D

r u

V

COMPUTATIONAL COMBUSTION

FLUID ANALYSIS

DYNAMICS EVALUATION

Final Contract Report No:

Report D.O.116

NAS8-36955

Number

CCFD-92-02

By

Y.M. University

Kim,

H.M.

Shang,

C.P.

Chen,

and

J.P. Ziebarth AL 35899

of Alabama

in Huntsville,

Huntsville,

April,
(NASA-CR-IG4326) FLUIO OYi_AHICS EVALUATION Univ.) 94 Fin,_1 p

1992
N93-12688 --TH_U-N93-12689 Unclas

COMPUTATIONAL CGM6USTION ANALYSIS Report (AIJb_ma

G3/_4

0120220

For

CFD George National Marshall

Branch(ED32) Space and Space Flight Center

C. Marshall

Aeronautics Space Flight

Administration Alabama 35812

Center,

\ \

f v

ABSTRACT This spray ciency physical dense solved study involves We the development discuss particle several tracking of numerical issues modelling the in dilute and dense effiof and are the

combustion. in the

concerning

computational improvement effects, coordinate based on

stochastic

method

as well as the vaporization,

submodels spray by effects.

of turbulence, The governing multiple The

combustion, gas-phase pressure droplet-phase droplet

swirling

equations correction

in Eulerian procedure

a time-marching technique. by a stochastic the time and and

operator-splitting nate are solved

equations technique.

in Lagrangian The k - e model

coordiis used

discrete length

to characterize dispersions ficiency transport tional senting
v

scales

of the gas phase To improve we implement dispersion

turbulence

for droplet efwidth

droplet/turbulence stochastic which tracking can account of this

interactions. calculations, for turbulent model confirm and

the computational a dispersion within

in the model parcel.

each computarepre-

The

testings

the capability

of accuratly turbulent

dispersion efficiency

in nearJ_y-homogeneous over the spray and delta function

in.homogeneous separated

flows with model. collision models

improved To account and

stochastic employed

flow(SSF) drop These

for the dense model

effects,

we have analogy

an existing model. transient

coalescence

a Taylor

breakup(TAB) all-speed

were incorporated procedure. burning, the

into a state-of-the-art of validation spray cases

multiphase cases involving

flow solution evaporating,

A se_luence dilute and

non-evaporating, The research tasks

dense

are included. group particle

concerning and particle

development

of multidimensional condition are separately

tracking

method E.

wall-boundary

documented

in Appendix

\

\

\

/? .:

TABLES

OF

CONTENTS

ABSTRACT NOMENCLATURE 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 General 1.2 Turbulent 1.3 Dilute 1.4 Dense Particle Models Models MODELLING Equations Equations Models Models Equations Mass & Heat Interaction and Collision Transfer Model Model Model CONDITIONS Equations OF THE MULTI-PHASE FLOWS Dispersion

Spray Spray

2. MATHEMATICAL 2.1 Basic 2.1.1 2.1.2 2.1.3 Mean Eulerian Flow

Turbulence Combustion

2.2 Basic 2.2.1 2.2.2 2.2.3 2.2.4

Lagrangian

Droplet-Phase Turbulence/Droplet Drop Breakup

Droplet/Wall

Impingement AND

3. NUMERICAL 4. RESULTS AND

MODEL

BOUNDRAY

DISCUSSIONS Particle Dispersion Turbulent Turbulent Combusting Kerosene with Dispersion

4.1 Turbulent 4.1.1 4.1.2

Nearly-Homogeneous lnhomogeneous Spray

Dispersion Flows

4.2 Dilute 4.2.1 4.2.2

Hollow-Cone Spray Flame Sprays

Spray

Flames Atomizer

a Rotating-Cup

4.3 Dense

ii

1 4. °°° III . CONCLUSIONS 6. Two-Phase B.2 4. Adaptation Particle (Contract of Multidimensional Condition Inc. Droplet Relations For Hydrocarbon Distribution Models Group Model Particle Tracking and E.d 4.3 Non-Evaporating Non-Evaporating Evaporating and Solid-Cone HoUow-Cone Burning Spray Spray Sprays 5.. Numerics Interaction of Beta Source Terms Density Function Fuels Probability C. Stoichiometric D.) Wall-Boundary Report To The FDNS Code from SECA. RECOMMENDATIONS APPENDIX A.3.3..3..

"x J i o v J NOMENCLATURE Bm Bt : " mass heat heat heat drag transfer transfer capacity capacity coefficent number number of air of droplet Cp : Cp._ : CD : dp : D: E: Ep : droplet diffusion mean specific mixture : particle gravity enthalpy diameter coefficient internal energy in Fick's energy of particle law specific internal f: Fpi g: h: hI : K: k: L: fraction drag force of gas phase enthalpy correction energy factor fuel vapor undersampling turbulentkinetic latent number heat Nt: Np : of droplets for each p particles computational number probability mean t : particle of computational P: p: Pr pressure Prandtl Reynold's radius velocity velocity for gases for droplets number number turbulent particle droplet I_ep : rp : U i : instantaneous instantaneos S: _.j SC t : source turbulent terms Schmidt number T: gas temperature iv ..

Symbol density of gases density fuel vapor droplet viscosity eddy density viscosity scalar energy for gases rate instantaneous turbulent instantaneous particle standard variance dissipation fraction mixture time relaxation deviation of pdf of pdf fuel gas phase time eddy liquid particle step index phase or parcel square index in an eddy 9: i: k: l: .p: TTn8 root mean t: Supercripts -: ' • turbulent density-averaged fluctuating v .time Td: 2: droplet temperature in the streamwise direction coordinate mass fraction Y: Y: coordinate direction normal to the streamwise Greek # : #! : Pd " # : #t : • • : r : a • a2 : Subscripts .

AL 35812 r5. P. Report No.Abstract This study involves the development of numerical modelling in spray combustion. The present mathematical formulation and numerical methodologies can be casted in any time-marching pressure correction methodologies (PCM) such as FDNS code and MAST code. Distribution Statement Unclassified . 116 5-32638 11. D. Ziebarth }. 17.O. These modelling efforts are mainly motivated to improve the computational efficiency in the stochastic particle tracking method as well as to incorporate the physical subrnodels of turbulence.Titile and Subtitle COMPUTATIONAL FLUID DYNAMICS COMBUSTION ANALYSIS EVALUATION 5. Sponsoring Agency Code 16. Aurthor(s) Y. D. and dense spray effects. Chen J. 3.. (of this page) Unclassified 21.O. Performing Organization Code University of Alabama in Huntsville 7.. Alabama 35899 1":2. 10. Shang C.. Report Duo April 10. NASA Report Document Page 2. Type of report and Period covered FINAL 04/11/91 . (of trois report) Unclassified NASA FORM 1626 OCT 86 20. University of Alabama in Huntsville Huntsville. Sponsoring Agency Name and Addre_ss"L National Aeronautics and Space Administration Washington. of pages 22. and Dense Spray r! Ig. 116 3. No. Security Class. M. _. P. D. 18. Work Unit No. Price _s . Kim H. Key Words (Suggested Spray Combustion.04/10/g2 14. A sequence of validation cases involving steady burning sprays and transient evaporating sprays will be included.F f . 1992 6. Performing Organization Report No. 20546-001 Marshall Space Flight Center.Unlimited Fuel Evaporation. Droplet Dispersion. Government Accession NO. 11 I. Security Class. by Author(s)) Swirling Effects Flows. M. HeQpient's Catalog No.. Supplementary Notes NAS8-36955. Contract or Grant No. vaporization. Performing Organization Name and Address 8.C. combustion.

as gas are better demand understanding for improving and propulsive of multi-phase performance. coupling. and elimination of numerical flows. of the local flow and continuous interphase properties accounts of spray for complex flows. multicomponent and excellent in Refs.1 General There numerical ing fuel have and been physical a number models of research for spray efforts[I-6] towards Many nature on aspects of the development of sprays [2]. classified methodologies discrete model. of the two-phase comprises equations expressed equations. and to model the the interactions Various dispersed been for the gas-phase transport are and largely the are has suggested spray the phenomena.6]. by equation The link is mathematically in the gas-phase are solved in terms The of liquid/gas-phase gas-phase pressure interaction equations correction equations source in Eulerian procedure in governing multiple The dinate on the a time-marching technique. flames requires the between approaches The as the continuum soluthe have The tions prediction of multi-phase droplets dynamics. model. diffusion. INTRODUCTION 1. formulations categorized the flow processes Lagrangian in handling poly-disperse spray. the effects interphase mathematical the Eulerian for the formulation conservation fuel droplets. droplet the in multi-phase in the discrete on s_ochastic separated employed present flow for between the model transport.[6]. systems such combustion and emission ramjet as well industrial space furnaces shuttle main turbine.5. properties [3] have have for as the of droplets been also studied been given [1]. operator-splitting droplet-phase Lagrangian . in and by These turbulent stability. engines. the discrete the approaches model summarized wide acceptance in Ref.1. parative three two-fluid well performances models. is usually In the turbulence model. droplet ComAmong combustion statistical computations droplet for three model. reviews [4. due the With droplet flexibility the gained to its comconvenient Eulerianflow(SSF) to acstochastic and gas two comphase phases terms coorbased putaional interphase Lagrangian approach[5] count separated bustion and the for efficiency. fuel and evaporation models of sprays the need analysis studies measurements motivated processes control engines. includ- of combustion.

dispersion by a statistical Potential ticles mean-squared on prior advantages represent of this method the spray is to reduce and the number to obtain of computational par- which dynamics grid-independent solutions ._-VJ coordinate is used droplet model number are solved to characterize dispersions by a stochastic the time and discrete length droplet scales technique. swirling Turbulent In the Particle stochastic separated of liquid technique flow(SSF) droplets approach.2 of turbulence. 1. The k . motivated capabilitiy In the to improve over following the physical range submodels of fuel spray as well as conditions issues method va- is mainly prediction geometries. in the Lagrangian or coordinates. width Each for the group(width) parcel determined due to the dispersion of droplets The mean the computational of each is taken group. particles to produce distributions for rather To circumvent approach with this deficiency. in which each and Jeng[7] proposed parcel represents This within the dispersion a group width(group) computational density droplet lent of physical model particles can account grows travels a probability turbulent turbu- distribution. having the each same computat]onal droplet parcel represents and based a collection sampling characteristics a random is entailed and for instantaneous gas fiow properties are used in the This stochastic satisfactory on a specified turbulence model the resulting for the droplet fluctuations tracking. non-unitary of internal Lewis in the gas-film. droplet-phase process dispersion Litchford requires Lagrangian a large computations number even of computational dilute sprays. we adress particle several concerning the computational improvement effects. properties. efficiency of physical and dense Dispersion in the stochastic submodels spray effects. includes the effects thermophysical flow effect. liquid the $tefan and the effect circulation and transient This to enhance and study heating. combustion. from a deterministic of its correspondPDF eddy is represented interactions. Lagrangian density to represent The which variance depends the mean of each probability function(PDF). stochastic ing position tracking. tracking as well as the porization. dispersion dispersion each when group. the a wider combustor subsections.e model for of the gas phase The present turbulence vaporization and droplet/turbulence of variable interactions.

the physiand initial In the study. The better in the underlying representations group model and Eulerian of "group" gas-flow evap- or "group" report dispersion to be presented Jeng. by Litchneeds is easy disper- is basically procedure similar to the approach different from of Litchford the method the present ford and is somewhat proposed parameters procedure the present Jeng[T].for two-phase flows regardless calculations. involves separated turbulence flow model is represented one-step is to account k . Two considered . spray-combusting flows with the liquid-fuel combusting emphasis strength swirl a hollow cone rotating conditions and the cup atomizer. lems include confined. The we evaluate combustion. strated the The present round jet in inhomogeneous demon- width model dispersion efficiency has successfully capability representing improved in nearly-homogeneous over the delta function and inhomogeneous SSF model. in which the calculation history. model in the gas-phase/dropletand effects. flow properties Example spray and two axisymmetric. oration in this Other advantages combustion of grid-refinement may include models. computer and of dispersion-related the present To evaluate summation to program sion width of the entire and requires time less Furthermore. transport interactions. flows with 1. the swirl also included the solution vaporization. the combustion The turbulent density effects processes fluctuations an irreversible on the mixture approach. present numerical for the multi-phase turbulent in probwith initial a flows has been tested by applying swirling it to predict the local flows[36. The properties centrifugal are force by the probability with function(pdf) are associated equations.37]. and turbulent the Special inlet swirl is given to the influence which numbers characterize are the of the spray spray to vaporization investigate the mixing. at an infinite for the turbulent and rate.e model. of turbulence. droplet the stochastic dispersion. procedure swirling cal submodels spray reacting distributions. memory. However. model to calibrate the stochastic simulation for the particle of particledispersion turbulence the computations turbulence dispersion of accuratly turbulent and were performed a particle transport laden in nearly-homogeneous turbulence.3 Dilute Spray Models In the dilute employed by the reaction introduced terms phase spray combustion models.

