Computers and Fluids, Vol 2, pp 173-190 Pergamon Press, 1974 PrAted in Great Brltam

DESIGN PAPER

DESIGN, OF MAXIMUM THRUST PLUG

NOZZLES WITH VARIABLE INLET GEOMETRY

GEAROLD R. JOHNSON,* H. DOYLE THOMPSON'~ and JOE D. HOFFMAN~

Abstraet--An optimization analysis is presented for axlsymmetric plug nozzles with variable
inlet geometry The analysis is based on the governing gas dynamic relations for a rotational
flow of a frozen or equihbrlum gas mixture. The problem is formulated to maximize the axial
thrust produced by the plug nozzle for a general isoperlmetnc constraint, such as constant
nozzle length or constant nozzle surface area. The effects of base pressure and ambient pres-
sure are included in the thrust expression to be maximized. The governing gas dynamic equations
and the differential and integral constraints that the solution must satisfy are incorporated
into the formulation by means of Lagrange multipliers. The formalism of the calculus of
variations is applied to the resulting functional to be maximized The results of the optimiza-
tion analysis are a set of partml differential equations for determining the Lagrange multlphers
in the region of interest and a set of equations for determining the necessary boundary condi-
tions for the solution. The complete set of equations for the gas dynamic properties and the
Lagrange multipliers are a system of first order, quasi-linear, non-homogeneous partml
differential equations of the hyperbolic type, which can be treated by the method of character-
istics. The characteristic and compatibility equations for the system are presented. A numerical
solution procedure is presented to determine whether or not a given plug nozzle geometry is an
optimal solution. An iteration technique is developed which systematically adjusts the plug
nozzle geometry until the optimal solution ~sobtained Selected parametric studies are presented.
These studies dlustrate the effect of the specific heat ratio, the design pressure ratio and the
base pressure model on the thrust performance and nozzle geometry of optimal, fixed length,
plug nozzles.

INTRODUCTION
IN RECENT years, concepts from optimization theory have been successfully applied to a n
ever growing n u m b e r of engineermg problems. The first applications were in the area of
a u t o m a t i c control systems. Subsequently, optimization techniques were used in flight and
orbital mechanics to determine flight profiles of m m i m u m propellant c o n s u m p t i o n . More
recently, these same techniques have been apphed to gas d y n a m i c problems. In the field of
external gas dynamics, the d e t e r m i n a t i o n of m i n i m u m wave drag bodies has been the
subject of a large n u m b e r of investigations. I n mternal gas dynamics, the problems treated
h a v e been the m a x i m i z a t i o n of the thrust produced by propulsive nozzles.J1,3]
O p t i m i z a t i o n of c o n v e n t i o n a l propulsive nozzles has shown that performance improve-
ments of a few per cent can be achieved by a suitable choice of the nozzle contour. For
rocket engine apphcations th~s represents only a modest i m p r o v e m e n t m mission perform-
ance. However, in the case of a ramjet or scramjet powered vehicle operating at sub-

* Associate Director, University Computer Center and Assistant Professor, Mechanical Engineering,
Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado., 80521 U S A.
t Associate Professor, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Purdue Umverslty, West Lafayette,
Indiana, U.S.A.
:1:Professor, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana, U S.A.
173
174 GEAROLDR JOHNSON,H. DO'tLI THOMPSONand JOE D HOFFMAN

orbital speeds, the net propulsive thrust may be only a few per cent of the gross thrust.
For such apphcations, an increase or decrease in gross thrust of only one per cent can be
magnified many times in net propulsive thrust. Since many ramJet and scramjet engines are
of an annular configuration, the nonconventional nozzle such as the plug nozzle appears to
offer advantages that cannot be achieved with conventional nozzles. The present analysis
was conducted for scram let type nozzles, but no restrictions were Included in the formulation
that are unique to scramjet type vehicles. Therefore, the present analysis is applicable for
both alrbreathing and rocket nozzles.
This paper presents the results of an optimization analysis utilizing the calculus of varia-
tions for determining the plug nozzle geometry that yields maximum thrust when an
engineering constraint is imposed on the plug contour. A numerical solution method and the
results of selected parametric studies are presented.

ANALYSIS
Because the plug nozzle has not benefited from the many years of development and
applications of conventional nozzles, the plug nozzle, in general, is not as well understood
as the de Lavat nozzle. Therefore, the concepts of the plug nozzle will be reviewed before
proceeding to the details of the formulation of the variational problem.
Figure 1 illustrates a typical plug nozzle configuration. A Cartesian reference frame O X Y
is shown where x is the axial coordinate and y is the radial coordinate. AIFD represents the
contour of the centerbody of plug. It is not necessary that the plug contour terminate in a
vertex on the axis. Plug contours with a truncated tip FD as shown in Fig. I can also be
considered. BEC represents the contour of the cowl shroud surrounding the plug. Basically,
the plug nozzle geometry is defined by the plug contour and cowl contour.
Figure 1 also illustrates the physical features of the flow field for the plug nozzle described
above. The flow emanates from the chamber in the case of a rocket or from the combustor in
the case of an alrbreather. The hne IT represents the transition from an assumed known
upstream flow to the flow in the nozzle. For a subsonic combustor, the line IT can be

tY
j-cow,

A ~ I ~FREE PRESSUREBOUNDARY
Pa

EXPANSION

TRAILINGSHOCK

~ I S _ OF SYMMETRY D] _ P b ~ ~ / b,-
0 X
Fag. 1. Plug nozzle flow field.
 Design of maximum thrust plug nozzles with variable inlet geometry 175

calculated from a transonic analysis such as the Moore and Hall[4] analysis or the Hopkins
and Hill[5] analysis. The method of computing the flow properties on 1Tis not critical to the
analysis method or the general result, but it does affect the result for a specific problem.
For all cases, the line I T is assumed to be known and represents the initial-value line from
which the supersonic portion of the flow field downstream of I T is calculated.
The flow region bounded by the lines IT, I K and TK can be calculated by the method of
characteristics for an inviscid fluid. The line I K is a left-running Mach line starting from
point I on the plug contour. Now, two regions can be identified: a region Q whose boundary
is I K T I a n d a region R downstream of the region Q. Since the flow is supersonic, any change
in the plug contour I F causes a change in the flow properties in region R but does not affect
the flow properties in region Q. The flow properties along I K can be calculated and the left-
running Mach hne 1K becomes the initial value line for the optimization analysis.
The cowl lip may be a point where the rarefaction waves constitute a Prandtl-Meyer type
expansion locally, or the cowl lip may be a specified contour such as a portion of a smooth
curve. In either case, the flow continues to expand around the cowl lip until the fluid pressure
is equal to the ambient pressure. The line where the nozzle jet pressure is equal to the
ambient pressure is defined as the free pressure boundary. This free pressure boundary is
characteristic of the external expansion plug nozzle.
As illustrated in Fig. 1, there is a right-running Mach line starting from point E on the
cowl lip contour that intersects the plug contour at point F. The flow field downstream of
the line E F does not affect the pressure distribution along the plug contour, IF, or the cowl
lip contour, KE. Therefore, if the cowl lip contour is terminated at point E, the flow field
downstream of EF does not have to be calculated in order to determine the thrust produced
by a plug nozzle. For an inviscid fluid the techniques of the method of characteristics can be
employed to fill in the flow field solution in the region R when the plug contour and the cowl
contour are specified.
For a plug nozzle where point F lies on the x axis, the determination of the flow field in
the region IFEKI would complete the analysis. However, as previously mentioned, truncated
plug nozzles are also to be considered. Therefore, to calculate the thrust produced by such a
nozzle, the base pressure acting on FD must be known. The base region of a truncated plug
nozzle is an extremely complex flow region. Figure 1 illustrates the basic features of a model
of the base flow region that was first postulated by Chapman[6] and extended by Korst[7]
and is frequently referred to as the Chapman-Korst model. The gas, after reaching point F,
expands through a system of rarefaction waves, separates from the surface at point F, and
turns toward the centerline. The interaction of the external inviscid flow and the internal
dissipative region produces a turbulent, circular motion of the fluid in the base region.
Recompression begins to occur as the fluid from opposite sides of the body converges. This
recompression produces waves which coalesce to form a trailing shock just downstream of
the wake throat. The fluid entrained by the internal flow near the base is returned to the
separated flow region near the wake throat.

FORMULATION OF THE VARIATIONAL PROBLEM

The variational problem is formulated in terms of the region R and the boundary B as
shown in Fig. 2. The boundary B consists of four distinct, connected boundaries: the
inviscid core boundary I F which, for the case of no boundary layer is the plug contour,
denoted by y = ~/(x); the initial-value line IK, denoted by y = Z(x); the cowl lip contour
KE, denoted by y = co(x); and the exit boundary FE, denoted by y =/~(x). These four
176 GEAROLD R. JOHNSON, H. DOYLE THOMPSON and JOE D HOFFMAN

Yj FCOWL LIP CONTOUR

/ y=w(x)

"~-~ LEFT- RUNNING

/ ~-~'-- MACH LINE

~ /~ R'GH;c:H~! INNIN~G

Pb×
Fig. 2 Plug nozzle description for the variational problem

boundaries are connected at the four corner poims K , / , F and E. In the formulation of the
variational problem, it is necessary either to specify the boundaries and the corner points or
obtain the boundaries and corner points from the necessary conditions of the calculus of
variations. As will be shown in the present formulation, some boundaries and corner
points are specified while others are obtained from the calculus of variations. For example,
in the present analysis the problem is to obtain the plug contour, y = r/(x); the cowl lip
radius, YE = og(xE) at point E; and the plug base radius, YF = q(XF) at point F.
In the formulation of the extremal problem the quantity to be maximized is the axial
thrust produced by the plug nozzle. The total axial thrust is obtained by summing the axial
thrust produced by the pressure and momentum flux across the initial-value line I K with the
axial thrust produced by the expansion section of the plug nozzle. Since the initial-value
line 1K represents a known line in the variational formulation, the axial thrust evaluated
along the line 1K is a known constant and, therefore, does not enter the extremal problem.
The axial thrust produced by the expansion section of the plug nozzle is obtained by sum-
ming the integrated axial component of the pressure force acting on the plug contour I F
with the integrated axial component of the pressure force acting on the cowl lip contour
KE. No momentum flux terms are included since both I F and K E are streamlines. In add]-
tion, the effect of the pressures Pa and Pb acting on their respective surfaces must be included
in the axial thrust. Thus, the portion of the thrust to be maximized can be written as
Axial thrust to be maximized [~ f~"
2rt =. -P~lfl d x + -poo(o dx
E

