SECA-FR-97-04

DEVELOPMENT

OF

TRIPROPELLANT

Contract

No.:

FINAL

CFD

DESIGN

NAS8-40583
REPORT

Prepared

for:

National Aeronautics
& Space Administration
George C. Marshall
Space Flight Center
Marshall
Space Flight Center, AL 35812

Prepared
Richard

by:

C. Farmer

Gary C. Cheng
Peter G. Anderson

SECA, Inc.
Suite 202
3313

Bob Wallace

Huntsville,
May,

AL
1997

Avenue
35805

CODE

SECA-FR-97-04

SUMMARY

A tripropellant
multiple propellant
of primary
interest
mixing

and

CFD

design

streams
as they
is GO2/H2/RP-1.

finite-rate

combustion

code

has

been

are injected
The code
processes

developed

which

occur

analysis serves as a multi-phase

homogeneous
spray
the droplet
tracking
analysis
that makes alternative
course, simplification
could have been affected
emphasizing
the droplet
tracking.
However,
accurate
gas-side temperature
predictions
The complex
secondary
flows
which
quantitatively
experiments
to aid in

predicted

by less

to predict

near

an injector

combustion
model,
analyses
extremely

details

of the

code

accurate

is necessary
combustor

such
flowfields,
the code is
determining
the critical location

mixing

faceplate.

of

system
for the
Thus

the

which explicitly
avoids
slow to compute.
Of

which are essential

for accurate
wall heating analyses.
are predicted
to occur
near a faceplate
cannot
be
methodology.

Since

have been reported,

the methodology
has also been
its validation.
Test cases
have been simulated

of the predicted

local

tripropellant
to account

by compromising
the combustion
description
and
proper
accounting
of the combustion
allows

very

few

to accomplish
flowfields

exceed

its computational
the state-of-the-art

also valuable
to design
and type of measurements

tripropellant

injector

applied to bipropellant
injectors
to describe
an axisymmetric

tripropellant
coaxial
injector
and a 3-dimensional
RP-1/LO2
impinger
analysis has been shown to realistically
describe
such injector combustion
exercising

the

into a rocket motor.

The
utilizes real fluid properties

meaningful
needed.

injector
system.
The
flowfields,
but further
optimization.
capabilities
future

Since

the

to measure

experiments

by

SECA-FR-97-04
TABLE OF CONTENTS

SUMMARY
1.0 INTRODUCTION

2.0 METHODOLOGY

2.1 Real Fluids Version of FDNS

2.2 Fluid Properties

2.3 CombustionKinetics

2.4 RadiationFrom SootyFlames

3.0 INJECTORANALYSES

10

3.1 Global Analysis of the FastractMotor

10

3.2 GOz/GH2CoaxialInjector

18

3.3 LO2/GH2Coaxial Injector

27

3.4 Tripropellant CoaxialInjector

27

3.5 FastrackInjector Configuration

32

4.0 CONCLUSIONSAND RECOMMENDATIONS

38

5.0 REFERENCES

39

APPENDIX A
Radiative

- RADIATION

A-1

Properties

Homogeneous
Homogeneous

Nongray

of the Radiative

for Appendix

A-2
A-11

Model

Transfer

Coupled
Radiative
Transfer
Nomenclature
for Appendix
References

A-2

Gray Model
Nongray
Model

Non-Homogeneous
Solution

A-1

EFFECTS

Equation

Equation
A

Solutions

A-11
A-13
A-15
A-16

ii

SECA-FR-97-04

DEVELOPMENT

OF TRIPROPELLANT

1.0
SECA,
injector

Inc.

system,

has developed

which,

for

the local mixture

of the combustor

ratio
flow
that

model,

adequate

analytical
injected

method
into the

sufficiently
other

matured
practical

code

to describe

the operation

both

RP-1

H 2 as

will

become

very

an advanced

detailed

CFD

combustion

models

available

tripropellant

used

rocket

and advanced
to reduce

otherwise

the

be required
To

describe

motor

large

number

to design
tripropellant

future

CFD

motor

and are being

injectors,

bipropellant

is important

included

and

was

in the final CFD

model.

The
proposed
gas/liquid

is termed

the Finite

tripropellant

design

study

and

may

flowfield

code

is analyzed

models

and heating
analyses
and much experience
information

doublet

injectors

were

can be made
are available

for
for

studies

real

fluid

properties

due

for
can

would

in arbitrary

identifying

sub-

and

in program

states,

funding,

the pressure

was

correction

not
step

the method which has been used for ideal

CFD design
code resulting
from this

Navier-Stokes

from

both

A combustion
kinetics
model for
Radiation
from sooty combustion

to a reduction

fluids

produced

simulated

code

which

representing

- Real

Fluids

this research
spray
and

meets

combustion

tracking

Version

drops,

in this

with the code

report.

(FDNS-RFV)

the objectives

code.

Since

the gas

discussed

impinging

not

injector

are

that

motors.

alternatives

assumption

in

have

design

This assumption
greatly simplifies
flow near the injector
face.
The

this

an

is not available

always assumed
to be in thermal equilibrium.
while still approximating
the multi-phase
to using

injector

It is recognized

but such

experimental

costly

a homogeneous

without

operation.

of

Difference

CFD

as a submodel

CFD

but,

Future
provides

is to provide

the new

To treat

be termed

code

Furthermore,

in the FDNS CFD code was completely

changed from
gases and incompressible
liquids.
The tripropellant
development
code.

the

to be used

but such valuable

combustors,

assessed,

design

developed,

super-critical
conditions
for RP-1, H2, and O2 must be used.
RP-1 including
soot formation
and oxidation
was developed.
gases

is

so that the remainder

gas-only
CFD codes.

injectors.
rocket

model

concepts.
The code

to validate

and structured

of the entire

been

This

of the multiple
propellant
streams
as they are
be described
with a computer
code which is

predictions

simulation
have

of a tripropellant

fuels.

exist.

to predict
the local mixing
motor.
This analysis
must

bipropellant

tripropeUant

and

of several
injector
in this investigation.

to the point that efficient

rocket performance
rocket
motor designs.
Extensive
data bases

designing
be

test data

do not currently

of developing

three-dimensional

spray

design
utilizes

the mixing characteristics

with the code developed

data

fast to provide

a general

a CFD

laboratory

The objective

CODE

and state of the propellants

near the injector
face
can be calculated
with conventional
multi-species

It is anticipated
although

DESIGN

INTRODUCTION

example,

sufficiently
general
to define
engine designs may be devised

CFD

Both

as demonstration

the

of the
mixed

and liquid

are

the calculation
limitations
and

shear
cases.

coaxial

and

SECA-FR-97-04

2.0
During

the course

design

processes,

Study

and

injector,

of the

severe

erosion

understanding
and

hence,

the

Space

code

injector/motor
can improve

of the

spray

rocket

engine

hardware
the rocket

Shuttle

problems

important
in analyzing
the internal
studies can help designers/researchers
various

METHODOLOGY
Main

combustion

The

engine

design

costly.

under
development.
The
combustion
flows have been
detailed

flow

data.

Hence,

and reduce

of turbulent,
multi-phase

and

the Fastrack

the injector

have

effect

posed

face have

a great

of the

ballistics of rocket motors.

understand
and analyze
can be very

analyses
However,

(SSME)

wall near

flows

design.

the present
work is to develop
an efficient
CFD
flowfields
for the liquid and hybrid rocket engines.
the point that numerical
combustion
devices.

Engine

on the liner

spray

CFD

the cost of hardware.

the

underlying

physics

to the
is also

combustion
objective

of

real fluid injector

has improved
to

provide practical
design models for
combustion
CFD models
are still

main reason
is that not many experimental
conducted,
and, unfortunately,
most of those

Hence,

spray
The

tool to simulate
CFD methodology

reacting flows
(liquid-spray)

challenge

vaporization

Though
extensive
experimental
the flow characteristics,
building
an efficient

design
Lately,

engine
occurred.

is still

not

studies
for spray
tests did not provide

well

understood,

and

this

shortcoming
is reflected
in the available
CFD spray combustion
models.
Due to the importance
of the benchmark
test data for spray combustion
flows, NASA Marshall
Space Flight Center
funded
Pennsylvania
State University
measurements
of the gas/liquid
coaxial
homogeneous

CFD

measurements

were

where

meaningful

doublets,

triplets,

require:

made.

Deleting

the droplet

flowfield

CFD

alternative
The

model

or other

The entire

or with

combustion

injection

three-dimensional
element.

spray
3-D

Tripropellant

to conduct
experimental
injector 1"2. The availability
tracking

of coaxial

assembly

studies

extent

the CFD

that

code

to the point

comprised

of like-

All of these configurations

to describe

the initial

must then be described

sufficient

can be made.

with elements

injectors.

be performed

to the

simplifies

and design

may be accomplished

variations

injector

to be benchmarked

simulations

analyses

tests to provide
flowfield
of such data allow the present

mixing

or unlikerequire

of a single

with an ensemble

that

injector

of such injectors

methodology.

complete

(1) definition

combustor/preburner

tripropellant

of the inlet boundary

conditions

CFD

design

to each

code

representative

(FDNS-RFV)
injector

will

element,

as obtained
from a model of the feed system such as that provided
by SECA's
porosity
model
for the SSME main combustion
chamber 3, (2) the CFD analysis
of each representative
injector
element
finally

(the number

the entire
CFD
CFD

motor

calculation.
simulation

analysis
2.1

of representative

(3) the use of the injector

and

Fluids

flow.

The

The injector
element
of the entire combustor.

can be used

Real

nozzle

elements

model

to determine

Version

The framework
flow solveP 5, which

of FDNS

of the CFD
employs

local

should

results

be small,

as boundary

injector

element

for a given

conditions
analysis

heating

design);

and

simulation

shall be accomplished

analyses
shall provide
streamtube
Both the injector element analyses
wall

motor

for a CFD

with a

bundles
to initiate a
and the entire motor

effects.

(FDNS-RFV)
model

a predictor

is an elliptic,

Finite

plus multi-corrector

Difference

Navier-Stokes

pressure-based

of

solution

(FDNS)
algorithm

SECA-FR-97-04
so that both compressibleand incompressibleflow problems can be analyzed. High order
upwind, total variationdiminishing(TVD), or centraldifferenceschemesplus adaptivesecondorder and fourth-order dissipationterms are usedto approximatethe convectionterms of the
transport equationssuch that computed supersonicflows through a shock regime will be
stabilized. Second-ordercentraldifferencingschemesare usedfor theviscousandsourceterms
of the governing equations. Vectorized point implicit, conjugategradient, and generalized
minimal residualmatrix solvers6 (GMRES)areoptionally employedto insurea stable,accurate,
andfast convergencerate. Multi-block, multi-zoneoptionsare included in the FDNS codeso
thatproblemswith complexgeometriescanbe analyzedefficiently. An extendedk-e turbulence
model with a modified near-wallboundarytreatment7 is utilized in the code for turbulent flow
computations.
based

In this approach,

on the velocity

transition

between

addition,

a modified

accounting

profile

the profile

suggested

logarithmic
wall

provide
appropriate
combustion
flows,
developed

and incorporated

this Phase

III study

for the methodology

of the

function

heat
several

by Liakopoulos

law

for the aerodynamic

of the non-dimensionalized
wall

treatment

heating

into the FDNS

from.

reported

herein.

In order to analyze
the effect of phase
and caloric
equations
of state were

effects

were

rocket

engine

purpose.

neglected

for the very

combustion

These

equations

The

over
and

the vapor

the original

specific

volumes

HBMS

or vice

correlations

versa,

by
to

II SBIR investigation

reports

also provide

spray
were
t which

more

detail

or above

equations

critical

pressure)

of state IH2 were

in existing

selected

for

this

"

T,

'

;'Or=--

0P

ideal-gas

dp_ + Z c

- 1

(2)

p_ T_

P_

temperature,

(1)

Pc

-2

p,

density,

of the thermal property

and

---- "_cc

enthalpy

and compressibility

polynomial
for

at the critical

for a given

a given

species,

species.

and

H and

R is the

gas

are not only of sufficiently

high order that properties
are accurately
of conditions,
but component
submodels may be easily modified.
In

pressure

curve

formulation.

or pressure.

robust predictions

liquid,

enthalpy

These equations
for a wide range

this instance,

(near

HBMS

zoi

Bij are the coefficients

constant.
predicted

flows
in FDNS

changes in the spray combustion

flows, real-fluid
developed 1. Interfacial
heat and mass transfer

BijPi, -2

Pc, Tc, Pc, and Zc are the pressure,

the real-fluid

the Phase

1I1 progress

i=l

RT

Ho are

compressible

incorporated

In

T_-2_

H - H0

condition.

for

been

a smooth

variations.

are:

P
_
P-_ = j.,

where

provides

sublayer

is suitable

under

high pressure

chambers.

u is formulated

near wall boundaries.

To simulate
as described
in subsequent
paragraphs,

Phase

thermal

profile

viscous

had previously

code

The

linear

9, which

transfer
calculations
additional
submodels,

is derived

g. This velocity

and

effects,

velocity

Multicomponent

The partial

when
are

and the liquid phase

a small

present

for the transport

volume

amount

at the same

properties.

density

mixtures

methodology

of multi-component
location.

Furthermore,

The

correlations

were

treated

is essential
vapor
properties

this real-fluid

were

improved

by adding

to provide

and

a large

routines

property

partial
accurate

amount
also

submodel

of

include
can be

SECA-FR-97-04

ported into

other CFD

Most

or used

of the pressure-based

is no longer
density

code,

valid in simulating

is calculated

as a stand

methods
the spray

in two

steps.

pressure-based

the continuity

methodology,

equation

combustion

In the

between

where

and

for

the perfect

for the

real-fluid

where

7,

R and

gas:

a are

the

Hence,

equation

on the above

the

i(_pP /

Dp is the matrix

denote

2.2

the values

Fluid

combustion

specific

heat,

and density

as the corrector

is
and
Like

is used to convert

step.

However,

correlation,

coefficient

the

a constant-temperature

(3)

d-P

(4)

(5)

gas

constant

pressure-correction

and

equation

sonic

can

(p* DpVP

speed

be derived

and can be written

of the

equations,

and previous

flow

from

the

p*

mixture,
continuity

as

/) = -V

of the momentum

at the intermediate

for

estimating

products

properties

have

of a RP-1

approximated

the

(C10's),

13%

Cll's,

fluid

(p" V) - p

and

At

(6)

the superscripts

of * and

time steps.

developed

1'_3 and

to

be

of
included

in Table

about

LO2/RP-1/H2

42%

in the

1.

The

liquid

mixtures

FDNS-RFV

Core

Labs

volume

of

and
code.

report

their
The

on RP-P

paraffins,

25%

and tri-cycloparaffins,
3% benzenes
and 6% naphthalenes.
revealed
about 12% liquid volume of molecules
with 10 carbon

29%

C12's,

fuel was designed

to simplify

properties

fuel are presented

constituents

The surrogate
In order

real

been

surrogate

monocycloparaffins,
24%
diExamination
of the constituents
smaller.

procedure

Properties

Methods

atoms

flow mixture

and species concentrations,

from the real-fluid
model.

At
where

which

/3p = a 2

(Vj_pP / ) -V

+V

model,
pressure

In the present model,

and the density:

= p/3,

gas law,

1
RT

_P -

model:

respectively.
based

dp

a constant

pressure

equation

perfect gas law can not be used as the correlation.

derivative
is used to correlate
the pressure
change

on the perfect

In the present

step,

mixture
energy
are calculated

a correlation

= p/

based

flows.

predictor

to the pressure-correction

pl

program.

are constructed

employed
to solve flow velocity
components,
then the flow mixture density and temperature
other

alone

the surrogate

25%

C13's,

to incorporate
model,

11%
these

the carbon

C14's

and

breakdowns
breakdown

the rest

either

larger

into the formulation.

was

reduced

to 20%

or

SECA-FR-97-04

Table 1.

n-UNDECANE
DODECANE
n-TRIDECANE
n-TETRADECANE
n-HEXYLCYCLOPENTANE
n-HEPTYLCYCLOPENTANE
n-OCTYLCYCLOPENTANE
n-NONYLCYCLOPENTANE
BICYCLOPARAFFIN1
BICYCLOPARAFFIN2
PENTAMETHYLBENZENE
HEXAMETHYLBENZENE
DIMETHYLNAPHTH

ALENE

Surrogates

.05013
.05948
.17828
.10235
.02921
.03570
.10437
.06547
.13496
.15453
.01509

C12H18

1.70

.786

.01758

C12H12

4.00

.967

.05285

Monocyclic Paraffin
Monocyclic Paraffin
Monocyclic Paraffin
Monocyclic Paraffin
Polycyclic Paraffin
Polycyclic Paraffin
Mononuclear
Aromatic
Mononuclear
Aromatic
Dinuclear Aromatic

C 11H22
C12H24
C13H26
C14H28
CI 1H20
C 12H22
C 11H 16

C12.39H24.15
1.9492
173.1453
.8111 gm/cc

of Number of
of LV of C1 ls
of LV of C12s
of LV of C13s
of LV of C14s

Carbon
(.20)
(.30)
(.30)
(.20)

of Liquid Volume
(.42)

Atoms per Molecule

20.0000
30.0000
30.0000
20.0000

by Type
42.0000
25.0000
26.0000
3.0000
4.0000

Monocyclic Paraffins
(.25)
Polycyclic Paraffins
(.24)
Mononuclear
aromatics
(.03)
Dinuclear aromatics
(.06)
Stoichiometric

.781
.791
.819
.761
.782
.782
.796
.803
.852
.819
.806

C 11H24
C 12H26
C 13H28
C 14H30

Molecular Weight
Liquid Density

Breakdown
Paraffins

4.70
6.00
18.80
12.50
2.70
3.60
11.20
7.50
11.30
14.70
1.30

Paraffin
Paraffin
Paraffin
Paraffin

Formula
H/C

Breakdown
Fraction
Fraction
Fraction
Fraction

for RP-1

Products:
18.426
12.389
12.075

Moles of 02 burned
Moles of CO2 formed
Moles of H20 formed
Heat of Formation

of Surrogates

-.56940E+02

kcal/mol

Heat of Formation

of Products

-.32886E+02
-. 18631E+04

kcal/100gm
kcal/mol

-. 10760E+04
kcal/100gm
-. 18061E + 04 kcal/mol

Heat of Combustion

-. 1043 IE +04 kcal/100gm

SECA-FR-97-04

Cll's,
which

30% C12's,
30% C13's and 20% C14's.
Eighteen
candidate
constituents
satisfied
both Core Lab breakdowns.
Various
liquid volume
fractions

analyzed

and

compared

to estimated

RP-1

molecular

weight

(175),

(H/C = 1.95) and liquid density (0.83 grams/cc).

A reasonable
due to the low H/C's
for aromatics.
Since the reported percentage
than reported

by other

indistinguishable

sources,

and since

from polycyclic

the polycyclic
paraffin
percentage
These considerations
are reflected

Table 2.

method

Critical
Critical
Critical
Critical

dinuclear

the naphthalenes

Critical

.05013
.05948
.17828
.10235
.02921
.03570
.10437
.06547
.13496
.15453
.01509
.01758
.05285

true

critical

13.

Unknown

aromatics

(naphthalenes)

are often

percentage

was reduced

by 2 % and

638.80
658.20
676.00
693.00
660.10
679.00
694.00
710.50
712.20
721.80
719.00
758.00
771.00

19.70
18.20
17.20
14.40
21.30
19.40
17.90
16.50
27.79
24.36
24.85
22.40

critical

volume.

The

in an H/C

31.09

for
liquid

the

RP-1

volumes

surrogate
of the

fuel

literature

14!6 suggest

were

constituents

using

calculated

This

constituent
critical

method

is a paraffin,

volume

to vary

utilizes

an interaction

cycloparaffin,
wildly,

hence

parameter

aromatic,
care

etc.

must

were

the

resultant

such as n-nonylcyclopentane

applicable.
reasonable

These
methods
were
utilized
and the
value for the critical volume
was obtained.

of the resulting

thermal

equation

which

varies

These

interaction

be used

molecules,

A plot

to 1.95.

Gibbs

using

the

critical

more

pressure

and

with cubic equations

_4 to estimate
critical
on whether

parameters
them.

For

cause

the
the

the complex

than one category

may be

interaction
parameters
adjusted
until a
The results are presented
in Table
2.

of state is shown

estimated

depending

in evaluating

or hexamethylbenzene,

using

were estimated
using the group
resulted
in a high value for the

temperature
but not the critical volume
when Gibbs method is employed
of state.
An alternative
was to use the method
of Chueh and Prausnitz
volume.

close

.240
.231
.240
.230
.229
.237
.231
.225
.253
.241
.225
.216
.251

647.05
694.58
784.25
920.29
590.05
689.67
744.64
805.54
539.09
593.72
541.27
607.72
517.53

method of Gunn and Yamada _4. Unknown

critical properties
contribution
method
of Joback zS. As before,
Gibbs method
mixture

ratio

692.776
19.974
646.093
.224

properties
saturated

to carbon

for RP-1 Surrogate

Properties

Temperature
(K)
Pressure (bar)
Volume (cc/gmol)
Zc

The

hydrogen

value of H/C was unattainable

(9%) of aromatics
was higher

was increased
by 2%.
This resulted
in the surrogate
shown in Table 2.

n-UNDECANE
DODECANE
n-TRIDECANE
n-TETRADECANE
n-HEXYLCYCLOPENTANE
n-HEPTYLCYCLOPENTANE
n-OCTYLCYCLOPENTANE
n-NONYLCYCLOPENTANE
BICYCLOPARAFFIN
1
BICYCLOPARAFFIN2
PENTAMETHYLBENZENE
HEXAMETHYLBENZENE
DIMETHYLNAPHTHALENE
Mixture
Mixture
Mixture
Mixture

complex

paraffins,

were identified
of each were

in Figure

1.

SECA-FR-97-04

Figure

Pressure and Density

RP-I
2.0

1.4

1.20

Comprised

A ong Isotherms

of 1.5 Surrogates

1.15

1.05

_D
L.

1.025

_O

L.

G.

t/tc

= 1.0

"(3
)
0.965
'(D
0.93

0/

1.5
Reduced

-7

Density

SECA-FRO7_4

2.3

Combustion

Kinetics

Combustion
kinetics
the formation
and oxidation

rates for H2/RP-1 at high pressures

are very fast except possibly for
of soot and for the pyrolysis
of RP- 1 constituents.
If local chemical

equilibrium

were

assumed,

ignition

be formed

if any

oxygen

immediately

were

pyrolyzed.

rigorously

The

identified.

large aromatics,
are too complex

delays

upon

present,
RP-1

Kinetics

and

contains

models

all large

for RP-1

composition
One global

was

model.

as the RP-1

kinetics

could

HJO2

steps

as an equilibrium
shown

in the wet

process.

in Table

4 was

For

used.

oxidation

that treat

The

rate

the

LO2/H2

simulation

approximation
computationally
2.4

quite

cases

model.
present

analyzed

as either

in Table

3.

This RP-1 kinetics

model
in a tripropellant
with the

with

for gaseous

02 is modeled

the

this global

global
model

reaction
is that the

combustion
at one mixture ratio.
of local mixture ratio, the global

However,

than

step is given

in this report,

introduced

better

be
be

therefore
the one surrogate
step for the surrogate
fuel

H_/O2 combustion

accurately.

considerably

Sooty

hybrid

CO2, H20,

expected

absorption

From
and

as the gases

be made

is

would
cannot

as it was used,

assuming

complete

this model

combustion

is an
and

is

efficient.

Radiation
RP-1

are

could

which

they

the hydrocarbons

for this global

distribution
of combustion
products
is evaluated
for equilibrium
If the stoichiometric
coefficients
were expressed
as a function
equation

that

fragments
are desirable,
but such models
species which comprise
RP-1 change from

used

approximation

no soot would

in the RP-1

species

changes
are unknown,
pyrolysis/partial-oxidation

CO reactions.

The

species

of so many

The combustion
is completed
by a wet CO equilibrium
accounts
for the large amounts
of H2 which would
be
equilibrium

not be predicted,

molecular

a mixture

large aliphatics,
or small two-carbon
for direct use in a CFD code.
The

lot-to-lot
of the fuel, but these
fuel characterization
was used.
used

injection

Flames

fuels
and

to form

CO, produce

to be small,
only,

tend

the

soot

as is the radiation

soot during

significant

radiation

the combustion

thermal

radiation.

is continuum

for the gases.

process.

and

However,

Since

is exchanged

gaseous

Soot,

as well

the soot particles

by emission

and

is strongly

and

radiation

discontinuously
wavelength
dependent.
To predict radiation
in combustion
devices,
three factors
must be considered:
(1) radiation
properties
for the optically
active species,
(2) the method of
calculating

the radiative

radiating
presented

gas species
in Appendix

presented

in Appendix
The

Absolutely

critical

exchange,

(3) the accuracy

of the concentration

A solely
issue

for computational

is the

of the injector

accurate

the magnitude
face-plate

are available.

in tripropellant

parametric
rocket

are

too

accurate

soot

Gaseous

and less critical

and

cumbersome

investigation
combustion

to

yield

of combustors.
devices

are

the

effects

species

since

gases

must

and

of liquid

drops.
particles

also be predicted,

account

for less of the

flowfield

experiments
Since

masses

for making such predictions;

data must be accomplished.

necessary

Definitive

non-existent.

liquid

shielding

The flowfield
analyses described
in this report are useful
identification
of typical combustion
systems and validation
solutions

more

of

of the radiation

radiation.
however,

indiscriminate

are both

prediction

predictions

CFD

of the

expediency.

but these

The

predictions

and particles.
The essential
elements
which
define
these factors
are
A.
No attempt
has been made to compromise
the radiation
analysis

no data to indicate

in the vicinity

and

data

to define

soot predictions

for

an

radiation
and

their

SECA-FR-97-04
verification are the final resultof tripropellantflowfield analysesandsincethis investigationwas
foreshortenedbecauseof funding reductions,the radiationmethodologydescribedin Appendix
A was not usedto makeradiationpredictionsfor tripropellant systems. The radiation aspects
of tripropellant systemsshould be revisited when (and if) more firm design concepts are
established.

Table
RP-1

+ 6.195
Rate=

RP-1

--, 12.39
Rate=

3.

02 --" 12.39

CO

ATBexp{-E/RT}
A = 4.4963x109,
C. +

12.075

Kinetics

12.075

Models

H2

H 2

2} [RP-1] L43 [02

To = 1700K,

+ e] -'5

e = 0.001p/Mo_

g-mole/cm

02 -* CO

Rate=

6 M_, R,, T

Kt
+K2(1

p.D.

where

, =

A2 =

1+

Po2 K3

1'

4.46x10

3,

Aa = 1.51x105,
A 4 = 21.3,
R., = 82.06
p, (density

atm.

diameter

Mw, (molecular
Po_ (partial

Fa/R

= 7.6497x103

EJR
E4/R

= 4.8817x104
= -2.0634x103

i = 1_ 4

K
g/cm 3
= 40 nm (assumed

of soot)

Global

value)

= 12 g/g-mole

of 02, in atm)

Combustion

1.509xl&

of soot)

weight

pressure

4.

E1/R

= 1.86

[c,] [0 2]

-_
K i = A i e'Z'r

; and

cm3/g-mole

of soot)

D, (particle

Table

- _b)

1 + K4 Po,

Am = 20,

= P'No_

Kinetic

Reaction
1.827

for RP-1/O2

[RP-1] '5 [Ojl

B = 1, E/R = 2.679x104

A exp{-25(1-T/To)
A = 0.5,

C. + 0.5

Combustion

(No_: mole

Model

+ 0.094

O + 0.196

of 02)

for Hz/O 2

A
H2 + 02--" 1.552 H20
+ 0.354 OH

fraction

3.1000E22

B
0

E/R
2.4070E4

SECA-FR-97-04

3.0
At the inception
tripropellant
rocket
elements
were being

APPLICATIONS

TO INJECTOR

of this investigation,

strong

motors
which utilized
evaluated.
Subsequent

The only tripropellant

effervescent
H2/RP-1

consideration

H2, RP-1,
and
NASA programs

injector
design
which
has
coaxial injector 17. Therefore,

bipropellant
as well as,

injectors
of the type used in the Fastrack
the aforementioned
coaxial
tripropellant

tripropellant

CFD

3.1

The Entire

design

code.

Fastrack

The

results

conducted.

The major

in order

that wall

given

to the use of

02.
Both impinging
and coaxial
dropped
the tripropellant
concept.

experimentally
investigated
was the
to the lack of validation
data, several

motor and bipropellant

coaxial elements,
injector
were simulated
to evaluate
the

of these

injector
global

goal of this study

heating

been
due

was being

simulations

are reported

in this section.

Motor

To initiate the study of clustering

of a 2-D axisymmetric
numerical

series

DESIGN

could

elements
to represent
an entire combustor,
a
simulations
of the Fastrack
test motor were

was to determine

be subsequently

the temperature

evaluated.

The

motor

along

the motor

configuration

wall,

is shown

in Figure 2. The flow conditions

which were used to parametrically
represent
the injector
are shown in Tables
5-7.
Uniform
flow of combustion
gas through
most of the injector
center

flow and film cooling

flow of RP-1

were

used

to represent

the injector

flow
and

configuration.

At

first, an ideal gas model was employed

to simulate RP-1 and combustion
gas.
A large gap for
the center fuel flow and outer film cooling flow was used as shown in Table 5, to compensate
for the

low

density

conducted,
shown

RP-1

vapor.

one was with frozen

in Fig.

3, indicate

frozen

was chosen

chemistry
In order

flow,
gas

the ideal

chemistry

gas

model,

and the other

that the difference

in the chemical
equilibrium
the center and outer coolant
conditions

For

is very

numerical

with finite-rate

small

because

calculations

chemistry.

the major

The

part

were
results

of the flow

is

and is uneffected
by the small amount of fuel which flows through
streams.
Therefore,
the frozen chemistry
at equilibrium
chamber

for further

study.

Figure

4 shows

the results

of the ideal

gas model

with

simulation.
to study the effect

the real fluids

in the previous

model

of a liquid phase

was employed

calculation.

between
a point midway
radially
fuel holes.
The small-gap
case

for the center

to simulate
film

these
coolant

different

mixing

Intially,

the

the film coolant

holes
that the film coolant

models,

the extended

fuel and the outer

two streams,

between
assumed

defined by a ring of thickness

equal to the gap between
a result,
the predicted
wall temperature
is much lower
to be a better simulation
of actual conditions.
Two

two

was

assumed

as opposed

coolant

fuel

to the ideal

to occupy

the

space

and the outer row of primary

was injected
through
an area

the film coolant holes and the wall.

As
than in the previous
case and is thought

k-e model

with

and

without

a temperature

correction
were used to study the effect of compressibility
on the species mixing and thus on the
nozzle wall temperature.
The temperature
correction
model modifies
the source term S,, in the
E equation

as

10

SECA-FR-97-04

Figure 2

SKETCH

OF FAST TRACK

NOZZLE

GEOMETRY

I'

,!

"

46

\ 3"

/"

3.94"

2.84"

II

,w_

"-

16.53"

11

_......

3.74"----_

SECA-FR-97-04

Table

5. INLET

CONDITIONS

FOR

(IDEAL

GAS,

FAST

LARGE

Inner Fuel Region

RP-1

flow

rate

0.76678

02 flow rate

532 R

Density

15.457
Velocity

Table

6.

INLET

CONDITIONS

Inner
RP-1

flow

02 flow

rate

FOR

FLUID

0.76678

532 R

3.32

4.323"/4.6"

532 R
15.457

1173.25

ft/sec

3.983

TRACK

NOZZLE

LARGE

GAP)

Gas Mixture

21.16322

lb/sec

6714

lb/ft 3
ft/sec

SIMULATION

Outer

Fuel

3.32

lb/sec

0.65"/4.323"

lb/sec
0

lb/ft 3

55.78

Temperature

Fuel Region

0.16457

Hot

0
0/0.65"

Velocity

MODEL,

lb/sec

Starting/Ending
radial location

Axial

FAST

Fuel Region

rate

Density

6714

ft/sec

Outer

lb/sec

0.65 "/4. 323"

lb/ft 3

5.382

(REAL

lb/sec

55.78

Temperature

SIMULATION

GAP)

21.16322

0
0/0.65"

NOZZLE

Hot Gas Mixture

lb/sec

Starting/Ending
radial location

Axial

TRACK

Region

lb/sec
0

4.323"/4.6"

532 R

54.04

lb/ft 3

0.16457

lb/ft 3

54.04

lb/ft 3

1.539

ft/sec

1173.25

ft/sec

1.139

ft/sec

12

SECA-FR-97-04

Table

7.

INLET

CONDITIONS
(REAL

FLUID

Inner
RP-1

flow

02 flow

rate

0.76678

radial

8.

WALL

frozen

(large

finite

(large

lb/sec

RP-1
gap)

GAP)

Gas Mixture

21.16322
55.78

Outer

Fuel

3.32

lb/sec

6714

Region

lb/sec
0

lb/sec

4.5"/4.6"

0.45"/4.5"

532 R

lb/ft 3

0.16457

lb/ft 3

54.04

lb/ft 3

3.212

ft/sec

1068.99

ft/sec

3.095

ft/sec

NOZZLE

EFFICIENCY

RESULTS

OF

TEMPERATURE

chemistry
rate

extended

k-e

T-corrected

Liquid

RP-1

extended

(small

gap)

T-corrected

THE

FOR

Calculation

Gas RP-1

Liquid

Hot

SIMULATION

54.04

NUMERICAL

AND

NOZZLE

SMALL

532 R

Velocity

gap)

TRACK

0/0.45"

Density

CEC

MODEL,

Temperature

Table

FAST

Fuel Region

rate

Starting/Ending
location

Axial

FOR

k-e
k-e
k-e

13

VARIOUS

MODELS

C',t_ti_

C'tota

(ft/s)

(ft/s)

_/c"

Tth_t

---

5987

---

5987

5474

5663

0.946

3618

5505

5705

0.953

3750

5300

5483

0.916

4158

5275

5457

0.911

3742

5340

5555

0.928

4334

5347

5563

0.929

3550

(R)

Figure

ALONG NOZZLE WALL

DISTRIBUTION

TEMPERATURE

(IdeolOos for RP-I

5OOO

4OO0
r_
0

3000

D
D
121_

2OOO

E
Frozen Chemistry
Finite Rote

1 000

l"11
,
0

10
X (inch)

12

14

16

18

20

22

41

TemF, er6ture

(de9

K,

9as

P,P-i/hot

9as

mr

n 9)
_MIN

-5

XMAX

0674E-01

YMIN

-6

O776E+O1

5681E+00

TMAX

1168E*@1

FMIN

_556E+02

FMAX

7342E+OB

DELF

7009E.02

CONTOUR

LEVELS

ID

VALUES
A

984e+0Z

68_0E+02

t_

Figure

6797E*03

8498E_0B

_198E+03

18_E+03

B6_OE*S?

59e1E*O_

7_02E*@3

DI

SECA-FR-97-04

(8)
S, =pIC,

where

Cx,

Ca,

temperature

C3,

and

which

C4 are

when

J'rk-C2_

modeling

raised

C3(T)C'-P-_-

constants,

and

to the C4 power 4.

This

T is a ratio

model

of

reduces

the

viscosity
across temperature
gradients.
The results, as shown in Figures
that with the temperature
correction
model the film cooling is predicted
However,

compared

than the gas RP-1

of gas RP-1.
was simulated
Table

7.

results

to the result
coolant.

of the ideal gas model,

This is because

the liquid

the momentum

apparent

coolant
RP-1

As

with

the

previous

in Figures

Figure

and

case,

the

same

two

mixing

models

turbulent

is less effective

is smaller

In order to model the liquid RP-1 coolant flow more accurately,

where the RP-1 coolant
is injected
at the coolant hole location

are shown

to ambient

5 and 6, demonstrate
to be more effective.

RP-1

of the liquid

local

were

than that

a small-gap
case
as described
in

employed,

and

the

7 and 8.

Table

8 summarize

these

simulations.

The

lowest

predicted

wall

temperatures
are believed
to be the most accurate.
The C efficiency
values are thought to be
realistic.
Additional
work is required
to evaluate
the effect of the ablative
liner response
to this
predicted
3.2

wall

temperature

GOz/GH2
Due

Shear

these

Coaxial

Injector

to the lack of definitive

configurations
meal fashion.
elements

distribution.

x'2'xT. These
were

consisted

of the proposed

shear

model

simulated

coaxial

to predict

first experiment
which
included:
mean flow,
concentrations

of GO2/GH2,

numerically

GO2/GH2

9.

The

which

good

the injector

H2/O2 combustion
are appropriate

as shown
illustrated

in Figures
in Figure

except

mixing

was

at these

and chemical

injector

water

is not consistent

simulated

reaction

injectors.

of the CFD
to validate

phenomena.

injector

model in a piececoaxial
injector

RP-1/GHz/GO2
aspects

several

All of

modeling.
the capability

This test case is the

combustion.

A uni-element

shear

coaxial

injector,

as sketched

the propellants
into the combustion
chamber.
The numerical
domain which starts 25.4 mm upstream
and stops 8 inches

face.

The

assumed

inlet

conditions

to occur

pressures.

under

The

of the propellants
conditions

numerical

results

of local

are

listed

chemical

are compared

in Table

equilibrium

to the test case

11-12.
The simulated
flowfield
is plotted in terms of temperature
and is
13. The agreement
between the numerical
results and the test data are very

for the H20

for the GO2/GH2

and
various

test case x, was

mole

fraction.

In Fig.

well predicted
which indicates
the turbulent
accurately.
The major part of the discrepancy
the reported

element,

was designed
to provide very detailed injector
flow data.
Measurements
root-mean-square
fluctuation
velocities,
OH radiance,
and stable species

for high pressure

from

LO2/GH2,
to evaluate

injector

in Figure 10, was used to introduce

simulations
are for a computational
downstream

injector

were simulated
to evaluate the homogeneous
spray combustion
Santoro
and his co-workers
at PSU investigated
several

injectors
The

test data on a tripropellant

are attributed

measurements

with the good

to inaccuracies

are correct,
agreement

11, the growth

of shear

layer

mixing and the chemical

reaction
between
the measurements
and
very

obtained

16

in the measurements.

little combustion
between

would

the predicted

is shown

to be

are simulated
the predictions
For example,

have

occurred.

and measured

if
This

velocity

Temperature

(deg

K,

l_qu_d

RP-1/hot

gas

mixture)
MIN

-5

YMAX

0674E-01

0776E-01

-6

YMIN

5681E+00

YMAX

I168E+01

FMIN

955BE*02

FMAX

7343E+O3

DELF

7009E02

CONTOUR

LEVELS

ID

VALUES
A

9840E+02

6850E+02

-4

t,:'_

[1

6797E.03

8498E+03

0198E+0]

1899E+03

360_E'0_

S3O!E+03

7002E*03

,0
,

41

Figure

Temperature

(deg

K,

_qu_d

RP-1/hot

gas

m_xture,

T-correct

o
MIN

-5

MA

0674E-01

YMIN

-S

0776E+01

5681E+00

YMAX

1168E*_1

FMIN

8556E+@2

FMAX

7344E_03

DELF

7009E+02

CONTOUR

LEVELS

ID

VALUES

9840E02

6850E02

I:L

If

:
=

::

','

;':

6797E+03

8498E+03

019BE+09

1B59E+03

3600E+03

53_IE*_q

70OZEOq

l"/1
('3

_b

Figure

Temperature

(deg

K,

liquid

RP-1/hot

gas

m,xture)
MIN

-5

_MAX

0674E-01

YMIN

-B

O776E+O1

5681E+00

YMAX

I168E+@I

FMIN

D555E+@Z

FMA

7321E+03

DELF

7009E+02

CONTOUR

LEVELS

ID

VALUES
A

9840E+02

6B50E+02

6797E*_

8498E+03

0198E+03

1_E03

3gO_E*_3

_301E+@_

70_2E+03

\
7

i'll

,b
",.,I

Figure

Temperature

(deg

K,

1 iqu_d

RP-1/hot

9as

mixture

T-correctlo
M]N

-5

XMAX

@674E-@1

YMIN

@776E+@1

-6

5681E@@

TMA

I168E_@I

FMIN

_555E_02

FMA

7329E+03

DELF

7009E+02

CONTOUR

LEVELS

ID

VALUES

984@E+02

685@E+02

i,

, [_;

i
i

if

_,*,

_;,

6797E_09

8498E+03

@198E+09

1899E+03

9600E+OD

5901E+07

7O@2E+Oq

6e

4_
;e

4_
",4

Figure

Figure

TEMPERATURE DISTRIBUTION ALONG NOZZLE WALL

(Frozen

Chemistry)

5000

4OOO
n-0
_b

5000

Q_

2O0O

.<.<2--.--- -

E
k.......

1 000
........

Ideal

gas

Real

Fluid

(large
Model

gap)
(large

gap)

Real

Fluid

Model

(large

gap,

Real

Fluid

Model

(small

gap)

T-correc

tio.'n)

Real Fluid Model (small gap, T-correcti.on)

g

10
X (inch)

12

14

16

>,
,

18

20

22

SECA-FR-97-04

N..

xu'ogen
Gaseous

t- Igniter

rurge

-_

/-Slot

Window/

Cooling

Hydroge

Gaseous
Oxyen

Viewing

Window

_
..
L;OOlln_
Water Out

12.7 mm
7.75 mm

1.53 mm

Figure

10.

The

Schematic

of the Uni-element

22

Shear

Coaxial

Injector

Test

Facility

SECA-FR-97-04

Table

Pressure

9.

Flow

Conditions

flow

rate

Axial

velocity

Table

Pressure

(kg/s)

Density

298

0.04196

0.0104

51.1

The

Inlet

Flow

Conditions

rate

Table

Pressure

(lb/s)

11.

The Inlet

Flow

Density

profiles.

rate

0b/s)

Furthermore,

the summation

Test

453

210

557

62.79

0.1516

0.397

0.049

of the LOJGH

2 Injector

Test

layer.

The

discrepancy

for the velocity

near the chamber

windows.

The

purge

fluctuating
values
of

velocity is concerned,
the axial fluctuating

assuming

isotropy.

flows,

hence

its use

being

smaller

than

suggest

flow

This

GH2

260

260

210

557

62.42

0.0864

0.371

0.073

of the measured

the

between

the

wall is caused

was not accounted

mole

fractions

and

by the nitrogen

purge

for in the numerical

is widely

accounts

measured

that any modifications

measurements

the disagreement
in the comparison
velocity
are calculated
from the

assumption

probably

for

values.

to the CFD

Case

LO2

is not close

difference
cannot be solely attributed
to unmeasured
radicals.
Temperature
not reported,
but verbal reports indicated
that temperature
was estimated
in the shear

Case

453

(R)

flow

Injector

GH2

Conditions

0b/ft 3)

LO2/GIt:

LO2

(psi)

Temperature

177.2

of the

(R)

flow

Case

290

(lb/fP)

Mass

Test

I. 31

(psi)

Temperature

Injector

I. 31

(m/s)

10.

GO2/GH2

GH2

(K)

Mass

of the
GO2

(MPa)

Temperature

Mass

The Inlet

recognized

the predicted
None

of the

model

are

23

comparisons

necessary.

#2

to unity.

This

measurements
were
to be about 3000 K

the numerical

predictions

used to protect
simulations.

the optical

As far as the

is anticipated
because
the
turbulence
kinetic
energy,

to be inaccurate
isotropic

#1

axial

for turbulent

fluctuating

made

in this

jet

velocities
evaluation

SECA-FR-97-04

FONS(_andard
0,_ seeding
Hz seeding

2O

o
A

20

k-e)

F'DNS(standard
02 _edin_

H= seeding

k-e)

10

10
E
E

--10

-10

-20

-2O
....

8'o loo 12o

140

10

20

30

50

40

mm

20

F'DNS(standard
=o

seeding

10

FDNS(standard k-e)
Oa _eding

rms Axlal Ructuotlon Velocity (m/see)

--

(a) x = 25.4

&

Axial Wlo Ity (m/see)

20

k-e)

0z
Ha seedir_
seeding

10

L.
&

-1 O

-20

2'0 .....
40

60

'o ....100

,_al v_lo I_ (m/oec

120

140

--

30

40

5O

mm

F'DNS(standard
I-Izseeding

A
10

,
20

rms AxialRuctuatlon Ve_ocity (m/see)

(b) x = 50.8

.._7.10

k-e)
A
20
10

_
_

Hz seeding
i

i
FDNS
(standard

Ai

k-c)

&

20.
E

-20
__
,

20

40

60

1;0

120

140

10

(c) x=
11

Comparison
Axial

Between

Velocities

20

,
30

40

rrns Axlal Ructuation Velb ff_ (m/see)

,_lal Velo_ Ity (m/see)

Figure

80

127mm

Measured

for Three

and

Axial

Calculated

Locations

24

Mean

(equilibrium

and

Root-Mean-Square

chemistry)

5O

SECA-FR-97-04

2O

_nl

I0

101

To
"2

Ol
E'ImO09

^_

gu4.

_"

-"

i.

_.

-nol
-_I

(a) x = 25.4

,-

"

-,-,-,-,"

tl

0.9 1/I

H_lokffroc6en

(_ 14ola
Froctien

I_ V_ Froction

,-,-,-,-,,,

i_

0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.t 0.5 0.6 0.7 _

0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0,5 0.6 0.70.S o-q 1.0

0,0 O.1 0.2 0.3 114 0.5 0.6 n7 0.8 0.9 1.0

,D

_,,=*,.dk-.,)

?
0

-10

_.

mm

oo

-10

09 11.1112 0,30.l

I._ llobFmi'_n

O]Uole
Frll:tio_

I_ V_ieFroc_n

(b) x = 50.8

20

g,O 0.1 0.2 0,3 0.4. 0.5 g_ 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.,0

0.0 0.1 0.2 0.,3 0.4 0.5 0.6 ()3 0.8 0.9 19

0,5 0.6 0.7 0._ O.t 1.0

i.

n.

mm

v-

v-

l-u

,,

10

?
E

T
-1_

-I0

-10

-20

-20F ,

(c) x =
12

0.2 0.30.,r _

0.7 0.80.g 1.0

I_bFmtke

HII4_ ['r,od_

Figure

......

g.O nl

0.0 0,1 0.2 Q_ 0.4 0.5 0,_ 0.7 0.8 0.9 I.Q

127mm

Comparison
Between
Measured
and Calculated
Axial Locations
(equilibrium
chemistry)

25

Species

Concentrations

for Three

VALUES

ID
A

9000E+02

8000E+02

'

.[

609gE+03

9000E+03

1900E+03

480@E+03

1758E_02

BI90E+02

4179E*Og

5B23E*03

7466E+03

9109E+Q3

0752E*09

2395E+03

"J

4@3BE+0_

Figure 13 PredictedTemperatureContoursfor the GO2/GH2Inject Flow

]C>

Figure

Figure

14

15

Predicted

Predicted

Temperature

Temperature

Contours

Contours

for the LOX/GH_

for the LOX/GH

Injector

2 Injector

Test Case

Test

Case

VALUES

#1

#2
,b

SECA-FR-97-04

3.3

LO2/GH2

Shear

Coaxial

Two LO2/GH2
shear
coworkers 2, were predicted
model.

The

expectation

Injector
coaxial injector
flow test cases, also examined
to further
validate
the real fluid homogeneous

was that the homogeneous

the mixing,

since droplet

experiment

was similar

generation

and dispersion

to that of the gas/gas

through

the inner

tube.

through

the outer

annulus.

The

inner
The

tube

inner

diameter
and

chemistry

for HJO2,

the cold temperatures

for both cases

even

at the

3000K,

suggested

are plotted

Test data

in Table

downstream

end

of the

the presence

The

would

underpredict

configuration

that liquid

and the gas

of the annulus

of the

oxygen

flowed

hydrogen

were

flowed

4.19

mm and

the desired test pressure.

The inlet
in Tables
10-11.
A global kinetics

to model
could

the spray

be important.

combustion

because

The calculated

results

14-15.

were reported

computation

of drops

model

except

mm,

to provide
are listed

effects

in Figures

combustion

3.42

diameters

employed

that finite-rate

as shown

for sub-critical

suggesting

4, was

test case,

was

outer

respectively.
The nozzle was changed
of the propellants
for both test cases

combustion

was not simulated.

injector

7.11 mm,
conditions

listed

spray

by Santoro
and his
spray combustion

to indicate

domain.

is unlikely.

a growing

Predicted

No mechanism

jet of LO2 spray

temperatures

are

has

suggested

yet been

about

by these investigators
or others for explaining
LO2 drops at these high gas temperatures.
If the
mixing and/or
combustion
is reduced
in the model
to allow for the presence
of LCh, the
predicted
combustion
efficiency
would be quite low. For combustion
experiments,
the primary
measurement
of interest is temperature.
However,
temperature
has not been reported,
therefore,
no modification
to the CFD model was made.
3.4

Tripropellant
The

third

Shear
test

Coaxial

case

tripropeUant
(GO2/GH2/RP-1)
coworkers
17. The schematic

Injector

simulated

Elements

with

the

homogeneous

spray

combustion

lb/sec,

injected

respectively.

through

respectively.

the

was

The

annulus,

gaseous
which

The combustion

chamber

oxygen

has

inner

has
and

is modeled

a mass
outer

flow

rate

diameters

chamber
through
are 0.015 lb/sec
of 0.48

of 0.18

for 7 in. downstream

from

lb/sec

in.

and

RP-1

step produces
Hence,

ignition

oxidation,
H2 and CO.
delays

The predicted
18, respectively.

soot formation,

The

The

combustion

may arise
temperature
flow

and soot oxidation

only from

in the first 3 in. of the combustor.

6 in. from the injector
face and

was completed
the RP-1

field and regions

is predicted

with

oxidation

the injector

striated,

where

a wet

the RP-1

is
in.,

face.
The
3, to

oxidation

CO equilibrium

model.

step.

of soot formation

to be highly

Drops
0.2 in.

process,

the
and

and
0.5

The chamber
pressure
is 500 psi and the temperature
of all propellants
is 540 R.
combustion
is represented
with three global
kinetics
expressions,
as shown
in Table
simulate

shear coaxial
injector
flow, also examined
by Santoro
and his
of the injector element is sketched
in Figure
16. The hydrogen
gas

is assumed
to be fully mixed with RP-1 and injected
into the combustion
inner tube of 0.15 in. diameter.
The mass flow rates of GH 2 and RP-1
0.15

model

are shown

in Figs.

but all of the RP-1

17 and

is vaporized

with a mean size of 20 tzm were reported

at a point
off of the centerline,
even though the combustion

efficiency
is reported
to be 97.5 %. Drop size distributions
point; however,
the total flowrate
of RP-1 liquid cannot

27

and velocities
be estimated

were reported
for this
from these data.
The

SECA-FR-97-04

velocity predictionsandmeasurements
arein closeagreement,eventhoughinsufficient testdata
areavailableto identify weakpointsin the analysis. The sootmassfractionpredictionsarevery
low. However, soot is predictedwhere it would be expected. The soot model canbe easily
tuned, if suitabletest datawereavailable.

RP-1

Figure

16.

Schematic

of Injector

Element

28

Used

for RP-1/GH2/GO2

tripropellants

Temperature

(deg

K,

GOX/GH2/RP-1

shear

coax,al

)
XMIN

-9

XMAX

4374E-01

YMIN

1937E+OO

-2

8906EO0

_MAX

8906E_00

FMIN

9907E+O2

FMAX

6657E+03

DELF

0000E402

CONTOUR

LEVELS

ID

b_

VALUES

0OOOE.02

0000E+02

[
i

,,
J

,,.,
!'t

,
3[

7000E.03

0000E+03

2999E_03

5999E+03

Q_

..-,I

Figure

17

Nass

+_racttons

o-F

soot

(GOX/GH2/RP-1

she_r

coax,a1

Enjector)

MIN

-9

XMAX
YMIN

4374E-01
7

-2

I_37E+00
8906E00

YMA

890BE@@

FMIN

@@0@E+@@

FMAX

@427E-06

DELF

5000E-07

CONTOUR

LEVELS

ID

VALUES

0000E+00

4500E-06

7999E-06

15_OE

5_0E-_6

t_

_6

Figure

18

SECA-FR-97-04

3.5

Fastrack

Injector

After

the firing

Elements
of early

versions

of the Fastrack

motor,

the liner

near

the injector

face

plate showed
locally
excessive
ablation.
The large ablation
occurred
in streaks in the axial
direction
with the number
of streaks,
as well as the distribution
of streaks over the wall in the
circumferential

source

direction,

being

dependent

on the design

of the injector

face plate is.

The objective
of the CFD analysis of the near-injector-flow
was to determine a possible
of the observed
ablation
phenomenon.
For this investigation,
the flow within a region

of the motor that was bounded

by a section
of the injector
face plate and the wall of the
combustion
chamber
was modeled
in detail.
The section of the injector
face plate used in the
CFD

modeling

three

holes

consideration

involved

for

a pair

film-cooling

with respect

(doublet)
flow.

of oxidizer

Recognizing

to the azimuthal

direction

holes,
the

a pair

symmetric

allowed

(doublet)
nature

the flow

of fuel
of

the

holes,
flow

to be computed

and
under

for only

one half of the injector

face plate element
with symmetry
boundary
conditions
imposed
to
account for the other half. The face plate section modeled
in the CFD analysis
can be identified
by referring

and

to Fig.

The orientation
some dimensions

2.
based on a coordinate
system erected in the center of the injector face
of the volume
treated by the CFD analysis
are shown in Figure
19.

R=4.60"

R=3.65"

Figure

19:

Volume

Element

Analysis.

31

Used

for

CFD

SECA-FR-97-04
The detailsof the faceplatesectionboundingthe volumeplottedin Figure 19are shown
in Figure 20. As shownin Figure 20, the computationaldomain consistsof one LO2 injector
hole, oneRP-1 injector hole, andone andonehalf RP-1 coolantinjector holes.

ooU_

RP-I

_]

LO2

Figure
20: Injector
Plate Section.

Although
rectangular,

the area

(elliptical)

hole

The
employing
uniform

the cross-sections
of each

41 nodes
grid

hole

in the physical

computational
spacing

dimensional

radial

was selected

in the injector
computational

is the same

consisted

closely
towards
the injector
face,
immediate
vicinity
of the injector.
clustered

injector

in Modeled

holes

in the

Face

CFD

modeling

as the corresponding

are

essentially

cross-sectional

area

of the

direction,

each

plane

case.

grid

in the

of the

Holes

hole regions

of 31 planes

direction,

and

21 nodes

in the axial direction

thus
The

axial

in the azimuthal

with the grid points

with
direction.
being

A non-

packed

more

allowing
for a better
resolution
of the flow in the
grid points in both, the radial and the azimuthal
are

to accurately

grid is shown

in the

in Figure

32

capture
21.

the incoming

mass-flows.

The three-

SECA-FR-97-04

Figure 21: Computational Grid Involving

3 lx4 lx21 Nodes.

A summaryof the initial conditionsfor the different mass-flowsentering the control

volume is given in Table 12. The axial componentof the velocity is implied by the mass
flowrate. The other two componentsof the total velocity vector were calculatedbasedon the
orientation of eachhole. The anglesused for the calculationswere taken from drawings
suppliedby NASA. The resultingtotal velocity vectorsfor the injected mass-flowsare plotted
in Figure 22.

Table 12. The Inlet Flow Conditionsfor the FastrackInjector FaceSimulation

LO 2 Hole

Area per hole (in2)

Mass flow rate per hole (lb/s)

RP-1

Hole

RP-1

Coolant

0.007726

0.002432

0.001077

0.4042

0.1482

0.0291

Temperature(R)

190

532

532

Density

67

46.5

46.5

514

514

514

Pressure

0b/ft 3)
(psi)

33

SECA-FR-97-04

Figure
22:
Mass-Flows.

Two
to analyze

numerical
the

simulations

effect

for the two boundaries

is a wall; while the

symmetry
plane.
case.
The flow

The
angle

Velocity

cant

angles

on

cant

near
the

of Injected

Fastrack
chamber

injector
wall

The

oxygen

and RP-1

was

carded

as secondary

in the circumferential
direction.
bottom
boundary
in the radial

cross-stream
to the radial

as well as the slip boundary

flows

were

were

heating.

well mixed

flow back

towards

The

downstream

first

case

of the LOz and

condition
was

was also used for this

results of case #1, as

secondary
flow structure
velocity
component
resulting

condition

imposed

on the bottom

of the impingement

the impingement

conducted

The top boundary

in the radial
direction
was assumed
to be

chemistry
model used for the tripropellant
injector
of case #1 is the original design.
The numerical

angles

face

In Table 13, the impingement

and cant angles
cases are shown.
For both cases, a symmetry

shown
in Figure
23, indicates
that a strong
streamwise
flow recirculation
was induced due
the propellant

Vectors

of the flowfield

of injector

corresponds
to that just described.
RP-1 streams
for two simulated
employed
direction

Total

surface

surface.

surface,

and toward

and a
from

and then

the top wall.

Also, the propellant

the same secondary

mixture recirculated
towards,
and heated,
the injector
face, and followed
flow structure.
As a result, the hot streak on the wall occurred
between
the

RP-1

and aligned

coolant

holes

secondary
flow could
of the bottom surface,
opening

between
To reduce

with

the propellant

injector

holes.

Though

have been over-predicted

due to the slip boundary
the induction
of the secondary
flow is reasonable

the impingement
the severity

point

the strength
condition
because

of the

assumption
of the large

and the top wall.

of the induced

secondary

flow,

a second

test case

was

simulated,

for which the cant angle for both the oxidizer

and fuel flow was eliminated.
The elimination
of the flow cant angle makes the assumed
slip boundary
condition
of the bottom
surface less
critical.

As anticipated,

the numerical

results,

as shown

34

in Figure

24 reveal

that a much

weaker

SECA-FR-97-04

Table

13.

The Impingement

and

Cant Angles

of the Propellants

for Both

Case #1
LO2 impingement
LO 2 cant

angle

angle

RP-1

impingement

RP-1

cant

angle

angle

Case

30

30

50

25

25

27'

secondary
flow, compared
to that in case #1 was induced.
much lower
and more uniform.
Meanwhile,
the region
thinner

compared

doublet.

This

to reduce

wall

Further

to that

indicates
heating
study

the assumption
the boundaries
homogeneous
the

most

in case

#1

and

that secondary
vs. optimizing
to add

enhance

rows

of injector

condition

of the detailed
injector
element
spray analysis
could be devised,

realistic

flowfield

#2

As a result, the wall temperature

is
of stoichiometric
mixture
is much

between

the

mixing,

LO2

doublet

and

but a compromise

must

the

RP-1

be made

performance.

the inner

of the slip boundary

is formed

flows

Cases

information

for

computation
time required
for these analyses
additional
simplification
could be realized.

holes

and thus

is recommended.

Also,

reduce
a gas

the sensitivity
only

solution

should be considered.
Other alternatives
however,
this methodology
is believed
the

computation
was

35

long,

required
but

further

for

the

to this
to yield

analysis.

optimization

to
for

and

The
some

Fast-Track

near

Znjector

%_rnulat

on

(no

Cavity)
-3

XMIN

0484E-02

XMAX

1418E+O0

YMIN

1880E+00

MAX

_61E+00

FMIN

0554E+02

FMA

7523E+03

DELF

8472E+02

CONTOUR

LEVELS

ID

VALUES

10555E+02

J
L

9027E+02

],,';

_ ;;,'[

_'}
?

//

691BE+03

8763E+03

OGIIE+03

Z458E+03

4305E*03

Bi52E+03

7999E+Oq

>

Figure

23

F-ast-Track

near

Znjector

S_rnu

at

on

(no

Cavity)
XMIN

-3

0484E-02

MAX

14i6E+00

YMIN

1860E+00

"MAX

_61E+O@

FMIN

0515E+02

FMA

7253E+03

DELF

8472E+02

CONTOUR

LEVELS

:/
ID

t_

VALUES

A,

0555E+02

9027E+02

'
,

Figure

24

:: (
I

6916E+03

8763E+03

[]

O611E+03

245BE+@3

4305E_

_15_E+0_

7_99E+_

" ,;
i

(%

SECA-FR-97-04

4.0
Conclusions
(1)

The

CONCLUSIONS

drawn

this investigation

FDNS-RFV

flowfields
(2)

from

code

conducted
sufficient

(1)

cases
of

bounding
injector

(2)

The

be analyzed

flows.

The
coarse

element

extension

example,
is a simple

analyses
should

finite-rate
extension

configurations

are

code

analysis
rows

injector-face

element

designs.
should

be

that they produce

flowfield
analysis.

essential

to

validate

are:
code
with

to determine

appropriate

of injector

elements

as boundary

the best

analyses

of

of gas

only

and

conditions

for detailed

be investigated.
spray

the presence

vaporization
which

element

the FDNS-RFV

to serve

of this homogeneous
fashion,

near

injector

studies to insure
of the applicable

design

detailed

use of multiple
grid

motor

measurements

with

this

analyses

in an approximate

injector

use of this CFD

synthesizing

(or gas/spray)

tool for evaluating

liquid

with analytical
as verification

temperature

for future

Additional
method

to characterize

in closer concert
test data to serve

Recommendations

analysis

and bipropellant

performed

In particular,
local
combustion
model.

are:

is a useful

of tripropellant

Experiments

& RECOMMENDATIONS

within

could

38

prove

combustion

of spray

drops

the homogeneous
quite

useful.

model
should

to account

for,

be considered.

spray

combustion

even
For
code

SECA-FR-97-04

5.0
Beisler,

M.A.,

Pal,

LO2/GH 2 Propellant
.

7.

Moser,

Cheng,
Effects

R.J.,

"Shear

Chen,

Saad,

Coaxial

"Laser
1995.

Light Scattering

Measurements

Y.S.,

Cheng,

G.C.,

and Farmer,

in 2-D Supersonic

Y., and Schultz,

Flows,"

M.H.,

R.C.,

AIAA

"Reacting

Paper 92-3602,

and Non-Reacting

R.C.,

Meeting,

P.G.

Jan.

Anderson,

14-17,

7, pp. 856-869,

and G.C.

Cheng,

SECA,

Inc.,

Progress

Reports

Hirschfelder,

J.O.,

et. al., Ind. & Engr.

Chem.,

50, pp. 375-385,

1958.

12.

Hirschfelder,

J.O.,

et. al., Ind. & Engr.

Chem.,

50, pp. 386-390,

1958.

13.

Farmer, R.C., and P.G. Anderson,

AL, July 1995.

14.

Reid, R.C.,

15.

Model,

16.

Peng, D.Y.,
and D.B.
Multieomponent
Systems

17.

Mouis, A.G.F.,
Pal, S., and Santoro, R.J., "Tripropellant
Injector,"
8th Annual Symposium
on Space Propulsion,
1996.

18.

Sparks,

"Propulsion

Huntsvulle,

Chemistry

of Gases & Liquids,

Thermodynamics

personal

for Film

1986.

in a Turbulent

Closure

Boundary

for CFD Applications,

4th Ed.,

McGraw

and It's Applications,

communication.

39

Chemistry

for CFD

AL, ongoing.

Robinson,
"A Rigorous
Method
from an Equation of State," AIChE

NASA/MSFC,

Simulation

on "Propulsion

11.

D.L.,

with Compressibility

1985.

NAS8-40574,

Reid,

Assembly

"On the use of Wall Functions

as Boundary
Flows,"
AIAA Paper 8543180, AIAA 23rd

under

M., and R.C.

Flow

Profile

Applications,

et al, The Properties

in a GO2/GH 2 Uni-

of Turbulent Flows Using an Extended k-c Turbulence

Viegas, J. R., Rubesin, M. W., and Horstman,

C. C.,
Conditions
for Two-Dimensional
Separated
Compressible
Sciences

in a

1992.

SIAM J. Sci. Stat. Comput.,

"Computation
1987.

Atomization

Within the SSME Main Injector

Liakopoulos,
A., "Explicit Representations
of the Complete Velocity
Layer,"
AIAA Journal, Vol. 22, No. 6, June 1984, pp. 844-846.

Farmer,

Injector

1994.

G.C., Farmer, R.C., and Chen, Y.S., "Numerical Study of Turbulent Flows
and Chemical Reactions," AIAA Paper 94-2026, 1994.

Aerospace
10.

and Santoro,

Cheng, G.C., Chen, Y.S., and Wang, T.S., "Flow Distribution

Using Porosity Formulation,"
AIAA 9543350, 1995.

Chert, Y.S., and Kim, S.W.,

Model," NASA CR-179204,

M.D.,

AIAA Paper 94-2775,

Moser, M.D., Pal, S., and Santoro, R.J.,

Element Rocket chamber," AIAA 9543137,

Cooling
o

S.,

Rocket,"

REFERENCES

Hill,

2nd Ed.,

SECA,

NY,

Inc., Huntsville,

1987.

Prentice

Hall,

for Predicting
the Critical
Journal, 23, No. 2, 1977.

1983.
Properties

of

Rocket Combustion
Using A Mixed RP-I/GH2
Penn State University,
pp. 55-58, Oct. 30-31,

SECA-FR-97-04

APPENDIX
RADIATION

Ra_diative

Properties

along

Since

scattering

is negligible,

absorbing

and emitting

and define

the equation

of transfer

is in local

thermodynamic

which

Iv is the

spectral

intensity,

Planck

coefficient

intensity

development
containing
that

transmissivity

is the
defined

is used

to identify

wave number.
from the point

directed

intensity,

k, is the

Integration
of equation
(1) over all wave
s = L to the observer
at s = 0 yields

]
toward

point

0 along

line

(2)

s.

of this equation
closely follows that presented
by Buckius
more than one component
is characterized
by the spectral
sum

of the

spectral

spectral

absorption

coefficients

of each

& Tien [1].

absorption

species.

With

(3)

for a mixture

of i components

is

,-Is} : II
which

is strictly

experimentally

valid

over

the

as

,{s} = exp

the transmissivity

an

(1)

blackbody

L
The
A medium

equilibrium,

s, through

k 1, -- k,/_,

Ibv is the

absorption
coefficient
and _, denotes
numbers
and along the line of sight

I-{0} is the spectral

for a line of sight,

properties.

(at/as)
where

EFFECTS

a Line-of-Sight

medium,

the radiative

finite

only

for

spectral

(4)

monochromatic
intervals

[2].

radiation
The

intensity

although

it is

in equation

found

to be

true

(2) becomes

(5)
1-{0}

= I

Ib'{s}

A-1

-_

as dl,

SECA-FR-97-04

Homogeneous

function

Gray

Model

The absorption
and emission
of radiant energy by a mixture
of gases and particles
is a
of the concentration,
temperature,
and pathlength.
The radiative
transfer
calculation

for a line

of sight

is, therefore,

dependent

pathlength.
This can result in very
For simplification,
the temperature
homogeneous
it is assumed

path
that

variations.
For
equation

variation

of these

yield

coefficient

which

parameters

along

in the analysis
is achieved
if
can account
for all spectral

the homogeneous

gray

model.

is not a function

of wave

number

or pathlength,

(5) becomes
1- {0} = (aT 4/a-) [ 1 - exp {- KL}]

where

K is a total averaged

is dependent

upon

determining

the

of v, therefore

the

for mixtures
of many components.
taken as constants
resulting
in a

Another
major simplification
of the absorption
coefficient

two approximations

the absorption

the

complicated
computations
and pressure
are often

approximation.
one mean value

These

upon

mean

definition

coefficient.

Nongray

intensity

coefficient.
of

K.

For

this simplification

Homogeneous
The

the

absorption

The

use of this homogeneous

Experimental

both

soot and

(6")

measurements

combustion

are

gases

gray
one

equation

method

K is a strong

of

function

is not acceptable.

Model

for a homogeneous

path

is obtained

from

equation

(5) as

(7)
I-{0}

= [

The spectral variation

of the transmissivity
rotational
bands.
The spectral dependence
narrow

or wide band

successfully

methods

employed

computationally

for various

intensive

[5],

established

from

data

models

based

on higher

are
For

gaseous

[3].

on

combustion
more

atmospheric
pressure

the exponential
gases.

importantly
and

flame
with

{L}ldv

for an infrared
radiating
gas is due to the vibrationalcan be evaluated
for practical
calculations
by either

In particular,

but

medium

lb,[1-r

wide band

The narrow

band

parameters

for

subatmospheric

pressure

model

models
these

[4] has been

are

much

more

models

have

been

wide

band

flames.

The

data.
single

vibrational-rotational

band,

the

frequency

dependence
for a band is restricted
to a small interval
as compared
to the blackbody
spectrum.
For this reason,
_v is removed
from the integral
in equation
(7) and taken constant
at the
wavelength

of the band

head

or center

depending

A-2

upon

the type

of band

to give

SECA-FR-97-04
The useof equation(8)
interval.

This

averaged

implies

procedure

with the continuum

this problem

that the gas absorbs

yields

by defining

the

correct

soot absorbance

a band

ra is the maximum

optical

depth

over

absorbance,

cannot

in this frequency

transmissivity,

rg, with

1" = d In A */d

where

like a blackbody

band

explanation

of this process

Use of wide band

formulas

head.

be introduced.

With

equation

Data

for using

shown

in Table
As

available.

1.

mentioned,
The

resolution.

band

problem

to evaluate
radiation

HITRAN

data base

rocket
directly

but

combustor

heating.

COs to mean

[9-12].

require

To account

plume

radiation.

Phillips

too

on

much

coefficient

for soot

present

radiation,

in a medium

k-

and the overlap

band

model

correction

taken

from

models

empirical

for combustion
data

taken

particles.

indicated
For

studies

lines

have

modest

been

between

the band

Several

time

integrations

made

has

to model
in the

predictions

directly

band

spectral

resulted

investigators

to be utilized
of narrow

also

sub-atmospheric

This

a comparison

are

and

in a band.

is still in progress.

used

modestly
to wide

high
band

for

model

using

have

simulating

data for 1-I20 and

measurements.
a medium
attenuate

containing
radiation

of any size distribution,

3 Q_,sf. _ 36_-f,
_ 2r
'
_

in equation

soot particles

[3] are

with

at atmospheric

Recently,

gases

only

particles

continuously
the governing

nk
[n2-k2+212+(2nk)

may

throughout
equation

be considered.
the spectrum.

for the absorption

(I0)
2

is the particle
absorption
coefficient,
r the particle
radius,
Q,b, the
f, the volume fraction of particles,
and m = n-ik the index of refraction.
variation

parameter

in [7].

primarily

computational

[4].

broadening
pressure
P_i in the
to be determined
for each gas
interval,
an overlap correction

wide

and

all of the

[9] made

his work

[17] compares

For small particle absorption,

coefficient
is given as [1, 8]

specific

conducted

data;

Leckner

absorption

particles

wavelength

is build

were

width

line data to predict

and measure
radiation
at high pressures
and
(about 800 K) [13-16].
Such data are very interesting
to compare

predictions,

where
k,,
efficiency,

base

data

by Edwards

0% the band

absorptances,

are given

radiation

by modeling

and HITRAN

the individual
temperatures

Small

[8] data

experiments

molecular
the SIRRM

band

given

intensity

exponential

of this model

narrow

SIRRM

The

pressure

Variations

[6] remedies

= 60Aii*

(8), the total band

Edwards

Edwards

Hence,

in an example

for the integrated

must be introduced.

frequency

conveniently

(9)

c0ij, the mean line width-to-spacing

ratio/3ij,
and the equivalent
transmissivity
of equation
(9) allows the total band absorptance
band.
When two or more gases have bands in the same spectral
must

be

In 1",_ 0.9

at the band

is shown

interval.

the band

the equation

Aij = (1-rg.i)0'u:_'l_i)Aij*
Further

but

that are

(10)

is dependent

contained

A-3

upon

in combustion

the

variation
systems,

absorption
The actual

of m for the
the optical

SECA-FR-97-04

Table

1.

Wide band model

Band Location

correlation

parameters

for various
Correlation

Pressure Parameters

x
I/_m]

(aO

71 pro"

_c = 140 em "t
(Rotational)

gases
Parameters

Cto
[cm-'/(g/m2)]

8.6 (To/T) '5 + 0.5

44,205

0.14311

69.3

8.6 (To/T) '5 + 0.5

41.2

0.09427

56.4

8.6 (Tort)'5+ 0.5

0.2
2.3
23.4

7o

too
[era "t]

(o,o,o)
6.3 #m

_/c = 1600 em a
(0,I,0)

2.7 #m

T/c = 3760 em q
(0,2,0)
(1,0,0)

0.13219

b'

60.0 b

(o,o,i)
1.87 #m

7/c = 5350 cm "1

(0,1,1)

8.6 (To/T) '5 + 1.5

3.0

0.08169

43.1

1.38 #m

v/_ = 7250 cm q
(1,0,1)

8.6 (To/T) 's + 1.5

2.5

0.11628

32.0

15 #m

v/c = 667 cm a
(0,1,0)

0.7

1.3

19.0

0.06157

12.7

10.4 #m

r/_ = 960 cm a
(-1,0,1)

0.8

1.3

2.47x10 9

0.04017

13.4

9.4 #m

T/c = 1060 cm "t

(0,-2,1)

0.8

1.3

2.48x10 -9

0.11888

10.1

4.3 #m

= 2410 cm "t
(0,0,1)

0.8

110.0

0.24723

11.2

2.7 #m

7o = 3660 cm "t
(1,0,1)

0.65

4.0

0.13341

23.5

2.0 #m

_/c = 5200 cm "t

(2,0,1)

0.65

1.3

0.060

0.39305

34.5

4.7 #m

v/c = 2143 cm "l

0.8

1.1

20.9

0.07506

25.5

0.8

1.0

0.14

0.16758

20.0

(1)
2.35 #m

_c = 4260 cm "t

(2)

A-4

SECA-FR-97-04

Footnotes
For the rotational

b.

for Table

Line overlap

tx = %--,

To

= 100K,

bands,

= Oo_

To,

bands

for the EWB

(-9 (To/T)s),

all but weak

for overlapping

Parameters

band a = ao exp

Combination
of three
= 25.9 cm 1

C*

1.

(0,2,0)

Model

3' = 3'o (To/T) '5

band are fundamental

from

13 = YPc = Yo

_o

'

(1

+ (b-

P0 = latm

_*('D
_(T)

_go"

Wffo)

(Vk + gk + 0k
(gk - I)IVkl

k-X vk'v,t

_,O3=

k=l

(v k + gk-

Vk=0

(vk
(T)

(gk (Vk

k--t,,k=O

A*

_.kvk

gk

1)1

-u,vk

1)IVkl
'Sk

j
l)l,e_UkV,,

(gk - 1)!vk!

A/w

7"0 =

c_ X/o_

A*

ro

1)! e-Ui"k

+ gk + 6k -

.,

1)!

A*=2(ro3)

's-3

A* = In {% 3} +2-3
A* = ro
A* = Into + 1

bands,

distance

for3

<

for3

< land_

for3
for3
for/_

< 1 1/3 < ro < co

< 1 and0 < ro < 1
< 1 and 1 < 7"0 < oo

A-5

1 and0

<

<

ro

-< 3

ro < 1/3

1)

c_o

SECA-FR-97-04

properties

have

been

dispersion

models

recently

reviewed

for m have

been

by

Reid

reported.

[18].

The

Furthermore,

review

indicated

although

the

that

several

dispersion

models

indicate
significant
differences
in m the predicted
volume IR absorption
coefficients
vary much
less.
These investigators
chose the model of Lee and Tien [19] for coding to generate
Figure
1. These index of refraction
values are recommended
until better data become
available.
The
data

are believed
Using

analyzed.

this radiation

The

2.2/_m.
excellent

to be reasonably

accurate.

model

for soot,

was

determined

soot density

the rocket

motor test data of Boynton

by considering

the

[20] were

soot to be the sole

re-

radiator

at

The re-analyzed
data are shown in Figs. 2-4 for three nozzle configurations.
The
fits of the test data show that the results are consistent
with the Lee & Tien radiation

model.

The

test report

suggested

particle
radiation,
but details
of these data are presented

that gaseous

radiation

was

estimated

and

of this removal
process
were not specified.
in the Phase II progress
reports
[21] that

removed

form

Additional
this Phase

the

analyses
III study

supports.
Using

equation

(9) in the transmissivity

r p{s}

For

a homogeneous

gives

path,

the intensity

and pathlength.
if f,, Q,b.,

If the medium

gas

Particulate
gas regions.

bands

intensity

medium

can also be used

and

is composed

in

the integral
in terms

of both particles

and absorption

Therefore,

the particle

evaluated

Aii accounts

at the

of this result

for the

The first
the gaseous

for the intensity

leaving

is dependent

Edwards
motor

ds

(3) results

(11)

in equation

(11)

of the particle's

is f, s.

properties,

the temperature

This

result

temperature,

of the homogeneous

path

band

and gases,

is continuous
transmissivity

center

the overlapping

and is essentially
can be removed

or head.

The

governing

spectra
constant

from

must be
over

integrals

equation

for

the
over

the

total

is

the particles.
term denotes

950

3 ,,,
----_2

to determine

emission

I-{0}

where

and

in equation

and L are known.

analyzed.
banded

f, is a constant

for a particulate
This

= exp

given

overlap

level

At this pressure

of species

term denotes
contribution
upon

path

the degree
results

as a parameter.
the radiation

with

+ _-'_'volb'oAo0

one another

(12)

and

r,p is the transmissivity

the intensity
resulting
from particulates,
that is transmitted
through the particles.

a homogeneous

[22] presented

with pressure
psi.

= I Ib'(1-%')dv

containing

gases

of homogeneity

of this type

simulation

The highest

pressure

is still not blackbody

A-6

and particles.

present

of

and the second

This is the result
The

applicability

in the system.

for conditions
which

typical

of a rocket

he considered

(for the soot level

which

was

about

was

. . . .......

. .

X
Q.)
"0
t-

\\'.

Q}
>

>
!

.-.l

0
0
I...

I0
9

8
7

2500
1 500
1000
300

,
. .

r
L

'

K
K
K
K

I *

J I _J

.5

Wavelength

Figure

1.

Optical

(/._m)

Properties

I .iJl

I 01

>
_o
.,4

for Soot

AREA RATIO= 5.25

oK
tO-1

6
5
4

r
I

2
U

3o

Q
I.J

10 -2

6
5
4

_A

10-3

6
5
4

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5
Wavelength

,3.0

3.5

1 680 K
--

rtl

4.0

(#m)
,.,,,I

Figure

2.

14

Foelsch

Nozzle

Radiation

Measurements

- High

Expansion

Ratio

AREA RATIO= 3.0

1 230

I(

I0-!
8
7

6
I

E
u

10 -2
8

7
6
5
D1

___1_________
! .0

t .5

L-----=-*
2.5

2.0

Wavelenglh

Figure

3.

Foelsch

Nozzle

Radiation

3.0

3.5

(/_m)

Measurements

- Medium

Expansion

Ratio

AREA RATIO= 1.50

I 0
7
6
5
4
3

'E

10-1

,>
O

u
Q

6
5

I0-2
7
6
5
4

'

1 .O

1.5

2.0

2.5
Wavelength

3.0

3.5

4.0

3
>

(#m)
,,,4

Figure

4.

Foelsch

Nozzle

Radiation

Measurements

- Low Expansion

Ratio

SECA-FR-97-04
assumed).This result is shownin Fig. 5, andit suggeststhat his radiationproperty estimation
method might be useful for predicting radiation within rocket combustors. Had blackbody
radiationbeenpredictedat this and lower pressures,the methodwould havebeen suspectand
further considerationbeenrecommended.

Non-homogeneous
The

nongray

most

complete

incorporate

the variations

complicated,

and more

pathlengths
nongray

that
model

The
equation

(12)

mixture

method

have

to determine

in temperature
detailed
large

from

a general

The analysis

is required.

needed

The resulting

in temperature

and

pathlength
is, therefore,

expressions

pressure

is to

where

more

are used

the

for

homogeneous

valid.

non-homogeneous

for a homogeneous

of particles

the intensity

and pressure.

information

variations

is no longer

general

model

and gases

intensity
nongray

if given

at s = 0 is given

path,

the

in equation

non-homogeneous

(5).

nongray

Similar
model

to

for a

as

-L

,-to} =

[sl]ds

dv +

-_
0

00

-L

O0

the overlap

in a similar
pathlength
nongray

correction

manner

is introduced

into Air

This

is the

result

The

equation

general

governing

terms
(12)

of equation
except

expression

(14)

are interpreted

that all quantities

for

the

are now

non-homogeneous

model.
An approximate
of the wide band

values

(14)

[ ,p0a0]

O_

to the homogeneous

dependent.

{s}]d dv
+fE..

I-{o} = fflb,-d[1-'_,,
d

where

(13)

[1-.,:,,,,Is}]dv
a_

reported

[23].

method of averaging
to replace non-homogeneous
parameters
for use in the homogeneous
total band

This work

gives

the average

values

regions
with scaled
absorptance
has been

as

= -

If

The

use

variation

of any

of the

of the partial

Solution
The

scaling
pressure

of the Uncoupled
radiative

transfer

techniques

(15)

o ds I
0

requires

detailed

pathlength

information

about

and temperature.
Radiative
equation

Transfer
(RTE)

Equation

is an integro-differential

A-11

equation

that

expresses

the

SECA-FR-97-04

32

llLllllllllllflllilllilllllll|illlillllliltl|l;llililllillllllllli|l!

30

P=64atm

ts =.64

q = 62.35

W/cm

- 28

(Tg

T= = 2075

= 1900 K

K)

26
24
tO

. 22
U

20
C_

'e "18
U

>t--

--

16
14

10

c.

8
6
4
2

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

WAVELENGTH.

Figure 5.

Combustion

5.0

MICRONS

Gas and Soot Radiation

A-12

6.0

7.0

SECA-FR-97-04

the conservation

of radiation.

this equation.
which

From

enters

neglected

The concentration

a solution

directly

into

in the energy

of the RTE

the

energy

equation,

and temperature
a radiation

equation.

heat

Usually

fields
flux

are needed

vector

q_ is small

such that the RTE can be solved

(q,)

to evaluate

can be obtained

enough

that

in an uncoupled

it can

fashion

be

after

the remaining
conservation
equations
are solved.
This is most fortunate,because
the RTE cannot
be solved in general,
even numerically.
The closest approach
is to use a Monte
Carlo [24]
simulation
to obtain the RTE solution.
It is not feasible to obtain a Monte Carlo solution at each
grid point at each CFD
conservation
equations.
being

time step to generate

a truly coupled
solution
of the entire system of
This dilemma has resulted
in a multitude
of approximate
RTE solutions

used to represent

the radiation

be obtained.
It is absolutely
made in order to determine

in the expectation

that some

form

critical

which

issue

is the accuracy

characterize

radiation.

as L&T

The

IDA

LOS analyses
(DAC)

combustor

code

justify

[27] offers

of gaseous

flowfields

can

2.

The NOZZRAD

are sufficiently
in the following

species

and

soot

accurate
to
paragraph.

concentrations

of interest.

and/or collected
and utilized
listed and described
in Table

soot in Table

are particularly
suitable
be used as a subroutine
[27].

of the prediction

tripropellant

SECA has developed

These codes are

indicated

solution

essential
that realistic
line-of-sight
(LOS) radiance
calculations
be
the extent
to which approximations
can be accepted
in RTE

solutions.
The radiation
properties
presented
in the previous
section
made the LOS analyses
using the RTE solution technology
described
The

of "coupled"

[25],

several
2. The

codes for use

Lee and Tien

GASRAD

in predicting
soot data are

[26], and SIRRM

[8] codes

for evaluating
LOS radiance
characteristics.
The NOZZRAD
code can
to provide
LOS data for use in other radiation
analyses
such as IDA
is best method

of offering

the assumptions
a very

a fully coupled

used in its development.

convenient

method

radiation

analysis,

The diffusion

of predicting

wall

provided

approximation

heating,

again

the
code

provided

its use

can be justified.
The
from

LOS

funding

performed

analyses

were

limitations

first

and

in order

planned
the

as part

fact

to obtain

that

realistic

all

of this

study,

of

other

the

concentration

but the reduced

aspects

fields

of

the

(especially

are very

of significant
endeavor.

Coupled

amounts

Radiative

The
modeling

difficult

CFD/radiation

of liquid

Transfer

extensive
studies

furnace

analyses

for

flame
verifying

hydrocarbon

studies

concentration
flames

droplets.

were

Hence,

Equation

Research

are feasible.

performed

due to geometrical

modeling

at the Naval

are typical of rocket motor

which must be re-examined
The

to predict

complexity

their

and

prediction

prevented

the possible

presence

and

uncertain

Solutions
efforts

of Lockwood

Laboratory

However,

at the National
predictions

to be

near the injector

design,
but these

is a costly

[29]

and

his colleagues

and by Moss,

none of these studies

Research

Council

of tripropellant
by radiation

simulated

A-13

using

and

indicate

conditions

flame
that
which

contain approximations
combustion
chambers.

of Canada

combustion

experiments

[28]

et al [30]

combustion,
and all of the radiation
analyses
before they can be applied
to rocket motor

investigated

resulting
had

of soot)

these analyses
from being made.
Upstream
radiative
heating of the flowfield
face and of the injector
face itself is extremely
important
for rocket
motor
flowfields

effort
study

[31] are very

since

hydrogen

a CARS

system.

valuable
enriched

SECA-FR-97-04

Table

NOZZRAD

2.

RTE

Solvers

emission/absorption/

i.

LOS

scattering

ii. Slabs

L&T

25

SOot/A1203
particles
wide
band model

SIRRIVI

GASRAD

emission/absorption/

i.

LOS

scattering

ii. 2-&

emission/absorption

LOS

old soot data,

6 Flux

from

cylindrical

field

A1203, narrow
band model
old soot data,
narrow
band

26

model
IDA

emission/absorption/
scattering
differential

w/ordinary

Cylindrical
coordinates

A1203, wide
band model

27

Cylindrical
coordinates

A1203 L&T

27

3-dimensional

A1203, old
soot data,
narrow
band

approximation
DAC

emissionabsorption
scattering
limit

REMCAR

diffusion

emission/absorption/
scattering,
Carlo

Monte

soot,
band

model

A-14

wide
model
24

SECA-FR-97-04
Nomenclature
Aij

C2

total band absorptance

for jth band
concentration
of particles
Planck's
second constant
volume

fraction

intensity
intensity

in the negative

complex

part

k,

absorption

K
L

average

m
n

complex
real part

pressure

Poi
Q.b,

equivalent
particle

absorption

particle

radius

distance
along
temperature

mass

Greek

symbols

of refractive

absorption

coefficient

index of refraction
of refractive
index
broadening

equal

pressure

to n-ik

of the ith species

efficiency

line of sight

pathlength

band

intensity

a- times the mean

emissivity

wavelength
wave number

Wij

index

coefficient

s direction

pathlength

integrated

Pi

of the ith species

of soot particles

I
I-

for Appendix

line width-to-spacing

ratio

solid phase density of soot

density of ith absorber
transmissivity
band width parameter

Subscripts
b
i

blackbody
species

j
1

band of specific
species
lower wave number
limit

particle

sc

scaled

u
p

upper
wave

parameter
wave number
number

limit

Superscripts
-

(overbars)

{ }

denote

average

values

functionality

A-15

SECA-FR-97-04

References
.

2.

Buckins, R.O., and C.L. Tien,

Pergamon Press, 1977.
Goody,

R.M.,

Atmospheric

3.

Modest,

M.F.,

Radiative

4.

Edwards, D.K.,
in Heat Transfer,

7.

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

17.

Heat Transfer,

Theoretical

Basis,

McGraw-Hill,

Edwards,

D.K.,

Int. J. Heat Mass

I, Oxford

Radiation

Heat Transfer

Notes,

University

New York,

"Molecular Gas Band Radiation," Irvine, T.F.,

12, pp. 115-193, Academic
Press, New York,

Ludwig, C.B., W. Malkmus, J.E. Reardon, and J.A.L.

Combustion Gases," NASA/MSFC,
NASA SP-3080,

Markarian,
Grumman
.

16.

Radiation,

Flame Radiation,"

Thompson,
1973.

Hemisphere

Felske, J.D., and C.L. Tien, "Wide Band Characterization

Infrared Gas Bands," Combustion
Science and Technology,
Publishers
Ltd., The United Kingdom, 1975

8.

15.

"Infrared

for Appendix

1964.

Jr., and J. P. Hartnett

1976.
"Handbook

Publishing

Eds.,

Corporation,

From

1981.

of the Total Band Absorptance of Overlapping

1_.!,pp. 111-I 17, Gordon and Bready, Science

Model

(SIRRM-II),"

AFAL-87-098,

Region,"

of Radiation by Gases from Low to High Pressures.

II. Measurements
Spectra,"
Journal de Physique II, France, pp. 2101-2118,
December

Hartmarm, J.M., et al, "Line-By-Line

Spectrose.
Radiat. Transfer, 12, pp.

and Narrow-Band
Statistical Model Calculations
119-127, Pergamon Press, Ltd., 1984.

Hartmann, J.J., "Absorption

of Radiation by Gases
Line and Narrow-Band
Statistical Models,"
Journal

M. E., "InfraredAnd Millimeter-Wavelength

Measurements
and Models," Infrared Phys.,

Perrin, M.Y., and J.M. Hartmann, "Temperature-Dependent

by CO2-N2 Mixtures
in the Far Line-Wings
of the 4.3
Transfe.....Er,3..33,pp. 311-317, Pergamon Press, Ltd., 1989.
Hartmann, J.M., et al, "The Infrared
Temperature
Measurements,"
J. Quant.
Ltd., 1993.

and Total Emissivity

for H20,"

J. Oust.

from Low to High Pressures.

I. Empirical Line-Byde Physique II, France, pp. 739-762, April 1991.

Sougiani, A., J.M. Hartman, and J. Taine, "Validity of Band-Model Calculations

to Radiative Properties and Conductive-Radiative
Transfer,"
J. Quant. Spectrosc.
243-257, Pergamon
Press, Ltd., 1985.

Leekner, B., "Spectral

1__9,pp. 33-48, 1972.

Advances

of Infrared Radiation

"Band Model Parameters

For H20 and CO 2 in the 300-1,000
K Temperature
AIAA 26th Thermophysics
Conference,
Honolulu,
Hawaii, June 1991.

Brodbeck, C., et al, "Absorption

and Calculations
of CO Infrared
1994.

Thomas,
Windows:

Press,

20, pp. 93-106,

1993.

P., and R. Kosson,

"Standardized
Infrared Radiation
Aerospace Corp., Bethpage, NY, March, 1988.

Phillips, W.J.,
AIAA-91-1429,

Transfer,

for CO 2 and 1-120 Applied

Radiat. Transfer, 33, pp.

Continuum
Absorption
30, pp. 161-174, Pergamon

in the Atmospheric
Press, 1990.

Measurements and Modeling of Absorption

#m CO2 Band," J. Quant. Spectrosc.
Radiat.

Continuum of Pure Water Vapor:

Calculations
and HighSpectrosc. Radiat. Transfer, 49, pp. 675-691, Pergamon Press,

of Water Vapor and Carbon

A-16

Dioxide,"

Combustion

and Flame,

SECA-FR-97-04

18.

Reed, Bob,
Prediction',

19.

Lee, S.C., and C. L. Tien, "Optical Constants of Soot in Hydrocarbon

Flames,"
Ont) on Combustion,
The Combustion
Institute, p. p. 1159-1166,
1981.

20.

Boynton, F.P., "Study on the Spectral Emissivity

of Carbon Particles
General Dynamics/Convair
Report GD/C-DBE66-006,
May, 1966.

21.

Farmer, R.C., P.G. Anderson,

and G.C.
Applications,
under NAS8-40574,
SECA,

JAb/NAY
Monterey,

AEDC,
Sverdrup Technology,
15 November
1993.

Workshop
Summary,
CA, July 1989.

"Radiation

Memorandum,

Cheng, Progress
Inc., Huntsvulle,
Effects

"Optical

Properties

Characteristics

24.

Everson,
J., and H. F. Nelson,
"Development
Transfer Code for Rocket Plume Base Heating,"
NV, January 1993.
Farmer, R.C., et al, "Radiation
Inc., Huntsville,
AL, December

Chemistry

in Combustion

Felske,
J.D.
and C.L. Tien, "Infrared
Radiation
From Non-Homogeneous
Overlapping
Bands," J. Quant. Spectrosc. Radiat. Transfer,
14, Pergamon Press,
1974.

Solid Rocket

Motor

Plumes,"

Motor,"

for CFD

Chambers,"

Gas Mixtures
Having
Great Britain, pp. 35-48,

and Application
of a Reverse Monte
AIAA 93-0138, 31st Aerospace
Sciences

From Advanced
1994.

Symposium

by a Rocket

Reports on "Propulsion
AL, ongoing.

on Flow

for Signature

Eighteenth

Produced

23.

of Soot

Carlo Radiative
Meeting, Reno,

SECA-FR-94-18,

SECA,

26.

Reardon, J.E., and Y.C. Lee, "A Computer Program for Thermal Radiation from Gaseous
Plumes (GASRAD),"
RTR 014-9, Remtech, Inc., Huntsville,
AL, December
1979.

27.

Saladino, A.J.,
SECA-FR-93-10,

28.

Lockwood,
F.C., and B. Shen, "Performance
Predictions
of Pulverized-Coal
Flames
Furnace
and Cement Kiln Types,"
Twenty-Fifth
Symposium
(Int) on Combustion,
Institute, pp. 503-509,
1994.

29.

Kaplan,
Ethylene

30.

Bressloff, N.W., J.B. Moss and P.A. Rubini, "CFD

Soot Production
in Turbulent Flames,"
Twenty-Sixth
Institute, pp. 2379-2386,
1996.

31.

Guider, O.L., D.R. SneUing and R.A. Sawchuk, "Influence of Hydrogen Addition to Fuel on Temperature
Field and Soot Formation
in Diffusion
Flames,"
Twenty-Sixth
Symposium
0nt) on Combustion,
The
Combustion
Institute, pp. 2351-2358,
1996.

and R.C.
SECA,

Farmer, "Radiation/Convection
Coupling
Inc., Huntsville,
AL, July 1993.

in Rocket

Motor

Rocket Exhaust

& Plume

of Power Station
The Combustion

C.R., S.W. Back, E.S. Oran and J.L. Ellzey, "Dynamics

of a Strongly Radiating
Jet Diffusion Flame," Manuscript
prepared for submission
to Combustion
and Flame.

A-17

Prediction
of Coupled Radiation
Symposium (Int) on Combustion,

Analysis,"

Unsteady

Heat Transfer and

The Combustion

Form

REPORT

DOCUMENTATION

PAGE

0UOliC ._Dor_. ncj burden

_Gr th s c_. ec't On of _ntormatlon
ts ._$tlmatc_l
_o average
; hour
]ath_.flnq
3r_o maintaining
the data
neectedo
_ncl (omDle_ln_
ancI revlew,ng
t_e collection
..'olleC_:c1.3f
nfqtt_dtlcn.
,rlctUali_CJ SuqcjeStlCn$
f.'Jt r_ltuCln 9 _$
Dur(31_n. _O '_asn_nclIon

bet
r_Donse.
_ncluclincj
of intor_at_on.
Jen_
Heaclau_
r_er_, Secvlce$.

Daws

and

_lcjhwav.

Suhte

1. AGENCY

1204.

Arlqnqton.

USE ONLY

IA

22202-4302,

',Leave

._ncl to

blanK)

the

Off

ce ,_r "lanacjement

2. REPORT

May,
4. TITLE AND

8uacjet.

DATE

the
tti'r_e for revlewlnq
instructions.
SearchlncJ
exlstlncj
Clara sources.
comments
t_af_incJ
this I_urden
e_lma|e
or any other
dl$_
o| this
DltC_.'_orate
tot Information
O_ratlOn$
arid ReDOes.
1._ lS _efffer$ogl

#aoerwor_:

Recluctzon

3. REPORT

1997

TYPE

Final

PrOleCl

[C1704-0188),

AND

DATES

Report

SUBTITLE

OF TRIPROPELLANT

Richard

6. AUTHOR(S}

Gary
Peter

CFD

DESIGN

OC

20503.

95/97

FUNDING

NUMBERS

CODE
NAS8-40583

C. Farmer
C. Cheng
G. Anderson

7. PERFORMING
ORGAt_IZATION
NA,UE(S)AND ADORESS(ES)
SECA,
Inc.
3313 Bob Wallace
Huntsville,

Wa_'_ngton.

COVERED

- April
S.

DEVELOPMENT

Approved

oMe _o ozo4-olee

Avenue,

AL

Suite

'8.

PERFORMING
ORGANIZATION
REPORT NUMBER

SECA-FR-97-04

202

35805
10. SPONSORING
/ MONITORING
AGENCY
REPORT NUMBER

'9. SPONSORING/MONITORING
AGENCY
NAME(S)ANDADORESStES)
NASA/MSFC
Marshall

Space

11. SUPPL_:MENTARY

12a.

DISTRIBUTION

13. ABSTRACT

Flight

Center,

AL

35812

NOTES

/ AVAILABILITY

(Maximum

12b.

STATEMENT

DISTRIBUTION

CODE

200 words)

A tripropellant,

such as GOJH2/RP-1,

CFD

design

code

has been

developed

to predict

the local mixing of multiple

propellant
streams
as they are injected
into a rocket motor.
The
code utilizes real fluid properties
to account for the mixing and finite-rate
combustion
processes
which

occur

spray

combustion

near

temperature
secondary
by less

an injector

predictions
flows

accurate

faceplate,

model.
which

Proper
which

are

essential

are predicted

methodology.

thus the analysis

accounting

cases

serves

the

for accurate

to occur

Test

of

wall

near a faceplate
have

been

as a multi-phase

combustion

allows

heating
cannot

simulated

homogeneous

accurate

analyses.

gas-side

The

be quantitatively

to describe

complex
predicted

an axisymmetric

tripropellant
coaxial
injector
and a 3-dimensional
RP-1/LO2
impinger
injector
system.
The
analysis
has been shown to realistically
describe
such injector
combustion
flowfields.
The code
is also valuable
to design meaningful
future experiments
by determining
the critical location and
type

of measurements

14. SUBJECT

needed.
15.

TERMS

NUMBER

OF PAGES

58
16.

17.

SECURITY
CLASSIFICATION
OF REPORT

unclassified
NSN 7540-01-280-5500

18.

SECURITY CLASSIFICATION
OF THIS PAGE

unclassified

19.

SECURITY
CLASSIFICATION
OF ABSTRACT

20.

PRICE CODE

LIMITATION

OF ABSTRAC

UL

unclassified
Standard
PrJ.scrlt:_d
298-_02

Form
by

_,NSI

298
StCl

(Rev.
Z39-18

2-89)