of distortion and and oscillation ener_'. 4 For non-evaporating. resolved should fects. and explicit rates informations of mass. collision & coalescence collision breakup(TAB) governing randomly model In the drop and outcomes with the model. ing the able droplet reasonable processes are sampled The the number of the collisions stochastic in consistency utilizes an analogy The particle and tracking distorton TAB between present and drop an oscillating breakup breakup model and a spring-mass assumption that system. streamline distributions chemistry the droplet/wall by the combustion with the strong employed model dealing the deficiencies of the k .e turbulence curvature. The and the effects capabilities of of droplet/turbulence the present procedure The present in flow properties.influence of swirl on the droplet interactions have been evaporation and trajectories. However. the probabilbetween two ity distributions drops method. Taylor length time to be steps. To account for the dense model[8] the drop model[9]. effects exchange momentum. regions. occurs grid on combustion drop time sizes breakup. and spray the in the results velocity fast to uncertainties impingement model. and and modeling droplet scale is the dense collision too short spray co- One of the important effects which include Atomization with practical atomization process computation and alescence. Accordingly. in terms effects. 1. the spray has several an easy introduction viscosity interphase evaporating. numerical flows and the general with of spray-combustion data. near-wall observed size and single-step the combustion attributed and mainly The discrepancies in the initial interaction. at quantitative and along are differences at near-burner centerline. to Reitz's to input model[34]. demonstrated procedure yields predictive by comparisons correctly predicts agreement with experimenfeatures tal data. show a reasonably good and burning dense spray the predictions . size equal model is prescribed exit tages t j.4 Dense Spray Models aspects in spray process. atomization spray and efthe be modeled the present analogy as a sub-grid-scale study employs process. by injecting Compared of no need a characteristic the TAB angle. the qualitative exist especially chamber experimental locations. diameter. Thus. cases. is based atomization near have are indistinguishatomiztion to the nozzle advanof liquid on the within a dense drops spray which the nozzle exit.

agreement with available experimental results in terms of spray penetration..1 Basic The source These liquid-phase the rates two is presented phases in Lagrangian by and the heat between the is described mass represent below.. and the species S_. and the total source terms p is the mean the interaction for these Detailed expressions . gas-phase respectively. 2. (2. and u_ are the i component of the instantaneous part velocity. + S_. size distributions. interaction transfer. and scalar density-weighted in an Eulerian variables as follows: (2. the are modeled The gas-phase by a system equation of unis writ- two-dimensional(axi-symmetric) coordinate two-way terms whereas coupling which ten in an Eulerian coordinates.1. Future studies and overall include characteristics comparison of the evaporating with the local the detailed available formulation in the experiment for resolving and the implementation displacement of a volume-of effects.t (2.. and liquid-phase processes equations. equations are given Eulerian Equations 2..1) + (pu ) = + (puiuj) = azi azj [pu_u_] + S.3) of of the the density-weighted Ct are quantities pressure.t mixture. source and fluctuating mean and ¢ and scalar the density-weighted including Sv terms and due of an instantaneous energy. part fluctuating u.t represents to the fuel concentrations the spray.2) + where p is the time-mean mean (pu. + S...1 Mean The Flow Equations conservation coordinate can equation be written of mass. of momentum. MATHEMATICAL MODELLING OF THE MULTI-PHASE FLOWS All the gas-phase steady.. momentum. and burning properties drop spray. fluid (VOF) the liquid volume 2.¢) density = -_-_-x [purz¢'] + S_.

'727. effect For reacting flows.-TST. the turbulent uiu _' ' and u_¢' eddy characteristics.4) (2.2 terms to model can be found in Refs.. we the unknown Models uiu_"':77-' and ui¢.p_ e (2.. [10.7) terms and effects[12].)a.. Turbulence The two-equation effective diffusivity model the is used to represent fluxes.7) 0 Here. density tion terms " 0 involving These ' .11].j Oui p20Xj OX j pe (2.4) and (2. = -#. for the expansion on the flow field due to heat from combus- 2.5) is defined scale in terms so that of a #t scale(k3/2/e) and a velocity (kl/2).8) are inserted from to account for variablecorrelaaccount _ 8z.3 Combustion Model .i in (2. k. e. correlations. partially tion..( _ au..5) The characteristic is given eddy viscosity(pt) turbulence appearing length in (2.1. To close the system of equations. 0"{ ' (2. are related viscosity In the eddy to the mean diffusivity models. originally come the pressure-velocity these terms release should in the Reynolds stress equation. r source need 2. through turbulent flow gradients turbulent the assumption number: of an isotropic and a constant Prandtl or Schmidt pu_.8) (2. and its dissipation equations: #.1.. (2.-_ _ Oui) 2 k au. can be modeled from The the turbulent turbulent kinetic transport energy.. + 0_ + 56'_(p + #' b-_ ) .a. by k2 #t = C_..6) rate. Op Op Opk _j 0 #t Ok .

The information These of the probability of both mean(f) variance of (g = (f . eddy Using this model. implies The by relating can coexist the fluctuations in the same place of mass but oxidizer way at a different convenient to include the effect of turbulent eddies density and on thermochemical function(pdf). _.It is assumed that liquid fuel droplets evaporate flames for this controlled istry the taken fuel to form a cloud of vapour. Rch_. mixing-controlled rate[14] Rmi_ where A is a model mass the constant. applicable one (2. = Ap kmin(Yi.xi)d_ axe available in the literatures. properxi). Arrhenius 7 chemically controlled rate.9) The present [11.) oxidant/fuel To account The ratio.10) Y! and s is the stoichiometric the oxidizer.12]. This ties is via the introduction function mixture equations. = f Numerous study detailed delta pdf probability the/3 density pdf which pdf functions ¢(_)P(_. The are also implemented breakup model[14] in the program. Yo axe the delay reaction time. fraction chemical of the fuel and kinetics need ignition to be considered.7) 2) of the by solving the transport by variables f and mean with g can be obtained values(C) density-weighted functions of any property density axe evaluated P(_. double The - adopts is known as the widely numerics procedures of the/3 axe well described in Appendix B. This gaseous in Refs. In is that most is to invoke intermediate a fast-chemistry species the influence assumption play is sufficiently turbulent into and do not a significant diffusion account flame model. can be treated assumption diffusion as turbulent can be found flames fast and act as distributed implies diffusion that sources of fuel which in spray evidence combustion process flames. is given by the usual formula[15]. on combustion This time. An idealized for physicallywhich the chemrole. Experimental approach 13. chemical the reaction the sigle-step reaction. convoluting contains fraction. is optionally rate incorporated is determined in the present as follows: reaction In an is A modified computer irreversible given by code. xi): the property a probability fuction. for the (2. P(_. of turbulence fractions. .

. The governing .2 2.2.u 4_rrp2 pd (2. computational size. (2. Rfu = A( Wf ) ( from either slower. The reaction rate. large This is described is essentially by a discrete a statistical particle approach method formulated track- on a Lagrangian ing a sufficiently represents and requires Each number of computational having for these dxi dt particles.11) of the reactants or the chemical reaction whichever R D.Vi (2. equal are : location..13) dpdvi ui + dt - ri m + Fbi (2. of the mixing rates is determined rate.16) force the centrifugal The particle r '-1 ' = relaxation + tti' ri can expresses 3P--_-CDtlli 8 rp -.14) drp dt and dTd m. the spray frame.17) 8 . fractions there (2.fi.d body force terms time such as the gravity as: (2.14). temperature. the remaining Once species Rc^_ ) mixtures. represents the = mpCp. and particle a number of droplets equations velocity. = rnin(R.1 Basic described Equations Equations in Appendix Droplet-Phase In this study.) Rch. of fuel and oxdizer determined from the be easily stoichiometric 2.vi t_i ! -. relations Lagrangian the mass can C.iz. Fbi force.pYf a PYo)be(-.Vi I (2. For simple one-step reaction of the hydrocarbon-air composition.12) axe five species participating have been the mixture determined.15) QL -'_ In equation and (2.

(2..o.19) correlation rate ½Scd _ )/n(1 + B. Qc is given 1 + the droplet per unit by the _.. the droplet evaporation .) to be constant (2. D etc. the heat which QL is assumed : energy QL ..t.16).424. at which equal they are are of thermodynamical on the temperature rule" [18] that dependent and fuel vapor utilizes mass fraction evaluated.mevL and Qc is the heat conduction (2.L p of gas such as K.ep (2.7-. u.) ° ) B-m correlation Qc = The Schmidt as number. 0.Y_ l-Y. for for Rep Rep > 1000 < 1000 (2.--...3Re_ (2./n(l+B. area. In equation the droplet.22) Prandtl number and mass transfer number are defined re- spectively Scd -and B. mass for the fuel vapor fraction.20) within the droplet by using temperature.17] m.47rrp2Qc j . is found = 27rdp(pD)(1 + 0. + u/ # In equation [16. = [1 + ("x.Cv is the drag coefficient given 24 by 1 + _Repl).15).21) rate to where L is the latent surface heat of vaporization.1 1% 9 . _ z'rd Ranz-MarshaU l.. The highly values la • pD' Prd = pCp K = Y' .' properties 1_ = P_. Y.. is obtained P W_ -l Y. (2. lpdp is given by the Frossling (2. droplet gas and reference A "one-third surface droplet value temperature surface a reference temperature between procedure to the plus one-third temperature of the difference The same in which the surrounding is applied from (2.1).18) Cz) = _ep(1 and In which Re v = lu.v..... 2K(T-Td)( dp ..24) to the is used.23) Cp.

Vtk -dt = rk 10 (2..27) the mean parcel of each pdf has equations The only represents variance the corresponding and probability the combined dispersion particle function.25) (2.. and Pr are and Wf the mass fraction and the fuel vapor weights pressure at the droplet respectively. the variance turbulence-induced and (2...26) CDIuk- dv Vk[ (2. into the flowfield. The instantaneous Lagrangian is dPk location tracking computational The governing by a stochastic particle computational uk - Vk dt dxk -dt with 3 I. the mirror velocity vector. on a wall. is estimated source terms the JANAF governing in the gas-phase distribution models equations are described A. axe the molecular from of fuel and mixture. back with On impingement momentum[10]. data bank [19].26): velocity can be splitted from equations dvtk (2._/ To account for turbulence probability of each scheme. the droplets are assumed 2.. but the droplet image instantaneous is injected properties and physical dimensions. pdfs then of each statistical to be calculated of particles pdf due and k. The two-phase in Ap- surface.Here Y. dispersion./ with to the represent To estimate the distribution of the parcel displacement turbulent turbulent effects. Interactions is described by a discrete particle method we follow formulated the concept computais calcufor each on a Lagrangian of [7] of combining ". dispersion.2S) . distribution a normal (Gaussian) for each paiticle equation tional lated particle. the spray frame.k-1 =8pp p The location particle's calculated by the above rk _-Pk + F6k (2.2. P. The C.2 to bounce the reduced Turbulence/Droplet In this study. For a given interaction pendix Td. droplet for the dilute sprays are also described in Appendix In case with same of the droplet passage through the plane of symmetry.25) u'k -. and IV.

the associated truncation of unnecessary time history efflcency terms was was discussed and additional computational obtained[35]. and (2. which to update We is from standard first choose/Ntki smaller particle than as the time step of the ita interaction and integrate and velocities. memory. 2.32) The change of variance of a computational mean squared particle dispersion rn 2 pdf within the k th eddy is represented by a characteristic in the form: ak 2 = ak-i 2 + (_ i=1 z'ki) (2. equations the k th eddy.33). eddy the number the choice Figure procedure the calculation in detail The For of time step/_tki the related interaction requires to store are discussed the 2.29) of u'k is randomly u'kr. domain..1 well describes is easy particle. computer u'k.. of interaction variance of the particle step within m.33) In equation the interaction is fixed. 11 . We then sum up the m steps for which Irtl the particle fully interact E i=! Atti = Ark (2. This method is procedure somewhat variance time and current time-marching numerical of [7] in which over the the calculation entire history of the current of the effective is summed study. = _/]k.29) the eddy lifetime. with each component deviation within (2.v'ki.28) (2.s dz'_ dt With chosen the isotropic a Gaussian turbulence distribution assumption. fluctuating locations (2..ak-1 within is the existing the k th eddy. computational when different of each need and aj.30) Vtki = Utkrrns + (Vtk(i_l) _ Utkrms)e'_(i-t) (2..31) with the k th eddy. implemented from particle In their errors the pdf recent eddy and with particles. (2. present each to program we just in the method less x'ki._s. in [24]. constants. varies issues pdf at the begining each turbluent across of Since the time within and this the eddy.

from symmetry and boundary at any point condition a cumulative the particle pdf distribution to the in coordinate may be y.(2.25)-(2.25)-(2. can be written ayk = K_ Here. is added 12 to the mean . P(y) Here. the yp is the instantaneous symmetric cumulative P(v) = location y v/_byke of computational function takes dy particles.33) normalized must particle be normalized variance according of computational to the as auk total particles.(2. simulated where a Monte in the sense chosen a fluctuating disThus each component deviation is randomly from a Gaussian gas velocity. when the mean tracking(uk poin of Litchford of computational is calculated this by the deterrainistic approach For is described tracking Eqs. in the mean and reflective Nt particle position. number the variances The of particles. the form.yp ) + err( (2.(2. as a stochastic°dispersion transport(SDWT) In the point delta model. with standard . as the deterstochastic is the transport(DDWT) velocity the approach model.27) velocity). distribution = 0.27) ministic Sampling instantaneous width dispersion is the mean width gas velocity).34) represents factor the statistical to account When uncertainty for undersampling.5[err( y . function by SSF model.36) where erf( ) = In accordance sitions with the approach particles 2 fo z and Jeng[7]. Carlo of u'k the method turbulence effects that on droplet dis- persion velocity tribution are u'k.35) After integration. the a correction (2.When convoluting pdf for a group of eq. fluctuations(uk is described using of gas-phase gas turbulent in Eqs. y is the distance defined as: axis or the reflective boundary. number K is of exist is the total computational in the calculation particles. y + yp )] (2. domain.

with a particular associated eddy.2. drop. The restoring to the suface external forces force on the mass due to liquid the TAB an easy viscosmodel introand to the gas aerodynamic to this analogy. is employed The collision to calculate routine is and coalescence the dispersed 13 . within procedures also of various [11. many between such modes numerical reported.22] stationary dispersed to specify in the implementations and the methods The details for of axe the methods choosing simulation times the time eddy of interaction and in Ref. advantages the spray informations of mass. in terms The damping to Reitz's to input ity axe introduced has several duction oscillation The major Compared of no need and model[34]. bag/stripping calculations which agreement times and experimentally droplet oscillation & observed breakup lation) distortion and breakup require has been two normalized particle arrays(deformation and oscilof the droplet radius(SMR). chi-squared has the same parameters The collision distribution temperature $MR. drop two parameters randomly the product Weber of the product calculated the parent is then chosen breakup. turbulence of a particle This type of simulation for the turbulent for statisti- of droplets turbulent used has been used Main previously differences properties [20. analogy. angle. mode can be De- limitation only one oscillation in the Taylor results The tracked. spite However.the turbulence dispersion cally is assumed to be isotropic. and from a drop can be determined Occurance for the radius with by the equation of droplet product for the acceleration the Sauter on these mean parameter. Following with and its deformation and oscillating are set to zero. aspects the interaction can be found 2. droplet is based on an analogy The oscillating the spring is analogous and distorting is analogous a spring-mass tension force.21. system. the explicit rates is that of distortion on the interphase of the TAB in reality good there exchange method exist momentum.3 Drop The Breakup study and Collision the TAB This and (Taylor model Analog" Breakup) model between force proan of present employs posed by O'Rourke and Amsden[9]. of liquid effects viscosity effects. this limitation. and energy.38]. velocity The breakup. forces. drop collision model among suggested by O'Rourke[8] liquid phase. extensively flows. depend drops oscillation number.

The previous multiple pressure-correction method[t1. the collision impact parameters are stochastically calculated. The additionalscalarconservation equations such as species. Discretization of the gas phase governing equation uses the finite volume approach.and the volume of computational cell. the outcome of every collision is coalescence.they are in the same computationalcell. the area based on rl + r2. This method is non-iterativeand applicableto all-speedflows. 3. a collision frequency between drops between the parcel(parcell ) of largerdrop radius(rl ) and the parcel(parcel2)of smallerdrop radius(r2)isobtained from the relationship in terms of the number ofdrops in parcel2.correctorsteps for each time-marching step.The probability with n collisions is assumed to follow a Poisson distributionbased on a collision frequency and the computational time step. NUMERICAL MODEL AND BOUNDARY CONDITIONS The present method isbased on the operator splitting technique[23]attempting to reach accurate transientsolutionafter prescribed predictor. each collision is a grazing collision. solver.the relativevelocitybetween drops. and enery are incorporated intothe same predictor-corrector sequence. Allthe dependent and independent variablesare stored at thesame grid location and the variablesat the finite controlvolume boundaries are interpolated between adjacent grid points. fast-transient.Ifthe collision impact parameter is lessthan a critical impact parameter. and only if. The In discretized equations were solved 14 by a conjugate (CGS) . To enhance the numerical stability.For the collision calculation. Using the probabilityinformations.operatinging forthe pairof particles if. the drops associated with each computation parcel axe considered to be uniformly distributedthroughout the computational cell where they are located. In opposite case.27] isextended to to handle the strong nonlinear couplings arisingin the multi-phase. and reacting flows. and the liquidsurfacetension coefficient. For allparcelsin each computational cell.The discretizations have been performed on a general non-orthogonal curvilinearcoordinatesystem with a second order upwind scheme for convection resulting terms and the central differencing scheme for diffusion gadient terms. The critical impact parameter depends on the drop radii. the implicit Euler scheme isemployed in differencing the temporaldomain.the relative velocitybetween parcell and parcel2.

.). ¢ . to avoid is somewhat in which terms Implicit the small different global between into particle a one-predictor/two-corrector and gas are evaluated are used solution PSIC(particle The method to treat by the mo- coupling times_eps..'_ t are .. Son .... except the continuity equation in the advective pn+l .4) upwind Ao. each time step is divided sequence.p. in cell) procedure[25] is non-iterative To improve spray-combusting expressed iterations and time-accurate.the present algorithm. A--"_ from the third-order scheme reacting (3._ b . Ao and Bo the numerical matrix in multi-phase from reaction may include nonlinear multi-phase the coefficient source terms the implicit rates._+l (3. H. same time The strong splitting coupling technique.t.2) the predictor- In) Predictor Momentum(u'): (3. +S_. and J are constructed terms and the central stability resulting for the convection To improve differencing for the diffusion flows. all transport form.t+ p. source interaction The 15 quantities S". from the procedures The unsteady mentum described exchanges above procedure source used here conventional are required. Bo. the convergence and the numerical equations stability for the fast transient are flows.1) _ pn n -SiC By using corrector operator-splitting method. . Here.._ . the transport as follows: equations with procedure step can be discretized (3. turbulence S_. u. and S_. the operators scheme terms.3) Scalar(¢'): pA (-_-Bo)C*=J'_(¢*)+Sq. treatment of the strong terms and such as chemical source terms.

• I10 16 . ¢ may represent the enery.'] = -.9) from + S_.momentum) at the (b) FirstCorrector Momentum(u* A new flowfleld(u _(p" ._. the mass fraction.[( RT" for the corrected 1 )p"u'] RT ° can be solved the equation of state.(3.l and the discretized 1 (At Continuity 1 .. .(3.5) momentum equations axe: _ + p"u'_ At (3.. The density(p*) is cal.7) and (3.(3.(p"u:) Equation culated (3.." . (3.RT-----:). ) are computed from Eq.8).)](p ° .(p"Du"A.-_ + A.p") + A.. step °): °°._ .._ ) = -p"ou "[. The general scalar dependent variables. pressure.. In this stage. The temperature T ° is calculated predictor step. p°) are sought to satisfy the continuity equation: from the flowfield(energy. (3.. -.(p .6) A_". Du" Equations Thus.ki(p"u.7) equation.3) from . p°._)p u i = n"(uT) (3..8) the pressure into correction Eq.t (3.. The _elocltms(u.p")] Here. p"(.s) axe now used of Eq.(3.(p".7) the velocity equation.t . equation _--_.t + Ai(_) 47 . and the turbulent transport quantities.Aip° as: + S"_' + S...A:) to derive -1 (3.p") + zx_(p'u_')= S_.p") = (3. yields taking the divergence and substituting 1 [ AtRT° -A. species.6) gives .A.8) p" = (-_ ..9) 1 1 pn 1 + ( RT------Z .) correction + S_.(3.u_')] + Ai[(p" Eq. p'.5) can be rewritten . the velocity field(u_) does not satisfy the continuity equation.[p"(u_" Subtracting Eq.p")u.determined from the existing flow fields.

pn 1 Du" By obtained: substituting Eq.14) into =(_--_ .")]+/k...5) are used to ([ The temperature T*" .[p*(u'** ...f)u..(3. (c) Second Corrector step Momentum(u*'*): A new flowfield(u**'. p") .(3.z (..o*) + _.(3._ At Eq.Du'[A. p'*.....A'_)u_" 17 .*) Eq..'*'] = o The discretized p.10) flowfield(eneKy'..[p'Du'[(A" --Ai(p'Du'A')](P°'-P')= + H'(u_ °) .A:)the corrected pressure equation is Eq.(3.14) Here.H'(u_)]] o .u_" = Du'[(A** .12)..11) Eq.. + S'_. + s_.AO)u.(p"u...13) -/kip" yields + S_.** .B.momentum).(3.13) .(3...Scalar(¢"): These update new the flowfield(u_*. ( -_ Subtracting I1 $111 (3. + p"u__. satisfying the continuity equation (3.'" from = g*(u.t yields (3.t+ -STis calculated from the corrected (3.p") +/k. O.A'_)u_" + H'(u_')- H"(uT) ] .5) from .") = s:.#') B coefficient.[(p'* . axe sought to satisfy the continuity equation: _(p Subtracting Eq. species. 1 u_ ° [AtRT "'' + A_( RT"" A.6) Ui .12) momentum equations are: (3.)¢'" = j'(¢') + s.(p'" -p')] (3.11) .

15) equation pressure(p"). by freezing calculations.11) are used to (_ The temperature . PISO treatment preswhich and en- In the present sure can ables does equations properly capturing not include pressure-based in Eq. Bo).. variables component from are zero.15) the hyperbolic A recently term Compare consistent of supersonic shock this developed non-iterative method[39] of density method[27].9) account waves. and written takes into Eq. vertical the subsonic axial inlet boundary.')¢"" T"" The is updated = j"(¢") calculated + s.t + .momentum). by enforcing the upstream and the radial boundary.".. °') velocities(u_ are computed Eq. velocity the normal grdients of all scalar outlet. RESULTS AND 18 DISCUSSIONS . This and (3.V 1 +( RT" Using of state. Scalar(¢'"): These update new flowfield(u_". the present can be simplified the coefficient matrix(Ao.(3. convective method." + s_.(3. next time the field values at the completes in the solution of the equation over the time-step. For ified.z----T from the p". variables are extrapolated wall was assumed 4. At the supersonic The all dependent to be adiabatic..Y flowfield(p". to represent quence _. step(n+l). components the entropy are obtained and the total pressure are specand to vanish the at The velocity components by the the extrapolation vorticity velocity are determined At symmetry. p'= . p_¢" satisb'ing the continuity equation (3.u. allows for the the pressure-based of continuity equation For the and steady is more state fast-transient procedure flow at all speeds.16) flowfield(energy. due to the inconsistent to our previous discretization reacting in the momentum this new method suitable equations.[( RT" 1 RT'" the density(p") from 1 )p'u'] RT'" is obtained from the (3. the interior. ¢*") are taken the se- species. updated T'".p") the B coefficient. the left hand involve nature side of the corrected a convection term flows.(3..15). the corrected The 1 )_ v" + A.

the eddy the phenomena diameter pollen). particles. computations.0 scale #rn solid glass).55 m/sec. a single in a deterministic squared dispersion along the centerthe variance line was sampled of the parcel Figure with respect PDF to evaluate by using representing parameters for each eddy and measured agreement interaction.1.To evaluate the stochastic performed particle dense 4. These also show favourable indicate the that experimental a single results with computational following and deterministic prediction trajectory capability for demonstrates this 4.1 shows to time. The turbulence calculations intensities were started and length at the exmesh). flow. evaporating. with model the medium. injection was assumed point particle perimental particle the delta to calculate DDWT of x/m = 20 (m is a 2. times undergo transit In this experiment. Particle 4. The jet in inhomogeneous include non-evaporating. particle dispersion 4.2 the efficiency.1 the present dispersion width transport interactions. comparison The DDWT of the predicted results show good Both models numerical parcel with the SSF results agreement the DDWT for light. the transit controls (87. to eddy hollowor the life time interaction interaction transition fluid .000 of 6.1. The For information particle velocity function were measured. Dispersion validation and burning for the spray Turbulent sprays. the accuracy. SSF computations.0 prn corn time controlling-interaction (87.1 Nearly-Homogeneous The particle dispersion turbulent Particle lifetime time Turbulent experimental Dispersion setup of Snyder and Lumley [28] in a PDF grid-generated transport in which grass) flow was used densities controls and for evaluating sizes are chosen times times from the present to examine (46. the overall nearly-homogeneous Inhomogeneous turbulent Turbulent Dispersion 19 . and heavy data.5 #m dispersion model. mean squared parcel the mean the related computational with particles respect trajectory were sampled For the the resulting dispersion to time. model and to calibrate were and a simulation of particle-turbulence dispersion the computations turbulence cases for the solid particle laden round models in nearly-homogeneous turbulence.54-cm-square fluid velocity equal to the mean 5.

conditions and the initial . Hollow-Cone The combustor of the first test and tangential The 2O case is shown velocity inlet in Fig. The smooth 50 parcel to the theoretical 4.1 swirling spray-combusting Kerosene geometry axial et.5.000 particles However in the is still evidence and is taken undersampling. profile regions due to undersampling. Using model. good shown approximation in Figure the distribution is relatively profile. the zero correction 200 computational samples of SDWT there corresponds The computed oscilla- to the delta profile tory SSF case using particles.[36]. 10. 10. The turbulent gas-phasetransport properties are provided by using the k-e tration profiles of the delta parcels.000 the 200 computational axial tions. irregular shown and of the SSF distribution.2 is very sensitive case of SDWT factor model to the level of the correction By increasing increase especially factor. 4. 4. K the for upstream in eq. locations.4.(13). Experimenobtained droplet tal from data for temperature.2 and 4.3 show the particle and the SDWT model and SSF concen- model for 50 and at several computaof slight here as a levels sampled SSF of the correction delta there factor. function particles for the model. capability with 4. is less uncertainty results with of increased shows 4.3. Spray Flames turbulent reacting flows has been tested by applying it to predict flow properties in two axisymmetric.The next example problem is a particle laden round jet[29] in which the turbulence is inherently inhomogeneous.000 4.2 the SDWT of accuratly efficiency Spray present representing dispersion function in inhomogeneous SSF model. improved Dilute The over the delta Flows Combusting numerical model for the multi-phase the local flows[36. the the delta clearly SDWT function indicated favourable These agreement numerical SSF with that computational model turbulent has the flows particles. case for 200 particle The 200 parcel factor In Figure with results case since is very model shows in Figure in the mean 200 parcels 10. function at various ate Figures SSF 4.3 is less because and K=4 sensitive to the correction sampling.2. components were measurement of Khalil a1. level in the mean the correction the uncertainty the dispersion factor case(K=0) and smooth considerably. confined.37]. function In Figure 4.

It is observed than those temperature profiles Radial are more velocity ical uniform for S=0.size distribution air/fuel mass ratio are given in Table 1.14. The predicted gas from downstream and to increase the temperature and measured 4.9 and from the siginificant discrepancies uncertainties locations of droplet/wall are associated impingement with However. result 4. in the recirculation temperature evaporate With intensive burning in this increasing the droplet centrifugal spreading increases due to the droplet the larger dispersion central re- and the increased circulation more inlet zone particle force term.72 and evaporation such 1.98 are shown the magnitude 4. the on the droplet flow pattern & burning 4. study. flow the The of axial present velocity numerThe poor recirof k . temperature contours case(S=0. there.13 and incorrect velocities to the inlet In the present distribution areobtained velocities..98). two swirling of swirl numbers(S=0. The temperature profiles for two swirl in near-wall process.11 and reverse model underpredicts of the present and velocities.e and 1. are presented is likely study.12. trajectories.72 of the low swirl case.10. In the high zone and region.17. and continue large portion of droplets survive in the central to evaporate droplets in the far downstream are trapped and high region.6-4. swirl corresponding to the higher is contributed to recirculate at near hot combustion regions. most of small producing swirl.98) were considered characdroplet In the recircu- In the present to investigate teristics.j numerical velocity in predicting attributed predicted size of central zone based the reverse to the deficiency and measured 4. by the 4. lower lation swirl swirl zone Fig. Liquid kerosene was used as fuel arid the was fixed at 20. in Fig. the inlet swirl 21 .72). and the deficiencies of the inlet swirl profiles of turbulence the unreliable the potential that informations errors the in inlet droplet and of the size & velocinlet high turbulence swirl case ity distribution. case(S=l. of the model is partly The profiles 4. influence show vectors.8 velocity the general and as the predicted of two swirl cases. cases are shown regions mainly the and in Fig. caused tangential significant of inlet from the velocities deviation swirl for two close in Fig.. length scale. The on the isotropic swirl cases assumption. deviations combustion in other models. performance culation model _. inlet In addition.

This cup small atomnearinitial process. axial locations. specificaspecified in the short therefore. which is capable of producing a near-monodisperse accurate representation spray allows the relatively of the droplet and eliminates inlet the uncertainties conditions were estimated was used in the droplet/wall and the droplet impingement intial gas-phase boundary conditions(droplet of E1-Banhawy mass ratio and was size & velocity Whitelaw[37]. high evaporation Figure mass The 4.2) data provided there droplet X.0228. measured and radial of temperature. tions. are characterized turbulent and (C02) Numerical by the mixing high-temperature trapping and droplets. with In present study. droplet 70 % fuel mass flow rate).2 Spray Fig.15 shows with the a Rotatlng-Cup liquid-fueled Atomizer combustor with a rotating spray.16-4. predicted in Figure velocity temperature conturs regions region are exist 4. considerable the injection in droplet and velocity can occur station.21 fractions numerical and intensive the predicted dioxide shows 22 the chemprofiles at four reaction.J the experimental injector profiles. fixed tion i distributions) Liquid from as fuel measurement and were the kerosene fuel/air out at 0.2. that zone. to the The rapid decay centerline could of the tangential be tied with the velocity errors in body rotation the prediction 4. two and and the smaller satellite The shown 30 % fuel mass trajectories. inlet with condiSince and the swirl number(S=1. of carbon results oxygen(O2) agreement qualitative with the . izer[37] monosized conditions The of reverse Flame 4. vectors. around It is observed the recirculation zone high-temperature the main flame in the shear the central indicate smaller ical that layer around results of recirculation these and downstream regions rate. show of the fuel spray.18. droplet Based on the experimental droplets( the droplet size distributions flow rate) the near-monosized droplets (24/_rn. with the measurement initial velocity were and some error be introduced data.estimated to the axial solid angular momentum close velocities. the inIn this and the initial droplet between might distributions for droplet change location in the velocity.. limited some informations potential errors for gas-phase associated size and droplet let test swirl conditions. 47pro. computaions and the are the carried diameter(rk for a test = 47/am).19-4. flux. case with small distance size.

tetradecane of the backUghted over the spray spray.3 mm and the present experiments used a diesel fuel for the liquid close physical properties domain and to tetradecane).0. model Liquid and which Kadato[30] includes were coUison._j experimental perature close fication and data. However. quantitative chemical differences exist The in the sigificant profiles of tem- corresponding concentrations..254.3. cross-section 65 mm downstream computations oil with used nozzle was 0.j and by a 25 radial of 20 mm 45 axial and grid. between At the far downstream the calculated of the spray values the differences to around 100 K.510) velocity model. profile.. and measured temperature decreases 4. fuel is injected nitrogen. the fine grid was parcels was varied used a grid-independent conditions pressure. as soot model. number 1500. and the attributed turbulent to the incorrect mixing species fast predicted such of swirl the insuitlcient neglect with C02 k . through Spray tip used to validate cence.5 mm axially. dense to obtain spray cell is 0. into constant room-temperature from 2 (SMD The photographs is the average diameter fuel(the and drop conditions sizes were measured are given in Table of the nozzle). measured values. in radius and 120 mm in length was diswith A computational cretized refinement radially grid ". of computational and the number at steady-state with the 23 back was between The present 1000 and numerical .5 mm to the The Since calculation is sensitive solution. temperatures regions(X/D=2. are mainly discrepancies speciby the and In to the inlet(X/D=0. The mesh spacing The was nonuniform smallest on the centerline 1. resolution.e turbulence carbon these of intermediate the single-step fractions 10%) of C02. close this to the injector. monoxide(CO) regions. hole tion test numerical models coalesa single penetraThe and breakup nozzle described pressure.. associated chemistry the overpredicted high high the CO heat mass mass can be partly observed the explained by the Due are existence to the of the relatively fractions(" rate in measurement.1 Non-Evaporating The solid-cone the present spray Solid-Cone measurements dense Spray of Hiroyasu spray above.--..3 Dense Spray 4.9) release calculated much higher than flame.

the drop sizedecreasesrapidlydue to drop breakup. the liquidisinjectedintoquiescent 24 ._ = 4 x 10-4rn2/s3).the drop diameter is equal to the nozzle diameter. the spray tip was defined to be the location of the leading spray drop parcel.0 MPa). Generally these curves can be broken into two sections.3. In the present computations.Figure 4. the drop sizeincreaseslargelyin far-downstream region.Figure 4.24 shows the variationof SMD injector. Further downstream.22. The initial as the small values(k = I x I0-3rn2/82.because higher gas densitiespromote collisions and coalescence. a near-field spray penetration could be more sensitive to the physicalsubmodels such as breakup and collision. the drop sizeremains relatively uniform afterinitial breakup region and then increasesslightly in the far-downstream region.3 ram.23 shows the predicted and measured spray tip penetration versus time. It is necessary to note that a far-field spray penetration is not a sensitiveindicatorof model performance.31] indicated that a far-field spray penetration is mostly influencedby the turbulence difr-usivity. In the low gas pressure case(1. I MPa). It can be seen that there is reasonably good agreement between the predictionand the measurement . The numerical resultswere insensitive to these initial values. 0. the drop size increasesgradually due to drop coalescence. However.2 Non-Evaporating k_j Hollow-Cone Spray The hollow-cone spray tippenetration data of Shearer and Groff[32] have been used forthe model validation.resultsdid not change appreciably when turbulent quantitieswere assumed thisparcel number was varied. The discrepancy could be associated to the fact that the experimental sprays were pulsed while the computations assumed a constant pressure injectionforthe entirecomputational time period. At the nozzle exit.0and 5. drop sizeisa time average over the spray cross-section at each axiallo- cation.This trend is alsoobserved in the measuments.For the high pressure cases(3. This plot indicatesthat the spray tip penetration and the core length decrease with the increase of the gas density. Previous studies[26. The spray parcel distributionfor three sprays is shown in Figure 4. 4. The three soliddata at 65 mm computed with axial distance from the The correspond to the measurements.Close to the injector. The predicted drop sizesat 65 mm axe qualitatively agreed with the experimental data for all three cases. In the experiment.

the spray spray is listed 2. and and measured tip penetration small The numerical results that turbulence because radial has a relatively effect on penetration is dominant. flow The rate 0.Sps spray pulses. spray reasonably the experimental tip penetration. al. Even .3. et. the head of the spray. 4. the ms. and the contours the spray however of the fuel Figure mass tion tration fraction increase distribution These results period for evaporating with respect sprays.25 shows distribution and the velcocity versus time. The test nozzle 100 mm conditions for evaporating in Table in radius 4. was discretized with A computational by a 21 radial The mesh spacing The was nonuniform refinement parcels reasons.26. [33] Liquid highsprays domain and 44 and conditurbulent as and buring validate the solid-cone present a sigle have been used to numerical hole fuel(tridecaue) temperature are given of 20 mm axial close tions grid. in a hollow-cone vectors spreading due to inertia near The gas velocity which the presence the outside of a vortex of spray.27 shows as the small boundary the spray The upstream boundary is treated are treated parcel as open boundaries. region curls the spray flow in the and spray In Figure A substantial of strong These inward center shapes 2. is injected nitrogen through high-pressure. of the cone near the injector compared the predictions quite favorably was also observed.3 Evaporating The evaporating and Burning Solid-Cone spray Spray measurement dense nozzle into of Yokoda spray model. pictures of the injection.2ms 25 due to evaporation. penetrathe penethough at early become nearly constant after t = 0. 500 and 700. The numerical timestep is used as are used in the computation. quantities a solid were assumed wall. vectors.room-temperature 2. The and diameter in length was 0. and about cone each angle nitrogen 2000 spray at P = parcels 550kPa. was between number of computational Due to the numerical values. to time show that of injection. on the centerline at steady-state the initial to the injector.58 mL/injection injection of duration set to the experimental in the early stage Figure the predicted indicate spray indicate tip toward spray tip velocity(60m/8) The parcel test from the movie in Table 3.0165 computational measured condition The experimental with velocity four are is 60 degrees. with agree the experimental with flow patterns observations[32]. and other 2.16 mm. about and 0. and burning or air.

is low and to the progressed to improve Future studies turbulent the prediction may include Therefore. and the deficiencies of the k-e dealing . of injection flame has the for burning overall computed the measure served is high near due configuration ones. fraction fuel mass fraction. The prediction of the statistically with the predicts stationary spray- flows is evaluated present numerical flows by comparison procedure available experimental features experi- correctly the the general with of spray-combustion mental locations. the soot model burning with the be incorporated spray model. of dilute and dense conclu- the present numerical the following 1. and yields qualitative exist agreement especially quantitative regions. the evaporated fuel vapor and continuously experimental spray penetra- penetrate spray Comparisons of the computed 2. sprays. Present fully implementation of the dispersion of accuratly turbulent width transport model dispersion has successin nearlyover demonstrated the capability representing flows with homogeneous the delta and in. The with parcel mass distribution. at different of a burning times spray study. observed in the results are attributed to uncertainties impingecombustion the strong spray size and velocity the single-step distributions fast chemistry turbulence 26 and the droplet/wall employed model by the with ment model. interaction. at near-wall combustion chamber mainly The discrepancies in the initial k . However. capability the detailed of the present comparison properties available in the experiment. agreement In the experimental tip where a considerable ratio level of soot was obthe temperature should dense local the spray the equivalence mixing. of the 2.homogeneous SSF for model. and differences along the at near-burner centerline. penetration agrees versus time are shown well with in Figure The present Figure tion distance the spray and oxygen the measured the contours results[33]. data. 5. more. the improved ettlciency function model 2.30 shows temperature. CONCLUSIONS The numerical spray-combusting sions are drawn models flows.v the liquid drop with does respect not penetrate to time.29 and 2.28. A numerical combusting data. in general: have From been developed for the analysis studies.

PDF for improvements The numerical and extensions of the present studies physical modelling are need • Implementation phase. To improve and overall capabilities configuration of a burningof the nuof the burnthe in- the prediction future model and efficiencies and physical width sprays. evaporating. To improve the future the works prediction must include capabilities the of the present studies of consistent non-evaporating. evaporating. of breakup conjunction and with coalescence multistep procedure. show a reasonably of spray flame. experimental penetration. of computationally evaporating.streamline numerical curvature. turbulent. transport to non-evaporating. dense available and the second-moment and the multi-step finite chemistry and For non-evaporating. packages multiple correction procedure of equilibrium of Fluid(VOF) • Implementation cient transient non-equilibrium chemitry for effi- reacting flow calculations. process: . good burning with spray cases. . the predicresults in agreement drop sizes. of strong and parcel flows. such and burning sprays stress by utilizing the non-isotropic model as the algebraic model model. turbulence closures. tions terms spray merical dispersion ing dense corporation models. of supercritical refinement the incorporation vaporization of atomization of soot model and further and breakup 6. procedure approach for multi- • Development pressure interphase and and by combining method. pressure correction • Optimization • Atomization methodology. tasks. and model. works must include the extensions evaporating. procedure. • Incorporation • Incorporation and adaptation modeling in of turbulence of wall/droplet modulation impingement 27 effects by droplets. RECOMMENDATIONS The and following recommendations spray are intended combustion for the following efficient combusting coupling Volume as suggestions modelling. models.

S. and burning dense flame propagation in a two-dimensional spray with transient droplet analysis of SSME injector spray atomization and combustion process. The validations and the applications of the proposed cases: spray combustion models will be consistently • Benchmark sprays. • Numerical • Application • Numerical studied solution for the following for non-evaporating. Wang of is NASA/MSFC extended eUing. time supplied Supercomputer 28 ./ authors would like to express their appreciation comments. participation Litchford and critical Acknowledgement PDF for valuable discussions on the parcel modby the The authors also wish to acknowledge Network through the C/LAY CPU UAH.. of combusting Acknowledgements The x. R.J. T. to Dr.v r • Incorporation of supercritical vaporization model. evaporating. Alabama for active to Mr._. • Unsteady vaporization. flows with supersonic droplet injection. to bipropellant simulation combustion.

Comb. Breakup".M.. Prediction 379-422.(1988). of the Flow ProperCalculation of Spray 9.(1983). Litchford. J. AIAA Technical 10.. Transport no. and Jeng.. pp. in Droplet 171-201. "Ignition Behavior 26th of a Dilute Aerospace Vaporizing Sciences MulticomReno. O'Rourke.P. Proz_ul. Flows with Variable Density and W.(1987). June 24-26. S.(1982). Advances 8. AIAA-88-0635.M. 391-398. Sprays". C. Flames".M.J.M. pp. Kollman Publishing. Method for Turbulent Flows.. Aggarwal. W. Sirignano.. Sci. 4.(1980).(1986). 18. 5. Faeth.REFERENCES 1. ponent Nevada. 29. J. Liquid Model for Particle P. 9. O'Rourke.(1981) National in Sprays". and Combustion in Spray". "The Formulation ASME of Combustion of Heat Models: Traa_." Journal 7. 12. pp. and Peters. pp. Los 8.K. Comb.(1980). "Models for Turbulent (ed. Turbulent R. Prog. 29 Combustion". to droplet spacing. Droplet P. J. Meeting. 291-322.(1989).P. pp. Sacramento. ergy G.(1987). pp. Conference. Prog. "Calculation AIAA J. Hemisphere in W. Asheim. 108.. "Fuel Sci. Kim.).M._ion 2. Dispersion "Collective "Efficient AIAA Statistical J. for Numerical 872089.K. compared 639. Fuel ancl Power. Chen. Sci. 633- 6.J. Alamos Effects on Vaporing Laboratory "The SAE report LA-9069-T. Law. 3. resolution pp. Energy "Recent Comb. 13. E1 Banhawy. ties Y. "Alternative Fuel Spray Behavior".P. Droplet Vaporization and Spray Combustion" . Jan.(1991). Drop 1443-1451. London. 91-2i96. Shang.A. TAB Method Paper J.(1991).A.. 5. Turbulence Propulsion 11. "Mixing. Transport 293-345. Spray". 1503-1510. Effects C. Kerosene-Spray H. pp. Jones. Energy 9. W.E. S. CA. EnVaporization and Combustion".. Paper "l_'on-Isotropic 27th Joint on Spray Combustion". and of a Confined Y.fer. . Sirignano. and Whitelaw. Prog.J.

(1976). H. J. Properties Fluid Flow Equations by Operator 24.M. O'Rourke. 83. bustion Reno. Ioannides. With B. P. and Jets : Measurements and Predictions".. Vaxiable Properties". : Effects 18.A. "JANAF Chem. "Modeling Lagrangian of Confined Schemes". Shishr. "Structure and 22. Numerical Implementation Physics. 52. 20. 23. A..W. 345-360. Comp. Fashola. drocarbon Combustion.. Gosman. Hubbard. Comb_fion Technology. InL "Droplet J. Phys.(1977).. D. F. B. 3.(1974).I. Heat and Vaporization Mass Transfer. "Investigation Science and of Liquid 14. Turbulent Diffusion Flames". 3O . and Hjertager. 719. "Chemical Kinetic Vol.H. Frossing. AIAA of Particle-Laden 396-404." AIAA Paper vaporization 26th model for spray com- Aerospace Science Meeting.(1975).(1990).S. Tuttle. pp. Geophysik. R.. of Transient 1003Table". 23. Particle Mass A. Turbulent buation". Stull tion." N. and Flows Transfer. Combustion Special on Soot arid Com- 16 th Symposium C. Discretized 62.(1938).(1981). 1008. for Droplet 40-65. Sci. "Solutions J. pp. the Comb. AIAA "Aspects Simulation of Fueled Combustors'. et al. pp.H.D. Chen. and et al.M in a Turbulent Gas".(1985). Physics.J. 229-241. J. J. G. Energy p. Westbrook. J. et al(1985). C. Ref. FluidHea_ and 21. Splitting". 17. calculations. Abrasnzon. Nevada. of the Implicitly Comp. Eulerian 691-700. Fueled pp. of Computer Chase A.F.(1984).13. 81-0323. pp. and Sirignano(1988). Thermochemical Data. 1-57. Shuen.K. Using 33. of Falling Droplets". J. Issa.tL N. and Mellor. "Droplet 88-0636. "Statistical Dispersion M.L. B. R. pp.(1989). Liquid E. 14. 311. on Combustion. Emphasis "On Mathematical Formation Modeling of Magnussen. Turbulent Int.P. Modelling pp. trage Zur Evaporation 170-216.L.10. 2nd ediand 18. and Prophet 19. and Dryer. of a Model pp. Gerlands BeIof Hy- 15. J. 16. "On Prog.

Journal. Bulletin "A Study of Diesel Spray and Flame 34. Sharma. A. H." 32. and Kobayashi. J.r . Proceedings "Injection of the 1984.(1978). Pressure 54. Processing R. D.H. physics.P. 1990.. Litchford. C.M. T.(1977).. for Gas-Droplet H. "The 99..(1984).(1990). Round and Jet".L. Paper Technique... Reitz. Eng.. Diffusion Functions in a Turbulent J. port 1992 Model and Jeng. FIuid_." of High 870598. for Spray Meeting. Navier-Stokes NAG8 -092. to be appeared in the Int. Fluid N.M.H. Numerical Model for Liquid Sprays". H.(1974). Veloc48.. "Particle 24..G. 30. Particle 325-332.T. Shearer. Meth. 29. 1991 Measurements Flow". Combustion". Particle "On the Efficiency of a Statistical TransJ. Flows". and Moneib. SAE 35. "A Novel Gas-Droplet Rocket Engine CFD Numerical Working J. Sprays. "A Particle-Fluid 229-253. 17-19... Jiang.. T. 35." to be appeared in AIAA "x. R. Kamimoto. 3. 27.kowicz.(1980).. Division Conference. 741. E1-Mahallawy. Snyder.. C. Eigth April Liquid NASA-MSFC. and Shang. by an Image and Diwaker. Transient Y. Phase NASA 28. Effects Diesel on Oscillatingand Gas Engine Poppet-Injector Power 33. Groff. Khalil.(1991) "MAST . Dec. R. Chen. Comp..J.i 36...(1988). E.M.J. Flow Pattern F. Laden Yasuo. Method Group Numer.. Kim. and Kadato. 1987 S. "Structure of JSME. . pp.(1971).P. H..M. 1992..A. Y. Du.E. C." J.D.P. in Generalized Coordinates". and 31.. Code H. p.. No. Crowe. "Effect of Combustion Sixteenth Air Swirl on the in a Cylindrical 31 Oil Fired Furnace". and Lumley. for Turbulent Dispersion.M.. pp. 25.. Hirosawa. AIChE T... System ASME pp. Jotaki..(1987). Turbulent pp. New York. J.. and Jiang.(1992). Report. in a Dust 509-519. Combustion Chamber. J. SAE Paper "Fuel 740715. "Some ity Autocorrelation 41-71.K. pp. K. H.. Chen. Shang. Yuu. S. Yokota. Droplet Size Distribution in Diesel Hiroyasu. and Stock.A Multi- All-Speed Contract W. Fuel Sprays. M. 33-42. Source in Cell Method 26. Yasukouchi. of Particle Mech. Fluid Y.

H.. 37. pp. Reno.. on Combustion. pp. PA.. 42.I. J.M. 38. tions R. H. Sh_ag.S. a/. Paper and Wang. on Dilute 253-275. No. "Solution of the Implicitly Phi. E1-Banhawy. Between Flame.. Spray and The Combustion Institute. Ziebarth.M. Sprays. Kim.P. pp. "Numer- ical Studies Science 39." of the Interaction Combustion and a Fuel Surrounding 1981 C.J ? Symposium 135-143. 3. Reacting 388-410. 32 . and Dense Nevada. 1977 Y.. 1991. Flow Equa- by Operator-Splitting.. Issa." .7. AIAA J. T. Comp. and Whitelaw.P. Y. Air. et." 92-0223. Pittsburgh. Chen. 30th Aerospace Meeting. "Experimental Combustion Stud). Discretized 93..

and droplet-phase I.5 ~ 2.5 m/s 310 K Temperature 33 .C. Air Mass Flow Rate Air/Fuel Ratio 355 kg/hr 20.C..17 310 K Rosin-Rammler 127 _m Inlet Air Temperature Droplet Sauter Droplet Number Dlatrlbution Mean Diameter Size Range of Size Range Velocity 10 -.Table 1. 290 15 11 m/s 6. Gas-phase B./ Axial Droplet Tangential Velocity Droplet Radial Droplet Droplet Velocity 0.1 m/s x_.

9 MPa Nozzle diameter: Case Pgas (MPa) Pgas (kg/m3) Vinj (m/s) Mini (kg/s) SMD (_m) 1 2 3 1.36 60 0. Test Conditions for the Measurement of Yokota et. Test Conditions for the Measurement of Hiroyasu and Kadota 300 pm In}ection Pressure: 9.54 86. Case Pinj (MPa) Pgas (UPa) "lamb (K) Minj (kg/s) Atmosphere Evaporating Spray Burning Spray 30 3.17 115.1 3.36 33.00326 N2 30 3.0 12.00688 0.41 0.0 900 0.00326 Air 34 .0165 60 Table 4.Table 2.0 58. al.00513 42.4 49.0 900 0.0 5.80 102. Test Conditions for the Measurements of Shearer and Groff.70 56. Pgas (kPa) Pgas (kg/m3) Vinj (m/s) VOUnj (ml/inj) Cone Angle (deg) 550 6.00609 0.8 Table 3.

J oil Jl J J owmn _J c_ Omll r_ q_ om lml S. qwml 35 .

._ I. @@ _m 17 B _ ! 0 [_-._ID]NOISU3dSICI 86 ._- _ _ .

oj M'O 180 I1_ _ 0OO o_ O ._lll '_I_ ° tirol L._ .": \ __ff ...'- ! .. .u 1_ 01 ZTO ! IOtO MO WC _¢lC 18© 0BeL ._m Tm o! ..'S_ ! ooc 37 .

i _ _'li / 0 m o¢lm 8 ! _a _0 NO _ WQ mO in _wmml c_ m _a "i L.v _ //° Lo °i cl im In / o7 itgo ml_ ! r_ ulu ow. _Dm 38 .

elm *m-I OC.Z: I_C .jJ 39 .|: 01: _" 00_..! 0 I..3 9m V r. = = Q m A qP o111 m m Z I. _%. ellUl k i MI m Iml _ m oral 03..

_ J 40 .

._ I'll .m 41 ._ .. ' '... '.._....f.: *_ "...__.r __v.._ • """ :....... q. mu .'..L .._'.too io atom m m *m _M m e._r%k._..'_.'..

. ............................ ............ ....'" _m ... . 111_tttffffftt_t_t......... ... "'[ Trrrz. ... _flfl_ll_*........° .... ................. Iltttt || ttl _t |||if| |I ill _l ||tilt II If! tt tttftl IF III _t _m Fe_tffet_tele_e. r_ftH/N..... _J > U 0 _1_ff_ttl_tr_.... 42 ................aC_ _111t111 111ttttlttt 11ttttllf _1111111 _1111111 ltt_tTtlftl 1111tttlttl !11_ttllttl _1111111 Itflftltttl fl t111tt tttftt! II tt_ltt fttltt! _ Itlltt tlflttt ttlltt tlttt! 11111! IIttt_ Tttltt Ittttt _11111_111ttttllttl _111111111111ttlttS _It111111tltttttttt _111111111tlttttltt_ _1111|1111ttttltlttS ttlttt tttttt tttttt tttttt ttlttt tt ttt ttlltf l! ttt tllfft tt ttt II tl$1tt It tit _t _1|11111111ttttlttt _11?111111ttt_tttt _111flttlltttttt_tt _1|t|tttttttftttlft _11111111ttttttttttt _|||11ttttttlttt_rt _1|11|ttftftllttttt _tlttttttftrtttft_t..... . I. ............ _l////_ _/ll//............... ...............................

1 _L kl eml / / / / kl q_ q_ fu _u pm e emm 43 .ao m c_ C r.

- 0 0 0 .72) o .X " O. O. 20OO 50O I{_ 1500 2OO0 _OO I0_1 150O 20OO 500 !000 50O 'EMPERATURE { K } Figure 4.98) 44 .52 m f o o uO c.._.1l m o .J 0 e-t r.0 150O 2000 ¢3 SOil I000 .L- X .2- X - O. 0 o o- =.10 Radial profiles of mean temperature(S=1.0..24 m o .- o r_ r_ 0 0 =.II m "1 '( " '3.J _J Z 0 o 0 q.L- X " 0. . soo _o_ is_ 2o_ TEMPERFITURE ( K } s0o _ooo (_ _s0o 20oo Figure 4.52 o i /0 _ -_ /O 0 el" o f_ w L.24 '_ = X " 0....9 Radial profiles of mean temperature(S=0.- o 0 coo Z CE crl °o 3 O" o 0 . O 0" 0" 0 (Ec_ 0 0 O O / 0 .

52 1 \ 0 0 0 O n.24 m 0 X " 0.0 0.11 Radial profiles of mean axial velocity(S=0.o 20.0 -zo.12 Radial profiles of mean axial velocity(S--1._q" J (I: 0 0 0 O" 0 0 t O O O _ 0 I 0 -lO.0 AXIAL .0 30.20 q@ O 0 tf_ m r." _- CDO Z 0 tn N o J C m ¸ O 0" 0 0 0 0 0 O O" O O O 0 o 0 -I0.98) 45 .0 2_.0 30.o AXIAL VELOCITY{m/s) o 0 i :5 .0._.24 m (_ X .o o.72) O X " 0.O I0.0 -10.0.o o. C_ [o.0 ..X-Oil m o X "0.o -2o.o _.o VELOCITY(m/s) :I ° 0 I0.0 Figure 4.52 m .o O7 1 20.o -io. o i 20.0 Figure 4. Ii m X .0 30.

0 30.0 TRNGENTIRL VELOClT?(m/s) Figure 4.24 m X .98) 46 .0 0.0 TBNGENTIRL VELOCITY(m/s) Figure 4.. _ _- //° 0 / i /° 10.0 0.0 I0.t O O r_ w c.0 /: _t/o 0.0 15.0 10.0 15.0 15.0 211.ii m o X " 0.0.13 Radial profiles of mean tangential velocity(S--0.0 30. x-.j" O X .52 \ 0 m 0 qD 0 _- 0 _0 lID 0° c5" 2 £- 0 t I 0.0 0.II m X . _ C.11 0.0 30.24 m 0 X " 0.52 _.?2) O X .0 20.0.0._o Z rr FU_ i (_ r'_ n_ .0.0 20.14 Radial profiles of mean tangential velocity(S=l.

i m i ¥ v J C_ q_ 47 .

17 Velocity vectors in kerosene spray flame fields X--fl.23m Figure 4.Figure 4.18 Temperature contours in kerosene spray flame fields 48 .16 Droplet trajectories in kerosene spray flame fields = = Figure 4.

.'O C'O I 0"0 r_ 0 0 m m qo v L_ X I I I I I O'I 8"0 9"0 _'0 _'0 0"0 c_ n_ cJ Q_ _. ¢ ! _@ u @ @ 0"! U_ CN 8"0 9"0 _"0 C"O 0"0 .! II X O" I 8"'0 9"0 i.¢ ! X OI 0 8"0 9"0 9"0 _'O ='0 !° cxl O'I (o_I_]T_ONWL_iO 7_IOWU L 49 .

'0 _'0 0'0 ( °_/_ ) ]3NYLS I(] 7Y I OY_I 5O .\ 0 0 '! 8"0 g'O _'0 _'0 O" 0 ! I t o I o _'0 ( 0"0 ql I 0"! C_ u') 8"0 9"0 _..'0 f.. X 0 o 0'! 8'_0 9"0 _.._ P41 6. -c_ m c_ -c_ X m_ e_ c_pJ O'T 8'0 9"0 _'0 _'0 0"0 6 I o _m n.

_ _J 51 .r_ ¢'_ ii I C_ X 0 O'I• _ 8"0 9 "'0 _'0t _'0 ( 0"{ @ llm IJ ! C_ @@ @@ x I I o'I CD 9"0 0 9"0 i 0 aQ _'o _'0 o'0 . >u @ 9@ r_ I m X =0 o'I Ln 8"0 0 9"0 "'0 0"0 ql" ! r_ X I O'I 8"0 9'0 _'0 _'0 0'0 [o_I_ )]3NUI_ I0 7W IOU.r CD 6=.

. • +._ _-..lt.i_• D::: ?:f.....:_'. ....._ _ . ° • • • . +.-.0 I I I I I MPa "" • • ' _ • .._.." .'. _ _° % ...-".:P"'_-._'_li".0_ 004 008 0. "."_: _.. . .. ._. " :". I:_::': v: .. +. .i .'_e.:'.... • .IP1 -_ .-.-. • .: _..1 MPa I I I I T T" I .. + %°+ .." -."_" ":"-'""i¶ ._'_:'f_..+Q 'L • +..._aq_.0 I I I I MPa ..0 0 . "._. "lep . ' ... . + ._"... :... "F " e -o" .:... '.: :. '.._.'°..'. _..'...'._'_. • :.'" +_" _. • . :+ Q ? 5._..:..-:..'_ f.* q... _.-. .'.o.._...s: .22 Spray parcel distribution in a solid-cone spray(_ = 3. ..:_'. .'_"'"_'. . . _-.0ms) 52 . .. " .. +..._._r" _ .'t_ . . 000 0... _i'l::_'l I:." .. .. :-+ _... " "". ""_"_ " :":_ • ..+:.t_'....-... o...: .y..._.+o'o+.. ... _-. _¢:'J'. _'" .. ."...+_m..-:.'- . _.._.. ._. • ' • ...:.08 0.. • .• . --_ ... "'"_ " ::."..'_.. l_D _+...._" " '_'""#"'" -" :-'_.."_" _.._w_.. • 1.10 012 Figure 4._. ._. ": t'.-. _'.: _" . ?.-. ." : . .. • ._.'..'" ... _.._. ._'_." ._ ._:._.+"_r_dr_ V . :+. + I 3....:._..._..v._".'_l.-:-_o." .-. S :. ...

=.. "o\ _"-...\..o \o I.. . ' /o °!i ._. .. _. o_ f..} ¢. \o _'--.ii |1 \0 8 ._'.a <i-. _" -_'_" bO 0 OOt Og 09 0'I. I .. -.. ko Oo\ o\ .o ¢... "_. [. I . O_ 53 . I . .I 11 .

om OOg Og_ 00_ 0_I 00I Og (_ 9-3) (]:MS 2 64 .

.88 ms i i i I .. •..... • . .." :: :: .........._J_ :: _'....... o ..":1::::: 11"11. I .....!!!............. _-7_!_l_.. "...._ 1: . .. :: .... 1..k_ . _.. Figure 4.... :: ::: :1 111111"1"'1 . I ....... .._-III _ _-_..ii :! ii :_i" "11 "i_ii!"!"i':"" 0....:111 11...1 . ...... ::::: ............ :_-_. I ............. . _J_tl_.32 Z . • . ....... ....... :. .. :::::::::2 ::::::::: :::::::: _IlllUI! II_lll ::::::".. "_9/I• .... ....=................ _". -o "°:::::::::::::: / X 0..."11.... . ... ..:.44 L ..... e.......... Ill II II :::::::::::::::::::: ......... i ! i ! _ i ! ! i i i i q i _ ! i i i ......! "i_. • __ ..... • • ! / \ ::::::::::::::::::::::: \ .I _ l n I . I ....¢Ss s.:.. ::i::::::i::ii! i..-. ....._ s... .. ..... _i .'... ms ::::::::' p '::::1 ! .lee_eeeg_99e_leegv_ ........ _............... :...... Ii . ...1:........ I / X.... loll I. l_plllll Illltlll IlllIIIU lUll. I "" ms .. '::1...... ::::::::::::::: °._. 1.......... ::::::::::: _lllll ::. /X B.. ...25 Spray parcel distribution and velocity vectors in a hollow-cone spray .... #" °...

0

i!
0

i

I

i

_

,

i

,

I

,

,,,
O_

O_

_I

OI

0

(_)

NOI±VU_.__ad

56

v

i
--......#

57

\

0
O_

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

1,i

0

Om

0

°Ion° o °
N_

em

o
sm

o_

L.

4
0
I I , I 0
om

tw

Og

O_

OC

O_

OI

0

(_) _oI±v_za_aa

58

i ° 8o L 59 ._ 0 t _'0 ' IO'O ' ' (30'0 ' ' • IO'O--_0"080"0 'IO_O i 00:0 IO0..8 _o "-' eL 0 k r._00- _o _o!o ooo_00-_00- .

°.i !!I °: [00 00'0 I0'0-80"080'0 I0'0 00'0 I0"0-80'0-800 [0:0 000 I0"_-800-- 6O .

p/dV (A.. = p-'l NP p=l - 7.L+ _) Z _37rpdrp3 where Np[( Cp. numerical stability.5) by substituting NP 1 S. (A.4) (-_-)p Here. = F_. volume heat dvi = u'_ +1 + u_ - 7 v_ t+l + Fbi (A.l Here.6) R_ 1 = d'--V _ p Npmp/(At + rp)(v'_ -.. on The parameters particle S_ and Ru are momentum at previous control timestep.iu_)_)l}/m/ (A.m. S"+_ ni.t = _ p=l Npmev. + (-_-l. and R...7) and mp= 47rr3ppd volume is the particle mass...4) into (A. the momentum inter- covergence S.APPENDIX The pressed two-phase as • A. interaction Two-Phase source terms NP Interaction in the Source governing Terms equations can be ex- Sm./( At + rp) (A._.2): (A.u_ +1 + R. quantities depending available information 61 . are obtained = -S..{x. the cell and hp and L are the droplet respectively. S.u i + Fbirp) (A.i.1) NP s.d dTp _ dvi .(h.. = -_ _ p NP N._.2) s..t can be treated implicitly.4) of the of the and computational droplet. (A. enthaipy To action dV denotes and improve source the the latent the term.

into problem.(B5) the quite when B(a. . b) can be calculated function. where stoichiometric value. aid (B2) _ b)..._ is expressed when 0 < _ <_G era(() = _ where m = l. in ( nature also ¢.'.4 ) APPENDIX B. function 0 to _s as is expressed the as polynomials integration _) is the domain monotonic.-x (1 _ _.)b-x _¢a_l( 1 _ _)b_ld function. and _ < _ < 1) is split The sections: to 1. M (M = index for the property) (B5) (B6) dm. of the following relationship: r(a)r(b) B(a. To scalax(_).._(_) are be produced errors mixture numerical (g) of the fraction avoid To two keep is small this the mixture fraction(f) of the (0 is close conserved to 0 or 1. the be Cm(_')(a-'(1--()b-]d( integrated errors These variance can by a trapzoidal unless axe due rule the to or (B4) Gaussian increments the spikey and quadrature. chosen of the when the to be Beta mean pdf Eq.(B1) yields (B3) Cm(Xi)--" The numerator of However. property ¢. Note that B(a.(B2) into Eq..xi)d_ (B1) P(_. Numerics of Beta Probability Density Function The density-weighted the property mean mixture properties with (era) at any density location function. _< 62 . xi): by convoluting functions a probability Cm(xi) where = _0 1 Cm(_)P(_..b) .xi) The denomenator from in Eq.(B2) the Gamma is the -- fl Beta _. F with the B(a.C ( <__ when .r(a + b) Substituting Eq. evaluated P(_..b) can significant small.

_"+°-'(1 . n . (BS) can be transformed T= _[dm.(B5) and (B6) into Eq.. property._. the mean can be calculated era(x.N (N = degree of the polynomial) Substituting Eqs. the degree era(x.b)]BETA(a+n. .4 _rt_a-I (1-. +(c_._)b-ld_ f01 _'_+"-_(1--_)b-'d_ = _'_[d.) f°_ .._"+_-'(I--_)b-_d_] f_.a+n. The of Eq.nn)BETAI(s.b) (Bg) In present mixture study._)b-'d_] from the solutions of the (BT) transport with zi axe evaluated numerator for f and g.(BT) is simplified as follows: T = _'_(cm.dR.(B4) results in 1 fo" + where equations a and b varying f_[ E n .-R..._ .b) (B10) 63 . .) 1 -- d_ + X: dR. fo n I _'"+"-I(1 _ _)b-'d_ as the convenient expression: (BS) For using IMSL routines. Finally..v n = 1.--dR.nn-d..) of the polynomial as is used as N = 6...) = T BETA(a.+(c.

)nw. fraction C02. mass N2.76. composition.=+ zWco_}] xWco2 _WH_o K3m 64 . tt.Yf. from species the can five species Once solutions the of the (fuel._) YCO. + (x + Here. the irreversible single-step reaction is expressed as follows: C. H20) and the n is 3.O = K2(1 .) (c4) K2 "-- [_Wmo + {(x+ _. are oxidizer mass In the )(02 + nY2) -_ zC02 + _ v H 20 + (z + -_ v )aY_ given the reaction mixture process. (Cl) and of fuel participating have been of the determined remaining transport the equations. + Yo= + Yf.APPENDIX C.KIYO2 . = K3Ymo = 1 -(Ymo where K1 =l+n_ (C2) (c3) + Yco. following sto- fraction relations.O2. be obtained from ichimetric YH. Stoichlometrie Relations For Hydrocarbon Fuels For the hydrocarbon-air mixtures.

Rosin-Rammler Distribution dQ qDq-l -(D/X)' d-'D = X---'-'7 e X SMD where D.1) in the size range from D N axe the number the total number diameter. (D. Droplet Distribution that which Models into the combusThe of size are assumes spray the fuel is injected consists as a fiilly distribution atomized with of spherical by a finite droplets./3.APPENDIX The tion present chamber dilute spray model D. and B are experimental/determined constants.2) . the spray distribution code. 65 .sawa in the computer a Rosin-Rammler have implemented distributions the following forms: Nukiyama-Tanasawa Distribution Ot dN --_ where dN and and D = A( SMO) e_B(D/SMD)a dD SMO parcels parcels. and of computational of computational to D +dD Sauter respectively. SMD is the mean a. number distribution droplet-size ranges. These is represented and A Nukiyama-Tana. A.r(1 .-) q contained in drops of diameter (D.3) less than volume q axe constants. and Q is the fraction X and of the total 1 (O.

_ Hunt. 1992 | 3313 SECA._vi_le. NAS8-36955 Final Report Prepared by: Y. C. Inc. S. Farmer Prepared for: in Huntsville 35899 University of Alabama Huntsville. AL March. Bob Wallace AverJu¢: Suite 202 AL 358C. .SECA-TR-g2-06 ' ADAPTION OF MULTIDIMENSIONAL AND PARTICLE WALL-BOUNDARY CONDITION MODEL TO THE FDNS CODE GROUP PARTICLE TRACKING / Subcontract 91-177 Contract No. Chen R.

........................... Model ..............................................................SECA-TR-92-06 Table of Contents Introduction Governing Finite Rate ............... ...................................... .... Conclusions References i .............................................. ................................................................................ Tomahawk Tomahawk Nozzle Plume Flowfield Flowfield .................................. ............................... 1 1 3 4 7 10 10 15 16 17 19 20 Chemistry Particulate-Phase Details Test of the Equations Particle Solution ........................ Method ......................................... ...... Equation ........................................... Liquid Injector Flowfields Closure ................ Cases • • • The The ...........................

This produce FDNS-3DEL number intended improve. model 5) were correction employed 6. mainly (FDNS-2DEL) The FDNS-2DEL not Cray.2. for based which a pressure flow predictor Turbulence wall plus multi-corrector with Navier-Stokes models compressibility (Ref. specific into long objective single reorder the calculations on the Cray of was it. simulated particle tracking methodology Governinq _quation The gas-phase governing equations of the FDNS module are the k_/ 1 . of to as test Since cases version code with cases FDNS slow. implicit in this Eulerian-Lagrangian particle study.4) submodels. 1. a very study to limited also and in was verify coded increase necessary. (Ref.3) flow CFD model is was developed based solver. FDNS. automatic vectorization dimensional the had to the FDNS-2DEL been number run of and to to implement the threecode. to trajectory Effects of or solution integration particle-gas efficient scheme reaction were developed particle and not size in change agglomeration fragmentation considered this investigation.7) was as used flow an and A the function models chemistry For finite-rate flow (Refs. reacting a simulation.SECA-TR-92-06 Introduction A particulate on the FDNS code two-phase (Refs. The too in use. because it had on the written was the vectorlzation form to of FDNS full three-dimensional of arrays the full this for study was utilized. particulate method two-phase using was simulations. At V the which onset had of been the present study. to treat been was a two-dimensional Lagrangian written slow a and for form version of of FDNS modified had already code been nor tracking was practical amenable to particles operational.

_)/a(x. equations effective energy.n. Sq. species parameters transport and momentum. pelf. v. viscosity. equations j. turbulence And.y. differences respectively. are and chemical respectively. are given as: 0 --Px + V[/_eff(Uj)x] -- (2/3)(peffVU) (2/3)(_effVU)y (2/3)(_effVU)= Up Dx Vp Dy x + + + Dx Dy DZ Wp Dz -py --Pz + + V[_eff(uj)y V[g'. h. u. Dy and Dz represent the drag forces and n takes on .ff(Uj)z] ] -- Sq = j-1 Dp/Dt + hv + Hp - - P(Prp(e/k) _n ') [(CI+C3Pr/_) Pr Cze] where Dx.z) = = (u/J) (a_i/ax j) (a_i/ax k) (a_/axk)/J + pt)/Oq =: (p The source terms in the governing equations. k.SECA-TR-92-06 Reynolds-averaged particle and large the drag energy Navier-Stokes forces and heat equations fluxes in with the Due the addition equations effect the the The of of momentum to the and to be equation. the given transformation as: j ut Gij /Ueff = a(_. to the the drag considered primary gas-phase inter-phase are written momentum as: exchange.1(apq/at) = a[-pUig + _effGij(aq/a_j) ]/a_ i + Sq where q - 1. e and model ei for the continuity. w. between force was the density particles surrounding contribution governing gas.

ij _ Kbjii(Pai/Mui)=. turbulence model constants given 6 and Finite Rate Chemistry Model For of gas-phase reactions chemical is reaction in modeling.SECA-TR-92-06 values between 1 and Dip is _ the N. system for are the equations. over all _i. and 4. Turbulent is used and to close the above aq. rate vp and of heat the wp are the particle per unit of velocity volume the to gas components. up. p = p/(RT/_).ij'] and is the species by production summing rate. Prandtl numbers. wi = 1_! ZXij J 3 . governing taken equations from Refs. rate and Pr stands is written turbulence kinetic production as: P: = (_t/p) [ (Suj/Sx! + aui/Sxj)2/2 - 2(SUk/SXk)Z/3] An equation of of state. transfer heat stands for the for viscous flux energy phase. Xij. Schmidt other 7. is written Xi j == (vij. terms of a general the system chemical written the stoichiometric species name (Mi) coefficients of the j-th (vii and reaction vij' ) and as i-th chemical Z v|j M! = Z vlj' M!' l ! The i due to net rate of j change in the molar as: concentration of species reactions . (in terms of mass fraction) calculated reactions. the gas phase._vij) [Kfjii(pai/Mwi ) _.

the species continuity equations are written as: p D. equations. in species accomplished limiting are time bounded adjusted A were allowable concentrations. mass The resulting to the within so physical that they are proportional and 8).mass p fluid fraction density rate rate species K_| = _j forward of of reaction reaction j j = Kfj/K.j = equilibrium - constant fivij)} i (I/RT) zc_j''vl])exp(Z(f_'v|j' free energy of species f! = Gibbs Kf = A T a exp{-E/RT} Finally.=! .)V_ i] = wi where o. (assumed to be 0. solutions such that species continuity species limits. fractions limited species turbulence for are changes source which each well are terms. detailed submodels PartiGulate-Ph_se Equations A in FDNS Eulerian-Lagrangian to the provide gas effects and particle of the tracking and method energy The was employed momentum particle exchanges particle between phase phase.V[(#ef_/o. .9) represents function constraints a crucial of the is Schmidt employed at the number to of for turbulent the time basic diffusion.j = backward K.SECA-TR-92-06 where _i " molecular weight of of species i i a! . similar reported chemistry previously approach (Ref. A penalty conservation This and is ensure every end for marching requirement combustion changes of the the the This numerical is stability by accuracy the the step a CFD model. element step.

I) = C_ Tp T_ t. and Nu stand which Typical for are drag coefficient of and Nusselt number in Refs.Tp)/t.v.V i)/t d (T.31 ( = = = f Pp = C d and heat Mach transfer number. 6 a_f Tp4/(pp dp) = C_ where U! Vi td = = = Gas Velocity Velocity Dynamic Relaxation Time Particle Particle .20 Factor -0. = = Particle Particle Particle Enthalpy Heat Capacity Temperature Temperature Time = Gas = Recovery Particle Thermal-Equilibrium = G (pp Up)/[12 Nu _/(Pr dp)] = Stefan-Boltzmann 4.SECA-TR-92-06 trajectories integration the phase drag are method forces calculated for using an efficient of then particle coupled the implicit sizes with particle as: time by the which gas several fluxes groups are and heat equations..4 pp dJ(3 cd Pc :u.76E-13 Particle Radiation Particle Particle Constant BTU/FT2-S-R Emissivity Interchange Diameter Density 0. 9 and as: Carlson Hoglund's is written . and The equations constitute are trajectory temperature history written DVI/Dt Dh_Dt = (U! . .. correlations correlation are (Ref. number and for functions Reynolds given 9) relative I0.

for 1 < Mach < 1.=1.82 e'1"_"'m)/Re] Nu = (I + 0. provided That is.427/_ "_ + 3. Ca - 24 [Re + S {4.SECA-TR-92-06 Cd " (24/Re) (I [I + + 0. the A more accurate is but more by complicated Henderson correlation (Ref.5 - + 0.86 (M/Re)'/2] (TJT) I/S 4}] And. 11). Cd " Cd N*1 + (4/3) (M - I) (Cd. Cd = [0.75 - Cd .459 Re°'55)/Re] where a = 0.28 + e")/ (3.65 - 1.53 TJT) + exp(-0.353 TJT)}]" 2 + + 0. 10). drag for coefficient Mach a 1.03 Re+ Re I/2.33 /(I + + exp(-0.38a) 0.15 M Re °'_7) + (1 1.0/Re for 0"M. applicability correlation improvement being actively Nusselt currently researched .75.1M + a)] + [i (4.5*M/Re /(i I/2) [0.058 2 + 1.75.75.2295 [I + Re°'S5)/ 3. a =0.34/M 1. It motor has been shown that the Henderson compared with of drag test the law givesbetter The number (Ref.247 0.9 + + 0.48 S = M(7/2) For 1"2 is Mach _ the molecular speed ratio.--1 ) which assumes a linear variation between M = 1 and M = 1. performance and is predictions possible data. 1.42 M (2 + 0.2_ S Re/S) (3.86(M/Re) I/2/S - 1/2 {2 + / 2/S [i 2 + 1.6 exp(-M/Re)] where 0.

order experimental test available In the 2-D version was of the FDNS to test flow solver. grid the In their The point.SECA-TR-92-06 Details of the Particle Solution Method In was flux the present for the two-phase calculation the and gas flow of flow model. velocity Therefore. \ i method After employed integrate of the a thorough integration . collides part is to particle of to the the fraction stick Energy stick. enthalpy been found enthalpy either the of form) form static the selected.e. the a fourth-order particle routine. with turned be wall must due the wall-boundary of which to the part the the conditions colliding result for size that are particles in treated which by using to a the fraction Particles normal for wall. but to do new so. definition extensive k. particle present static It has drag each then then size for every and These source FDNS forces terms flow to evaluate governing of the equations. an independent drag forces module and for are heat and in the heat employed contributions the for are are to Subroutines trajectories forces locating called fluxes fluxes gas-phase two total forms particles particle saved used integrating group.j" form motor the energy usually provides shear gives better as similar enthalpy rocket for best been liquid made layers. particle field. although solutions. locally the other is particles wall. shown of by which solutions energy has the A determination solid (two-phase) equation not yet simulates made. stick particle stick wall a decreased size particle which and fraction. rocket plumes Particle specified wall. energy can of equation be the solver. equation equation plume SSME. form that or (i. which more only parallel to the exchange This assumed of particles be in model particle data interaction become can improved. Runge-Kutta trajectories.

