Homework 2, part 2! ii) Calculate and plot design spike contour,

Similar documents
Design And Analysis Of Thrust Chamber Of A Cryogenic Rocket Engine S. Senthilkumar 1, Dr. P. Maniiarasan 2,Christy Oomman Jacob 2, T.

Departures from Ideal Performance for Conical Nozzles and Bell Nozzles, Straight-Cut Throats and Rounded Throats Charles E. Rogers

Basic Ascent Performance Analyses

PROPULSIONE SPAZIALE. Chemical Rocket Propellant Performance Analysis

Propulsion Systems Design MARYLAND. Rocket engine basics Survey of the technologies Propellant feed systems Propulsion systems design

Propulsion Systems Design MARYLAND. Rocket engine basics Solid rocket motors Liquid rocket engines. Hybrid rocket engines Auxiliary propulsion systems

Rocket Science 102 : Energy Analysis, Available vs Required

Homework # cm. 11 cm cm. 100 cm. MAE Propulsion Systems, II

Multistage Rocket Performance Project Two

Propulsion Systems Design

Applied Thermodynamics - II

3. Write a detailed note on the following thrust vector control methods:

Propulsion and Energy Systems. Kimiya KOMURASAKI, Professor, Dept. Aeronautics & Astronautics, The University of Tokyo

Trajectory Code Validation Slides

AAE SOLID ROCKET PROPULSION (SRP) SYSTEMS

Rocket Propulsion. Combustion chamber Throat Nozzle

Civil aeroengines for subsonic cruise have convergent nozzles (page 83):

Rocket Performance MARYLAND U N I V E R S I T Y O F. Rocket Performance. ENAE 483/788D - Principles of Space Systems Design

Propulsion Systems Design MARYLAND. Rocket engine basics Survey of the technologies Propellant feed systems Propulsion systems design

MARYLAND. Rocket engine basics Survey of the technologies Propellant feed systems Propulsion systems design U N I V E R S I T Y O F

Rockets, Missiles, and Spacecrafts

Rocket Propulsion Basics Thrust

Computational Fluid Dynamics Analysis of Advanced Rocket Nozzle

Concurrent Trajectory and Vehicle Optimization for an Orbit Transfer. Christine Taylor May 5, 2004

Rocket Performance MARYLAND U N I V E R S I T Y O F. Rocket Performance. ENAE 483/788D - Principles of Space Systems Design

Shen Ge ECAPS LLC. Yvonne Vigue-Rodi Adelante Sciences Corporation May 6, 2016 AIAA Houston Annual Technical Symposium

Mass Estimating Relationships MARYLAND. Review of iterative design approach Mass Estimating Relationships (MERs) Sample vehicle design analysis

Fundamentals of Gas Dynamics (NOC16 - ME05) Assignment - 10 : Solutions

Rocket Performance MARYLAND U N I V E R S I T Y O F. Rocket Performance. ENAE 483/788D - Principles of Space Systems Design

1. (a) Describe the difference between over-expanded, under-expanded and ideallyexpanded

Engineering Sciences and Technology. Trip to Mars

A Computational Study on the Thrust Performance of a Supersonic Pintle Nozzle

A little more about costing Review of iterative design approach Mass Estimating Relationships (MERs) Sample vehicle design analysis

Numerical Design of Plug Nozzles for Micropropulsion Applications

SOLUTIONS MANUAL. ROCKET PROPULSION ELEMENTS, 8 th EDITION. By George P. Sutton and Oscar Biblarz. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Technology of Rocket

LAUNCH SYSTEMS. Col. John Keesee. 5 September 2003

Gravity Turn Concept. Curvilinear Coordinate System Gravity Turn Manoeuvre concept Solutions for Constant Pitch Rate

Propulsion Systems Design

Learn From The Proven Best!

The Interstellar Boundary Explorer (IBEX) Mission Design: A Pegasus Class Mission to a High Energy Orbit

Rocket Performance MARYLAND U N I V E R S I T Y O F. Rocket Performance. ENAE Launch and Entry Vehicle Design

A trendsetting Micro-Launcher for Europe

Modelling Nozzle throat as Rocket exhaust

Lecture with Numerical Examples of Ramjet, Pulsejet and Scramjet

Altitude Dependence of Rocket Motor Performance

Satellite Orbital Maneuvers and Transfers. Dr Ugur GUVEN

DEVELOPMENT OF A COMPRESSED CARBON DIOXIDE PROPULSION UNIT FOR NEAR-TERM MARS SURFACE APPLICATIONS

One-Dimensional Isentropic Flow

Satellite Engineering

Rocket Performance MARYLAND U N I V E R S I T Y O F. Rocket Performance. ENAE Launch and Entry Vehicle Design

Rocket Performance MARYLAND U N I V E R S I T Y O F. Ballistic Entry ENAE Launch and Entry Vehicle Design

SOLAR ROCKET PROPULSION Ground and Space Technology Demonstration. Dr. Michael Holmes, AFRL/PRSS

How Small Can a Launch Vehicle Be?

AIAA SCORES: Web-Based Rocket Propulsion Analysis for Space Transportation System Design

Solid Rocket Motor Internal Ballistics Using a. Least-Distance Surface-Regression Method

MODELING & SIMULATION OF ROCKET NOZZLE

IX. COMPRESSIBLE FLOW. ρ = P

MagBeam: R. Winglee, T. Ziemba, J. Prager, B. Roberson, J Carscadden Coherent Beaming of Plasma. Separation of Power/Fuel from Payload

Section 8: Getting Things into Space: Rockets and Launch Requirements

Richard Nakka's Experimental Rocketry Web Site

A COMPARISON OF NUCLEAR THERMAL ROCKETS WITH TRADITIONAL CHEMICAL ROCKETS FOR SPACE TRANSPORT. Joshua T. Hanes

Chapter 7 Rocket Propulsion Physics

Variations of Solid Rocket Motor Preliminary Design for Small TSTO launcher

Astrodynamics (AERO0024)

Numerical Investigation of Supersonic Nozzle Producing Maximum Thrust For Altitude Variation

Richard Nakka's Experimental Rocketry Web Site

Investigation of Combined Airbreathing/Rocket. Air Launch of Micro-Satellites from a Combat Aircraft

Section 4.1: Introduction to Jet Propulsion. MAE Propulsion Systems II

Parametric Design MARYLAND. The Design Process Regression Analysis Level I Design Example: Project Diana U N I V E R S I T Y O F.

AAE 251 Formulas. Standard Atmosphere. Compiled Fall 2016 by Nicholas D. Turo-Shields, student at Purdue University. Gradient Layer.

Characteristics of some monopropellants (Reprinted from H. Koelle, Handbook of Astronautical Engineering, McGraw-Hill, 1961.)

PROBLEM SCORE Problem 1 (30 Pts) Problem 2 (30 Pts) Choose Problem #2 or #3! Problem 4 (40 Pts) TOTAL (100 Pts)

Study of Required Thrust Profile Determination of a Three Stages Small Launch Vehicle

Experimental Study of Dual Bell Nozzles

Launch Vehicles! Space System Design, MAE 342, Princeton University! Robert Stengel

Rocket Thermodynamics

MONTANA STATE UNIVERSITY DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING. EMEC 426 Thermodynamics of Propulsion Systems. Spring 2017

Performance Characterization of Supersonic Retropropulsion for Application to High-Mass Mars Entry, Descent, and Landing

USA Space Debris Environment, Operations, and Policy Updates

Parametric Design MARYLAND. The Design Process Level I Design Example: Low-Cost Lunar Exploration U N I V E R S I T Y O F

COMPUTATIONAL ANALYSIS OF CD NOZZLE FOR SOLID PROPELLANT ROCKET

Please welcome for any correction or misprint in the entire manuscript and your valuable suggestions kindly mail us

MONTANA STATE UNIVERSITY DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING. EMEC 426 Thermodynamics of Propulsion Systems. Spring 2018

The motion of a Rocket

Internal and External Flow of Rocket Nozzle

Design and Optimization of De Lavel Nozzle to Prevent Shock Induced Flow Separation

MAE 180A: Spacecraft Guidance I, Summer 2009 Homework 4 Due Thursday, July 30.

INFLUENCE OF NOZZLE GEOMETRY ON THE PERFORMANCE OF RECTANGULAR, LINEAR, SUPERSONIC MICRO-NOZZLES

Prediction of Transient Deflector Plate Temperature During Rocket Plume Impingment and its Validation through Experiments

ENAE 483: Principles of Space System Design Loads, Structures, and Mechanisms

General Remarks and Instructions

PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS OF AN ELECTRON POSITRON ANNIHILATION ROCKET

Mission to Mars. MAE 598: Design Optimization Final Project. By: Trevor Slawson, Jenna Lynch, Adrian Maranon, and Matt Catlett

Multidisciplinary mission design optimization for space launch vehicles based on sequential design process

Solar Thermal Propulsion

Flow Analysis and Optimization of Supersonic Rocket Engine Nozzle at Various Divergent Angle using Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD)

SECOND VEGA LAUNCH FROM THE GUIANA SPACE CENTER

Powered Space Flight

proptools Documentation

Transcription:

Homework 2, part 2! 1) For Aerospike Nozzle use Sonic Throat section, assume axi-symmetric design, full spike length.. For Aerospike Nozzle use Sonic Throat section, assume axisymmetric. design, full spike length.. Design a Conical aerospike nozzle replacement for the RS-27A Nozzle i) First Compare RS-27A Nozzle Length with minimum length nozzle of same expansion ratio (assume conical nozzle with 15.2503:1 expansion ratio,! θ exit = 30.5 deg.). Plot both Contours! ii) Calculate and plot design spike contour, iii) Calculate design altitude for this expansion ratio and plot design mach number and pressure profile along spike, assume 15.2503:1 expansion ratio and chamber properties identical to RS-27A! iv) Plot delivered Thrust and I sp as a function of altitude for RS-27a Stage stage 1a: 0 to 16.31 km altitude (RS-27A + 3 x Gem40) stage 1b: 16.31 km altitude 105.52 km altitude (RS-27A) Assume conventional Nozzles for Gem-40 boosters 1!

Homework 2 (2)! iv) Calculate mean I sp over the operating range of the First stage (use above generated data) Use 2/3rds rule Stage 1a Stage 1b Use I sp ( ) eff = 2 3 # % $ ( I sp )Rs 27 A+ 3x Gem40 & ( ' launch + 1 # 3 % I sp $ & ( )Rs 27 A+ ( 3x Gem40 ' Gem40 Burnout Use ( I sp ) eff = 2 ( 3 I sp ) R2 27 A initial (16.31km) + 1 3 I sp ( ) R2 27 A final (105.52km) v) Re-work delta II Homework problem (HW 2) using new mean I sp s for stage 1a and 1b with the RS-27A aerospike nozzle compare to earlier results using standard conical nozzle for stage 1 assume conventional nozzles for Both Gem-40 and AJ10-118 Second Stage Engine 2!

3-D Nozzle Algorithm" Aerospike Nozzle! tanφ x = R e R x X x φ x = ν e ν x + µ x X x = R x = R exit R exit R x ( ) tan ν e ν x + µ x 1 sin ( ν ν + µ e x x ) ε.' 2 * ( ) γ + 1+, ' 0 1+ γ 1 2 M x ( ) / 2 γ +1 * 1 2( γ 1) +, 3 2 sin ( µ ) x = 1 M x 3!

Stage 1 Properties! Boeing Delta II Rocket Stage 1!!- Sea Level Thrust: 890kN!!- Vacuum Thrust: 1085.8 kn!!- Nozzle Expansion Ratio: 15.2503:1!!- Conical Nozzle, 30.5 deg exit angle! Combustion Properties:! (RS-27A Rocketdyne Engine)!!- Lox/Kerosene, Mixture Ratio: 2.24:1!!- Chamber Pressure (P 0 ): 5161.463 kpa!!- Combustion temperature (T 0 ): 3455 K!!- γ = 1.2220!!- M W = 21.28 kg/kg-mol! - Propellant Mass: 97.08 Metric Tons! - Stage 1 Launch Mass: 101.8 Metric Tons! 4!

Include 2-D Spike Contour on Plot!! 3-D flow! relief effect! Allows conical! Aerospike to! turn corner! faster than 2-D! spike and still! preserve isentropic! flow! 14!

Spike Design Characteristics! iii) Calculate design altitude for this expansion ratio and plot design mach number and pressure profile along spike, assume 15.2503:1 expansion ratio and chamber properties identical to RS-27A! 5!

Compare RS-27A Nozzle to Minimum Length Nozzle! Slight Thrust! For Minimum Length! Nozzle Due to Higher! Exit Angle! Launch Thrust,! I sp Levels! 6!

Compare RS-27A Nozzle to Aerospike Nozzle! 7!

Spike Design Characteristics (1)! At Design Condition! Design! Sea Level! Vacuum! 8!

Spike Ramp Characteristics (1)! 9!

Nozzle Comparison Summary! Launch Thrust, knt Vacuum Thrust, kn Design Thrust, knt Launch I sp, sec Vacuum I sp, sec Design Isp, sec Length, cm RS-27A Normal Nozzle! RS-27A Minimum Length Nozzle! RS-27A Full Aerospike Nozzle! RS-27A Truncated Aerospike Nozzle, 61. 1% (RS-27A Length) 890.0 1085.8 1018.7 247.0 301.3 282.7 107.3 844.6 1040.4 973.3 234.4 288.7 270.3 83.8 965.7 1161.5 1094.4 268.0 322.3 303.7 276.6 953.8 1148.8 1082.6 264.7 318.8 300.4 107.6 RS-27A Truncated Aerospike Nozzle, 69.7% (Minimum Length) 945.7 1140.7 1074.49 262.4 316.6 298.2 83.8 Spike Wins all Around!! 10!

Spike Performance Comparisons (1)!! 11!

Delta II Launch Analysis! iv) Plot delivered Thrust and I sp as a function of altitude for RS-27a Stage stage 1a: 0 to 16.31 km altitude (RS-27A + 3 x Gem40) stage 1b: 16.31 km altitude 105.52 km altitude (RS-27A) Assume conventional Nozzles for Gem-40 boosters, full aerospike for RS-27A! Stage 1a! Full Aerospike Nozzle Thrust, I sp at Sea Level:!!!965.7 knt, 268.0 sec Aerospike Nozzle Thrust, I sp at 16.31 km (P amb = 9.797 kpa):!!!1142.6 knt, 317.1 sec! Nozzle Mass Flow: 367.445 kg/sec! 12!

Stage 1a (4)! vi) Effective Specific Impulse!! (3 x Gem 40 + RS-27A/w aerospike over operating altitude range!!!! ( I ) sp launch = F + 3 F RS 27 A Gem40 ( I sp )Gem = 253.4sec! 40 burnout = = 289.8sec! ( ) launch g 0 ( ) = m RS 27 A + 3 m Gem40 ( F RS 27 A + 3 F Gem40 )Gem40 burnout g 0 m RS 27 A + 3 m Gem40 ( ) = ( I ) sp eff = 2 3 " $ # = 265.5 sec! ( I sp )Rs 27 A+ 3x Gem40 % ' & Launch + 1 " 3 $ I sp # % ( )Rs 27 A+ ' 3x Gem40 & Gem40 Burnou = 13!

Delta II Launch Analysis! iv) Plot delivered Thrust and I sp as a function of altitude for RS-27a Stage stage 1a: 0 to 16.31 km altitude (RS-27A + 3 x Gem40) stage 1b: 16.31 km altitude 105.52 km altitude (RS-27A) Assume conventional Nozzles for Gem-40 boosters, full aerospike for RS-27A! Stage 1b! Aerospike Nozzle Vacuum Thrust, I sp :!!!1161.5 knt, 322.3.0 sec ( I ) sp eff = 2 3 "( I ) # sp R2 27 A $ % Gem40 Burnou + 1 "( 3 I ) # sp R2 27 A $ % R2 27 A MECO = = 318.8 sec! 14!

Required versus Available Delta V! At $250/oz! You just saved! ~$4.5 Mil! On Payload! Aerospike! 2688 kg! Original! 2175 kg!

Delta II Launch Analysis! iv) Plot delivered Thrust and I sp as a function of altitude for RS-27a Stage stage 1a: 0 to 16.31 km altitude (RS-27A + 3 x Gem40) stage 1b: 16.31 km altitude 105.52 km altitude (RS-27A) Assume conventional Nozzles for Gem-40 boosters, full aerospike for RS-27A! Stage 1a! 61.1% Aerospike Nozzle Thrust, I sp at Sea Level:!!!953.8 knt, 264.7 sec Aerospike Nozzle Thrust, I sp at 16.31 km (P amb = 9.797 kpa):!!!1130.9 knt, 313.825 sec! Nozzle Mass Flow: 367.445 kg/sec! 16!

Stage 1a (4)! vi) Effective Specific Impulse for 61.1% Truncated Nozzle!! (3 x Gem 40 + RS-27A/w aerospike over operating altitude range!!!! ( I ) sp launch = F + 3 F RS 27 A Gem40 ( I sp )Gem = 252.1sec! 40 burnout = = 288.5sec! ( ) launch g 0 ( ) = m RS 27 A + 3 m Gem40 ( F RS 27 A + 3 F Gem40 )Gem40 burnout g 0 m RS 27 A + 3 m Gem40 ( ) = ( I ) sp eff = 2 3 " $ # = 264.2 sec! ( I sp )Rs 27 A+ 3x Gem40 % ' & Launch + 1 " 3 $ I sp # % ( )Rs 27 A+ ' 3x Gem40 & Gem40 Burnou = 17!

Delta II Launch Analysis! iv) Plot delivered Thrust and I sp as a function of altitude for RS-27a Stage stage 1a: 0 to 16.31 km altitude (RS-27A + 3 x Gem40) stage 1b: 16.31 km altitude 105.52 km altitude (RS-27A) Assume conventional Nozzles for Gem-40 boosters, full aerospike for RS-27A! Stage 1b! Aerospike Nozzle Vacuum Thrust, I sp :!!!1148.8 knt, 318.8 sec 61.1% truncated nozzle! ( I ) sp eff = 2 3 "( I ) # sp R2 27 A $ % Gem40 Burnou + 1 "( 3 I ) # sp R2 27 A $ % R2 27 A MECO = = 315.5 sec! 18!

Required vs. Available Delta V! 61.1% Aerospike! 2600 kg! Original! 2175 kg! Still a reasonable $4 mil! gain!!

Examples: Current (2007) Launch Costs to LEO Soyuz booster ( Soyuz spacecraft, Progress) LEO (200 km) Payload: 7,000 kg; Launch vehicle price:$37.5 million; Payload cost: $5,357 per kilogram. ($151.9/oz) Space Transportation System (Space Shuttle) LEO Payload: 28,803 kg; Launch vehicle price (estimated, pre-columbia ): $300 million, Payload cost: $10,416 per kilogram ($295.4/oz) Post-Columbia, $1 billion per launch, Payload cost: $34,718 per kilogram Proton (ISS modules) LEO Payload: 19,760 kg; Launch vehicle price: $85 million; Payload cost: $4,302 per kilogram ($122.0/oz) Ariane 5ES (ATV vehicle) LEO Payload: 21,00 kg; Launch vehicle price: $176 million; Payload cost: $9,778 per kilogram ($277.6/oz) At $250/oz! You just saved! Zenit 2 LEO Payload: 13,740 kg; Launch vehicle price: $42,5 million; Payload cost: $3,093 per kilogram. ($87.7/oz) Space-X Falcon 9 LEO (185 mi) mission from CCAFS, 9,900 kg payload; Launch vehicle price: $35 million, Payload cost: $3,535 per kilogram. ($100.3/oz) Any way you slice it LEO Payload is worth Far More than its weight in pure Silver!