Moving-Boundary Model of Cryogenic Fuel Loading, I: Two-Phase Flow in a Pipe

Hafiychuk, V.; Foygel, M.; Devine, Ekaterina Ponizovskaya; Smelyanskiy, Vadim; Watson, Michael D.; Brown, Barbara; Goodrich, C. C.

doi:10.2514/1.t4481

Cited by 7 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It will allow us to restrict our consideration to the simplest cases of one-region [cold vapor V case, Sec. III.B [1]) and two-region (TP-V case, Sec. III.D [1]) saturated LN 2 flow while keeping all substantial features of the TP flow in place.…”

Section: National Bureau Of Standards Transfer Line: Modeling Vs mentioning

confidence: 97%

“…As in [1], to simulate the chilldown regime, we assume that the pipe is initially filled with gaseous N2 at an atmospheric pressure, with the pipe, the gas, and the environment at a temperature of 300 K. At initial time t 0, the external pressure is applied to the TL inlet, leaving the outlet open (Fig. 3).…”

Section: National Bureau Of Standards Transfer Line: Modeling Vs mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As was mentioned already in the first paper [1], this approach can be applicable to the modeling and optimization of many complex space technical systems and their elements working on two-phase flows. A similar approach can be developed for controlling the strategy for thermal management systems used for cooling solar array panels, space loop-heat-pipe systems, etc.…”

mentioning

confidence: 97%

“…I N PART 1 of this paper [1], we formulated a moving-boundary model of two-phase (TP) cryogen flow in a fuel line, which connects the storage and the "vehicle tanks." Its development is stimulated by a recent construction of the experimental cryogenic liquid nitrogen system ( Fig.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…1) that is designed at the NASA Kennedy Space Center (KSC) to test autonomous regimes of fuel loading [2]. According to this model, the fuel supply line is divided into control volumes (CVs) [1]. Each CV is characterized by defined cross sections that are perpendicular to the pipe axes z.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Moving-Boundary Model of Cryogenic Fuel Loading, II: Theory Versus Experiments

Hafiychuk¹,

Foygel²,

Devine³

et al. 2015

Journal of Thermophysics and Heat Transfer

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A moving-boundary model of two-phase cryogenic flow, which was developed in the companion paper (Hafiychuk, V., Foygel, M., Ponizovskaya-Devine, E., Smelyanskiy, V., Watson, M., Brown, B., and Goodrich, C., "Moving-Boundary Model of Cryogenic Fuel Loading, I: Two-Phase Flow in a Long Pipe," Journal of Thermophysics and Heat Transfer (to be published)), is applied toward simulation of liquid nitrogen flow data collected for the cooldown regime in two different experimental fuel transfer lines: 1) the 1966 National Bureau of Standards (now the National Institute of Standards and Technology) setup and 2) the novel NASA Kennedy Space Center cryogenic testbed. With relatively small computational effort compared to full-scale schemes, the model describes pressure and temperature histories, kinetics of the vapor void fraction, and interphase boundary motion in two different parts of the transfer lines. The aforementioned time-dependent characteristics are shown to be in a good agreement with the experimental data on the cooldown stage of liquid nitrogen loading obtained at the National Bureau of Standards setup (with no fitting parameters used) and in a fair agreement with the NASA Kennedy Space Center testbed setup (with a small fitting) for chilldown and fast fill operations. The fast and accurate modeling procedure accounts for cryogen fueling operations in both the nominal and major fault regimes. Nomenclature A = internal cross-sectional area of pipe, nozzle, or vent valve, m 2 C = constant pressure (volume) specific heat, J∕K∕kg D = diameter of pipe, m t = time, s κ = thermal conductivity, W∕m · K ρ = density, kg∕m 3Subscripts O = outer vent = vent w = tube wall

show abstract

Section: National Bureau Of Standards Transfer Line: Modeling Vs mentioning

confidence: 97%

Section: National Bureau Of Standards Transfer Line: Modeling Vs mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 97%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations