scholarly journals Swirled injector modeling for cavitating multiphase flow

2019 ◽  
Vol 128 ◽  
pp. 06007
Author(s):  
Bartosz Ziegler ◽  
Jędrzej Mosędrżny ◽  
Natalia Lewandowska
Keyword(s):  
Experimental Data ◽  
Nitrous Oxide ◽  
Heat Exchange ◽  
Multiphase Flow ◽  
Equilibrium Model ◽  
Rocket Engine ◽  
Flow Modeling ◽  
Hybrid Rocket ◽  
Hybrid Rocket Motor ◽  
Significant Magnitude

The goal of this study is to present a comparison between different approaches to multiphase injection modeling of self-pressurized rocket engine propellant. Swirled, tangential orifice injector of nitrous oxide, for an “N” class hybrid rocket motor is the object of the study. A brief descriptionof the injector purpose and geometry is provided, followed by a description of different approaches for flow modeling. Examined techniques range from 0D, Homogeneous Equilibrium Model (HEM) to 3D multiphase with mass and heat exchange between phases. Results of analyses are provided and compared with experimental data. The discrepancies between results are of significant magnitude but expected nature. Co clusions about most feasible approaches for engineering calculations are drawn.

Restartable Hybrid Rocket Motor using Nitrous Oxide

2006 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vadim Zakirov ◽  
Ke Wan ◽  
Fan-li Shan ◽  
Hai-yun Zhang ◽  
Lu-ming Li
Keyword(s):  
Nitrous Oxide ◽  
Rocket Motor ◽  
Hybrid Rocket ◽  
Hybrid Rocket Motor

Safety Aspects of Nitrous Oxide Use in Hybrid Rocket Motor Design and Testing

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Timothy J. Velthuysen ◽  
Kai M. Broughton ◽  
Michael J. Brooks ◽  
Jean Pitot ◽  
David M. Lineberry ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Nitrous Oxide ◽  
Rocket Motor ◽  
Hybrid Rocket ◽  
Safety Aspects ◽  
Hybrid Rocket Motor ◽  
Motor Design ◽  
Design And Testing

Deep Throttle of a Nitrous Oxide and Hydroxyl-Terminated Polybutadiene Hybrid Rocket Motor

2014 ◽  
Vol 30 (1) ◽  
pp. 78-86 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen A. Whitmore ◽  
Zachary W. Peterson ◽  
Shannon D. Eilers
Keyword(s):  
Nitrous Oxide ◽  
Rocket Motor ◽  
Hybrid Rocket ◽  
Hybrid Rocket Motor

On the Computational Modeling of Unfluidized and Fluidized Bed Dynamics

2014 ◽  
Vol 136 (10) ◽  
Author(s):  
Lindsey C. Teaters ◽  
Francine Battaglia
Keyword(s):  
Experimental Data ◽  
Pressure Drop ◽  
Multiphase Flow ◽  
Fluidized Bed ◽  
Void Fraction ◽  
Volume Fraction ◽  
Flow Modeling ◽  
Ansys Fluent ◽  
Minimum Fluidization Velocity ◽  
Two Factors

Two factors of great importance when considering gas–solid fluidized bed dynamics are pressure drop and void fraction, which is the volume fraction of the gas phase. It is, of course, possible to obtain pressure drop and void fraction data through experiments, but this tends to be costly and time consuming. It is much preferable to be able to efficiently computationally model fluidized bed dynamics. In the present work, ANSYS Fluent® is used to simulate fluidized bed dynamics using an Eulerian–Eulerian multiphase flow model. By comparing the simulations using Fluent to experimental data as well as to data from other fluidized bed codes such as Multiphase Flow with Interphase eXchanges (MFIX), it is possible to show the strengths and limitations with respect to multiphase flow modeling. The simulations described herein will present modeling beds in the unfluidized regime, where the inlet gas velocity is less than the minimum fluidization velocity, and will deem to shed some light on the discrepancies between experimental data and simulations. In addition, this paper will also include comparisons between experiments and simulations in the fluidized regime using void fraction.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document