Appendix X

Project Report on

Structural Analysis of Rocket Motor Head-end

Project work submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirement for the award of the
degree of
BACHELOR OF ENGINEERING
in
MECHANICAL ENGINEERING
By
TANUJ M- 2451-18-736-065
GREESHMA SANTHOSHINI M - 2451-18-736-106
SAI SANDEEP R - 2451-18-736-308
Under the guidance of

Mr. K. SUNIL KUMAR, Scientist-E, ASL, DRDO, Hyderabad

Mr. AMITABH CHAKRABORTY, Scientist-F, ASL, DRDO, Hyderabad

Mr. M. KAMESWARA REDDY, Asst. Professor, MED, MVSREC

DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

MATURI VENKATA SUBBA RAO (MVSR) ENGINEERING COLLEGE
Nadergul, Hyderabad – 501 510

(Affiliated to Osmania University, Hyderabad)

2021-2022

1|Page
Appendix XX

2|Page
 DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING
MATURI VENKATA SUBBA RAO (MVSR) ENGINEERING COLLEGE

NADERGUL, HYDERABAD-501510

This is to certify that

“Structural Analysis of Rocket Motor Head-end”

is the bonafide work carried out by

M TANUJ - 2451-18-736-065
GREESHMA SANTHOSHINI M - 2451-18-736-106
SAI SANDEEP R - 2451-18-736-308

in the Department of Mechanical Engineering, Maturi Venkata Subba Rao (M.V.S.R.)

Engineering College, Hyderabad (Affiliated to Osmania University) in partial fulfilment of
the requirements for the award of the Bachelor of Engineering degree in Mechanical
Engineering.

Mr. M. Kameswara Reddy, Dr. M. Madhavi, Ph.D.

Asst. Prof., Prof. & Head,

Department of M.E., Department of M.E.,

MVSR Engineering College, MVSR Engineering College,

Hyderabad. Hyderabad.

3|Page
 DECLARATION

This is to certify that the work reported in the present project entitled “Structural Analysis of
Rocket Motor Head-end” is a record of bonafide work done by us in the ASL (Advanced
System Laboratory), DRDO (Defence Research and Development Organization), Hyderabad.

The reports are based on the project work done entirely by us and
not copied from any other source.

The results embodied in this project report have not been submitted to any other
University or Institute for the award of any degree or diploma to the best of our
knowledge and belief.

M. TANUJ - 2451-18-736-065
M. GREESHMA SANTHOSHINI - 2451-18-736-106
R. SAI SANDEEP - 2451-17-736-308

4|Page
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

We would like to extend our sincere gratitude to all personalities being repository of
knowledge who have been supporting and embracing research attitude in ourselves and for
their valuable contribution for successful completion of our project.

We would like to express our deep sense of gratitude to our project guide,
Mr. K. Kameswara Reddy, Assistant Professor, Department of Mechanical
Engineering, MVSREC, for his consistent encouragement, co-operation and valuable
suggestions that has helped us in completing this project.

We are indebted to Mr. K. Sunil Kumar Scientist E, at ASL, DRDO and Mr. Amitabh
Chakraborty Scientist F, at ASL, DRDO for creating proper Guidance and Enlightening us
with valuable suggestions for completing this project.

We are extremely thankful to Dr. M. Madhavi, Professor and Head, Department of

Mechanical Engineering for providing good academic environment and encouragement given
to us in our department.

Our respect and regards to Dr. G. Kanaka Durga, Principal, M.V.S.R Engineering College,
for her cooperation and encouragement.

Dedication is not enough to express our gratitude towards our parents who have
encouraged our career through enormous sacrifices.

We also acknowledge our profound thanks to our friends for their constant support and
encouragement.

M.TANUJ - 2451-18-736-065
M.GREESHMA SANTHOSHINI - 2451-18-736-106
R.SAI SANDEEP - 2451-17-736-308

5|Page
 ABSTRACT

Pyrogen Igniters are the small rocket motors used for ignition of large solid rocket motor
(SRM). Pyrogen igniter is assembled to solid rocket motor, with its head end fastened by
M12 fasteners. This joint is designed to have leak proof, with O ring fasteners from high
temperature gases. Purpose of pyrogen igniters headend is to withstand pyrogen igniters
maximum pressure of nearly 1 second and rocket motor pressure for nearly 90 seconds.
Head end is fabricated with 15CDV6 steel. During realization it is subjected to 1.2 times of
rocket motor MEOP i.e,88 ksc. strain gauges of 3 no’s. are positioned at critical areas on
flange to monitor strains.

This Report deals with the design of rocket motor head-end Modelling of rocket motor head-
end is done in SOLIDWORKS. Stress distributions are due to the effect of working stress
developed in the component. The maximum working stress is compared with allowable yield
stress of the material. 2D Axi -Symmetric structural analysis for rocket motor Head-end is
performed to determine the stress level using ANSYS workbench.

In this project work literature survey carried out on the rocket motors. So, the material
selection is done and finally with suitable material, the rocket motor hardware is designed
using ASME pressure vessel code. For the optimization point of view the hardware structural
analysis is carried out using ANSYS package and weight is minimized. The structural
analysis result comparison has carried out with test results

In this thesis, a detailed theoretical and experimental study of solid rocket motor pyrogen
igniters characteristics have been conducted. Proof Pressure test (PPT) is carried out on each
Head-end. Strains are monitored at 3 locations. ANSYS analysis is validates with
experimental data.

6|Page
 TABLE OF CONTENTS
Declaration ii
Acknowledgements iii
Abstract iv
List of Tables vi
List of Figures

Chapter 1. Introduction 1-

1.1 Background of the study

1.2 Objective of thesis

1.3 Scope of the study

1.4 Constructional Feature of SRM

1.5 Methodology 15

Chapter 2. Literature survey 23

Chapter 3: Fundamental of Pyrogen theories 27

Chapter 4: Material Selection Criteria 29

Chapter 5: Design Methodology and Implementation 35

Chapter 6: Theoretical Design Calculation 43

Chapter 7: Simulation results 47

Chapter 8: Experimental work 55

Chapter 9: Study results and conclusions 65

Chapter 10: Future Scope of Work 66

Chapter 11: References 67

Chapter 12: Glossary 68

7|Page
List of figures and tables

8|Page
 CHAPTER-1
INTRODUCTION

1.1 BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY

Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV) is a satellite launch vehicle operated by the

Indian Space Research Organization (ISRO). The function of GSLV is medium lift launch system.

It uses three staging system to dispatch the payload 5 ton

Table 1 : Parameters of GSLV staging

Stages First Stage Second Stage Third Stage

Type S 139 Booster L110 GS2 Vikas Cryogenic engine

solid liquid propellant

propellant (2
(1 No’s)
No’s)

Height (in m) 11.6 2.8 8.7

Diameter (in m) 2.8 2.8 2.8

Propellant used
N2O4 / UDMH LOX/LH2
HTPB (solid)

Propellant mass (in tons) 138.2 39.5 42.5

Burn time (in sec) 100 139 149

Specific Impulse= 2.89 2.89 4.45

thrust
(inkm/s)
mass flow rate

9|Page
The Satellite Launch Vehicle or SLV was a small lift launch vehicle project started in the
early 1970s by the Indian space research Organization to develop the technology needed to
launch satellites. SLV was intended to reach a height of 400 kilometers and carry a payload
of 40 kg. This vehicle is required to escape from the gravitational influence thus reaching an
infinite distance from it .so to bring the rocket to 11.2 km/s the conversion system cannot
handle it so we use propellant in rocket motor for bringing heavy thrust. Propellant has
oxidizer and fuel inbuilt since air is not available in space for combustion

Figure 1.1: illustrates geostationary space launch vehicle

Agni-V is an Indian nuclear capable intercontinental ballistic missile developed by the

Defence Research and Development Organization. This missile is has a range of around
4,000 to 6,000 km. It is a three-stage, road-mobile and solid-fueled intercontinental ballistic
missile which is transported by a truck and launched via a canister. Agni V is primarily used
for enhancing India's nuclear deterrence against China.

10 | P a g e
The Agni-V is a three-stage solid fuelled intercontinental ballistic missile with composite
motor casing in the second and third stage. In many aspects, the Agni-5 carries forward the
Agni-3 pedigree. With composites used extensively to reduce weight, and a third stage added
on (the Agni-3 was a two-stage missile), the Agni-5 travel to 6000km range. Total flight
duration for the first flight test of Agni-V on 20 April 2012 was for 1130 seconds.

Table 2: Specifications of Agni V

Mass 50-56 ton

Length 17.5 m

Diameter 2m

Warhead Strategic nuclear weapon

Warhead weight 1.5 ton

Figure 1.2: Illustrates Ballistic missile Agni-5

11 | P a g e
Rockets are a type of aircraft used to carry a payload at high speeds over a wide range of
distances depending on the design Rockets are powered by a reaction type engine which uses
chemical energy to accelerate and expel mass through a nozzle and relies on the principals of
Sir Isaac Newton’s third law of motion to propel the rocket forward.
Rocket engines use either solid or liquid fuel. They carry both the fuel and the oxidizer
required to convert the fuel into thermal energy and gas byproducts.

The rocket engine casing must be able to withstand the internal pressure load due to burning
of propellant gases loads and the force applied to the payload through the attachment point. In
some locations, the casing materials must be able to withstand high pressures and elevated
temperatures due to the combustion of the fuel. The components will be sized based on the
maximum load and pressure the casing will be subjected to during the mission. This
maximum load will be referred to as the limit load. Rockets are a type of aircraft used to
carry a payload at high speeds over a wide range of distances.

Rockets are powered by a reaction type engine which uses chemical energy to accelerate and
expel mass through a nozzle and relies on the principals of Sir Isaac Newton’s third law of
motion to propel the rocket forward. Rocket engines use either solid or liquid fuel. They carry
both the fuel and the oxidizer required to convert the fuel into thermal energy and gas
byproducts.

The gas byproducts under pressure are then passed through a nozzle which converts the high-
pressure low velocity gas into a low-pressure high velocity gas. The thrust output depends on
the mass flow rate of the fuel and the velocity of the ejected exhaust. Whereas, liquid rocket
needs many separate equipment and pressure vessels to store the fuel and oxidizers. Solid -
rocket working is simple and easy to understand. The solid fuel is a mixture of fuel and
oxidizer It has the property to burn instantly and continues to burn without stoppage. The
exhaust is expelled through a nozzle and thrust is generated as a result.

The analysis and the construction of the solid rocket motor head end hardware involve
consideration of various stresses acting on the motor hardware due to pressure and thermal
loads. For this analysis to be done, selection of material and their properties, motor hardware
performance and operating conditions, a few design considerations, etc.., are the parameters

12 | P a g e
required to be studied to obtain the solution.

Structural analysis is the determination of the effects of loads on physical structures and their
components. Structures subject to this type of analysis include all that must withstand loads,
such as buildings, bridges, aircraft and ships. Structural analysis employs the fields of applied
mechanics, materials science and applied mathematics to compute a structure's deformations,
internal forces, stresses, support reactions, accelerations, and stability. The results of the
analysis are used to verify a structure's fitness for use, often precluding physical tests.
Structural analysis is thus a key part of the engineering design of structures.

1.2 OBJECTIVE OF THESIS

1.2.1 GENERAL OBJECTIVE

The main objective of this thesis is to conduct a detailed theoretical and experimental study
on pyrogen igniter particularly rocket motor head end as well as an investigation of the
influence of rocket motor pressure, MEOP of Pyrogen ignitor and also for its optimum
performance for SRM startup or ignition

1.2.2 SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES

 To make a clear theoretical base for different types of igniters used in missile system, and
through study on pyrogen type igniters for SRM application; conducting an experimental
analysis of its strain data at every pressure step, maximum & minimum principal strains,
von mises stress.

