Copyright© 1997, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc.
COMBINED DUCTED ROCKET and SOLID FUEL RAMJET CYCLE
C.R. Limage*
Atlantic Research Corporation
Gainesville, Va
ABSTRACT
This paper evaluates the combination of a
ducted rocket with a solid fuel ramjet to enhance
the acceleration capabilities of the solid fuel ramjet
cycle. Trade studies were conducted on both an
air launched high speed cruise missile and a low
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA on July 20, 2017 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.1997-3397
altitude ground launched missile. Study results
showed a greater than 20% reduction in total
propellant (booster and ramjet) required using the
combined ducted rocket cycle.
The feasibility of the combined cycle was
demonstrated in a test program. Testing evaluated
both thrust and surface regression rates for solid
fuel ramjet grains only and solid fuel grains
augmented with ducted rocket flow. Test results
showed 100% net thrust augmentation is
achievable during ducted rocket burn with
minimum effect on solid fuel ramjet grain burning
characteristics after ducted rocket burn-out.
Results of the paper clearly demonstrate
the feasibility of the combined ducted rocket/solid
fuel ramjet cycle for enhancing the acceleration
capabilities of solid fuel ramjet powered missiles.
INTRODUCTION
The Solid Fuel Ramjet (SFRJ) propulsion
system is potentially the most attractive choice for
many missile applications. It is inherently a higher
energy system than the ducted rocket. It has the
advantage of simplicity over a liquid fuel ramjet and
thus fits within the "wooden round" concept of solid
rocket propulsion motors. Typical missile systems
where the SFRJ has shown promise are those
missions requiring extended flight times at nearly
constant cruise conditions such as:
- High speed cruise missiles
- Low altitude surface-to-air or air-to-
surface missiles
* Senior Member AIAA
Copyright ©1997 by the American Institute of Aeronautics and
Astronautics, Inc. All rights reserved.
1
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
- Low altitude anti-ship missiles
- Anti-armor missiles
- Gun launched projectiles
The inherent sensitivity of the SFRJ grain
regression rate with airflow and pressure provide
a passive throttle capability for the missile as a
function of Mach number and altitude. However,
the lack of active throttling places some limits on
the systems acceleration capabilities compared to
fully throttleable systems such as liquid fuel ramjets
and variable flow ducted rockets. As a result, the
SFRJ engine requires either a larger solid rocket
motor to boost the SFRJ engine to takeover Mach
number or the loading efficiency of the SFRJ grain
is compromised to obtain the increased surface
area needed for higher fuel flows. The relative
inefficiency of the resultant SFRJ fuel loading or
the larger booster motor can severely degrade the
potential SFRJ missile performance.
In order to overcome the SFRJ limited
acceleration capability it is proposed to combine
the high acceleration capability of the Ducted
Rocket (DR) with the SFRJ to produce a more
efficient missile system then the SFRJ alone. The
solid fuel ducted rocket cycle offers some distinct
advantages during the acceleration phase. The
ducted rocket has a much higher stoichiometric
fuel/air ratio then the SFRJ, and therefore is
capable of operating at much higher fuel flows and
hence higher thrust levels during acceleration for
the same inlet capture flow. Additionally, the
ducted rocket recovers a large percentage of the
incoming fuel momentum resulting in improved inlet
operating margins at lower operating speeds.
Finally, the ducted rocket gas generator produces
a high velocity stream of hot fuel-rich gases and
micron size fuel particles with significant axial
momentum. This hot efflux readily ignites and
burns when mixed with the incoming free stream
airflow. Flowing this hot efflux from the gas
generator over the surface of the SFRJ grain will
significantly increase the ignition and sustain
combustion limits of the SFRJ grain particularly
 Copyright© 1997, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc.
during the initial low Mach number acceleration
phase.
The resulting combined ducted rocket and
solid fuel ramjet cycle (DR/SFRJ) would be
configured by integrating a small fuel rich gas
generator with the solid fuel ramjet to supply
increased fuel flow during initial operation. The
gas generator would be located just upstream of
the inlet dump region as shown in Figure 1. The
gas generator would have a fixed throat area sized
to provide a nearly stoichiometric mixture when
combined with the SFRJ fuel flow. Sufficient gas
generator fuel would be supplied to accelerate the
missile to the desired cruise condition. A trade
study of two applications was conducted to
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA on July 20, 2017 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.1997-3397
evaluate the efficiency of the combined DR/SFRJ
cycle. The two applications considered were a
high speed air launched cruise missile and a low
altitude ground launched missile.
TRADE STUDIES
For the high speed air launched cruise
missile, a study was conducted to evaluate the
advantage of using the combined ducted rocket to
assist in reaching the desired cruise conditions
versus using a larger booster motor. The study
was conducted using a 10 inch diameter missile
with a constant inert weight of 325 pounds. The
missile was launched from Mach=0.9 at 20kft
altitude and climbed to a constant cruise Mach =
5.0 at 60kft. A total range of 150 nm was assumed.
Because of the extreme differences between the
ramjet take-over conditions and the cruise
conditions, large variations in the SFRJ grain
burning surface (greater than 2 to 1) would be
needed to achieve the fuel flow rates required for
satisfactory ramjet operation. These large
variations in burning surface geometry can't be
accomplished without large losses in available fuel
loading. Therefore, for the cruise missile, the SFRJ
grain was sized for cruise conditions only and the
ducted rocket grain was used during the
acceleration and climb phase to provide the
additional fuel required. In conducting the study,
the amount of booster propellant was varied and
the DR/SFRJ geometry (inlet and throat area) was
sized at the resulting take-over condition to
maximize thrust while retaining positive inlet
margins. Using these constraints, the effects of
end-of-boost Mach number (Meob) on the amount
of propellant needed for boost, climb and cruise
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
are shown in Figure 2. A significant total propellant
weight advantage is seen available by use of the
DR/SFRJ approach with a low end of boost Mach
number. The difference between Meob = 2.5 and
Meob = 4.5 results in over 20% reduction in total
propellant required and a 15% reduction in the total
missile launch weight. Equally important would be
the reduction in propellant volume required for
missiles that are carried internally.
The low altitude ground launched missile
study compared the amount of total propellant
(booster plus ramjet) required using the DR/SFRJ
cycle versus using a boosted SFRJ only. In this
study, the SFRJ grain was sized for successful
ramjet take-over and not optimized for cruise. As a
result, for the SFRJ only, the fuel-air ratio was
higher then desired for cruise for the systems with
smaller boosters (lower end of boost Mach
numbers). For a typical low altitude ground
launched missile, the amount of propellant that can
be saved by the use of the combined DR/SFRJ is
shown in Figure 3. The figure shows the total
propellant weight (booster + ramjet) required for a
10 nm fly-out versus end-of-boost Mach number
(Meob). The two systems converge when the
booster size is sufficient to achieve the selected
cruise Mach number (M=2.5). The figure shows
the minimum DR/SFRJ total propellant weight to be
20% less than for the SFRJ with booster only. This
difference in total propellant weight could be used
as additional SFRJ fuel loading (approximately
25% increase) which would significantly enhance
the range of the DR/SFRJ cycle relative to a
boosted SFRJ missile of the same launch weight.
TEST PROGRAM
In order to evaluate the feasibility of the
DR/SFRJ concept, a test program was conducted.
The objectives of the tests were to demonstrate the
effectiveness of increasing the thrust level of a
solid fuel ramjet by injecting the exhaust gases
from a fuel rich ducted rocket gas generator over a
SFRJ grain. The test hardware is shown
schematically in Figure 4 . A solid fuel gas
generator is combined with 6" diameter SFRJ
hardware. Air flow is introduced annularly into the
head end of the gas generator blast tube to form a
coaxial mixing region prior to reaching the solid fuel
grain. The fixed area gas generator nozzle throat
was sized to provide a near-stoichiometric
condition when ignited concurrently with the SFRJ
 Copyright© 1997, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc.

grain. A circular injector plate is located at the
head end of the solid fuel grain. A L/D=2 mixing
section is located downstream of the grain. The
SFRJ grain design was sized for optimum cruise
fuel-air ratio. A reduced smoke propellant was
used in the gas generator and a hydrocarbon
SFRJ propellant was used for the main motor.
Initial testing was conducted without the gas
generator to obtain baseline SFRJ performance.
Testing was performed over a range of air flow
rates from 3.2 to 10 Ibm/sec at a constant air
temperature of 1200°R. This provided a range of
simulated cruise flight conditions for evaluating the
potential thrust augmentation. A matrix of the test
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA on July 20, 2017 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.1997-3397
at 35K ft. A distinct 200 Ibf drop in thrust is seen
when the gas generator burns out. Correcting the
thrust levels for ram drag results in over a 100%
increase in net sustained thrust during gas
generator operation. Similar results were obtained
for the other two flight conditions. Table 3 shows
the average gross thrust and combustor pressure
measurements during the augmented and non-
augmented portions of the test for the three
augmented tests. A comparison of the net thrust
results after correction for inlet ram drag, with and
without gas generator augmentation is shown in
Figure 7 as a function of airflow. The two solid
lines are linear fits for the augmented and non-

conditions is presented in Table 1. The combined augmented data. Good correlation is seen
DR/SFRJ test sequence was initiated by igniting between the non-augmented portion of the gas
both the gas generator and the SFRJ grain generator firing (GAS GEN OFF) and the SFRJ
simultaneously to simulate the initial acceleration only test data. These results clearly demonstrate
condition. The gas generator was sized to burn out the feasibility of the DR/SFRJ cycle to augment
about half way through the SFRJ grain burn thrust.
resulting in a step down in thrust to the normal
sustain level. Ramjet performance was measured Table 2. Average Thrust and Combustor
using combustor pressure and thrust stand Pressure, SFRJ only
measurements. Test No. Wair Thrust P4
(Ibm/sec)^ (Ibf) (psi)
Table 1. Demonstration Test Matrix
Test Wair TTo Configuration 1 3.2 304 70
No. Jlbm/sec) (°R) 2 6.0 725 90
1 3.2 1200 SFRJ only
3 10.0 1175 140
2 6.0 1200 SFRJ only
Table 3. Gas Generator (GG) Augmented Data,
3 10.0 1200 SFRJ only With and Without Gas Generator Operation
4 4.0 1200 Gas Generator Test Wair Thrust Thrust P4 P4
No. (Ib/sec) with no with no
5 6.0 1200 Gas Generator GG GG GG GG
(Ibf) (Ibf) (psi) (PS')
6 8.0 1200 Gas Generator
4 4.0 560 445 73 60
A typical gross thrust trace for a non-gas-
generator-augmented test is shown in Figure 5 for 5 6.0 880 685 107 85
the 6.0 Ibm/sec test condition, simulating a flight
6 8.0 1075 1005 128 122
condition of Mach 3.2 at 35K ft. The initial large
increase in thrust is caused by the methane torch
igniter system. A summary of the average gross A novel experimental diagnostic tool was
thrust and combustor pressure results for the three employed to resolve grain surface spatial and
non-augmented tests are presented in Table 2. A temporal regression behavior during the test. This
gross thrust trace from a typical run with gas technique measures surface regression rate by
generator augmentation is shown in Figure 6, relying on fiber optic strands embedded in the grain
again at the 6.0 Ibm/sec test condition of Mach 3.2 to sense the arrival of the burning grain surface. A
schematic of the fiber optic approach is presented

American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

 Copyright© 1997, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc.

in Figure 8 showing a fiber optic probe, location in the grain bore in pounds mass per square inch per
the grain and output. Each fiber optic mates to an second.
individual photo transistor to indicate an initial light
pulse from arrival of the burning grain surface. Table 4. Average Grain Regression Behavior,
Each fiber optic probe is made up of three fiber SFRJ only
optic strands, positioned within the grain web at
Test Wair f G
0.125 inches from the initial port surface, and
No. (Ibm/sec) (in/sec) (Ibm/in2-sec)
thereafter spaced at 0.125 inch intervals. Four
probes at 90 deg orientations were located at 3- 1 3.2 0.0223 0.2068
inch intervals along the grain length, beginning at
3 inches from the leading edge of the grain. The 2 6.0 0.0300 0.3916
grain was drilled after casting to accommodate the
fiber optic probe installation. 3 10.0 0.0377 0.6575
Data acquired from the fiber optic probes
are used to prescribe the local regression behavior The regression rate behavior was
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA on July 20, 2017 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.1997-3397

of the three-dimensional grain bore contour as a measurably altered by the gas generator
function of time, and circumferential and axial augmentation. Figure 10 shows the surface spatial
positions. The data reduction technique centers on and temporal regression behavior for Test 5 (same
the use of a cubic spline numerical approximation conditions as Test 2, 6.0 Ibm/sec). The figure
approach to establish the contour functional shows a more non-uniform regression behavior
behavior between accurately known measured than observed in the non-augmented case. The
data points. Data reduction generates a function instantaneous regression rate versus time for the
which characterizes the grain surface spatial and augmented test, Figure 11, shows a rapid
temporal regression behavior allowing local decrease in regression rate during the gas
evaluation of grain surface regression rate, port generator burn followed by nearly constant rate
area and burning surface area. after gas generator burn out. The return to a
Evaluation of the local grain regression nearly constant burn rate after gas generator burn
rate will begin with an examination of the SFRJ out demonstrates that the combined DR/SFRJ
performance without gas generator augmentation. approach can provide the desired cruise fuel flow
Grain surface spatial and temporal regression rates. The average regression behavior for the
behavior is shown in Figure 9 for Test No 2 (air three augmented tests are shown in Table 5. The
flow = 6.0 Ibm/sec). The figure represents regression rate are presented as the average over
contours of the regressing grain surface at one the total test and the average over the augmented
second time intervals. The grain is 15.8 inches in portion only.
length, with a web of 0.58 inches. The vertical
scale is much expanded for clarity. The x-axis Table 5. Average grain Regression Behavior,
represents the original grain surface. The y-axis SFRJ with Gas Generator
represents the plane of the sudden expansion,
while the line at y=0.58 inches is the grain case Total Test GG Only
interior surface. Flow within the grain port is from Test r G f G
left to right. Figure 9 shows a region of high rate No. (in/sec) (Ibm/in2-sec) (in/sec)_ (Ibm/in2-sec)
regression occurring downstream of the
recirculation zone reattachment region with rather 4 .02404 .2573 .03083 .2798
uniform regression behavior observed over the
remainder of the grain. This regression behavior is 5 .03191 .3901 .03525 .4247
typical of SFRJ combustion patterns. The
instantaneous regression rate (distance between 6 .03327 .5099 .03703 .5382
lines) is seen to be fairly uniform through out the
run. Average regression rate for the three non- A comparison of the augmented and non-
augmented tests are shown in Table 4, where r is augmented regression rate test results are
the average surface regression rate in inches per presented in Figure 12. The data show a
second and G is the average air mass flux through surprising good correlation between the non-

American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

 Copyright© 1997, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc.

augmented data and the augmented test overall
average data. During the gas generator burn time
a significant increase in regression rate is
observed. It is not clear at this time the degree of
augmentation attributable to the gas generator fuel
flow and that attributable to enhanced SFRJ fuel
flow. Further diagnostic of the fiber optic
regression data is required to decouple these two
elements.
CONCLUSIONS
The results of the test program
demonstrated the feasibility of the combined
DR/SFRJ cycle for delivering excess thrust for
acceleration over a range of flight conditions. The
surface regression data show that the gas
generator has little effect after burn out on the
SFRJ burning characteristics. The test results
combined with the system trade studies validate
that the proposed combined engine system
provides a unique method for enhancing the
performance of a SFRJ powered missile.

Mixing Section Ramjet

Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA on July 20, 2017 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.1997-3397

Nozzle

Solid Fuel Ramjet

^— Ducted Rocket
Grain
Grain

Figure 1. Schematic of Combined Ducted Rocket and Solid Fuel Ramjet Cycle.
600 51.0

50.0

500

400

HI
a.
O
CC
300
i I

ML=0.9
HL=20KFT
200

100 40.0
2.5 2.7 2.9 3.1 3.3 3.5 3.7 3.9 4.1 4.3 4.5 4.7 1.8 1.9 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5
END OF BOOST MACH - Meob END OF BOOST MACH - Meob

Figure 2. Total Propellant for Cruise Missile, 150 Figure 3. Total Propellant for Ground Launched
NM at M=5.0, H=60kft. Missile, 10NM at M=2.5.

American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

 Copyright© 1997, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc.

Hydrocarbon
SFRJ Grain
Air Inlet
r—Combustor
\ Mixing Section
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA on July 20, 2017 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.1997-3397

Gas Generator -Gas Generator

Exit Nozzle
Ramjet-
Exhaust
Nozzle

Figure 4. Schematic of Feasibility Demonstration Test Hardware.

TESTNo. 2 M=3.2 TEST No. 5

6.0 Ibm/sec H=35Kft 6.0 Ibm/sec

r\
MA.
THRL ST

jo r
o:
xt- RAM ~"
DRAG sus
tTAIN
THR LIST

s^- I-- \

r
........... \

°
'0 00 20.00 10.00 60.00 80.00 120.00 llO.i .00 a'o.oo ub. DO s'o.oo a'o.oo I'OO.OO 1^0.00 140.

TIME - sec TIME -sec

Figure 5. Thrust Performance, Test No. 2, SFRJ Figure 6. Thrust Performance, Test No. 5,
only, 6.0 Ibm/sec. Augmented SFRJ, 6.0 Ibm/sec.

American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

 Copyright© 1997, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc.

RBER OPTIC ASSEMBLY

UGMENTED J
/fs
400 RBER Of TK PROBE
i GAS GEN OFF / ~ ~ 1
a GAS GEN ON / \

£ / i ,

h- 300
CO
ID
/ A
D: / /NON-AUGMENTED
X
/

/ \
t 200 / /
—— T-—— '
z / \
/

LLI / /

C5 / /

£ 100
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA on July 20, 2017 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.1997-3397

>
<

0
A
/

-1 nn
0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0
AIR FLOW - Ibm/sec
8.0 10.0 12.0 v^
Figure 7. Average Net Thrust With and Without Figure 8. Schematic of Fiber Optic Diagnostic
Augmentation. Approach

0.64

0.48

CQ
LU

^ 0.32
<
(T
(3

0.16

0.00
2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 16.0 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 16.0
GRAIN LENGTH GRAIN LENGTH

Figure 9. Grain Regression Behavior, Test No. Figure 10. Grain Regression Behavior, Test No.
2, SFRJ Only. 5, Augmented SFRJ.

American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

 Copyright© 1997, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc.

0.05 i———r

0.040
x's
~ 0.04
8 0.038
10
-i' 7
f 0.036
UJ A f*'
O
co < 0.034
/
CO
UJ /
cc z f
f
"
/
o
UJ
Q 0.032
CO ~l
//
a: 0.02 CO f''^
co tt 0.030
'
0
O
UJ 3 - SFHJ Only
UJ
a: 0.028 /
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA on July 20, 2017 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.1997-3397

Au jmentec
<
2
UJ
O
< 0.026
/ -
0.01
LU / o SFRJ.W/O GAS GEN
CO 4 GAS GEN ONLY
< 0.024 * GAS GEN, TOTAL TEST ^
/
O
0.022

0.00 0.020
0,0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 16.0 18.0 Q1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.
TIME - sec MASS FLUX - Ibm/in2-sec

Figure 11. Instantaneous Regression Behavior, Figure 12. Average Grain Regression Behavior
Test No. 5, Augmented SFRJ. With and Without Augmentation.

8
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics