Acta Astronautica 69 (2011) 485498

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Acta Astronautica
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/actaastro

Numerical study of liquid propellants combustion for

space applications
R. Amri a,n, T. Rezoug b
a
b

Centre of Space Techniques (CNTS), Po Box 13, 31200 Arzew, Algeria

Aeronautics Laboratory, University of Blida, Po Box 270, Road of Soumaa, Blida, Algeria

a r t i c l e i n f o

abstract

Article history:
Received 9 December 2010
Received in revised form
7 April 2011
Accepted 4 May 2011
Available online 26 May 2011

The present study focuses on the combustion of liquid propellants used in engines for
space propulsion applications (satellites and launch vehicles). The combustion of the
following propellant combinations was studied: hydrogen/oxygen, hydrocarbon fuel/
oxygen, hydrocarbon fuel/hydrogen peroxide, hydrazine/nitrogen tetroxide, Monomethyl hydrazine/nitrogen tetroxide and Unsymmetrical dimethyl hydrazine/nitrogen
tetroxide. The purpose of this paper is to determine the combustion ame temperature
and the other thermochemical parameters (combustion products politropic parameter
and molecular mass) as function of mixture ratio by mass of oxidizer to fuel (O/F).
Furthermore, the vacuum specic impulse was also calculated at assumed pressure
conditions of propulsion engines to show the effect of mixture ratio of the propellants
on the performances. For the determination of the equilibrium composition at assumed
temperature, nonlinear systems of equations were solved numerically using Liebersteins method. Some results were presented and compared with previous research in
this area, the comparison shows good agreement between the results and the difference
is less than 5%. As example, three cases of bi-propellant engines were studied using the
programs of combustion and frozen uid ow approximation: Space Shuttle Main
Engine (SSME), Zenit second stage engine (RD-120) and Ariane-5 upper stage engine
(Aestus).
& 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords:
Combustion
Liquid propellant
Thermochemical parameters
Flame temperature
Specic impulse

1. Introduction
Liquid-propellant rocket engines have been used as the
primary propulsion systems in most launch vehicles and
spacecraft since the initial conquest of space [4]. In the
beginning of military application of rockets raised additional operational requirements for propellant selection to
be considered:

 Safe long-term storability at ambient conditions without

propellant boil-off.

 Easy and reliable ignition, preferably hypergolic.

n

Corresponding author.
E-mail address: amri_redha@yahoo.co.uk (R. Amri).

0094-5765/$ - see front matter & 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.actaastro.2011.05.008

In order to satisfy these requirements storable hypergolic

propellants like MMH/N2O4 and UDMH/N2O4 were selected
for new launchers and upper stages (Kosmos, Proton, Tsyklon,
Titan 24 and Ariane 14). As examples of bi-propellant
engines, Viking engine of the rst and second stages of the
Ariane 4 launcher and its liquid strap-on boosters (NTO/
UDMH), the upper stage Aestus engine (NTO/MMH) for the
Ariane 5 launcher, different kinds of orbit and attitude control
engines operating in the low-thrust regime below 500 N. The
initial concept for the Space Shuttle reaction control system
used gaseous oxygen with gaseous hydrogen as propellants,
this was then changed to storable propellants MMH/N2O4,
mainly for lower landing weight and volume, and lower
development costs. A liquid oxygen/hydrocarbon was considered the next best option in system studies. In contrast, high
performance launch vehicles require liquid oxygen/liquid

486

R. Amri, T. Rezoug / Acta Astronautica 69 (2011) 485498

Nomenclature
Ae
Cn
Cp
D
De
E
F
f
DHr0
Isp
Kp
Lv
M
mn
md
mfuel
moxidizer
npi
nt
Nu
P0
Pa

nozzle exit area (m2)

exhaust velocity (m/s)
heat capacity at constant pressure (kJ/kg K)
droplet diameter (m)
exit diameter (m)
nozzle expansion ratio
thrust (N)
nonlinear equation
energy of chemical reaction under a standard
condition (kJ)
specic impulse (s)
equilibrium constant
latent heat of vaporization (J/kg)
molar mass (kg/kmol)
mass ow rate (kg/s)
droplet mass (kg)
fuel mass (kg)
oxidizer mass (kg)
number of moles of the product (i) (mol)
total number of moles (mol)
Nusselts number
combustion pressure (bar)
ambient pressure (bar)

hydrogen for the highest specic impulse possible which is

used for Space Shuttle Main Engine (SSME), Centaur, Saturn 5,
Ariane 4 upper stage and Ariane 5 core. In particular, reusable
vehicle concepts use cryogenic propellants for highest performance. Due to new cost considerations and ecological awareness Green propellants become fashionable nowadays [4,5].
The terms Green propellants or Non-toxic propellants are
used for a variety of hydrocarbon fuels and oxidizers like liquid
oxygen/H2O2. Many engines using non-toxic propellants have
been developed already, mainly liquid oxygen/RP-1 (RD-120
engine used in the Zenit second stage launch vehicle). For this
reason, the thermochemical study on these liquid propellants
is necessary to dene its performance and give us the required
informations for the design of propulsion engines. The current
paper aims to provide an analysis on the combustion of these
popular liquid propellants.
2. Analysis method
In this section we introduce an approach to determine
the thermochemical parameters of combustion for the
most popular liquid propellant combinations. The study is
based on the determination of combustion chamber temperature (Tc), politropic parameter (g) and the molecular
mass (M) of the combustion gases as a function of the
proportions of injected liquid propellant oxidizer to fuel
ratio (moxidizer/mfuel). The main idea in the study is to solve
two basic thermochemical problems:

 Given the combustion chamber conditions (pressure

(P0), temperature (T0)) at assumed temperature, we
determine the chemical reaction products,

Pe
Pr
Pref
Prg
R
Rd
Sc
T
T0
Tc
Td
Tg
Ui
Vi
Xi
x

a
g
mg
rg
lg
Gg

exit pressure (bar)

pressure ratio
reference pressure (bar)
Prandtls number
universal gas constant (J/kmol K)
Reynolds number
Schmidts number
temperature (K)
initial temperature (K)
combustion chamber temperature (K)
droplet temperature (K)
gas temperature (K)
gas velocity (m/s)
droplet velocity (m/s)
position (m)
number of moles of H2O2, it denes the
concentration
by
mass
of
hydrogen
peroxide (mol)
number of moles of H2O (mol)
stoichiometric coefcient
specic heat ratio
gas viscosity (Pa s)
gas density (kg/m3)
gas thermal conductivity (W/m K)
binary diffusion coefcient (m2/s)

 Given the chemical reaction products, we determine the

ame temperature which veries the energy equation,
then we determine all the other thermochemical parameters of the combustion.
The liquid propellants combinations studied and its
initial temperature (T0) are shown in Table 1.
2.1. Combustion products and ame temperature
The following
considered:

six

(06)

chemical

reactions

were

 Liquid hydrogen (H2) and liquid oxygen (O2)

2aH2 O2-np1H2Onp2O2 np3OH np4H2
np5O np6H

(1)

 Hydrocarbon fuel (CnHm) and Oxygen (O2)

aCnHm O2-np1CO2 np2H2Onp3O2 np4CO np5OH
np6H2 np7Onp8H

(2)

 Hydrocarbon fuel (CnHm) and hydrogen peroxide (H2O2)

aCnHm (xH2O2 yH2O)-np1CO2 np2H2O np3O2
np4CO np5OH np6H2 np7Onp8H

(3)

where x and y are the number of moles of H2O2 and H2O,

respectively, and they dene the concentration by mass of
hydrogen peroxide.

R. Amri, T. Rezoug / Acta Astronautica 69 (2011) 485498

487

Table 1
Liquid propellants initial temperatures.

Fuel
Oxidizer
T0(fuel) (K)
T0(oxidizer) (K)

Reaction 1

Reaction 2

Reaction 3

Reaction 4

Reaction 5

Reaction 6

LH2
LOX
20
90

Hydrocarbon
LOX
298
90

Hydrocarbon
H2O2
298
298

N2H4
N2O4
298
298

MMH
N2O4
298
298

UDMH
N2O4
298
298

 Hydrazine (N2H4) and nitrogen tetroxide (N2O4)

(Kp) are calculated by Gordon and McBride expressions:

2aN2H4 N2O4-np1H2Onp2O2 npN2 np4NO

np5OH np6H2 np7Onp8H np9N

(4)

Cp
a1 a2 T a3 T 2 a4 T 3 a5 T 4
R

14

H
a2
a3
a4
a5
a6
a1 T T 2 T 3 T 4
RT
2
3
4
5
T

15

S
a3
a4
a5
a1 LnT a2 T T 2 T 3 T 4 a7
R
2
3
4

16

 Mono-methyl hydrazine (MMH) and nitrogen tetroxide

(N2O4)
4aCH3NHNH2 5N2O4-np1CO2 np2H2Onp3O2
np4N2 np5NOnp6COnp7OH np8H2 np9O
np10H np11N
(5)

 Unsymmetrical dimethyl hydrazine (UDMH) and nitrogen tetroxide (N2O4)

The coefcients a1a7 were used over two different

temperature ranges:

a(CH3)2NNH2 2N2O4-np1CO2 np2H2Onp3O2

a 300 r T o 1000;

np4N2 np5NOnp6COnp7OH np8H2 np9O

np10H np11N
(6)

a: Stoichiometric coefcient.
The concept of chemical equilibrium plays an important
role in rocket chemistry. Chemical equilibrium allows us to
predict the chemical species, which are present as products
when using reactants at a given set of conditions. In the
present work the following equilibrium equations were
considered,
2CO222COO2

(7)

2H2O22OH H2

(8)

2H2O22H2 O2

(9)

and

b 1000 r T r 6000:

The equilibrium constants (Kp1Kp7) of the equilibrium

reactions (7)(13) were calculated by:


DG
17
Kpi exp 
RT
Where DG Gproducts Greactants and G HTS, G is Gibbs
free energy.
The products of combustion after dissociation are: CO2,
H2O, O2, N2, NO, CO, OH, H2, O, H, and N.
The total number of moles (nt) of the reactions is:
X
npi
18
nt
i

H222H

(10)

The number of moles of the products and the total

number of moles are unknown, to solve the problems we
use the equations governing the mass conservation of the
elements (C, O, H, and N) and the equilibrium equations
such as the unknown (npi) of any chemical reaction can be
dened mathematically.
For hydrogen and oxygen combination:

O222O

(11)

 Using the chemical reaction (1), the conservation of

mass equations for (H) and (O) are the following:

N222N

(12)

N2 O222NO

(13)

The equilibrium constants of these reactions are, respectively: Kp1, Kp2, Kp3, Kp4, Kp5, Kp6 and Kp7. The thermodynamic
parameters: heat capacities of gases (Cp), enthalpies (H),
entropies (S) and the equilibrium constants (Kp) are determined by Gordon and McBride method at different temperatures. The thermodynamic parameters: heat capacities of gases
(Cp), enthalpies (H), entropies (S) and the equilibrium constants

H : 4a 2np1 np3 2np4 np6 -2np1 np3

2np4 np6 4a 0

19

O : 2 np1 2np2 np3 np5 -np1 2np2

np3 np5 2 0

20

 The total number of moles (nt) of the reactions (1) is

nt np1 np2 np3 np4 np5 np6 -np1 np2 np3
np4 np5 np6 nt 0

21

488

R. Amri, T. Rezoug / Acta Astronautica 69 (2011) 485498

 Using the denition of equilibrium constant (Kp) [1] for

the reactions (8)(11):
Reaction 8 : Kp2

n2p3 np4 Pr
n2p1 nt

-n2p3 np4 Pr Kp2 n2p1 nt 0

22

Reaction 9 : Kp3

n2p4 np2 Pr
n2p1 nt

-n2p4 np2 Pr Kp3 n2p1 nt 0

23

Reaction 10 : Kp4
Reaction 11 : Kp5

n2p6 Pr
np4 nt
n2p5 Pr
np2 nt

-n2p6 Pr Kp4 np4 nt 0

24

-n2p5 Pr Kp5 np2 nt 0

25

Combustion of (N2H4/N2O4)
8
2np1 np5 2np6 np8 8a 0
>
>
>
> n 2n 2n n n n 4 0
>
p5
p7
p1
p2
p3
p4
>
>
>
>
>
2np3 np4 np9 4a2 0
>
>
>
> n2 K n n 0
>
>
p7 p3 p2
>
> p4
>
>
2
2
>
< np5 np6 Pr Kp2 np1 nt 0
n2p6 np2 Pr Kp3 n2p1 nt 0
>
>
>
>
>
> n2p7 Pr Kp5 np2 nt 0
>
>
>
>
> n2 P K n n 0
>
p4 p6 t
>
p8 r
>
>
>
>
>
n2p9 Pr Kp6 np3 nt 0
>
>
>
: n n n n n n n n n n 0
t
p5
p7
p1
p2
p3
p4
p6
p8
p9
29
Combustion of (MMH/N2O4)

Eqs. (19)(25) constitute a nonlinear system of Eqs. (26) for

hydrogen/oxygen combination. Similarly, the systems
(27)(31) were obtained for the other propellant
combinations.
Combustion of (H2/O2)
8
2np1 np3 2np4 np6 4a 0
>
>
>
>
>
n 2np2 np3 np5 2 0
>
>
> p1
>
>
n2p3 np4 Pr Kp2 n2p1 nt 0
>
>
>
<
n2p4 np2 Pr Kp3 n2p1 nt 0
>
>
>
n2p5 Pr Kp5 np2 nt 0
>
>
>
>
> n2 P K n n 0
>
>
p4 p4 t
p6 r
>
>
>
: np1 np2 np3 np4 np5 np6 nt 0

26

8
np1 np6 4a 0
>
>
>
>
>
2np2 np7 2np8 np10 24a 0
>
>
>
>
>
2n
>
p1 np2 2np3 np5 np6 np7 np9 20 0
>
>
>
>
2np4 np5 np11 8a10 0
>
>
>
>
>
>
n2p5 Kp7 np4 np3 0
>
>
>
>
2
2
>
>
< np6 np3 Pr Kp1 np1 nt 0
2
2
n
P
K
n
n
p2 p2 nt 0
> p7 p8 r
>
>
>
2
2
>
n
P
K
n
n
>
p3 p2 nt 0
p8 p3 r
>
>
>
>
2
>
P
K
n
n
n
>
p5 p3 t 0
p9 r
>
>
>
> 2
>
P
K
n
>
p4 np8 nt 0
>
> p10 r
>
>
2
>
np11 Pr Kp6 np4 nt 0
>
>
>
>
: np1 np2 np3 np4 np5 np6 np7 np8 np9 np10 np11 nt 0

30
Combustion of (UDMH/N2O4)
8
np1 np6 2a 0
>
>
>
>
>
2np2 np7 2np8 np10 8a 0
>
>
>
>
>
2np1 np2 2np3 np5 np6 np7 np9 8 0
>
>
>
>
>
2np4 np5 np11 2a4 0
>
>
>
>
>
>
n2 Kp7 np4 np3 0
>
> p5
>
>
2
2
>
>
< np6 np3 Pr Kp1 np1 nt 0

Combustion of (CnHm/O2)
8
np1 np4 na 0
>
>
>
>
>
2np2 np5 2np6 np8 ma 0
>
>
>
>
>
2np1 np2 2np3 np4 np5 np7 2 0
>
>
>
> n2 n P K n2 n 0
>
>
p1 p1 t
p4 p3 r
>
>
< 2
np5 np6 Pr Kp2 n2p2 nt 0
>
>
>
n2p6 np3 Pr Kp3 n2p2 nt 0
>
>
>
> 2
>
>
n Pr Kp5 np3 nt 0
>
>
> p7
>
>
>
n2p8 Pr Kp4 np6 nt 0
>
>
>
: n n n n n n n n n 0
t
p5
p7
p1
p2
p3
p4
p6
p8

27

n2p7 np8 Pr Kp2 n2p2 nt 0

>
>
>
>
>
> n2p8 np3 Pr Kp3 n2p2 nt 0
>
>
>
>
>
> n2p9 Pr Kp5 np3 nt 0
>
>
>
> 2
>
np10 Pr Kp4 np8 nt 0
>
>
>
>
> 2
>
np11 Pr Kp6 np4 nt 0
>
>
>
>
: np1 np2 np3 np4 np5 np6 np7 np8 np9 np10 np11 nt 0

31
Combustion of (CnHm/H2O2)
8
np1 np4 na 0
>
>
>
>
>
2np2 np5 2np6 np8 ma2x2y 0
>
>
>
>
>
2np1 np2 2np3 np4 np5 np7 np8 2xy 0
>
>
>
> n2 n P K n2 n 0
>
>
p1 p1 t
p4 p3 r
>
>
< 2
np5 np6 Pr Kp2 n2p2 nt 0
>
>
>
n2p6 np3 Pr Kp3 n2p2 nt 0
>
>
>
> 2
>
>
n Pr Kp5 np3 nt 0
>
>
> p7
>
>
>
n2 P Kp4 np6 nt 0
>
> p8 r
>
: n n n n n n n n n 0
t
p5
p7
p1
p2
p3
p4
p6
p8

28

where Pr is the ratio of the combustion pressure by the

reference pressure (P0/Pref), Pref 1.013 bar.
The method used for the determination of combustion
products and ame temperature based on the bisection and
Liebersteins numerical methods, the inputs of calculation
are the reactants temperature, combustion pressure and
mixture ratio by mass (mass oxidizer/mass fuel). Using the
bisection method, we suppose a large temperature range
[1000,6000], where the ame temperature is inside the
selected range. Then, we subdivide the interval until
obtaining the ame temperature which veries the energy
equation with a good precision. The general energy

R. Amri, T. Rezoug / Acta Astronautica 69 (2011) 485498

From the Eq. (36) we get:

equation of the chemical reactions is written by:

Z T0
Z T0
X
X
DHr0 npi,reactants
Cpi dT
npi,products
Cpi dT
298

ek 

298

is the energy difference between the reactants

where
and products under standard conditions (kJ).
We should note that at each iteration the calculation of
the equilibrium composition of the combustion is needed
at any temperature. To perform that, it is necessary to solve
the previous nonlinear system of equations. Liebersteins
numerical method was used to solve the problem [7].
Liebersteins method
Mathematically, considering the nonlinear system of
equations representing the chemical combustion of the
previous propellants, they can be written in the form:
8
f1 x1 ,x2 ,x3 ,. . .,xn 0
>
>
>
>
>
f2 x1 ,x2 ,x3 ,. . .,xn 0
>
>
>
>
>
>
< f3 x1 ,x2 ,x3 ,. . .,xn 0
...
33
>
>
> fi x1 ,x2 ,x3 ,. . .,xn 0
>
>
>
>
>
...
>
>
>
:
fn x1 ,x2 ,x3 ,. . .,xn 0
where the vector X (x1, x2, x3, . . ., xn)T correspond to molar
numbers of the products and (f1, f2, . . . fn) correspond to the
functions related the molar numbers.
!
!
System (33) is in the form: F x 0
(k)
Considering X , the kth approached solution at the
iteration k. So, we can write the vector solution as:
X

k k
k T
xk
1 ,x2 ,x2 ,. . .,xn ,

The solution at the iteration (k1) is: X(k 1) X(k) e(k)

or, in the following form:
2 k
3
x1 ek1
6 k
7
6 x2 ek2 7
6
7
6 ... 7
6
7
X k 1 6 k
34
7
6 xi eki 7
6
7
6 ... 7
4
5
xkn ekn

For the ith equation and the kth iteration, we have the
following function:
fixk1 ek1 ,xk2 ek2 ,. . .,xkn ekn 0

35

If we suppose that the function (f) and its rst derivatives are known and the second derivatives are limited. By
application of development in Taylor series of the 2nd
order of this function at xk, we nd:
!
2
@f xk
ek @2 f xk

. . .
36
f xk 1 f xk ek
2
@xk
@xk2
The second order is limited, that means it exist (xa):
(xk rxa rxk 1), and then:
@2 f xa
-0
@xk2

37

f xk
yek 2
@f xk =@xk

38

At the iteration (k 1), we obtain Newtons process:

32

DHr0

489

xk 1 xk 

f xk
@f xk =@xk

39

For many variables [7]:

8
1 k
fi xk1 1 ,xk2 1 ,. . .,xki1
,xi ,. . .,xkn
>
>
k1
k
>
x

x
w
>
k

1
k

1
k

i
i
>
@fi x1 ,x2 ,...,xi1 1 ,xki ,...,xkn
<
>
>
i 1,2,. . .,N
>
>
>
:
0 o wr 2

@xki

40

2.2. Molecular mass and politropic parameter

After determination of the ame temperature and
number of moles of the products, the molecular mass (M)
and politropic parameter (g) of the combustion products
can be calculated by the following equations:
P
i npi Mi
41
M P
i npi
Cp

P
i npi Cpi
P
i npi

Cp
Cp R

42

43

where R is the universal gas constant (8314.41 J/kmol K)

The mixture ratio by mass is calculated from the
reactants of the chemical reactions as follows:


moxidiser =mfuel

molecular weight of oxidizernumber of moles of oxidizer

molecular weight of fuelnumber of moles of fuel

44
2.3. Performance of propulsion engines
As an important parameter to estimate the performance of
the propulsion engine, the specic impulse is referred to the
thrust produced by the engine per unit weight ow rate, so
our interest in this part is to determine the specic impulse as
function of mixture ratio. A computer program was performed
to compute the performance of thrusters and propulsion
engines, the program based on the frozen ow approach
[2,3,8], the equilibrium chemical reaction is assumed to occur
very slowly, the products of combustion do not change in
chemical composition while traversing the nozzle, so the
thermochemical parameters (Tc, M, g) do not change through
the thruster or engine. The following simplifying assumptions
are made:







Isentropic ow.
Flow is in one dimension.
Products of combustion constitute a perfect gas.
Flow is frozen.
Flow is steady.

490

R. Amri, T. Rezoug / Acta Astronautica 69 (2011) 485498

The thrust (F) and specic impulse (Isp) equations are:

"

F At P0 g

2
g1

 g1=g !#1=2
g 1=g1
2
Pe
1
Pe Ae Pa Ae
g1
P0



45

Isp

F
m g0

Sherwoods (Sh) number are calculated using:

td
Prg

46
Sc

rd D2
18mg

48

mg Cpg

49

lg

mg
rg Gg

50

where g0 is the acceleration of gravity (g0 9.807 m/s2); Pe

is the nozzle exit pressure (Pa); Pa is the ambient pressure
(Pa); Ae is the nozzle exit area (m2); and mn is the mass ow
rate (kg/s).

Nu 2 0:552Rd Prg

2.4. Effects of propellants injection

where mg, rg, lg, and Gg are, respectively, the gas viscosity,
density, conductivity and binary diffusion coefcient. D is the
droplet diameter, Rd is the Reynolds number calculated by:

Usually, the combustion efciency is strongly inuenced

by the injector design. A good injector design gives good
engine performance, because it produces small droplets
which atomize, vaporize, and mix rapidly and therefore,
reduce the size, the mass of the combustion chamber and
increase the combustion efciency. The vaporization process
of the propellant is different if one of the propellants is a gas.
For Example, this occurs in the combustion of liquid hydrocarbon with gaseous oxygen, where the evaporation of liquid
oxygen is much faster than hydrocarbon producing two
phases mixture. The same thing for liquid oxygen with
gaseous hydrogen propellant in thrust chambers or precombustion chambers, where liquid hydrogen absorbs heat from
cooling jackets of the engine and gasies.
Many mathematical models for the evaporation of
liquid fuel droplets in a gas were developed and evaluated
by experimental data [1013]. In our study, we follow the
approaches proposed in [12].
Consider the case of two-phase ow in which the
dispersed phase is in the form of discrete single component
spherical liquid droplets with density much larger than
that of the surrounding ambient gas, and momentum
exchange with the carrier gas is assumed to be only a
function of the drag force. Furthermore, the thermal energy
exchange between phases is assumed to occur only
through convective heat transfer, and the internal droplet
vertical ow is neglected. Under these conditions, the
generic Lagrangians equations describing the transient
position (Xi), droplet velocity (Vi), droplet temperature
(Td) and mass (md) of a single droplet are:
8
dXi
>
Vi
>
> dt 
>

>
>
dVi
>
> dt ft1d Ui Vi  g0
<
 
 Lv  1 dm
47
dTd
2Nu y1
>
f3P
>
td Tg Td Cpl md dt
dt
rg
>
>
 
>
>
>
> dm  Sh md Hm
:
dt

3Sc

1=2 1=3

1=2

Sh 2 0:552Rd Sc1=3

Rd

rg 9Ui Vi 9D
mg

51
52

53

The calculations of the parameters (f1, f2 and Hm) were

presented in [12]. For application in our study, two models
were selected:
Equilibrium model (Mass analogy-Ia model)
Hm Bm,eq

54

Non-equilibrium model (LangmuirKnudsenI model)

Hm ln 1 Bm,neq

55

where Bm,eq and Bm,neq are Spalding mass numbers for

equilibrium and non-equilibrium cases.
System (47) was solved numerically for the combinations (liquid hydrocarbon/gaseous oxygen) and (liquid
oxygen/gaseous hydrogen). Decane (C10H22) and heptane
(C7H16) were selected as liquid hydrocarbons for this
application. Our computations were performed with the
following parameter values:

 Hydrocarbon/oxygen: Tg 500 K, Td0 300 K, U0 50 m/s,

V0 10 m/s, D0 25 and 100 mm, pressure P1.0 bars.

 Hydrogen/oxygen: Tg 300 K, Td0 100 K, U0 50 m/s,

V0 10 m/s, D0 25 and 100 mm, pressure P 10 bars.
where the subscript 0 indicates the initial conditions. In
this study, heptane and decane were selected as hydrocarbons. Figs. 1 and 2 show the variation of heptane and
decane droplets diameter squared (D2) versus time with
gaseous oxygen. Figs. 3 and 4 show the results for oxygen
droplets with gaseous hydrogen. It is clear that, in the nonequilibrium conditions the evaporation of the droplets is
slower than the equilibrium conditions.
In conclusion, the following remarks should be taken in
the design of the injection system:

td

 Large droplets require longer time and distance for

where (dm/dt) is the evaporation rate, Ui and Tg are,
respectively, the gas velocity and temperature, Lv is the
latent heat of evaporation, y1 is the ratio of the gas heat
capacity to the liquid phase (y1 Cpg/Cpl). The particle time
constant for Stokes ow (td), Prandtls number (Prg),
Schmidts number (Sc), Nusselts number (Nu) and




evaporation, but by injection of small droplets sizes

the evaporation time is reduced.
Small droplets sizes provide preferred combustion efciency and less combustion chamber volume.
Evaporation of droplets under non-equilibrium conditions is slower than in the equilibrium conditions,

R. Amri, T. Rezoug / Acta Astronautica 69 (2011) 485498

491

Droplet diameter squared D2 (m2)

1,20E-08

1,00E-08

8,00E-09

6,00E-09

4,00E-09

2,00E-09

Heptane (Equilibrium)
Heptane (Non-Equilibrium)
Decane (Equilibrium)
Decane (Non-Equilibrium)

0,00E+00
0.001

0.01
Time (Second)

0.1

Fig. 1. Droplet diameter squared variation versus time for oxygen/heptane and oxygen/decane for initial droplet diameter (D0 100 mm).

7E-10

Droplet diameter squared D2 (m2)

6E-10
5E-10
4E-10
3E-10
2E-10
1E-10
0
0.0001

Heptane (Equilibrium)
Heptane (Non-Equilibrium)
Decane (Equilibrium)
Decane (Non-Equilibrium)
0.001
Time (Second)

0.01

Fig. 2. Droplet diameter squared variation versus time for oxygen/heptane and oxygen/decane for initial droplet diameter (D0 25 mm).

which increase the evaporation time of the liquid

propellant.
Injection at low ow velocity gives long residence time
for vaporizing the propellants.

3. Results and discussion

Many results were obtained and compared with existing works on the combustion of the propellant combinations, and the comparison shows very good agreement.
In this part, some selected results were presented and
compared with Lewis and Isp code results [3]. The results

given show the combustion ame temperature (Tc), combustion products molecular mass (M), combustion products
politropic parameter (g) and vacuum specic impulse
(Isp) as a function of oxidizer to fuel ratio (mox/mfuel).
The calculated molecular mass and politropic parameters
are frozen in the combustion chamber. The calculated
vacuum specic impulse assume a chamber pressure of
34.5 bar, an exit pressure of 13,800 Pa, and zero ambient
pressure.
The results for the combustion of liquid hydrogen (H2) and
liquid oxygen (O2) are shown in Figs. 5 and 6. The rocket
propellant fuel (RP-1) was selected as liquid Hydrocarbon

492

R. Amri, T. Rezoug / Acta Astronautica 69 (2011) 485498

1,20E-08
Droplet diameter squared D2 (m2)

Oxygen (Equilibrium)
Oxygen (Non-Equilibrium)
1,00E-08

8,00E-09

6,00E-09

4,00E-09

2,00E-09

0,00E+00
0.001

0.0010

0.0100

0.1000

Time (Second)
Fig. 3. Droplet diameter squared variation versus time for hydrogen/oxygen for initial O2 droplet diameter (D0 100 mm).

Droplet diameter squared D2 (m2)

7E-10
Oxygen (Equilibrium)
Oxygen (Non-Equilibrium)

6E-10
5E-10
4E-10
3E-10
2E-10
1E-10
0
0.00001

0.00100

0.00010

0.01000

Time (Second)
Fig. 4. Droplet diameter squared variation versus time for hydrogen/oxygen for initial O2 droplet diameter (D0 25 mm).

fuel, and the results for the combustion of RP-1/O2 are shown
in Figs. 7 and 8. Hydrogen peroxide usually comes with
some percentage of water, and the typical concentrations
range from 85% to 98% by mass. Figs. 9 and 10 show the
results for the combustion of 90% H2O2 oxidizer with RP-1
fuel. Figs. 1116 show the results for the combinations
(N2H4/N2O4), (MMH/N2O4) and (UDMH/N2O4).
As it can be seen in Figs. 516, for maximum specic
impulse the optimum mixture ratio is approximately:

 (mox/mfuel 3.4) for the combination H2/O2; and for

mixture ratio more than the optimum value, the specic
impulse decrease, and much of H2 is burned to H2O, H
and OH.

 (mox/mfuel 2.3) for the combination RP-1/O2; and for





mixture ratio more than the optimum value, the specic

impulse decrease, and the carbon CO is burned to CO2
and oxygen.
(mox/mfuel 7.0) for the combination RP-1/90% H2O2; and
for mixture ratio more than the optimum value, the specic
impulse decrease, and the carbon is burned to oxygen.
(mox/mfuel 1.0) for the combination N2H4/N2O4; and for
mixture ratio more than the optimum value, the specic
impulse decrease, and H2O is burned to oxygen.
(mox/mfuel 1.5) for the combination MMH/N2O4;
and for mixture ratio more than the optimum value,
the specic impulse decrease, and in the combustion
products (CO and H2) decrease and (H2O, O2) increase.

493

4000

500

3500

450

3000

400

2500

350

2000

300
250

1500
Tc (Calculated)
Tc ( Lewis&Isp code)
Isp (Calculated)
Isp ( Lewis&Isp code)

1000
500

200
150
100
10

0
0

3
4
5
6
7
Mixture ratio by mass (mox/mfuel)

Vacuum Specific Impulse (s)

Flame Temperature (K)

R. Amri, T. Rezoug / Acta Astronautica 69 (2011) 485498

18

1.375

16

1.35

14

1.325

12

1.3
M (Calculated)
M ( Lewis&Isp code)
(Calculated)
( Lewis&Isp code)

10
8
6

1.275
1.25
1.225

Politropic parameter ()

Molecular mass of combustion products at

the chamber (kg/kmol)

Fig. 5. Flame temperature and vacuum specic impulse of the combustion (H2/O2).

1.2

1.175
10

0
0

3
4
5
6
7
Mixture ratio by mass (mox/mfuel)

Fig. 6. Molecular mass and politropic parameter of the combustion (H2/O2).

350

3800

300

3400
3200

250
3000
2800

Tc (Calculated)
Tc ( Lewis&Isp code)

2600

Isp (Calculated)
Isp ( Lewis&Isp code)

2400

200

150

2200
2000
1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8
2
2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8
Mixture ratio by mass (mox/mfuel)

3.2

100
3.4

Fig. 7. Flame temperature and vacuum specic impulse of the combustion (RP-1/O2).

Vacuum Specific Impulse (s)

Flame Temperature (K)

3600

26

1.3

25

1.28

24

1.26

23

1.24

22

1.22

21

1.2

20

1.18

M (Calculated)
M ( Lewis&Isp code)
(Calculated)
( Lewis&Isp code)

19
18

1.16
1.14

17

Politropic parameter ()

R. Amri, T. Rezoug / Acta Astronautica 69 (2011) 485498

Molecular mass of combustion products

at the chamber (kg/kmol)

494

1.12

16
1

1.2

1.4

1.6 1.8 2
2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8
Mixture ratio by mass (mox/mfuel)

3.2

1.1
3.4

Fig. 8. Molecular mass and politropic parameter of the combustion (RP-1/O2).

350

3000

300
2600
2400

250

2200

Tc (Calculated)
Tc ( Lewis&Isp code)
Isp (Calculated)
Isp ( Lewis&Isp code)

2000
1800

200

150

Vacuum Specific Impulse (s)

Flame Temperature (K)

2800

1600
1400
2

5
6
7
8
9
10
Mixture ratio by mass (mox/mfuel)

11

12

100
13

1.26

24
23
22
21
20
19
18
17
16
15
14
13
12
11
10

1.25
1.24
M (Calculated)

1.23

M ( Lewis&Isp code)

1.22

(Calculated)
( Lewis&Isp code)

1.21
1.2
1.19
1.18
1.17
1.16

5
6
7
8
9
10
Mixture ratio by mass (mox/mfuel)

11

12

1.15
13

Fig. 10. Molecular mass and politropic parameter of the combustion (RP-1/H2O2).

Politropic parameter ()

Molecular mass of combustion products at

the chamber (kg/kmol)

Fig. 9. Flame temperature and vacuum specic impulse of the combustion (RP-1/H2O2).

R. Amri, T. Rezoug / Acta Astronautica 69 (2011) 485498

495

Tc (Calculated)
Tc ( Lewis&Isp code)
Isp (Calculated)
Isp ( Lewis&Isp code)

Flame Temperature (K)

3200
3000

300

250

2800
2600

200

2400
150
2200
2000
0.5

1.5

2.5

3.5

4.5

Vacuum Specific Impulse (s)

350

3400

100
5.5

Mixture ratio by mass (mox/mfuel)

27

1.3

26

1.28

25

1.26

24

1.24

23

1.22

22

1.2
M (Calculated)
M ( Lewis&Isp code) 1.18
(Calculated)
1.16
( Lewis&Isp code)
1.14

21
20
19
18

Politropic parameter ()

Molecular mass of combustion products

at the chamber (kg/kmol)

Fig. 11. Flame temperature and vacuum specic impulse of the combustion (N2H4/N2O4).

1.12

17
16
0.5

1.5

2
2.5
3
3.5
4
Mixture ratio by mass (mox/mfuel)

4.5

1.1
5.5

3400

350

3200

300

3000
250
2800
200
2600
2400
2200
0.5

1.5

Tc (Calculated)
Tc ( Lewis&Isp code) 150
Isp (Calculated)
Isp ( Lewis&Isp code)
100
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
5
5.5
Mixture ratio by mass (mox/mfuel)

Fig. 13. Flame temperature and vacuum specic impulse of the combustion (MMH/N2O4).

Vacuum Specific Impulse (s)

Flame Temperature (K)

Fig. 12. Molecular mass and politropic parameter of the combustion (N2H4/N2O4).

R. Amri, T. Rezoug / Acta Astronautica 69 (2011) 485498

28
27
26
25
24
23
22
21
20
19
18
17
16
15
14
0.5

1.3
1.28
1.26
1.24
1.22
1.2
1.18

M (Calculated)
M ( Lewis&Isp code)
(Calculated)
( Lewis&Isp code)

1.5

3.5
3
4
2.5
Mixture ratio by mass (mox/mfuel)

4.5

1.16
1.14

Politropic parameter ()

Molecular mass of combustion products

at the chamber (kg/kmol)

496

1.12
1.1
5.5

Fig. 14. Molecular mass and politropic parameter of the combustion (MMH/N2O4).

350

3600

300

3200
3000

250
2800

Tc (Calculated)
Tc ( Lewis&Isp code)
Isp (Calculated)
Isp ( Lewis&Isp code)

2600
2400

200

2200

150

Vacuum Specific Impulse (s)

Flame Temperature (K)

3400

2000
100
5.5

1800
0.5

1.5

2
2.5
3
3.5
4
Mixture ratio by mass (mox/mfuel)

4.5

28
27
26
25
24
23
22
21
20
19
18
17
16
15
0.5

1.3
1.28
1.26
1.24
1.22
1.2
M (Calculated)
M ( Lewis&Isp code)
(Calculated)
( Lewis&Isp code)

1.18
1.16
1.14
1.12

1.5

4
2.5
3
3.5
2
Mixture ratio by mass (mox/mfuel)

4.5

1.1
5.5

Fig. 16. Molecular mass and politropic parameter of the combustion (UDMH/N2O4).

Politropic parameter ()

Molecular mass of combustion products at

the chamber (kg/kmol)

Fig. 15. Flame temperature and vacuum specic impulse of the combustion (UDMH/N2O4).

R. Amri, T. Rezoug / Acta Astronautica 69 (2011) 485498

 (mox/mfuel 2.0) for the combination UDMH/N2O4; and

for mixture ratio more than the optimum value, the
specic impulse decrease, and in the combustion products the elements (CO and H2) decrease and (CO2, O2)
increase.

It is clear that these optimum mixture ratios are not the

values for highest ame temperature. Figs. 516 show a
good agreement between the calculated parameters and Isp
and Lewis code results (difference, less than 5% in the
worst case). Table 2 presents the differences between the
results for all the parameters. Numerically, it could be seen
from Liebersteins method, the number of nonlinear equations that should be solved to nd the combustion products

Table 6
RD-120 engine results.
Vacuum specic impulse (s)
Flame temperature (K)
Molecular mass of the combustion products (kg/kmol)
Politropic parameter (g)

H
O
2.77%
0.26%

H 2O
68.28%

H2/O2
(%)
Tc 4.04
M 1.24
g 0.85
Isp 4.64

RP-1/O2 RP-1/
(%)
H2O2 (%)

N2H4/
N2O4 (%)

MMH/
N2O4 (%)

UDMH/
N2O4 (%)

3.1
0.60
0.34
1.42

0.66
0.66
0.45
2.04

3.15
0.62
1.39
4.86

1.64
0.75
0.45
2.21

1.89
4.70
0.33
1.58

Table 3
Space Shuttle Main Engine, Aestus engine and RD-120 engine input data.

Fuel
Oxidizer
Mixture ratio
Chamber pressure (bar)
Nozzle area ratio
Throat diameter (mm)

SSME

AESTUS

RD-120

Hydrogen
Oxygen
6.034
226.148
77.544
258.748

MMH
N2O4
2.05
10.0
83.17
130.96

RP-1
Oxygen
2.6
162.7
106
185.2

Table 4
Space Shuttle Main Engine (SSME) results.
Vacuum specic impulse (s)
Flame temperature (K)
Molecular mass of the combustion products (kg/kmol)
Politropic parameter (g)

458.491
3664.52
13.523
1.1957

Table 5
AESTUS engine results.
Vacuum specic impulse (s)
Flame temperature (K)
Molecular mass of the combustion products (kg/kmol)
Politropic parameter (g)

325.79
3197.98
22.008
1.2272

353.998
3843.11
23.736
1.2076

H2O
O2
OH
H2
O

H2
24.75%
Table 2
Differences in (%) between the calculated results and Lewis and Isp code
results.

497

H
OH
3.93%

O2
0.00%

Fig. 17. Combustion products (%) of Space Shuttle Main Engine (SSME).

is (n) equation, which decreased the calculation work and

increased the speed and accuracy of calculation.
As an application, three engines were studied in
the present paper (Space Shuttle Main Engine, Aestus
engine and RD-120 engine). Table 3 shows the input
data used for the study [6,9]. Tables 46 give the results
in term of vacuum specic impulse, Flame temperature,
Molecular mass and politropic parameter, the Figs. 1719
give the combustion products at the exhaust of the
three engines. Table 7 shows a comparison with actual
engines performances [6], where a good prediction was
obtained.

4. Conclusion
This paper has studied the combustion of the more
popular liquid propellant combinations used for space
applications, in particular for big satellites and launch
vehicles stages. The combinations studied are: H2/O2,
RP1/O2, RP-1/H2O2, N2H4/N2O4, MMH/N2O4 and UDMH/
N2O4.
The thermochemical parameters determined from the
chemical reactions are: combustion ame temperature,
molecular mass and politropic parameter as function of
mixture ratio by mass of oxidizer to fuel, these parameters
are necessary to calculate the specic impulse and evaluate
the performance of any propulsion engine. Liebersteins
numerical method was applied to solve nonlinear systems
of equations to determine the combustion products at
given temperature. In addition to that, the bisection
method was used to nd the ame temperature. Some
results have been presented and compared with Lewis and
Isp code results, and show good agreement (difference less
than 5%). For application, three engines were studied:
Space Shuttle Main Engine (SSME), Zenit second stage
engine (RD-120) and Ariane-5 upper stage engine (Aestus).

498

R. Amri, T. Rezoug / Acta Astronautica 69 (2011) 485498

O
0.67%
CO
10.13%

H
2.44% N

H2
8.49%

OH
3.89%

0.00%

CO2
5.57%

H2O
35.45%

NO
0.88%

CO2
H2O
O2
N2
NO
CO
OH
H2
O
H
N

O2
1.11%

N2
31.36%

Fig. 18. Combustion products (%) of AESTUS Engine.

OH
6.72%

H2
7.40%

O
1.32%

CO2
H
2.55%

CO2
17.00%

H2 O
O2
CO
OH
H2
O

CO
30.27%

H2 O
34.74%

O2
0.00%
Fig. 19. Combustion products (%) of RD-120 Engine.

Table 7
Comparison with actual engines performances.

Calculated Isp (s)

Actual Isp (s)
Difference (%)

SSME engine

AESTUS engine

RD-120 engine

458.491
454.4
0.90

325.79
324.0
0.55

353.998
350.0
1.14

Acknowledgments
The authors wish to thank the Aeronautics Department
of University of Blida and Centre of Space Techniques for
their support to perform this project and ALSAT-1 project
manager, Mr. Mohamed Bekhti. The authors also wish to
thank Mr. David Gibbon (Surrey Space Center-UK) and
Dr. Ian Coxhill (Ampac ISP-UK).
References
[1] G.J. Van Wylen, Fundamentals of Classical Thermodynamics, John
Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1973.
[2] George P. Sutton, Rocket Propulsion Elements, Sixth edition, California, 1992.
[3] Ronald W. Humble, Gary N. Henry, Willey J. Larson., Space Propulsion
Analysis and Design, McGraw-Hill Companies, 1995.

[4] D. Haeseler, A. Gotz, A. Frohlich, Non-Toxic Propellants for Future

Advanced Launcher Propulsion Systems, AIAA 2000-3687, in: Proceedings of 36th AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference,
Huntsville, 2000.
[5] A. Gotz, C. Mading, L. Brummer, D. Haeseler, Application of Non-Toxic
Propellants for Future Advanced Launcher Vehicles, AIAA 2001-3546,
in: Proceedings of 37th AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference, Salt Lake City, 2001.
[6] Bradford John, SCORES-II Design Tool for Liquid Rocket Engine
Analysis, AIAA Paper 2002-3990, SpaceWorks Engineering, Inc.
(SEI), 2002.
[7] Numerical Analysis Courses of Aeronautics Department, University of
Blida, 2005.
[8] A.Thompson philip, Compressible Fluid Dynamics, sixth edition,
McGraw-Hill Companies, California, 1995 1972.
[9] A.L. Worlund, C. Mading, J.H. Hastings, Space Shuttle Main Engine
Evolutions, AIAA Paper 2001-3417, in: Proceedings of 37th AIAA/
ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference, Salt Lake City, 2001.
[10] V.R. Dushin, A.V. Kulchitskiy, V.A. Nerchenko, V.F. Nikitin,
E.S. Osadchaya, Yu.G. Phylippov, N.N. Smirnov, Mathematical simulation for non-equilibrium droplet evaporation, Acta Astonautica
Journal (2008) 13601371.
[11] N.N. Smirnov, V.N. Pushkin, V.R. Dushin, A.V. Kulchitskiy, Microgravity investigation of laminar ame propagation in monodisperse
gasdroplet mixtures, Acta Astonautica Journal (2007) 626636.
[12] R.S. Miller, K. Harstad, J. Bellan, Evaluation of equilibrium and nonequilibrium evaporation models for many-droplet gasliquid ow
simulations, Multiphase Flow Journal (1998) 10251055.
[13] Sergei S. Sazhin, Advanced models of fuel droplet heating and
evaporation, Progress in Energy and Combustion Science Journal
(2006) 162214.