Sarah Mecklem, Damian Curran, Will Landsberg, Ananthanarayanan Veeraragavan

DOI Number XXX-YYY-ZZZ

Conference Number HiSST-2022-448

A numerical comparison of distributed fuelling schemes was conducted using US3D Reynolds­Averaged
Navier Stokes (RANS) for an ethylene­fuelled Mach 8 axisymmetric scramjet with tandem cavities. Three
fuelling configurations were evaluated using a combination of injector ports located upstream, downstream, between, and within the tandem cavities ­ maintaining a consistent fuel­to­air equivalence ratio
at 50% of stoichiometric. Combustion behaviour was compared between ‘cold­wall’ conditions, representing shock tunnel equivalent test conditions with minimal wall heating, and ‘hot­wall’ conditions,
representing steady, in­fight wall temperatures. Under hot­wall conditions, a portion of the wall boundary represented a thermal sink for regenerative fuel heating. Mixing, fuel penetration, and total heat
release were highest for the upstream­only (baseline) fuelling configuration, however the distributed
fuelling schemes presented resulted in up to 29% less drag at the expense of a 9% reduction in total
heat release. Distributed fuelling methods external to the cavity were more robust to changes in the
thermal environment.

Read the full paper >

In Categories: HiSST 2022, Propulsion Systems and Components
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.