Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
ScienceDirect
AvailableScienceDirect
Available onlineatatwww.sciencedirect.com
online www.sciencedirect.com
Energy Procedia 00 (2017) 000–000

ScienceDirect
Energy Procedia 00 (2017) 000–000
ScienceDirect
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia

Energy
EnergyProcedia
Procedia141 (2017) 000–000
00 (2017) 267–272
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia

4th International Conference on Power and Energy Systems Engineering, CPESE 2017, 25-29
4th International Conference September
on Power and Energy
2017, Systems
Berlin, Engineering, CPESE 2017, 25-29
Germany
September 2017, Berlin, Germany
Modeling
Theof15ththe Turbulent
International Combustion
Symposium on Districtin Solid-fuel
Heating and Cooling Ramjet
Modeling of the Turbulent Combustion in Solid-fuel Ramjet
Assessing the feasibility
Lunkun Gongaa*, of XiongusingChenthe a
heatMusa
, Omer demand-outdoor
a

Lunkun Gong *, Xiong Chen , Omer Musaa a

temperature functionof Science
Nanjing a
University
a
for anda long-term
Technology, Nanjing, district heat
210094, People’s Republicdemand
of China
Nanjing University of Science and Technology, Nanjing, 210094, People’s Republic of China
forecast
I. Andrića,b,c*, A. Pinaa, P. Ferrãoa, J. Fournierb., B. Lacarrièrec, O. Le Correc
Abstract
a
IN+ Center for Innovation, Technology and Policy Research - Instituto Superior Técnico, Av. Rovisco Pais 1, 1049-001 Lisbon, Portugal
Abstract b
An in-house multi-physics Veolia Recherche
coupling code has&been Innovation, 291 Avenue
developed to solveDreyfous
the 3-DDaniel, 78520 Limay,
Navier-Stokes Francewith chemical reaction to
equations
c
Département Systèmes Énergétiques et Environnement - IMT Atlantique, 4 rue Alfred Kastler, 44300 Nantes, France
predict the unsteady
An in-house turbulent
multi-physics combustion
coupling code has in been
solid-fuel ramjet.
developed Firstly,
to solve thethe governing
3-D equations,
Navier-Stokes chemical
equations with reaction
chemicalmodels
reactionand
to
numerical
predict themethods
unsteadyare illustrated
turbulent in detail. in
combustion Then the flow
solid-fuel field of
ramjet. solid-fuel
Firstly, ramjet is analyzed.
the governing equations, The resultsreaction
chemical show that fuel-rich
models and
region
numericalexists near the
methods arefuel surfaceinand
illustrated oxygen-rich
detail. Then theregion existsofnear
flow field the central
solid-fuel ramjet axis. Finally, the
is analyzed. Thecalculated regression
results show rate is
that fuel-rich
compared
region
Abstract with
exists those
near the obtained
fuel with
surface andconnected-pipe
oxygen-rich test.
region The
existsgood
near agreement
the central demonstrates
axis. Finally, the
the predictive
calculated capability
regression of
ratethe
is
developed
compared code.
with those obtained with connected-pipe test. The good agreement demonstrates the predictive capability of the
©District
2017 The
developed Authors.
code.
heating Published
networks by Elsevier addressed
are by
commonly Ltd. in the literature as one of the most effective solutions for decreasing the
© 2017 The
Peer-review Authors.
under Published
responsibility of Elsevier
the Ltd. committee
organizing of CPESE 2017.
© 2017 The Authors.
greenhouse under Published
gas emissions by
from of Elsevier
thethe
buildingLtd.
sector. These ofsystems
Peer-review responsibility scientific committee the 4threquire high investments
International Conferencewhich are returned
on Power and Energythrough the heat
Peer-review
sales. Due
Systems under responsibility of the organizing committee of CPESE 2017.
to the changed climate conditions and building renovation policies, heat demand in the future could decrease,
Engineering.
Keywords: solid-fuel ramjet; multi-physics coupling code; regression rate; combustion characteristics
prolonging the investment return period.
Keywords: solid-fuel ramjet; multi-physics coupling code; regression rate; combustion characteristics
The main scope of this paper is to assess the feasibility of using the heat demand – outdoor temperature function for heat demand
forecast. The district of Alvalade, located in Lisbon (Portugal), was used as a case study. The district is consisted of 665
1.buildings
Introduction
that vary in both construction period and typology. Three weather scenarios (low, medium, high) and three district
1.renovation
Introduction
scenarios were developed (shallow, intermediate, deep). To estimate the error, obtained heat demand values were
Solid-fuel
compared withramjet (SFRJ)
results from is an heat
a dynamic attractive
demand air-breathing
model, previously propulsion
developedsystem due to
and validated its authors.
by the simple structure. The
Solid-fuel
schematic ramjet
diagram of (SFRJ)
solid-fuelis an attractive
ramjet is shown air-breathing
in Fig. 1. propulsion
The incoming system
air is
The results showed that when only weather change is considered, the margin of error could be acceptable due to
compressed itsbysimple
anfor structure.
airsome
intake The
system,
applications
schematic
then
(the mixes diagram
error in and
annual of
reacts solid-fuel
demandwithwas ramjet
the lower
solid is shown
fuel
than forinallFig.
pyrolysis
20% 1. The
products
weather inincoming air is compressed
the recirculation
scenarios considered). zone behind
However, by an
afterthe air intakerenovation
system,
backward-facing
introducing
then
step. mixes
scenarios, and
Downstream
the reacts
error of
value with
the the solid
up tofuel
reattachment
increased point,
59.5% pyrolysis products
the diffusion
(depending theinweather
on flame the recirculation
between the solid
and renovationzone
fuelbehind the products
pyrolysis
scenarios backward-facing
combination and the
considered).
The Downstream
step. valueair
incoming of exists
slope of
coefficient
nearthethe increased
reattachment
solid on average
point,
fuel surface. the within
In diffusion
the theflame
range between
aft-chamber, of
the3.8% up
thetosolid
unreacted 8% per
fueldecade,
mixed pyrolysis
gases thatcontinue
will corresponds
products and
to tothe
the
react,
decrease
incoming
which in
airthe
improves number
exists
the near ofthe
ramjet heating
solidhours of 22-139h
fuel surface.
combustion efficiency during
In [1]. the heating the
the aft-chamber, season (depending
unreacted on the
mixed combination
gases will continueof weather and
to react,
renovation
which
Theimprovesscenarios
combustion considered).
the ramjet
in SFRJ isOn
combustion the efficiency
other hand, [1].
diffusion-controlled, function
andintercept increasedhave
many studies for 7.8-12.7% per decade
been conducted to (depending
investigateonthethe
coupled scenarios).
The combustion in The values suggested could be
SFRJ is diffusion-controlled, used to modify the function parameters for the scenarios considered, and
diffusion-controlled combustion characteristics aimedand at many studies
improving have performances.
engine been conductedThe to effects
investigate the
of fuel
improve the accuracy of heat demand estimations.
diffusion-controlled combustion characteristics aimed at improving engine performances. The effects of fuel
© 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
Peer-review under responsibility of the Scientific Committee of The 15th International Symposium on District Heating and
* Corresponding author. Tel.: 86-025-84315605; fax: 86-025-84315605
Cooling.
E-mail address:glunkun@163.com
* Corresponding author. Tel.: 86-025-84315605; fax: 86-025-84315605
E-mail address:glunkun@163.com
Keywords: Heat demand; Forecast; Climate change
1876-6102 © 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
Peer-review
1876-6102 ©under
2017responsibility
The Authors. of the organizing
Published committee
by Elsevier Ltd. of CPESE 2017.
Peer-review under responsibility of the organizing committee of CPESE 2017.

