r

w w w . p o s t e r s e s s i o n o m

Nozzle Erosion in Long Burn Duration Rockets
Pavan Narsai, Brian Cantwell
Department of Aeronautcs & Astronautics, Stanfrord University

Evans, B. (2008). Nozzle Erosion Characterization in a NonMetallized Solid Propellant Rocket Motor Simulator. Internation Journal of Energetic Materials
and Chemical Propulsion , 90.
Coy, E. S. (2010). Film Cooling of Liquid Hydrocarbon Engines for Operationally-Responsive Space Access. Edwards AFB, CA: Air Force Reserach Laboratory (AFMC).
Sutton, G. B. (2010). Rocket Propulsion Elements. Hoboken, New Jersey, USA: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Thakre, P. A. (2009). Chemical Erosion of Refractory-Metal Nozzle Inserts in Solid-Propellant Rocket Motors. Journal of Propulsion and Power , 25 (1).

A major obstacle ahead of the use of long-burning rocket motors for
upper stage systems is the nozzle erosion problem. Nozzle throat
regression can lead to large performance losses due to reduced
expansion ratios and possibly reduced efficiencies. Although the nozzle
erosion problem has been extensively studied for liquid engines and
solid rocket motors, relatively little work has been done for hybrid
rockets.
Introduction
Nozzle erosion is a problem that has been relatively untouched for
hybrid rockets. Regression rates for common materials are not readily
available for hybrid rocket systems, and only simple mitigating
techniques have been explored to reduce erosion. However, these
simple solutions may not be satisfactory for long burning systems, which
can experience significant erosion.
Purpose
Nozzles are simple devices that convert thermal energy of gas into
kinetic energy. Nozzle performance is characterized by thrust generation
from high pressure fluids. Parameters include the expansion area ratio,
A
e
/A
T
, chamber to ambient pressure ratio P
T
/P
a
, exit to ambient pressure
ratio P
e
/P
a
and the ratio of specific heats !.

The throat sections of nozzles typically regress significantly, causing a
reduction of the expansion area during burn. Furthermore, a
significantly larger throat area can cause losses in c* efficiencies.
Nozzle erosion can be attributed to three different phenomena:
Erosion due to ablation and heat transfer
Erosion due to particle collisions
Erosion due to surface oxidation

Nozzle Performance and Erosion
One method of modeling the regression of the throat section is treating
it as a hybrid system. The regression rate is then related to a
regression rate coefficient and a propellant flux term.





For simplicity, the regression rate coefficient is assumed to be constant.
The differential equation can then be integrated.


This model predicts increasing throat regression rates as chamber
pressure is increased. It also predicts large losses in expansion area
ratio for long burn times.
Modelling Nozzle Erosion
Nozzle erosion issues for hybrid rockets needs to be further studied.
Currently, most nozzle protection schemes mimic those of seen in solid
rocket motors. However, the hot gases flowing through the nozzle are
more similar to those found in liquid rocket systems, which typically
employ more complex cooling schemes. Some possible nozzle
protection schemes can include:
Mimicking film cooling by careful placement of fuel grain ahead of
nozzle throat.
Nozzle cooling by using the pressurant fluid that is usually already
present in hybrid systems to maintain oxidizer tank pressure, an inert
gas, or the oxidizer.
To fully understand nozzle erosion in hybrid systems, regression rates
for common materials need to be measured, along with the testing and
modeling of various nozzle cooling and protecting schemes.
Future Work
Bibliography
Financial support for this research is provided by the Department of
Aeronautics & Astronautics at Stanford University.

Acknowledgments
For further information, please contact Pavan Narsai.
Email: pnarsai@stanford.edu

Further Information


T = ! mu
e
+ (P
e
! P
a
)A
e
C
F
=
T
A
T
P
T
=
! mu
e
A
T
P
T
+
P
e
P
T
!
P
a
P
T
"
#
$
%
&
'
A
e
A
T
C
F
=
2(
( !1
"
#
$
%
&
'
2
( +1
"
#
$
%
&
'
( +1
( !1
1!
P
e
P
T
"
#
$
%
&
'
( !1
(
)
*
+
+
+
,
-
.
.
.
/
0
1
2
1
3
4
1
5
1
1
2
+
P
e
P
T
!
P
a
P
T
"
#
$
%
&
'
A
e
A
T

! r
n
= a
n
O
F
!
"
#
$
%
&
G
n
m
G
n
=
! m
p
A
N

D
n
2m
dD
n
=
2
2m+1
!
m
a
n
! m
p
m
dt
Techniques for minimizing nozzle erosion fall into three classes: Liquid
Engines, Solid Rocket Motors, and Hybrid Rocket Motors.
Liquid Rocket Engines
Film cooling
Nozzle cooling through liquid fuel and oxidizer
Solid Rocket Motors
Additives used to reduce oxidizing species
Hybrid Rocket Motors
Additives can be used to reduce oxidizing species, as well as reduce
the optimal oxidizer to fuel mass (O/F) ratio.
At Stanford, zirconium oxide coating of nozzle surfaces has been
used to protect nozzles during short burns.
Minimizing Nozzle Erosion
Above: Simulations for nozzle erosion
vs. chamber pressure with a 3600 second
burn time. An conservative regression
rate constant is used.

Below: Thrust coefficient curves for
various pressure and area ratios. Note
the maximum point of each curve
represents perfect expansion, where exit
pressure matches ambient pressure.









Note: Regression rates listed are typical for solid rocket systems.

1yplcal 8egresslon 8aLes of MaLerlals
!"#$%&"'
)*+&,"' -$.%$//&01
-"#$ 2&13/$,4
5066$1#/
A1! Modern
CraphlLe
.004-.006 8rlule
yrolyuc CraphlLe .001-.002
3u Carbon-Carbon .0003-.001 Lxpenslve
Carbon CloLh
henollc
.003-.010
Slllca CloLh henollc .010-.020
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
1 10 100 1000
T
h
r
u
s
t
C
o
e
f
f
ic
ie
n
t
, C
F

Expansion Area Ratio (AE /AT )
Thrust Coefficient vs. Expansion Area Ratio at Various Pressure Ratios
Pt/Pa = 5
Pt/Pa = 10
Pt/Pa = 20
Pt/Pa = 50
Pt/Pa = 100
Pt/Pa = 200
Pt/Pa = 500
Pt/Pa = 1000
Pt/Pa = 2000
Pt/Pa = 5000