Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Introduction To Aerospike Engines
Introduction To Aerospike Engines
Introduction:
It was not long ago when the aerospike nozzle was unknown to all but a handful of
rocketry experts. Aside from a spate of research in the early 1970s, the concept of the
plug nozzle appeared to be nothing more than a footnote in aersopace history. Though
explored by the Germans as early as World War II for use in jet engines, it was not until
the unveiling of Lockheed Martin's winning X-33 concept that this type of engine has
received widespread attention.
In this site, we will first explore what a rocket nozzle is and compare the three major
families of nozzles used to date. Next, the theory underlying the aerospike family of
nozzles will be presented. In addition, the advantages and disadvantages of this form of
nozzle, in comparison with the traditional converging-diverging nozzle, will be
discussed. Finally, we will look at the effort to research, develop, and test aerospike
engines, especially those developed for NASA's X-33 launch vehicle.
Rocket Nozzles
Before we can understand what an aerospike nozzle is and how it works, we need to
establish some basic terminology and learn about the purpose of a rocket nozzle.
Purpose:
Simply put, the nozzle is the component of a rocket or air-breathing engine that
produces thrust. This is accomplished by converting the thermal energy of the hot
chamber gases into kinetic energy and directing that energy along the nozzle's axis, as
illustrated below.
Mathematically, the ultimate purpose of the nozzle is to expand the gases as efficiently
as possible so as to maximize the exit velocity (v exit). This process will maximize the
thrust (F) produced by the system since the two are directly related by the equation
where
F = thrust force
In theory, the only important parameter in rocket nozzle design is the expansion area
ratio (e), or the ratio of exit area (A exit) to throat area (A throat).
Fixing all other variables (primarily the chamber pressure), there exists only one such
ratio that optimizes overall system performance for a given altitude (or ambient
pressure). However, a rocket typically does not travel at only one altitude. Thus, an
engineer must be aware of the trajectory over which a rocket is to travel so that an
expansion ratio that maximizes performance over a range of ambient pressures can be
selected.
Nevertheless, other factors must also be considered that tend to alter the design from
this expansion ratio-based optimum. Some of the issues designers must deal with are
nozzle weight, length, manufacturability, cooling (heat transfer), and aerodynamic
characteristics.
Not all rocket nozzles are alike, and the shape selected usually depends on the
application. This section discusses the basic characteristics of the major classes of
nozzles used today.
Nozzle Comparisons:
To date three major types of nozzles, the cone, the bell or contoured, and the annular or
plug, have been employed. Each class satisfies the previously discussed design
criteria to varying degrees. Examples of these nozzle types can be seen below.
Size comparison of optimal cone, bell, and radial nozzles for a given set of conditions
[from Huzel and Huang, 1967]
Conical Nozzle:
The conical nozzle was used often in early rocket applications because of its simplicity
and ease of construction. The cone gets its name from the fact that the walls diverge at
a constant angle. A small angle produces greater thrust, because it maximizes the axial
component of exit velocity and produces a high specific impulse (a measure of rocket
efficiency). The penalty, however, is a longer and heavier nozzle that is more complex
to build. At the other extreme, size and weight are minimized by a large nozzle wall
angle. Unfortunately, large angles reduce performance at low altitude because the high
ambient pressure causes overexpansion and flow separation.
Bell Nozzle:
The bell, the most commonly used nozzle shape, offers significant advantages over the
conical nozzle, both in size and performance. Referring to the above figure, note that
the bell consists of two sections. Near the throat, the nozzle diverges at a relatively
large angle but the degree of diveregence tapers off further downstream. Near the
nozzle exit, the diveregence angle is very small. In this way, the bell is a compromise
between the two extremes of the conical nozzle since it minimizes weight while
maximizing performance. The most important design issue is to contour the nozzle to
avoid oblique shocks and maximize performance. However, we must remember that the
final bell shape will only be the optimum at one particular altitude.
Annular Nozzles:
Before describing the various forms of annular nozzles, it is useful to mention some key
differences in design parameters from the conical or bell nozzles. The expansion area
ratio for a traditional nozzle has already been discussed. When considering an annular
nozzle, the area of the centerbody (A plug) must also be taken into account.
Another parameter particular to this type of nozzle is the annular diameter ratio, D p / D t,
or the ratio of the centerbody diameter to that of the throat. The ratio is used as a
measure of the nozzle geometry for comparison with other plug nozzle shapes. Typical
values of this ratio appear in the above figure.
Annular Nozzles I
Having introduced the three principal families of nozzle shapes, we will now look more
closely at the two major subclasses of annular, or plug, nozzles.
Two major types of plug nozzles have been developed to date. They are distinguished
by the method in which they expand the exhaust, outward or inward. The radial out-flow
nozzle was the subject of much research in the late 1960s and early 1970s. Examples
of this type are the expansion-deflection (E-D), reverse-flow (R-F), and horizontal-flow
(H-F) nozzles shown in the figure below.
Size comparison of optimal cone, bell, and radial nozzles for a given set of conditions
[from Huzel and Huang, 1967]
The name of each of these nozzles indicates how it functions. The expansion-deflection
nozzle works much like a bell nozzle since the exhaust gases are forced into a
converging throat region of low area before expanding in a bell-shaped nozzle.
However, the flow is deflected by a plug, or centerbody, that forces the gases away
from the center of the nozzle. Thus, the E-D is a radial out-flow nozzle.
The reverse-flow nozzle gets its name because the fuel is injected from underneath, but
the exhaust gases are rotated 180 thereby reversing their direction. Similarly, the fuel
in the horizontal-flow nozzle is injected sideways, but the exhaust is rotated 90.
Judging by the amount of literature obtained on this subject, little work has been done
on the R-F and H-F nozzles, and they will not be considered further. The E-D, on the
other hand, has been one of the most studied forms of annular nozzles. While similar in
nature to the bell nozzle, the most notable difference is the addition of a centerbody. As
shown below, this "plug" may be located upstream of, downstream of, or in the throat,
with each location resulting in better performance for a given set of operating conditions.
Comparison of centerbody locations in Expansion-Deflection nozzles [from Conley et al,
1984]
The purpose of the centerbody is to force the flow to remain attached to, or to stick to,
the nozzle walls, as illustrated in the following figure.
Expansion-deflection nozzle flow behavior at low altitude [from Sutton, 1992]
This behavior is desirable at low altitudes because the atmospheric pressure is high and
may be greater than the pressure of the exhaust gases. When this occurs, the exhaust
is forced inward and no longer exerts force on the nozzle walls, so thrust is decreased
and the rocket becomes less efficient. The centerbody, however, increases the pressure
of the exhaust gases by squeezing the gases into a smaller area thereby virtually
eliminating any loss in thrust at low altitude.
Annular Nozzles II
Having introduced the three principal families of nozzle shapes and discussed the radial
out-flownozzle, we will now look more closely at the second class of annular nozzles.
The second major variety of annular nozzles is the radial in-flow type, exemplified by the
spike shown below.
Size comparison of optimal cone, bell, and radial nozzles for a given set of conditions
[from Huzel and Huang, 1967]
This type of nozzle, named for the prominent spike centerbody, is often described as a
bell turned inside out. However, the nozzle shown above is only one of many possible
spike configurations. Variations of this design, shown below, include
Note that each of the above spike nozzles features a curved, pointed spike, the most
ideal shape. This spike shape allows the exhaust gases to expand through an
isentropic, or constant entropy, process. In so doing, the nozzle efficiency is maximized
and no energy is lost because of turbulent mixing in the exhaust flow. While the
isentropic spike may be most efficient, it also tends to be prohibitively long and heavy.
However, theoretical studies have shown that replacing the curved shape by a much
shorter and easier to construct cone results in very little performance loss. The following
graph illustrates that the thrust decreases by less than 1% for cone half-angles up to
30. Furthermore, the graph gives an indication of how much the spike length can be
reduced by employing a cone-shaped spike.
Changes in nozzle performance and length due to replacement of the lower centerbody
[from Berman and Crimp, 1961]
Aerospike Nozzles:
Previously, we discussed methods of reducing the length of a spike nozzle centerbody by replacing the
ideal spike with a conical spike. While this method does indeed result in a much shorter nozzle length, we
can go even further by removing the pointed spike altogether and replacing it with a flat base. This
As any fluid dynamicist recognizes, the significant disadvantage of the "flat" plug is that a turbulent wake
forms aft of the base at high altitudes resulting in high base drag and reduced efficiency. However, this
problem can be greatly alleviated in an improved version of the truncated spike that introduces a "base
bleed," or secondary subsonic flow, into the region aft of the base.
Example of an aerospike nozzle with a subsonic, recirculating flow [from Hill and
Peterson, 1992]
The circulation of this secondary flow and its interaction with the engine exhaust creates an "aerodynamic
spike" that behaves much like the ideal, isentropic spike. In addition, the secondary flow re-circulates
upward pushing on the base to produce additional thrust. It is this artificial aerodynamic spike for which
Linear Aerospike:
All of the nozzles we have studied thus far have been annular, or circular when viewed from below. Still
another variation of the aerospike nozzle is not an annular nozzle at all. A second approach, pioneered by
the Rocketdyne company (now a division of Boeing) in the 1970s, places the combustion chambers in a
This approach results in a more versatile design allowing the use of lower-cost modular combustors.
Aerospike Aerodynamics
Thrust Characteristics:
The basic thrust characteristics of the aerospike nozzle can be better understood by referring to the
following figure.
Example of an aerospike nozzle with a subsonic, recirculating flow [from Hill and
Peterson, 1992]
The nozzle generates thrust in three ways. First, the thrusters in the toroidal chamber, located at the base
of the nozzle, generate thrust as the fuel is combusted and exhausted. We shall label this thrust
component F thruster, and we can compute this thrust using the equation
where
We previously discussed how nozzles generate thrust when the exhaust gases expand against the nozzle
walls. Although we used the bell nozzle to illustrate that discussion, the exhaust gases in a spike nozzle
expand against the spike centerbody rather than outer walls. Thus, the expansion of the exhaust gases
where
A centerbody = cross-sectional area of the centerbody moving along the nozzle axis
p centerbody = pressure of the exhaust gases on the centerbody moving along the nozzle axis
Finally, we mentioned that the aerospike nozzle is so named because an "aerodynamic spike" is created
through the addition of a secondary, circulating flow aft of the flat nozzle base. As the supersonic primary
flow, consisting of the high-pressure gases exhausted from the thrusters, expands downstream of the
base, the primary flow interacts with the subsonic, secondary flow causing it to circulate. This low-
pressure flow then re-circulates upward to exert an additional thrust force on the base.
where
Summing up these three thrust components yields the following relationship for the total thrust force (T)
Aerospike Flowfield:
The exact nature of the exhaust flowfield behind an aerospike nozzle is currently the subject of much
research. The most notable features of a typical aerospike nozzle flowfield are shown in more detail
below.
The primary exhaust can be seen expanding against the centerbody and then around the corner of the
base region. The interaction of this flow with the re-circulating base bleed creates an inner shear layer.
The outer boundary of the exhaust plume is free to expand to ambient pressure. Expansion waves can be
seen emanating from the thruster exit lip, and these waves reflect from the centerbody contour to the free
jet boundary. Compression waves are then reflected back and may merge to form the envelope shock
At low altitude (high ambient pressure), the free boundary remains close to the nozzle (see below)
causing the compression waves to reflect onto the centerbody and shear layer themselves. The waves
impacting the centerbody increase pressure on the surface, thereby increasing the centerbody
component of thrust. The waves impacting the shear layer, on the other hand, increase the circulation of
Shadowgraph flow visualization of an ideal isentropic spike at (a) low altitude and (b)
high altitude conditions [from Tomita et al, 1998]
As the vehicle ascends, the pressure decreases and the free boundary expands further and further away
away from the nozzle contour, as shown above. As it does so, the compression waves also move
downstream and eventually cease to impact on the centerbody. The pressure profile on the contour
becomes constant and no longer varies with ambient pressure. However, the secondary flow remains
under the influence of ambient pressure for a much longer period. Only at very high altitudes do the
compression waves impact downstream of the sonic line, at which point the base pressure becomes
constant. The primary exhaust is then said to have enclosed the wake.
Altitude Compensation
Altitude Compensation:
To begin our discussion of altitude compensation, we must first understand how a traditional bell nozzle
As discussed in the above figure, bell nozzles suffer from reduced efficiency at low and high altitude
because of the difference between the pressure of the exhaust gases and the ambient pressure of the
atmosphere. At low altitudes, the exhaust pressure is too low, and the higher atmospheric pressure
pushes the exhaust inward. This inequality causes the exhaust to become separated from the nozzle
walls reducing the amount of thrust generated. This condition is known as overexpansion. At high
altitude, the bell nozzle suffers from the reverse problem. Here, the exhaust pressure is much higher than
the ambient pressure causing the exhaust to continue to expand past the nozzle exit. Since the additional
expansion occurs outside of the nozzle, that expansion does not exert thrust on the nozzle, so that thrust
At the optimum altitude, for which the nozzle is tailored during the design process, the exit pressure
equals the ambient pressure. Note in the above figure that the exhaust plume becomes column shaped
indicating that the exhaust is perfectly expanded thereby maximizing efficiency and thrust. Thus, both
overexpansion and underexpansion reduce overall engine efficiency and thrust. If we could somehow
minimize the exit area at launch and increase it as the rocket ascends, we could optimize the nozzle for
each altitude and maximize the thrust. Such a nozzle, would markedly improve overall performance. An
ideal nozzle would be able to continually adjust its contour, area ratio, and length to maximize thrust at
each altitude (see the figure below), a concept known as altitude compensation.
Ideal nozzle that continually adjusts its geometry as altitude increases [from
Rocketdyne, 1999]
However, a bell nozzle that continually changes its geometry is clearly not practical, and the designer
must instead make a series of tradeoffs in selecting the area ratio of a nozzle. The following graph gives
The ideal nozzle, indicated by the thick solid line, represents the maximum performance possible. At low
altitudes, we want a small area ratio, meaning the exit area is small, to minimize overexpansion.
However, the graph shows that we will pay for this excellent performance at low altitude with
underexpansion at high altitude resulting in large thrust losses. The converse is true of a high area ratio--
high altitude performance is maximized at the expense of overexpansion and poor efficiency at low
altitude.
While altitude compensation is certainly desirable in any rocket application, this adaptive quality is a
virtual necessity in any Single Stage to Orbit (SSTO) vehicle, like the X-33. Some believe that a
reasonably sized payload simply cannot be carried from sea-level to orbit in a one-staged vehicle with
current engine technology. Numerous methods of incorporating altitude compensation have been tried.
Examples include extendible nozzles that "grow" through flight, "aspirated" nozzles in which ram air is
injected into the nozzle to fill the exit and keep flow attached, and a step along the nozzle wall that
However, many claim that the ultimate strength of the aerospike nozzle is its inherent altitude
This ideal behavior results from the fact that the outer plume boundary of the primary flow is acted upon
only by the ambient pressure of the atmosphere. Recall from our discussion of
aerospike thrust characteristics, high ambient pressure at low altitudes forces the exhaust inward
increasing the pressure on the "centerbody" and the centerbody component of thrust. In addition, the
base region is open to high ambient pressure resulting in a greater "base" thrust component. At design
pressure, the flow becomes column shaped, much like a bell nozzle, for maximum efficiency. When
operating at low ambient pressure (at high altitude or in a vacuum), the flow is constrained by
expansion/compression waves that direct the exhaust axially to maintain the thrust force on the
centerbody. At low pressures, however, the nozzle operates in a "closed wake" state. Since the base is
not subject to a high ambient pressure, there is no altitude compensation benefit, and the aerospike
behaves like a high area ratio bell nozzle. Thus, in theory at least, the aerospike nozzle meets or exceeds
Performance Losses
Performance Losses:
When we first introduced altitude compensation, we compared a theoretical aerospike nozzle with a bell
nozzle and an ideal nozzle. According to theory, the aerospike should meet or exceed the performance of
the bell at all altitudes, thanks to its inherent altitude compensation characteristics. However,
experimental data shows that these predictions are not necessarily true, for many potential sources of
The most important cause of these losses is the elimination of the full-length isentropic spike previously
discussed. The following graph indicates the loss in performance resulting from the replacement of a "full"
Even though the aerodynamic spike does behave similarly to an actual spike, performance will still be lost
due to oblique shock formation and the transition from an open to a closed wake. The effect of this
transition can be seen in the above figures in the sudden decrease in thrust efficiency at pressure ratios
around 20-30. Another important loss results from the replacement of an annular nozzle by a linear one.
In a linear engine, exhaust may flow to the side of the engine rather than along its axis, as illustrated in
the following figure. Other typical sources of performance loss are usually functions of individual designs,
such as the type of thrusters employed and their arrangement, but these are beyond the scope of this
discussion.
Many researchers working on the X-33 and similar projects in other countries are currently conducting a
great deal of research into methods of alleviating these performance losses. The most important of these,
already mentioned several times, is the introduction of a secondary flow aft of the nozzle base, or a base
bleed. The pivotal question surrounding the secondary flow is how great it should be. Research has
shown that too small a bleed has no impact on performance while too large a bleed can have a
Some experimental results are provided above comparing the full spike, aerospike without base bleed,
and aerospike with minimum base bleed (0.3% of the primary flow) and maximum base bleed (2.4%).
Beyond a bleed of about 3%, performance begins to suffer because the base flow actually re-circulates
too quickly. As indicated in the above figure, the maximum bleed results in far better performance,
matching the full spike over a very large range of operating pressures.
The same study also looked at the use of endplates, or sidewalls, along the aerospike, as illustrated
below. Two types of sidewalls were evaluated, one extending well into the base flow region and another
Smaller nozzle: The truncated spike can be far smaller than a typical bell nozzle for the same
performance, as shown below. In addition, a spike can give greater performance for a given
length.
Size comparison of a bell and a plug nozzle [from Berman and Crimp, 1961]
Superior performance: Altitude compensation may result in greater installed performance.
Less risk of failure: The aerospike engine uses a simple gas generator cycle with a lower
chamber pressure than typical rocket engines reducing the risk of a catastrophic explosion.
Although low chamber pressures result in reduced performance, the aerospike's high expansion
ratio makes up for this deficiency.
Lower vehicle drag: The aerospike nozzle fills the base portion of the vehicle thereby reducing a
type of drag called base drag.
Thrust vectoring: Because the combustion chambers can be controlled individually, the vehicle
can be maneuvered using differential thrust vectoring. This eliminates the need for the heavy
gimbals and actuators used to vary the direction of traditional nozzles.
Cooling: The central spike experiences far greater heat fluxes than does a bell nozzle. This
problem can be addressed by truncating the spike to reduce the exposed area and by passing
cold cryogenically-cooled fuel through the spike. The secondary flow also helps to cool the
centerbody.
Manufacturing: The aerospike is more complex and difficult to manufacture than the bell nozzle.
As a result, it is more costly.
Flight experience: No aerospike engine has ever flown in a rocket application. As a result, little
flight design experience has been gained.
Development
Though the concept of the aerospike nozzle has been around for many years, little actual flight or test
experience has been available until recently. Nonetheless, we will take a brief look at the effort to develop
Early Development:
The first serious studies of spike nozzles were performed in Germany in conjunction with the
development of the turbojet engine. Engines, like those used on the Messerschmitt Me 262 shown below,
utilized a plug centerbody to vary the throat area for better performance.
View of the spike centerbody used in the engine nozzle on the Me 262
of aerospike engines during the 1950s, 1960s, and 1970s. The development effort, conducted by the
NASA Lewis Research Center (now known as NASA Glenn) in Cleveland, OH, and by Rocketdyne's
Nevada test facility, tested aerospike engines ranging in size from subscale cold-flow models to a full-
scale 250,000 lb thrust engine. These tests included 73 ground tests of full-sized engines totaling over
launch vehicle called Neptune. The propulsion arrangement for this concept consisted of a "toroidal plug
nozzle" that behaved much like an aerospike with primary and secondary flows.
Current Development:
The early NASA and Rocketdyne research efforts have led to the development of the XRS-2200 linear
aerospike engine that was to be used on the X-33 test vehicle. Four of these engines, subscale versions
of those planned for the VentureStar vehicle, were built. Two were installed on the X-33 while the other
two were being used in ground tests at the NASA Stennis Space Center in Mississippi. Each engine
employed 20 combustion chambers, ten aligned on the end of each ramp centerbody, to produce 206,400
lb of thrust at sea level. The full-sized RS-2200 engine intended for the VentureStar was to have 14
combustion chambers (7 per side) to produce 431,000 lb of thrust. The maximum specific impulse of
these engines is estimated at 455 seconds. The first two test engines began test-stand testing at NASA
Stennis in September 1999. The test program called for 41 firings: 6 initial firings to develop ignition
sequencing, 8 to analyze engine performance at different power levels, 11 firings of two separate flight-
No rocket plug nozzle of any type is believed to have actually flown until the Linear Aerospike SR-71
Experiment (LASRE) began at the NASA Dryden Flight Research Center in 1997.
Flight test of the LASRE aerospike engine mounted on the SR-71
Mounting a 10% scale half-model on the back of an SR-71 Blackbird high-speed research aircraft, NASA
engineers used the flights to measure the net thrust, plume expansion, plume aerodynamics, and other
parameters of the engine. Tests were to be performed from Mach 0.6 at 15,000 ft to Mach 3.2 at 80,000
aerospike engine did successfully complete a number of test firings, as illustrated below.
In addition to the US test program, basic research on aerospike engines has also been undertaken in
Germany, France, and Japan in recent years. The Japanese research, in particular, is quite interesting as
it is intended to support the H-2A rocket and a single-stage-to-orbit (SSTO) vehicle called the HOPE-X.
Unfortunately, Japan's sagging economy has caused significant cutbacks in the nation's space program
and little more than concept studies and some basic experimental performance results have been
Summary
In 1996, NASA committed itself to the development of a revolutionary new launch vehicle, the X-33. To be
successful, this vehicle would require significant advances in rocketry technology, not the least of which
are the linear aerospike engines. As we have seen, the strength of this type of engine is its ability to
adjust to varying operating conditions resulting in improved off-design performance as compared with
traditional converging-diverging nozzles like the bell. While the advantages of this nozzle have been
recognized since the 1950s, it has never been utilized in rockets because of the lack of flight-test data
and the perceived high risk of using an untried design. Hopefully, this deficiency will soon be rectified
With NASA's decision to cancel the X-33 after its contract with Lockheed Martin expired in March 2001,
the future of not only the aerospike engine, but of the entire single-stage-to-orbit concept remains unclear.
However, even if the X-33 never flies, the research conducted by NASA and the Rocketdyne division of
Boeing to develop aerospike engines of sufficient performance and reliability to be used on an actual
2. Angelino, Gianfranco. Approximate Method for Plug Nozzle Design, AIAA Journal, vol. 2,
no. 10, October 1964, pp. 1834-1835.
3. Anselmo, Joseph C. NASA Nears X-33 Pick, Aviation Week & Space Technology, June
17, 1996, pp. 29-30.
4. Asker, James R. NASA, Industry Hit Snags on X-33, Aviation Week & Space
Technology, June 30, 1997, pp. 27-28.
5. Berman, K. and Crimp, F.W., Jr. Performance of Plug-Type Rocket Exhaust Nozzles, ARS
Journal, January 1961, pp. 18-23.
6. Carroll, B. F. and Dutton, J. C. Transonic Flow in the Throat Region of Radial or Nearly
Radial Supersonic Nozzles, AIAA Journal, vol. 23, no. 7, July 1985, pp. 1127-1129.
8. Dornheim. Michael A. SR-71 to Test Aerospike Rocket for X-33 Proposal, Aviation Week
& Space Technology, March 11, 1996, pp. 69.
9. Dornheim, Michael A. Follow-on Plan Key to X-33 Win, Aviation Week & Space
Technology, July 8, 1996, pp. 20-22.
10. Dutton, J. C. and Addy, A. L. Transonic Flow in the Throat Region of Annular Supersonic
Nozzles,AIAA Journal, vol. 20, no. 9, September 1982, pp. 1236-1243.
11. Fick, M and Schmucker, R. H. Linear Aerospike Performance Evaluation, AIAA Paper 97-
3305, 1997.
12. Flinn, Edward D. Aerospike Engine Powers RLV Savings, Aerospace America, vol. 34,
no. 11, November 1996, pp. 18-19.
13. Freeman, Delma C. Jr., Talay, Theodore A., and Austin, Robert Eugene Single-Stage-to-
Orbit--Meeting the Challenge, Acta Astronautica, vol. 38, no. 4-8, 1996, pp. 323-331.
14. Hall, Charles R. and Mueller, Thomas J. Exploratory Analysis of Nonuniform Plug Nozzle
Flowfields,Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets, vol. 9, no. 5, May 1972, pp. 337-342.
15. Hill, Philip G. and Peterson, Carl R. Mechanics and Thermodynamics of Propulsion.
Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing, 1992, pp. 538-540.
16. Hopkins, D. F. and Hill, D. E. Transonic Flow in Unconventional Nozzles, AIAA Journal,
vol. 6, no. 5, May 1968, pp. 838-842.
17. Humphreys, Robert P., Thompson, H. Doyle, and Hoffmann, Joe D. Design of Maximum
Thrust Plug Nozzles for Fixed Inlet Geometry, AIAA Journal, vol. 9, no. 8, August 1971,
pp. 1581-1587.
18. Huzel, Dieter K. and Huang, David H. Design of Liquid Propellant Rocket Engines.
Washington DC: NASA Science and Technical Information Office, 1967, pp. 89-95.
19. Korte, J. J., Salas, A. O., Dunn, H. J., Alexandrov, N. M., Follett, W. W., Orient, G. E., and
Hadid, A. H. Multidisciplinary Approach to Aerospike Nozzle Design, NASA TM-110326,
February 1997.
20. Kumakawa, A., Onodera, T., Yoshida, M., Atsumi, M., and Igarashi, I. A Study of
Aerospike-Nozzle Engines, AIAA Paper 98-3526, 1998.
22. Migdal, David. Supersonic Annular Nozzles, Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets, vol. 9,
no. 1, January 1972, pp. 3-6.
23. Mueller, Thomas J. and Hall, Charles R. Jr. Separated Flow Region within a Planar
Expansion-Deflection Nozzle, Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets, vol. 5, no. 6, June
1968, pp. 738-740.
24. Mueller, Thomas J. and Sule, Wayne P. Condensation and Probe Interference Effects on
Planar Expansion-Deflection Nozzle Experiments, Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets,
vol. 6, no. 7, July 1969, pp. 857-859.