Potential of derivation of a series of C6–C14 1-alkene skeletal oxidation mechanisms on the basis of reaction rate rules

Abstract

Olefins, accounting for one-fifth proportion of gasoline fuel, are also essential intermediates in the combustion of large hydrocarbons and vital precursors of large polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and soot. The unsaturated C = C bond of alkenes renders a more complex low-temperature reaction scheme compared with their corresponding n-alkanes. Thus, it is of great necessity to obtain a thorough knowledge of the chemical kinetics of alkenes. However, the studies on the chemical kinetics of long-chain olefins are far from sufficient. In this work, a collection of skeletal oxidation mechanisms for 1-alkenes from 1-hexene (C6H12-1) to 1-tetradecene (C14H28-1) were constructed in light of recent advances in skeletal mechanism construction for fuels sharing similar structures based on reaction rate rules. For each 1-alkene, the skeletal mechanism includes ∼54 species and ∼216 reactions. Meanwhile, the effect of the C = C double bond was evaluated by conducting a bond dissociation energy calculation to assist the skeletal mechanism construction and derivation. It is discovered that the allylic position is preferred for H-atom abstraction reactions owing to its lowest bond dissociation energy among different locations for all heavy 1-alkenes. Furthermore, the reactions of OH addition to the C = C bond become important at low temperatures, which competes with the H-atom abstraction reactions. This results in the lower reactivity of 1-alkenes compared with corresponding n-alkanes at low temperatures. The acquired skeletal mechanisms were validated against extensive experimental data including laminar flame speeds, ignition delay times in shock tubes, and key species concentrations in jet-stirred reactors, flow reactors, and premixed laminar flames. The good agreements between experiments and simulations demonstrate the prediction capability of all the skeletal mechanisms of 1-alkenes although minor discrepancies exist in the concentration predictions for C2–C3 species, which might stem from a highly reduced C2–C3 sub-mechanism being utilized in the present mechanism.