1876-6102 © 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Peer-review under responsibility of the Scientific Committee of The 15th International Symposium on District Heating and Cooling.
1876-6102 © 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the 4th International Conference on Power and Energy
Systems Engineering.
10.1016/j.egypro.2017.11.104
268 Lunkun Gong et al. / Energy Procedia 141 (2017) 267–272
Lunkun Gong et al. / Energy Procedia 00 (2017) 000–000

components such as mental additives have been widely researched to increase the fuel regression rate [2-5]. Beside
the conventional tubular solid fuel, different non-conventional configurations have been explored to improve engine
performance [6, 7]. In the current theoretical investigations, beside the analysis based on traditional heat-transfer
theory [1,8], Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) has been a useful tool in predicting the diffusion-controlled
combustion, which allows experimental tests to be conducted only in the last period of real project, reducing
research cost and shorten research cycle. In 1990s, Elands et al. [9] developed a computer code called COPPEF
describing the flow and combustion process in solid-fuel ramjet, in which k-epsilon turbulence model was applied in
combination with standard wall function. Finite-rate kinetics and diffusion flame model were implemented. In recent
years, various in-house codes and commercial softwares are both wildly employed to model the diffusion-controlled
combustion [10-12]. Due to the improvement of numerical methods and deeper understanding of the combustion
process of solid fuel, the combustion modeling of diffusion-combustion in solid-fuel ramjet is always proceeding.
In order to predict the combustion process in SFRJ, an in-house multi-physics coupling code is developed by
solving the Navier-Stokes governing equations coupled with continuity, energy and species transport equations in
the present research. Then the combustion characteristics of solid-fuel ramjet are investigated with the present code,
demonstrating the predictive capability of the developed code.

Fig. 1. Schematic diagram of solid-fuel ramjet.

2. Numerical method

2.1. Gas-phase governing equation

In the present investigation, three-dimensional equations are applied to model the combustion process in solid-
fuel ramjet. The gas-phase governing equations are expressed in the following form:


t 
UdV   Fc  ndS   Fv  ndS 
   SdV 
(1)

Where U is conservative vector, Fc is convective flux vector, Fv is viscous flux vector, S is chemical reaction
source term, in which the mass, momentum and energy source terms result from the fuel adding into the chamber
near the solid fuel surface due to pyrolysis of the solid fuel. These vectors are given by

0 
    u i   vj   w k   i   j   k 
u     xx 
 (  u 2  p ) i   uvj   uw k 
xy xz

   yx i   yy j   yz k 
v    uvi  (  v  p ) j   vw k
2   
U   Fc    Fv   zx i   zy j   zz k 
  w   uw i   vw j  (  w  p ) k 
2
 
E     x i   j   k 
       y z
E  p u i  E  p v j  E  p w k  
   c  c  c
  i    u i   vj   w k    Di i i   Di i j   Di i k 
 i  x y z 

i i
 Lunkun Gong et al. / Energy Procedia 141 (2017) 267–272 269
Lunkun Gong / Energy Procedia 00 (2017) 000–000

 S 
   T 6
c
 Su   
x u xx  v xy  w xz      Di hi i
 x x
S  i 1

S
v
  T 6
ci (2)
 Sw   
y u yx  v yy  w yz      Di hi
 y i 1 y
 
 S E   T 6
ci
  u zx  v zy  w zz      Di hi
  
z
z z
 wi  SC2 H 4 
i 1

Where i, j, k are the unit normal vectors in x, y and z directions, respectively.  , u, v, w, E, p and T represent density,
velocity components in x and y directions, energy, pressure, and temperature, respectively.  is viscous stress,  is
thermal conductivity,  i, Di, c, wi and hi (i=1,2,…,6) represent the density, diffusion coefficient, mass fraction, mass
source due to the gas-phase chemical reaction and enthalpy of unit mass of component i, respectively. The
turbulence model used in this study is k-ω SST model proposed by Menter [13].

2.2. Solid-phase governing equation

In the numerical investigation of solid-fuel ramjet, solid-fluid heat coupling method is used to obtain the fuel
surface temperature, therefore, the heat-conduction equation is solved to obtain the temperature of solid fuel. The
two-dimensional axisymmetric and three-dimensional solid-phase governing equations are expressed in the
following form：

 T T T
t 
c
sTs dV  (s x i  s y
 j  s
z
k )  ndS  s rS
 hs (3)

Where s , cs , s and hs represent the density, heat capacity, thermal conductivity and energy of unit mass of high-
density polyethylene (HDPE), respectively. The last terms in Eq. (3) represents the energy source due to the
regression of solid fuel.

2.3. Chemical reaction model

The chemical reactions in the chamber of solid-fuel ramjet are very complex, and it is very difficult to propose a
precise chemical reaction model. As the main products in the chamber are N2, CO, H2O, CO2, O2 [14], in this paper,
it is assumed that the only pyrolysis product of polyethylene is C2H4, and a simplified gas-phase reaction model [15]
is implemented, which is shown in Table 1.

Table 1. Chemistry reaction model of ethylene.

Reaction A (cm3•mol-1•s-1) n Ea (J/mol)
14
C2 H 4  O2  2CO  2 H 2 2.10×10 0 149779.2
2CO  O2  2CO2 3.48×1011 2 84261.5
20
2 H 2  O2  2 H 2O 3.00×10 -1 0.0

Where A is the pre-exponential factor, Ea is the activation energy, n is the temperature exponent. To model the
turbulence-chemistry interaction, the second-order moment turbulence-chemistry model proposed by Zhou [16] is
used in this work. The regression rate of solid fuel is usually expressed by Arrhenius empirical equation [17], the
pyrolysis rate of HDPE is given by

r  Apy exp( Eapy / RuTw ) (4)

Where Tw is the solid fuel surface temperature. The value of Eapy is 130KJ/mol, and the value of Apy is 8750m/s.
270 Lunkun Gong et al. / Energy Procedia 141 (2017) 267–272
Lunkun Gong et al. / Energy Procedia 00 (2017) 000–000

2.4. Numerical solution method

The finite-volume method is used to discretize the gas-phase governing equations. The third-order monotone
upstream centered scheme for conservation laws (MUSCL) is adopted for the convection term and Van Albada
limiting function is used to prevent the non-physical oscillations in the regions with large gradients, while the central
difference scheme is utilized for the viscous term. The convective flux through a cell face is obtained by
AUSMPW+ scheme. The lower upper symmetric Gauss-Seidel (LU-SGS) implicit method is applied to temporal
discretization for steady calculation, while the dual time-stepping method in conjunction with LU-SGS implicit
method is applied for unsteady calculation. The finite-volume method is also used to solve the heat conduction
equation. The central difference scheme is implemented to discretize the diffusion term. The explicit Euler method
is used for the temporal discretization.

3. Combustion characteristics of solid-fuel ramjet

3.1. Computational model

The computational models are shown in Fig. 2. As the computational model is axisymmetric, one eighth of the
whole flow field is selected as the computational domain. The length of solid fuel is 300mm, chamber inlet diameter
is 35mm and fuel port diameter is 70mm. The model contains 705256 multi-block hexahedral grids. The mesh is
clustered near the wall and solid fuel surface to resolve the large gradients of flow variables such as temperature and
turbulent kinetic energy. The distances of the first cells in the fluid domain from the solid fuel surface and adiabatic
walls are about 2×10-3mm, keeping y+=1~3, which meet the requirement of SST turbulence model.
In the simulation, the total computational time is 1.5s. At the beginning stage of the simulation, the ignition gas
flows into the chamber together with incoming air to ignite the solid fuel. The mass flow rate of ignition gas is
0.2kg/s and the total temperature is 2500K. The species of ignition gas are N2, H2O, CO2. After a period of 0.5s, the
mass flow rate of ignition gas is zero and only air flows into the chamber. As the present investigation simulates the
flight condition of Ma=2.0 at sea level, the total temperature of air is 540K and the mass flow rate is 0.3kg/s.

Fig. 2. Computational model.

3.2. Boundary condition

The boundary conditions are shown in Fig. 2. For inlet boundary, the mass flow rate and total temperature of the
incoming gas are specified. For the two sides of the computational domain, periodic boundary is employed. For
outlet boundary, the pressure is specified and other parameters are extrapolated from the interior of the physical
domain if the velocity at outlet is subsonic, while all variables are determined from the solution inside the domain if
the velocity is supersonic. For adiabatic wall, the velocity is zero and the gradients of other parameters are set to
zero. At the fluid-solid fuel interface, the fluid-solid heat coupling method is adopted, in which the heat flux and
temperature at the interface are equal for the gas-phase governing equations and solid-phase governing equation.
 Lunkun Gong et al. / Energy Procedia 141 (2017) 267–272 271
Lunkun Gong / Energy Procedia 00 (2017) 000–000

3.3. Boundary condition flow field characteristics

Fig. 3 shows the streamlines in the chamber, where the line color represents the temperature of mixed gas. A
recirculation zone exists obviously downstream of the step, where the incoming air mixes and combusts with the
fuel pyrolysis products. In the shear layer near the step, the incoming air combusts with the fuel-rich gases in the
recirculation zone in stoichiometric ratio, reaching the maximum temperature. In the redeveloped region, the
diffusion flame exists near the solid fuel surface.

Fig. 3 Streamlines in the chamber

Fig. 4 shows the radial profiles of temperature and species at two axial positions. In Fig. 4, △y denotes the
distance of cell center from the solid fuel surface. It can be seen that the profiles are similar at two different
positions. At △y=0.01m, a thin chemical reaction layer exists, where fuel and air mix and combust in stoichiometric
ratio, reaching the maximum temperature of about 2400K. Fuel-rich and air-rich gases exist at two sides of the zone.
C2H4 near the solid fuel surface diffuses to the chemical reaction zone, and O2 near the center axis diffuses to the
chemical reaction zone. The results are similar with the experimental results in [14].

