Turbulent dilute acetone spray flames are simulated in an Eulerian–Lagrangian framework using Conditional Source-term Estimation (CSE) for closure of the mean reaction rate. The objective of this work is to assess the performance of the coupled CSE-spray approach, investigated for the first time for the selected configuration. One non-reacting case and four non-premixed flames, AcF1–AcF3 and AcF5 are chosen. Detailed tabulated chemistry is included. Predictions of mean axial velocity, gas temperature and spray statistics are compared with available experimental data. Good agreement between the predicted gas temperatures and experimental values is found. The peak temperature tends to be overpredicted and shifted radially outwards in the simulations, in particular farther downstream. Same trends are observed in all flames, but the predictions deteriorate with flame AcF5. Possible sources of discrepancy are inaccurate turbulent mixing field, increased level of premixing for flame AcF5, the neglect of spray effect in the chemistry tabulation and a larger experimental uncertainty in the temperatures in the high-temperature regions. The mean droplet velocity profiles are in good agreement with the experiments for the four flames. However, the velocity was underpredicted, in particular near the centreline, for flames AcF1 and AcF2.

在欧拉-拉格朗日框架中使用条件源项估计（CSE）模拟平均丙酮溶液的平均反应速率，以模拟湍流的稀丙酮喷雾火焰。这项工作的目的是评估针对所选配置首次进行研究的耦合CSE喷涂方法的性能。选择一个无反应的情况和四个非预混火焰，即AcF1-AcF3和AcF5。包括详细的列表化学。将平均轴向速度，气体温度和喷雾统计数据的预测与可用的实验数据进行比较。在预测的气体温度和实验值之间找到了很好的一致性。在模拟中，峰值温度往往会被过度预测并径向向外移动，尤其是在更下游的位置。在所有火焰中观察到相同的趋势，但是使用火焰AcF5的预测却变坏了。可能的差异来源是湍流混合场不正确，火焰AcF5的预混合水平增加，化学表中喷雾效应的忽略以及高温区域温度的较大实验不确定性。平均液滴速度曲线与四个火焰的实验非常吻合。但是，对于火焰AcF1和AcF2，速度预测不足，尤其是在中心线附近。平均液滴速度曲线与四个火焰的实验非常吻合。但是，对于火焰AcF1和AcF2，速度预测不足，尤其是在中心线附近。平均液滴速度曲线与四个火焰的实验非常吻合。但是，对于火焰AcF1和AcF2，速度预测不足，尤其是在中心线附近。