SECA-TR-92-06 it was found that the when explicit the scheme can sometimes become was the give diverged particle Therefore. of motion. particle cell. employed in the of the implicit For integration convenience. showed detailed comparisons pressure FDNS-2DEL analyses unacceptable losses . X-component equation dX_dt dUp/dt = Up = A (U© Up) where A - 1/t d veloclty velocity location U¢ = gas Up = particle Xp = particle In finite difference form the above equations can be written as: Xp(_I) Up(n_l) - Xp(") Up(n) I (_t/2) _tA [U¢ [Up (_1) Up + Up (")] (n+l)] or Xp(ml) = Xp (") + _t/2 Up (_I) [Up (n) + atA [Up(_I) + Up (") ] U¢]/(I+_tA) These magnitude resolutlon. present particle solutions an model. source terms scheme large. two of equations source are terms. time least unGonditionally To provide is steps stable better chosen to go so despite time that a a grid the the a variable would take at step size 4 time across The needed hurdle give recognition calculating developing that the an improved integration trajectories explicit scheme was was for in particle The a major appeared to previous were to FDNS-3DEL. but that scheme acceptable solutions. consider That is.

law were energy the particle were of Initially these Since field codes expected problem been used suspected. and initially the suspected of behavior. pressure flowfield was not this have FDNS-2DEL to results found nozzle the comparisons (RAMP. k.j 9 . equation. and lengthy not to were turbulence drag made model.SECA-TR-92-06 predicted. method poorly of the Resolving would consumed to run much resources of which test otherwise a wider variety cases. causing the form this of Several solution the other factors were Namely. in the plume and Runge-Kutta FDNS-EL code. were calculations be the cause to give and before effects the found poor good results. to SPP. perform conventional SPF-II).

The the in temperatures FDNS-3DEL exit plane _K) than and RAMP gas near solution show The in (2470 °K) solutions essentially raggedness nozzle same the to centerline profile a weak temperatures. (Ref. for was with the concentration nozzle. to be and profiles. with and 12). and temperature be due to the appears oblique at is the shock. and comparable already for predictions been performed. approximated the previous uniform could exit direct The FDNSgas comparisons 2DEL solutlon solutions lower RAMP made. the centerllne An in This flowfield includes centerline case) shape. Consideration injector a plume also made.SECA-TR-92-06 Test C_s_$ The rocket and cases of major test nozzle case which was studied was of was the Tomahawk solid motor an are analysis. grain. flowfield These oxygen-hydrogen described in the coaxial following paragraphs. particle which down the flow change and a very strong In more (as a inlet boundary the condition. flowfield This the these Figures water was test calculated case was and with chosen FDNS-3DEL because had available Mach shown 1-4. • The Tomahawk Nozzle Flowfield The and is Tomahawk in nozzle Figs. temperature. near so plume. predicted (2250 somewhat the centerline °K). chamber flow chamber. approximate would to would Mach the from this The uniform subsonic breaks locate laded temperature in the flow with the probably number. sharp temperature of the contours particle limiting streamline 10 . that be plane (2400 The respectively. FDNS-2DEL other 1-4 RAMP codes were solutions show the comparison velocity. centerline apparent the is non-zero temperature of the normal nozzle effect complete gradient flowfield of the SRM subsonic due to portion indicated. number. chamber simulation flow burning the particles compared contour velocity.

..... o ° . ..-4 .. ° ...... ..-_ 11 .....

I-i t_ .,-t

12

v

t_ -,-4

13

°.

Ilt_t !!! I :::::::::::::::::::::: _ll_t_ltlt_l_l_l__ ii17 7ii _ll_l!.

• "

,.

_J

.--

.

.

..

14

of the energy the on equation free shear a temperature Better nozzle form definition would of the inception induced elimlnate does k-_ not the outside The effect. indicates static The spike of at the total the predicted production total of form the of flow layer sharply from of the afterburning energy reactions. similar code problem (Ref. the Mach crossing much thereby turbulence the the creating model turbulent A plume kinetic energy used.SECA-TR-92-06 respect and total to gas only flow forms Letting which of the the well fills energy the nozzle. was used probably energy equation to the such exhibit a spike. to such the that particles in order which to account particles moves the the very plume However. impact The to on The the place at the significant converging the for plume is the hit analysis spectrally allows reflect. gas such particle in drag the parallel nozzle. Both give hit the static enthalpy equation which the the same stick nozzle or solutlons. 13). centerline. This disc for a long distance rapid to and the when remedy the k-_ using in near be with excessively was in belleved the plume with plume/atmosphere due to the effect mixing of too being predicted. streamlines reflection transonic occur of case the being does not considered. particles behaved particle section. the equation indicates layer. exists The SPF/II SPF/II standard code is JANNAF to switch turbulence models between 15 . When down stream the of Tomahawk the exit plume plane is is calculated FDNS-2DEL. were Both considered. • The Tomahawk Plume Flowfield The The water and form near plume free appears shear to be is well predicted defined with and FDNS-3DEL. centerline crossing particles region in the wall only wall elastically where start reflect there of is give solutions. this model static A Mach for number correction turbulence this simulation.

content assumes in for manner the not the of describing supercritlcal the flow changes. lump (or one lump remains particle) transfer in to this be being analyzed. such models arbitrarily not supplying vaporization spray do The realistically reason that describe such models supercritical J phenomena. than analysis should not to noted FDNS-3DEL model It at require the the like change of other turbulence mixing. FDNS-3DEL model is better An insufficient to determine indeed fix than number if the of Mach test cases have been number modified the turbulence for far- turbulence solution model field code is will this when problem. are with too the afterburning so much of combustion the cold reaction atmosphere was had not Actually. the at version the of FDNS-3DEL phase phase to is does the not treat (or mass particle particle gas continuous) a lumped model the the before the be the treated is with particle instant temperature of time constant the flow throughout through be removed particle computation the code of any during field. plume plume/atmosphere results with computed the glance. such that current from Also. the extended although k-_ problem The behaved used.e. This must potential be left any rate for plume future prediction resolution. of the injection heat of which vaporization are (Ref. LOX is could spread described with that region cloud code local supercritical modification. fuel if or However. FDNS-2DEL. only 16 . could be The easily does on energy treated supercritical because In heat fact. based 14).SECA-TR-92-06 and run far with plumes. ratio a without mixture one i. that the existence of afterburning apparent. • Liquid Injector Flowfields The transport phase. parameters should first rates mixed be adjust that look slow. is useful a droplet with the These for restrictions spray should describing of combustion. not have considered.

option and incorporated be analyzed FDNS-3DEL. of function performed. stated spray is simulation be general transfer constant two-phase. well For it is Recently. reactions were these been This finally flowfield all the particle calculated trajectories for each have analysis. turned The on. enough in 3this meaningful. evaluation (Ref. first. from and these conditions of the beginning in an motors the order the results rocket overall and reduction their should the optimum Such For a computation attendant broken step restart the motor into size analyzing recommended for that in within in flowfield to use be subregions for the has nozzle Mach been analysis. was feasible reliable early because not FDNS-3DEL completed Closure The slow more calculation Several of two-phase strategies ideal and reacting were gas tried flow the was of flows to was at make best this is a process. was for developing a hydrogen-oxygen the currently a However. simultaneously works time. property analysis property dimensional study. plumes.SECA-TR-92-06 work at all is of that the the oxygen heat lump of vaporization crudely at evaluated the at the heat An be of this a very a temperature capacity oxygen described constant nature strong was were not of spray approximates supercritical coaxial the oxygen high the llquid-like from by lump a pressures. The example. injector lump could to be of such eminating FDNS-3DEL and single with size was assuming A the lump density. computed. were process then the Initially. the temperature real-gas calculation state models accurate oxygen SECA used. flow treated procedure entire conditions. in of calculated. Currently. but the If mean demonstration lump density calculation would that equation would the engine more heat be the of considered. analysis 15). efficient. should computed 17 . not code made. range number region.

j 18 . of be then be near used be to calculate The the near between the and far to the computed• somewhere shock mixing version and break near chosen field between establishment essentially field.f SECA-TR-92-06 nozzle plume. the exit The and conditions far far of plume plume the should should should complex jet. ". initially flowfields The structure dominated FDNS-3DEL large balanced development predominately a parabolized structures predict is also large plume other recommended.

expedite the methods considered. procedure. appear such as to mechanics good working Euler-Lagrange order• structure cases.SECA-TR-92-06 \ i. CFD solutions Compare type . solution finite-rate The accurately CFD code (FDNS-3DEL) test case was developed the and CFD Tomahawk nozzle indicates simulates this flow. • Particle the mass transfer code. Secondary turbulent-mixing/shockstudy with more test interaction However. subregions the CFD carefully selected versions aids of which developing are two such parabolized computational should employed. Analyzing finite-rate utillzation analyses with large. CFD of should complex code all be is flowfields a time which with any two-phase. A two-phase. therefore such flowfields consuming would Analyzing and codes be process. • More test cases of the should be run to establish The be in the range of of the validity calculation calculation effects. l 19 . to not verify now these The to available. data are do is it require should be further noted many of that suitable complex best SPF-II one flow can experimental interactions currently analyses. vectorized. The effects inclusion are of not currently effects included would be in current these relatively simple.

91-1967. Heat Transfer AIAA Nashville Sulyma.S.G. June 1991. Gas/Particle to be presented 1964. Version II 4." 7th SSME CFD 1989. Meth. J. svmmD. April 8. R. Paper-91-0078." 1992. 8. Vol... June 1991. 3. Launder 91-1789. 13. Chen. Smith. AL. Science Shuen.D. B. Chen Chen and and R. "Numerical Fuel Preburner Flowfield CFD Method. January 1991..L. AL. 5. Farmer. pp. and R.S. Y. June of Nov.. Freeman. Dash. Inc.D. Volume I" Applications. Paper 1988. Huntsville. Y. and B. II. AIAA and P. Chen. Moylan. S. 707. J. Y." November. Rates MSFC. Farmer. Chen. SECA. R. AIAA Jan. February. i0. Jan. 1976. 4. Meeting. _. Report on NAS8-38961. SECA. 12.C.S.E. Y. Y. J.. Paper Intl. Wang.. 1990. 9.S. and Vol.February. Chen.J. R. ¥.M.S. D. July.B.. T. Farmer in Rocket Engine Combustion Cooled Nozzles. 3. in Solid June "Investigation Rocket Motors. J. 90-2494. 1989. Huntsville. Spalding. 1992.S. 14. 269-289.B.. Inc. 15. ApDli. Sanford. Vol.. B.C. Myruski:. Paper D." March 1991 Progress Report on NAS8-38472. 2O . 1991.S.C. and V. 1974. Hoglund. April AIAA 14. Vol. S. C. Anderson.. M.l.S.F. & Meeting. 2. p. "Heat Transfer Chambers and Regeneratively 1991 . Chen. CFD. AIAA 4th ¢omp. T.A.. AIAA 88-0417.C. et al. 6. 1991. 2. Yang. Plume Flowfield Code Report CR-RD-SS-90NJ. Wang AIAA AIAA and Paper Paper Y. "The JANNAF (SPF-II).SECA-TR-92-06 v Re ferences: 1.. "Model Development for Exhaust Plume Effects on Launch Stand Design. 89-0286. and P. July 1990.S. AIAA Standard Technical Princeton. Farmer. 7. Investigation of Transient SSME with a Pressure Based Reactive Working Group Carlson Henderson. 1992 Progress Inc.S.