1.3 SCOPE OF THE STUDY

The scope of the thesis includes the following important topics:

1. Theoretical study of Material used for rocket motor head-end and its composition as
well as its mechanical properties.

2. Detailed study on boundary conditions acting at two different locations subjected to

different pressures.

13 | P a g e
 3. Design rocket motor head-end

4. Modeling the rocket motor head-end choosing suitable material.

5. Simulation of rocket motor head-end.

6. The structural analysis result comparison has carried out with test results.

7. Theoretically validate the experimental results.

1.4 CONSTRUCTION FEATURE OF SRM

The force needed to propel solid rocket motor (SRM) is primely obtained from the
combustion of a propellant at prescribed pressure, temperature condition. Thus, the
fundamental use of igniter in rocket propulsion is to induce a combustion reaction of a
solid propellant in a precisely controlled manner at a restricted burn rate. A designer of
SRM ignition system must be able to understand the requirements of particular type of
igniters. Lack of theoretical knowledge is considered as great obstacle to meet the
requirements at low costs with reliable design procedure. Therefore, it has been rely on an
empirically derived formulations that cannot effectively consist and coordinate all
relevant design variables and are not suitable for design optimization

The fundamental function of an igniter in rocket motor (SRM) is to enable the exposed
surface of solid propellant of rocket motor to a thermal state that results in a sustainable
combustion of a propellant within a prescribed ignition time or delay. It is observed that
for optimum solid rocket propellant ignition process a proper interaction of fundamental
parameters such as temperature (T), pressure (P) and time (t) are required. Similarly, the
chemical composition of propellant and its grain size and shape also plays a major role in
ignition performance.

Based on the above parameter igniters are classified in to various types. The most
significant classification of igniters is based on the energy release system, which produces
the required amount of pressure, temperature and heat flux required for combustion of a
propellant in SRM. The two basic classifications of ignitors for SRM are pyrotechnic and
pyrogen igniters

14 | P a g e
 A solid rocket motor (SRM) is constructed from the following main parts of the rocket:
Solid rocket motor case (RMC), insulation, igniter, nozzle and solid propellant

1.4.1 ROCKET MOTOR CASING(RMC)

It is a cylindrical structural part which encloses the propellant grain, solid propellant
igniter and insulating material. The solid propellant combustion process takes place
inside the combustion chamber with in motor casing. RMC required to resist internal
pressure that resulting from the solid propellant combustion, which is estimated as
3.00 MPa to 30.00 MPa, designed with an appropriate safety factor. RMC is most-
frequently constructed from metal materials of high strength steels and recently from
composite materials. In designing RMC, we have to know the effect of stresses
induced in a casing from combustion chamber pressure and the thermal stresses,
stresses due to bending loads and inertial forces while determining the required
thickness of the casing and determining material of the motor casing

(a) Sectional view of rocket motor and its components

(b) Full representation of 3-D view of SRM

Figure 1.3 Constructional feature of typical solid rocket

15 | P a g e
1.4.2 INSULATION

An insulation in SRM is a layer of heat protection material placed in between the

internal surface of the casing material and exposed external surface of the burning

propellant. The use of insulator material is just to prevent the casing from attainment

of temperature that can damage its structural integrity. The high temperature of

propellant combustion gases inside SRM may ranging from 2,000 0K to 3,500 0K,

which needs a thermal protection system of subcomponents of the SRM. Usually,

insulator materials are characterized by very low thermal conductivity, good capacity

of ablative cooling and high heat capacity. The common thermal insulation materials

in SRM casing application includes Ethylene-Propylene-Diene-Monomer (EPDM) or

ROCASIN (Rocket CASing INsulation) with reinforcing materials.

1.4.3 AN IGNITER

It is one of an essential part of SRM construction, which is assembled in the rocket

motor to achieve the ignition process in SRM. Basically, an igniter induces the
combustion reaction inside combustion chamber of SRM in a controlled manner by
producing sufficient amount of heat flux. A rocket motor igniter provides the
necessary quantity of heat to ignite or initiate the rocket motor propellant. The SRM
igniter uses an electro explosive device (EED) to stimulate the ignition of ignitor
charge, which in turn ignites a propellant grain. An ignition system provides sufficient
energy to a solid rocket propellant surface to initiate stable combustion. The charge of
ignitor requires a tremendous amount of specific energy, and designed to release hot
gases or a solid particles of ignition charge. The heat releasing compositions used in
an ignitor includes black powder (BP), metal-oxidants and solid propellant. The
igniter, starts the rocket operating when an electrical signal is received.

1.4.4 ROCKET NOZZLE

The high pressure and temperature gases of combustion products of rocket motor are
ejected through a converging-diverging section of a rocket motor called a nozzle.

16 | P a g e
 Inside a motor the chemical reaction take place to produce chemical energy of the
propellant and then converted to kinetic energy of gas that propels the motor, in the
forward direction which is known as thrust. The proper selection of material for
nozzle is a significant step of design of rocket motor, particularly for the nozzle throat
where an erosive hot particle flow will take place. Some of the materials used for
nozzle throat include refractory metal, and composites of carbon or graphite that can
resist erosive burning effects. Common nozzle materials are carbon phenolic, asbestos
phenolic with throat as graphite

1.4.4 SOLID PROPELLANTS

It is casted in with various geometric configuration or propellant grain. The two main
categories of solid propellant grains configurations are case bonded and free-standing grain
configuration. A case-bonded configuration is made by directly casting the grain into the
motor case, which is already made with thermal insulation material.

In a free-standing configuration, the grains are not directly cast into the motor case. Instead,
the propellant is pre-casted in some special mold. Once the curing process of the cast is
completed, the grain is extracted from the mold. Therefore, the grains are then loaded to the
insulated motor case on the assembly line. This type of configurations are called cartridge
loaded grains configuration. The geometric design of a grain configuration defines the
performance of a given solid propellant type and nozzle design

Figure 1.4 Generic SRM components and its cross-sectional view

The propellant in SRM burns at the proper rate known as burn rate in order to maintain the

17 | P a g e
desired amount of thrust profile and need to have structural continuity to resist the pressure
load and acceleration introduced during ignition operation. The propellants are classified into
two categories: Double base propellant (DBP), and Composite propellants (CP).

In DBP the fuel and an oxidizer composition are mixed in a molecular level. The primary
ingredients in these types of propellants are nitrocellulose (NC) dissolved in nitroglycerine
(NG) with minor additives. Both NC and NG ingredients are explosives containing fuel and
oxidizer within molecular structure. DBP have been used in military applications.
The second general type of solid propellant type is composite propellant (CP). CP is a
heterogeneous mixture of fuel, oxidizer and binder. Fuels are generally metallic powders and
oxidizers are crystalline materials. Aluminum (Al) being the most common metallic powder
fuel while ammonium perchlorate (AP) is the most popular crystalline oxidizer. The chemical
formula for AP is NH4ClO4 subscript. The binder materials are rubber-based material that
serves to hold the mixture together in a cohesive grain. The binder material includes
hydroxyl-terminated polybutadiene (HTPB) and polybutadiene nitrile (PBAN). To improve
the ballistic performance of the propellant, small amounts of highly energetic materials such
as “Her Majestic Explosive” (HMX) have been added

1.4.5 ROCKET MOTOR STATIC TEST

Performance of rocket motors is evaluated in static test bed. Motors are tested against
thrust wall of nearly 100-ton capacity. During the test pressure, thrust and vibration data
is evaluated and its data is recorded in data acquisition system It is the static pad of the
rocket motor which is used to test and visualize the data such as pressure, specific impulse
and thrust to calculate other parameters which are important. By using static motor is easy to
adjust, cheap and reliable. The motor Static test pad is one of the advanced ways to test the
motor performance without waste a lot of money

The basic working principle of the static test pad is to make the motor ignite and push the
load cell to calculate the force as the rocket. Newtons law of motion are the basic equation to
calculate the motor performance. By using the second law and third law of motion we would

18 | P a g e
know the thrust and the acceleration in real time. As the mass of the rocket reduced due to the

reduction of the motor fuel. That can affect the motor performance.

Fig 1.5 Rocket Motor static test

Arranging Data Acquisition System pressure vs time can be plotted. From that graph Pmax
need to be noted. For safe design testing 1.2 factor is considered on MEOP and
experimentally PPT tested is carried out and checked for any leakage in the fluid from the test
piece

19 | P a g e
 Fig 1.6 graph illustrates the Rocket motor curve with MEOP of 73.5 bar

For case 1: MEOP =73.5bar (refer from fig 1.6)

On considering factor Pmax =1.2*73.5=88 bar
So PPT is carried out at 88 bar to stimulate rocket motor pressure

1.4.6 PYROGEN STATIC TEST

Pyrogen Static Test is to verify in safe conditions the correct functioning of ignitor and verify
functional parameters like pressure curve inside ignitor case, gas flow ejected from the exit
nozzles

Pyrogen igniters are evaluated adequately for reproducibility and quality control by
measuring the pressure-time profile during test firing. In this respect, the pyrogen acts as a
small self-contained rocket motor. The igniter is fired in the open with internal operating
pressures taken by use of conventional pressure-sensing transducers and high-speed recording
equipment.

20 | P a g e
 Fig 1.7: Pyrogen static test

Arranging Data Acquisition System pressure vs time can be plotted. From that graph Pmax
need to be noted. For safe design testing 1.2 factor is considered on MEOP and
experimentally PPT tested is carried out and checked for any leakage in the fluid from the test
piece

Fig 1.8: Graph illustrates Performance of pyrogen

For case 2: MEOP =108 bar (refer from fig 1.8)
On considering factor Pmax =1.2*108=130 bar
So PPT is carried out at 130 bar to simulate MEOP of Pyrogen igniter

21 | P a g e
1.5 METHODOLOGY

1. Literature review and data collection regarding different types of igniters thereby
focusing on pyrogen igniter and its material composition.
2. Collecting and interpreting the data from the NASA data manual/sheets and other
aerospace relate books, journals, publications and exploring internet.
3. Detailed study on boundary conditions
4. Design rocket motor head-end
5. Modeling and simulations of the rocket motor head-end
6. The structural analysis result comparison has carried out with test results.
7. Theoretically validate the experimental results.
8. Finally, discussion and analysis of the results and then based on the result
recommendation and conclusion was made for the thesis work.

CHAPTER-2.
LITERATURE SURVEY

ASME [1] Pressure vessel code section VIII division 2 gives the equations for the calculation
of shell and dome thickness. This Division contains mandatory requirements, specific
prohibition and nonmandatory guidance for the design, materials, fabrication, examination
inspection, testing and certification of pressure vessels and their associated pressure relief
devices

Alexander flake [5] developed equation for the calculation of minimum required area of the
bolt and the thickness of flange. This approach is called as Schneider approach.

NASA SP-8025 [6] has given the details about the material properties for the various solid
rocket motors. Based upon these material properties the material is selected for the solid
rocket motor to withstand the pressures that are going to act on the motor casing. NASA
has given the solid propellant performance prediction and analysis. Based upon this the
performance of the solid propellant rocket motor the design is done by considering the loads
that are going to act on the solid rocket motor casing. The effectiveness of this process is
predicted and assessed by evaluating the reaction thrust developed through the pressure-

22 | P a g e
imparted momentum of the expanded exhaust gases Mathematical modeling used to simulate
solid rocket combustion-chamber internal flow fields is reasonably good for steady-state and
transient flow prediction.

NASA [7] has given the details of the solid rocket motor preliminary design review and
structural analysis of the solid rocket motor factory joint including metallic and non-metallic
components. A structural analysis is performed to verify the structural integrity of the solid
rocket motor at certain working temperature.

NASA [8] has given the solid propellant performance prediction and analysis. Based upon
this the performance of the solid propellant rocket motor the design is done by considering
the loads that are going to act on the solid rocket motor casing. The effectiveness of this
process is predicted and assessed by evaluating the reaction thrust developed through the
pressure-imparted momentum of the expanded exhaust gases Mathematical modeling used to
simulate solid rocket combustion-chamber internal flow fields is reasonably good for steady-
state and transient flow prediction.

