(c)2001 American Institute of Aeronautics & Astronautics or Published with Permission of Author(s) and/or Author(s)' Sponsoring Organization.

SSSSSSSSS^m SSqSS SSSSSSSSSSim mSSSSSSSSL

AiAA

A01-34303

AIAA 2001-3598

Status of Army Pintle Technology for Controllable Thrust Propulsion

S. Burroughs U.S. Army Aviation and Missile Command Bedstone Arsenal, AL

37th AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint

Propulsion Conference and Exhibit

8-11 July 2001

Salt Lake City, Utah

For permission to copy or to republish, contact the copyright owner named on the first page. For AIAA-held copyright, write to AIAA Permissions Department, 1801 Alexander Bell Drive, Suite 500, Reston, VA, 20191-4344.

(c)2001 American Institute of Aeronautics & Astronautics or Published with Permission of Author(s) and/or Author(s)' Sponsoring Organization. UNCLASSIFIED

2001-3598
STATUS OF ARMY PINTLE TECHNOLOGY FOR CONTROLLABLE THRUST PROPULSION Susan. L. Burroughs U.S. Army Aviation and Missile Command Propulsion and Structures Directorate Redstone Arsenal, AL ABSTRACT The U.S. Army Aviation and Missile Command (AMCOM) is developing pintle technology for controllable thrust propulsion. The technology program is investigating several technical areas: modeling and simulation, pintle motor design and performance prediction, pintle and nozzle design, materials testing, actuation and control mechanisms, and ammonium nitrate propellants. The program heavily leverages the U.S. Army's Small Business Innovative Research (SBIR) program through multiple on-going efforts. These efforts have produced modeling and simulation tools currently being used at AMCOM, as well as pintle motor hardware for static testing. A twelve-inch diameter heavywall pintle motor has been successfully tested at AMCOM, providing a controlled boost-sustain thrust profile. Recent controlled thrust tests have been successfully completed on a seven-inch diameter heavywall pintle motor. Another SBIR program is currently developing a miniaturized, low cost actuation and control system for pintle motors. These various technology areas are being focused for future generation U.S. Army tactical missiles. INTRODUCTION Controllable thrust propulsion technology is being explored by government and industry as a solution to the propulsion requirements for the next generation of U.S. Army missiles. Pintle controlled solid propulsion is one approach to achieving this goal. Using pintle technology, a conventional solid propellant rocket motor can provide variable thrust levels, providing the capability to decrease missile flight time to target, or to increase maximum range capability. To maximize the controllability of thrust with a pintle motor, a propellant with a high burn rate exponent is desirable. The governing equations for rocket propulsion show that a high burn rate exponent Release C: "This material is declared a work of the U.S. Government and is not subject to copyright protection in the United States." propellant will provide a higher change in chamber pressure than a lower burn rate exponent propellant with the same change in throat area. This fact, along with the desire to minimize propulsion system sensitivity, has directed propellant selection towards ammonium nitrate based propellants that typically have high burn rate exponents in the range of 0.7 to 0.9. One of the first SBIR efforts in pintle technology was the Axial Pintle Motor (APM) program, which involved development of a twelve-inch diameter heavywall pintle controlled motor.1 The scope of the effort was to develop a fully functional, reusable heavywall pintle motor for the development and testing of pintle and nozzle materials, propellants, and pintle control hardware. The SBIR program encompassed the design, fabrication, and testing of the pintle motor. This program has been successfully completed. A recent SBIR program was the Variable Thrust Motor (VTM) program, a two-fold program that encompassed development of a modeling and simulation tool, as well as a low cost tactical pintle motor test bed in a seveninch diameter configuration.2 The test bed was required to be of a tactical size for tactical missile applications, and would be .used for validation of the modeling tool. The SBIR program encompassed the design, fabrication, and multiple static firings of the test bed for validation of the design as well as the modeling and simulation tool. This program is nearing completion. Another two-fold SBIR program that also involves development of a modeling and simulation tool as well as a test bed for validation is ongoing.3 The modeling and simulation tool has been developed, and design and fabrication of the heavywall pintle motor is underway. An SBIR program just underway involves development of actuation and control technology. Requirements include high performance, low cost, and low weight for a system that will provide for movement of the pintle upon command, to include the control software and electronics to interface with the rocket motor. The program includes the requirement to test the system in a

1 American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

(c)2001 American Institute of Aeronautics & Astronautics or Published with Permission of Author(s) and/or Author(s)' Sponsoring Organization.

UNCLASSIFIED

pintle controlled rocket motor for final validation. As this program is just underway, no detailed information is available for publication.
Other work at AMCOM includes pintle motor design and analysis, as well as materials testing. Materials testing has focused on lightweight materials for the pintle. Design and analysis efforts include flight simulations to determine the effects of pintle motor designs on missile performance.4 The focus has been on thrust management optimization schemes and effects on time of flight and range.
AXIAL PINTLE MOTOR

TEST RESULTS

APM DESIGN

Industrial Solid Propulsion, with Aerojet as subcontractor, conducted the APM program. The APM is shown in Figure 1. It consists of a motor chamber 12 inches in diameter and 20 inches in length. Programmatic decisions drove the selection of a hydraulic actuation system for the pintle.1 The system is housed in the actuator and nozzle section. Hydraulic fluid for the actuation system is housed externally in a hydraulic power cart. Multiple burst disk assemblies were used in the motor in the event of an over-pressure condition. The propellant grain tested in the APM is a Class 1.3 reduced smoke propellant cast in a hard phenolic sleeve, and cartridge-loaded into the chamber. The grain tested was a seventy pound charge in an endburner configuration. Ignition is accomplished with a "bag" igniter consisting of BKNO3 pellets. The APM control system consists of a controller, control software, and required cabling.

Results from the first static firing are shown in Figures 2 and 3. Figure 2 shows pressure versus time, with a plot of pintle position overlaid for comparison purposes. Figure 3 gives the thrust-time trace. Comparisons of the actual pressure and the predicted pressure show deviations in performance during both the boost and sustain phases. As seen in Figure 2, at 2.25 seconds the pintle begins move in towards the throat. Note that zero on the figure corresponds to zero pintle position, which corresponds to the minimum throat area achievable with the hardware as built. The design is such that the pintle cannot fully block the throat. At 3 seconds the pintle reached the zero position, and was held there until approximately 5 seconds, during which time the pressure decreased from the commanded 1750 psi to just under 1000 psi. This is indicative of throat erosion that the pintle could not compensate for. Post test inspection of the hardware in fact revealed that the nozzle throat experienced excessive erosion. Figure 2 shows that the pintle and control system compensated for the throat erosion until the physical limits of the hardware were reached at 3 seconds. At this time there was not sufficient stroke to obtain the throat area to hold 1750 psi.

At 5 seconds the correct pressure ramp was obtained by the pintle, as seen in Figure 2. At this time the pintle begins to move from the zero position and begins to correctly control motor pressure again. The 500 psi sustain pressure is reached at the correct time. Note that at 5.5 seconds the pintle beings to move towards the throat, indicating that the nozzle is continuing to erode significantly. The pintle successfully compensates for the erosion until 11 seconds into the test, at which time the pintle is at zero position. As the nozzle continues to erode and no pintle stroke is left, the pressure decreases below the commanded 500 psi.
The motor provided boost and sustain thrust levels of 1700 lbf and 800 lbf. These thrust levels represent a 2.1:1 thrust turndown ratio, with a total impulse of 15,140 lbrsec and a duration of 15 seconds.

Figure 1. Axial Pintle Motor

Despite the anomalies noted above, the test was considered a success. The overall design of the motor was successfully validated. The control of motor chamber pressure to a predetermined duty cycle was accomplished within the limits of the hardware. Although unexpected, the extensive nozzle throat erosion provided a scenario that allowed the pintle motor to demonstrate the capabilities of the control system. The test demonstrated that the pintle motor can adequately compensate for nozzle erosion if the erosion

American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

(c)2001 American Institute of Aeronautics & Astronautics or Published with Permission of Author(s) and/or Author(s)' Sponsoring Organization.

UNCLASSIFIED

2000

"Pressure "Commanded Pressure Position

1500

3 1000

500

12

18

Time, seconds

Figure. 2^ Pressure-Pintle Position: APM Test

2000

1500

1000

500

Time, seconds

Figure 3. Thrust-Time: APM Test

American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

(c)2001 American Institute of Aeronautics & Astronautics or Published with Permission of Author(s) and/or Author(s)' Sponsoring Organization.

UNCLASSIFIED

rate is known in advance. The system demonstrated its capability for use as a reusable test bed.
The APM has been turned over to AMCOM for further work. Near-term efforts with the APM include a test planned with an aluminized propellant grain at AMCOM facilities. Other planned efforts include multiple tests with increased mass flow rates.
VARIABLE THRUST MOTOR

The VTM program included the development of a modeling and simulation tool for pintle motor performance prediction. Predictions of pressure, pintle position, thrust, and efficiencies were required. The software combines computational fluid dynamics with internal ballistics for a complete package for performance prediction.2*5
TEST RESULTS

VTM DESIGN

Colorado Engineering Analysis, with Aerojet as subcontractor, conducted the VTM program. The VTM design is shown in Figure 4. It was configured to provide durability, reusability, and quick assembly and post-test disassembly. The test bed was also designed for evaluation of pintle actuation and control concepts, new propellants, pintle materials, and pintle designs. The motor's external diameter is seven inches, chosen for applicability to future tactical missiles. The motor consists of a motor chamber into which a cartridge grain is loaded, a forward mounted actuator assembly, an aft nozzle closure assembly, and the pintle with its guide and insulation sleeve. The pintle shaft has a dynamic seal at the forward end of the motor. The shaft runs the length of the motor chamber, insulated from the hot gases by a sleeve, and is supported at the aft end by a pintle guide. Multiple burst diaphragms are used for pressure release in the event of an over-pressure condition. An electromechanical actuator and electronic controller provide pintle actuation and control. The propellant grain consisted of an ammonium nitrate based minimum smoke propellant in a 24 pound charge case-bonded to a cartridge sleeve. The igniter assembly, not shown in Figure 4, consists of an externally mounted igniter with a small propellant charge for ignition.

Figure 5 shows the results from one of the VTM tests. The pressure profile is shown with pintle position overlaid for comparison purposes. The boost pressure of 3000 psi was attained with a rapid ignition transient. The sustain pressure of 1400 psi was held constant throughout the sustain phase of operation until motor burnout occurred at approximately 23 seconds. The steady (constant) pintle position during sustain indicates little- effect of burn surface variations, erosion, or thermal growth. Figure 6 shows the thrust-time trace from the test. A boost thrust of 1500 lbf was attained, followed by a sustain thrust of 110 lbf. Thrust turndown ratio was 13.6:1 for the test. Both Figures 5 and 6 show calculated values for pressure and thrust from the modeling and simulation tool developed. The extremely close agreement between the calculated values and actual values indicate the fidelity of the modeling and simulation tool for performance prediction.

The VTM test provided a total impulse of 5485 Ibrsec. Figure 7 shows the calculated versus measured total impulse and specific impulse for the test. The delivered sea level specific impulse in Figure 7 can be compared to the average delivered specific impulse of 224 lbr sec/lbm calculated from the total impulse of 5485 lbr sec. Another VTM has been successfully tested demonstrating a boost thrust of 1350 lbf followed by a sustain thrust of 200 lbf. Thrust turndown ratio was 7:1 for this test. Total impulse was 5381 Ibf-sec/lbm with an average delivered specific impulse of 223 Ibfsec/lbm. For the two tests discussed, specific impulse and thrust efficiencies on the order of 90 to 92.5% for the boost phase and 89 to 91% for the sustain phase were achieved.
The testing portion of this program has been successfully completed. Final work is ongoing in the validation of the modeling and simulation tool. The hardware is being turned over to AMCOM for further testing.

Figure 4. Variable Thrust Motor

American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

(c)2001 American Institute of Aeronautics & Astronautics or Published with Permission of Author(s) and/or Author(s)' Sponsoring Organization.

UNCLASSIFIED
MODELING AND SIMULATION TOOLS

u./

f
Pressure (psia)

o A .... ...

Measured Pressure Measured Position Calculated Pressure calculated Position

.... 0.6
0.5

aoa '

s
t

0.4
Cft

3*ar

0.3
Y'^ooocooo

Q.

*
nn

0.2 0.1 0.0 30

1 0.

iX

10

15

20

25

Time (sec)

In addition to the extensive performance prediction discussed in the Variable Thrust Motor section, other work has been done in the area of modeling and simulation.5'6'7 The modeling and simulation tool developed by Colorado Engineering Analysis combines computational fluid dynamics analysis capabilities with internal ballistics prediction capabilities. The pintle imbedded internal to the combustion chamber interrupts the normal gas flow paths seen in conventional solid rocket motors. Effects of an imbedded pintle on gas flow, to include Mach number, pressure, and temperature were investigated with the modeling and simulation tool.

