Fuel stagnation temperature effects on mixing with supersonic combustion flows

An experimental study of the effect of fuel stagnation temperature on mixing in a supersonic hydrogen-air flame is described, The combustor consisted of a constant-area rectangular duct with a centrally located fuel-injection strut that spanned the width. A high-enthalpy stream of air was supplied by a free-piston shock tunnel, and heated hydrogen fuel, supplied by a gun-tunnel, was injected into the freestream as a coflowing planar jet. The freestream total enthalpies were 5.6, 6.5, and 9 MJ/kg, and fuel stagnation temperatures were 300, 450, and 700 K, Raising the fuel stagnation temperature increased the fuel velocity to be near that of the airstream and resulted in a decrease in the mixing rate, Even as the fuel and air velocities became equal, significant mixing still occurred because of a large difference in density, Increasing the freestream enthalpy reduced the difference between the initial air temperature and the adiabatic flame temperature, which in turn reduced the heat addition, and subsequently, the amount of pressure rise in the duct.

Ramp and constant power trials produce equivalent critical power estimates

The standard critical power test protocol on the cycle prescribes a series of trials to exhaustion, each at a different but constant power setting. Recently the protocol has been modified and applied to a series of trials to exhaustion each at a different ramp incremental rate. This study was undertaken to compare critical power and anaerobic work capacity estimates in the same group of subjects when derived from the two protocols. Ten male subjects of mixed athletic ability cycled to exhaustion on eight occasions in randomized order over a 3-wk period. Four trials were performed at differing constant power settings and four trials on differing ramp incremental rates. Both critical power and anaerobic work capacity were estimated for each subject by curve fitting of the ramp model and of three versions of the constant power model. After adjusting for inter-subject variability, no significant differences were detected between critical power estimates or between anaerobic work capacity estimates from any model formulation or from the two protocols. It is concluded that both the ramp and constant power protocols produce equivalent estimates for critical power and anaerobic work capacity.