David Heckman [9] in 1988 has explored that the finite element analysis is an extremely
powdery tool when used correctly. For pressure vessels finite element analysis provides an
additional tool for use in analysis. However, it must be compared to other available data, not
taken as being correct just because it looks right.

Roy Hartfield [54] In their A Review of Analytical Methods for Solid Rocket Motor Grain
Analysis presents the Analytical methods for solid rocket motor grain design are proving to
be tremendously beneficial to some recent efforts to optimize solid-rocket propelled missiles.
The analytical approach has fallen out of favor in recent decades; however, for some classes
of grains, the analytical methods are much more efficient than grid-based techniques. This
paper provides a review of analytical methods for calculating burn area and port area for a
variety of cylindrically perforated solid rocket motor grains. The equations for the star, long
spoke wagon wheel, and dendrite grains are summarized and the development of the burn-
back equations for the short spoke wagon wheel and the truncated star configurations are
included. This set of geometries and combinations of these geometries represent a very wide
range of possibilities for two-dimensional grain design

23 | P a g e
Mahesh B. Gosavi[2] In their A Review on Failure Modes of Composite Pressure Vessel had
proposed Modern composites, using continuous fibers in a resin matrix, are important
candidate materials in the engineering of energy-efficient structures. In many applications,
fiber / matrix materials are lighter, stronger and more cost effective when compared with
traditional materials like metals. Filament-wound tubular structures, more specifically
pressure vessels, offer significant weight saving over conventional all metallic ones for
containment of high-pressure gases and liquids. The main advantage of COPV’s over similar
sized monolithic metallic pressure vessels is a much better strength-to-density ratio due to
significant mass reductions. Currently, a large amount of research works has been
concentrated on the stress and failure analysis of the cylindrical part of the composite metallic
vessels. The study of the stress and strain distribution in the structure is of prime interest for
designing the vessel. The complicated failure mechanisms and degradation mechanisms are
distinct characteristic of composites although they exhibit high stiffness- and strength-density
ratios. In this paper various failure modes of composite pressure vessels are studied such as
failure due to hygrothermal stresses, influence of flaws, effect of thermal loads etc

Sidhant Singh [13] In their Solid Rocket Motor for Experimental Sounding Rockets had
proposed an Experimental Sounding rocket are major contributors for research in the field of
aerospace engineering. However, experimental sounding rockets are rarely used by institutes
in India for student research projects. A major factor that forestalls the use of sounding
rockets in student research projects is the unavailability of rocket motors which involves
complex machining and explosive propellants; this problem was encountered by us while
developing sounding rocket for research and learning purpose. The paper is focused on
design and construction of a solid rocket motor that can be utilized as the main propulsion
unit in experimental sounding rockets by researchers. Initially, basic designs were evaluated
and the different concepts of propellant configuration were observed. The availability, ease of
manufacturing and casting of propellants was a major factor in determining the suitable
propellant

Mohamad Izwan[12]Ghazali In their Design Fabricate and Testing Small Rocket Motor
discussed the study on Solid Rocket Motor (SRM) based solid propellant. This project focus
on and discusses the study of optimum design based SRM characteristics including the
methods of the optimum design selection and fabrication, analysis using COSMOS and static

24 | P a g e
thrust testing. Before that, the researcher has focus on the fundamental of solid rocket motor
for designing and fabricating. There are two main factors need to be considered in the design
selection and fabrication which are performance or processability and mechanical strength.
The theoretical performance of the propellant was obtained by using CHEM program.
Strain Gauge Rosettes:
Strain gauge rosettes are used often in engineering practice to determine strain states at
specific points on a structure Figure 2.1 illustrates three commonly used strain gage rosette
configurations. Each of these configurations is designed with a specific task in mind. The far-
right rosette in Figure 2.1 is referred to as a tee rosette. Tee rosettes are two element rosettes
and should only be used when the principal strain directions are known in advance from other
considerations. The middle rosette in Figure 1 is referred to as a rectangular rosette and the
far left as a delta rosette. These three element rosettes are used in applications where the
principal strains are unknown. There are many other parameters that need to be taken into
consideration when choosing a strain gage. Literature from manufacturers of strain gages
provides some guidance in choosing the proper strain gage for a given application.

Fig 2.1: Examples of common strain gauge rosettes encountered in engineering practice

The primary focus of this treatise is the rectangular rosette. Figure 2.2 illustrates the
numbering sequence and geometry that will be used in the following discussion. Figure 2.3
shows an actual rectangular strain gage. rosette installed on a structure with the lead wires
soldered onto the terminal tabs.

25 | P a g e
Fig 2.2 Illustration of the orientation of the rectangular strain gauges rosette gauge rosette
being evaluated in this example

Figure 2.3: Rectangular strain gage rosette installed on a structure with lead wires attached.

26 | P a g e
 CHAPTER-3.
FUNDAMENTALS OF PYROGEN THEORIES

3.1 INTRODUCTION
The search for an adequate theory to explain fully the solid propellant ignition process has
resulted in the creation of several analytical models, three of which appear to represent the
primary schools of thought. These three models are generally referred to as the solid-phase,
heterogeneous, and gas-phase ignition theories. Although each theory has demonstrated some
credence under certain conditions, no one theory is universally accepted by specialists in the
field. The primary differences among the models are the location of the exothermic reaction
with respect to the propellant surface and the physical state of the reacting ingredients. In
most practical ignition systems, solid propellant ignition is dominated by a thermal induction
interval during which the temperature of the propellant surface is raised by external heating to
the temperature at which chemical reaction rates become significant. Propellant exothermic
reactions rapidly become the dominant heat source and ignition of the propellant is achieved.

3.1.1 Solid-phase theory

The first analytical model describing the solid-phase theory of solid propellant ignition is
generally attributed to Hicks. This model defines the transient temperature of the propellant
surface during ignition in terms of heat transferred to the surface from externally applied heat
flux and heat generated by exothermic chemical reactions of the solid propellant. Making the
classical assumptions of one-dimensional heat flow in a semi-infinite solid, the thermal
heating is described by the partial differential equation
ρc (∂T/ ∂t ) = k(∂2T/ ∂x2) + ρQZ exp (- E/RT )
where
p = propellant density in solid state, gm/cm3
c=specific heat at constant pressure, cal/gm-C
T= temperature, °K
t = time, sec
k = coefficient of thermal conductivity, cal/cm-sec-°C
Q = heat of reaction per unit mass, cal/gm
Z = pre-exponential factor, sec-1
E = energy of activation, cal/mol

27 | P a g e
R = universal gas constant, cal/K-mol
x = distance from gas-solid interface, cm

3.1.2 Igniter energy release

To obtain the total rate of heat input to the propellant surface, the heat transmitted through
convection, conduction, radiation, recombination, chemical reaction, and condensation at the
propellant surface must be included. During the thermal induction interval the convection and
radiation modes are strongly dominant, and other effects are normally neglected. For this
condition, the heat transfer at any point along the flow channel in the rocket motor may be
expressed in the relationship
q = h( Tg – Ts ) + σε(Tg4- Ts4 )
where, h = film heat-transfer coefficient, cal/sec-cm2-°K
Tg = igniter gas temperature at point of contact with propellant surface film, °K
Ts = temperature at the propellant surface, °K
σ= Stefan-Boltzmann constant, cal/cm2-sec-oK4
ε= hot particle emissivity, dimensionless

The quantity of energy required to ignite commonly used motor propellants has been
evaluated by use of convective heating, conductive heating, radiative heating, and chemical
heating. Effect of the rate at which energy is applied, environmental pressure, and
environmental gas composition have each been evaluated and found to be a significant factor
under certain conditions.

Fig 3.1: Effect of pressure on propellant ignition time at various heat flux values.
The arc-image furnace, which uses radiative heating, has been used extensively to evaluate

28 | P a g e
propellant ignition characteristics. This furnace permits closely controlled flux intensities to
be varied independently of such environmental conditions as pres-sure, gas composition, and
gas velocity. A significant contribution so obtained is the determination of pressure effect on
propellant ignition. It has been established that most propellants exhibit a "critical ignition
pressure" below which ignition cannot be achieved and that ignition energy requirements
tend to decrease as pressure is increased above this level until a pressure-independent regime
is reached. This characteristic is illustrated graphically.

The combustion process in rocket propulsion systems is very efficient, when compared to
other power plants, because the combustion temperatures are relatively very high; this
accelerates the rate of chemical reaction, helping to achieve nearly complete combustion. The
energy released in the combustion is between 95 and 99.5% of the possible maximum. This is
difficult to improve. The rocket motor designers have been concerned not so much with the
burning process as with controlling the combustion (start, stop, heat effects) and with
preventing the occurrence of combustion instability.

3.2 IGNITION PROCESS

This section is concerned with the mechanism or the process for initiating the combustion of
a solid propellant grain. The igniter in a solid rocket motor generates the heat and gas
required for motor ignition. Motor ignition must usually be complete in a fraction of a second
for all but the very large motors ignition process is divided into three phases for analytical
purposes:

Phase I, Ignition time lag: the period from the moment the igniter receives a signal until the
first surface grain burns.
Phase II, Flame-spreading interval: the time from first ignition of the grain surface until the
complete grain burning area has been ignited.
Phase III, Chamber-filling interval: the time for completing the chamber-filling process and
for reaching equilibrium chamber pressure and flow.

The ignition will be successful once enough grain surface is ignited and burning, so that the
motor will continue to raise its own pressure to the operating chamber pressure. The critical
process seems to be a gas-phase reaction above the burning surface, when propellant vapors
or decomposition products interact with each other and with the igniter gas products. If the

29 | P a g e
igniter is not powerful enough, some grain surfaces may burn for a short time, but the flame
will be extinguished.

Fig 3.2: Typical ignition pressure as a function of time. It shows the time trace of the igniter
propellant together with the propellant of the main grain. An electric signal is received a few
milliseconds before time zero

3.3 CLASSIFICATION BASED ON ENERGY RELEASE SYSTEM

SRM are ignited using ether a pyrotechnic or a pyrogen igniter. The pyrotechnic igniters act
directly onto the propellant surface of the SRM with very hot particles which in turn,
initiate/ignite the solid propellant. The pyrogen igniters is applicable for very large rocket
motors such as ballistic missiles. The propulsive force (thrust) of a rocket is resulting from
the combustion of propellant at high pressure and temperature

(i) Pyrotechnic igniter

It is defined as a SRM igniter employing a solid explosive charges or energetic materials

usually propellant which is capable of providing energy to burn large surfaces within short
burning period. Pyrotechnic ignitor consists of pyrotechnic chemicals or charges in the form
of various size and shape as powder, granules, or pellets as main charge.