+ pbyr2/2 - payE2/2 (1)

The governing differential equatmns for an axisymmetric, steady, inviscid, lsentrop]c

and rotational flow model are as follows:
pUx + pry + up:, + vpr + pv/y = 0 (2)
puux + pvuy + p~, = 0 (3)
puvx + pvvy + py = 0 (4)
upx + vpy - a2up:, - a2vpy = 0
 Design of maximum thrust plug nozzles with variable inlet geometry 177

Equation (2) is the continuity equation, equations (3) and (4) are the x and y momentum
equations, respectively, and equation (5) is a form of the energy equation where the speed
of sound, a, is a function of the static pressure p, the stagnation pressure P and the stagnation
enthalpy H. The gas composition is assumed to be a general mixture either in a fixed
(frozen) composition or determined from equilibrium thermodynamic considerations. No
restrictions need be placed on the gas thermodynamic model other than that the fluid is
a continuum and is elastic. The gas dynamic model requires that entropy and the stagnation
enthalpy be constant along streamlines, but their values may vary between streamline. Thus,
the flow model can closely approximate many real flow situations where large gradients in
the stagnation conditions exist across the flow field. These equations are incorporated in the
optimization analysis to ensure that the governing equations are satisfied at every point in
the flow region R.
Along the boundary IF, the velocity components must satisfy the tangency condition,
i.e. the inviscid core boundary must be a stream-line. The boundary IFis constrained to be a
streamline by imposing the equation of a streamline as a differential constraint. Therefore,
along IF
qp(uil - v) = 0 (6)
In the usual ideahzation of a plug nozzle, the cowl lip is assumed to be a point with a
Prandtl-Meyer expansion occurring at this point. However, inclusion of a cowl lip contour
KE, specified as y = ~o(x), results in a more general geometric description of the plug nozzle.
In this approach, the flow variables are continuous along KE rather than discontinuous as
for the Prandtl-Meyer expansion.
Along the cowl lip contour KE the velocity components must also satisfy the tangency
condition, i.e. the cowl lip contour must be a streamline. Therefore, along KE

ow(uCo- v) = 0 (7)

where & denotes the derivative dco/dx. However, unlike the boundary IF, the cowl lip
contour is treated as known; i.e. y = og(x) is a specified function.
In the previous sections the line EF, denoted by y =/z(x), has been intuitively presented as
a right-running Mach line. The condition that EF is a right-running Mach line is obtained
from the necessary conditions of the calculus of variations. In the mathematical formulation,
no constraints are placed on the boundary EF.
The geometrical or engineering constraint is imposed upon the plug nozzle contour by
the formal introduction of an isoperimetric integral constraint into the variational problem.
An isoperimetric constraint is the integral of some function along the plug contour where
the integral must be equal to an arbitrary specified constant. The isoperimetric constraint is
assumed to have the form
XF

f 9(x, r/, ~, p) dx = constant (8)

Xl

For example, if g = 1, a constant length nozzle is specified. It should be noted that the
isoperimetric constraint could also be a function of u, v and p. For engineering applications,
it is difficult to conceive of a constraint expressed in terms of u, v or p. However, a constraint
for some approximation of the nozzle weight could contain the pressure p. Therefore, the
function # is expressed in terms of x, q, ~ and p.
178 GEAROLD R. JOHNSON, H. DOYLE THOMPSON and JOE P. HOFFMAN

The functmnal to be maximized is obtained by applying the formalism of the calculus of

variations. This consists of multiplying each d~fferentlal constraint by a Lagrange multiplier,
integrating over the region where the constraint apphes, and, then adding the resulting
integral to the thrust equation. The lsoperimetric constraint is in integral form; therefore,
this constraint is multiplied by a Lagrange multiplier and added to the thrust equation. For
the axisymmetrlc plug nozzle, the functional I to be maximized is written as

I = J JR {21(PU:` + pry + up:, + vpr + pv/y) + ).2(pUtlx -1- pvtt v + Px)

+ 23(pUVx + pVVr + P r ) + 24(Upx + Vpy -- a2upx -- a2vpr)}dx dy

Xr
+ ~ -- [pY]~ "~ fllnp(t/~ -- L') + fl2g] dx
"X I

+ f X ~ _ [pfD(J) "]-f13 (Dp(u(D -- V)] d x + pbYF2/2 -- e a y e 2 / 2 (9)

The formulation is seen to be a problem of Bolza in two independent variables. In the

above equation, 21 through 24 are functions of x and y,/31 and f13 are functions of x, and/32
is a constant.
The problem is then to find the conditions which ensure that the functional is stationary
with respect to variatmns consistent with all of the constraints previously mentioned. The
necessary condition for the extremum to exist is that the first variation of the functional
must vanish. Applying the techniques of the calculus of variations results in three general
conditions that must be satisfied if an extremal of a given functional is to be found. These are
the Euler equations, the transversality conditions and the Erdmann-Weirstrass comer
conditions. A complete development of the necessary conditions for this problem is con-
tained in ref. [3].

SUMMARY OF R E S U L T I N G EQUATIONS
The gas dynamic equations and the Euler equations govern the flow and Lagrange multi-
plier fields, respectively. In the supersonic flow region, these equations are hyperbolic and
can be solved by the method of characteristics. The characteristic lines are streamlines and
Mach lines. The following five equations are valid along streamlines:
p = v/u (10)
pu du + pv dv + dp = 0 (11)
dp - a 2 dp = 0 (12)

y d21 + u d2 2 + v d2 3 -- '~2 du - ,~3 dv - (v/y)(2 2 + 2 3 U/H) dx = 0 (13)

y d2t - a 2 d24 - y22 dv - 23 dv - (24/p)(av 2 - 1) dp + (24 a2v/yu)22 dp/pu = 0 (14)
Along the Mach lines, the following six equations are obtained:
3~ = tan(0 _+ ~) (15)
(cot alp) dp +_ (u dv - v du) + (av/y) dx/cos(O _+ ~) = 0 (16)
- y d21 + tan ct(v d22 - u d23) + 22 du + 23 dv + (24/p)(dp - a 2 dp)
-T- (v/y)tan ~(22y - 23) dx = 0 (17)
 Design of maximum thrust plug nozzles with variable inlet geometry 179

In the above equations, the upper signs refer to the left-running Mach lines and the lower
signs refer to the right running Mach lines. Note that each of the equations, equations
(15)-(17) represents two equations.
The boundary conditions for the Lagrange multipliers along the inviscid core boundary I F
are given by the following expressions.
31 : ),1 (18)
),3 = ),2 il -- rio - - f l 2 g p (19)
XF

),t 2,F + j (l/q)[r/O d v / d x - (PO - d p q l d x ) l p u ] d x

x

xF

+ f12 | ( 1 / q ) [ o v d v / d x - (9. - dg~/dx)/pu] d x (20)

"x
where

),1~ = - ( 1 / y p u ) [ ( p - Pb)Y + f12 9y] r (21)

f12 = (1/O)[(V/U)pbY -- PqO] (22)

r
The boundary conditions for the Lagrange multipliers along the cowl lip contour E K are
given by the following expressions:
33 = 21 (23)
23 = ),2 tb - o969 (24)
where

)`,E = - (p - p.)/pu E (25)

The boundary conditions for the Lagrange multlpliers along the exit right-running Mach
line E F are given by the following three equations:
21///i + 22(u/i - v) = 0 (26)
2 1 / / - 23(u/~ - v) - 0 (27)
2 1 / / - 24 a2 = 0 (28)
Equations (10), (11), (12), (15) and (16) are the equations needed to calculate the flow
field. The flow field initial-value line, the plug contour, and the cowl lip contour provide the
necessary initial and boundary conditions. The remainmg equations, equations (13), (14)
and (17)-(28) are the design equations obtained from the calculus of variations.

NUMERICAL SOLUTION PROCEDURE

TO recognize how the design equations can be used in a logical computational sequency,
it is necessary to ascertain whether a certain plug nozzle contour and cowl lip radius represent
the solution to the variational problem. The solution procedure outlined below consists of
two parts: (1) the calculation of the flow field throughout the region R of Fig. 2, and (2) the
evaluation of the Lagrange multipliers throughout the region R.
180 (_JEAR()LI)R IOHNSO"4,H O()'fL~THOMPSONand Jo~ D HOFI-MAN

The flow field is solved by employing the method of characteristJcs. The flow is assumed
to be known along the left-running characterl~ttc I K Also, the lnVlSCld core boundary I F a n d
the cowl hp contour K E are specified. Starting from 1k, the flow field throughout the region
R can be calculated by the simultaneous solution of equations (I0)-(12) and equations (15)
and (16).
Once the flow field has been determined, equations (21), (22), and (26)-(28) are used to
evaluate 21, 22 , 23 , ).~ and 2 2 a t point F. Starting at point F, equations (16), (27), (28) and
the compatlblhty equation for a right-runmng Mach hne, equation (17), are used to evaluate
21, 22,23, and 24 along FE. The exit right-running characteristic serves as the initial-value
hne from which to ~tart the method of characteristics solution [using equations (13), (14)
and ( 17)] for the kagrange multlphers in the region R When the solution along the boundary
I F is sought, equation (20) is used to evaluate 2~ and the rlght-runmng Mach line compa-
tlblhty equation (17j, is omitted Similarly, when the solution along the boundary K E is
sought, equation (24) l~ used to express 23 m terms of 22 and the left-running Mach hne
compatlbdlty equation, equation (17), Js omitted. It remains to satisfy equation (19) along
the plug contour l F a n d equation (25) can be used to evaluate the ambient pressure. Equa-
tion (19) serves ab a check to determine whether or not the specified boundary I F represents
ap optunum solution. Equation (19) is evaluated using the known multiphers and the flow
varmble~ at each point along I F If th~s expression is indeed satisfied, the specified plug
contour yields a ma~,lmum thrust for the ambient pressure obtained from equation (25). If
equation (19) is not satisfied, then some relaxatlon techmque must be employed to adjust the
plug boundary until equation (19) is satisfied
The relaxauon technique for adjusting the boundary contour I F consists of rewriting
equation (19) m the following form

E t t = 23 - ~1/.2 + qq 4- fl2gp (29)

Generally, E,~ wdl not be zero. Therefore, a relationship between equation (29) and the
boundary coordinates must be determined to reduce the error along IF, 1.e. E t v , to zero
Upon exammauon, it can be seen that equaUon (29) exphcitly contains q, the slope of the
boundary contour If it is assumed that the remaining variables in equations (29) do not
change appreciably w~th small changes in tl, equation (29) can be employed to evaluate the r/
that reduces the error to zero. Solving equation (29) for li results m the following expression
q = (23 + flzgp)./()~2 - tl) (30)
The new boundary contour q(x) can be determined by simply Integrating equation (30).
Because small changes m i) affect the other varmbles appearing m equation (30), the solution
~s an lteratlve process.
In the above, equation (25) is used to evaluate the ambient pressure for which the plug
nozzle develops maximum thrust. Using this techmque the ambient pressure cannot be
specified a prtort. It is usually desirable to specify the ambient pressure, therefore, a relaxa-
tion technique is required to adjust the cowl hp radius. The relaxation technique used for
adjusting the cowl hp radius consists of rewriting equation (25) in the following form:

E E = 21~ - (p - po)/pu E (31)

where 2 ~ , p, and the flow field variables at point E are known from the solution procedure.
Once again, the error EE will generally not be equal to zero. Unfortunately, equation (31)
 Design of maximum thrust plug nozzles with variable inlet geometry 181

does not contain the cowl lip radius, y~, explicitly. Therefore, a technique similar to that
used for the plug contour cannot be employed. In order to properly adjust the cowl lip
radius, it is necessary to determine how a change in the cowl lip radius affects the value of the
error at point E, equation (31). This change is determined numerically. The procedure
consists of calculating the error for a given cowl lip radius and then perturbing the cowl lip
radius. The entire flow field and Lagrange multiplier field are recalculated and the error at
point E is evaluated. These changes are expressed as an approximation to the partial deriva-
tive, aE/ay. Once this partial derivative is known, it is possible to relate the change of the
cowl lip radius to the change in the error at point E. This is accomplished by using a linear
approximation of the form

dE r. (Y-Y,)
E - E,=-~y (32)

The desired value of the error E is zero. Equation (32) provides the relationship necessary
to solve for the cowl lip radius that will drive the error at point E to zero. The relaxation of
the cowl lip radius is continued until equation (25) is satisfied for the design ambient pressure.
Because of the nonlinearity of the problem, the solution is an iterative process.
In order to reduce computational time, the relaxation techniques for the plug contour and
the cowl lip radius are conducted simultaneously. Convergence using this technique has been
satisfactory, usually requiring less than ten iterations.
To illustrate the behavior of the scheme, the following example case is presented. The
example selected is a constant length nozzle t2.5 in long with an initial cowl lip radius of
10.25 in. The gas thermodynamic properties, which are assumed to be constant, are:
y = 1.23, R = 56 ft'lb:/lbm- °R, Po ='500 psia, and TO = 6000°R. The plug nozzle is
designed for a mass flow rate of 148.077 lb,,/sec and the nozzle exhausts to a 14.7 psia back
pressure.
The first estimate of the plug nozzle geometry as well as the final solution are shown in
Fig. 3. The convergence criterion for all point values of the error function is 10-3, and 8
~0 "I

=o

#4
u)
FINAL C O N T O U R ~

I
2
I
4 6
I~ 8
I I
I0 12
AXIAL DISTANCE,X ~(mches)

F~g. 3. N o z z l e c o n t o u r s f o r convergence e x a m p l e .

CAF Vol. 2 No 2 - - E
182 GEAROLDR JOHNSON,H DOYLETHOMPSONand JOE D HOFFMAN

o61

04

ITER=4

0.2

O0

O~
0£
W
-02

ER=2~TER:0
-O4

-06 I

-080 I
2 4
I
6
I
8
I I
I0
]
12
AXIALDISTANCE
x,~ (inches)
Fig. 4. Error functlon behavior.

iterations are required to achieve this condition. Figure 4 presents the behavior of the error
function along the plug contour at selected stages of the solution process. The curve denoted
by ITER = 0 designates the values of the error function for the first estimate of the plug
contour. The curve ITER = 2 corresponds to the values of the error function after two
adjustments to the plug contour. The changes in the wall angle are illustrated in Fig. 5. As
can be seen, the changes in the wall angles vary in a similar manner to the values of the
error function but with opposite sign. Figure 6 presents the cowl lip radius for each succes-
sive interation. Computer time for this case was 200 sec on a CDC 6400 computer.

RESULTS
A computer program was developed based upon the design equations, the solution pro-
cedure and the relaxation scheme presented m the previous sections. The program was
written in EXTENDED FORTRAN for the Control Data Corporation, 6000 series, computers.
The program description, input/output formats, and several sample cases are presented in
ref.[8].
The purpose of these studies was to determine how various design parameters influence
the performance and the nozzle geometry of maximum thrust plug nozzles. These studies
illustrate the effect of the specific heat ratio and the design pressure ratio on the thrust
performance and nozzle geometry of optimal, fixed length, plug nozzles. The results of other
parametric studies are presented in ref.[3].
Design of maximum thrust plug nozzles with variable inlet geometry 183

20

IO

~ITER=6'8" •ITER=2 / .-'~

~ o

-I0

2 4 6 8 I0 12
AXIAL DISTANCE,x ~ (inches)
Fig. 5. Wall angle behavior.

12

10q

O
9

D._ O
O O O O O
8 8

I I I
D 2 4 6
ITERATION
Fig. 6. Cowl lip radius behavior.
184 GEAROLD R JOHNSON, H. DOYLE THOMPSONand JOE D HOFFMAN

In this section, the thrust performance and the nozzle geometry of maximum thrust plug
nozzles designed for a fixed length are compared with the thrust and nozzle geometry of the
corresponding perfect plug nozzle. The perfect plug nozzle, as defined here, is a plug nozzle
that terminates in a vertex on the x axis and produces parallel uniform exit flow at an exit
pressure equal to the ambient pressure. For purposes of comparison, the corresponding
perfect plug nozzle is designed for the same mass flow rate, chamber conditions, thermo-
dynamic properties and ambient pressure as employed to determine the optimal fixed length
nozzle.
For a perfect plug nozzle, the minimum nozzle length, the cowl lip radius and the total
axial thrust produced can be calculated from one-dimensional gas dynamic relationships.
Since the perfect plug nozzle expands to the ambient pressure, the Mach number M can be
obtained from the isentropic pressure relationship. For a constant specific heat ratio 7 this
relationship is
M = ([2/(~ - 1)][(Po/Pa) ''z- 1,/~ _ 1])1/2 (33)
where (Po/Pa) is the design pressure ratio. Since the perfect plug nozzle produces parallel
uniform flow, the Mach number is a constant across the entire exit. For a perfect plug
nozzle that terminates in a vertex on the x-axis, the cowl lip radius can be obtained from the
one-dimensional continuity equation. For constant stagnation conditions Po and T o , gas
constant R, ratio of specific heats 7 and specified mass flow rate rh and pressure ratio, the
cowl lip radius is given by
t '' R 'o t 1''
YEP= [zMpaJ + (7--- iM 2]/2)} (34)

where the exit Mach number M is constant and IS obtained from equation (33). The length
of the perfect plug nozzle is given by
Lp = )'E,,(M 2 - 1) 1/2 (35)

where the length is defined to be the axial distance between the cowl hp and the vertex of the
plug contour. The total axial thrust produced by a perfect plug nozzle is given by
Tp = tiI([27RTo/(7 - 1)][1 - (pa/Po)t~-l)/~]) ~/2 (36)
where the subscript P on YE, L and T denotes a perfect plug nozzle. Equations (33)-(36) are
relatively simple to solve and provide a basis for nondimensionalizing the thrust, length
and cowl lip radius of fixed length, maximum thrust, plug nozzles.
The first study presents the effects of the specific heat ratio 7 on the thrust performance and
the nozzle geometry. The pressure ratio (Po/Pa) for this study was fixed at 34. An inlet Mach
number, I.e. the Mach number specified at point I in Fig. 2, of 1.03 was employed. The
results are for a constant chamber temperature T O of 6000 R and a gas constant R = 56
ft-lby/lb,, - R. A mass flow rate of 148.077 lbm/sec and a chamber pressure, Po -- 500 psia
were specified. The results of this study are presented in Figs. 7-9.
For a constant value of the specific heat ratio and the conditions specified above, the
length, the cowl hp radius and thrust of a perfect plug nozzle can be calculated from equa-
tions (33)-(36). Therefore, the reference values L v , Yep and Tp are constants for the above
conditions once a value of y is specified.
Figure 7 presents the nondlmensionahzed thrust ratio (T/Tp) vs the nondlmensionalized
nozzle length ratio (L/Lp) for specific heat ratios of 1.1, 1.23, and 1.4. Thrust ratios of
Design of maximum thrust plug nozzles with variable inlet geometry 185

I O0

7"=14 S
0 99

F_=
0 98 T :12 ~ PolPa=54

o_
~ 097
r~
F-
"1-
~- 0.96

095

0,2 i J I I r
oo 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
LENGTHRATrO,L/Lp
Fig. 7. Effect of length on thrust with 7 as a parameter.

12
~ ~--7:123

1.0 \ V
08
%/%=34
o~

~j06
>-

04

O0 I I I I I
0.0 0.2 04 06 0.8 1.0
L/Lp
Fig. 8. Effect of length on cowl hp radius with y as a'parameter.
186 GEAROLD R. JOHNSON, H DOYLE THOMPSON a n d JOE D. HOFFMAN

-70

~ " ~ y =I I

"~ -60
xJ
~ " ~ 7= 123

'-50 ~ y = 1 4

~z - 4 0
po/PQ=34
-50

I [ I I I
O0 0.2 0 4 06 08 I0
L/Lp

Fig. 9. Effectof length on inject,on angle with y as a parameter.

optimal, fixed length, plug nozzles are shown for length ratios ranging from 20 to 100 per
cent of the perfect plug nozzle length. Results for plug nozzles shorter than 20 per cent are not
included because the base pressure prediction model is inaccurate for very short plugs and
results in unreasonably large base pressure predictions.
As illustrated in Fig. 7 for a ~ of 1.23 and a length ratio of 50 per cent, the optimal plug
nozzle develops a thrust of 99.6 per cent of the ideal thrust. For the same ~, and a length
ratio of 20 per cent, the optimal plug nozzle develops a thrust of 97.6 per cent of the ideal
thrust. It appears, therefore, that very short optimal plug nozzles can be effectively utilized
at the expense of only a small loss in available axial thrust. As also shown in Fig. 7, the
thrust ratio for optimal, fixed length, plug nozzles increases as ~ increases.
In Fig. 8 the cowl lip radius ratio (YE/YEp)is plotted versus the length ratio with y as a
parameter. For a fixed ~ the cowl lip radius goes through a minimum as the length is de-
creased. The base pressure model and the ambient pressure determine the shape of the cowl
lip radius curve as a function of the nozzle length. The larger the base pressure acting on the
plug base the larger the thrust contribution due to the base pressure, and, therefore, the
plug base radius increases. When the thrust contribution due to the base pressure becomes
larger than the thrust loss due to the ambient pressure, the plug radius increases without
hmit. For very short plug nozzles the present base pressure model predicts very large base
pressures and, as a consequence, the cowl lip radius increases rapidly for very short nozzles.
For this reason, the present solution yields an infinite cowl lip radius when the ambient
pressure is zero.
For the base pressure model and the ambient pressure used m this study, the cowl lip
radius is within _ 5 per cent of the perfect plug nozzle cowl lip radius for optimal, fixed
length, plug nozzles ranging from 25-100 per cent of the perfect plug length. Thus, for a
wide range of optimal plug nozzle lengths, the cowl lip radius is nearly constant. Only for
very short plug nozzles does the cowl lip radius differ markedly from the perfect plug nozzle.
Figure 9 presents the injection angle versus the length ratio for the same optimal nozzles
 Design of maximum thrust plug nozzles with variable inlet geometry 187

of Figs. 7 and 8, where the injection angle has been defined as the wall slope (also the flow
angle) at p o i n t / i n Fig. 2. Figure 9 shows the injection angle is nearly constant for the nozzle
length ratios shown. The effect of 7 is much more pronounced. For a fixed length, as 7
decreases the more the flow is initially directed radially inwards, i.e. the more negative the
injection angle.
Figures 10, 11 and 12 present similar results with the pressure ratio as a parameter for a
constant value of 7 = 1.23. Again, an inlet Mach number of 1.03 was specified.
Figure 10 presents the thrust ratio versus the nozzle length raUo for pressure ratios of 12,
34 and 100. As illustrated, the thrust ratio for an optimal, fixed length, nozzle increases as
the pressure ratio increases. Figure 11 presents the cowl lip radius ratio versus the length
ratio for the same values of the pressure ratio. As shown, the cowl lip radius ratio is not
very sensitive to the pressure ratio for the nozzle lengths presented. The injection angle is
presented versus the length ratio in Fig. 12. As the pressure ratio increases the more the flow
is initially directed radially inwards.
The purpose of the third study is to determine the effect of the base pressure on the
optimal, fixed length, plug nozzle. The base pressure prediction model employed in the
previous studies is of the form

Pb = 0"846 p r / M F 1 3 (37)

wherepF and M r are the pressure and the Mach number at point F(see Fig. 2). It should be
noted that equation (37) is a rather crude model for the base pressure, however, it should be
pointed out that the form of the base pressure model does not affect the analysis method,
but it certainly affects the result for a particular nozzle. Experimental measurements of base
pressure have been made by Mueller[9, 10] and these relationships could be substituted into

1.0
o,0ooOO-
Po,'po=34

.99

G
rr
7--125

.9~
rr
"r

96t
O0 I I I I I
o 2 0.4 o6 o.e Lo
LENGTH RATIO, L/Lp

Fig. 10. Effect of length on thrust with pressure ratio as a parameter.

188 GEAROLD R JOHNSON, H. DOYLE THOMPSON and JOE D HOFFMAN

12
~k V Po/Po = I00

IO

08
k~ i^iPo= 12

>, 7 = 1.23
06
w

04

02

0.0 ] J I I t
O0 02 04 06 08 I0
L/Lp

Fig. 11. Effect of length on cowl hp radius with pressure ratio as a parameter,

Po/Po = lO0

-70'
Po/Pa= 34

,-~ -60
s
'~ -50 P o / P=12
a

g
C----40

T=123
z _ 30

0 00•0 02
I
04
I

L/Lp
06
I
08
I I
1,0

Fig. 12. Effect of length on rejection angle with pressure raUo as a parameter
 Design of maximum thrust plug nozzles with varmble inlet geometry 189

the present analysis. To determine the effect of the base pressure, the constant in the numera-
tor of equation (37) was perturbed +25 per cent.
The baseline plug nozzle employed in this section was designed for the following condi-
tions: Po = 500 psia, T O = 6000 R, R = 56 ft-lbs/lb m - R, ~ = 1.23, rn = 148.077 lbm/sec,
plug length IF of 5.9 in and an ambient pressure of 14-7 psia. The inlet Mach number was
specified at a value of 1.03. For this optimal plug nozzle, the axial thrust contribution due
to the base pressure is 3 per cent. Since the thrust contribution of the base pressure is 3 per
cent, a + 10 per cent change in the base pressure would result in a +0.3 per cent change in
the axial thrust. The performance improvement is only 0.05 per cent for a 10 per cent change
in the effective base pressure for optimal plug nozzles designed for the same inlet conditions
but employing the perturbed base pressure prediction models. Therefore, when the thrust
contribution of the base region is small, the axial thrust produced by the nozzle is relatively
insensitive to the base pressure.
As illustrated in Fig. 13, the nozzle geometry is not nearly as insensitive to the effective
base pressure. As the base pressure increases the plug nozzle size increases in the radial
direction and for decreasing base pressure the optimal nozzle decreases in the radial direc-
tion. The optimal nozzle geometry appears to be quite sensitive to the base pressure predic-
tion model.
The results presented are typical of the type of result that can be obtained from the com-
puter program developed during this study. Other studies are, of course, possible. Studies
similar to those presented here could include the effect of variations in the stagnation pres-
sure and enthalpy across the flow, the effect of a more realistic base pressure model on the
design of very short plug nozzles and the effects of different design constraints.

0 5 7 5 P F / M F I'a

- - P b = 0 8 4 6 P F / M F ~3

Pb = 0 . 6 3 4 5 PF / M F ~ a

_8

=-6
bJ

09
4

Y=123

Po/po = 3 4

I I I
2 4 6 8
AXIAL DISTANCE, x ~ (inches)

Fig. 13. Effect of base pressure on plug contour shape.

190 GEAROLD R JOHNSON, H DOYLE THOMPSONand JOE D HOFFMAN

CONCLUSIONS
The results o f three p a r a m e t r i c studies were presented to illustrate how various design
p a r a m e t e r s affect the destgn o f m a x i m u m thrust plug nozzles. The conclusions based u p o n
these studies are as follows.
(1) Plug nozzles are capable o f very g o o d theoretical performance.
(2) Short o p t i m a l plug nozzles can be effectively utihzed at the expense o f only a rela-
tively small loss m available axial thrust.
(3) The geometry (particularly the cowl lip radius) o f o p t i m a l fixed length plug nozzles ts
sensitive to the base pressure, a n d therefore, an accurate base pressure prediction
model is essential to a reahstic design.
(4) The inlet rejection angle o f o p t i m a l nozzles is a function o f b o t h the pressure ratlo
a n d the specific heat ratio a n d is highly sensitive to b o t h parameters.
(5) The present design p r o g r a m is h m i t e d to finite pressure ratios ( a m b i e n t pressure must
be greater t h a n zero) a n d lengths greater than a p p r o x i m a t e l y 20 per cent o f the
c o r r e s p o n d i n g perfect plug nozzle length. The removal o f these limitations requires a
m o r e accurate base pressure prediction model.
(6) The design procedure described here has the potential to be extended in a straight-
f o r w a r d m a n n e r to include the effects o f base bleed, chemically reacting flows, b o a t
tatl drag, a n d other effects not specifically considered here. In addxtlon, other nozzle
geometries such as a n n u l a r t h r o a t nozzles, e x p a n s i o n - d e f l e c t i o n nozzles a n d their
three-dimensional counterparts could be treated.

REFERENCES
1. Guderley K G and Armltage J V, General Approach to Optimum Rocket Nozzles, Chap. 11, Theory oJ
Opnmum Aerodynamw Shapes Academic Press, New York (1965)
2. Hoffman J. D , Scofield M P and Thompson H D , Thrust Nozzle Optimization Including Boundary-
layer Effects, J. Opt. Theory Apphcattons 10, 133-159 (1972)
3. Johnson G. R , Ph.D DlssertaUon, Purdue University (1972).
4 Moore A. W and Hall J. M , Transomc Flow In the Throat Region of an Annular Nozzle with an
Arbitrary Smooth Profile, Aeronau. Res Coun. Report 26-543 (1965).
5. Hopkins D F and Hill D E , Transonic Flox~ In Unconventional Nozzles, AIAA J 6, 838-842 (1968).
6. Chapman D. R , An Analysis of Base Pressure at Supersomc Veloemes and Comparison with Experi-
ments, NACA TR-1051 (1951)
7. Korst H. H , A Theory for Base Pressure m Transomc and Supersomc Flow, J Appl Mech. 23, 593-600
(1956).
8 Johnson G R., Thompson H D and Hoffman J. D Design of Maximum Thrust Plug Nozzles wtth
Vartable Inlet Geometry, Vol 2, Computer program manual, Air Force Aero Propulsion Laboratory,
AFAPL-TR-70-75 (1971)
9. Mueller T. J. Determination of the Turbulent Base Pressure m Supersonic Axisymmetnc Flow, J Space-
craft and Rockets, 5, 101-107 (1968)
10. Hall C. R. and Mueller T. J Exploratory Analysis of Nonuniform Plug Nozzle Flowfields, J Space-
craft and Rockets 9, 337-342 (1972)