The document summarizes the design and testing of a hybrid sounding rocket. It discusses:
1) Two static test fires were performed, with the first failing due to epoxy not containing chamber pressure and the second experiencing nozzle failure after 8 seconds.
2) Thermal modeling was conducted using 1D calculations and ANSYS finite element analysis to determine temperature distributions. Model results showed maximum fuel temperatures around 1500C, lower than previous estimates.
3) Limitations of the thermal modeling were recognized, including neglecting ablation and two-phase fuel behavior. Further work is needed to better understand nozzle temperatures and failure.
The document summarizes the design and testing of a hybrid sounding rocket. It discusses:
1) Two static test fires were performed, with the first failing due to epoxy not containing chamber pressure and the second experiencing nozzle failure after 8 seconds.
2) Thermal modeling was conducted using 1D calculations and ANSYS finite element analysis to determine temperature distributions. Model results showed maximum fuel temperatures around 1500C, lower than previous estimates.
3) Limitations of the thermal modeling were recognized, including neglecting ablation and two-phase fuel behavior. Further work is needed to better understand nozzle temperatures and failure.
The document summarizes the design and testing of a hybrid sounding rocket. It discusses:
1) Two static test fires were performed, with the first failing due to epoxy not containing chamber pressure and the second experiencing nozzle failure after 8 seconds.
2) Thermal modeling was conducted using 1D calculations and ANSYS finite element analysis to determine temperature distributions. Model results showed maximum fuel temperatures around 1500C, lower than previous estimates.
3) Limitations of the thermal modeling were recognized, including neglecting ablation and two-phase fuel behavior. Further work is needed to better understand nozzle temperatures and failure.
The document summarizes the design and testing of a hybrid sounding rocket. It discusses:
1) Two static test fires were performed, with the first failing due to epoxy not containing chamber pressure and the second experiencing nozzle failure after 8 seconds.
2) Thermal modeling was conducted using 1D calculations and ANSYS finite element analysis to determine temperature distributions. Model results showed maximum fuel temperatures around 1500C, lower than previous estimates.
3) Limitations of the thermal modeling were recognized, including neglecting ablation and two-phase fuel behavior. Further work is needed to better understand nozzle temperatures and failure.
Consists of liquid oxidizer (NO2) and solid fuel (HTPB) Performed a static test fire on 4/5/2013 Collected 8 seconds of thermocouple data for the full system
Heat paths are very big concern
o Nozzle failure not confirmed Aluminum weakening with temperature CTE mismatch
Prepared concurrently with the failure tree
Design at STF 5
Hysor Static Test Fire 4
o Failed structure system Epoxy couldnt contain the pressure building up in the combustion chamber
Static Test Fire 5
o Improved structure system Nozzle shoot off at bottom after approximately 8 seconds
Injector Housing/Nozzle Retainer
o Al 6061-T6 E=1*107 PSI
v=.33 k=167 W/m*K
Fuel o HTPB E=284 PSI v=.499
k=.217 W/m*K
Nozzle o Graphite GR001CC E=1.33*107 PSI v=.31 k=85 W/m*K
data Compute thermal resistance of each material in each zone Convert thermocouple heat flux to net heat energy in zone Solve for intermediate and innermost temperatures
Results
All temperatures are in degrees C
Ambient temperature is 5 C Black is collected data Red is model prediction
Minimal heating of chamber structure
o Reduced concerns about needing temperature dependent materials properties
Fuel pellet internal temperature of 1500 C while exhaust gases are roughly 3000 C o Applying the exhaust temperature directly as a BC may be inaccurate
Pyrolysis of fuel pellet complicates inner surface boundary
o Simultaneous vaporization and chemical decomposition
Graphite nozzle also losing material at an unknown rate
o Use a coarse mesh for initial calculations 8 radial element divisions varial radial direction based on material 40 vertical element divisions each a little smaller than an inch o After initial runs can expand mesh for more detailed calculations Incorporate more material factors (epoxies etc)
Initial Mesh o Doesnt include nozzle o Sanity check results w/ 1D model
Max inner temp of fuel
o o o o
Predicted w/FEM 1-D Model Ansys Model Old Grad Project Models
1081 C 1568 C 998 C 3037 C
Heat Path through graphite
nozzle is of great importance o Nozzle failure mode is not fully understood o Fuel temperatures largely remained unchanged o Needed to generate Nozzle Coordinates o Showed limited temperature increase in the nozzle Heat flux is hard to quantify in this area
Temperature of the internal combustion chamber
is still very difficult to quantify. Sanity Checks work out o ANSYS Model and FEM model are very similar 1-D model in similar ballpark
Based on this semesters modeling the internal
temperatures assumed for design in previous semesters seem to be very high o Large SFs o Many unknowns associated with the flow
Debugging is always a pain
o Generated an excel sheet to check coordinates as well as element nodes
Double check the chemistry work from previous
semesters Establishes good knowledge base for moving forward with nozzle design. CTE with these new temperatures is possibly an issue for the future nozzle design and will be a set of starting points.