Figure 5. Pressure-Pintle Position: VTM Test

"

I 2S

i 1. iL
;

1
r*9fltor

Pintle Position (in.)

Thrust (Ibf)

'i
:

o A .... ...

Measured Thrust Measured Position Calculated Thrust Calculated Position

... ..

Figure 8 shows the Mach number contour plot for the APM pintle and nozzle configuration at various pintle stroke positions relative to the nozzle throat. Figure 8 shows the 0.5 inch and the 1.0 inch pintle positions and the resulting change in Mach number contours.

S5

_A

_A

^T" Tlr-*I*CT^IJ "^

i
15

i
20

i ^2^J

2.2 1,8
1 .41 1*

10

25

30"

Time (sec)

Figure 6. Thrust-Time: VTM Test

6000

O.S 0.2

Figure 8. Mach Number Contour Plots

10

15

20

25

30

Time (sec)

Figure 7. Isp-Total Impulse: VTM Test

Figure 9 shows the 1.5 inch and the 2.0 inch pintle positions and the resulting change in Mach number contours.

American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

(c)2001 American Institute of Aeronautics & Astronautics or Published with Permission of Author(s) and/or Author(s)' Sponsoring Organization.

UNCLASSIFIED This tool is an effective means of examining the effects of the pintle on gas flow. All stroke positions can be evaluated and pressure and thrust values obtained. The tool provides a visual means of evaluating any nozzle flow separations, an important consideration for optimizing motor performance. Pressure contours as well as temperature contours can also be obtained for any condition. The direction of gas flow can be predicted by the code and displayed visually. This is useful for determining areas experiencing flow turning. presented in the figure the nozzle design is the same. The pintle size varies, however, as does the position. Both cases were designed to produce the same motor chamber pressure. The resulting effect on the nozzle flowfield can be clearly seen. In the second case the flow turns and the separated zone at the end of the pintle is more pronounced, as is the series of weak shocks down the length of the nozzle.

12.2
.8

10. 6

F
10.2

Figure 10. Mach Number Contour Plots Figure 9. Mach Number Contour Plots A second modeling and simulation tool is being developed by CFD Research Corporation under another SBIR contract managed by AMCOM.3'8 Work is ongoing in the development of the tool. Testing will be conducted with a seven inch diameter heavywall pintle motor designed by CFD Research Corporation in FY 01 to provide data for validation of the software. Figure 10 shows the results of an analysis of the flowfield in the seven inch diameter pintle motor nozzle using the second code being developed. In both cases AMCOM is making use of both modeling and simulation tools for pintle motor design efforts as well as performance prediction.9 One of the tools has been successfully validated, while the second is expected to be completed and validated in the FY 02 timeframe. Other modeling and simulation efforts at AMCOM are focusing on the system level in terms of missile performance. Missile flight simulations are being conducted using three degree-of-freedom (DOF) trajectory simulations. Various pintle motor designs are being evaluated with the focus on thrust management schemes. Maximizing missile range is a key consideration in the flight trajectory studies.

American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

(c)2001 American Institute of Aeronautics & Astronautics or Published with Permission of Author(s) and/or Author(s)' Sponsoring Organization.

UNCLASSIFIED
MATERIALS TESTING

The APM and VTM tests discussed earlier made use of refractory metal alloys for pintle materials. These materials experienced minimal erosion, but weight is an issue with their use. Materials testing at AMCOM has focused on lightweight, high temperature materials for pintle applications. Testing of a carbon/silica carbide (C/SiC) pintle provided by Snecma, France was recently conducted at AMCOM in a controllable thrust motor designed by Aerojet.10 The C/SiC pintle was tested in a non-axial, heavywall pintle motor with an ammonium nitrate based propellant. The pintle weighed 5.2 grams, an 82% weight reduction in comparison with a rhenium-molybdenum pintle. The propellant grain was an end-burner configuration cartridge loaded into the motor chamber. Ignition was provided by a BKNO3 and black powder "bag" igniter. Figure 11 shows the motor on the test stand.

The C/SiC pintle experienced essentially no erosion during the test. Pre and post-fire weights show an increase of 0.1 grams, which is attributed to material build-up on the pintle that was not fully removed. There were no dimensional changes between pre and post-fire examination.

