ROCKET PROPULSION PART I

Mohamed ElShorbagy 201302512

Mohamed Khairy Abbas 201300202

Hazem Saad 201304146

Introduction:
In any design process, it starts with defining the requirements or the goals of the end user. It then
takes several steps including translating the requirements into technical terms and extracting
information from them. A profound and iterative analysis is performed to achieve the requirements
given a specific set of input and constraints until the design becomes optimum in the eyes of the
user. The analysis is performed in different conditions to guarantee that all the scenarios are put into
consideration to make sure of the robustness and stability of the system. In aircraft engine design, it
follows the same steps as any design process. It starts with defining the weight of the payload, the
range of flight and some other parameters. These requirements are then translated into technical
information like the amount of thrust needed to lift the aircraft and the minimum amount of fuel
needed. In this report, we will follow the same steps to design a turbojet engine that meets the
thrust requirements for a specific supersonic transport aircraft mission in different segments of the
flight. There will be different scenarios in the analysis and the best one will be chosen as our design
proposal.

Problem definition:
It is required to design a turbojet engine that meets the thrust requirements for all mission

segments (take off, climb, and cruise) for a supersonic transport aircraft that has the following

performance data.

Rate of climb 5.05 m/s @ 7.6 km

Max TIT allowed 15000 K
Range 7251 km
𝐖𝐞𝐦𝐩𝐭𝐲 78700 kg
𝐖𝐩𝐚𝐲𝐥𝐨𝐚𝐝 19600 kg
𝐀𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐰𝐢𝐧𝐠 358.25 m2
Assumptions:

 Engine specific fuel consumption to remain constant during each segment.

 The fuel amount to be stored in tanks may be approximated by 1.25 mfcruise

Requirements:

 Selecting The engine design parameters and size along with power setting scenario
(afterburning on/off during each segment) that minimize the overall fuel weight required to
fulfill the airplane mission.

Analysis:
Mechanical Analysis:

In order to know the thrust needed to lift the plane, we need to draw the free body diagram of the
plane and analyse the forces acting on the plane, and apply newton’s laws to calculate the Thrust
needed.

Take off:

For take-off, maximum lift is needed which means we need the plane to take the maximum angle of
attack with the horizontal axis. This AOA corresponds to 𝛼 = 80 .

From Equilibrium:

𝐿 = 𝑊 cos(𝛼)

𝑇 = 𝐷 + 𝑊 sin(𝛼)

Climb:

From the rate of climb we get 𝜃: Figure 1 free body diagram @ Takeoff

𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑐𝑙𝑖𝑚𝑏 = 𝑉∞ sin(𝜃)

1
𝐿= 𝜌 𝑉 2 𝑆𝐶 = 𝑊 cos(𝜃)
2 ∞ ∞ 𝐿

Having 𝜃 we can get 𝐶𝐿

𝑊 cos(θ)
∴ 𝐶𝐿 =
1
𝜌 𝑉2𝑆
2 ∞ ∞

Figure 2 free body diagram @ climb

We can rewrite the drag now:

1
𝐷 = 𝜌∞ 𝑉∞2 𝑆𝐶𝐷
2
1
∴𝑇= 𝜌 𝑉 2 𝑆𝐶 + 𝑊 sin(𝜃)
2 ∞ ∞ 𝐷

Since

𝐶𝐷 = 0.07 + 0.28 𝐶𝐿2

1
∴𝑇= 𝜌 𝑉 2 𝑆(0.007 + 0.28𝐶𝐿2 ) + 𝑊 sin(𝜃)
2 ∞ ∞

Cruise:

Since 𝐿 = 𝐷

𝐿
We can get the drag from the ratio.
𝐷

And since 𝑇 = 𝐷

So, we now have the thrust calculated.

Figure 3 free body diagram @ cruise

We have now completed the Mechanical analysis and came up with the steps to calculate the thrust
in each segment of the flight. Now we go to the gas dynamics analysis.

Gas dynamics analysis:

Since we calculated the thrust in the previous step in all segments, the next step will be similar for all
segments in analysis. What we can do now is implement the analytical procedure for a general case,
let’s say cruise for instance and then repeat the procedure for each segment by only changing the
numbers.

Analysis @ cruise:

(inlet Rem): Given 𝑀0 ,ℎ  we get 𝑇0 , 𝑃0

𝑎0 = √𝛾𝑅𝑇0

𝑉0 = 𝑀0 𝑎0
𝛾𝑐
𝛾 −1
𝜏𝑟 = 1 + 𝑐 𝑀02 , 𝜋𝑟 = 𝜏𝑟𝛾𝑐 −1
2
0 2 (intake): 𝑇𝑡 2 = 𝑇𝑡0 = 𝑇0 𝜏𝑟

𝜋𝑑 = 𝜋𝑑𝑚𝑎𝑥 𝜂𝑟

𝜂𝑟 𝑖𝑠 𝑎 𝑓𝑢𝑛𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑖𝑛 𝑀0 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑐𝑎𝑛 𝑏𝑒 𝑠𝑜𝑙𝑣𝑒𝑑 𝑛𝑢𝑚𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑦

𝜋𝑑 𝑐𝑎𝑛 𝑏𝑒 𝑐𝑎𝑙𝑐𝑢𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑑

2 3 (Compressor): assume 𝑒𝑐 = 0.87

Iterate on 𝜋𝑐
𝛾𝑐−1
𝛾𝑐
𝜏𝑐 = 𝜋𝑐

34 (combustion): 𝑇𝑡4 = 15000 𝑘

From technology table 𝜋𝑏 = 0.94

𝐶𝑝 𝑇𝑡4
𝜏𝜏 = 𝑡
𝐶𝑝𝑐 𝑇0

𝑓 = 𝐹(𝜏𝑐 , 𝜏𝑟 , 𝜏𝜏 , 𝜂𝑏 , ℎ𝑃𝑅 )

𝜂𝑏 = 0.99 , hPR = 4.28 ∗ 10^7 J/kg

𝐶𝑝𝑡 (𝛾𝑡 −1)

45 (Turbine): 𝛾𝑡 = 1.333, 𝐶𝑝𝑡 = 1148.86, 𝑅𝑡 = 𝛾𝑡

𝜏𝑡 = 𝐹(𝜏𝑐 , 𝜏𝑟 , 𝜏𝜏 , 𝜂𝑚 , 𝑓)

𝑇𝑡5 = 𝜏𝑡 𝑇𝑡4

𝑒𝑡 = 0.85 from technology table

𝛾𝑡
(𝛾𝑡 −1)𝑒𝑡
𝜋𝑡 = 𝜏𝑡

57(AB on): 𝜋𝐴𝐵 = 0.94, 𝜂𝐴𝐵 = 0.98 from technology table

 If 𝑇𝑡5 = 15000 𝑘, 𝑇𝑡7 = 18000 𝑘 from technology table

 𝜏𝑡 = 𝐹(𝜏𝐴𝐵 , 𝜏𝑡 , 𝜏𝜏 , ℎ𝑝𝑟 , 𝑓)

57(AB off): 𝜋𝐴𝐵 = √𝜋𝐴𝐵 𝑜𝑛

 𝑇𝑡7 = 𝑇𝑡5

79(Nozzle)

 The nozzle is assumed to be a converging diverging nozzle with full expansion in order to
satisfy the thrust requirements for the mission especially in the Supersonic regime.
  With all this we can calculate Specific thrust and Specific fuel capacity, minimum and
maximum with the 2 scenarios where the after burner is on or off:
𝑓
 𝑆𝐹𝐶𝑚𝑖𝑛 = 𝑆𝑇
𝑚𝑖𝑛

𝑓+𝑓𝑎𝑏
 𝑆𝐹𝐶𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 𝑆𝑇𝑚𝑎𝑥

Now thrust can be simply calculated at all segments

Results:
Using a Matlab code, we were able to calculate the design parameters for all the segments and
through the two scenarios of having an afterburner and not having one. He results were the
following:

Scenario 1

Cruise Design:

Pi_Compressor(Cruise no AB) 31
Thrust required in Cruise 180 KN
Specific Thrust 515.3 N/Kg/s
𝒎𝟎 349.3 kg/s
A 3.7 𝒎𝟐
SFC_cruise(With no AB) 3.56 * 10^-5
f 0.0183
𝒎𝟎𝒇 6.4078
𝒎𝒇𝒖𝒆𝒍 87.56 ton
The following figures are the figures generated through the matlab code showing also the choice of
the design point.

Figure 4 Pressure ratio vs SFC @cruise Figure 5 Pressure ratio vs ST @cruise

at this point we've finished the sizing of the first engine required for cruise only. continue to select
an engine to satisfy all flight regimes.
Take off:

𝒎𝟎 761.5 Kg/s
Specific thrust (With AB) 1072 N/Kg/s
𝑻𝒉𝒓𝒖𝒔𝒕𝒓𝒆𝒒𝒖𝒊𝒓𝒆𝒅 708.7 KN
Thrust_Takeoff(with AB) 816 KN (Accepted)
Specific thrust (With no AB) 590.5 N/Kg/s
Thrust_Takeoff(with no AB) 450 KN (Rejected)
SFC_takeoff(With AB) 5.078 * 10^-5

Figure 6 Pressure ratio vs SFC @take off Figure 6 Pressure ratio vs ST @ take off

Climb:

𝒎𝟎 𝒄𝒍𝒊𝒎𝒃 505.6 Kg/s

Specific thrust (With no AB) 578.9 N/Kg/s
Specific thrust (With AB) 1100 N/Kg/s
required thrust_climb 162.56 KN
Thrust_Climb (no AB) 292.7 KN (Accepted)
SFC_Climb (With No AB) 3.55 * 10^-5
 Figure 9 Pressure ratio vs SFC @climb Figure 10 Pressure ratio vs ST @ climb

Scenario 2:

Take off:

Pi_Compressor(Take off with AB) 21.5

Thrust required in Take off 708 KN
Specific Thrust(with AB) 1091 N/Kg/s
𝒎𝟎 649 kg/s
A 3.15 m^2
SFC_Takeoff(With AB) 4.99 * 10^-5

at this point we've finished the sizing of the first engine required for take-off only. continue to select
an engine to satisfy all flight regimes.

Cruise:

𝒎𝟎 336Kg/s
Specific thrust (With no AB) 1072 N/Kg/s
𝑻𝒉𝒓𝒖𝒔𝒕_𝑪𝒓𝒖𝒊𝒔𝒆(𝒘𝒊𝒕𝒉 𝒏𝒐 𝑨𝑩) 196 KN
thrust_Cruise_required 180 KN
SFC_Cruise(With no AB) 3.61 * 10^-5
f 0.0211
𝒎𝒅𝒐𝒕𝒇 7.083 Kg/s
𝒎𝒇𝒖𝒆𝒍 96.87 Ton
This number is bigger and is rejected however we will continue the analysis to check whether this
design will cover the spectrum of needed Thrust in all other flight regimes or not.

Climb:

𝒎𝟎 𝒄𝒍𝒊𝒎𝒃 430.9 Kg/s

Specific thrust (With no AB) 584 N/Kg/s
required thrust_climb 162.56 KN
Thrust_Climb (no AB) 251 KN
SFC_Climb (With No AB) 3.55 * 10^-53.677 * 10^-5

Conclusion:
Upon observing the results, It is clear that scenario 1 is better than scenario 2. In the second
scenario, the fuel amount needed to run the journey is bigger than that of scenario 1. Also upon
comparing the data and results from scenario 1 to the design parameters of the concord plane, we
found out that our design almost has similar specifications, at which it uses 𝑚𝑓𝑢𝑒𝑙 = 90 𝑇𝑜𝑛 in one
flight which has almost equal range and fly at similar Mach number so this number is considered to
be reasonable.