COMBUSTION AND FLAME 42: 183-196 (1981) 183

Turbulent Gaseous Combustion

Part I: Local Species Concentration Measurements

MAX H. LEWIS* and L. DOUGLAS SMOOT**

Chemical Engineering Department, Brigham Young University, Prove, Utah84602

Experimental measurements were made of fuel mixture fraction profiles and species concentration profiles (O 2, N 2,
CH 4, CO, CO 2, H 2O, and tracer Ar) in turbulent natural gas diffusion flames. Twenty-eight tests were performed in an
axisymmetric combostor with coaxial feed of fuel and air. The test variables included type and arrangement of sample
probe, comhustor wall temperature, and air feed temperature. Gas samples were obtained with both water-quench and
water-cooled probes. Direct water-quench probes were more effective in quenching reactions inside the sampling probe
than water-cooled probes; however, some of the CO 2 in the gas samples was dissolved in the quench water. A 350K
change in the wall temperature had a negligible effect on gas mixing rates, hut did alter the local gas species distributions
somewhat. More complete combustion was achieved with elevated air feed temperatures, but more complete mixing
was obtained at lower air temperatures. The results provide a data base for evaluating predictive computer models.

INTRODUCTION Reynolds numbers, and four levels of swirl. Bilger

Turbulent diffusion flames are widely used in
practical combustors and as a consequence, knowl-
edge of the complex processes occurring during
combustion has become a matter of technological
importance. Turbulent mixing and combustion in
free flames were studied by Hawthorne et al. [1]
with a wide variety of gaseous fuels. Hubbard [2]
investigated the effects of preheating combustion
air on flame properties in a furnace burning coke
oven gas. Becker et al. [3, 4] studied furnace mixing
patterns for cold, coflowing streams in a cylindrical
duct, with emphasis on the regime where recircu-
lation occurs. Lockwood et al. [5] investigated
turbulent mixing in a cylindrical combustor, axially
fired with gas from a concentric tube burner.
Measurements of mixture fraction were made for
four fuel/air ratios, two burner geometries, two
Graduate Student, presently with Conoco, Inc., Ponca
City, OK.
** Professor and Dean, Engineering Sciences and Tech-
nology.
Copyright © 1981 by The Combustion Institute
Published by Elsevier North Holland, Inc.
52 Vanderbilt Avenue, New York, NY 10017
and Beck [6] investigated nitric oxide formation in
the turbulent diffusion flame of hydrogen and air.
Also, the effect of the probe size and construction
on sample accuracy was considered. Kent and
Bilger [7] and Lenze [8] found that small depar-
tures from isokinetic sampling produced small
errors in their results for slender-nosed probes, but
results for blunt-nosed probes were far more
sensitive. Ceransky and Sawyer [9] reported that
the effect of increasing reactant temperature on the
combustion species was similar to that of increasing
the fuel-to-air velocity ratio. Results included radial
and axial concentration profiles for a number of
species, along with temperature profiles for
propane-air flames. However, they were mainly
concerned with NO x formation.
Kent and Bilger [7] provide radial and axial gas
species concentration profiles, along with tempera-
ture profiles for axisymmetric, turbulent combus-
tion of hydrogen in a coflowing stream of air.
Onuma and Ogasawara [10] provide similar data
for combustion of propane and air. EI-Mahallaway
et al. [11], Elghobashi [12], and Gosman et al. [13]
0010-2180/81/080183+14502.50
184 MAX H. LEWIS and L. DOUGLAS SMOOT

report experimental temperature and mixture frac- TABLE 1

tion profiles for city gas-air flames. Gosman et al. Summary of Test Conditions
113] also cite a number of references using various
types of coaxial, cylindrical combustors. Reactor Dimensions (cm)
The major objective of the present work was to
obtain detailed local measurements of gas species Inside diameter 20.32
Outside diameter 35.56
concentration, mixture fraction, and temperature Length 152.40
for subsequent comparison with theoretical model Ceramic insulation 6.99
predictions (see Part II). Other objectives included Wall thickness 0.64
comparison of a probe bank and a single traversing Primary tube (blunt)
probe, comparison of water-quench and water- Inside radius 0.80
Wall thickness 0.32
cooled probes, and determination of the effects of Length 66
wall temperature and secondary air temperature Secondary annulus
on combustion and mixing. Outside radius 2.86
Inside radius 1.11
Length 66
EXPERIMENTAL
Flow Characteristics Fuel Air
The test facility consisted of a high-pressure air
system, a natural gas system to supply the fuel, the Velocity (m/s) 21.3 34.3
combustor, a scrubber for the exhaust gas, and a Pressure (Kpa) 94 94
Temperature (K) 300 589
Gas flow rate (g/s) 2.84 36.3

Air Stream~-'l ""11

\LIII[I Fuel Stream gas sample train. The combustor, shown in Fig. 1,
was oriented vertically to minimize three-
dimensional effects. It consisted of three 30-cm
sections, three 15-cm sections, and two 8-cm
Preheat
Methlne-~-,--- [ "•----'7 Igniter sections each lined with 7-cm thick castable, high-
purity aluminum oxide insulation. One of the 15-
Wall
Temperature_......., cm sections housed the sampling probes. Windows
(18
Locatlonsl
allowed visual observation of the flame. The na-
Probe tural gas flame was ignited with a hydrogen-air
Section
igniter. The cross-sectional areas of the igniter and
preheat inlet openings relative to the surface area of
the lid were negligible. They were mounted flush to
Interchangeable 152.4
Section the top surface of the burner and were not operated
during the sampling period. A water spray at the
Castable exit of combustor reduced the temperature of the
Steel Casing "t combustion gases to about 600K prior to entering
the exhaust scrubber. A summary of test conditions
is given in Table 1.
Gas samples were collected with a bank of water-
quench probes or with a single, traversing water-
Wa~r cooled probe. The probes were constructed with a
Exhaust ---------: small pressure tap just inside the inlet. The value of
isokinetic sampling in turbulent flow has been
Fig. 1. Laboratory combustor (dimensions in em). questioned [14, 15]. Even so, an effort was made to
TURBULENT DIFFUSION FLAMES I: MEASUREMENTS
equilibrate the mean static pressure inside and
outside the probe to obtain an accurate sampling
velocity. The sample was taken over a period of
time sufficient to average out the random fluctu-
ations. In recirculation regions, isokinetic sampling
was not attempted.
When the water-quench probes were used, the
gas was separated from the water. Gas samples
were analyzed chromatographically, with two
ultrasonic detectors, for Ar, H2, 02, N2, CH4, CO,
CO2, and C2H 6. TheAr and H 2 were analyzed with
0 2 as the carrier gas, while He was used as a carrier
for the other gases. The H 2 0 content was calcu-
lated from a hydrogen balance. Temperature was
measured with a platinum-platinum/10%
rhodium thermocouple. These measured values
were corrected for small conduction and significant
radiation losses.
DATA REDUCTION
The local extent of mixing between the fuel and air
streams (i.e., mixture fraction) was determined by
use of a mass balance for the argon trace gas
injected into the fuel stream 1-16]:
f =(Mp, /M~)(MsXax- MxXa~)/(MsXap- MpXas),
(1)
wherefis the mixture fraction, defined as the mass
fraction of fuel in the local mixture. The data from
chromatographic analyses were used directly in Eq.
(1) to determinef. The mixture fraction ranges from
zero in the pure air stream to unity in the pure fuel
stream. For the conditions in this study, f for fully
mixed fuel and air streams was 0.072.
The gas sample was cooled to approximately
300K in the probe, so that the water formed during
combustion was condensed before the sample was
analyzed. To determine the H 2 0 content, a hydro-
gen mass balance was used 1-16] in conjunction
with the mixture fraction.
TEST PROGRAM
Twenty-eight tests were performed. The natural gas
molar composition was 88.53% CH4, 7.44% C2H6,
2.55% N 2, 1.39% CO2, 0.09% H2, with less than
185
0.01% H20. Argon was injected into the natural
gas stream as a gas tracer in all tests and constituted
approximately 5% of that stream. The pure air
contained 0.93% Ar. The natural gas flow rate and
air flow rate were 2.84 g/s and 36.3 g/s, respectively,
in all runs. A bank of water-quench probes was
used in test series A, while a single traversing, water-
cooled probe was used in test series B. The wall
temperature was varied in series A, while the air
temperature was varied in series B. Possible errors
arising from the type and arrangement of probes
were determined by comparing series A and B.
Radial profile data were collected at nine axial
stations (9.5, 17.5, 24.6, 32.7, 39.8, 47.6, 63.2, 78.1,
and 137.5 cm aft of the fuel-air burner inlet).
DATA ACCURACY
The following factors were considered in assessing
the data accuracy and reliability: (1) variation from
design operating conditions; (2) gas analysis; (3)
element balances; (4) CO2 dissolution; (5) reproduc-
ibility; (6) probe construction and positioning; and
(7) cooled versus quench probe.
A choked flow nozzle and an automatic pressure
control loop were used to regulate the mass flow
rate of the air stream to within ___2.0%. Similarly,
the argon mass flow rate was within +10%.
However, the argon concentration in the primary
stream was measured chromatographically for
each test; therefore, the inaccuracy in argon flow
regulation was not of concern. The natural gas flow
rate varied by ___1.1%. Accuracy of gas analysis was
+ 1%, based on a comparison with calibration
gases.
The gases were composed of five elements: Ar, H,
N, O, and C. An Ar balance was used to determine
the local mixture fraction; a hydrogen balance was
used to deduce the H 2 0 concentration; N 2 was in
such large proportions compared to the other gases
that a material balance on N was not a sensitive test
of data accuracy. To check data accuracy, in-
dependent balances were made for C and O. The
oxygen atom balance errors ranged from - 6 % to
+ 13% with an average value of -1%, while the
carbon balance errors ranged from - 2 6 % to
+ 30% with an average value of -4%.
186 MAX H. LEWIS and L. DOUGLAS SMOOT
13 %. I I I i i l i I I

11

~0~ z~-'------/~- 2 .
5J - 0....._.0~0____0 ~ / ~
I I I I I I 1 I ~ - - n "

2 k I I I l I I I I I 1

@
0
h.
1 1 ~ . ~ H2
]
Q t o...._o.7~o~u~ ~+ 8
0
"l ' ' ' ' ' ~ b_ 1
I l I I I I l I
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

~ /,, ' , 'CH4 '

i i i t i 12

x
6
8._~
10
4
6 •

2
4 :l
I I I
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Radial Position, cm
Fig. 2. Radial profiles of 02, H2, CO 2, CH4, and mixture fraction using water-cooled
(o) and water-quench probes (zx) at an axial location of 47.6 em.

Positioning of the probe could be achieved only
to within +0.4 cm from the desired location,
causing some error in determining local species
composition and mixture fraction in regions of
rapidly changing radial concentration gradient.
Also, near the centerline, in the upper region of the
reactor where significant radial concentration
gradients existed, the collected sample represented
the average species concentration over the area of
the probe inlet. The magnitude of this error in
mixture fraction was estimated to be a maximum of
22?/0, while the error was negligible for radial
positions outside 3 cm or for axial positions aft of
25 cm.
In a test with a single water-quench probe on the
centerline and near the reactor exit, four 1-min
samples were collected in sequence over a 20-min
period. Resultant gas composition did not vary
significantly among samples.
A series of tests was conducted to determine CO 2
solubility in the probe quench water. Partial pres-
sure of CO2 and quench water temperature and
flow rate were systematically varied. For the con-
ditions of this study, it was determined that
TURBULENT DIFFUSION FLAMES I: MEASUREMENTS 187

1,~ I I I I I
approximately 4 ~ of the CO 2 in the gas sample
was absorbed into the probe quench water, with .70
most of this loss taking place in the front end of the ©
probe. Data reported herein were corrected for
CO 2 losses, using detailed results from this series of ~ .30
tests [16].
From duplicate tests at 17.5 and 32.7 cm, the .20
mixture fraction values were within + 170, except x

near the centerline. Reproducibility of the species

profiles were also good, being duplicated to within .10 ~....._..~

+770. .07
I I l I I I
7 10 20 40 70 100 200
TEST RESULTS Reduced Axial Position, z/r 1
Fig. 3. Axial decay of mixture fraction (% single probe;
Probe Type
o, probe bank).

Two tests were run at 47.6 cm to compare water-

cooled and water-quench probes. A single travers-
ing probe was used to collect samples in each test.
The results from the water-quench probe were
corrected for CO2 dissolution. Fig. 2 shows the
radial profiles for 02, H2, CO 2, CH 4, and mixture
fraction. The oxygen collected was 28--3570 lower
for the water-cooled probe compared to the water-
quench probe. Likewise, the radial profile for CO2
concentration was 30-3870 higher near the center-
line for the cooled probe as compared to the
quench probe, while CH 4 concentration was 20-
3070 lower. These results suggest that further
reaction of the gases takes place in the cooled
probe. The observed differences in gas species
concentration are not a result of differences in
mixing since the radial profiles of the mixture
fraction are similar for both probes. In a separate
test, a cooled and a quench probe were inserted on
directly opposite sides of the reactor at an axial
location of 47.6 cm. In turn, each probe was
moved to the sample position, a sample withdrawn,
and the probe was then moved back to the wall.
The gas analyzed from the cooled probe resulted in
23.3~ less 02, 16.8~ less CH 4, 75.770 more CO,
42.370 more H2, and 20.0~o more CO 2 as compared
to the quench probe. These results indicate that the
cooled probe does not "quench" the reactions as
rapidly as the quench probe.
Centerline data of Fig. 3 all show no significant
difference in mixture fraction determined from the
five-probe bank as compared to a single probe. All
were water-quench probes.
Reactor Profiles
Radial composition profiles are illustrated in Figs.
4 and 5. Fig. 4 shows the steep concentration
gradients that characterize the upper regions of the
reactor. By the 78.1-cm axial station (Fig. 5), the
radial species concentration profiles are almost flat.
Figs. 6 and 7 show selected gas composition profdes
at eight axial locations. Mixture fraction profiles
are shown in Fig. 8 with measured and corrected
temperature profiles in Fig. 9. The set of local
mixture fraction, local gas species concentration,
and local temperature measurements give a de-
tailed picture of the mixing and combustion proc-
esses occurring in the laboratory reactor.
Wnll Temperature
Two tests were conducted at an axial location of
63.2 cm using a bank of five water-quench probes.
In the first, the combustor walls were preheated to
l140K before samples were withdrawn. In the
second, gas samples were withdrawn when the
walls were only 540K. Fig. 10 shows the radial
profile data for these two tests. The mixture fraction
plot indicates that mixing was not greatly altered
by variations in wall temperature. For radial
distances less than 3 cm, the concentrations of CH 4,
188 M A X H. LEWIS a n d L. D O U G L A S SMOOT

[ :f/-,--~. I I I I I I I 100

8O

,,l//
i /// \/
l/ o,,
~02 Qco,
,o!
o
-'IX /\ "Right Scale . 40

'L/ Y
20

I i i
0 1 2 3 4 S 6 7 8 9 10
Radial Position, cm

Fig. 4. Radial composition prof'des at an axial location of 9.5 cm using water-cooled

probe. CO and H 2 wore not detected.