The results of this test make the C/SiC material a viable candidate for a lightweight, high temperature material in a pintle application. Additional testing is planned in the VTM configuration in an extended duration test with higher mass flow rates. This test should provide additional performance data for the C/SiC material.
CONCLUSIONS

Figure 11. Non-Axial Pintle Motor

Figure 12 shows the thrust-time profile for the test. The motor provided a boost-sustain-coast-boost thrust profile.
CSiC Pintle Test

The various SBIR programs, along with in-house efforts at AMCOM, represent a multi-pronged approach to developing pintle technology for controllable thrust propulsion. Two heavywall, reusable pintle motors have been successfully developed and tested and are at AMCOM for further testing. Controllable thrust was successfully demonstrated in both the 12 inch diameter and the 7 inch diameter pintle motors. Two modeling and simulation tools have been developed for pintle motor design and performance prediction. Validation of one tool is essentially complete, with work ongoing with a second. Materials testing at AMCOM with a C/SiC pintle have demonstrated the material to be a viable candidate for a lightweight, high temperature material. Reductions in weight of 82% were demonstrated with this material over refractory metal alloys. Extensive work is beginning on actuation and control technology to interface with the pintle technology being demonstrated. Systems work is ongoing in motor design and missile trajectory simulations to identify the best methods of thrust management implementation to maximize missile performance. These multiple technology areas are being focused for controllable thrust propulsion.

10

12

14

16

Time, seconds

Figure 12. Thrust-Time: Non-Axial Pintle Motor

American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

(c)2001 American Institute of Aeronautics & Astronautics or Published with Permission of Author(s) and/or Author(s)' Sponsoring Organization.

UNCLASSIFIED JANNAF Rocket Nozzle Technology Subcommittee Meeting, Cocoa Beach, Florida. 10. Burroughs, Susan L., McClellan, James A., Lynch, Michael D., Wong, Kent J., 'Testing of Carbon/Silicon Carbide in a Controllable Thrust Pintle Motor," 2001 JANNAF Rocket Nozzle Technology Subcommittee Meeting, Cocoa Beach, Florida.

REFERENCES
1. Burroughs, Susan L., Rosenfield, Gary C, Lynch, Michael D., Wong, Kent J., McClellan, James A., Turner, Tom W., "An Axial Pintle Motor for Thrust Control of Tactical Rocket Motors," 1999 JANNAF Rocket Nozzle Technology Subcommittee Meeting, Salt Lake City, Utah.

2. Burroughs, Susan L., Luke, Gary D., Lynch, Michael D, Wong, Kent J., "Controllable Thrust Propulsion Using Pintle Technology," 2001 AIAA Missile Sciences Conference, Monterey, California.
3. Ostrander, Mark J, Bergmans, John L., Thomas, Matt E., Burroughs, Susan L., "Pintle Motor Challenges for Tactical Missiles," 2000 AIAA Joint Propulsion Conference, Huntsville, Alabama. 4. Maykut, Albert R., Burroughs, Susan L., "A Trajectory Study and Performance Analysis of Pintle Rocket Motor Designs," 2001 JANNAF Rocket Nozzle Technology Subcommittee Meeting, Cocoa Beach, Florida. 5. Prozan, Robert J., Luke, Gary D., Burroughs, Susan L., "Effects of Pintle Size and Geometry on Performance of Pintle Rocket Motors: SBIR Phase I," 1998 JANNAF Joint Propulsion Meeting, 1998 JANNAF Propulsion Meeting, Cleveland, Ohio.

6. Prozan, Robert J., Luke, Gary D., Burroughs, Susan L., "Developments in the Automated Pintle Design Code," 1999 JANNAF Rocket Nozzle Technology Subcommittee Meeting, Salt Lake City, Utah.
7. Luke, Gary D., Prozan, Robert J., Burroughs, Susan L., "Validation of Pintle Design Code Using Cold Flow and Hot Fire Static Test Data," 1999 JANNAF Rocket Nozzle Technology Subcommittee Meeting, Salt Lake City, Utah.

8. Ostrander, Mark J., Burroughs, Susan L., "Performance Analysis of Pintle Controlled Rocket Motors Using the Axial Pintle Motor Design (APMOD) Software," 1999 JANNAF Rocket Nozzle Technology Subcommittee Meeting, Salt Lake City, Utah.
9. Densmore, Barry D., Burroughs, Susan L., Ostrander, Mark J., "Component Design and Analysis for a Pintle Controlled Motor," 2001

American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics