Sandwich propellant combustion: Modeling and experimental comparison

Computational Fluid Dynamics in Combustion

“…With the addition of fuel, the burning rate behaviour of the propellant becomes different from that of pure AP. There are many experimental observations regarding the burning behaviour of this propellant, which remained unexplained before the CFD analyses were made on the burning propellant 21 . The typical dimensions of the binder and AP thickness are about 20 mm and 200 mm respectively.…”

Laminate Propellant Combustion (Review) 2. Theoretical Investigations

“…The work of Ramakrishna, Paul, and Mukunda [28,29] represents additional movement toward direct comparisons between experimental and computational results of laminate propellant combustion. In their first effort [28], a computational model was formulated for pure binder laminates using the unsteady equations for mass, momentum, energy, and species transport in order to predict burning rate and burning surface profile.…”

“…In their first effort [28], a computational model was formulated for pure binder laminates using the unsteady equations for mass, momentum, energy, and species transport in order to predict burning rate and burning surface profile. In the condensed phase, surface pyrolysis laws were used to describe the surface regression; however, an attempt was made to model the low pressure deflagration limit of pure AP by considering the transition from exothermic reactions in a surface liquid layer to endothermic processes and a dry surface.…”

“…In the condensed phase, surface pyrolysis laws were used to describe the surface regression; however, an attempt was made to model the low pressure deflagration limit of pure AP by considering the transition from exothermic reactions in a surface liquid layer to endothermic processes and a dry surface. By adopting the AP deflagration model of Guirao and Williams [9], the authors of [28] were able to study the role of the primary and final diffusion flames [5] at high and low pressure for changes in the AP monopropellant flame. Flux boundary conditions were used at the burning surface boundary and symmetric boundary conditions were used at the lateral extremities of the sandwich.…”

“…The parameter selection also ensured that the model satisfied the combustion stability criterion of Denison and Baum [30]. The authors of [28] correctly pointed out that conformance to model stability has gone overlooked in many other efforts. Pressure-dependent specific heat was utilized and reaction prefactors were selected to match a reference-burning rate of 3.3 mm/sec at 20.7 atm at a temperature of 850 K. It is noteworthy that low noninteger values for the reaction order (pressure exponent) were selected for the primary and final diffusion flames, a deviation from bimolecular reactions that was not explained by the authors.…”