See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/338876119

Correction: Numerical Modeling and Analysis of Afterburner Combustion of a

Low Bypass Ratio Turbofan Engine

Conference Paper · January 2020

DOI: 10.2514/6.2020-0628.c1

CITATION READS

1 18

6 authors, including:

Muhammad Muneeb Safdar Bilal Mufti

National University of Sciences and Technology Georgia Institute of Technology
9 PUBLICATIONS   6 CITATIONS    12 PUBLICATIONS   5 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Bilal Mufti on 25 October 2022.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 AIAA SciTech Forum 10.2514/6.2020-0628
6-10 January 2020, Orlando, FL
AIAA Scitech 2020 Forum

Numerical Modeling and Analysis of Afterburner

Combustion of a Low Bypass Ratio Turbofan Engine
M. Muneeb Safdar1, Bilal Mufti2 and J. Masud3
Aerospace Engineering Department, College of Aeronautical Engineering,
National University of Sciences & Technology, Islamabad, Pakistan
muneeb.safdar@cae.nust.edu.pk

Afterburner is used to augment the thrust of aircraft during the takeoff or combat
situations. Flow through afterburner of a turbofan engine is 3-dimensional, reactive,
compressible, viscous and turbulent. Performance of afterburner significantly depends
on combustion performance which is influenced by many individual factors and their
mutual interaction. These factors include chemical factors (fuel properties, reaction
Downloaded by GEORGIA INST OF TECHNOLOGY on October 25, 2022 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.2020-0628

kinetics), aero thermodynamic factors (Pressure, temperature, and velocity of the

mixture approaching the afterburner combustion chamber) and geometrical factors
(shape and dimensions of flame holder / diffuser). These and other factors both singly
and commonly affect combustion performance of an afterburner. Therefore, to evaluate
the overall combustion performance of a low bypass ratio turbofan engine, turbulent
combustion was modeled and analyzed using computational fluid dynamics (CFD)
technique. Analysis was carried out to simulate afterburner functioning at engine
ground run (standard sea level conditions). The computed wet thrust, total pressure and
total temperature at the afterburner exit showed good agreement when compared with
the experimental results. Combustion performance was evaluated in terms of axial and
radial concentration of various species involved in combustion, total pressure loss
through the afterburner, combustion stability enforced by flame holder and variation of
total temperature and pressure in radial as well as axial direction. Fuel was found
completely burnt during the combustion simulation, thereby, depicted efficient
combustion. Combustion was found stable in afterburner due to optimum sized flame
holder. Flow characteristics through afterburner were also investigated. Exhaust nozzle
was revealed to be operating in over expanded mode.

Nomenclature

CFD Computational Fluid Dynamics

CAD Computer Aided Design
CD Convergent Divergent
M Mach number
RKE Realizable K-E turbulence model
SKE Standard k-epsilon
y+ Non-dimensional length scale associated with turbulence model
PDF Probability Distribution Function

I. Introduction

An afterburner is a thrust reinforcing device of gas turbine engines installed on military aircraft.
Reinforcement of thrust is usually required during takeoff, combat, supersonic flight and when higher
maneuverability of aircraft is required. The afterburner works by de-swirling of gases leaving the turbine,
followed by diffusion of gases in diffuser and pouring additional fuel into the gases to initiate the combustion in
the wake of flame holders [1]. An amount of oxygen that remains un-burnt in main combustion chamber after
passing through turbine act as oxidizer for the fuel to burn. The combustion results in increased temperature of

1
Assistant Prof, Aerospace Engg Dept, CAE, National University of Sciences & Technology (NUST), Pakistan
2
Lecturer & Research Associate, Dept of Mech. & Aero. Engg, IAA, Air University, Islamabad 44000, Pakistan
3
Associate Prof, Dept of Mech. & Aero. Engg, IAA, Air University, Islamabad 44000, Pakistan. Associate
Fellow AIAA.

1
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
Copyright © 2020 by Muhammad Muneeb Safdar. Published by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc., with permission.
 gases which raises the velocity of exhaust gases. Velocity of exhaust gases is further increased by passing
through variable area CD nozzle and resulting in increased thrust.
The afterburner combustion efficiency is influenced by many individual factors and their mutual interaction.
These factors include fuel properties, reaction kinetics, aero thermodynamic factors (Pressure, temperature, and
velocity of the mixture approaching the afterburner combustion chamber) and geometrical factors (shape and
dimensions of flame holder / diffuser) [2]. All engine performance parameters are interlinked with each other.
Improvement in a single parameter can adversely affect other performance parameters. In jet engines, efficiency
of afterburner is maximum when combustion takes place at the highest possible pressure and temperature, and
then gases are expanded down to the ambient pressure. However, as the oxygen contents in air are reduced after
passing through main combustion chamber and combustion is not taking place in a highly compressed air,
efficiency of afterburner combustion is reduced in comparison to main combustion. Efficiency of afterburner
combustion also reduces with increasing altitude due to decreased inlet pressure at higher altitudes.
Historically, different studies have been carried out to study the flow field and analyse the performance of
afterburning section of a turbo-engine. Shigeo Nakanishi and Charles R. King [3], investigated the effects of
configuration changes on afterburner combustion performance. The reduction in V-gutter flame holder diameter
caused a considerable loss in efficiency. Cheng-Xian Lin et.al [4] studied the effects of inlet turbulence intensity
Downloaded by GEORGIA INST OF TECHNOLOGY on October 25, 2022 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.2020-0628

and angle of attack on the chemically reacting turbulent flow. The investigation of temperature variation around
a V-gutter flame holder in a channel was done in detail in this study. Cuppoletti et al. [5] investigated the high
frequency combustion instabilities with a radial V-gutter flame holder. In this study simulation of operating
conditions of a modern gas turbine engine augmenter was done. Robert Branstetter and Gregory M Reck [6]
simulated afterburner with circular V –gutter and sector of parallel V gutter. In all these studies a relatively basic
geometry of flame holder (V-gutter) and fuel spray bars was modelled and flow field characteristics downstream
of exhaust nozzle were not analysed in detail. This study aims to model the afterburner combustion of engine a
low bypass ratio turbofan and study the combustion performance and flow characteristics inside the afterburner
section as well as downstream of the converging diverging (CD) exhaust nozzle.

II. Geometry Modelling

Afterburner under study consists of diffuser to reduce the fluid velocity and increase the static pressure in
order to ensure efficient and stable combustion (Fig.1a), fuel spray bars to ensure proper fuel distribution into
the afterburner combustion zone (Fig.1b), a flame holder to create a low velocity recirculation zone ahead of it
for efficient burning of fuel (Fig.1c) and a variable area CD nozzle to create a higher exit jet velocity by
changing its throat and exit area under different operating modes of engine.

(a) (b) (c)

Fig.1 (a) Diffuser (b) Fuel Spray Bars (c) Flame Holder

2
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
Downloaded by GEORGIA INST OF TECHNOLOGY on October 25, 2022 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.2020-0628

Fig.2 Isometric view of Modelled Afterburner

Geometry was modelled using the available drawings. Intricate geometric features were also modelled to
analyze their effect on afterburner performance. The fuel spray bars had 42 small holes to spray fuel. The
Geometry of flame holder was also complex due to large number of holes and contours on its body.
All the individual components of afterburner i.e. diffuser section, fuel spray bars, flame holders and tail pipe
were assembled (Fig.2). Analysis was performed on a 30 degree sector of afterburner due to its axisymmetric
geometry. The sector comprised of 01 flame holder and 02 fuel spray bars. In order to apply proper boundary
conditions at exit and to capture flow characteristics downstream of CD nozzle, the computational domain was
extended in radial direction as well as axial direction as shown in Fig.3.

Fig.3 Sector View of Afterburner with Extended Computational Domain

III. Grid Generation

Accuracy of CFD analysis is heavily dependent upon the grid density, mesh size and quality [7]. Intricate
geometric features of flame holders and fuel spray bars were meshed with triangular element as shown in Fig. 4.
After creating the surface mesh, volume mesh was grown from the flame holder and fuel spray bars surfaces
onto the adjacent mesh interfaces Fig. 5. This enabled a smooth transition from a finer mesh to a coarser mesh.
The geometry was sliced into multiple sections in order to create different mesh type in different sections of the
geometry as shown in Fig. 3. The major proportion of geometry was meshed with hexahedral elements having
the advantage of aligned flow direction with meshed element and keeping the element count to as minimum
possible [8]. The diffuser section, jet pipe, CD nozzle and extended computational domain were meshed with
hexahedral elements; however, volume comprising flame holder and fuel spray bars was meshed with
tetrahedral element. A five layered prism was also applied to capture near wall effects and to cater for required
Y-plus values. Mesh independence study was carried out and finally a mesh size of 3.6 million was selected for
analysis.

3
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
Downloaded by GEORGIA INST OF TECHNOLOGY on October 25, 2022 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.2020-0628

Fig.4 Surface Mesh on Various Components of Afterburner

Fig.5 Volume Mesh on Afterburner Domain

IV. Computational Setup

A. Combustion Modeling
Simulating turbulent combustion in afterburner section of a turbo-engine is a major challenge in field of
CFD [9]. Combustion can be modelled through Premixed, partially premixed, and non-premixed combustion
approach[10]. In afterburner of engine under the study, air and fuel enters the afterburner combustion chamber
in distinct streams with simultaneous mixing and burning, therefore, non-premixed combustion model was used.
This method uses Mixture fracture approach (probability distribution function) which is used for simulation of
turbulent diffusion flames [11]. The mass fractions of individual species involved in combustion reaction are
obtained through balanced chemical reactions between fuel and oxidizer. The non-premixed model also has the
advantage that it allows prediction of intermediate species, and rigorous coupling between turbulence and
chemistry. Therefore, method is computationally efficient as it does not require the solution of a large number of
species transport equations. The settings of various parameters for modelling non premixed combustion are
given in Table 1.

Table 1. Non Premixed Combustion Model Settings

S No Parameters Status
1 Inlet Diffusion ON
2 Compressibility Effects ON
3 Energy Treatment Non Adiabatic
4 State Relation Chemical Equilibrium
5 Fuel Species C12H23
6 Fuel Temperature 342 K
7 Oxidizer Temperature 1030 K

4
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
 B. Boundary Conditions
Adiabatic no slip condition was applied on the walls of afterburner. Pressure boundary condition was
applied at afterburner inlet and exhaust to control the intake mass flow rate. Pressure far field was imposed at the
boundary of extended computational domain.

C. Turbulence Model
Two types of turbulence models were analyzed; Standard k-epsilon (SKE) model and Realizable k-
epsilon (RKE) for comparison. RKE model was selected as it showed better results as compared to the SKE
model [12]. For inlet boundaries, value of turbulence kinetic energy was calculated as 0.01 whereas a value for
turbulence dissipation rate was calculated as 1 [13] . The computed results were found to be consistent with
experimental results, therefore further trials with different turbulence models was not done.

V. Results and Discussion

A. Afterburner Performance Comparison with Experimental data

Downloaded by GEORGIA INST OF TECHNOLOGY on October 25, 2022 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.2020-0628

Afterburner performance parameters computed using CFD technique was compared with available
experimental data for validation. A comparative analysis revealed that performance values computed using CFD
were in good agreement with the experimentally computed values. [14].

Table 2: Comparison of Afterburner Performance Parameters (CFD Vs Experimental)

PARAMETER CFD CALCULATED VALUES EXPERIMENTAL VALUES

Thrust 7686 kgf 8300 kgf
Mass flow rate 74.4 kg/s 76 Kg/s
Exit total pressure 264659 Pa 274302 Pa
Exit total temperature 1953k 1960k

B. Concentration of Species Involved in Combustion

The concentration of combustion species (reactant and products) involved in chemical reaction was analyzed
in order to assess the combustion efficiency. As the fuel requires oxygen to burn, therefore, concentration of
oxygen was found to be lowest in the combustion region (Fig.6a). Flame behind the flame holder continues to
ignite the fuel, causing the flame to propagate downstream. The fuel C12H23 was found to be almost completely
consumed inside the afterburner (Fig.6b) depicting an efficient combustion process.

(a)

(b)
Fig.6 (a) Concentration of O2 (b) Concentration of Fuel C12H23

5
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
 The product of combustion is carbon dioxide, vapor state of H 2O and small fraction of carbon monoxide.
Mass fractions of these combustion products are shown in Fig.7. In the combustion zone concentration of CO2
was found maximum (Fig.7a). Concentration of water vapors was found moderate (Fig.7b), concentration of CO
was found relatively less (Fig.7c). Several other combustion by products were also produced but are not
presented here due to their very low concentration.

(a)
Downloaded by GEORGIA INST OF TECHNOLOGY on October 25, 2022 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.2020-0628

(b)

(c)
Fig.7 (a) Concentration of CO2 (b) Concentration of H2O (c) Concentration of CO

C. Total Pressure Loss Coefficient

Performance of the afterburner is evaluated in terms of wet thrust and the total pressure loss across the
system. The total pressure loss of an afterburner is mainly composed of losses due to the diffuser, the drag of the
flame holder and the losses occurred during combustion process. These losses in total pressure have a major
effect on engine thrust. Typically, a 1% increase in total pressure loss will result in a 1% decrease in thrust [14].
Total Pressure loss coefficient of the afterburner was found to be 9.2% which shows that afterburner is
efficient and well-designed. The major loss of 5% of total pressure was caused by the flame holder. Variation of
total pressure through afterburner is shown in Fig.8.

Fig.8 Contours of Total Pressure in Flow Domain

6
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
 D. Analysis of Flow Recirculation behind Flame Holders
Recirculation of flow is required behind the flame holders to get a stabilized and efficient combustion. Flame
holder produces a low velocity circulatory flow in its wake (Fig.9). This circulatory flow help to stabilize the
flow, however, it also contributes towards the total pressure loss coefficient of afterburner. Hence, there is an
optimum size of the flame holder for a given approach stream velocity which gives highest flame stability and
efficiency. The geometry of the flame holder is revealed to be of optimum size as it not only ensures stabilizing
the combustion but also avoids significant loss in total pressure of flow through afterburner as seen in Para 3.

Flame Holder
Downloaded by GEORGIA INST OF TECHNOLOGY on October 25, 2022 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.2020-0628

Fig.9 Recirculation of Flow in the Wake of Flame Holder

E. Radial and Axial Variation of Mach No, Pressure and Total Temperature.
The analysis was further extended to investigate the various flow characteristics through afterburner.
Variation of Mach number in flow domain is shown on axial plane in Fig.10. Mach number increases along the
length of CD nozzle and it reached its maximum value at the exit plane of the nozzle. The nozzle is revealed to
be over-expanded at sea level. Mismatch in pressure at nozzle exit gives rise to Mach “disc” in nozzle exhaust.
A large plume section can be observed downstream of exhaust nozzle in the form of reflecting Prandtl Mayer
oblique shock and expansion waves.

Fig.10 Axial Variation of Mach No in Flow domain

Fig.11 shows the radial variation of Mach number on flame holders. It is evident that Mach number is
maximum at the center area due to no blockage to the flow. Mach number was found to be minimum at surface
of flame holder.

7
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
Downloaded by GEORGIA INST OF TECHNOLOGY on October 25, 2022 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.2020-0628

Fig.11 Radial Variation of Mach No on Flame Holders

The exit gas pressure is lower than the atmospheric pressure; therefore, a supersonic compression process is
required in order to match the exit pressure with ambient pressure. An oblique shockwave is formed at the exit
of nozzle increasing the pressure to more than ambient value. Subsequently, an expansion wave is formed to
lower the pressure in order to match with ambient pressure. In this way Nozzle produces jet flow consisting of
regions of increasing and decreasing pressure as depicted in Fig.12. Static pressure is maximum at the body of
flame holder due to formation of stagnation point at the flame holder (Fig.13).

Fig.12 Axial Variation of Static Pressure in Flow Domain

Fig.13 Radial Variation of Static Pressure on Flame Holders

8
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
 The afterburner flame behind the nozzle was found to be 8m long at static sea level conditions. The
incoming air is heated along the flow direction. As the air mixes and burns with the gas gradually, the
temperature distribution becomes uniform. The maximum flame temperature was observed at the exit of exhaust
nozzle as shown in Fig.14. The cool bypass air maintains the temperature of outer boundary wall of jet pipe at a
relatively lower value. Average temperature of gas at nozzle exit was found 1953K.

Fig.14 Variation of Total Temperature in Flow Domain

Downloaded by GEORGIA INST OF TECHNOLOGY on October 25, 2022 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.2020-0628

Radial variation of total temperature on flame holders is shown in Fig.15. Highest temperature is observed in
upper struts of flame holder as most of the fuel spray holes are located in upper annular region of afterburner.
Relatively lower temperature was observed at the center portion of afterburner. The temperature near the outer
wall is also at a lower value thus maintaining the jet wall at safe temperatures.

Fig.15 Variation of Total Temperature on Flame Holders

The radial variation of temperature at various axial location of afterburner is shown in Fig.16. Flame anchors
behind the flame holder and the high temperature region continues downstream in reacting flow. The maximum
temperature was found at the average radius of 2/3R. However, temperature was at lower value at axis and
boundary of afterburner. The increase in temperatures throughout the length of afterburner increases the velocity
of the gases considerably to achieve the required boost in thrust.

Fig.16 Radial and Axial Variation of Total Temperature

9
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
 VI. Conclusion

The combustion performance and flow field analysis of afterburner has successfully been carried out in this
study. Non-premixed turbulent model was used to simulate turbulent combustion in afterburner section. The
computed wet thrust, total pressure and total temperature at the exit of afterburner were compared with the
experimental results. The numerical results were found in good agreement with the experimental values.
Concentration of reactant and product species involved in combustion was analyzed which revealed an efficient
combustion. Pressure loss coefficient was found to be 9.2 % at static sea level condition which depicts an
efficient combustion with minimum loss of total pressure. Geometry of flame holder was evaluated on its
purpose of creating a low velocity recirculation zone downstream in order to ensure efficient combustion. The
geometry of the flame holder is revealed to be of optimum size as it not only ensures stabilizing the combustion
but also avoids significant loss in total pressure of flow through flame holder. Axial and radial variation of flow
parameters was also analyzed in afterburner as well as in extended computational domain at the downstream of
afterburner. Engine was found to be operating with over-expanded nozzle at static sea level condition.
Downloaded by GEORGIA INST OF TECHNOLOGY on October 25, 2022 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.2020-0628

References

1. Mattingly, J. D. Elements of propulsion: gas turbines and rockets: American Institute of Aeronautics
and Astronautics, 2006.
2. Trovati, A., Turrini, F., and Vinci, C. "Afterburner design and development," RTO meeting
proceedings. 1999.
3. King, C., and Nakanishi, S. "Effects of some configuration changes on afterburner combustion
performance," 1957.
4. Lin, C.-X., and Holder, R. J. "Reacting turbulent flow and thermal field in a channel with inclined bluff
body flame holders," Journal of Heat Transfer Vol. 132, No. 9, 2010, p. 091203.
5. Cuppoletti, D., Kastner, J., Reed, J., and Gutmark, E. "High frequency combustion instabilities with
radial V-gutter flameholders," 47th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting including The New Horizons
Forum and Aerospace Exposition. 2009, p. 1176.
6. Branstetter, J. R., and Reck, G. M. "Afterburner performance of film-vaporizing V-gutters for inlet
temperatures up to 1255 K," 1973.
7. Anderson, J. D., and Wendt, J. Computational fluid dynamics: Springer, 1995.
8. Dewan, A. Tackling turbulent flows in engineering: Springer Science & Business Media, 2010.
9. Sivaramakrishna, G., Muthuveerappan, N., Shankar, V., and Sampathkumaran, T. "CFD Modeling of
the Aero Gas Turbine Combustor," ASME Turbo Expo 2001: Power for Land, Sea, and Air. American
Society of Mechanical Engineers, 2001, pp. V002T02A030-V002T02A030.
10. Smith, C. E., and Leonard, A. D. "CFD modeling of combustion instability in premixed axisymmetric
combustors," ASME 1997 International Gas Turbine and Aeroengine Congress and Exhibition.
American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1997, pp. V002T06A041-V002T06A041.
11. Peters, N. "Laminar flamelet concepts in turbulent combustion," Symposium (International) on
Combustion. Vol. 21, Elsevier, 1988, pp. 1231-1250.
12. Wilcox, D. C. Turbulence modeling for CFD: DCW industries La Canada, CA, 1998.
13. Spalart, P., and Allmaras, S. "A one-equation turbulence model for aerodynamic flows," 30th
aerospace sciences meeting and exhibit. 1992, p. 439.
14. Kumar, R. "A method of estimating pressure loss across flame holders in high velocity streams,"
combustion Science and Technology Vol. 21, No. 5-6, 1980, pp. 199-203.

10
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

View publication stats