Pyrotechnic compositions contain fuel and oxidizer which are elements, alloys or
compounds. Frequently used elemental fuels are metallic powders of aluminum, magnesium,
titanium, iron, manganese, tungsten, boron, etc. compounds used as fuels are hydrocarbon,

30 | P a g e
picrate’s, carbohydrates, sulphides of arsenic and antimony, etc. The oxidizers used are easily
reducible metallic oxides or peroxides, nitrates, chlorates, and chromates of alkali and
alkaline earth metals. The charge is contained in vented or perforated tubes. The initiation is
generally through electrical means

(ii) Pyrogen Igniter

The pyrogen is basically a small rocket motor used to igniter a larger rocket motor. The
boost charge, usually a readily ignited pelleted pyrotechnics, propagates the ignition train
from the initiators to the pyrogen propellant grain. In some small pyrogens, this charge is
eliminated and ignition is accomplished directly from the initiator. Reaction products from
the pyrogen grain are expelled through the pyrogen nozzle and impinge on the surface of the
motor propellant. The pyrogen chamber and nozzle must be structurally adequate to contain
the combustion products during igniter operation, after which they may be either retained or
consumed. In larger motors, igniters of this type are sometimes mounted externally and fired
in through the nozzle. A major objective in the design of the pyrogen igniter is to obtain the
necessary energy output while keeping the igniter as small and as light in weight as possible.
Occasionally, the designer in restricted to using a pyrogen propellant that is the same as the
motor propellant. When the choice is not so restricted the designer considers carefully the
ballistic characteristics of the main available propellants in relation to particular needs.
Pyrogen ignition system is shown in Fig. 3.3

Fig. 3.3 Typical pyrogen igniter

Once the igniter charge weight is worked out, the next step in the design of pyrogen igniter is
to arrive at a suitable grain configuration for the igniter grain (main charge). To maintain
igniter weight and size at a minimum, the grain design must provide the required surface area
and web thickness within the smallest volume possible. A high burning rate propellant is
recommended to reduce the required propellant surface area. The propellant should be easily

31 | P a g e
ignitable at low pressures and should produce igniter chamber pressure higher than the
operating pressure of the chamber. Grain web greater than required for the minimum burning
duration is provided to obtain adequate grain strength.

The grain configuration is often so selected that the pressure time curve is initially
progressive till such time the pressure inside the main motor exceeds the critical pressure and
then regressive to prevent excessive ignition pressure spikes in the main motor as by this time
a considerable portion of the main propellant is already ignited.

Pyrogen igniter designed in the same principles as pyrotechnic ignitor for a small rocket
motor application and consists of a cast propellant grain of fast-burning type as the main
charge. A pyrogen igniter is basically a small rocket motor that is used to ignite a larger
rocket motor. The pyrogen is not designed to produce thrust. All use one or more nozzle
orifices, both sonic and supersonic types, and most use conventional rocket motor grain
formulations and design technology. Heat transfer from the pyrogen to the motor grain is
largely convective, with the hot gases contacting the grain surface as contrasted to a highly
radiative energy emitted by pyrotechnic igniters.

For pyrogen igniters the initiator and the booster charge are very similar to the designs used
in pyrotechnic igniters. Reaction products from the main charge impinge on the surface of the
rocket motor grain, producing motor ignition. Common practice on the very large motors is to
mount externally, with the pyrogen igniter pointing its jet up through the large motor nozzle.
In this case, the igniter becomes a piece of ground-support equipment

The propellants used in pyrogens must conform to requirements similar to those for
propellants used in rocket motors. Consequently, the testing of these propellants is similar to
that used for rocket motors. However, frequently the tolerances on burning rate and the
physical properties of propellants used in pyrogen igniters are not as critical as when the
propellants are used in rocket motors. The required energy flux outputs can be achieved over
a relatively wide burning-rate tolerance. The smaller propellant webs, thicknesses, and
lengths in pyrogens result in less strain from temperature changes.

32 | P a g e
 Fig3.4: Pyrogen Ignitor Rocket Motor Assembly

1.Pyro cartridge
2.Head end flange with O-Rings and fasteners
3.Pyrotechnic Ignitor
4.Composite casing (Glass Epoxy)
5.HTPB (Hydroxyl-Terminated Polybutadiene) composite Propellant Grain
6.Nozzle Inserts
7. ROCASINE Nozzle end Inhibition

3.4 EXPLOSIVE TRAIN

Fig 3.5 a) Explosive chain for pyrogen igniter

33 | P a g e
 Fig 3.5 b) Stages of Ignition

The control system transmitting electrical impulses as input, initiates the pyro-cartridge
which Charges the igniter mass. This charge mass in the form of pellets, burns and produces
gases, emits from the multiple flash holes. The igniter functions only up to 50 milli seconds
to the maximum extent. The fire flash produced by the pyro-cartridge charge hits on the
pyrotechnic igniters, uses solid explosives as heat producing
materials. On again fire flash the pyrogenic propellant ignites and produces high temperature
gases with operating time of 60 milli seconds to the maximum. These gases pass through
nozzle with high velocity and hits over the inner grain surface of rocket motor that leads to
the initiation for combustion of solid propellant inside rocket motor. Whereas once the rocket
motor starts, the igniter has to withstand high temperature and motor pressure externally. The
insulating material protects the internal metal canister even after charring and mechanical
erosion. The retainable igniters are required in long duration motors where ejection of igniter
is not possible. During the complete burn duration of the motor, the igniter sustains the severe
thermal environment. Generally, these igniters are positioned at head end of the motor.

3.4 PERFORMANCE PARAMTERS OF ROCKET MOTOR

3.4.1 BURNING TIME, ACTION TIME, PRESSURE RISE TIME

The burning time, action time, and pressure rise time at ignition are defined in Fig. 3.6. Time
zero is actually when the firing voltage is applied to the ignition squib or prime charge.
Visible exhaust gas will actually come out of the rocket nozzle for a period longer than the
action time, but the effluent mass flow ahead and behind the action time is actually very
small.

Fig 3.6: Definitions of burning time and action time

34 | P a g e
Ignition Delay: It is the time taken from start signal to 10% Pmax. The graph between Pressure
of the thrust and time is shown above which at very first, move linearly for less than 0.1 sec
called Ignition delay time
Initial Maximum Pressure, Pmax: After the web thickness of the grain gradually increases
pressure or thrust hence attains maximum peak point which is initial maximum value.
Ignition Rise Time: Time taken for 10%Pmax to 75%Pmax. Successive burning of contour lines
of grain of propellent takes place such that ignition happens gradually and pressure is built up
very steeply in graph to the corresponding time is ignition rise time this happens less than 0.3
sec.
Burning Time, or Effective Burning Time, tb: Usually, the interval from 10% maximum
initial pressure (or thrust) to web burnout, with web burnout usually taken as the aft tangent-
bisector point on the pressure–time trace (see Fig. 3.6).
Action Time, ta: The burning time plus most of the time to burn Unburned propellant
remaining at the time of web burnout typically, the interval between the initial and final 10%
pressure (or thrust) points on the pressure–time trace) known as action time (ta).
Web Thickness: The minimum thickness of the grain from the initial burning surface to the
insulated case wall or to the intersection of another burning surface is called web thickness
(can refer to fig 3.7)

Fig 3.7: Diagram of successive burning surface contours, each a fixed small time apart. It
shows the growth of the internal cavity. The lengths of these contour lines are roughly the
same (within ±15%), which means that the burning area is roughly constant.

35 | P a g e
Propellent surface burns layer by layer called regression burning. Performance of the
propellent is directly proportional to the burn surface area.As the propellent gets consumed
and reaches the outer counter line then performance of the pressure Vs time comes down

3.4.2 PROPELLANT GRAIN AND GRAIN CONFIGURATION

The grain is the shaped mass of processed solid propellant inside the rocket motor. The
propellant material and geometrical configuration of the grain determine the motor
performance characteristics.

Progressive Burning: Burn time during which thrust, pressure, and burning surface area
increase (see Fig. 3.8).
Regressive Burning: Burn time during which thrust, pressure, and burning surface area
decrease (see Fig.3.8).
Neutral Burning: Motor burn time during which thrust, pressure, and burning surface area
remain approximately constant (see Fig. 3.8), typically within about ±15%. Many grains are
neutral burning.

Fig 3.8: Classification of grains according to their pressure–time characteristics.

36 | P a g e
 CHAPTER-4:
MATERIAL SELECTION CRITERIA

The selection of material for Pyrogen-ignitor head-end is a challenging task to the design
engineers in a particular field of the rocket science. The selection of material for a Pyrogen-
ignitor head-end should be based on specific parameters such as higher specific strength and
stiffness, low weight, tailor, machinability, availability, easiness for service conditions in
high temperature and pressure.

4.1 CONVENTIONAL METALLIC MATERIALS

The metallic materials that we use conventionally include temper steel, Ni-Cr-Mo-V,
aluminum, titanium alloys and also maraging steel are the most common material used in
materials of Pyrogen-ignitor head-end. Temper steel is used due to its high strength and easy
availability of design data (or material properties) and easy manufacturing process. Another
most commonly used conventional material for Pyrogen-ignitor head-end is Ni-Cr-Mo-V. Ni-
Cr-Mo-possess high fracture toughness that provides excellent leaked proof property for the
material. The alloy of aluminum and titanium provide high strength ranging up to 1,600 MPa.

Maraging Steel is an alloy of steel of new generation type that consists very low carbon. This
type of steel is very expensive and used only in critical regions of the rocket motor.is Ultra
high strength steel of grade MDN 250 which is a nickel-based alloy. It is characterized by
high specific strength, easily available, and with well-established fabrication technology.
maraging steel of grade MDN-250 has been widely used in a structure used in space
technology and defense programs. The compositions are like carbon (≤0.02%), nickel (18%),
cobalt (8%), molybdenum (4.5%), Titanium (0.5%)

The welding of Modified 15CDV6 Plates by Automatic GTAW process without preheating,
was difficult because of Carbon Equivalent (C E) > 0.9. Yield strength for Modified
15CDV6steel (0.26C, 4cr, 0.68 Mo), i.e., 1400-1420 MPa almost 40% higher than yield
strength of the Ti-inoculated standard 15CDV6 steel (0.15 c, 1.50 Cr.0.8 Mo), i.e., 990-1020
MPa.

37 | P a g e
Table 3: Materials used in metallic Pyrogen-ignitor head-end and their properties
Material Modified 15 CDV6 Modified Maraging Cobalt free 3Ni-Cr-2Si
Properties 15CDV6 15CDV6 steel mild steel
(MDN-250)
UTS (MPa) 1600 1080 1600 1750 1765 1950
Yield 1470 930 1470 1680 1725 1650
strength
(MPa)
Elongation 8.0 12.0-14.0 8.0 10.0 5 10
(%)
Fracture 90-100 100-120.0 90-100 80.0 90 80-90.0
toughness
(MPa/m)
Weld 21.70 12.80 21.70 23.10 22.68 25.60
efficiency
(%)

15CDV6 is a low carbon (0.15%), chromium (1.5%), molybdenum (0.8 to 0.9%), vanadium
(0.2 to 0.3%) heat-treatable steel with high strength after heat treatment (1080-1280 N/mm²).
The alloy is easily welded and does not require localized heat treatment after welding.
15CDV6 combines outstanding yield strength with good toughness. Chromium Molybdenum
Vanadium Heat Treatable Steel Tube
15CDV6 is a chromium-molybdenum-vanadium heat treatable steel with high strength after
heat treatment (1080-1280 N/mm²). Alloy 15CDV6 is available in Bar, Round bar, Sheet,
plate and Tube

Benefits of using 15CDV6 include:

 Outstanding yield strength
 Excellent weldability
 Good overall mechanical properties
 Good toughness and creep resistance
 Cost-effective alternative
 Heat-treatable

38 | P a g e
Table 4: Chemical Compositions of 15CDV6 Steel
Weight C P Si V Mn S Cr Mo
%
Max 0.12 - - 0.20 0.80 - 1.25 0.80
Min 0.18 0.020 0.20 0.30 1.10 0.015 1.50 1.00

Table 5: Material Properties across different directions of 15CDV6 Steel

Property (Tangential) Along the (Transverse) Across the
grain grain

Tensile Strength (MPa) 1080 (min.) 1000 (min.)

Yield Strength (MPa) 930 (min.) 850 (min.)

%Elongation 10 10

Hardness (HB) 290-360 290-360

Impact toughness (J) 60(min.) 60(min.)

39 | P a g e
 CHAPTER 5
DESIGN METHODOLOGY AND IMPLEMENTATION

Pyrogen igniter head-end as shown in fig 5.1 is basically a single- domed right cylinder with
one end opening and a thread joint between metallic head and composite casing. This Head-
end firmly holds the rocket motor casing and having Head end flange with O-Rings and
fasteners. The Top portion on the flange comprises of 3 ignitor pressure port and 1 motor
pressure port. The 3-ignitor pressure port is arranged such a way that one is at top center
plane is for pyro flash and rest 2 ignitor pressure port are separated by 120 0 apart which are
used to stimulate MEOP of pyrogen igniter. Motor pressure port is used to stimulate rocket
motor pressure

Fig 5.1: Pyrogen igniter head-end (photograph)

40 | P a g e
 Fig 5.2: Bottom View of Pyrogen igniter head-end (photograph)

5.1 2D LAYOUT DRAWING:

Auto Cad 2022 version is used for 2D modelling Software for integral part.

Fig 5.1 Auto Cad interface

41 | P a g e
 Figure -5.3 AutoCAD drawing with appropriate dimensions and tolerances

BASIC DRAWING COMMANDS FOR AUTOCAD:

Measuring Commands:

 Grid

 Snap
Basic Draw Commands:

 Circle

 Line

42 | P a g e
 Arc

Display Commands:

 Limits

 Zoom

 Pan

Editing Commands:

 Erase

 Trim

 Extend

Creating Layers Commands:

 Layer

 Line Type

Construction Commands:

 Array

 Copy

 Mirror

 Move

 Offset

 Fillet

 Chamfer

 O Snap

Placing Letters on Drawing:

 Text

43 | P a g e
 Text Alignment Options

Cross Hatching Options:

 Hatch Ansi31 & 35°

5.2 3D MODEL CREATION:

5.2.1 SOLIDWORKS INTERFACE

The modeling of each integral part by using SOLIDWORKS 2019 solid modeling software.
5.2.2 MODELING OF PYROGEN IGNITER HEAD-END
a) Modeling of Domed Right Cylinder:

44 | P a g e
Features used:
 Sketch
 Revolved boss/base

b) Modeling of fasteners provisions:

Features used:
 Sketch
 Extrude Cut

c) Modeling of Pressure Ports Head:

Features used:

45 | P a g e
  Sketch
 Boss Extrude
d) Modeling of Igniter Pressure Port:

Features used:
 Sketch
 Thread
 Extrude Cut

e) Modeling of threaded region on cylindrical shell:

Features used:

46 | P a g e
 Thread

f) Modeling of Motor Pressure Port

Features used:
 Sketch
 Thread
 Extrude Cut

g) Modeling of Igniter Pressure Port for Pyrogen Flash:

Features used:
 Sketch

47 | P a g e
 Thread
 Extrude Cut

5.2.3 VIEW ORIENTATIONS OF PYROGEN IGNITER HEAD-END MODEL:

Fig 5.4: Front view of Model

48 | P a g e
 Fig 5.5: Top view of Model

Fig 5.6: Side View of Model

49 | P a g e
 Fig 5.7: Isentropic View of Model

CHAPTER-6
THEORETICAL DESIGN CALCULATIONS

From Table 3 we selected 15CDV6 Steel. It is characterized by high specific strength, easily
available, and with well-established fabrication technology.
6.1 Material Properties of 15CDV6 Steel:

UTS (MPa): 1080MPa

Y.S(MPa) :930MPa
Elongation (%) =12
Young’s Modulus:200GPa

6.2 Factor of Safety selection criteria:

Table 6: Factor Safety across different stress:
Factor of Safety NY. S NU.T. S
Value 1.25 1.33

Where NY. S represents factor of safety on yield strength and NUTS is factor of safety on
UTS. The selection of above vales of factor of safety is based on AVP-32 and MIL standards

50 | P a g e
chosen.
6.3 Calculating the yield and ultimate stresses:

The Allowable yield stress:

Y . S 930
σ yield = = = 744 MPa
Ny . s 1.25

The Allowable ultimate tensile stress:

UTS 1080
σ UTS = = = 812.03 MPa
Nuts 1.33

The lowest of the above two allowable stresses σ yield = 744 MPa is taken for design.

6.4 Nomenclature:

P = Ignitor MEOP (in MPa)

R= Crown radius of dome (in mm)
r = Knuckle radius of dome
t'= Head End Dome thickness
D= Inner Diameter of shell thickness
Ŋweld= Weld Efficiency
Rc = internal radius of cylindrical portion
PCD =pitch circle diameter on which
E=Young’s Modulus of a material
µ = Poisson’s Ratio
δ= Radial Dilation of cylindrical casing
D'=Thread Root Diameter
L=Thread Length
D o = Flange Outer Diameter
H= Flange thickness
l = Distance between shell mid thickness to screw pitch hole
d'=Center to edge distance
C'= center to center distance between screws
N=No. of screws per unit length of circumference of screw pitch circle
σ max =σ allow= Allowable stress in material
d=screw diameter

51 | P a g e
ds=screw hole diameter
Ds=diameter of screw hole
n= Number of fasteners in the flange joint
d ' =b max= Distance from screw circle to outer edge of the flange
Ab = cross section area of one screw at root of thread
p' =MEOP of motor =pressure acting on plate over radius 'c'
a=radius of plate
h'= thickness of plate
σ'b = allowable screw stress
6.5 The inputs for Pyrogen igniter head-end:
R=210mm
r=15% of R
P=MEOP=130bar=13MPa
Rc = 102.5mm
Ŋweld =1
E = 200 * 106N/mm2
µ= 0.31
d=12mm
area factor = 0.8
σallowable = 744MPa
Ds=12.8mm
shear strength of epoxy composite = 44MPa
p'=88bar=8.8MPa

6.6 HARDWARE DESIGN CALCULATIONS:

1)Head End Dome Thickness:

( ( ))
0.5
1 R
M= 3+ ( ) ( Empirical Equation)
4 r

M=
1
4 ( ( ))
3+
210 0.5
31.5
M = 1.395
P∗R∗M
Thickness = t' = (Pressure vessel design formula)
2 σ allowable−0.2 P

52 | P a g e
 13∗210∗1.395
t' =
2∗744−0.2∗13
Thickness = t' = 2.56mm
Minimum thickness = 0.632mm
Thickness of 6mm has been considered to the head end dome based on experience of
previously designed and analyzed pyrogen igniters considering high bending moment due to
motor opening of ф 350mm and due to manufacturing requirements.

2)
a) cylindrical shell thickness:

PD
σ=
2t
PD
t= (For thin cylinders)
2 σ allowable∗ŋ weld
13∗240
t=
2∗744∗1
t=2.096mm(minimum)
minimum thickness of 10mm has been provided due to configuration and manufacturing
requirements

b) Dilation of cylindrical casing:

2
P Rc
δ= ∗(2−μ) (for thin cylinders)
2t ' E
13∗102.52
δ= ∗(2−0.31)
2∗6∗( 200∗103 )
=0.0915mm(radial)

3)Thread joint between metallic head end and composite casing:

Thread shear load = Igniter MEOP * projected area

53 | P a g e
 π 2
=P* ¿ D
4
π 2
= 13 * ¿ 240
4
= 588106.144 N
Thread shear area = π∗D '∗L∗area factor
As = π∗thread root dia∗thread length∗Area factor
Thread root diameter = Nominal diameter - p/2
D' =Dn-p/2
D' = 260 – 3/2
D ' = 258.5
Assume area factor = 0.8
As= 3.14∗258.8∗82∗0.8
= 53273.871 mm2
P s 588106.144
Thread shear stress = =
As 53273.871
=11.03 N/mm2
Since shear strength of epoxy composite = 44MPa
44
FOS = = 3.98
11.03

4)Flange Joint Design:

a) Bolting Pattern
The igniter head end dome flange is
connected to the motor headend
polar boss though 48 no’s of
M12*3 screws at PCD 390mm
D o−PCD
center to edge distance =
2
d' =

54 | P a g e
420−390
2
d' = 15mm
π∗PCD
center to center distance between screws =
n
π∗390
C' =
48
C' =25.51mm
C' ≈2.12d (Screw diameter, d=12mm)

b) Flange thickness:

R.W Schneider approach for calculating flange thickness

Rc = 205/2 = 102.5mm
390
d' = – 102.5
2
=92.5mm
n
N=
π∗PCD
= 0.0499
390
l= −102.5
2
=92.5mm
H = 1.3 Rm ¿
H = 1.3∗102.5¿
H = 14.491mm
16mm thickness provided. The schneider’s approach takes into account bending moment
acting on flange & screws, prying of joint due to load not being acting along screw’s axes

c)Number of fasteners:

1+ l / bmax
n = 4.71 p'Rm2
σ ' b Ab
420−390
l =
2

55 | P a g e
 = 15mm
π 2
Ab= C/s area of Bolt = ∗Ds
4
π
= ∗12.82 = 128.67 mm2
4
σ'b = min {σut/FOS, σyt/FOS} = min {1220/1.33, 1100/1.25} = 880MPa
Where NY. S represents factor of safety on yield strength and NUTS is factor of safety on
UTS. The selection of above vales of factor of safety is based on AVP-32 and MIL standards
chosen.
92.5
(1+ )
n= 2 15
4.71∗8.8∗102.5
880∗128.67
n = 27.56≈28 fasteners
Number of fasteners provided are 48.
Though the minimum no of fasteners is 28 as per design, it has been taken as 48(i.e., ensuring
18% margin) for considering the following constraints:
(i)There are two O-rings: face sheal and shaft seal. both the O-rings should compress by 20%
so that fasteners can take more preload torque

(ii) the pyrogen igniter is designed for composite rocket motor, so whenever pressure is
applied it dilates i.e., the strain rates are high and head end region would expand nearly by 3
to 4 mm so that fasteners can also take dilation load.
(iii)All rocket motors are high pressure vessels, there should not be any leakage of the
emission gases hence in order to increase joint stiffness and load bearing capability the
number of fasteners are increased
7)Thickness of flat plate between head end dome and flange:
Maximum stress in a concentrically loaded plate with uniform pressure acting over a circle of
radius 'c' having clamper edges

56 | P a g e
c= 2Rc
=2*102.5
=205mm

Do
a=
2
420
= =210mm
2

3 p ' c2 a c2
σmax = ( 1+ μ) 2 (log e + 2 )
2 h' c 4a
3 8.8 ¿ 2052 210 205 2
744 = (1+ 0.31) (log e + )
2 h'
2
205 4 ¿ 2102
h' = 14.94mm
thickness considered has been provided from configuration point of view.

CHAPTER-7
SIMULATION RESULTS

The material used: 15CDV6 Steel

Youngs modulus: 200GPa
Poisson’s ratio: 0.3
Yield Strength: 930MPa
UTS: 1080MPa
7.1 Case 1: A pressure load of 130bar (12.7486MPa) corresponding to upper bound MEOP
of the igniter has been applied on the inner edge of the mounting planes.
Finite Element Analysis and Results: Finite Element analysis has been carried out using FE
tool Ansys. Axisymmetric modeling with symmetric boundary conditions has been
employed. Element used is SOLID 183(8 node) with 2 translations in the nodal X and Y
directions at each node. The Finite Element model has been shown in the figure 10.1 below.
7.1.1 Boundary conditions:
 Fixed Support at flange
 Subjected pressure 12.7486 MPa inside the threaded region

57 | P a g e
 Figure 7.1 illustrates boundary conditions.
The deformation plot and von-mises stress distribution of the mounting flange has been
shown in the figure 7.2 and figure 7.4 respectively.
7.1.2 Total Deformation Results:

 Maximum displacement :0.5mm (at Central Region)

Figure 7.2: Result and displacement of mounting flange (in mm)

58 | P a g e
7.1.3 Maximum and Minimum Deformation:

To the reference of fig 7.3 it can be concluded as Maximum displacement is at inner radius of
dome and Minimum displacement is at near to corner of O- ring slot

Figure 7.3: Max and Min displacement of mounting flange (in mm)

7.1.4 Equivalent Stress Results:

Maximum stress: 448.4 MPa (at O ring fastener region)

Figure 7.4: Von-mises stress distribution in mounting flange (in MPa)

Finite Element Analysis of the mounting branch of pyrogen ignitor headend has been carried
out, the value of maximum Von-mises Stress is 448.4MPa (excluding the effects of stress

59 | P a g e
concentration), ensuring a factor of safety of 1.25 against yield stress and considering the
maximum yield stress and ultimate stress as 930 MPa and 1080 MPa respectively. Hence the
mounting frame is safe for the proposed structural optimization. It is recommended to give
fillet radius at all the reentrant corners.

7.1.5 Maximum and Minimum Stress:

Figure 7.5: Max and Min stress of mounting flange (in mm)

To the reference of fig 7.5 it can be concluded as Maximum displacement is at central region
and Minimum displacement is at near to steep corner of Flange

7.1.6 Stress Probe at Centre and Radius:

Fig: 7.6 Gauge locations of mounting flange (in mm)

60 | P a g e
The stress to be monitored at these locations 1 and 2 (refer fig 7.6). These locations are
attached with stress probes to obtain with results.
To the reference to fig 7.7 the stress at radius (point 1) is 111.36MPa and the stress at center
(point 2) is 243.5MPa

Fig 7.7: von-mises Stress Probe at Centre and Radius locations (in MPa)

7.2 Case 2: A pressure load of 88ksc (8.6MPa) corresponding to upper bound MEOP of the
igniter has been applied by fastening 48 Nos of M12 fasteners.
Finite Element Analysis and Results: Finite Element analysis has been carried out using FE
tool Ansys. Axisymmetric modeling with symmetric boundary conditions has been
employed. Element used is SOLID 183(8 node) with 2 translations in the nodal X and Y
directions at each node. The Finite Element model has been shown in the figure 10.4 below.

7.2.1 Boundary conditions:

 Fixed Support at flange
 Subjected pressure 88 bar applied by fastening 48 Nos of M12 fasteners

61 | P a g e
 Figure 7.8 illustrates boundary conditions.
The deformation plot and von-mises stress distribution of the mounting flange has been
shown in the figure 7.9 and figure 7.10 respectively.
7.2.2 Total Deformation Results:

 Maximum displacement :0.48mm (at inner radius of dome Region)

Figure 7.9: Result and displacement of mounting flange (in mm)

62 | P a g e
7.2.3 Maximum and Minimum Deformation:

Figure 7.10: Max and Min displacement of mounting flange (in mm)

To the reference of fig 7.10 it can be concluded as Maximum displacement is at inner radius
of dome and Minimum displacement is at near to corner of O- ring slot

7.2.4 Equivalent Stress Results:

Maximum stress: 361.27 MPa (at O ring fastener region)

Figure 7.11: Von-mises stress distribution in mounting flange (in MPa)

Finite Element Analysis of the mounting branch of pyrogen ignitor headend has been carried
out, the value of maximum Von-mises Stress is 361.27MPa (excluding the effects of stress
concentration), ensuring a factor of safety of 1.25 against yield and considering the maximum

63 | P a g e
yield stress and ultimate stress as 930 MPa and 1080 MPa respectively. Hence the mounting
frame is safe for the proposed structural optimization. It is recommended to give fillet radius
at all the reentrant corners.
7.2.5 Maximum and Minimum Stress:

Figure 7.12: Max and Min stress of mounting flange (in mm)

To the reference of fig 7.12 it can be concluded as Maximum displacement is at central

region and Minimum displacement is at near to steep corner of Flange

7.2.6 Stress Probe at Centre and Radius:

The stress to be monitored at these locations 1 and 2 (refer fig 7.6). These locations are
attached with stress probes to obtain with results.

Fig 7.13: von-mises Stress Probe at Centre and Radius locations (in MPa)
To the reference to fig 7.13 the stress at radius (point 1) is 196.68MPa and the stress at center
(point2) is 125.22MPa

64 | P a g e
 CHAPTER-8
EXPERIMENTAL WORK

8.1 HYDRAULIC PROOF PRESSURE TEST (PPT):

What is a Proof Pressure Test?

Proof pressure testing is a type of non-destructive pressure test that is used to prove the
durability of a given test sample in a controlled setting. The setup of PPT is shown in the fig
8.1. The common requirements and standards for these tests are often two to six times the
normal operating pressure of the test sample; samples that pass typically are not subject to
deteriorating loads and therefore the component is not intended to be pressurized till leak or
burst.

Fig 8.1. Schematic Layout of arrangement of Proof Pressure Test

Benefits of Proof Pressure Testing:

 Non-destructive test (designed to test parts without causing deformation)
 Prove parts meet required ‘factor of safety’ standards
 Confirm reliability and/or function of individual components
 Confirm design margin of a part for production

Non-destructive testing such as proof pressure testing is common in productions that require
every part to be tested prior to being distributed or used in an assembly. For example,
aerospace and defence companies often have sensitive components that need to be tested
prior to being used in the field.

65 | P a g e
In this case proof pressure testing may give a component the ‘seal of approval’ you need-
indicating the component can endure the required workload and therefore it should be able to
endure a pressure properly at or above normal operating pressure without deformation,
bursting, or leaking.

It is type of Non-Destructive Testing where high pressurized fluid (water or hydraulic oils)
are pumped by means of motor or hand pump. The pressurization shall be done in the steps of
0-5-10-20-30-40-50-60-70-80-90-100-110-120-125-130 bar and 0-5-10-20-30-40-50-60-70-
80-88 bar. It is performed to determine product integrity and fabrication quality of the
project. It is not time dependent; it is pressure dependent; the object should withstand to the
subjected pressure. The hold time is usually 3 mins.
Each igniter flange shall be subjected to hydraulic proof pressure test by measuring strain and
3 locations on the flange which is shown in the figure 8.2. All the necessary hardware and
instrumentation for PPT of flanges is to be procured. It has subjected to PPT at 2 loading
conditions.

Figure8.2: Strain Gauge locations on Head end Flange during PPT

66 | P a g e
8.2 VISUAL INSPECTION
It is an inspection of an asset made using only the naked eye. This kind of inspection does not
necessarily require any special equipment, but it does require special training, so that the
inspector knows what to look for as they visually review the asset.

8.3 DIE PENETRATION (DP)TEST

The principle of liquid penetrant testing is that the liquid penetrant is drawn into the surface-
breaking crack by capillary action, and excess surface penetrant is then removed; a developer
(typically a dry powder) is then applied to the surface to draw out the penetrant in the crack
and produce a surface indication. Cracks as narrow as 150 nanometers can be detected. The
indications produced are much broader than the actual flaw and are therefore more easily
visible.
It is a method of Non-Destructive testing which include 3 steps in subsequent manner:

Step1: Pre-Clean the test piece: -

Work piece is covered may be with rust or paint material defects are masked up. So, material
should be thoroughly clean.

Figure 12.2 Pre-clean the test piece

Step2: Apply penetrant:
Penetrant is usually red coloured low viscosity oil. Due to penetrant high surface wetting
capability. It penetrates into defects and cracks after several minutes of dwell time.

67 | P a g e
 Figure 12.3: Apply penetrant

Step3: Rinse the Test piece:

Rinse the path surface cautiously with water, which removes the penetrance completely from
the surface, but leaves it in crack onto the surface, the location of crack is clearly indicated on
surface.

Figure 12.4: Rinse the test piece

Advantages:
1) Almost all the materials can be tested.
2) Simple and low cost for a single inspection.
Disadvantages:
1) Only suitable for surface defects.
2) No information about depth of flaws can be gained

8.4 PROOF PRESSURE TEST REPORT FOR IGNITER FLANGE

Material of Construction: 15 CDV6
Proof Test Pressure: CASE I-130bar (PRESSURIZATION WITH OIL)
CASE II-88bar (PRESSURIZATION WITH OIL)

0.2% Proof Stress: 98 kg/mm²

The details of Strain Gauges used are as follows:
Type : CEA-06-125UR-350-3 No's
Temperature Compensation for Gauge Length: Steel
Gauge Length : 3.5mm

68 | P a g e
Gauge Resistance :350.0 ± 0.5% Ω
Gauge Factor :2.05± 0.5%
Material Properties
Young's Modulus :200GPa
Poison's Ratio :0.31

Test Procedure:

Strain Gauge rosettes were fixed at the locations identified by the critical thickness and as
shown in figure 12.5
Required precautions and recommended adhesives were used for fixing the strain gauges on
the test hardware. Proper protective coating was applied on all Strain Gauges to protect from
the atmospheric effect. All the 6 channels of Strain Gauges were connected to the Strain
Recording System the IGNITER FLANGE placed in a test pit and connected to a manually
operated high pressure pump the hydraulic pressure pump and the recording instrumentation
were located at a safe distance from the les pit, Strain Gauges were initialized for the
atmospheric pressure conditions and the initial reading of the pressure gauge and the Strain
Gauges were recorded.

Fig 12.5: Locations set up and channels identifications of Rosette strain gauge

69 | P a g e
 Two different set up a planned to simulate two different kinds of internal pressure to each
IGNITER FLANGE
SET UP 1
Each Igniter Flange is pressurized up to 88 bar and depressurized
SET UP 2
Each Igniter Flange is pressurized up to 130 bar and depressurized.
At each pressure step the pressure was held for recording the data and immediately
pressurized to the next step. During hold period the data is recorded immediately after
reaching the specified pressure and at the completion of hold period Igniter Flange tor was
then disconnected from the pressure line for visual examination After completion of cach
cycle the hardware is thoroughly inspected for leak. Only after ensuring that there is no leak
from any part of the test set up the proof test is conducted. Care was taken to see that the
Pressure Transducer read the same reading during hold time of every stage of pressurization
indicating a 'NO LEAK' condition.

Observations
Case 1 :130 bar
Table '7' gives Channel wise Strain data at every pressure step and, Table '8' gives the stress
data, Table '9' gives 'Maximum & Minimum Principal Strains & Table '10' gives Von Mises
Stress Data
Case 2 :88 bar
Table '11' gives Channel wise Strain data at every pressure step and, Table '12' gives the
stress data, Table '13' gives the Maximum & Minimum Principal Strains & Table '14' gives
Von Mises Stress Data

STRAIN DATA
PRESSURE: 130 bar Reading are in Micro strain

Table 7 gives channel wise Strain data for each location at every pressure step
Pressure Location-1 Location-2
In
Kgf/cm2
Ch : 1 Ch : 2 Ch : 3 Ch : 4 Ch : 5 Ch : 6
µε µε µε µε µε µε
0.03 1 0 0 -1 0 0
10.12 17 -4 -7 45 61 75
20.16 33 -9 -15 94 122 147
30.45 51 -11 -24 143 183 219

70 | P a g e
 40.65 66 -14 -35 191 242 292
47.64 76 -18 -40 223 282 339
60.18 95 -23 -52 283 359 430
70.09 110 -28 -62 330 418 501
80.11 125 -32 -72 376 477 572
90.13 141 -36 -82 425 535 643
100.27 156 -50 -91 471 596 714
110.31 171 -46 -101 519 653 786
120.03 185 -50 -111 564 710 854
130.07 201 -55 -119 611 767 924
130.07 200 -55 -120 612 767 925
120.28 187 -50 -111 568 713 860
111.92 175 -46 -103 528 664 800
100.07 156 -40 -91 470 591 713
91.08 143 -35 -81 429 538 650
80.16 127 -30 -71 377 473 571
70.19 112 -25 -62 328 414 500
60.23 97 -21 -51 282 356 429
50.34 83 -18 -43 235 297 360
40.24 68 -13 -33 188 238 288
30.43 53 -11 -24 140 179 218
20.31 35 -10 -15 92 119 146
10.24 19 -7 8 45 60 76
0.03 -1 -4 1 -2 -3 1

Sample Calculations:
The Derived Parameters from the measured strain parameters are stress data, Maximum &
Minimum Principal Strains & Von Mises Stress Data

Case 1:
Pressure :130 bar
E=2*104kg/mm2
Poison's Ratio =0.3
Location-1:
To the reference from the table 7,
ɛa = 201µɛ=201*10-6
ɛb = -55µɛ = -55*10-6
ɛc= -119µɛ= -119*10-6
Maximum and Minimum principal stress,
σ1 = E ¿ ]

= 2∗10
4
[ 201+ (−119 )
2 ( 1−0.3 )
±
1
√
2 ( 1+ 0.3 )
2
]2
∗ ( 201−(−119 )) + ( 2 (−55 )−201−(−119 ) ) ∗10
−6

σ1= 4.04 kg/mm2

71 | P a g e
 σ2 = -1.70kg/mm2

Maximum and Minimum principal strain,

1
2
√
ɛ1,2 = [ɛ a+ɛ c ± 2 [ ( ɛ a−ɛ c ) + ( ɛ b−ɛ c ) ] ]
2 2

1
2 √
= [201−119 ± 2 [ ( 201−(−55)) + (−55−(−119) ) ] ]
2 2

ɛ1 = 227.69
ɛ2 = -145.59

Principle angle α ,
2∗ɛb−ɛ a−ɛ c
tan2 α =
ɛ a−ɛ c
2∗(−55)−201−(−119)
=
201−(−119)
α = -15.480
Von – misses stress,
σv ¿ √ σ 12+ σ 22−σ 1∗σ 2
=√ (4.04)2+(−1.70)2−(4.04)∗(−1.70)
= 5.09kg/mm2
Factor of safety,
Proof Stress 98
FOS = =
Working stress 20.32
(Here refer to table10, working stress is max (5.09,20.32) =20.32)
FOS = 4.82

STRESS DATA
PRESSURE: 130 bar Reading are in Micro strain

Table 8 gives Stress data for each location at every pressure step

Pressure Location-1 Location-2

In Kgf/cm2
SigMax SigMax Alpha SigMax SigMax Alpha
Ksmm Ksmm Deg Ksmm Ksmm Deg
0.03 0.03 0.00 -22.50 0.00 -0.03 -22.50
10.12 0.37 -0.09 -18.44 1.95 1.48 -1.91
20.16 0.72 -0.20 -18.44 3.85 3.03 -1.62
30.45 1.07 -0.30 -15.58 5.76 4.59 -1.51

72 | P a g e
 40.65 1.34 -0.46 -15.15 7.68 6.12 -0.28
47.64 1.56 -0.54 -15.91 8.92 7.14 -0.99
60.18 1.94 -0.71 -15.60 11.32 9.05 -0.97
70.09 2.23 -0.86 -15.58 13.19 10.56 -0.84
80.11 2.52 -1.01 -15.35 15.05 12.03 -0.88
90.13 2.83 -1.15 -15.22 16.93 13.58 -0.26
100.27 3.13 -1.27 -15.21 18.80 15.06 -0.83
110.31 3.44 -1.44 -15.39 20.70 16.59 -0.11
120.03 3.70 -1.58 -15.22 22.49 18.03 -0.20
130.07 4.04 -1.70 -15.48 24.34 19.52 0.09
130.07 4.01 -1.72 -15.35 24.36 19.55 0.27
120.28 3.75 -1.58 -15.28 22.65 18.15 0.20
111.92 3.51 -1.45 -15.27 21.06 16.88 0.00
100.07 3.13 -1.27 -15.21 18.77 15.03 0.12
91.08 2.89 -1.11 -15.26 17.11 13.71 0.39
80.16 2.57 -0.97 -15.18 15.04 12.05 0.30
70.19 2.26 -0.83 -14.94 13.15 10.51 0.00
60.23 1.98 -0.67 -15.37 11.29 9.03 -0.19
50.34 1.70 -0.56 -15.55 9.46 7.54 0.23
40.24 1.41 -0.41 -15.57 7.57 6.03 0.00
30.43 1.12 -0.30 -16.76 5.71 4.51 0.00
20.31 0.78 -0.21 -19.33 3.82 2.98 0.00
10.24 0.44 -0.13 -21.40 1.97 1.49 0.92
0.03 0.06 -0.06 37.98 0.03 -0.06 29.52

MAXIMUM & MINIMUM PRINCIPAL STRAIN DATA

PRESSURE: 130 bar Reading are in Micro strain

Table 9 gives the Maximum & Minimum Principal Strains

Location-1 Location-2

Pressure Ε Max Ε Min Alpha Ε Max Ε Min Alpha

In Kgf/cm2 µε µε Deg µε µε Deg

0.03 1 0 -22.50 0 -1 -22.50

10.12 20 -10 -18.44 75 45 -1.91
20.16 39 -21 -18.44 147 94 -1.62
30.45 58 -31 -15.58 219 143 -1.51
40.65 74 -43 -15.15 292 191 -0.28
47.64 86 -50 -15.91 339 223 -0.99
60.18 107 -64 -15.60 430 283 -0.97
70.09 124 -76 -15.58 501 330 -0.84
80.11 141 -88 -15.35 572 376 -0.88
90.13 159 -100 -15.22 643 425 -0.26
100.27 176 -111 -15.21 714 471 -0.83
110.31 193 -123 -15.39 786 519 -0.11

73 | P a g e
120.03 209 -135 -15.22 854 564 -0.20
130.07 228 -146 -15.48 924 611 0.09
130.07 226 -146 -15.35 925 612 0.27
120.28 211 -135 -15.28 860 568 0.20
111.92 197 -125 -15.27 800 528 0.00
100.07 176 -111 -15.21 713 470 0.12
91.08 161 -99 -15.26 650 429 0.39
80.16 143 -87 -15.18 571 377 0.30
70.19 125 -75 -14.94 500 328 0.00
60.23 109 -63 -15.37 429 282 -0.19
50.34 94 -54 -15.55 360 235 0.23
40.24 76 -41 -15.57 288 188 0.00
30.43 61 -32 -16.76 218 140 0.00
20.31 42 -22 -19.33 146 92 0.00
10.24 24 -13 -21.40 76 45 0.92
0.03 4 -4 37.98 2 -3 29.52

VON MISES STRESS DATA

PRESSURE: 130 bar
Reading in Kg/mm 2
Table 10 gives Von Mises Stress Data

Pressure (in Kgf/cm2) Stress (LOC -1 Ksmm) Stress (LOC -2 Ksmm)

0.03 0.02 0.02

10.02 0.42 1.76
20.16 0.84 3.51
30.45 1.25 5.27
40.65 1.62 7.03
47.64 1.89 8.18
60.18 2.37 10.37
70.09 2.76 12.09
80.11 3.15 13.79
90.13 3.55 15.53
100.27 3.93 17.24
110.31 4.33 18.98
120.03 4.70 20.62
130.07 5.11 20.32
130.07 5.09 22.35
120.28 4.74 20.77
111.92 4.42 19.31
100.07 3.93 17.21
91.08 3.58 15.69
80.16 3.16 13.79
70.19 2.77 12.05

74 | P a g e
 60.23 2.39 10.34
50.34 2.04 8.66
40.24 1.65 6.93
30.43 1.30 5.22
20.31 0.90 3.48
10.24 0.51 1.78
0.03 0.11 0.08

STRAIN DATA
Reading are in Micro strain
PRESSURE: 88 bar

Table 11 gives channel wise Strain data for each location at every pressure step
Pressure (in Location-1 Location-2
Kgf/cm2)

Ch: 1 Ch: 2 Ch: 3 Ch: 4 Ch: 5 Ch: 6

µε µε µε µε µε µε

0.03 -1 0 0 0 0 1
10.24 76 54 37 60 55 50
20.01 153 108 77 122 107 92
30.65 240 168 121 188 163 137
40.09 324 232 169 250 215 173
50.18 424 312 234 314 270 213
60.18 530 403 311 381 322 253
70.07 638 496 393 445 370 292
80.26 752 595 480 514 419 332
88.06 841 671 550 566 456 363
88.06 841 671 550 566 457 363
80.54 764 605 492 517 419 331
70.39 654 512 408 449 367 291
60.33 549 420 329 382 317 250
50.26 445 333 254 316 266 208
40.49 344 250 184 252 215 170
29.87 249 176 124 187 160 128
20.01 161 107 69 124 107 88
10.12 67 35 12 59 51 46
0.03 -24 -35 -43 -4 -1 3

Case 2:
Pressure :88 bar

75 | P a g e
E=2*104kg/mm2
Poison's Ratio =0.3
Location-1:
ɛa = 764µɛ=764*10-6
ɛb = 611µɛ = 611*10-6
ɛc= 712µɛ= 712*10-6
Maximum and Minimum Principal stress,
σ1,2 = E ¿]

= 2∗10
4
[ 764+712
±
1
2 ( 1−0.3 ) 2 ( 1+0.3 )
√ 2
] 2
∗ ( 764−( 712 ) ) + ( 2 ( 611 )−764−( 712 ) ) ∗10−6

σ1 = 23.08kg/mm2,
σ2 = 19.09 kg/mm2
Maximum and Minimum principal strain,
1
2
√
ɛ1,2 = [ɛ a+ɛ c ± 2 [ ( ɛ a−ɛ c ) + ( ɛ b−ɛ c ) ] ]
2 2

1
2
√
= [764+712 ± 2 [ ( 764−611 ) + ( 611−712 ) ] ]
2 2

ɛ1 = 867.63,
ɛ2 = 608.36
Principle angle α ,
2∗ɛb−ɛ a−ɛ c 2∗611−764−712
tan 2 α = =
ɛ a−ɛ c 764−712
α = -39.210
Von – misses,
σv = √ σ 12 +σ 22−σ 1∗σ 2
=√ 23.082 +19.092−23.08∗19.09
= 20.26 kg/mm2
Factor of safety,
Proof Stress
FOS =
Working stress
(Here refer to table10, working stress is max (13.55,20.26) =20.26)
98
=
20.26
FOS = 4.83

76 | P a g e
 STRESS DATA
PRESSURE: 88 bar Reading are in Micro strain

Table 12ves Stress data for each location at every pressure step

Location-1 Location-2

Pressure (in SigMax SigMin Alpha SigMax SigMin Alpha

Kgf/cm2) Ksmm Ksmm Deg Ksmm Ksmm Deg

0.03 0.00 -0.03 -22.50 0.03 0.00 22.50

10.24 1.92 1.31 -3.65 1.65 1.49 0.000
20.01 3.88 2.69 -5.22 3.29 2.83 0.00
30.65 6.09 4.22 -5.93 5.04 4.25 0.56
40.09 8.26 5.83 5.30 6.64 5.45 2.60
50.18 10.88 7.92 -5.07 8.31 6.75 3.67
60.18 93.72 10.31 -4.54 10.04 8.07 2.23
70.07 16.64 12.82 4.52 11.71 9.35 0.56
80.26 19.72 15.48 -4.39 13.49 10.68 -1.26
88.06 22.14 17.60 -4.78 14.84 11.70 -2.39
88.06 22.14 17.60 -4.78 14.84 11.71 -2.11
80.54 20.06 15.82 -4.80 13.55 10.68 -1.54
70.39 17.09 13.26 -4.39 11.79 9.36 -1.09
60.33 14.26 10.83 -4.90 10.04 8.01 0.43
50.26 11.48 8.49 -4.90 8.32 6.65 2.12
40.49 8.79 6.29 -4.96 6.66 5.39 2.79
29.87 6.30 4.35 -4.77 4.96 4.04 2.42
20.01 4.00 2.57 -4.93 3.31 2.75 1.59
10.12 1.56 0.70 -4.65 1.60 1.40 -6.50
0.03 -0.81 -1.11 -4.49 0.04 -0.07 4.07

