PHASE II FINAL REVIEW

11-07-2013

DESIGN AND ANALYSIS OF MIXER EJECTOR SYSTEM FOR OPTIMIZED THRUST PERFORMANCE
GUIDED BY, Mr. J.BRUCE RALPHIN ROSE, Asst. Prof, Dept of Aeronautical Engg, Regional Center of Anna University , Tirunelveli Regional -627007.

PRESENTED BY, A.BHARATHITHASAN, Reg No:950011404004, II Year M.E AERONAUTICAL, Regional Center of Anna University , Tirunelveli Regional -627007.

In this proposed work. . One effective way to reduce noise is to decrease the intensity of the turbulent mixing of the jet exhaust with the surrounding air by decreasing the exhaust jet velocity. Mixer ejector are used for verifying the nozzle thrust output by creating different effects.OBJECTIVE A mixer ejector nozzle system performance is based on length of the nozzle .amount of noise reduction and thrust loss. The thrust increase is are result of ejector inlet suction forces generated by the secondary flow accelerating around the inlet contour.

PROBLEM IDENTIFIED  Noise reduction during take off and landing  Increase in thrust  Accelerating the mass flow rate .

The thrust 1996 calculations also indicated amplitude and increase nozzle parameter.LITERATURE SURVEY SL. Gilinsky concept is proposed for REDUCING JET NOISE jet noise reduction with minimal thrust loss or even thrust Augmentation. G. M. M.N TITLE O 1 AUTHOR INFERENCE YEAR SUPERSONIC NOZZLE T. . 2 NOZZLE THRUST J. candidate means to Patersont reduce jet noise of commercial supersonic 1992 aircraft during takeoff and landing. W. Seiner &  Nozzle design OPTIMIZATION WHILE M. Tillman* Ejectors are a MIXER EJECTOR and R.

and jet interference with aircraft structure 4 NUMERICAL S. Jet mixing aerodynamics is vital to several areas of commercial and military aircraft design. AERODYNAMICS USING Abdol-Hamid THE THREEDIMENSIONAL NAVIERSTOKES CODE PAB3D .SL.N TITLE O 3 AUTHOR INFERENCE YEAR HIGH REYNOLDS SJohn NUMBER ANALYSIS OF Carlson FLAT PLATE AND SEPARATED AFTERBODY FLOW USING NON-LINEAR TURBULENCE MODEL R Subsonic flat plate boundary-layer flow parameters such as normalized velocity 1996 distributions. local and average skin friction. Paul Pao& SIMULATION OF JET Khaled S. such as jet propulsion 1997 efficiency. aero acoustics. propulsion integration. and shape factor.

6 Computational Investigation of Counterflow Vectoring C.N TITLE O 5 AUTHOR INFERENCE YEAR Experimental.Hunter and A computational study Fluidic K. the entire over expanded range of nozzle performance would be within 10% of the peak thrust efficiency. which was divided into two distinct flow regions. .SL.Deere of fluidic counter flow Thrust thrust vectoring has 1999 been conducted.A. Craig and Computational Hunter Investigation of Separated Nozzle Flows A. Results indicate that 1998 with controlled separation.A. Over expanded nozzle flow was dominated by shock induced boundary layer separation. Theoretical.

MIXER/EJECTOR Hunter SYSTEMS Thrust performance predictions.Presz Jr candidate means to mix A SUPERSONIC MIXER out the high-velocity. Presz.M. and thrust augmentation capability 2002 of mixer Ejector system.N TITLE O 7 AUTHOR INFERENCE YEAR THRUST T.G. EJECTOR mixer ejectors can provide rapid mixing of 1999 a supersonic jet for acoustic benefits all while increasing aircraft system static thrust 8 THRUST W. Jr..SL.Tillman & Mixer ejectors are a CHARACTERISTICS OF W. G. AUGMENTATION WITH Reynolds & C. .

