An experimental and modeling study of propene oxidation. Part 2: Ignition delay time and flame speed measurements

Experimental data obtained in this study (Part II) complement the speciation data presented in Part I, but also offer a basis for extensive facility cross-comparisons for both experimental ignition delay time (IDT) and laminar flame speed (LFS) observables.To improve our understanding of the ignition characteristics of propene, a series of IDT experiments were performed in six different shock tubes and two rapid compression machines (RCMs) under conditions not previously studied. This work is the first of its kind to directly compare ignition in several different shock tubes over a wide range of conditions. For common nominal reaction conditions among these facilities, cross-comparison of shock tube IDTs suggests 20–30% reproducibility (2σ) for the IDT observable. The combination of shock tube and RCM data greatly expands the data available for validation of propene oxidation models to higher pressures (2–40 atm) and lower temperatures (750–1750 K).Propene flames were studied at pressures from 1 to 20 atm and unburned gas temperatures of 295–398 K for a range of equivalence ratios and dilutions in different facilities. The present propene–air LFS results at 1 atm were also compared to LFS measurements from the literature. With respect to initial reaction conditions, the present experimental LFS cross-comparison is not as comprehensive as the IDT comparison; however, it still suggests reproducibility limits for the LFS observable. For the LFS results, there was agreement between certain data sets and for certain equivalence ratios (mostly in the lean region), but the remaining discrepancies highlight the need to reduce uncertainties in laminar flame speed experiments amongst different groups and different methods. Moreover, this is the first study to investigate the burning rate characteristics of propene at elevated pressures (>5 atm).IDT and LFS measurements are compared to predictions of the chemical kinetic mechanism presented in Part I and good agreement is observed.