David CERANTOLA, Daniel HANDFORD, Pradeep DASS

DOI Number: 10.82241/ceas-hisst-2024-252

Conference number: HiSST-2024-252

Leveraging computational fluid dynamics to design ramjet combustors requires a trade-off between solution fidelity and imposed assumptions. Many previous analyses decoupled the combustor from the adjacent components to increase confidence in the complex chemistry were at the expense of neither capturing flow distortion impact on thrust nor nozzle surface temperatures in excess of material limitations. Given the expectation that a lower fidelity approach can capture bulk flow trends from gaseous-hydrogen and air combustion, the 2D computational domain considered in this paper evaluated both the combustor and converging-diverging nozzle sections with the realizable k-ε turbulence model, two-step reaction mechanism, and turbulence chemistry interactions equated using the eddy dissipation concept.
A baseline study that varied flight Mach number (M0) between 3 and 5 and dynamic pressure between 21 kPa and 76 kPa (3–11 psi) showed that specific impulse (Isp) varied between 2400 s and 3600 s as a function of M0 with maximum wall and liner temperatures staying below suggested limits 1300 K and 1770 K respectively. A geometric study that varied injector, flameholder, and liner parameters at M0 = 3 or 5 and 5 psi operating conditions found that performance was most strongly influenced by equivalence ratio φ and liner length L26 where maximizing L26 was beneficial for thrust but L26 < 1 m was required to respect the temperature limits. Setting φ = 0.7 resulted in maximum Isp > 3800 s whereas thrust was maximum when φ = 1.1. The best configuration had no appreciable change in Isp but increased thrust by 41% and 7% at the M0 =3 and 5 conditions respectively relative to the baseline results. Conclusions identify how the geometric parameters response variability can be leveraged to improve design.

Read the full paper here

Email
Print
LinkedIn
The paper above was part of  proceedings of a CEAS event and as such the author has signed a publication agreement to have their paper published in the repository. In the case this paper is found somewhere else CEAS always links to the other source.  CEAS takes great care in making the correct content available to the reader. If any mistakes are found  in the listings please contact us directly at papers@aerospacerepository.org and we will correct the listing promptly.  CEAS cannot be held liable either for mistakes in editorial or technical aspects, nor for omissions, nor for the correctness of the content. In particular, CEAS does not guarantee completeness or correctness of information contained in external websites which can be accessed via links from CEAS’s websites. Despite accurate research on the content of such linked external websites, CEAS cannot be held liable for their content. Only the content providers of such external sites are liable for their content. Should you notice any mistake in technical or editorial aspects of the CEAS site, please do not hesitate to inform us.