Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “LIQUID INJECTION”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 37 records · Page 2
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Modeling and Simulation of Tank Pressure Control using Zero-Boil Off Active Thermal Control for LOXSAT Technology Demonstration Mission

To-date, research and modeling of cryogenic fluid management technologies (CFM) for spaceflight has been limited to ground tests, short-duration zero-g simulations (e.g. drop towers), and small-scale experiments on-orbit. There has not been a large-scale flight demonstration of a flight-like system. As future NASA missions to take humans further from Earth will require large, in-space cryogenic propulsion vehicles, it is imperative to begin collecting flight data for these systems to accurately model and design future vehicles. To meet this goal, NASA awarded tipping point technology demonstration awards to Eta Space, Lockheed Martin, Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX), and United Launch Alliance (ULA) to demonstrate on-orbit storage and transfer of cryogenic propellant. For its award, Eta Space is developing LOXSAT-1. It is a small satellite that will be launched on a Rocket Lab Electron rocket. The spacecraft consists of a Rocket Lab Photon spacecraft bus with a primary payload of a spherical liquid oxygen (LOX) storage tank with thermodynamic control systems. The primary objective of the mission is to demonstrate zero-boil-off storage of liquid oxygen. To accomplish this objective, the payload is equipped with an active thermal control system fluid loop that consists of propellant management device (PMD), positive-displacement pump, heat exchanger connected to a cryocooler, and a spray bar mixing injector. When the fluid loop is operating, fluid is drawn from the tank by the PMD and pumped through the heat exchanger, lowering the fluid temperature below the fluid temperature in the tank. This subcooled liquid is then injected back into the tank through the spray bar. The subcooled injected liquid has two effects. If it is sprayed into the ullage space, the injected liquid will form into jets or droplets and exchange heat with the ullage gas. This will cool and condense the gas, reducing the pressure in the tank. Additionally, the liquid that is not sprayed through the ullage, as well as any remaining liquid spray from the ullage, will rejoin the liquid mass of the tank, lowering the bulk temperature of the liquid. These combines effects provide for zero-boil off pressure control by lowering the tank pressure and the liquid saturation pressure simultaneously, ensuring the liquid stays subcooled. To model these complex mechanics and predict the performance of the active thermal control system, NASA is providing Eta Space with 3 parallel models of the tank. The approach of providing 3 different models allows for cross-checking and comparisons between the three to better understand how different modeling assumptions and selection semi-empirical factors affects the modeling result. Additionally, developing 3 models provides three different schemes for numerical simulation, providing confidence that results depict real physical phenomenon and not numerical quirks of the program. Within the tank thermodynamics, there are two primary areas of heat transfer we concern ourselves with: the heat transfer between the ullage space and the droplet spray, and between the ullage space and bulk liquid. For the droplet heat transfer, there are multiple sets of assumptions that can be made and correlations that can be used. Currently, two working models - the TankSIM model and Easy5 model – provide for an overview of the different approaches available. The TankSIM model and Easy5 model use two different models for droplet heating and evaporation that illustrate how the models use different types of mechanisms to arrive at the same answer. For the TankSIM model, droplets are treated as spheres of constant radius. Heat is transferred from the ullage to the droplet and warms the droplet until it reaches saturation, then the droplet begins evaporating and reducing its radius and mass. To calculate the heat transfer coefficient between the droplet and ullage, the Ranz-Marshall correlation is used. To determine the number of droplets in the ullage, a resident mass approach is used. This approach averages the number of droplets such that residuals at the start-up and shut-off of the spray bar cancel out. This same approach is used in the Easy5 model. The GFSSP model implements a linked list to track individual droplet “nodes” within the model. For the Easy5 model, the droplet is assumed to have an interface at a temperature equal to the saturation temperature corresponding to the pressure of the gas phase. The heat transfer from the gas to the interface and the interface to the droplet bulk is then calculated, and the net mass transfer between the droplet and interface is determined by performing an energy balance across the interface. For the gas side of the interface, the Ranz-Marshall correlation is used. For the liquid side of the interface, a variety of correlations were tried, including Kronig and Brink (1950) and effective conductivity models. As a result of these assumptions, the Easy5 model currently predicts faster depressurization, as at saturated vapor conditions, the heat transfer coeffect on the liquid side for the Easy5 model is greater than the heat transfer coefficient predicted by Ranz-Marshall used in the TankSIM code. This greater heat flux translates into faster condensation of the saturated ullage gas. At the bulk liquid to ullage interface, the models are in much closer agreement. Both models model the ullage as a sphere centered within the bulk liquid in the tank, and both use the energy-jumping boundary condition to model heat and mass transfer across the interface. There are slight differences in how the interface temperature is calculated, however. The Easy5 model assumes the temperature of the interface is equal to the saturation temperature associated with the pressure of the gas phase. The TankSIM model calculates this temperature with Alabovskii’s equation, which provides a correction factor for interface temperatures. Analysis tasks are focused on determining rates of depressurization within the tank during active cooling operation. To maintain net positive suction head at the pump inlet, the tank pressure cannot fall faster than the saturation pressure associated with the temperature of the bulk liquid. Additionally, there is interest in analyzing the performance of the loop at different pump speeds and cryocooler input powers. Adjusting the flowrate affects both the performance of the heat exchanger between the cryocooler and pumped liquid, and the heat transfer between the droplet spray and the ullage. Ideally, a pump speed and cryocooler power can be selected that will allow the tank to operate in zero-boil-off mode with a very narrow range of storage pressure.

Cameron J. Hines↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Modeling and Simulation of Tank Pressure Control using Zero-Boil Off Active Thermal Control for LOXSAT Technology Demonstration Mission

To-date, research and modeling of cryogenic fluid management technologies (CFM) for spaceflight has been limited to ground tests, short-duration zero-g simulations (e.g. drop towers), and small-scale experiments on-orbit. There has not been a large-scale flight demonstration of a flight-like system. As future NASA missions to take humans further from Earth will require large, in-space cryogenic propulsion vehicles, it is imperative to begin collecting flight data for these systems to accurately model and design future vehicles. To meet this goal, NASA awarded tipping point technology demonstration awards to Eta Space, Lockheed Martin, Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX), and United Launch Alliance (ULA) to demonstrate on-orbit storage and transfer of cryogenic propellant. For its award, Eta Space is developing LOXSAT-1. It is a small satellite that will be launched on a Rocket Lab Electron rocket. The spacecraft consists of a Rocket Lab Photon spacecraft bus with a primary payload of a spherical liquid oxygen (LOX) storage tank with thermodynamic control systems. The primary objective of the mission is to demonstrate zero-boil-off storage of liquid oxygen. To accomplish this objective, the payload is equipped with an active thermal control system fluid loop that consists of propellant management device (PMD), positive-displacement pump, heat exchanger connected to a cryocooler, and a spray bar mixing injector. When the fluid loop is operating, fluid is drawn from the tank by the PMD and pumped through the heat exchanger, lowering the fluid temperature below the fluid temperature in the tank. This subcooled liquid is then injected back into the tank through the spray bar. The subcooled injected liquid has two effects. If it is sprayed into the ullage space, the injected liquid will form into jets or droplets and exchange heat with the ullage gas. This will cool and condense the gas, reducing the pressure in the tank. Additionally, the liquid that is not sprayed through the ullage, as well as any remaining liquid spray from the ullage, will rejoin the liquid mass of the tank, lowering the bulk temperature of the liquid. These combines effects provide for zero-boil off pressure control by lowering the tank pressure and the liquid saturation pressure simultaneously, ensuring the liquid stays subcooled. To model these complex mechanics and predict the performance of the active thermal control system, NASA is providing Eta Space with 3 parallel models of the tank. The approach of providing 3 different models allows for cross-checking and comparisons between the three to better understand how different modeling assumptions and selection semi-empirical factors affects the modeling result. Additionally, developing 3 models provides three different schemes for numerical simulation, providing confidence that results depict real physical phenomenon and not numerical quirks of the program. Within the tank thermodynamics, there are two primary areas of heat transfer we concern ourselves with: the heat transfer between the ullage space and the droplet spray, and between the ullage space and bulk liquid. For the droplet heat transfer, there are multiple sets of assumptions that can be made and correlations that can be used. Currently, two working models - the TankSIM model and Easy5 model – provide for an overview of the different approaches available. The TankSIM model and Easy5 model use two different models for droplet heating and evaporation that illustrate how the models use different types of mechanisms to arrive at the same answer. For the TankSIM model, droplets are treated as spheres of constant radius. Heat is transferred from the ullage to the droplet and warms the droplet until it reaches saturation, then the droplet begins evaporating and reducing its radius and mass. To calculate the heat transfer coefficient between the droplet and ullage, the Ranz-Marshall correlation is used. To determine the number of droplets in the ullage, a resident mass approach is used. This approach averages the number of droplets such that residuals at the start-up and shut-off of the spray bar cancel out. This same approach is used in the Easy5 model. The GFSSP model implements a linked list to track individual droplet “nodes” within the model. For the Easy5 model, the droplet is assumed to have an interface at a temperature equal to the saturation temperature corresponding to the pressure of the gas phase. The heat transfer from the gas to the interface and the interface to the droplet bulk is then calculated, and the net mass transfer between the droplet and interface is determined by performing an energy balance across the interface. For the gas side of the interface, the Ranz-Marshall correlation is used. For the liquid side of the interface, a variety of correlations were tried, including Kronig and Brink (1950) and effective conductivity models. As a result of these assumptions, the Easy5 model currently predicts faster depressurization, as at saturated vapor conditions, the heat transfer coeffect on the liquid side for the Easy5 model is greater than the heat transfer coefficient predicted by Ranz-Marshall used in the TankSIM code. This greater heat flux translates into faster condensation of the saturated ullage gas. At the bulk liquid to ullage interface, the models are in much closer agreement. Both models model the ullage as a sphere centered within the bulk liquid in the tank, and both use the energy-jumping boundary condition to model heat and mass transfer across the interface. There are slight differences in how the interface temperature is calculated, however. The Easy5 model assumes the temperature of the interface is equal to the saturation temperature associated with the pressure of the gas phase. The TankSIM model calculates this temperature with Alabovskii’s equation, which provides a correction factor for interface temperatures. Analysis tasks are focused on determining rates of depressurization within the tank during active cooling operation. To maintain net positive suction head at the pump inlet, the tank pressure cannot fall faster than the saturation pressure associated with the temperature of the bulk liquid. Additionally, there is interest in analyzing the performance of the loop at different pump speeds and cryocooler input powers. Adjusting the flowrate affects both the performance of the heat exchanger between the cryocooler and pumped liquid, and the heat transfer between the droplet spray and the ullage. Ideally, a pump speed and cryocooler power can be selected that will allow the tank to operate in zero-boil-off mode with a very narrow range of storage pressure.

zero boil-off↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Modeling and Simulation of Tank Pressure Control using Zero-Boil Off Active Thermal Control for LOXSAT Technology Demonstration Mission

To-date, research and modeling of cryogenic fluid management technologies (CFM) for spaceflight has been limited to ground tests, short-duration zero-g simulations (e.g. drop towers), and small-scale experiments on-orbit. There has not been a large-scale flight demonstration of a flight-like system. As future NASA missions to take humans further from Earth will require large, in-space cryogenic propulsion vehicles, it is imperative to begin collecting flight data for these systems to accurately model and design future vehicles. To meet this goal, NASA awarded tipping point technology demonstration awards to Eta Space, Lockheed Martin, Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX), and United Launch Alliance (ULA) to demonstrate on-orbit storage and transfer of cryogenic propellant. For its award, Eta Space is developing LOXSAT-1. It is a small satellite that will be launched on a Rocket Lab Electron rocket. The spacecraft consists of a Rocket Lab Photon spacecraft bus with a primary payload of a spherical liquid oxygen (LOX) storage tank with thermodynamic control systems. The primary objective of the mission is to demonstrate zero-boil-off storage of liquid oxygen. To accomplish this objective, the payload is equipped with an active thermal control system fluid loop that consists of propellant management device (PMD), positive-displacement pump, heat exchanger connected to a cryocooler, and a spray bar mixing injector. When the fluid loop is operating, fluid is drawn from the tank by the PMD and pumped through the heat exchanger, lowering the fluid temperature below the fluid temperature in the tank. This subcooled liquid is then injected back into the tank through the spray bar. The subcooled injected liquid has two effects. If it is sprayed into the ullage space, the injected liquid will form into jets or droplets and exchange heat with the ullage gas. This will cool and condense the gas, reducing the pressure in the tank. Additionally, the liquid that is not sprayed through the ullage, as well as any remaining liquid spray from the ullage, will rejoin the liquid mass of the tank, lowering the bulk temperature of the liquid. These combines effects provide for zero-boil off pressure control by lowering the tank pressure and the liquid saturation pressure simultaneously, ensuring the liquid stays subcooled. To model these complex mechanics and predict the performance of the active thermal control system, NASA is providing Eta Space with 3 parallel models of the tank. The approach of providing 3 different models allows for cross-checking and comparisons between the three to better understand how different modeling assumptions and selection semi-empirical factors affects the modeling result. Additionally, developing 3 models provides three different schemes for numerical simulation, providing confidence that results depict real physical phenomenon and not numerical quirks of the program. Within the tank thermodynamics, there are two primary areas of heat transfer we concern ourselves with: the heat transfer between the ullage space and the droplet spray, and between the ullage space and bulk liquid. For the droplet heat transfer, there are multiple sets of assumptions that can be made and correlations that can be used. Currently, two working models - the TankSIM model and Easy5 model – provide for an overview of the different approaches available. The TankSIM model and Easy5 model use two different models for droplet heating and evaporation that illustrate how the models use different types of mechanisms to arrive at the same answer. For the TankSIM model, droplets are treated as spheres of constant radius. Heat is transferred from the ullage to the droplet and warms the droplet until it reaches saturation, then the droplet begins evaporating and reducing its radius and mass. To calculate the heat transfer coefficient between the droplet and ullage, the Ranz-Marshall correlation is used. To determine the number of droplets in the ullage, a resident mass approach is used. This approach averages the number of droplets such that residuals at the start-up and shut-off of the spray bar cancel out. This same approach is used in the Easy5 model. The GFSSP model implements a linked list to track individual droplet “nodes” within the model. For the Easy5 model, the droplet is assumed to have an interface at a temperature equal to the saturation temperature corresponding to the pressure of the gas phase. The heat transfer from the gas to the interface and the interface to the droplet bulk is then calculated, and the net mass transfer between the droplet and interface is determined by performing an energy balance across the interface. For the gas side of the interface, the Ranz-Marshall correlation is used. For the liquid side of the interface, a variety of correlations were tried, including Kronig and Brink (1950) and effective conductivity models. As a result of these assumptions, the Easy5 model currently predicts faster depressurization, as at saturated vapor conditions, the heat transfer coeffect on the liquid side for the Easy5 model is greater than the heat transfer coefficient predicted by Ranz-Marshall used in the TankSIM code. This greater heat flux translates into faster condensation of the saturated ullage gas. At the bulk liquid to ullage interface, the models are in much closer agreement. Both models model the ullage as a sphere centered within the bulk liquid in the tank, and both use the energy-jumping boundary condition to model heat and mass transfer across the interface. There are slight differences in how the interface temperature is calculated, however. The Easy5 model assumes the temperature of the interface is equal to the saturation temperature associated with the pressure of the gas phase. The TankSIM model calculates this temperature with Alabovskii’s equation, which provides a correction factor for interface temperatures. Analysis tasks are focused on determining rates of depressurization within the tank during active cooling operation. To maintain net positive suction head at the pump inlet, the tank pressure cannot fall faster than the saturation pressure associated with the temperature of the bulk liquid. Additionally, there is interest in analyzing the performance of the loop at different pump speeds and cryocooler input powers. Adjusting the flowrate affects both the performance of the heat exchanger between the cryocooler and pumped liquid, and the heat transfer between the droplet spray and the ullage. Ideally, a pump speed and cryocooler power can be selected that will allow the tank to operate in zero-boil-off mode with a very narrow range of storage pressure.

zero boil-off↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Modeling and Simulation of Tank Pressure Control using Zero-Boiloff Active Thermal Control for LOXSAT Technology Demonstration Mission

To-date, research and modeling of cryogenic fluid management technologies (CFM) for spaceflight has been limited to ground tests, short-duration zero-g simulations (e.g. drop towers), and small-scale experiments on-orbit. There has not been a large-scale flight demonstration of a flight-like system. As future NASA missions to take humans further from Earth will require large, in-space cryogenic propulsion vehicles, it is imperative to begin collecting flight data for these systems to accurately model and design future vehicles. To meet this goal, NASA awarded tipping point technology demonstration awards to Eta Space, Lockheed Martin, Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX), and United Launch Alliance (ULA) to demonstrate on-orbit storage and transfer of cryogenic propellant. For its award, Eta Space is developing LOXSAT-1. It is a small satellite that will be launched on a Rocket Lab Electron rocket. The spacecraft consists of a Rocket Lab Photon spacecraft bus with a primary payload of a spherical liquid oxygen (LOX) storage tank with thermodynamic control systems. The primary objective of the mission is to demonstrate zero-boil-off storage of liquid oxygen. To accomplish this objective, the payload is equipped with an active thermal control system fluid loop that consists of propellant management device (PMD), positive-displacement pump, heat exchanger connected to a cryocooler, and a spray bar mixing injector. When the fluid loop is operating, fluid is drawn from the tank by the PMD and pumped through the heat exchanger, lowering the fluid temperature below the fluid temperature in the tank. This subcooled liquid is then injected back into the tank through the spray bar. The subcooled injected liquid has two effects. If it is sprayed into the ullage space, the injected liquid will form into jets or droplets and exchange heat with the ullage gas. This will cool and condense the gas, reducing the pressure in the tank. Additionally, the liquid that is not sprayed through the ullage, as well as any remaining liquid spray from the ullage, will rejoin the liquid mass of the tank, lowering the bulk temperature of the liquid. These combines effects provide for zero-boil off pressure control by lowering the tank pressure and the liquid saturation pressure simultaneously, ensuring the liquid stays subcooled. To model these complex mechanics and predict the performance of the active thermal control system, NASA is providing Eta Space with 3 parallel models of the tank. The approach of providing 3 different models allows for cross-checking and comparisons between the three to better understand how different modeling assumptions and selection semi-empirical factors affects the modeling result. Additionally, developing 3 models provides three different schemes for numerical simulation, providing confidence that results depict real physical phenomenon and not numerical quirks of the program. Within the tank thermodynamics, there are two primary areas of heat transfer we concern ourselves with: the heat transfer between the ullage space and the droplet spray, and between the ullage space and bulk liquid. For the droplet heat transfer, there are multiple sets of assumptions that can be made and correlations that can be used. Currently, two working models - the TankSIM model and Easy5 model – provide for an overview of the different approaches available. The TankSIM model and Easy5 model use two different models for droplet heating and evaporation that illustrate how the models use different types of mechanisms to arrive at the same answer. For the TankSIM model, droplets are treated as spheres of constant radius. Heat is transferred from the ullage to the droplet and warms the droplet until it reaches saturation, then the droplet begins evaporating and reducing its radius and mass. To calculate the heat transfer coefficient between the droplet and ullage, the Ranz-Marshall correlation is used. To determine the number of droplets in the ullage, a resident mass approach is used. This approach averages the number of droplets such that residuals at the start-up and shut-off of the spray bar cancel out. This same approach is used in the Easy5 model. The GFSSP model implements a linked list to track individual droplet “nodes” within the model. For the Easy5 model, the droplet is assumed to have an interface at a temperature equal to the saturation temperature corresponding to the pressure of the gas phase. The heat transfer from the gas to the interface and the interface to the droplet bulk is then calculated, and the net mass transfer between the droplet and interface is determined by performing an energy balance across the interface. For the gas side of the interface, the Ranz-Marshall correlation is used. For the liquid side of the interface, a variety of correlations were tried, including Kronig and Brink (1950) and effective conductivity models. As a result of these assumptions, the Easy5 model currently predicts faster depressurization, as at saturated vapor conditions, the heat transfer coeffect on the liquid side for the Easy5 model is greater than the heat transfer coefficient predicted by Ranz-Marshall used in the TankSIM code. This greater heat flux translates into faster condensation of the saturated ullage gas. At the bulk liquid to ullage interface, the models are in much closer agreement. Both models model the ullage as a sphere centered within the bulk liquid in the tank, and both use the energy-jumping boundary condition to model heat and mass transfer across the interface. There are slight differences in how the interface temperature is calculated, however. The Easy5 model assumes the temperature of the interface is equal to the saturation temperature associated with the pressure of the gas phase. The TankSIM model calculates this temperature with Alabovskii’s equation, which provides a correction factor for interface temperatures. Analysis tasks are focused on determining rates of depressurization within the tank during active cooling operation. To maintain net positive suction head at the pump inlet, the tank pressure cannot fall faster than the saturation pressure associated with the temperature of the bulk liquid. Additionally, there is interest in analyzing the performance of the loop at different pump speeds and cryocooler input powers. Adjusting the flowrate affects both the performance of the heat exchanger between the cryocooler and pumped liquid, and the heat transfer between the droplet spray and the ullage. Ideally, a pump speed and cryocooler power can be selected that will allow the tank to operate in zero-boil-off mode with a very narrow range of storage pressure.

zero boil-off↗
NASA NTRS2016

Modeling the Rapid Boil-Off of a Cryogenic Liquid When Injected into a Low Pressure Cavity

Many launch vehicle cryogenic applications require the modeling of injecting a cryogenic liquid into a low pressure cavity. The difficulty of such analyses lies in accurately predicting the heat transfer coefficient between the cold liquid and a warm wall in a low pressure environment. The heat transfer coefficient and the behavior of the liquid is highly dependent on the mass flow rate into the cavity, the cavity wall temperature and the cavity volume. Testing was performed to correlate the modeling performed using Thermal Desktop and Sinda Fluint Thermal and Fluids Analysis Software. This presentation shall describe a methodology to model the cryogenic process using Sinda Fluint, a description of the cryogenic test set up, a description of the test procedure and how the model was correlated to match the test results.

Fluid Mechanics↗
NASA NTRS1993

Liquid fuel injection elements for rocket engines

Thrust chambers for liquid propellant rocket engines include three principal components. One of these components is an injector which contains a plurality of injection elements to meter the flow of propellants at a predetermined rate, and fuel to oxidizer mixture ratio, to introduce the mixture into the combustion chamber, and to cause them to be atomized within the combustion chamber so that even combustion takes place. Evolving from these injectors are tube injectors. These tube injectors have injection elements for injecting the oxidizer into the combustion chamber. The oxidizer and fuel must be metered at predetermined rates and mixture ratios in order to mix them within the combustion chamber so that combustion takes place smoothly and completely. Hence tube injectors are subject to improvement. An injection element for a liquid propellant rocket engine of the bipropellant type is provided which includes tangential fuel metering orifices, and a plurality of oxidizer tube injection elements whose injection tubes are also provided with tangential oxidizer entry slots and internal reed valves.

Cox, George B., Jr.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Investigation of Liquid Fuel Injection Processes in a Rotating Detonation Combustor using Megahertz Planar Laser-Induced Fluorescence Imaging

Direct imaging of liquid fuel injection is performed within an optically accessible rotating detonation combustor (RDC) using planar laser-induced fluorescence (PLIF) to spatio-temporally resolve the highly dynamic spray characteristics at rates up to 1 MHz. The RDC is operated on air and hydrogen to sustain a stable, cyclically propagating detonation wave with cycle periods of up to ∼250 μs. One of the hydrogen fuel injection sites is replaced with a liquid jet to introduce a diesel spray as a fuel surrogate to enable tracer-free fluorescence excitation using the 355 nm third-harmonic output of a burst-mode Nd:YAG laser. The time-resolved PLIF measurements reveal the evolution of the highly unsteady spray, including the dwell period after the arrival of the detonation wave, the jet recovery, breakup and entrainment into the supersonic crossflow of air, propagation into the detonation chamber, and interaction with the detonation wave. Following passage of the detonation wave, the spray characteristics reveal significant changes in the momentum flux ratio between the liquid and air streams, altering the jet trajectory and temporarily halting fuel delivery to the detonation channel. This temporary cessation of fuel spray injection into the combustor is quantified, along with the fill rate as a function of time. As the injection system recovers, the fuel spray eventually returns to a quasi-steady position prior to the arrival of the detonation wave, allowing qualitative comparisons with theoretical jet trajectories for a range of air mass-flux conditions. These data, enabled by ultra-high-speed PLIF imaging, represent some of the first detailed measurements for characterizing and quantifying the interactions of liquid jets and detonations in an operating RDC.

Propulsion↗
NASA NTRS1980

Real gas effects 2: Influence of condensation on minimum operating temperatures of cryogenic wind tunnels

Condensation effects are responsible for the minimum operating temperatures of cryogenic wind tunnels at total pressures up to about 9 atmospheres. The two primary modes of condensation homogeneous nucleation and heterogeneous nucleation and the conditions with which either may limit minimum operating temperatures are reveiwed. Previous hypersonic and supersonic condensation data are reviewed as are data taken in the nitrogen gas, Langley 0.3 Meter Transonic Cryogenic Tunnel. Analysis of data in the 0.3 m tunnel suggests that the onset of homogenous nucleation may be approximated by an analysis by sivier and that the onset of heterogeneous nucleation is only apparent just below free stream saturation. Extension of the results from the 0.3 m tunnel to other nitrogen gas cryogenic tunnels is discussed and is shown to depend on length scales, purity of the liquid nitrogen injected for cooling, number of particulates in the flow, and the extent to which the injected liquid nitrogen is evaporated.

Hall, R. M.↗
NASA NTRS1993

Observations of liquid jets injected into a highly accelerated supersonic boundary layer

Experiments were conducted to observe the cross-sectional structure and streamwise growth of round transverse liquid jets injected into a highly accelerated boundary layer in supersonic flow. The accompanying shock structure was also visualized. In one case, a round jet of acetone was injected into a fully turbulent Mach 2.5 boundary layer that was subsequently accelerated and partially laminarized through a sharp Prandtl-Meyer expansion corner. In the second case, a jet was injected into the laminarized Mach 3.2 boundary layer downstream of the expansion corner at the same jet-to-freestream momentum ratio. The jet and shock structure in both cases were visualized using schlieren optics. Wall-flow patterns were visualized using paints. It was found that the lateral spreading of jets injected downstream of the expansion fan was augmented close to the wall and had a cross-sectional structure significantly different from that of the jet injected upstream: the upstream jet spreads rapidly at the expansion corner in both the lateral and vertical directions.

Johnson, Arthur W.↗
NASA NTRS1988

Modeling of liquid jets injected transversely into a supersonic crossflow

Analytical/numerical modeling of the behavior of a single nonreacting liquid jet in compressible (high subsonic and supersonic) crossflows is described here. Inviscid, compressible flow about the elliptical cross-section of the jet is solved numerically, using a procedure modeled after that of Godunov. External boundary layer analysis along the surface of the elliptical cross-section allows determination of an effective drag associated with the jet, which balances centripetal forces resulting from jet deflection. Mass and momentum balances performed along the jet, with and without the inclusion of mass loss due to droplet shedding, are then incorporated so that liquid jet trajectories and bow shock penetration may be calculated. Comparisons of the predictions are made with experimental results.

Heister, S. D.↗
NASA NTRS1991

Hydrogen no-vent fill testing in a 1.2 cubic foot (34 liter) tank

Experimental results of no-vent fill testing with liquid hydrogen in a 1.2 cubic foot (34 liter) stainless steel tank are presented. More than 40 tests were performed with various liquid inlet temperatures, inlet flowrates, initial tank wall temperatures, and liquid injection techniques. Fill levels equal to or exceeding 90 percent by volume were achieved in 40 percent of the tests with the tank pressure limited to a maximum of 30 psia. Three liquid injection techniques were employed; top spray, upward pipe discharge, and bottom diffuser. Effects of each of the varied parameters on the tank pressure history and final fill level are evaluated. The final fill level is found to be indirectly proportional to the initial wall and inlet liquid temperatures and directly proportional to the inlet liquid flowrate. Furthermore, the top spray is the most efficient no-vent fill method of the three configurations examined. The success of this injection method is primarily due to condensation of the ullage vapor onto the incoming liquid droplets. Ullage condensation counteracts the tank pressure rise resulting from energy exchange between the fluid and the warmer tank walls, and ullage compression. Upward pipe discharge from the tank bottom is the next most efficient method. Fluid circulation induced by this fill configuration tends to diminish thermal stratification in the bulk liquid, thus enhancing condensation at the liquid gas interface.

Moran, Matthew E.↗
NASA NTRS1991

Hydrogen no-vent fill testing in a 34 liter (1.2 cubic foot) tank

Experimental results of no-vent fill testing with liquid hydrogen in a 34 liter stainless steel tank are presented. More than 40 tests were performed with various liquid inlet temperatures, inlet flowrates, initial tank wall temperatures, and liquid injection techniques. Maximum pressure within the receiver tank was limited to 0.207 MPa (30 psia), and fill levels equal to or exceeding 90 percent by volume were achieved in 40 percent of the tests. Three liquid injection techniques were employed; top spray, upward pipe discharge, and bottom diffuser. Effects of each of the various parameters on the tank pressure history and final fill level are evaluated. The final fill level is found to be indirectly proportional to the initial wall and inlet liquid temperatures and directly proportional to the inlet liquid flowrate. Furthermore, the top spray is the most efficient no-vent fill method of the three configurations examined. The success of this injection method is primarily due to condensation of the ullage vapor onto the incoming liquid droplets. Ullage condensation counteracts the tank pressure rise resulting from energy exchange between the fluid and the warmer tank walls and from ullage compression.

Moran, Matthew E.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Parametric Analysis of the Charge-Hold-Vent Method for Cryogenic Propellant Tank Chill Down

In the absence of external heat exchangers, the on-orbit transfer of cryogenic propellants requires the receiver tank to first be quenched to a sufficiently low energy state to allow for a continuous no-vent fill to avoid unnecessary venting of liquid. One proposed method for tank chilldown that minimizes the potential for venting liquid is the charge hold vent (CHV) method. CHV follows a cyclic process that gradually removes thermal energy from the receiver tank by injecting liquid with the vent valve closed and allowing the fluid and wall to reach near-thermal equilibrium before venting the superheated vapor. However, the CHV method must be optimized to minimize complexity, mass, and time. This paper presents a modular CHV analytical model used to quantify the number of cycles and propellant mass consumed based on first principles. The model is used to examine the effect of eight parameters: receiver tank material, volume, mass, maximum expected operating pressure, and initial pressure, liquid injection pressure and temperature, and the target temperature. The model is validated against the only two available CHV datasets. Based on results, the tank mass-to-volume ratio is the most important factor in determining the number of CHV cycles and thus degree of difficulty in tank chilldown. The model can easily be used for early-stage design, sizing, and analysis of cryogenic propellant transfer systems.

Tank Chilldown↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Parametric Analysis of the Charge-Hold-Vent Method for Cryogenic Propellant Tank Chill Down

Abstract. In the absence of external heat exchangers, the on-orbit transfer of cryogenic propellants requires the receiver tank to first be quenched to a sufficiently low energy state to allow for a continuous no-vent fill to avoid unnecessary venting of liquid. One proposed method for tank chilldown that minimizes the potential for venting liquid is the charge hold vent (CHV) method. CHV follows a cyclic process that gradually removes thermal energy from the receiver tank by injecting liquid with the vent valve closed and allowing the fluid and wall to reach near-thermal equilibrium before venting the superheated vapor. However, the CHV method must be optimized to minimize complexity, mass, and time. This paper presents a modular CHV analytical model used to quantify the number of cycles and propellant mass consumed based on first principles. The model is used to examine the effect of eight parameters: receiver tank material, volume, mass, maximum expected operating pressure, and initial pressure, liquid injection pressure and temperature, and the target temperature. The model is validated against the only two available CHV datasets. Based on results, the tank mass-to-volume ratio is the most important factor in determining the number of CHV cycles and thus degree of difficulty in tank chilldown. The model can easily be used for early-stage design, sizing, and analysis of cryogenic propellant transfer systems. Keywords: tank chilldown, charge-hold-vent, no-vent fill

Tank Chilldown↗
NASA NTRS1996

Atomization and Dispersion of a Liquid Jet Injected Into a Crossflow of Air

In recent years, environmental regulations have become more stringent, requiring lower emissions of mainly nitrogen oxides (NOx), as well as carbon monoxide (CO) and unburned hydrocarbons (UHC). These regulations have forced the gas turbine industry to examine non-conventional combustion strategies, such as the lean burn approach. The reasoning behind operating under lean conditions is to maintain the temperature of combustion near and below temperatures required for the formation of thermal nitric oxide (NO). To be successful, however, the lean processes require careful preparation of the fuel/air mixture to preclude formation of either locally rich reaction zones, which may give rise to NO formation, or locally lean reaction zones, which may give rise to inefficient fuel processing. As a result fuel preparation is crucial to the development and success of new aeroengine combustor technologies. A key element of the fuel preparation process is the fuel nozzle. As nozzle technologies have developed, airblast atomization has been adopted for both industrial and aircraft gas turbine applications. However, the majority of the work to date has focused on prefilming nozzles, which despite their complexity and high cost have become an industry standard for conventional combustion strategies. It is likely that the new strategies required to meet future emissions goals will utilize novel fuel injector approaches, such as radial injection. This thesis proposes and demonstrates an experiment to examine, on a mechanistic level (i.e., the physics of the action), the processes associated with the atomization, evaporation, and dispersion of a liquid jet introduced, from a radial, plain-jet airblast injector, into a crossflow of air. This understanding requires the knowledge not only of what factors influence atomization, but also the underlying mechanism associated with liquid breakup and dispersion. The experimental data acquired identify conditions and geometries for improved performance of radial airblast injectors.

Seay, J. E.↗
NASA NTRS1974

Solid rocket thrust vector control

Thrust vector control systems that superimpose a side force on the motor thrust, steering being achieved by the side force causing a moment about the vehicle center of gravity are described. A brief review of thrust vector control systems is presented, and two systems, flexible joint and liquid injection, are treated in detail. Treatment of the flexible-joint thrust vector control system is limited to the design of the flexible joint and its insulation against hot motor gases. Treatment of the liquid injection thrust vector control system is limited to discussion of the injectant, valves, piping, storage tanks, and pressurization system; no evaluation is presented of the nozzle except for (1) the effect of the injectant and erosion at the injection port and (2) the effect of injection on pressure distribution within the nozzle.

Source record↗