Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 11

Tir Part

Experimental and numerical study of the turbulent flow inside a dual inlet research ducted rocket combustor A. Ristori, G. Heid, A. Cochet, G. Lavergne XIV Symposium ISOABE Florence (Italy), September 05-10, 1999
TP 2000-14

Experimental and numerical study of the turbulent flow inside a dual inlet research ducted rocket combustor
tude exprimentale et numrique de l'coulement turbulent dans une chambre de combustion de Recherche du Statofuse deux entres d'air
par

A. Ristori, G. Heid, A. Cochet, G. Lavergne

XIV Symposium ISOABE Florence (Italy), September 05-10, 1999

Rsum : Un programme de recherche sur les statoracteurs a t initi l'Onera en 1995 avec le soutien de la DGA/SPNuc dans le but d 'amliorer la mthodologie de conception et de mise au point des foyers de statoracteurs par l'utilisation de codes CFD valids. Cet article prsente les deux modles de Statoracteurs de Recherche conus spcialement pour simuler exprimentalement les moteurs de type statofuse : le premier est ddi aux coulements non ractifs et pression atmosphrique, et le second aux exprimentations en coulement ractif dans des conditions plus ralistes. Les visualisations hydrauliques et les rsultats des mesures de vitesse obtenues par anmomtrie Laser 2D sur le modle transparent sont prsents. Les rsultats des simulations numriques de l'coulement, menes l'aide du code Navier-Sokes 3D turbulent et ractif dvelopp l' Onera et dnomm MSD, sont galement prsents. Les rsultats des simulations dans les cas en non ractif sont compars aux mesures LDV ; un accord plutt satisfaisant entre les mesures et les calculs est obtenu. De plus, les rsultats des simulations numriques menes dans des conditions plus ralistes (cas d'coulements ractifs) sont prsents et analyss.

Ce Tir part fait rfrence au Document dAccompagnement de Publication DEFA0004

EXPERIMENTAL AND NUMERICAL STUDY OF TURBULENT FLOW INSIDE A DUAL INLET RESEARCH DUCTED ROCKET COMBUSTOR A. Ristori , G. Heid, A. Cochet, G. Lavergne Office National dEtudes et de Recherches Arospatiales Palaiseau, France Abstract A research ramjet program has been initiated at ONERA with the support of DGA/SPNuc in 1995 with the aim to improve methodology for ramjet combustion chamber design and tuning by using validated CFD codes. This paper presents the two dual inlet ramjet research models specifically designed to simulate experimentally solid-propellant ducted rocket (SDR) motors: the first one is dedicated to cold flow experiments at atmospheric pressure and the second one to hot flow experiments under more realistic conditions. Hydraulic visualizations and aerodynamic 2D LDV results obtained on the transparent model are presented. Computations of the flow with the 3D reacting turbulent NavierStokes code developed at ONERA and named MSD are also presented. The calculated results in non reacting flow cases are compared with LDV data; a rather good agreement between measurements and calculations are obtained. Moreover, calculated results in more realistic conditions (reacting flow cases) are presented and analyzed. _________________________________________ Introduction A three-dimensional ramjet combustor geometry has been defined (combustion model) in order to have operating conditions of the combustor (pressure, velocity, temperature) comparable to real motors ; this combustor (Fig. 1) could be used either as a Solid Ducted Rocket (SDR) or Liquid Fueled Ramjet (LFRJ) motor. Validation studies of numerical tools used for SDR or LFRJ motors 1-6 have been made always in non reacting flow cases. This suggests that an experimental study of both SDR and LFRJ propulsion system in non reacting and reacting flow cases would be worthwhile to validate numerical tools in a large range of ramjet operation. The first part of the program is focused on cold flow studies: visualizations (water flow) of the mixing inside the SDR combustor (a specific transparent model at scale 1.6 with respect to the combustion model has been built) as a function of fuel-air-ratio and LDV measurements (air flow) inside this model have been carried out. ____________

PROBE WINDOWS

IGNITER

Fig. 1: 3-D view of the combustion SDR model. The second part of the program will be focused on Combustion studies: visualizations, LDV, LIF and gas analysis measurements will be made in the SDR combustor (combustion model) under realistic conditions. Today, cold flow studies have started (limited to cold flow experiments with low air velocities). Moreover, first numerical results obtained with a one-step fast chemical reaction scheme are presented for the SDR propulsion system (combustion model) ; those results needs to be confirmed by experiments. This paper presents the two ramjet research models specifically designed to simulate experimentally SDR motors : - the first one is dedicated to cold flow experiments at atmospheric pressure (transparent model in plexiglass ). A cold flow hydraulic test rig has been used to perform flow visualization of the mixing process between air and gas generator products inside the 3D test combustor. The flowfields inside this dual inlet combustor were studied experimentally using colorimetric techniques and image processing for flow visualizations of the mixing process. Then, a cold flow aerodynamic test rig has been used to perform 2D LDV measurements inside the test combustor. The experimental data obtained from this study are helpful in understanding the mixing processes and flow structures inside such a combustor, and also for partial validation of the numerical code MSD. Cold flow experimental results obtained with the transparent model (visualizations of mixing, 2DLDV measurements) and comparisons with numerical results are presented.

Copyright 1999 The American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics Inc. All rights reserved

1 American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

- the second one is dedicated to hot flow experiments under more realistic conditions (combustion model equipped with quartz windows). At this time, numerical results under realistic conditions on this model have been performed. Next steps of this study will be aerodynamic and combustion testing with local characterization of the flowfields (LDV, visualizations, LIF, gas analysis) on the SDR combustor model. The transparent and combustion set-ups will also be used for the Liquid Fueled Ramjet (LFRJ) study; in this case, the aim will be the two phase flow characterization for the validation of two phase flow models in CFD codes. _________________________________________ Research Ducted Rocket Combustor The SDR propulsion system considered here consists of a main combustor with two lateral air inlets and a fuel injection into the head end of the combustor, as shown in Fig. 1. In real ducted rocket, the fuel is a solid propellant located into an auxiliary combustor which is used as a gas generator; the partially burned products are ejected through holes into the head end of the main combustor and continue to burn with the incoming air. In the ducted rocket designed for experiments, gas generator products are replaced by air for cold flow experiments and propane for hot flow experiments. The combustion ramjet design (Fig. 2) is representative of a real engine with the following characteristics : * The dome plate is flat and dome height is adjustable from 30 mm to 100 mm (basic configuration of dome height = 50 mm) ; * Area ratio A4 / A2 = 2 ; * Area ratio Ainj / A4 = 0.09 for semipropellant products as fuel ; * Mach number M4 = 0.35 ; * Mach number M6 = 1.55. Dimensions of the ramjet combustion model have been determined by using those engine characteristics and test rig performances. Test conditions for different flight case are given in table I for stoechiometric air/fuel mixtures: Table I
FLIGHT CONDITION Low altitude Middle altitude High altitude Tair (K) 520 600 750 mair (kg/s) 2,9 1,9 0,9 mC3H8 ( g/s ) 186 122 58 Pduct ( bar ) 7,1 4,7 2,2 Tduct th (K) 2418 2440 2472

* 2 Air inlets : section 50x50 mm2 * Distance between air inlet axis : 250 mm * Air injection angles : = 45 * Dome height : 50 mm * 2 Fuel inlet holes : = 11 mm * Distance between fuel holes : 50 mm * Duct: section 100x100 mm2 * Nozzle: section 55.8x100 mm2

Fig. 2 : Schematic of the ramjet combustion model.

In order to facilitate optical access inside the combustor, the geometry has been designed with a square section for the air inlets and the duct.

_________________________________________ Visualizations in the transparent SDR model This model built in plexiglass is only available for atmospheric tests with water or air flow. For this reason, there is no nozzle at the outlet and the length of the model has been limited compared to the combustion model. Fig. 3 show a picture of the transparent SDR model installed on the hydraulic test rig. The scale factor between the transparent model and the combustion model shown in is equal to 1.6 (all dimensions are multiplied by this factor in order to facilitate measurements on the plexiglass model). Dimensions are for air inlets 80x80 mm2, for duct 160x160 mm2 and for fuel holes =17.6 mm for hydraulic tests and =23.6.mm for aerodynamic tests (to keep momentum quantity or differential injection pressure when propane is replaced by air for aerodynamic tests).

2 American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

= 0.5

Fig.3: Transparent SDR model installed on the hydraulic test rig. For these tests, a water flow simulate air flow and a tracer dye (fluoresceine) mixed with water simulate fuel flow. With the objective to visualize fuel and air mixing processes, a laser light sheet can move across side and lengthwise sections of the combustor. A CCD video camera (Sony XC75) is used to record images on a S-VHS videocassette recorder ; the intensity delivered by each pixel of the camera is directly proportional to the local concentration of fuel. Experiments were conducted for different fuel injection conditions. Visualizations of the mixing process, for the lengthwise section ZE = 40 mm, show (Fig. 4) that the increase of the equivalence ratio improve the fuel jet penetration into the ram-air streams. However, if the fuel jet momentum becomes too high ( = 1.7 and .=.2.3.), a large fraction of the fuel passes through the ram-air stream without mixing with the air ; as a consequence, we could observe a decrease of the efficiency or the blow-out of the combustor. Visualization pictures of Fig. 5 are given for an equivalence ratio of 0.5. The fuel jet penetration in the rich dome region is shown for the two lengthwise following sections : the first one is located in the axis of the duct at ZE = 0 mm, and, the second one in the axis of one injector at ZE.=.40 mm. Air fuel mixing process is shown for four sections from the head end of the combustor to downstream air inlets respectively at XE.=.15.mm.(Section 1) ; 48 mm .(Section 2) ; 71.mm .(Section 3) ; 134 mm .(Section 4) ; 188 mm (Section 5); 210 mm .(Section 6) ; 261 mm (Section 7) and 337 mm (Section 8). Sideways to air inlets, the formation of four contra-rotative secondary flows creates conditions for fuel and air mixing in the chamber. The intensity level of those recirculation structures is very important to create an efficient mixing. The more rich region is quickly located near the axis of the duct (see section 8 of Fig. 5); this is favorable to increase the flame surface and consequently the combustion efficiency.

= 1.1

= 1.7

= 2.3

MIN

MAX

Fig.4: Influence of equivalence ratio on fuel jet penetration in the SDR model.

3 American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

1 2 3 X (mm)

5 6

1 2 3 X (mm)

5 6

Numerical results obtained for low altitude flight conditions in reacting flow with an equivalence ratio of 0.5 are qualitatively in agreement with hydraulic experiments concerning mixture ratio distribution in the duct (Fig. 6). The higher mixture ratio zone is situated more close to the center of the duct when we approach to the exhaust plane; however, hydraulic visualizations show a faster mixing in the duct than computations (Fig. 7) probably because higher residence time in water.

Section 1

Section 5

MIN

Fig. 6: Experimental (left) and numerical (right) mixture ratio distribution at Section 7.
Section 2 Section 6

Hydraulic visualization

Section 3

Section 7

MIN

MAX

Numerical results (Reacting Flow)


Section 4 Section 8

MIN

MAX

Fig.5: Visualization pictures for = 0.5.

Fig. 7: Experimental (top) and numerical (bottom) mixture ratio distribution at ZE=0mm.

4 American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

_________________________________________ LDV Measurements and Calculations in the SDR transparent model LDV measurements in aerodynamic test facility In order to measure detailed gas-phase velocity and turbulent fluctuations profiles during cold flow tests, a four-beam, two-color (blue and green) Laser Doppler Velocimeter is used (Fig.8). A fiberoptic probe is used to collect laser beams and create a probe volume, the forward light is then collected by a multimode fiberoptic probe with two photomultipliers (one for each component of the velocity) at the end.

turbulence modeling; the classical K-epsilon model is used in this study. In order to complete the formulation, the mean reaction rate . must be determined. A fast chemistry modelization is assumed to describe the diffusion flames encounted in the SDR combustor. The reaction is considered as a spontaneously mixing of the fuel and oxidizer in a homogeneous reactor. The one-step scheme considered for propane-air combustion gives the stoechiometric coefficient and the Shvab-Zeldovich variable of the reaction. The fuel reaction rate .F calculation is based on the CRAMER 9 model. Results and Discussions Due to the presence of two symmetrical planes [xy] and [xz] in its geometry (Fig. 9), only a quarter of the combustor has been taken into account for computations. The mesh (a quarter of the combustor) is composed of 38625 nodes in the duct and 20250 nodes in the air inlet. The combustor operates at atmospheric pressure and temperature (293 K) ; the mean air mass flow is 66.4 kg/m2/s and inlet air boundary conditions as well as fuel boundary conditions were imposed in order to be in agreement with experiments. The mean fuel flow is 41.1 kg/m2/s, the resulting FuelAir-Ratio is equal to 4.23 %.
Y

YE (mm) = 80 YE (mm) = 0 YE (mm) = - 80

XE (mm) = 250

390

645

Fig.9: Mesh of transparent SDR model. Fig. 8: Laser Doppler Velocimeter system
ZE (mm) = 0 40 80

Flow solver of Navier-Stokes equations


Y

The flow solver named MSD and developed at ONERA 8 is an approximate Riemann solver based on a 3-D finite volume technique using structured meshes. The numerical conservative upwind implicit scheme features the shockcapturing Roes method. The fluxes decomposition is based on the flux difference splitting method. Favre-average conservation equations of the flow are continuity equation, continuity species equations, momentum equations and energy equation. In order to close those equations, the Reynolds stresses are formulated through

The schematic of Flow pattern observed in the SDR combustor is given on Fig. 10. The recirculation zone at the dome region is caused by the jet impingement of the two ram air streams and the existence of free volume at the head end of the combustor. Due to the plane symmetry, there are two counter rotating vortices in the dome region.

5 American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

V exp. / num. (m/s), XE=250 mm

ZE = 0 mm
YE (mm)

80
20 17 14 11 9 6 3 0 -3 -6 -9 -11 -14 -17 -20

40

-40

-80 -80 -40 0 40 ZE (mm) 80

120

V exp. / num. (m/s), XE=390 mm

ZE = 40 mm
YE (mm)

80
20 17 14 11 9 6 3 0 -3 -6 -9 -11 -14 -17 -20

40

Fuel injector

-40

-80 -80 -40 0 40 ZE (mm) 80 120

V exp. / num. (m/s), XE=645 mm


80 80
20 17 14 11 9 6 3 0 -3 -6 -9 -11 -14 -17 -20

40
YE (mm) YE (mm)

40

-40

-40

-80 -80 -40 0 40 ZE (mm) 80 120

-80 -80 -40 0 40 ZE (mm) 80 120

Fig.10: Schematic of Flow pattern calculated in the SDR combustor. In cross sections of ram-air outlets, four contra-rotating vortices are created (bottom part of Fig. 10) ; those vortices provide an efficient mechanism for mixing the ram air with fuel gases as shown previously on hydraulic visualizations pictures. In order to analyze precisely the flow pattern in the SDR combustor, the LDV measurements were conducted on two different lengthwise sections and three different cross sections in the chamber. Concerning lengthwise planes, one is the mid plane located at ZE=0 mm and the other is parallel to the mid plane and located at ZE=30 mm (Fig. 9) ; 585 positions were selected for measurements on each half plane. Concerning cross section planes, there are located downstream ram-air outlets at XE=250 ; 390 and 645 mm (Fig. 9) ; 224 positions were selected for measurements on each half plane. The measured velocity data at the different cross and lengthwise sections defined is compared with the computational results. The comparison between data and calculated velocities in air inlets shows a good estimation of profiles and acceleration of fluid flow in the inner bend. 2D LDV measured velocity and turbulence profiles for ram-air inlets and fuel inlets have been entered as boundary conditions in the CFD code for calculations in this configuration. Fig.11: Velocity field measured and calculated for three sections (XE=250 mm to 645 mm).

Fig. 12: Comparison of measured and calculated axial velocity and fluctuations distributions.

6 American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

A general good agreement between experimental data (on left parts of Fig. 11) and calculated velocities (on right parts of Fig. 11) are obtained in the duct for the sections XE = 250 mm ; 390 mm and 645.m. The measured turbulence intensity 2 distribution ((u ) , <uv>) are shown in the bottom part of Fig. 11 at the section XE = 250 mm. We can notice that the higher turbulence intensity regions are corresponding to the higher mean velocity gradient regions (20 mm< |YE| < 40 mm)
U num./exp. (m/s), XE = 250 mm
80 60 40 20

U num./exp. (m/s), XE = 250 mm


80 60 40 20

V num./exp. (m/s), XE = 250 mm


80 60 40 20

YE

0 -20 -40 -60 -80

YE
0 20 40 60 80

0 -20 -40 -60 -80 -40

-20

20

40

U num./exp. (m/s), XE = 390 mm


80 60 40 80 60 40 20

V num./exp. (m/s), XE = 390 mm

V num./exp. (m/s), XE = 250 mm


YE
80 60

20

YE

0 -20

0 -20 -40 -60 -80 -40

40

-40
20

YE

0 -20 -40 -60 -80

YE

-60
0 -20 -40 -60 -80 -40

-80

20

40

60

80

-20

20

40

U num./exp. (m/s), XE=645mm


-20 0 20 40

V num./exp. (m/s), XE = 645 mm


80 60 40 20

20

40

60

80

80 60

U num./exp. (m/s), XE = 390 mm


80 60 40 20

V num./exp. (m/s), XE = 390 mm


80 60

40 20

YE

YE

0 -20

0 -20 -40 -60 -80 -40

40 20

YE

-40

0 -20 -40 -60 -80

0 -20 -40 -60 -80 -40

-60 -80

20

40

60

80

-20

20

40

20

40

60

80

-20

20

40

Numerical results (K-eps. model) LDV Experiments


<uv> num./exp. , XE = 250 mm
80 60

U num./exp. (m/s), XE = 645 mm


80 60 40 20

V num./exp. (m/s), XE = 645 mm


80 60 40

(u2) num./exp. , XE = 250 mm


80 60 40 20

20

YE

40
0

0 -20 -40 -60 -80

20
-20

YE

0 -20

YE
-100 -80 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 80 100

0 -20 -40 -60 -80

-40 -60

-40
0 20 40 60 80 -80 -40 -20 0 20 40

-60 -80

Numerical results (K-eps. model) LDV Experiments


80

10

15

20

UV

U"

<uv> num./exp. , XE = 390 mm

(u2) num./exp. , XE = 390 mm


80 60 40 20

<uv> num./exp. , XE = 250 mm


80 60 40 20

(u2) num./exp. , XE = 250 mm


80 60 40 20

60 40 20

YE

0 -20 -40 -60 -80

YE
-100 -80 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 80 100

0 -20 -40 -60 -80

YE

0 -20 -40 -60 -80

YE

0 -20 -40 -60 -80

UV

10

15

20

U"

-100 -80

-60

-40

-20

20

40

60

80

100

10

15

20

UV

U"

<uv> num./exp. , XE = 645 mm


80 60 40 20

(u2) num./exp. , XE = 645 mm


80 60 40 20

<uv> num./exp. , XE = 390 mm


80 60 40 20

(u2) num./exp. , XE = 390 mm


80 60

YE

YE

40 20

0 -20 -40 -60 -80

0 -20 -40 -60 -80

YE

YE

0 -20 -40 -60 -80

0 -20 -40 -60 -80

-100 -80

-60

-40

-20

20

40

60

80

100

10

15

20

UV

U"

-100 -80

-60

-40

-20

20

40

60

80

100

10

15

20

Numerical results (K-eps. model) LDV Experiments

UV

U"

<uv> num./exp. , XE = 645 mm


80 60 40 20

(u2) num./exp. , XE = 645 mm


80 60 40 20

YE

YE

Fig. 14: Calculated and measured profiles (lengthwise Section ZE = 0 mm) Fig. 12 shows a comparison of the measured and calculated axial velocity and fluctuations distributions for ZE=0mm and ZE=30mm . Fig. 13 and Fig. 14 shows more precisely the good agreement in experimental and numerical profiles shapes, respectively for the lengthwise section ZE = 40 mm and ZE = 0 mm, 2 even if axial velocity U and fluctuations (u ) levels calculated are almost underestimated.

0 -20 -40 -60 -80

0 -20 -40 -60 -80

-100 -80

-60

-40

-20

20

40

60

80

100

10

15

20

UV

U"

Numerical results (K-eps. model) LDV Experiments

Fig. 13: Calculated and measured profiles (lengthwise Section ZE = 40 mm)

7 American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

MASS FLOW RATE (kg/s)

Mean velocity is about 60 m/s at the outlets of ram-air and about 30.m/s in the duct. In real case (combustion model), mean ram-air velocity is 150 m/s and axial duct velocity is 250.m/s. Thus, those cold flow aerodynamic measurements could be used only for a partial validation of the CFD code. In fact, compressibility effects are not taken into account in this case with a Mach Number less than 0.1 in the duct against 0.35 in real case. Measured and calculated velocity and turbulent distributions are mostly in agreement. Next steps will be the use of ASM turbulence model with probably an enhancement of predictions as a result. Results obtained partially validates, for this kind of applications, the theoretical and numerical models developed in the MSD code. Next steps will be the use of ASM turbulence model with probably an enhancement of predictions as a result. _________________________________________ Calculations in the SDR combustion model in Non Reacting and Reacting Flow Cases

equal to 0.98 at the exhaust plane of the combustor in this case.


EXIT MASS FLOW RATE
2.6 2.7 2.8 2.9 3.0 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 0.000

0.005

0.010 0.015 TIME (s)

0.020

0.025

Fig. 16: Mass flow rate fluctuation in the SDR combustor for reacting flow case. Fig. 17 represents the fuel tracer mass fraction and static temperature fields at different cross sections along the duct. We can notice that fuel tracer concentration is higher at the center of the duct ; as shown previously on hydraulic visualizations (Fig. 5). The consequence of this result is that the temperature is also higher at the center of the duct. _________________________________________

Calculations of the non-reacting and reacting flows in the SDR combustion model have been made with a mesh (based on a quarter of the combustor) composed of 48260 nodes in the duct and 9800 nodes in the air inlet (Fig. 15)

Summary and conclusions In this study, we have analyzed the three dimensional flowfields and fuel air mixing distributions inside a Research Ducted Rocket Combustor. Hydraulic air fuel mixing visualizations and Aerodynamic LDV measurements have been experimented on a transparent model of the combustor in order to validate qualitatively and quantitatively the 3D, turbulent, reacting CFD code developed at ONERA and named MSD. Numerical results obtained on the transparent SDR model are quantitatively in agreement with LDV experiments ; other numerical results obtained on the combustion SDR model in realistic conditions are qualitatively in agreement with hydraulic visualizations. Next steps of this study will be aerodynamic and combustion measurements (LDV, visualizations, LIF, gas analysis) on the combustion model. The transparent and combustion models will also be used for Liquid Fueled Ramjet (LFRJ) studies. Then, the aim will be the two phase flow characterization for the validation of two phase flow models in MSD code.

Fig. 15: Mesh of the SDR combustor model In reacting flow case, instationnary results are obtained with a fluctuation of the mass flow rate at the exhaust of about 10 % at a frequency equal to 430 Hz, which is characteristic of the longitudinal mode of the ramjet (Fig. 16). By meaning values on several periods, we obtain the mean combustion efficiency which is

8 American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

_________________________________________ Acknowledgments We would like to thank DGA/SPNuc for its support to this research program.

_________________________________________ Nomenclature A m. M P Re T V XE YE ZE Y s . section [m2] mass flow rate [kg/s] Mach Number pressure (Pa) Reynolds Number temperature [K] velocity [m/s] distance [m] distance [m] distance [m] mass fraction Stochiometric coefficient of the reaction equivalence ratio density [Kg/m3] rate of production of species (s-1)

_________________________________________ References [1] C.L. Chuang, D.L. Cherng, W.H. Hsieh, G.S. Settles, and K.K. Kuo, "Study of Flowfield Structure in a Simulated Solid-Propellant Ducted Rocket Motor" , 27th Aerospace Sciences Meeting, AIAA Paper-89-0011, 1989 [2] Y.C. Chao, W.F. Chou, S.S. Liu, "Computation of Turbulent Reacting Flow in a Solid-Propellant Ducted Rocket", Journal of Propulsion and Power, vol. 11, N 3, May- June 1995. [3] T.M. Liou, Y.H. Hwang, and Y.H. Hung, "Computational Study of Flow Field in Side Inlet Ramjet Combustors", AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE 24th Joint Propulsion Conference, AIAA Paper88-3010, 1988. [4] T.M. Liou and Y.H. Hwang, "Calculation of Flowfields in Side-Inlet Ramjet Combustors with an Algebraic Reynolds Stress Model", Journal of Propulsion, vol. 5, N 6, Nov.-Dec. 1989. [5] P.K. Wu, M.H. Chen, T.H. Chen, "Flowfields in A Side-Inlet Ducted Ramrocket with/without Swirler", 31st AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference and Exhibit, AIAA Paper-95-2478, 1995. [6] F.D. Stull, R.R. Craig, G.D. Streby, and S.P. Vanka, "Investigation of a Dual Inlet Side Dump Combustor Using Liquid Fuel Injection", Journal of Propulsion, vol. 1, N 1, Jan.-Feb. 1985. [7] AGARD Advisory Report 323 - Working Group 22 on "Experimental and Analytic Methods for the Determination of Connected-Pipe Ramjet and Ducted Rocket Internal Performance", AGARD AR-323 , 1994. [8] D. Dutoya, M.P. Errera, P.J. Michard, A. Ristori, "Prsentation dun code de calcul dcoulements compressibles 3-D dans des canaux et des cavits de forme complexe", AGARD Conference Proceedings CP-510 , 1992 pp 29-1 , 29-21 . Paper presented at the Propulsion and Energetics Panel 77th Symposium held in San Antonio (USA) 27-31 May 1991. [9] F. Dupoirieux, "Calcul numrique dcoulements turbulents ractifs et comparaison avec des rsultats exprimentaux" , La Recherche Arospatiale n 1986-6, Nov-Dec, pp 443-453.

Subscripts air air inlet station C3H8 fuel inlet station duct end of duct station (before nozzle) th theoretical F fuel species

10 American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi