Module Title: Fundamental Principles and Name: Hanna F.

Porras
Nozzle Theory
Date: May 15, 2020 Page No.: 1 of 2
Instructor: Engr. Carl Lawrence C. Famero, MEAM
Grade: Short Research

Cone Nozzle
Advantages:
➢ Some of the advantages of a conical nozzle are its simple cone shape for design, and it
contains no inflection as the propellants are expelled from the combustion chamber.
This lack of inflection means that the nozzle is a straight line coming out of the throat
to the exit.
➢ This lack of inflection is critical for solid and hybrid engines because these types of
engines usually have some pieces of solid propellant expelled all the way out of the
nozzle. Therefore, a conical nozzle is desired for solid and hybrid propellant types due
to the lack of inflection.
Disadvantages:
➢ One of the disadvantages of a conical nozzle is the fact that there is a significantly more
divergence loss at the exit. The propellant flow strives to be completely parallel to the
centerline of the nozzle as it exits. Since the exit angle of a conical nozzle is the same as
the cone angle, the flow exits at not parallel but rather at the cone angle. When there is
an angle at the exit the flow experiences a divergence loss which causes energy loss and
in turn a loss of nozzle efficiency.
➢ Another disadvantage is a conical nozzle contains more material and therefore mass than
a Bell nozzle of the same design. In general, for a design, the more massive the launch
vehicle is the more expensive it will be. These factors are all some of the downfalls when
using a conical nozzle design
Bell
Advantages:
➢ Some of the advantages of a Bell nozzle are that it reduces the divergence loss at the
exit, it is less massive, and in turn more efficient than a conical nozzle.
➢ Also, the bell nozzle is shorter and has less mass than the conical nozzle because it is
more compact. These characteristics make a Bell nozzle much more efficient than a
straight conical nozzle.
Module Title: Fundamental Principles and Name: Hanna F. Porras
Nozzle Theory
Date: May 15, 2020 Page No.: 2 of 2
Instructor: Engr. Carl Lawrence C. Famero, MEAM
Grade: Short Research

Disadvantages:
➢ The disadvantage to a Bell nozzle is it can only be applicable for liquid rocket engines.
This is because the solid propellants expel particles which would deteriorate a Bell
nozzle. When applied to a Bell nozzle shape these “chunks” of propellant are forced
into the walls of the nozzle and can cause significant deterioration.
➢ Bell nozzle was considered in early designs when a liquid propellant system was still
feasible. The final designs for our launch vehicles did not include any liquid engines,
and therefore the Bell nozzle was not used for the final design.
Annular
Advantages:
➢ Shortened nozzle length for the same performance, or increased performance
(higher expansion area rations) for a given length. The relatively stagnant region in
the center of the nozzle can possibly be used for installation of gas generators,
turbopumps, tanks, auxiliary equipment, and turbine gas discharges.
➢ A segmented combustion chamber design approach can be used, easing
development effort (individual segments can be built and tested during the early
phases) and improving combustion stability. And Improved performance at sea level
or low altitudes.
Disadvantages:
➢ Relatively high cooling requirements, because of higher heat fluxes and greater
surface areas to be cooled. And heavier structural construction in some applications.
➢ The aerospike is more complex and difficult to manufacture than the bell nozzle. It
is more costly than the other nozzles.