METHODOLOGY  CATIA  ANSYS .

ejector wall pressure distribution. thrust augmentation and noise suppression characteristics of four simple. .  The ejector is produced the maximum pumping (secondary (induced) flow normalized by the primary flow) also exhibited the lowest wall pressures in the inlet region. multi-element. and the maximum thrust augmentation.CHARACTERISTICS OF MIXER EJECTOR NOZZLE  The performance of such mixer–ejectors is important in aircraft engine applications for noise suppression and thrust augmentation. jet mixer–ejector configurations is presented.  The four configurations included the effect of ejector area ratio (AR=ejector cross-sectional area/total primary nozzle area) and the effect of non-parallel ejector walls.  Information on the mixing. pumping.

2D-Mixer Ejector model .

Pressure. Temperature) .NOZZLE DESIGN  DESIGNING NOZZLE BY USING CATIA  DESIGNING MIXER/EJECTOR MODEL  OPERATING CONDITION (Mach Number.

NOZZLE DIMENSION .

MIXER/EJECTOR MODEL BY CATIA RECTANGULAR SHAPE C-SHAPE TRIANGULAR SHAPE .

.

which consists of 41032 nodes and 206645 elements. The parameter geometry finite model of mixer in shown above.NOZZLE MESH MODEL Tetra hetra elements can be used to mesh any volumes. .

MESHING OF MIXER EJECTOR MODEL TRI ANGULAR SHAPE C-SHAPE .

BOUNDARY CONDITION S.NO PARAMETER VALUE 1 2 3 4 Vp Vs Ts Tp 32 m/s 17 m/s 350 K 500 k .

VELOCITY VARIATION From the above fig shows that at the C-Shape mixer ejector nozzle .Ts =300 k .the was 9.Vs=17 m/s Tp = 500k.Vs=17 m/s Tp = 500k.the was 8.05e+01 at vp = 32m/s.63e+01 at vp = 32m/s.Ts =300 k From the above fig shows that at the rectangualr mixer ejector nozzle.

63e+01 at vp = 32m/s.Ts =300 k .Vs=17 m/s Tp = 500k.the was 8.VELOCITY VARIATION From the fig shows that at the triangular mixer ejector .

5 2 1.2 0.5 2 1.4 0.2 0.5 0 0 0.THRUST AUGUMENTATION VS MASS FLOW RATE 3 2.3 0.6 0.5 1 0.5 0.3 0.1 0.4 0.7 ms/mp Fig(a)RECTANGULAR 4 2 0 0 -2 1 2 3 Fig(b)TRIANGULAR 4 5 Fig ( c )C-SHAPE ɸ -4 -6 -8 -10 ms vs mp .1 0.5 0 0 0.7 ms/mp ɸ ɸ 3 2.5 1 0.5 0.6 0.

5 2 1.8 1 1.8 1 2.6 va vs vp 0.5 ɸ 2 1.8 Fig ( e ) TRIANGULAR 1 1.2 0 0.5 ɸ ɸ 1 0.6 0.6 va vs vp 0.2 0.2 fig (f) RECTANGULAR .2 0.5 3 2.5 1 0.4 0.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 3 2.5 0 0 0.2 0.THRUST AUGUMENTATION VS VELOCITY 3.4 va vs vp 0.5 0 0 0.4 0.5 0 fig (d)C-SHAPE 3.

m 10 12 14 16 Fig (g )C-SHAPE 100 90 80 Fig (h)RECTANGUALR 70 velocity.m 10 15 120 100 velocity.m/s 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 0 2 4 6 8 distance.m/s 80 60 40 20 0 0 2 4 6 8 distance.m/s 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 0 5 distance.DISTANCE VS VELOCITY 100 90 80 70 velocity.m 10 12 14 16 Fig (i) TRIANGULAR .

DISCUSSION  Figure (a) to (c )presents ejector thrust augmentation versus pumping.rectangular shape and triangular shape. Va/Vp). Ejector thrust gains are seen to be a maximum at static operation.rectangular and triangular. and thus results in lower ejector system thrust. An ideal augmenter thrust curve is also presented for comparison purposes. . Graph is plotted various shape of mixer ejector . and to decrease asymptotically to zero as the ejector forward velocity approaches the primary flow velocity. As the airplane flight speed increases.c -shape and triangular. The velocity changed by the various shape of mixer ejector nozzle .they are C-shape . Graph was plotted thrust augmentation versus various mass flow rate at various shape of the mixer ejector . the ingested secondary flow momentum increases.  Figure (d) to (f) Thrust augmentation is as a function of the ratio of airplane speed to the primary jet velocity (i.like this rectangular . These results predict that an ejector always increases the static thrust of a nozzle.  Fig (g) – (i) presents various velocity versus nozzle length distance.like this c shape .e. This secondary flow momentum has to be subtracted from the thrust generated by the ejector.

The same inlet contour also directs the secondary flow into the ejector for low loss mixing. Then found out thrust was increased in exit area.CONCLUSION  The mixer/ejector nozzle is designed and nozzle will be optimized with varying parameters and analyzed.  The design of the ejector shroud inlet is critical to the performance of a mixer/ejector system. the secondary flow accelerates less around the inlet lip resulting in lower lip suction forces. As the airplane speed increases.  Properly designed mixer/ejectors can increase engine bypass ratio while generating an increase in static thrust. .  The thrust increase is are result of ejector inlet suction forces generated by the secondary flow accelerating around the inlet contour. This loss in thrust is a result of inlet ram drag.  Compared the various type of mixer ejector shape with various velocity.  Mixer/ejector exhaust systems provide a simple means of reducing the jet noise on older aircraft. and therefore lower thrust augmentation.

.. 1966. and Reynolds.. 91-2243. G. Reynolds. Presz. 86-1614. June. Presz. 15th AIAA Aeroacoustical Conference. Forced Mixer Lobes in Ejector Designs. 1991. Mixer/Ejector Noise Suppressors. Paper No. and McMormick. Morin B.. March... 1993. William H.REFERENCE 1. Compound Compressible Nozzle Flow. AIAA 27th Joint Propulsion Conference. 5. A. Paper No. and Presz. and Gousy.884. W. W. 3. October. Thrust Characteristics of a Supersonic Mixer Ejector. ASME Paper 66-GT-l 16. January 1994. W. 1986. Presz. Bernstein. Tillman. W. Heiser. Thrust Augmentation Using Mixer / Ejector / Diffuser Systems. 94-0020. R. AIAA 22nd Joint Propulsion Conference.. United States Patent 5. 93-4345.. 1966. and Hevenor. C.. AIAA 2nd Propulsion Joint Specialist Conference. W. Paper No.Aerospace Science Meeting. ALMEC Suppressor. . 2. Paper No. G. 4. 66-663.. Thrust Augmentation. 1999 7... G. D. AIAA 32. June.472. W. June. Paper No. Presz. 6. Heiser. Alternating Lobed Mixer/Ejector Concept Suppressor.

June 1999. NASA TP-3596. .8.. Experimental. July 1998. AIAA 98-3107. and Abdol-Hamid. Hunter.A. and Computational Investigation of Separated Nozzle Flows.. Theoretical. 9.A.A. AIAA 99-2669.S. C. K. Preparing a journal to publish in “journal of mechanical science “. C.. Computational Simulation of Fluidic Counterflow Thrust Vectoring. Presented a technical paper on “Design and analysis of Mixer Ejector nozzle for a optimized thrust performance” at National level conference on emerging Trends in Mechanical Engineering on 12th april 2013. and Deere. Numerical Simulation of Jet Aerodynamics Using a Three Dimensional Navier Stokes Method (PAB3D). Hunter. Pao.P. S. September 1996. 10. K..

THANK YOU .

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful