Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Lecture 23
Lecture 23
Lecture 23
∂ ln ( Rates )
n= (1)
∂ ln P
and the definition of τ is such that the variations in gas generation rate due to this
sensitivity are given locally by
• •
m− m ∂τ P '(t ) − P '(t − τ )
=− =n (2)
• ∂t P
m
Similar sensitivity indices can be introduced for velocity, etc. Once this parameterization
is accepted, it is only a matter of mathematical modeling to obtain the stability limits of
a given acoustic wave or cavity. This modeling could be linear or even allow for non-
linearities in the gas dynamics. It is one of the strengths of this theory that the acoustic
part of the problem, namely, combustor geometry, steady state combustion and heat
release, etc. are separated from the unsteady combustion effects, which allows for
generalization of test results and accumulation of meaningful stability data.
The results of calculations using the linear sensitive time lag theory are
displayed as shown in Fig. 1 (Ref. 26).
Here are shown the loci of marginal stability for severe modes of a combustor,
on a map of interaction index n vs. sensitive lag τ . Each point on one of the lines
corresponds to a particular oscillation frequency, and these frequencies are found to
be within ± 10% of the undisturbed acoustic frequency of the mode. The goal of the
designer is to manipulate the factors influencing n and τ in order to place the
operating point outside all the stable regions of the various modes.
A recent example of this approach is described in Ref. 30. Here the emphasis
is on the tangential acoustic modes. A detailed 2-D fluid mechanical model (in the
transverse plane) is coupled to a series of empirically derived droplet vaporization
laws for UDMH and N2O4. The flow is turbulent, modeled using a K- ε approximation,
and the drops are allowed to slip, exerting drag forces which are computed from
empirical drag coefficients, and also modifying the vaporization rates due to
convective heat transfer. The drop-heating transients are ignored. The computations
yield detailed time histories of all the fluid parameters, and comparisons to limited
test data on parametric effects of pressure and injector type are found to be
favorable.
A similar computation, but for longitudinal modes only, is described in Ref. 27.
Here the spatial dependence is on one dimension only (axial), but the droplet
interactions are calculated in somewhat more detail, including drop thermal inertia.
These calculations show strongest instability when the ratio of the acoustic period to
the droplet vaporization time is 0.15, which, as noted before, can be interpreted as
indicating a “sensitive” time lag which is a fraction (0.1-0.2) of the total vaporization
time. The calculations also show cases of entropy wave excitation, for which the
frequency corresponds closely to the convective time in the chamber.
∂ ∂
= =0
∂z ∂y
∂ρ ∂ ( ρ u )
1. + =m (mass addition p.u. volume, p.u. time)
∂t ∂x
∂u ∂u ∂p
2. ρ + ρu + = f (force p.u. volume)
∂t ∂x ∂x
⎛ ∂T ∂T ⎞ q ⎛ ∂ (1 / p ) ∂ (1 / p ) ⎞
3. cv ⎜ +u ⎟ = − p⎜ +u ⎟⎟ (q=heating rate p.u. volume)
⎝ ∂t ∂x ⎠ p ⎜ ∂t ∂x
⎝ ⎠
p R
4. = T
ρ M
Assume small perturbations about a uniform steady background, (with µ, m ,f, q):
u =0 (6)
0
D() ∂ () ∂ () ∂ ()' ∂ ()' ∂ ()'
Because of (6), ≡ + u = + (u + u ') (7)
Dt ∂t ∂x ∂t ∂x ∂t
2nd order
Linearizing then,
∂ρ ' ∂u '
+ρ =m (8)
∂t ∂x
∂T ' p ∂p '
ρ cv =q+ (10)
∂t ρ ∂t
p' ρ' T ' M' ⎛ p' ρ ' µ ' ⎞
− = + (11) T ' = T ⎜⎜ − + ⎟ (13)
p ρ T M ⎝ p ρ µ ⎟⎠
⎛R
T⎜
⎞ ∂ρ '
+ cv ⎟ = −q +
c v ∂p '
+p
c v ∂ M '/ M ( )
⎝M ⎠ ∂t R g ∂t Rg ∂t
cp
∂ρ '
=
⎡
1 ⎢ 1 ∂p '
−q+
⎤
p ∂ M '/ M ⎥ ( ) (14)
∂t c p T ⎢ γ − 1 ∂t γ −1 ∂t ⎥
⎣ ⎦
⎡
1 ⎢ 1 ∂p '
−q+
⎤
p ∂ M '/ M ⎥(+ρ
∂u '
=m
) (15)
⎢
c p T γ − 1 ∂t γ −1 ∂t ⎥ ∂x
⎣ ⎦
Differentiate w.r.t. t:
⎡
1 ⎢ 1 ∂ 2 p ' ∂q
− +
2
(
⎤
p ∂ M '/ M ⎥
+ ρ
∂ 2u '
=
)
∂m (16)
⎢
c p T γ − 1 ∂t
2
∂t γ −1 ∂t 2
⎥ ∂ x ∂t ∂t
⎣ ⎦
∂ 2u ' ∂ 2 p ' ∂f
but, from 12, ρ = − + substitute in (16)
∂x ∂t ∂x 2 ∂x
⎡
1 ⎢ 1 ∂ 2 p ' ∂q
− +
2 ⎤
−
(
p ∂ M '/ M ⎥ ∂ 2 p ' ∂f
+ =
∂m ) (17)
⎢
c p T γ − 1 ∂t
2
∂t γ −1 ∂t 2
⎥ ∂x 2
∂x ∂t
⎣ ⎦
2
Now ( γ − 1 ) c p T = γ R g T = c ( c =speed of sound) (18)
∂2 p '
− c
2
2 ∂ p'
=
⎡
∂ ⎢ 2
c m + ( γ − 1 ) q − p
∂ µ '/ µ ⎤ (
⎥ − c 2 ∂f
) (19)
∂t 2
∂x 2
∂t ⎢ ∂t ⎥ ∂x
⎣ ⎦
Subtract, divide by ρ :
∂ 2u '
− c
2
2 ∂ u'
=
1 ∂f
−
⎡
1 ∂ ⎢ 2
c m + ( γ − 1 ) q − p
∂ M' M ⎤
⎥
( ) (22)
∂t 2 ∂x 2 ρ ∂t ρ ∂x ⎢ ∂t ⎥
⎣ ⎦
2
Note the combination c m + ( γ − 1 ) q − p
(
∂ M' M )
∂t
Adding heat, adding mass, or having a decrease rate of molecular mass, all are (up
to factors) equivalent acoustic disturbances.
To close the problem, one needs to relate the perturbations (m, q, f, ∂µ ' ) to
∂t
the state variables ( p ', ρ ', u ',T ' ), by looking at the particular mechanisms
(vaporization, combustion, etc), and how they depend on pressure, velocity, and so
on.
Looking at Eq. (19), we see that the effects of gas mass generation m, heat
∂µ '/ µ
generation q and molecular mass change − are similar. All of them have the
∂t
effect of increasing the local volume, and we suspect therefore that when these
quantities (acting together) peak when the pressure also peaks, we will have
unstable condition.
2
Q = c m + ( γ − 1) q − p
(
∂ M' M ) (23)
∂t
∂2 p ' 2
2 ∂ p' ∂Q
2
− c 2
= (24)
∂t ∂x ∂t
⎡ ∧ i ω t − kx ) ⎤
p '(t ) = Re ⎢ p e ( ⎥
(25)
⎣ ⎦
∧ 2 ∧ ∧
− ω 2 p + k 2 c p = iω Q (26)
Define ω 1 iQ (27)
ν ≡ ; h= ∧
kc 2k c p
We now ask what form h should have for stability. First, we note that at the
stability threshold, ν is real, and so h = (1 − ν 2 ) / 2ν must also be real. From (27),
∧ ∧
this means that i Q must be in phase (or counter-phase) with p , namely, “volume
addition rate” must be 90o ahead of or behind pressure oscillations:
νR
ν R + 2hR − =0
ν R2 + ν I2
(31)
νI
ν I + 2hI + =0
ν R2 + ν I2
1 ⎡ 1 ⎤
From (31b), hI = − ν I ⎢1 + 2 2 ⎥
(32)
2 ⎣ ν R + iν I ⎦
This shows that whenever hI > 0 , ν I < 0 . Since p ' ∼ e iωt = e −ω t e iω t ,ν I < 0
I R
⎛ ∧
⎞
implies instability. Also, from (27b), hI > 0 implies ⎜ Q∧ ⎟ > 0 , which means that the
⎜ ⎟
⎝ p ⎠R
“volume addition rate” Q(t) must have a positive projection on pressure p’(t),
namely, a part in-phase with it. This is a confirmation of the physical intuition that
releasing “volume” when pressure is high must be de-stabilizing. We repeat that this
may mean heat addition, gas addition (vaporization) or molecular mass reduction
rate (decomposition of complex molecules).
Let us now consider briefly the effect of body forces f. Returning to (19) and
defining the complex quantity.
∧
if (33)
ρ = ∧
kp
ν 2 + 2hν (1 − ρ ) = 0 (34)
2ν hI + ρ I = 0 (35)
In the absence of forces, we found that hI > 0 would lead to instability. We see now
that if ρ I = −2ν hI , which is negative, then the process stabilizes at least to the point
⎛ ∧
⎞
of neutral stability. From (33), the conclusion is that ⎜ f∧ ⎟ < 0 is stabilizing, i.e., the
⎜ ⎟
⎝ p ⎠R
body forces should be in the backwards direction (against H velocity) when pressure
is high, and vice-versa.
So, the body forces are in quadrature with the pressure gradient force ( −∇ P ), and
are taking energy away from the wave motion.
Basic scenario:
Express that the total mass burnt in ( t − τ , t ) is always the same, equal to
that burnt under mean condition
t
⎛ p − p⎞
t
∫τ R ⎜⎜ 1 + n ⎟ dt1 = ∫ R d t1 (3)
t− ⎝ p ⎟⎠ t −τ
t −τ t
P −P
∫τ
t−
R dt1 + R n ∫ P
dt1 = 0
t −τ
t
P −P
τ − τ = −n ∫ dt1 (4)
t −τ P
Let now, specifically, m be the rate of gas generation from liquid (local, per
unit volume). The liquid injection rate is constant, equal to m . The gas generated in
(t, t+td) is mdt. This gas originates from liquid that reached its “maturity” for
vaporization between t − τ and ( t − τ )+d ( t − τ ), and since liquid arrives at m ,
m dt = m d ( t − τ )
m−m dτ
= − (5)
m dt
dτ P (t ) − P (t − τ )
From (4) = −n
dt P
m−m P (t ) − P (t − τ )
and so =n (6)
m P
Despite all efforts at avoidance through design, the need remains for devices
that will help damp the many potential modes of instability in any given rocket
combustor. A new technology for active control is now evolving [31], in which
feedback controlled acoustic generators are used to cancel unstable waves. Since the
growth can be detected at small amplitude, it may not be necessary to inject very
large acoustic powers for this purpose. Nevertheless, the mainstay of current
practice is based on passive damping methods. A good description of these methods,
with design guidelines, is given in Ref. 32.
The most important high frequency stabilization devices are injector head
baffles and acoustic absorbers. Baffles are radial or circumferential barriers attached
to the injector head and extending 0.1-0.2 diameters in the axial direction. An
example of a baffled injector is that of the SSME (Fig. 3, from Ref. 2). The exact
mechanism by which baffles enhance stability is not well understood, which has led
to some divergence in design. It appears that the effect is related to the sensitivity
of the droplet velocity cross-over point, which occurs quite close to the injector face,
and it may involve disruption of the tangential gas motion associated with tangential
modes, or shifting of the local acoustic frequencies to values above the characteristic
drop vaporization frequencies.
Acoustic absorbers are cavities on the chamber walls with relatively narrow
connecting channels to the chamber, so as to dissipate power during pressure
oscillations in their vicinity. Their action is much better understood than that of
baffles, and designers can proceed with some confidence, using methods described,
for example in Ref. 32. Absorbers are often located on the cylindrical walls, near the
injector, or as “corner slots” between injector and cylinder. They can also take the
form of a continuous double wall with an array of holes periodically arranged to
connect to the chamber. The absorption coefficient of a well-designed absorber can
be high over a relatively wide frequency band, so as to contribute damping to the
most prevalent modes. Sometimes several different absorbers are used, each tuned
to a different frequency. Fig. 4 (Ref. 32) shows a baffled injector with corner
absorbers, and Fig. 5 (Ref. 32) shows an extended acoustic liner.
VR dPR •
2
= −m (1)
c dt
d
dt
(
( ρ Ai Lv ) = Ai PR' − Pc )
•
or, using m = ρ A i v ,
• ⎛ • 2 ⎞
d m Ai ⎜ m ⎟ (2)
= P − P −
L ⎜⎜ 2 ρ A i2 ⎟⎟
R C
dt
⎝ ⎠
•
Consider next the other half-cycle, when the cavity is filling ( m <0). The
pressure at the chamber-side of the duct, which is now the flow inlet is
1
Pc' = Pc −
2
( )
ρ −v 2 , whereas that at the exit of the duct is now just PR. Eq. (1) still
holds, whereas the momentum balance is now
• ⎛ • 2 ⎞
d m Ai ⎜ m ⎟ (3)
= ⎜ P − P +
2 ρ A i2 ⎟⎟
R C
dt L ⎜
⎝ ⎠
⎛ •
⎞
•
⎜ dP m •
⎟
d2 m Ai d m dPc
= ⎜ R − − ⎟
dt 2 L ⎜ dt ρ A i2 dt dt ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎝ ⎠
•
• m •
2
d m dm Ai • A i dPc
+ + c2 m=− (4)
dt 2
ρ L A i dt LVR L dt
•
This equation is non-linear in m , but we can obtain reasonable results for steady
•
state operation if we replace m by its time average over one cycle. The analysis
•
reduces them to that of a forced linear oscillator, except that m needs to be
⎛ • ⎞
⎜ m ⎟ ∧
⎜ 2 Ai ⎟ • Ai ∧
(6)
⎜ −ω + ρ L A i ω + c L V ⎟ m = − i ω L δ pc
2
⎜ i R ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎝ ⎠
∧
V ∧ •
i ω R2 δ PR = − m (7)
c
c2 A i
∧
δ PR L VR (8)
∧
=
•
δ Pc m
c2 A i
+ i ω − ω2
L VR ρ L Ai
Ai
From this, the natural frequency of the oscillations is seen to be ωn = c (9)
L VR
and the damaging factor ζ is given by
• •
m m
L VR
2 ζ ωn = , or ζ = (10)
ρ L Ai 2 ρ L Ai c Ai
∧
•
For the “rectified sine wave” m (t), we can see that m = 2 m , and from (7) and (8),
• •
c2 A i
•
2 VR ∧
2 V L VR ∧
(11)
m = ω δ PR = ω R2 δ Pc
π c 2
π c •
m
c2 A i
+ i ω − ω2
L VR ρ L Ai
ω ω LVR
(12)
ν ≡ =
ωn c Ai
∧
δ Pc
2 VR (13)
ρ ≡
π L A i 1 ρ c2
2
2 2
• ⎛ ρ c Ai 2 2
⎞ ⎡
We then obtain m = 1 ⎜ ( ) (1 − ν ) ⎤
2 4
⎟ ⎢− 1 − ν 2 + 2
+ p2ν 4 ⎥ , and substituting in
2 ⎜⎝ ω VR ⎟ ⎣
⎠ ⎦
(10), the damping ratio is
p2ν 2 / 2 (14)
ζ2 =
( ) ( )
2 4
1 −ν2 + 1 −ν2 + p2ν 4
(a) For any frequency, the damping increases with pressure fluctuation intensity.
This is a favorable circumstance because we need the damping most when
combustion is rough. Mathematically, this is a consequence of the non-
linearity of the equation. Physically, energy is dissipated both during
aspiration and during expulsion of gas from the cavity, (by the mixing out of
the jet kinetic energy), and it is clear that more energy is dissipated when the
driving pressure differences are stronger.
(b) Although the algebra is still tedious, differentiation of (14) shows that ζ is
maximum at ν = 1 , i.e., when the cavity is tuned in resonance with the
pressure fluctuations (by selecting parameters so that ωn = ω ). Putting ν = 1
in (14) gives
∧
δ Pc
VR
ζ MAX = p /2 = (15)
π L Ai 1
2
ρc2
∧ ∧
δ Pc δ Pc
1 2 VR 2
ζ MAX = = ω (16)
ωL π ρ Ai π ρ
This indicates we should use short inlets, large cavity volumes and
Ai ω2
small inlet areas (subject to = 2 ).
LVR c
∧
δ Pc
1 2 1 2
L=
ω ζ MAX π ρ
=
12 , 500 π
(1.25 × 10 ) 4
= 7.2 × 10−3 m = 7.2 mm
π
VR = 1.34 0.0052 = 2.63 × 10−5 m3 = 26.3 cm2
4
If this is shaped as a cubic cavity, its side is about 3 cm. These dimensions are
sketched (roughly to scale) below.
1 •
δξ R = δ m v 2 + ρ δ PR VR =
2
• •
d (δξ R ) 1 • dδ PR m δm
= δ m v δv + VR v = δv =
dt 2 dt ρ Ai ρ Ai
With no dissipation
• •
d m Ai d δ m Ai L •
= ( PR − PC ) = δ PR δm
dt L dt L Ai
• VR dPR d δ PR c2 • VR
m=− =− δm δ PR
c 2 dt dt VR c2
2
L 2⎛ • ⎞
c ⎜ δ m ⎟ + VR (δ PR )
2
2
Ai ⎝ ⎠ L ⎛ • ⎞ VR
2 (
δ PR )
2
ζR = = ⎜δ m⎟ +
2ρc 2
2 ρ Ai ⎝ ⎠ 2ρc
With dissipation
⎛ • • ⎞
• ⎜ m δ m⎟
dδ m A i ⎜ ⎟ c2 L •
= ⎜ δ PR − 2 ⎟
δm
dt L ρAi Ai
⎜ ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎝ ⎠
d (δ PR ) c2 •
=− δm VR δ PR
dt VR
d ⎡ L 2 ⎛ • ⎞2 2⎤
c ⎜ δ m ⎟ + VR (δ PR ) ⎥
•
⎢ m
dt A
⎢⎣ i ⎝ ⎠ ⎦⎥ = ⎛ • ⎞
2
3
•
m ∧
• •
2 •
Average εR = m = m
2 ρ 2 A2i π
∧
• Ai ∧ ρ L Ai ρ A2i ∧
At resonance, m = − δ Pc = − δ Pc
L • •
m m
2 ρ Ai
2
• ∧ •
2 ∧
m = δ Pc m = ρ A2i δ Pc
π •
π
m
3/2 3 3/2
•
1 ⎛2 ∧
⎞ 1 ⎛2⎞ 2 Ai ∧
εR = 2 ⎜
ρ A2i δ Pc ⎟ = ⎜ ⎟ δ Pc
2 ρ Ai ⎝ π
2
⎠ 2 ⎝π ⎠ ρ
• 3
1 ζR 1 N ⎛2⎞ 2 Ai ρ c2 2 NA i ρ
( ∆ωI )ch. =N = = c2
2 ξc 2 2 ⎜⎝ π ⎟⎠ ρ ∧ 2π 3/2
Vc ∧
Vc δ Pc δ Pc
contribution of ωI of
chamber, due to N
resonators Ai
Also, (ωn )c = (ωn )R = c
L VR
( ∆ωI )c 1 N Ai ρ 1 L VR 1 N ρ c2
∆ζ c = = c2 = L VR A i
ωn 2π 3 Vc δ Pc c Ai 2 π3 Vc ∧
δ Pc
δ Pc 1.25 × 104 1
Example ω = 2π × 2000 Hz = =
ρc 2
1.2 × 1.25 × 106
120
π
L = 7.2 × 10−3 m VR = 2.63 × 10−5 m3 Ai = 25 × 10−6 m2
4
1 N π
∆ζ c = 7.2 × 10−3 × 2.63 × 10−5 × 25 × 10−6 120 = 2.7 × 10−5 N
2π ∋ 0.1 4
π D lT N l 2 3730 × 16
N= lT = = = 475 cm
l 2
πD π × 40