Infrared signature of NEPE, HTPB rocket plume under varying flight conditions and motor size

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infrared.2020.103590Get rights and content

Highlights:

  • Simulating IR signatures and flow structure of plume at the rear of solid rocket motor.

  • Using HTPB (weak afterburning) and NEPE (strong afterburning) propellants.

  • Confirming the effect of altitude, flight Mach number, and motor size.

Abstract

In this study, radiation signatures of rocket plumes based on HTPB and NEPE propellants are simulated under varying altitudes, flight Mach numbers, and motor size. The flow field of plume is calculated by computational fluid dynamics, and the infrared signature is predicted using a Ludwig model. To verify the numerical method, experiments were conducted using small rocket motors and radiometric FTIR. The acceptable agreement between numerical calculation and the experiment was obtained in 25 μm wavelength region. The total radiance decreases with increasing altitude whether afterburning exists or not. A decreasing rate in the radiance of the plume with strong afterburning is larger than that of the plume with weak afterburning. The change in total intensity according to altitude depends on the afterburning and is directly affected by the radiating area. As the flight Mach number increases, total radiance, total intensity, and radiating area decrease. The motor size makes radiation intensity increase exponentially; exponent value is from 2.6 to 2.7. As the motor size increases, the effect of altitude increases, while the effect of flight Mach number decreases.

Introduction

Infrared signatures of exhaust plumes are determined by the thermodynamic property of media such as temperature, species and these quantities. The thermodynamic state of the plume is determined by the flow structure at the rear of the nozzle. Therefore, the infrared signature of gas in an exhaust plume appears differently depending on the propellant, propellant mixture ratio, shape of nozzle, and type of propulsion engine.

Most commonly, carbon dioxide and water vapor at the rear of the nozzle generate strong peaks at 4.3 μm and 2–3 μm wavelengths, respectively. This is the case particularly during afterburning, (secondary combustion between products of incomplete combustion and ambient air), where infrared signature is dramatically rising as temperature and amount of carbon dioxide increase at downstream [1], [2], [3], [4]. Niu [5] performed a study of the flow structure and infrared signatures relative to afterburning, chamber pressure, and ratio of propellant. This study showed that afterburning increased the length and intensity of the radiance area. Further, with increased chamber pressure and HTPB (Hydroxyl Terminated Polybutadiene) binder ratio, the spectral and total infrared intensity also increased.

In addition, even with the same fuel and propulsion system, the infrared signatures vary depending on the altitude, flight Mach number and engine size of the rocket. As the flight Mach number and ambient air condition are changed depending on the altitude and acceleration during flight, the flow structure of the rocket plume is changed over time. This is the main reason for variations in the radiation signature.

The study of radiation signature since the 1960 s has considered the variation due to altitude; it has been found that the increased altitude and reduced ambient pressure results in a dramatic expansion of the plume [4], [6], [7], [8], [9]. To consider afterburning according to altitude, Vitkin [6] developed and applied the code that corrects the chemical mechanism depending on altitude. Alexeenko [7] interpreted the radiation signature for AtlasⅡ at altitude ranges from 15 km to 40 km and compared these with experimental results. Through satellite measurements, Simons [4] explained the change in total intensity of the plume with variations of altitude—the main reason being the changing volume of the plume and the extinction of afterburning. Calhoon [8] also performed a study of the extinction mechanism of afterburning to estimate correctly the change of radiation intensity due to altitude. He stated that the extinction of afterburning is caused by Damkohler effect. Niu [9] analyzed spectral infrared signatures at altitudes between 5 and 70 km using infrared radiation analysis code, validated with AtlasⅡ data, while considering the effects of atmospheric absorption.

The study of the velocity effect of the rocket vehicle on the radiation signature while comparing with effect of altitude is limited. Stowe [10] has drawn the contours of the change of infrared radiation signature and flow structure relative to the velocity of the rocket, which indicates a tendency of the plume to get thinner with increasing velocity.

Further, the size of the rocket engine has a great effect on the infrared signatures. Most studies concentrate on small size rocket motors [11], [12], [13], [14], [15]; this is because these studies require validation with experiment in developing prediction method and real size experimental costs are very high [7], [16], [17]. Non-reacting supersonic jets have similarity in size [18], [19]; however, for reacting supersonic jets, there is no similarity due to the absence of scale law for chemical reaction. Therefore, in developing a rocket motor, the radiation signature of a real size plume and its size effect must be studied. Ludwig [3] conducted a study to confirm the size effect. However, the studies did not seem to consider changes in thermodynamic properties with varying size motors. In another study, Zhang and Li [20] confirmed the size effect of Trident D5 by reducing the size of engine gradually to 1/10 scale. The spectral and total intensity were compared for each size. Their study found that the total intensity is proportional to the exponential function of length scale and has a range of exponent value from 1.5 to 2.5.

Depending on the purpose of use, the type of propulsion engine varies, and therefore propellants studied for infrared signature of exhaust plume are different for all types, mixture ratio, and size. In military field, there are many recent studies on the IR signature of HTPB [5], [10] based propellant with weak afterburning and NEPE (Nitrate Ester Polyester) based propellant with strong afterburning, which do not show visible primary and secondary smoke [21], [22], [23], [24], [25]. However, only a few studies have been conducted on afterburning and infrared signatures relative to flight condition and motor size.

In his study, a numerical analysis was performed for infrared signature and flow structure of HTPB (weak afterburning) and NEPE (strong afterburning) based propellant plume and confirms the effect on the infrared signature according to flight condition and motor size.

Ludwig's model was used to predict the infrared signatures. The flow structure of rocket plume was analyzed using computational fluid dynamics and ray tracing methods. This was applied to obtain the thermodynamic properties of the medium in which the ray travels and which the results used as input values to Ludwig’s model. It was assumed that the ray proceeds in a lateral direction. To verify the numerical method, static firing experiments using small rocket motors and radiometric FTIR (Fourier Transform Infrared) were conducted. The experimental and numerical results were compared. To confirm the effect of flight condition, the radiation signature of the plume was predicted depending on altitude and flight Mach number. To confirm the size effect, the motor size was changed while maintaining its shape.

Section snippets

Solid rocket motors

HTPB-based and NEPE-based propellants were investigated in this study. HTPB propellant used in this study is a reduced smoke propellant which consists of AP (Ammonium Perchlorate)/HTPB/ZrC. Compared with the general HTPB series, it does not contain aluminum for low observability. NEPE-based propellant consists of RDX (Royal Demolition Explosive)/polyurethane which has low combustion temperature and hardly generates smoke. For the experiment, both propellants contained small amount (0.5 wt%) of

Flow field analysis

To predict infrared signatures of the rocket plume, an analysis of the flow field was performed. To compute the compressible flow including turbulent and chemical reaction, axisymmetric Reynolds Averaged Navier-Stokes equations were numerically solved. To calculate the compressible flow with a high Reynolds number, the density-based method was used. The least square cell-based method and Roe’s Flux Difference Splitting (FDS) scheme were used for gradient and spatial accuracy. The numerical

Comparison of experiment and numerical results.

The predicted radiation signature and measurement result of HTPB and NEPE plums at 1.3 m from the nozzle exit are shown in Fig. 5. The thin solid lines represent the experimental results and thick solid lines are the results from computation. As is already known, the strong signatures are observed in H2O (2.53.0 μm) and CO2 regions (4.24.6 μm) regions for HTPB and NEPE. For HTPB, the signatures observed in the CO2 region were greater than the H2O region, and small peaks are observed near the

Effects of flight conditions and size

To investigate the effects of flight conditions on the infrared signature, a numerical analysis using various ambient pressures and flight speeds was performed. The rocket motor conditions used in the analysis are described as follows. The pressure in the combustion chamber is 68 atm for both propellants, which is similar to the experimental conditions. The nozzle throat diameter of the solid rocket motor is 60 mm, and the diverging section is in the shape of a cone with an expansion angle of

Conclusions

To analyze the infrared signatures of plumes using HTPB and NEPE propellants, the flow field was analyzed using CFD and the infrared signature was predicted using Ludwig’s model and ray tracing method. The numerical results were found to be in good agreement with the experimental results using a small rocket motor and radiometric FTIR.

Various simulations were conducted while varying the ambient pressure, flight Mach number, and motor size to confirm how the flight condition and size affect the

Declaration of Competing Interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Acknowledgement

This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

References (30)

  • A. Devir et al.

    Comparison of calculated and measured radiation from a rocket motor plume

  • G. Avital et al.

    Experimental and computational study of infrared emission from underexpanded rocket exhaust plumes

    J. Thermophys. Heat Transf.

    (2001)
  • A. Blanc et al.

    UV- and IR-signatures of rocket plumes

    Propellants Explos. Pyrotech.

    (2002)
  • A. Boischot et al.

    Evaluation of computation codes for rocket plume’s infrared signature by using measurements on a small scale aluminized composite propellant motor

    Proc. SPIE

    (2006)
  • J.B. Dargaud et al.

    Numerical study of solid-rocket motor ignition overpressure waves including infrared radiation

    J. Propul. Power

    (2013)
  • Cited by (0)

    1

    Technical Center of Hyundai Mobis, Hyundai Co, 17-2, 240 Mabuk-ro, Gigeung-gu, Yongin, 16891 Gyeonggi-do, Republic of Korea.

    View full text