%-85% of the original solid volume, as No simulation was performed for oxygen con-
measured from the tip diameters of the origi- centrations beyond 40% where the smoldering
nal solid sample and its ash. The unburned process was close to the transition region and
solids had sharp conical profiles, with the cone the model, which is developed for hetero-
half-angle (measured from the centerline) geneous smoldering reactions only, was not
increasing from about 10° at 15% 0 2 to about appropriate.
25° at 60% 0 2. The variation of the steady Figure 4 shows the field variation of porosity
state smoldering rate/speed with oxygen con- under steady state smoldering condition for
centration is shown in Fig. 3. Figure 3 indicates different values of oxygen mass fraction at the
a gradual (nonlinear) increase in the smolder- inlet. The clustered contours in the solid indi-
ing speed with an increase in the oxygen con- cate a thin conical burning front. The cone
tent of the incoming gas mixture. For oxygen angles of the burning fronts evaluated from
concentrations above 73%, the solid burned figures like Figs. 4a-4c are in very good agree-
with a small but visible flame. However, above ment with the experimental results. Both the
55% the experimental data showed deviation numerical and experimental results indicate an
from the trend established in the smoldering increase in the burning front cone angle with
region, Fig. 3, indicating the possible onset of a an increase in the oxygen concentration.
transition region (e.g., undetectable colorless
flame proceeding observable flaming).

5.0

= Experimentdata
• Numerical data

o°°t
4.0
._c

~ ~ Regionof smoldering
3.0 ~n
-_~ o
a

~ ~ ° "6
_g
2.0 "6
C[:

.°
g- o

r (a)
r (b)
r (c)
0.0 i i - =' ' / i i , , I , , , , 1 , , , ,
25 50 75 100 Fig. 4. Field variation of porosity at constant smoldering
OxygenConcentration( % ) rate for different inlet oxygen mass fractions: (a) Yo2 = 0.2,
Fig. 3. Experimental data and numerical results for steady (b) Yo2 = 0.3, (c) Yo2 = 0.4, seven equally incremented
smoldering speed versus input oxygen concentration. contours between % = 0.3 and ~ash 0.9 are shown.
=
MODELING OF TWO-DIMENSIONAL SMOLDERING 179

0.5 m/s 0.5m/s 0.5 rrVs

There are not many relevant quantities in a > )

LOI test that can be measured nonintrusively. HH~

The repeatability of measurements of the

burning front temperature with optical ther-
mometers or pyrometers is poor, and the level
of measurement uncertainty is quite high. The
limited information gathered in the LOI exper-
iments; including the limiting oxygen concen-
tration for the sustainment of the process, the i:iiii i

steady state smoldering rates for different oxy-

gen concentrations; and the variation of the
shape of the burning front were all in good
agreement with the numerical predictions. This
developed a high level of confidence in the
model and numerical procedure for the range (a) (b) i ~ , (c)
of the parameters examined. Fig. 5. Velocity flow field for 20% oxygen inlet mass
fraction: (a) t = 0.42 min, (b) t = 1.4 rain, (c) t = 5.2 min.

Numerical Results
the smoldering simulation are shown in Fig. 6.
In this section, more comprehensive informa-
The figure depicts the gradual heatup 0f the
tion generated from the simulation of the
unburned solid and the cooling of the ash, with
smoldering of the charcoal sample under the
the maximum temperature on the burning front
conditions of Table 1 is presented. The param-
at or near the centerline. The temperafure of
eters of Table 2 are used with 20% constant
the solid support changes only when the' burn-
oxygen mass fraction at the inlet. Figure 5
ing front gets close to it. The corresp0nding
presents velocity field in the test chamber at
field variations of oxygen mass fraction are
three different times after the solid is ignited.
shown in Fig. 7. The constant mass f~action
The velocity field is much stronger near the
lines are clustered near the burning froat, and
smoldering solid, indicating the significant con-
the figures indicate to the diffusion of 9xygen
tribution of thermal buoyancy in defining the
in the ash and to a lesser extent in the solid.
gas flow in the test chamber. The thermal
The field variations of the porosity are pre-
buoyancy accelerates the gaseous mixture over
sented in Fig. 8 for different times in the
the solid and ash, and the hot combustion
smoldering simulation. The clustered contours
products being ejected out of the ash also help
indicate a thin burning front that develops with
to increase the magnitude of the maximum
velocity above the solid to more than ten times
the inlet velocity. The strong influence of
buoyancy in defining the flow near the smol-
/ A
9
1205.0
1105.0

/
e i000.0
7 905.9o
dering solid confirms previous assessments that 6 805.9o
5 705.00
the LOI measurements are not very sensitive 4 (;os.oo
3 505.00
to the changes in the inlet gas velocity [32]. 2 40$.00
I 30S.00
The figures also show a very weak gas flow in
the ash, marking an approximate shape for the
burning front. The velocity fields remain simi-
lar to Fig. 5c at larger times if viewed with
respect to the burning front. This is intuitively
expected since the smoldering has attained a
constant rate and the flow is dominantly con-
trolled by the thermal buoyancy. (a) (c)
The temperature distributions in the test Fig. 6. T e m p e r a t u r e field for 20% oxygen inlet mass frac-
chamber, solid, and ash at different times into tion: (a) t = 0.42 min, (b) t = 1.4 min, (c) t = 5.2!min.
180 M. K A R I M M O A L L E M I E T AL.

1400 1.0
A 0.1~
0.177
8 o.lsS 1200
7 0.133 D.II
0 o.111
lOOO
0 O.Om
4 o.o07

~° B.ll

~ ~o 0,4

j J
0.2
200

0 I I ~ m I . . . . I . . . . I • ; ' m J . . . . O.0
10 20 30 40 50
T i t f t e ( Ilec. )

Fig. 7. Oxygen concentration field for 20% oxygen 1.0

inlet mass fraction: (a) t = 0.42 min, (b) t = 1.4 rain,

(c) t = 5.2 rain. oJ

o.e

time into a cone. The apex angle of the cone

o.4
takes a constant value as soon as t h e smolder- o.10
a.

ing attains its constant speed.

The time history of temperature, oxygen
concentration, and porosity at a point in the j.0
to 2o 3o ~
solid, point A of Fig. 2b, are shown in Fig. 9. Time (lec. )

The initial rise in the t e m p e r a t u r e is due to the
heatup and ignition process (t < 10 s). During
this time period, the porosity at this point in
the solid does not change, while the oxygen
concentration changes slightly as oxygen dif-
fuses towards the burning front. The smolder-
ing front reaches point A at t = 12 s after
ignition of the sample, and the smoldering rate
(a) (b) (c)
Fig. 8. Porosity field for 20% oxygen inlet mass fraction:
(a) t = 0.42 min, (b) t = 1.4 min, (c) t = 5.2 rain, three
constant porosity contours are plotted for % = 0.3, 0.6,
and 0.9.
Fig. 9. Time history of porosity, temperature, and oxygen
concentration at point A of Fig. 2b.
is initially slow as indicated by the slope of the
variation of e with time. This is followed by an
increase in the smoldering rate, accompanied
by a rise in temperature and drop in the oxy-
gen concentration. The rise in temperature
increases the smoldering rate while the drop in
the 0 2 concentration has an adverse effect on
it. The result is an almost constant rate of
smoldering at this point until all combustible
mass is consumed (t = 38 s) and porosity
reaches that of ash (e = 0.9). The maximum
t e m p e r a t u r e at point A is achieved a few sec-
onds after the burning front passed through it,
due to the conduction and convection heat
transfer from the just-passed burning front.
After the passing of the burning front, the
t e m p e r a t u r e at this point drops due to convec-
tive cooling, and concentration of oxygen
increases due to diffusion and in the absence
of a sink (the burning front).
The variations of temperature, porosity, and
concentrations of 0 2 and CO 2 over the cross-
section a - a of the solid, Fig. 2b, at t = 3.1 min
are presented in Fig. 10. At this time, the
MODELING OF TWO-DIMENSIONAL SMOLDERING 181

1400 1.0
50% reduction in the smoldering speed, mostly
1200
o.I
due to the reduction of oxygen convection and
diffusion towards the burning front.
o.s

}-0 0.4 ~ CONCLUSIONS

A mathematical model and a numerical solu-
tion procedure have been developed for ana-
lyzing macroscopic smoldering behavior of a
. . . . , . . . . , . . . . , . . . . t . . . . i . . . . o.o
o.o 2.s s.o 7.S
r (rnm)
1o.0 12.s Is.o solid in a stream of air. For a solid with a
simple single-step smoldering reaction, the vol-
ume averaged conservation equations of mass,
momentum, and species were solved simUiating
0.30 . [ 1.0 the LOI test conditions. The predictions of the
simulations, including the smoldering rates and

| o .
1
O.2O
O~
shape of the burning front for different oxygen
concentrations at the inlet, compared weil with
the experimental measurements on standard
samples of wood-charcoal, The simulations also
o.10 generated information about the coupled and
o.7
sometimes competing heat and mass trans-
fer mechanisms that define the smoldering
o.0o0.° 0.o characteristics of the solid.
2.S s.O 7.5 10.0 12,$ 15.0
r(rnml