18 i i i I , , i ' ~>~ 1 90

~ .__--0 80

14 ~ - - O - - F I 0--(3--0--0 D O O-- 70
/
-~ 12 / I I i I t I J I I 60 -

8 i , l ~._.....A---v V ~ 40
~ v v U
5 6
> _ _ 0 ~ v
0 Ar 0 c% 30 ~;
-"
H20
"Right Scale A 02 120
4 ~ 0 ~ [] N2. © CO

2 10

0 1 2 3 4 S 6 7 8 9 10
Radial Position, cm
Fig. 5. Radial concentration profiles at an axial location of 78.1 cm using a water-
cooled probe.
 ..]

L'-'
1jo zIo ~ I
4o I
so ,,I I I I I I I I
9O 100 i10 130 140 150
,-]

T T T T 'TJ

0 0
-9.5- - 24.6- 111 --47.6- --78.S-- Z
18 18 18.
c"'
IS- ~, IS.
12" / 1 12.
12 ~ H20 C~
9- 9'4 v C 0 2 / 9.
I OH 2 / ~
S. 6.
3- 3.
c
• o 0
0 2 4 6 ~ 10
I~. --17.5-- 18 -32.7- 18 -s3.2-- -- 137.5--
® 18 18
o
z 1S- 15- 15- 15. Z
...]
12- 12. 12- 12.
9- 9.
6- 6- 6.
3- 3-~^^ ^ 3.

0 Oi 0 ?~ 0
0 0 o ~ ; ~ ~ :o 0 2 4 6 8 10
Radial Position, cm

Fig. 6. Radial prof'fles o f H 2 0 , CO2, H 2, and CO at several axial locations using a

water-cooled probe.

',,0
 o

| I ! i I S•L I I I ! I I
0 10 20 30 40 ,'o /o ,; 5;O 100 i~0 Ill 130 140 ISO

? T T T
~T ® o e e e e e e
-9.S-- 785
50 25 -24.$- 25 --4~6-- 25 - "-

40. 20. 2O 2O

30. o CH 4 1S- ~ 15 IS

20, 10- 10 10

I0, S. S

2 4 6 8 10
O,
o 1 l ~ i to
o
~-~~-..
0 2 4 6 8 10
0 • •
2 4
•
6
, •
8 10
o
Z
--17.$-- --32.7-- --137.5--
"so 25 25- 25
,! !
40- 20- 20-
No 02 or CH4
30- IS- IS. 15- detected

20-
l lO- 10- lO-

10- S- 5. S-

o 0 c~
2 4 6 8 10 p~
b Radial Position, cm

Fig. 7. Radial profiJes of 0 2 and CH4 at several axial locations using a water-cooled o
probe.

r.~

o
o
TURBULENT DIFFUSION FLAMES I: MEASUREMENTS 191

~t I I f I

50~ Axial Location, cm

l/ 0 9.S
t/ ~ 17.5
I I r-I 24.6
40~/ ~ 32.7
~\l o 38.8
" I\1 ¢ s3.2
30fl 0137.5

|'of
~ 0

o ~
Radial Position, cm
Fig. 8. Radial prof'des of mixture fraction for various axial locations (water-cooled
probe).

1400
_o_

_ 1200 o/~~/f°'---o---o---o--F -
g
IP
/Y
0 Measured Corrected
0 9.5 cm A 9.5 cm
E3 39.8 cm 0 39.8 cm

8O0

_/
I I I I I I I I I
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Radial Position, cm
Fig. 9. Measured and corrected gas temperature prordes at axial locations of 9.5 and
39.8 cm.
192 MAX H. LEWIS and L. DOUGLAS SMOOT

I I I I I

o
I
02

~
I I

I
1

I
I

I
l

I
0

I
D
©
t
@ - ~f-I

l
a.
Tw = 1140 K
@
O
z
CH41 I~"'".......L
c
0
.,
i
c0~
I I
~o~~..-------:O----'-
l I I I I I I