Fig. 4 Radial distributions of temperature and species at (a) x=60mm and (b) x=250mm in the chamber

3.4. Regression rate distribution

Regression rate of solid fuel is a critical parameter affecting SFRJ performances, therefore, the comparison of the
calculated and experimental regression rates are carried out in the subsection. The regression rate distribution along
the axial direction is obtained with connected-pipe test. Fig. 5 presents the calculated and experimental regression
rates. The calculated and experimental trends of regression rate are similar. The regression rate increases firstly,
reaching the maximum value near the reattachment point, and then decreases gradually. Compared with the
experimental results, the calculated regression rate in recirculation zone increases more slowly, resulting in lower
value, while the regression rate in the redevelopment zone is 10% higher.
272 Lunkun Gong et al. / Energy Procedia 141 (2017) 267–272
Lunkun Gong et al. / Energy Procedia 00 (2017) 000–000

Fig. 5 Comparison of calculated and experimental regression rates

In conclusion, though the present code cannot predict the detailed chemical reaction process in the chamber due
to the simplified chemical reaction models, the comparison demonstrates that the developed codes can basically
predict the solid-fuel performances.

4. Conclusions

In the present paper, 3-D unsteady multi-physics coupling code is developed to predict solid-fuel ramjet
performances. The flow field of solid-fuel ramjet is investigated with the code. The results show that fuel-rich
region exists near the fuel surface and oxygen-rich region exists near the central axis, which is similar with previous
experimental results. Finally, the comparison of the calculated regression rates with the experimental results is
conducted. The good agreement demonstrates the predictive capability of the developed code.

References

[1] Krishnan S, George P, Solid fuel ramjet combustor design, Progress in aerospace sciences 1998; 3: 219-256.
[2] Sun X, Tian H, Yu N, et al. Regression rate and combustion performance investigation of aluminum metallized HTPB/98HP hybrid rocket
motor with numerical simulation, Aerospace science and technology 2015; 42: 287-286.
[3] Carmicino C, Sorge A R. Experimental investigation into the effect of solid-fuel additives on hybrid rocket performance, Journal of
propulsion and power 2015; 2: 699-713.
[4] Karabeyoglu M A, Altman D, Cantwell B J. Combustion of liquefying hybrid propellants: Part 1. General theory, Journal of propulsion and
power 2002; 3: 610-620.
[5] Kim S, Moon H, Kim J. Thermal characterizations of the paraffin wax low density polyethylene blends as a solid fuel, Thermochimica Acta
2015; 613: 9-16.
[6] Kim S, Kwon O C. Regression characteristics of the cylindrical multiport grain in hybrid rockets, Journal of propulsion and power 2013;
3:573-581.
[7] Whitmore S A, Walker S D. Engineering model for hybrid fuel regression rate amplification using helical ports, Journal of propulsion and
power 2017; 2: 398-407.
[8] Marxman G A. Boundary-layer combustion in propulsion, Symposium (International) on Combustion 1967; 1: 269-289.
[9] Elands P J M, Korting P A O G, Wijchers T. Comparison of combustion experiments and theory in polyethylene solid fuel ramjets, Journal of
propulsion and power 1990; 6:732-739.
[10] Mazzetti A, Barbante P. Numerical modeling of combustion processes in hybrid rocket engines, International journal of energetic materials
and chemical propulsion 2016; 3: 249-274.
[11] Merotto L, Mazzetti A. Numerical simulations of combustion processes in hybrid rocket engines using OpenFoam and COOLFluiD codes,
Proc. of 5th European Conference for Aeronautics and Space Sciences, Munich, July 1-5, 2013.
[12] Cai G, Zeng P, Li X. Scale effect of fuel regression rate in hybrid rocket motor, Aerospace Science and Technology 2013; 1: 141-146.
[13] Menter F R, Two equation eddy viscosity turbulence models for engineering application, AIAA Journal 1994; 8: 1598-1605.
[14] Schulte G, Pein R, and HÖgl A. Temperature and concentration measurements in a solid fuel ramjet combustion chamber, Journal of
Propulsion and Power 1987; 2: 114-120.
[15] Baurle R A, Mathur T, Gruber M R, Jackson K R. A numerical and experimental investigation of a scramjet combustor for hypersonic
missile applications, Proc. of 34th AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference and Exhibit, Cleveland, July 13-15,1998, 1998-3121.
[16] Zhou L X, Chen X L, Zheng C G. Second-order moment turbulence-chemistry models for simulating NOx formation in gas combustion,
Fuel 2000; 11:1289-1301.
[17] Chiaverini M J, Harting G C, Lu Y C. Pyrolysis behavior of hybrid-rocket solid fuels under rapid heating conditions, Journal of propulsion
and power 1999; 6: 888-895.