Fig. 10. Radial variation of porosity, temperature, and REFERENCES

concentrations of oxygen and carbon dioxide at cross-
section a - a of Fig. 2b, at t = 3.1 rain. 1. Thomas, P. H., Fire SafetyJ. 19:125-140 (1992).
2. Ohlemiller, T. J., Prog. Ener. Combust. Sci. 11:277-310
(1985).
smoldering had already started over the exter- 3. Quintiere, J. G., J. Fire Mater. 5:52 (1981).
nal part of the solid, as indicated by the varia- 4. Atreya, A., Combust. S¢i. Technol. 39:163-194 (1984).
tion of the porosity. The temperature variation 5. Quintiere, J. G., J. Res. Natl. Bur. Stand. 93:61-70
has its maximum in the central core of the (1988).
solid, and drops slowly in ash, and rather 6. Tewarson, A., and Ogden, S. D., Combust. Flame
89:237-259 (1992).
abruptly in the gaseous stream. The oxygen 7. Quintiere, J. G., Harkleroad, M., and Hasemi, Y.,
concentration is almost zero near the burn- Combust. Sci. Technol. 48:191-222 (1986).
ing front where the CO 2 concentration is 8. Thomas, P. H., Self Heating and Thermal Ignition--A
maximum. Guide to Its Theory and Application, Heat Release
Besides the results presented here, numeri- and Noncombustibility of Materials, ASTM STP-502,
Philadelphia, PA, 1972.
cal simulations were performed in which the 9. Ohlemiller, T. J., Bellan, J., and Rogers, F., Combust.
sensitivity of the smoldering process to changes Flame 36:197-215 (1979).
in the properties of the smoldering material, 10. Ohlemiller, T. J., Combust. Sci. Technol. 26'.89-105
and tests conditions were examined. Due to (1981).
the space limitations, however, the results are 11. Apte, V. B., Bilger, R. W., Green, A. R., and
Quintiere, J. G., Combust. Flame 85:169-18~ (1991).
provided elsewhere [23]. A significant result of 12. Loh, H. T., and Fernandez-Pello, A. C., Twentieth
the parametric study is the effect of ash con- Symposium (International) on Combustion, The Com-
tent of the solid on its smoldering speed. bustion Institute, Pittsburgh, 1985, pp. 1575-1582.
Increasing the ash content from 3% to 10% 13. Fernandez-Pello, A. C., Ray, S. R., and GlasSrnan, I.,
resulted in an increase of 45% in the smolder- Combust. Sci. Technol. 19:19-30 (1978).
14. ASTM E 906-83, Standard Test Method for Heat and
ing rate, which was attributed to a decrease in Visible Smoke Release Rates for Materials and Prod-
the convective heat loss. Further increase of ucts, American Society for Testing and M~terials,
the ash content to 17%, however, caused a Philadelphia, PA, 1984.
182
15. ASTM E 1354-90, Standard Test Method for Heat
and Visible Smoke Release Rates for Materials
and Products Using Oxygen Consumption Calori-
meter, American Society for Testing and Materials,
Philadelphia, PA, 1984.
16. Babrauskas, V., Fire Safety J. 17:13-26 (1991).
17. Ohlemiller, T. J., Combust. Flame 81:341-353 (1990).
18. Ohlemiller, T. J., Combust. Flame 81:354-365 (1990).
19. Kansa, E. J., Perlee, H. E., and Chaiken, R. F.,
Combust. Flame 29:311-324 (1977).
20. DiBlasi, C., Crescitelli, S., Russo, G., and Cinque, G.,
Combust. Flame 83:333-344 (1991).
21. Fenimore, C. P., and Martin, F. J., Combust. Flame
10:135-139 (1966).
22. ASTM D-2863-87, Fire Test Standards, 3rd ed.,
American Society for Testing Materials, Philadelphia,
PA, 1990.
23. Moallemi, M. K,, Zhang, H., and Kumar, S. (to be
submitted).
24. Gary, W. G., and O'Neill, K., Water Resour. Res.
12:148-154 (1976).
M. K A R I M MOALLEMI ET AL.
25. Cheng, P., Advances in Heat Transfer (T. F. Irvine,
Jr., and J. P. Hartnett, Eds.), Academic, New York,
1978, Vol. 14, pp. 1-105.
26. Georgiadis, J. G., and Catton, I., J. Heat Transf.
ASME Trans. 110:635-641 (1988).
27. Smoot, D. L., Fossil Fuel Combustion (W. Bartok and
A. F. Sarofim, Eds.), Wiley, New York, 1991, p. 653.
28. Patankar, S. V., Numerical Heat Transfer and Fluid
Flow, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1980.
29. Isaacs, J. L., J. Fire Flamrnab. 1:36-42 (1970).
30. SFPE Handbook of Fire Protection Engineering, P. J.
DiNenno, Editor-in-Chief, National Fire Protection
Association, Quincy, MA, 1988.
31. lncropera, F. P., and DeWitt, D. P., Fundamentals o]
Heat and Mass Transfer, 3rd ed., Wiley, New York
1990.
32. Kanury, A. M., and Holve, D. J., J. Heat Transl.
A S M E Trans. 104:338-343 (1982).
Received 16 June 1992; revised 7 April 1993