0
o
I I I I I I I I

2 i I I I I I I I
~[::]

o/", , ,

.10 h I i I I I I I

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 9 10

Radial Position

Fig. 10. Effect o f wall temperature on gas composition and m i x t u r e fraction at an

axial location of 63.2 cm.
TURBULENT DIFFUSION FLAMES I: MEASUREMENTS 193

I I I 1 I I I I I

~ 10

oO
~o
I"
~ 5
I I I I I I I I I

1800 i i I I i r i z ,

0 0~0--~-.0~
644K~ -~'~'~ O ~
1600
s.K- o
~'~0~0_ -

.=
1400
@
O.
E

1200

1000 • I I I I I I I I I
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Radial Position, cm

Fig. 11. Effect of air temperature on mixture fraction and gas temperature at an axial
location of 47.6 cm.

CO, and C O 2 w e r e an average of 23%, 11%, 29%, Air Temlaeratta,es

and 8% lower respectively, with hot walls as
compared to cold walls. However, H 2 0 concen-
tration averaged 41% higher with hot walls. The
lower percentages of CH4 and 02 indicate more
complete combustion, but the lower CO and CO2
concentrations cast doubt on this conclusion. Since
only relatively small differences were found with
hot or cold walls, the formation of soot in the cold-
walled test could account for the lower CH 4 and
CO2 levels. Whereas some of the carbon from the
C H , could form soot, all the hydrogen released
from the CH 4 could react with the 0 2 to form
water, thus accounting for the higher H 2 0 levels in
the hot-wall test.
Effects of inlet air temperature over the range from
644K to 298K are shown in Figs. 11-13. Fig. 11
shows radial profiles of the mixture fraction for air
inlet temperatures of 589, 394, and 298K. In all
cases, no significant differences existed near the
centerline. Also, the profiles were almost identical
near the wall except when the air temperature was
lowered to 394K. For temperatures of 394K or
below, the mixture fraction was somewhat greater
near the wall. Near the wall for the 300K case, the
value approaches the well-mixed value (0.072); thus
by lowering the air temperature, more complete
mixing is achieved. Although the temperature of
194 MAX H. LEWIS and L. DOUGLAS SMOOT

I I I I I I I I I

10 cII4

L ~-589 K

~300 K
0"0 O~
I I I

~ 15/ f f I I I f I I

~,.,/-394 K
'oF o \\
L \

/ o-o o_
0 / I I I I I I I I I
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Radial Position, crn
Fig. 12. Effect o f air temperature on CH 4 and 0 2 at an axial location o f 47.6 cm.

the inlet air was changed, the mass flow rate was
held constant. Thus, a decrease in the inlet air
temperature also resulted in a decrease in the inlet
velocity. Ratios of the air velocity to the fuel
velocity were 1.69, 1.62, 1.37, 1.13, and 0.86 for inlet
air temperatures of 644, 589, 478, 394, and 300K,
respectively. Thisvelocity change had a marked
impact on mixing rates. The radial mixture fraction
profiles were almost identical until the velocity
ratio was near to or less than unity.
At the higher air temperatures, the centerline
concentrations of 0 2 and CH 4 in Fig. 12 were
lower, while CO and H 2 (Fig. 13) and CO 2 were
higher, compared to the lower air temperature
runs. Methane was found nearer the wall in the
lower air temperature cases. This phenomenon
may be a result of enhanced mixing since the
mixture fraction plot indicated more complete
mixing at lower temperatures. H 2 and CO profiles
of Fig. 13 are very similar. Further, both show an
unusual characteristic of very low values near the
centerline with higher values near the wall for an
inlet air temperature of 300K. Changes in the
recirculation patterns caused by lowering the inlet
air temperature may help to explain the shape of
the H z and CO profiles for the 300K test.
The uncorrected radial gas temperature profiles
for these tests are also shown in Fig. 11. For inlet air
temperatures of 478, 394, and 300K, the reactor
temperatures were highest at the wall and de-
TURBULENT DIFFUSION FLAMES I: MEASUREMENTS 195

2.5 i i i i i I i i 1

~._~O g0
2.0
- £~- 644K .. 0 / 0 ~ 0 ~

1.5

1.0

0.5

c 0
o"
#.
0
2.5 i I i i i i i i i

1.,5 "~q ~S~9 K "0~0"~'-'0--

,.o _J
478K--~ ~O. .,U

o
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Radial Position, cm

Fig. 13. Effect o f ak temperature on CO and H 2 at an axial location o f 47.6 cm.

creased toward the centerline. However, for inlet air
temperatures of 589 and 644K, the reactor tem-
peratures were hottest at the centerline and de-
creased toward the wall. The change in shape of the
temperature profile with inlet air temperature may
be the result of shifts in the location of the flame.
This work was supported by the Electric Power
Research Institute, Palo Alto, California, with Mr.
John Dimmer, Project Officer, and by the Research
Division, Brigham Young University. The authors
express appreciation to Philip Smith, Paul Hedman,
and Guy Lewis for assistance in conducting tests and
analyzing results.
NOMENCLATURE
f mixture fraction
Mp fuel molecular weight
Ms air molecular weight
Mx sample molecular weight
Tw wall temperature
Xap mole fraction of argon in fuel
Xas mole fraction of argon in air
Xax mole fraction of argon in sample
REFERENCES
1. Hawthorne, W. R., Weddell, D. S., and Hottel, H. C.,
Third Symposium (International) on Combustion,
Combustion Institute, Pittsburgh, P~, 1949, p. 226.
2. Hubbard, E. H., Z Inst. Fuel 30:564-576 (1957).
3. Becker, H. A., Hottell, H. C., and Williams, G. C.,
Ninth Symposium (International] on Combustion,
Combustion Institute, Pittsburgh, Pa., 1963, p. 7.
4. Becket, H. A., Hottel, H. C., and Williams, G. C.,
Eleventh Symposium (International)on Combustion,
Combustion Institute, Pittsburgh, P~, 1967, p. 791.
196
5. Lockwood, F. C., EI-Mahallaaway, F. M., and Spald-
ing, D. B., Combust. Flame 23:283-293 (1974).
6. Bilger, R. W., and Beck, R. E., Fifteenth Symposium
(International) on Combustion, Combustion Insti-
tute, Pittsburgh, Pa., 1974, p. 541.
7. Kent, J. H., and Bilger, R. W., First Australasian
Conference on Heat and Mass Transfer, Monash Uni-
versity, Melbourne, 1973, Section 4.4, p. 39.
8. Lenze, B., Chemi-lng.-Tech. 42:287 (1970).
9. Cernansky, N. P., and Sawyer, R. F., Fifteenth Sym-
posium (International) on Combustion, Combustion
Institute, Pittsburgh, Pa., 1974, p. 1039.
10. Onuma, Y., and Ogasawara, M., Combust. Flame
30:163-176 (1977).
11. E1-Mahallaway,F. M., Lockwood, F. C., and Spald-
ing, D. B., Combustion Institute European Sympo-
sium, Academic Press, London, 1973, p. 633.
MAX H. LEWIS and L. DOUGLAS SMOOT
12. Elghobashi, S., Studies in Convection, Volume II,
B. E. Launder, Ed., Academic Press; London, 1977.
13. Gosman, A. D., Lockwood, F. C., and Solooja, A. P.,
Seventeenth Symposium (International) on Combus-
tion, Combustion Institute, Pittsburgh, Pa., 1978, p.
747.
14. Goulard, R., MeUor, A. M., and Bilger, R. W., Corn-
bust. Sci. Tech. 14:195-219 (1976).
15. Bilger, R. W., Progr. Astronautics and Aeronautics
53:49-69 (1977).
16. Lewis, M. H., "Local Measurements in Turbulent
Natural Gas Combustion," M.S. Thesis, Department
of Chemical Engineering, Brigham Young Univer-
sity, Provo, Utah, 1979.
Received 10 August 19 79; revised 7 July 1980