ESS-38-087

Pulse Detonation
Engines
Joshua Katzenberg
Cranfield University, Cranfield, Bedfordshire MK43 0AL, United Kingdom, j.katzenberg@cranfield.ac.uk

Abstract

Pulse Detonation Engines (PDEs) are an improvement on ‘pulsed jet’ engines, with the first PDE powered flight in 2008. Use
of the PDE has been minimal as gas turbines have dominated terrestrial applications and, conventional chemical rockets, non-
terrestrial. With the non-ceasing demand for reduced weight and fuel consumption for aerospace engines, coupled with the
advancement in computational tools, PDEs are undergoing a relatively quiet creep towards viability and commercial applica-
tion. The potential rewards are large if the technology is successful. PDEs offer non-continuous thrust with a high noise
rating, but their ability to produce near constant-volume combustion (via detonation rather than deflagration) offers higher
thermal efficiency, thrust and SFC improvements over existing technologies. The ability to traverse from Mach 0 to 5 with a
single engine is also highly sought after and offered by PDEs. PDEs can find applications on small and large scales, in a
package that is low-weight and low-complexity (to manufacture). Generally they are smaller than the same existing engines
of equal thrust or power. If the problems that plague such a design can be solved; noise, vibration, material fatigue and emis-
sions, they may become the next major step in aerospace propulsion.
Keywords: Pulse Detonation Engine; PDE; Detonation; Deflagration; Constant-Volume Combustion

Nomenclature combust the fuel-oxidizer mixture” (Panicker, 2008)[1].

PDE Pulse Detonation Engine
DDT Deflagration to Detonation Transition
τ Pulse Cycle Duration (sec)
ɣ Ratio of Specific Heats
SFC Specific Fuel Consumption
EPNdB Effective Perceived Noise Decibel
PDRE Pulse Detonation Rocket Engine
CFD Computational Fluid Dynamics
RDE Rotating Detonation Engine
1. History of Pulsed Propulsion
The idea of pulsed propulsion has existed since the late
1800’s. It was not until the German V-1 during WWII that
the potential of such an engine was realised in the form of a
‘pulse jet’, albeit not without downsides. They work by
using the high temperature generated by combustion,
coupled with the back/suction pressure just after a pulse to
draw air and fuel in and then either the ambient heat, or an
electrical source (such as a spark plug), to ignite the fuel.
The resulting pressure wave produces a thrust force,
propelling the engine. This happens many times per
second, creating pulses of non-continuous thrust. Valves
can be used to optimise the frequency but suffer from
mechanical wear and material problems.
Pulse Detonation Engines (PDE) expand on this concept
by making “use of detonation waves to compress and
Instead of using deflagration of the fuel/air mixture, using
supersonic compression the power output is increased
significantly by reducing the time that the same amount of
energy is released over. The study of detonation waves
continued after WWII, with the recognition of potential
with “any device that transforms internal energy into
kinetic energy in a gaseous medium” (Oppenheim,
1963)[2].
The advent of advanced gas turbines, specifically
turbofans, altered the nature of the direction of aerospace
propulsion. Quiet, efficient and reliable, they quickly
became the workhorse of civil aviation, with low-bypass
turbofans finding military roles. They have dominated
aerospace, found applications in military aerospace, marine
propulsion and power generation.
As such, interest waned until the 1980’s when “Boeing
engineer Thomas Bussing decided to give pulse detonation
another spin” (Lu, 2007)[3]. The renewed interest spurred
an increase, demonstrated by the number of patents being
filed (Fig. 1). There have been significant developments
with progress “noted in the research towards the
development of pulse detonation engines for air-breathing
and rocket applications” (Kailasanath, 2002)[4] in such
areas as “fuel atomization and mixing, detonation
initiation, inlets and nozzles, component and system
performance estimates” (Kailasanath, 2002)[4].
The advancements have seen prototype and test-bed
demonstrators from Pratt & Whitney and General Electric.

1
38th Engine Systems Symposium – March 2013
J. Katzenberg / Pulse Detonation Engines
However, the first flight of an aircraft powered with a PDE
was January 31, 2008[5].
Figure-1 - US PDE patents filed 1988-2006
Fig. 2 shows the demonstrator in action. The “goal was
to demonstrate that the engine could be made to run with
acceptable qualities and enough thrust to sustain flight,
and that noise levels would be tolerable” (Sweetman,
2008)[6] and development on various systems continues.
Figure-2 – First PDE flight, 2008[6]
2. PDE Basic Principle of Operation
The primary difference between a pulse jet and a PDE is
that the combustion process occurs with a detonation wave
and is therefore supersonic. The combustion of a fuel can
propagate in two ways; deflagration and detonation.
Deflagration is a subsonic process whereby the flame front
has a Mach number under one. This is the process in pulse
jets and gas turbine combustors and is relatively well-
studied and understood. Detonation is more complex as it
involves the interactions of a flame front and shock waves.
As such, it is a much faster process than deflagration, with
the result, that for a fixed unit of fuel i.e. available
chemical energy, by reducing the time over which it is
released, the power output increases significantly. This has
the potential to be transferred to increased efficiencies and
propulsive operating performance.
The operation of a PDE is usually a four-stroke process
(although three-stroke processes can be used). The stages
are as follows:
2.1. STAGE 1: Fuel/Air Mixing
Fuel and air are drawn into a constant volume chamber
via the drop in pressure caused by the previous pulse
detonation. The fuel/air ratio is controlled by a valve(s)
dependent on the operating conditions such as flight
2
ESS-38-087
velocity and design intake type. The valve(s) is then closed,
with the combustor exit remaining open throughout the
whole cycle
2.2. STAGE 2 – Ignition and Detonation
With the fuel/air within the control volume, an ignition
initiator (such as a spark plug) starts combustion. This
often begins as a deflagration process, but through the use
of geometry or Deflagration to Detonation Transition
(DDT) devices such as a ‘Shchelkin spiral’, the flame-front
is transitioned to supersonic. A PDE by definition requires
the transition of the flame from subsonic to supersonic, and
this has to occur within the engine length. DDT devices
work by restricting the flow of the combustion products,
effectively reducing the distance over which combustion
occurs and causing the flame front to accelerate past Mach
one. The process itself is not fully understood and requires
some educated guesses in order to create successful
designs. As the detonation wave moves through the air/fuel
mixture towards the combustion zone/chamber exit, the
pressure and temperature behind it rapidly increases.
However, at the closed-end, due to expansion processes,
the temperature and pressure begin to decrease.
2.3. STAGE 3 – Blow-Down
The detonation wave exits the chamber, resulting in a
pressure differential at the exit. As a result, rarefaction
waves propagate to the back/closed wall of the chamber.
These waves reflect off the closed wall and expel the
combusted air/fuel gas to exit the combustion chamber at
high velocity, typically supersonic. By passing these gasses
through devices such as nozzles and ejectors, the thrust
generated can be increased. Depending on the design of the
PDE, the following stage can occur immediately after this,
or the reduced pressure in the chamber following the gas
expulsion can cause a “series of compression and
rarefaction waves that are alternately created and reflected
and accelerate the burned gas towards the open end of the
chamber” (Coleman, 2001)[7]. This process can continue
until it decays to zero. Depending on PDE design and
operating frequency, this process can be accentuated or
reduced.
2.4. STAGE 4 – Purge
The combusted products are expelled and air is flushed
through the system. This is not always necessary, but has
two advantages. Firstly, it helps prevent “premature
ignition of the fresh propellant charge” (Coleman, 2001)[7]
and secondly, it helps to cool the chamber. As the
detonation chamber is subject to extremely high
temperatures, this helps prevent early mechanical failure,
usually on test-beds and demonstrators. For future designs,
active cooling may need to supplement the purge stage.
All four stages are shown in Fig. 3. It should be noted
that, for simplicity, (2) and (3) have been combined above.
As each pulse, or cycle, consists of these four stages, an
expression for cycle time can be concluded:
𝜏 = 𝑡𝑓 + 𝑡𝑐 + 𝑡𝑏 + 𝑡𝑝
Where, ‘τ’ is the cycle time period, ‘tf’ is the fuel/air
mixing, ‘tc’ is ignition and initial combustion, ‘tb’ is the
38th Engine Systems Symposium – March 2013 ESS-38-087
J. Katzenberg / Pulse Detonation Engines

blow-down stage and ‘tp’ is the purge. The lower the cycle 𝑇0
𝜂𝐵𝑟𝑎𝑦𝑡𝑜𝑛 = 1 −
time the more the output tends towards a ‘quasi- 𝑇1
continuous’ thrust state, and hence, a higher thrust engine.
Whereas the Humphrey cycle factors in ‘ɣ’ and the
change in temperature due to the constant volume
production:
1
𝑇2 𝛾
𝑇0 (𝑇1 ) − 1
𝜂𝐻𝑢𝑚𝑝ℎ𝑟𝑒𝑦 = 1−𝛾
𝑇1 𝑇2 − 1
𝑇
[ 1 ]

The difference between the two cycles is therefore:

1
𝑇 𝛾
( 2) − 1
𝑇1
𝛾
𝑇2
Figure-3 - PDE wave cycle [8] 𝑇 −1
[ 1 ]
A three-stage cycle is also possible. In a four-stage
cycle, the air/fuel filling and mixing stage and the purge The detonation combustion process will always result in
stage, make up a significant proportion of τ, during which, the above factor producing a value under one, which
next to no power/thrust is being generated. By combining therefore results in a higher efficiency for the Humphrey
the two processes the cycle time can be significantly cycle than Brayton. The Lenoir cycle, which represents the
reduced and hence operating frequency increases, which Humphrey cycle but with a lower compression ratio, can
has a direct impact on thrust. also be used to represent a PDE cycle (but is otherwise the
same). The work of the engine can be illustrated as below:
3. Thermodynamic Process of PDEs

The main advantage of using detonation to combust fuel

is that because it happens so rapidly it “closely
approximates a constant volume combustion process”
(Coleman, 2001)[7]. This has several advantages, best
illustrated graphically:

Figure-5 - p-v diagram for difference thermal cycles [7]

The area in the p-v diagram determines the work used

Figure-4 - T-S diagram for different thermal cycles [7]
The ideal Brayton cycle (Fig. 4) is the typical
thermodynamic cycle associated with engines that use
deflagration, such as gas turbines; it shows heat addition at
a constant pressure. The Humphrey cycle illustrates
detonation combustion as constant volume heat addition. It
can immediately be seen from Fig. 4 that detonation
combustion produces a higher output temperature with
lower entropy rise. As the efficiency of the Brayton cycle is
dependent on temperature change during either
compression or expansion, the following applies:
and available. It clearly shows that the Humphrey cycle,
with the increased pressure at constant specific volume,
provides a greater work output than the Brayton cycle.
Thus, a PDE provides a greater amount of work with a
higher temperature rise for the same amount of chemical
energy input (fuel). This is primary reason that
investigations into PDEs continue despite the material and
theoretical difficulties in testing and predicting detonation
combustion.
4. Advantages of PDEs
Since the introduction of gas turbines, no other engine
system has been able to replicate, or better, their

3
38th Engine Systems Symposium – March 2013
J. Katzenberg / Pulse Detonation Engines
performance, fuel efficiency or reliability on a significant
scale. Bypass ratios are increasing as SFC slowly drops.
Power and marine applications find considerable use and
versatility. However, this is all based on the deflagration of
fuel which is not as efficient as detonation. As fuel costs
are expected to increase, an engine based on a
fundamentally more efficient process could potentially
usurp the gas turbine’s dominance by providing more thrust
(Fig. 6) and simultaneously reducing SFC (Fig. 7).
Figure-6 - Thrust comparison of a turbofan and PDE [9]
Figure-7 - SFC comparison of a turbofan and PDE [9]
Benefits are already being seen in small-scale, high-
thrust engines; “The maximum thrust produced by the PDE
was over twice that produced with the same engine
geometry operating in continuous (Ramjet) mode.”
(McManus, 2001)[10] whilst “When operated at similar
thrust levels, thrust specific fuel consumption (TSFC) of the
PDE was approximately 0.40 Ib/hr/lb compared to 0.67
Ib/hr/lb for the Ramjet.” (McManus, 2001)[10].
The required fluid containment structures allow PDEs to
be made smaller and lighter, which directly translates to
reduced costs in manufacturing and maintenance. Reduced
weight would also reduce fuel usage on aircraft, saving
passengers and operators money.
The high specific impulse[1] provided can allow
operation over a large range of flight speeds. It is
anticipated that traversing from Mach 0 to 5 is possible
with a single engine via air-breathing PDEs. Currently this
requires either a gas turbine or rocket to propel a vehicle to
a speed where ram pressure compresses the intake air
enough to not require active compression
(RAMJETs/SCRAMJETs).
4
ESS-38-087
Figure-8 - Varying specific impulse of different engine types [1]
Various fuels can be used, but the most common ones
that have been tested are hydrocarbons and hydrogen. The
performance increase is significant and far outmatches
other propulsion methods in terms of specific impulse up to
Mach ~5.
The PDE, once realised, should also be cheaper to
manufacture and of reduced weight when compared to e.g.
gas turbines.
5. Disadvantages and Problems Still to be Solved
The reason that the first flight for a PDE only occurred
in 2008[6] is due to the complexity in controlling the flow
(and associated systems) in the detonation. It is not yet
fully understood and numerical models are slowly making
progress. The problems, viewed as the gas traverses, are as
follows:
5.1. Fuel System
Although most conventional fuels and hydrogen are
usable, the fuel system still has to be considered,
specifically the manner in which the fuel is delivered. The
fuel inlet system must withstand high temperatures and
pressures.
5.2. Inlet Design
External flows have been found to “heavily influence the
dynamics of the engine” (Panicker, 2008)[1]. The intake air
must be diffused efficiently, paying close attention to
potential shock wave formation as this can disrupt the
combustion process if shocks form around the valve(s). If,
in the diffusion process, the static pressure rises too much,
it can cause auto-ignition of the fuel, something that must
be avoided. Careful attention must be paid to the inlet
design in order to have a successful system. Furthermore,
as most test-bed PDEs have not yet flown, true
representations of the intake conditions in flight conditions
are unknown. As such, data in this area is lacking
somewhat.
5.3. Valve Design
A PDE can either be single or multi-chambered. Single
chamber valve engines have to rapidly open and close the
38th Engine Systems Symposium – March 2013
J. Katzenberg / Pulse Detonation Engines
flow of air (or oxidant) to the combustion chamber. This is
often performed mechanically and therefore has a high
wear rate, due to both cycle fatigue and creep caused by the
high temperatures experienced. They directly control the
pulse rate (frequency), and hence, thrust of the engine.
Gaining precise control of this process is both a mechanical
and aerodynamic challenge. As some engine designs move
towards quasi-continuous thrust via several chambers (Fig.
10), the complexity of the problem increases. The
chambers now have to be timed, and if done mechanically,
the weight of the system becomes a factor.
An efficient valve is complex and time-consuming to
design, and can be a major stumbling block when
designing a PDE, one that must be overcome to make the
PDE suitable for sustained operation.
5.4. Repeated Successful Detonations that are Consistent
Most deflagration combustion processes can transition
to a detonation within a constant area chamber if the
chamber length is long enough. However, this does not
constitute an efficient design and thus the detonation is
desired to occur in the shortest possible distance – hence
the use of DDT devices. The transition to detonation must
be consistent and predictable over a range of frequencies so
that a measure of on-demand control of the engine can be
provided. This is one of the biggest difficulties when
designing a PDE, one that will require much more research
and development before the PDE can be truly realised as an
alternative power or propulsion system.
5.5. Sustaining Detonations
Once the challenge of achieving successful detonations
has been reached, the engine must be able to sustain this
until all fuel has been combusted. Zones either rich or lean
of fuel can cause the detonation wave to become unstable
and even fail. This is as much a fuel/air(or oxidant) ratio
problem as it is a fuel system problem, where failure in
either of these aspects can negate the benefits of a PDE.
Existing research shows that “cell size is very sensitive to
fuel concentrations, being lowest at stoichiometric or
slightly fuel rich condition. If the cell size increases due to
change in the equivalence ratio away from unity and
eventually becomes larger than the tube diameter, the
detonation will fail.” (Panicker, 2008)[1]. Very careful
consideration must be paid to this factor for a successful
design, and it is a very challenging aspect of the design to
overcome.
5.6. Components and Internal Structures of the Engine
As mentioned, a PDE operates at high temperatures and
pressures. However, as a deflagration wave is significantly
slower than a detonation wave (often by several orders of
magnitude), although its average temperature is lower, the
greater residence time in contact with the internal engine
components actually causes more heat to be transferred to
the internal components/structures. This has immediate
wear problems, especially at the DDT device where the
transition occurs. The DDT device additionally experiences
extremely high pressures, to the point that at the position of
DDT the chamber a “large bulge” (Panicker, 2008)[1] is
sometimes witnessed after a test device is run.
5
ESS-38-087
Other components, specifically the combustion chamber
itself, the ignition system (such as spark plugs), valves and
joints suffer from similar problems. Due to the fundamental
nature of operation of a PDE, these problems are unlikely
to be eliminated, and instead, have to be mitigated by
heavy investment into durable material technologies.
5.7. Nozzle/Exit Design
The expulsion of the detonation wave generates thrust
and by using different nozzle types, such as straight or
convergent – both internally and externally, different exit
profiles can be seen:
Figure-9 - Shadowgraph showing different shock formations
based on internal exit geometry[11]
Other devices such as convergent-divergent nozzles or
ejectors, although relatively well studied, need additional
consideration due to the high temperatures, pressures and
presence of shock waves to become efficient, effective and
withstand the operating conditions.
5.8. Exhaust Products
At temperatures beyond approximately 1900K [12]
oxides of nitrogen (NOx) form. As engines using
deflagration i.e. gas turbines, have a lower combustion
temperature, they have the advantage here over PDEs. A
tough problem to solve as the advantages of PDEs come
from the high temperature in detonation.
5.9. Noise
Any engine entering service needs to comply with ever
more stringent regulations if it stands a chance of being
used at any big international airport. Shock waves by
definition are loud and further research is required to find a
way to mitigate and damp the noise else PDEs will have
little chance of competing in civil aviation markets,
especially as in the past 20 years, gas turbines have seen
their noise levels drop by 20-25 EPNdB, a “more than 100-
fold reduction” (Nalianda, 2013)[13]
5.10. Other
Integration with existing airframes, especially with the
high vibration levels, will pose several engineering
challenges. Sensors and control mechanisms must be
produced that can withstand the extreme operational
conditions in order to safely monitor the engine during
operation.
Should a successful engine be realised, it must be able to
be easily and quickly inspected and repaired – such as the
modular design of current turbofans. If the engine works
but maintenance is long and expensive, the PDE will lose
its economic advantage quickly and see its adoption rate
rapidly stagnate beyond specialist markets such as military
applications.
38th Engine Systems Symposium – March 2013
J. Katzenberg / Pulse Detonation Engines
6. Applications of PDEs
One of the primary uses of pulse detonation engines, as
previously discussed, is their use as propulsion devices. As
a pure propulsive device, at least two big engine
manufactures have investigated this potential:
Figure-10 - Pratt & Whitney PDE test firing [3]
Figure-11 - General Electric PDE test-rig [14]
Figures 10 and 11 are the type of PDE that can acceler-
ate from Mach 0 to 5. Multi-tube PDEs, coupled with
devices such as nozzles and ejectors, can fill in the zero-
thrust gap between exhaust stages of individual nozzles to
provide quasi-continuous thrust, helping them compete
with gas turbines.
As the heating process in a PDE is inherently more
efficient than the combustion chamber in a gas turbine, one
application proposal is to augment a turbofan with PDE
afterburners in the bypass flow – “the engine ideal
performance with a pulse detonation afterburner was
better than the same turbofan engine” (Mawid M. P.,
2002)[15]:
Figure-12 - Hybrid PDE/turbofan concept [15]
6
ESS-38-087
Further work on the geometry of such a hybrid design is
required as these can greatly affect the efficiency. Further
designs can completely replace the existing combustion
chamber in the gas turbine core of a turbofan:
Figure-13 - Hybrid PDE/turbofan [1]
As the detonation wave compresses the air, less work
will need to be done by the compressor, which translates to
a reduction in stages and engine length/weight.
The higher temperatures able to be reached with a
detonation over deflagration combustion process also have
potential applications in power generation via a combined
cycle, either to drive turbines directly or through heat
transfer to a fluid such as water. Patents such as ‘Scalable
Power Generation using a Pulsed Detonation Engine’ (Lu
F. W., 2008) [16] have already been filed.
Further small-scale use is the replacement of missile
rockets, or small turbojets, with PDEs. Generally reduced,
or comparable, weight for short-duration flights allows
munitions to be created with a higher velocity and
increased payload.
The high thrust-to-weight ratio, combined with low SFC
offered by small to medium sized PDEs has additional
military/rescue applications in small surveillance vehicles.
Although noise would be a problem for military vehicles,
having a semi-autonomous vehicle able to get on station
rapidly and then loiter with a high endurance capacity is
extremely appealing. The lower cost, both in manufacture
and maintenance would suit civil applications such as
search and rescue extremely well.
Another application is Pulse Detonation Rocket Engines
(PDREs):
Figure-14 - Pulse detonation rocket engine [17]
As with atmospherically operated PDEs, the existing
benefits of reduced weight and cost are present. However,
38th Engine Systems Symposium – March 2013 ESS-38-087
J. Katzenberg / Pulse Detonation Engines