MAXIMUM & MINIMUM PRINCIPAL STRAIN DATA

PRESSURE: 88 bar Reading are in Micro strain

Table 13 gives the Maximum & Minimum Principal Strains

Location-1 Location-2

Pressure (in Ε Max Ε Min Alpha Ε Max Ε Min Alpha

Kgf/cm2) µε µε Deg µε µε Deg

0.03 0 -1 -22.50 1 0 22.50

10.24 76 37 -3.65 60 50 0.000
20.01 154 76 -5.22 122 92 0.00
30.65 241 120 -5.93 188 137 0.56
40.09 325 168 5.30 250 173 2.60
50.18 426 232 -5.07 314 213 3.67
60.18 531 310 -4.54 381 253 2.23
70.07 640 391 4.52 445 292 0.56

77 | P a g e
80.26 754 478 -4.39 514 332 -1.26
88.06 843 548 -4.78 566 363 -2.39
88.06 843 548 -4.78 566 363 -2.11
80.54 766 490 -4.80 517 331 -1.54
70.39 655 407 -4.39 449 291 -1.09
60.33 551 227 -4.90 382 250 0.43
50.26 446 253 -4.90 316 208 2.12
40.49 345 183 -4.96 252 170 2.79
29.87 250 123 -4.77 187 128 2.42
20.01 162 68 -4.93 124 88 1.59
10.12 67 12 -4.65 59 46 -6.50
0.03 -24 -43 -4.49 3 -4 4.07

VON MISES STRESS DATA

PRESSURE: 88 bar Reading in Kg/mm 2

Table 14 gives Von Mises Stress Data

Pressure (in Kgf/cm2) Stress (LOC -1 Ksmm) Stress (LOC -2 Ksmm)

0.03 0.02 0.02

10.24 1.70 1.58
20.01 3.44 3.08
30.65 5.41 4.69
40.09 7.35 6.13
50.18 9.75 7.65
60.18 12.37 9.22
70.07 15.09 10.72
80.26 17.98 12.33
88.06 20.26 13.55
88.06 20.26 13.55
80.54 18.32 12.37
70.39 15.53 10.78
60.33 12.89 9.20
50.26 10.31 7.62
40.49 7.85 6.13
29.87 5.59 4.57
20.01 3.51 3.07
10.12 1.35 1.51
0.03 0.99 0.10

78 | P a g e
Remarks

The Igniter Flange were subjected to two different Pressure conditions in two different test
set ups. The strain recorded by all the Igniter Flange & with in allowable limit. No visual leak
or any damage was noticed, during the test or during the hold period at Proof Pressure.
Strains were stable during the hold period of 3 Minutes Proof Pressure. The Stresses at all
locations are all less than 0.2% Proof Stress 98 Kg/mm) for the material (15 CDV6 Steel. The
residual strain recorded after depressurization to zero pressure was within 10% of strain
recorded at Proof pressure. The 15 CDV6 Igniter Flange have met all the conditions of
Acceptance test criteria. All the Igniter Flange achieved a factor of safety more than 4. Hence
all the vessels can be recommended for further use

CHAPTER-9
STUDY RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

In the present study the Pyrogen igniter Head-end design is carried out as per ASME pressure
vessel code for MEOP of 73.5 bar and 108 bar for the bolt. The flange design is carried out
following the Schneider’s approach. The values calculated in the present study are listed
below. The thickness calculated for the different regions are the thickness of the cylindrical
shell is 2.096 mm, head end dome is 2.56 mm, flange thickness is 14.491mm and thickness of
flat plate between dome and flange is 14.94 mm. The ‘O’ ring groove are configured by
considering 15 to 25% squeeze of ‘O’ ring diameter. The values of Von- misses stresses are
determined by conducting the finite element analysis for the calculated thickness. The
maximum stress is observed to be 448.4MPa for 130 bar and 361.27MPa for 88 bar. In the
rest of the region stress is observed to be below yield stress value of 15CDV6 material. So,
the thickness calculated for the shell and the flanges are safe for the desired pressure load and
pre-tension of the bolts. The expansion of cylindrical casing dilation is observed to be 0.0915
mm in radial direction. So, the thickness of cylindrical shell designed is safe for the desired
internal pressure load. The expansion of ‘O’ ring grooves at all the locations from 15% to
25% which is greater than 15%
After structural analysis of the Head -end it is clear that the stress developed at various
locations of the casing are within allowable limit and a factor of safety of (FOS) 2.07 for 130
bar pressure and FOS of 2.57 for 88 bar pressure is obtained by designing the casing using
ASME codes. The deformation of the Head-end is also known using ANSYS and the

79 | P a g e
maximum deformation value is given by 0.5 mm for 130 bar and 0.48mm for 88 bar. And the
maximum deformation occurred is located at the O-ring fastener region and inner radius of
dome region respectively

CHAPTER-10
FUTURE SCOPE OF WORK

 Replacing the existing materials with advanced materials to improve mechanical

properties.
 In the present model, the volume occupied by the solid charge is very small compared
to the volume of the motor. Hence, to avoid computational complications, the region
occupied by the charge is also considered to be part of free volume of motor. The
model can be further refined to deduct the volume occupied by the charge for motor-
free volume and increase the motor-free volume as the charge regresses. Also by
appending model for solid propellant ignition, combustion and regression to the
igniter model, an ignition transient model can be developed
 We have configured methodology for head end analysis. The same methodology i.e.,
ANSYS analysis and experiment test can be opted for new designs to optimize the
head end’s

CHAPTER-11
REFERENCES

[1] ASME Pressure vessel code section VIII division 2

[2] NASA SP-8025,” Solid rocket motor metal cases”, April 1970(N72-18785)
[3] Davanas , G.E. Jensen and D. W. Netzer (Eds),”Solid rocket motor design” chapter 4 of
tactical missile propulsion vol. 170,progress in aeronautics and astronautics,AIAA,1996. pp
323-379
[4] L. Strand, “Laboratory test methods for combustion-stability properties of solid
propellants,” in Nonsteady Burning and Combustion Stability of Solid Propellants, L. De
Luca, E. W. Price, and M. Summerfield, Eds., vol. 143 of Progress in Astronautics and
Aeronautics, pp. 689–718, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics,Washington,
DC, USA, 1992
[5] Design Method In Solid Rocket Motors AGARD Lecture Series No.150 Revised Version
1988 (North Atlantic Treaty Organization Advisory Group For Aerospace Research And
Development)
[6] George P. Sutton, „Rocket propulsion elements‟ consultant formerly laboratory associate,
Lawrence Livermore national laboratory. ISBN-13: 978-0471838364
[7] Design Method In Solid Rocket Motors AGARD Lecture Series No.150 Revised Version
1988 (North Atlantic Treaty Organization Advisory Group For Aerospace Research And

80 | P a g e
Development).
[8] Sutton, G. P. and Biblarz, O., Rocket Propulsion Elements, 7th ed., John Wiley and Sons,
New York, 2001
[9] NASA SP-8064,” Solid propellant selection and characterization”, June 1971(N72-
13737).
[10] Twitchell, S. E., Solid Rocket Motor Internal Insulation, SP-8093, NASA, December
1976.
[11] Beena AP, Sundaresan MK, Nageswara Rao B (1995) Destructive tests of 15CDV6 steel
rocket motor cases and their application to lightweight design. Int J of Pressure Vessel and
Piping: 313-320
[12] K. G. McConnell and P. S. Varoto, Vibration Testing: Theory and Practice, 2nd ed.,
John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, NJ, 2008.
[13] K. Yanagawa, T. Fujita, H. Miyajima, and K. Kishimoto, “High Altitude Simulation
Tests of LOX-LH2 Engine LE-5,” Journal of Propulsion and Power, Vol. 1, No. 3, May–June
1985, pp. 180–186.
[14] P. M. J. Hughes and E. Cerny, “Measurement and Analysis of High-Frequency Pressure
Oscillations in Solid Rocket Motors,” Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets, Vol. 21, No. 3, May–June
1984, pp. 261–265.
[15] Y. M. Timnat, Diagnostic Techniques for Propulsion Systems, Progress in Aerospace
Sciences (Series), Vol. 26, No. 2, 1989, pp. 153–168.

CHAPTER-12
GLOSSARY
1. Rocket Propulsion: is a means of locomotion whereby thrust is produced by ejecting
matter, which is stored in the vehicle being propelled.

2. Chemical Rocket Propulsion: refers to those systems where the energy comes from
a chemical reaction or combustion of a Fuel with an Oxidizer.

3. The Chamber Pressure: is the pressure in the combustion chamber of an operating

rocket propulsion system.

4. Propellant: is the stored matter that is energized and ejected. It can be a Liquid
Propellant (stored in vehicle or missile tanks) or a Solid Propellant (stored inside its
combustion chamber).

5. Specific Impulse: is a parameter indicating propulsion system performance. It can be

defined as the thrust of an equivalent rocket propulsion system (same chamber
pressure, same propellant, same nozzle throat to exit area ratio) that has a propellant
mass flow of unity. Higher values of specific impulse indicate a better system.

6. Total Impulse: is the integral of thrust over the propulsion operating time. It is a
measure of the total kinetic energy of the nozzle exhaust gas as released by the

81 | P a g e
 combustion of all the available propellant in the propulsion system.

7. A Rocket Motor: uses solid propellants and a simple motor usually has these key
components: the propellant Grain (the shaped mass of solid propellant), the motor
Case, which is a pressure vessel containing the grain, Insulation for preventing the
case from becoming too hot, a supersonic Nozzle to accelerate the gasified, reacted
propellant, and a mounting provision to hold the motor to the vehicle or missile. Cases
are really pressure vessels constructed from heat treated alloy metal (steel, titanium)
or from filament reinforced plastic (usually an epoxy plastic) with fibers made of
glass, Kevlar, or carbon.

8. Solid Rocket Propellant: typically consists of an oxidizer (usually a crystalline solid

like ammonium perchlorate), an organic Fuel (such as a rubbery polymer like
polybutadiene, which also acts as the glue to hold the grain together), and various
additives to improve performance, storage, thrust-time profile, manufacture, aging,
etc. Additives include liquid Plasticizers, Explosives, Burning Rate Catalysts, etc.

9. The Burning Rate: is the rate of regression of the burning grain surfaces as
propellant is consumed or burnt in a direction normal to the surface. Surfaces that are
bonded to the case walls or to insulators, will not burn. The burning rate varies with
chamber pressure and the initial ambient temperature of the grain.

10. Inhibitors: are layers of non-burning materials that are glued to exposed grain
surfaces so that they will not burn.

11. The propellant Grain: has Perforations, Slots, Grooves, holes, or Port Areas so as to
predetermine the amount of initial burning surface. Most grains are cast into and
bonded to the case; some grains are bonded to a separate cartridge, and then loaded or
placed into the case.

12. The Binder: is a thin layer of sticky rubbery material that promotes the adhesion of
the grain to the case.

13. Igniters: burn igniter propellants, which then form hot gas at an elevated pressure and
they in turn initiate the combustion of the main propellant, either a solid propellant or
a non-hypergolic liquid bipropellant. The igniter is started by a small amount of
electrical energy, (e.g., hot wire) or laser energy.

82 | P a g e
14. The Nozzle Area Ratio: is the nozzle exit area divided by the nozzle throat area. For
optimum gas expansion in a nozzle the gas pressure at the nozzle exit is equal to the
local ambient atmosphere pressure. Typical values of this nozzle area ratio are
between 4 and 20 for expansion to sea-level pressure and between 40 and 200 for
operation at very high altitude (space vacuum).

15. Pyrotechnic igniters are device containing a pyrotechnic composition used primarily
to ignite other materials which are more difficult to ignite, like thermites, gas
generators, and solid rocket propellants

16. Pyrogen igniters are small rocket motors, designed in accordance with the same
principles as a rocket motor and consist of a cast propellant grain of the fast-burning
type as the main charge.

17. Thrust is a reaction force described quantitatively by Newton's second and third laws.
When a system expels or accelerates mass in one direction, the accelerated mass will
cause a force of equal magnitude but opposite direction on that system

83 | P a g e