the primary advantage of such an engine over a fully understood and whether it can achieve the same
conventional liquid rocket engine is that it negates the need aerospace propulsive benefits that the PDE offers is not yet
for a complicated turbopump – “an expensive part of certain.
conventional rocket engines” (NASA, 2003)[17]. The high
temperatures and pressures experienced due to the
detonation wave allow liquid fuel to be injected at far lower
pressures – estimated to be approximately ten times
lower[17]. Without having to design, develop and carry
large/heavy turbopumps the rocket would be able to
convert more of the energy it expends into altitude rather
than fighting gravity. This has a positive reinforcement
effect as less weight is required to be lifted, less fuel is
needed, which results in a further reduction in weight. One
yet unresolved problem, however, is how to ignite a
combination fuel in space. Once the first cycle has been
completed the process should be self-sustaining.
Overall, these are the immediate applications for PDEs,
ones that have either been realised in some capacity or ones
with active research on-going. As the technology matures,
further, yet unthought-of applications and uses for PDEs
could be found.

Figure-15 - RDE showing detonation wave-front [18]

7. Future Developments

Aside from the developments in the theoretical

understanding of detonations provided by ever increasing
computational resources and CFD models, major
development potentials are being seen in two areas.
7.1. Aerodynamic Valves
Currently being investigated by General Electric. They
provide an increased frequency that is approximately an
order of magnitude larger than can be achieved than with a
mechanical valve. This uses the shape of the chamber itself
to control aerodynamic forces and bypasses many of the
material and operation limits of mechanical valves. It can
“allow air in before detonation, but the pressure from
detonation will be high enough to prevent the second
charge of air and fuel from entering until the detonation
wave moves downstream.” (Kelly)[14]. This promises a
significant improvement over existing designs.
7.2. Rotating Detonation-Wave Engines
Not strictly a PDE as there is no ‘pulse’, but operates on
the principle of detonation and thus has the same
thermodynamic cycle benefits. It operates by injecting fuel
into a thin annular chamber just before the detonation wave
arrives, thus providing a continuous and sustained
combustion, albeit azimuthally, but with strong axial
vectors.
It reduces or eliminates several of the problems that
PDEs suffer from, such as high vibration and non-
continuous thrust. In initial studies, the RDE is said to offer
an “increase in performance for the RDE over the PDE of
about 33%” (Schwer, 2011)[18]. In addition they have been
demonstrated to “further increase the performance of air-
breathing propulsion devices above pulsed or intermittent
detonation-wave engines” (Schwer, 2011)[18]. This design
takes many of the advantages and hard-earned knowledge
of PDEs and implements it on a platform that can offer
continuous thrust without the same magnitude of
vibrations. However, the total performance envelope is not
8. A Concluding Note on the Viability of PDEs
Although PDEs have not yet been realised
commercially, extensive research suggests that they, or the
principle of detonation in combustion, could play a
significant and paradigm-shifting role in aerospace
propulsion (and potentially power generation). The current
dominant form of propulsion up to approximately Mach 3
is the gas turbine, either in turbojet, turbofan or turboprop
configurations. Beyond this RAMJETs and SCRAMJETs
are more viable, but these suffer from the fact that they are
not able to operate at speeds below ~3.5 and ~6
respectively and need an additional propulsion system to
reach speeds at which shock compression is high enough to
produce a net benefit. The PDE can bridge this gap and
traverse from Mach 0 all the way to 5 with a single engine.
No other air-breathing engine has this potential. PDEs can
even be integrated into existing engine designs, such as
turbofans, to produce a hybrid design that requires less
compression, has a higher thrust and lower SFC.
PDEs are less complex to manufacture, are lower weight
and hence cost less than gas turbines to manufacture and
operate. Maintenance should also benefit in terms of cost
and repair time.
If the problems, of which there are several that are
currently prohibiting the realisation of a commercial
engine; detonation design considerations, noise, emissions
and overall reliability, can be solved, the PDE has the
potential to revolutionise air transport and significantly
affect power generation capabilities.
Therefore, the benefits of such an engine system are
worth the continued effort in both time and resources that
are required to further understand this type of engine and it
is recommended that they continue.

7
38th Engine Systems Symposium – March 2013 ESS-38-087
J. Katzenberg / Pulse Detonation Engines

References

[1] Panicker, P. (2008). The Development and Testing of Pulsed

Detonation Engine Ground Demonstrators. Arlington:
University of Texas.
[2] Oppenheim, A. (1963). Significance of Detonation Study to
Propulsion Dynamics. Berkeley: University of California.
[3] Lu, F. (2007). Pulse Detonation Propulsion Systems
Introduction. Arlington: University of Texas.
[4] Kailasanath, K. (2002). Recent Developments in the
Research on Pulse Detonation Engines. Nevada: AIAA.
[5] Norris, G. (2008). Pulse Power: Pulse Detonation Engine-
powered Flight Demonstration Marks Milestone in Mojave.
Aviation Week & Space Technology, Vol. 168, No. 7, 2008,
pp. 60.
[6] Sweetman, B. (2008, May 20). Retrieved February 10,
2013, from Aviation Week:
http://www.aviationweek.com/Blogs.aspx?plckBlogId=Blog
%3a27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-
01329aef79a7&plckPostId=Blog%3a27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-
bd3a-01329aef79a7Post%3a4fc6099b-8047-4d20-9437-
619945118647
[7] Coleman, M. (2001). Overview of Pulse Detonation
Propulsion Technology. Maryland: Chemical Propulsion
Information Agency.
[8] APPP. (2013). Pulse Detonation Engine Technology
Project. Retrieved February 2013, from www.isset.org:
http://www.isset.org/nasa/nano/www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/
AERO/base/pdet.htm#TechnicalSummary
[9] Mawid, M. (2001). Application of Pulse Detonation
Combustion to Turbofan Engines. Journal of Engineering
for Gas Turbines and Power, 270-283.
[10] McManus, K. F. (2001). MEMS-Based Pulse Detonation for
Small-Scale Propulsion Applications. Niskayuna: AIAA.
[11] Glaser, A. (2010). Three Tube PDE Rig Shadowgraph.
Retrieved February 16, 2013, from GE Global Research:
http://ge.geglobalresearch.com/blog/three-tube-pde-rig-
shadowgraph/
[12] Singh, R. (2011). Gas Turbine Combustors - Volume 1.
Cranfield University.
[13] Nalianda, D. (2013). Propulsion Systems Performance and
Integration Notes - Exhaust Systems. Cranfield University.
[14] Kelly, J. After Combustion: Detonation!. Retrieved
February 15, 2013, from Popular Science:
http://www.popsci.com/military-aviation-
space/article/2003-08/after-combustion-detonation?single-
page-view=true
[15] Mawid, M. P. (2002). Turbofan Engine Thrust
Augmentation with Pulse Detonation Afterburners.
Indianapolis: AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion
Conference & Exhibit.
[16] Lu, F. Wilson, D. (2008). Scalable Power Generation using
a Pulsed Detonation Engine. US Patent No. 7,340,903 B2.
[17] NASA. (2003). Advanced Space Transportation Technology
Summary. Retrieved February 16, 2013, from NASA:
http://www.nasa.gov/centers/marshall/pdf/173616main_puls
e_detonate.pdf
[18] Schwer, D. K. (2011). Rotating Detonation-Wave Engines.
Laboratory for Computational Physics and Fluid Dynamics.