NUMERICAL ANALYSIS ON STAR-SEGMENTED

ROTATION FUEL GRAIN WITH ALUMINIUM

A PROJECT REPORT

Submitted by

KARTHIKA A S (TVE22MEPL06)

in partial fulfilment for the award of the degree

of
MASTER OF TECHNOLOGY
in
PROPULSION ENGINEERING

DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING, TRIVANDRUM

APJ ABDUL KALAM TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY
JANUARY 2024
 DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING TRIVANDRUM

CERTIFICATE

This is to certify that the project report entitled “NUMERICAL ANALYSIS ON STAR-
SEGMENTED ROTATION FUEL GRAIN WITH ALUMINIUM” submitted by
KARTHIKA A S (TVE22MEPL06) to the APJ Abdul Kalam Technological University in
partial fulfillment of the requirements for the award of the Degree of Master of Technology in
Mechanical Engineering (Propulsion Engineering) is a bonafide record of the project work
carried out by him / her under my /our guidance and supervision. This report in any form has
not been submitted to any other University or Institute for any purpose.

Prof. Abdul Jaleel H Dr. Karthika A. S

Associate Professor Professor
Project Guide P G Coordinator
Dr. Suneesh S. S.
Professor
HOD
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

First and foremost, I concede the surviving presence and the flourishing refinement of almighty
GOD for his concealed hand yet substantial supervision all through the project.

I extend my sincere gratitude to our principal Dr. XAVIER, for his countenance towards the
successful accomplishment of the course.

I sincerely thank Dr. SUNEESH S S, Head of the department of the Mechanical Engineering
for valuable support, comments, advice, guidance and constant encouragement that enables me
to complete my project on time.

I am thankful to my guide Mr. ABDUL JALEEL H for his great support and guidance.

I am also thankful to all the faculty and staff members of Mechanical Engineering Department
for their valuable help and advice.

Further, I extend sincere thanks to my beloved friends for their comments, ideas and criticisms.

Finally, I am grateful to my parents, family members for their help, encouragement and moral
support given to me during the course of work.

KARTHIKA A S
 INDEX

SL NO CONTENTS PAGE NO
1 CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION 04
1.1 WORKING PRINCIPLE OF HYBRID ROCKET 06
MOTOR
1.2 MOTIVATION 07
1.3 SCOPE OF THESIS 08
2 CHAPTER 2
COMPUTATIONAL ANALYSIS 09
2.1 COMPUTATIONAL FLUID DYNAMICS 09
2.2 DISCRETIZATION METHODS 09
2.3 CFD PROCEDURE 10
3 CHAPTER 3
LITERATURE REVIEW 12
4 CHAPTER 4
METHODOLOGY 17
4.1 GEOMETRY 17
4.2 EQUATIONS 18
4.3 MESHING 19
4.4 ANALYSIS 19
5 CHAPTER 5
VALIDATION 21
5.1 GEOMETRY 21
5.2 MESHING 21
5.3 BOUNDARY CONDITIONS 21
5.4 GRID INDEPENDENCE STUDY 21
6 RESULTS 23
6.1 TEMPERATURE DISTRIBUTION 23
6.2 MASS FRACTION OF OXYGEN 23
7 CONCLUSION 26
8 FUTURE WORK 26
9 FUTURE SCOPE 26
10 REFERENCES 27

1
 LIST OF FIGURES

Figure no Page no
1 Typical Hybrid rocket motor 04
2 Mixing and combustion of solid fuel and oxidizer 07
3 Linear regression for solid fuel grain 07
4 CFD process 11
5 Algorithm of numerical approach used by simulation software 11
6 Full scale motor with star-segmented rotation grain 17
7 The cross-section in the middle of star grain 18
8 The rotation angle of 2 star-segmented grain 18
9 Geometry of 3D star-segmented rotation fuel grain 18
10 Meshing of 3D star-segmented rotation fuel grain 19
11 Geometry of 2D star-segmented fuel grain 21
12 Meshing of 2D star-segmented fuel grain 21
13 Boundary names of 2D star-segmented fuel grain 21
14 Temperature distribution of 2D star-segmented fuel grain 23
15 Temperature distribution of 3D star-segmented rotation fuel grain 23
from journal
16 Mass fraction of 3D star-segmented rotation fuel grain from journal 23
17 Mass fraction of 2D star-segmented fuel grain 24
18 Velocity distribution of 2D star-segmented fuel grain 24
19 Pressure distribution of 2D star-segmented fuel grain 25

2
 ABSTRACT

A fuel grain arrangement, consisting of two star-segmented grains, is opted. The impact of
rotation and mid-chamber length on regression rate and flow characteristics is examined.
Hydrogen Peroxide and Hydroxyl Terminated Polybutadiene combined with Aluminium
powder are utilized as propellants in this study. The simulation is carried out in ANSYS
FLUENT software. An UDF is set for finding the regression rate for the grain. The simulation
outcomes are compared among the base case, star-segmented grain with a rotation of 22.50 and
without rotation. The results of this research offer valuable insights for enhancing the
performance of hybrid rocket motors featuring star grain configurations.

3
 CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

Solid rocket motors are simpler to design and produce than the other chemical rocket
propulsion technologies. They have a wide variety of thrust levels, from a few Newtons
produced by a small thruster to a few million Newton produced by a huge booster used for a
space launch vehicle. They are used for single operations. In terms of economics, they are also
considerably cheaper to create.
On the other hand, it might be claimed that there are drawbacks, such as non-controllability
and non-reusability. The amount of thrust in a liquid propellant engine may be adjustable, and
the engine itself may be reused. Additionally, solid propellant rocket motors perform less well
when taking their specific impulses into account.
So, we introduced a new motor called Hybrid motor. The use of fuel and oxidizer in different
phases constitutes a hybrid propellant combination and the rockets using fuel and oxidizer in
different phases are known as hybrid rockets. Different combinations of solid, liquid or gaseous
fuels and oxidizers have been experimented with. The preference has been to use solid
polymeric fuels with liquid oxidizers, such as liquid oxygen, red fuming Nitric acid and di-
nitrogen tetroxide. A typical configuration of a hybrid rocket is shown in Fig.

Figure 1 Typical Hybrid rocket motor

4
Considering the main parts, a solid propellant rocket motor consists of following components:
➢ Motor Case
The motor case is the outer shell of the rocket motor, covering its internal parts, including
the igniter, insulation, and propellant grain. The combustion chamber experiences
tremendous pressure as a result of combustion processes and the motor casing must be built
to handle that pressure. The raw material for the motor case might be metals like aluminium
or steel as well as composite materials.
➢ Igniter
Ignition is the first critical step in rocket propulsion. It is a process of initiating self-
sustained combustion in a solid rocket motor, Liquid engine or Hybrid motor. Ignition of a
fuel-oxidizer propellant combination is achieved by increasing the temperature to its auto
ignition temperature by supplying sufficient energy. Igniter is designed to provide this
energy and to start self-sustained combustion in a rocket motor or engine. Pyrogen igniter,
Pyrotechnic igniter, Spark torch igniter and Hypergolic igniter are the variety methods of
igniter commonly used in solid and hybrid rocket motors.
➢ Insulation
An insulation substance is required to protect the motor parts because the combustion
chamber's temperature can reach thousands of Kelvins during the combustion process. In
order to reduce the tensions created inside the chamber, insulations are also utilized. In
solid propellant rocket engines, materials like EPDM and silica are frequently utilized as
insulators.
➢ Nozzle
Nozzles are used to accelerate and expand the hot gases produced inside the chamber. It is
vital to build the nozzle to expect greater performance from rocket motors because they are
the ones that decide the motor performance and thrust level. Divergent nozzles are
commonly used for the space applications. Since the section from the combustion chamber
to the throat of the nozzle is act itself as a convergent part of the nozzle. Graphite is used
at the throat of the nozzle, because it can withstand at high temperature.
➢ Hybrid Propellants
When fuel and oxidizer are in different phases, the propellant combination is termed as the
hybrid. Hybrid propellants generally comprise a liquid oxidizer and a solid fuel. The fuel
is a polymer as in the case of solid propellants. The liquid oxidizer could be LOX, HNO3,
N2O4. Since the boiling temperature of liquid oxidizers LOX and LF are to each other, a
mixture of 90% LOX and 10% LF, known as FLOX-10, has been used with a solid polymer
5
 fuel such as a polybutadiene. Increasing the fluorine content to about 70% gives higher
values of Isp. This is due to the formation of HF instead of H2O and CO instead of CF4 in
the combustion products both of which contribute to a lower value of molecular mass.
➢ Injector
The most commonly used injector in the hybrid rocket engine is the Showerhead injector.
The injector meters the required amount of oxidizer into the chamber and igniter initiates
the combustion. Oxidizer droplets get vaporized in the pre-combustion chamber, flow
through fuel grain port and react with the fuel to achieve stable combustion. Thus, the
combustion process is influenced by the incoming oxidizer flow pattern. Flow
characteristics can significantly affect the overall behavior of motor in terms of fuel
consumption, combustion efficiency, combustion stability and thrust.
➢ Pre-Combustion chamber
The pre-combustion chamber vaporizes the incoming flow oxidizer from the injector and
distributes the oxidizer into the grain port for combustion process.
➢ Post-Combustion chamber
After main combustion the oxygen and remaining fuel is mixed in the post-combustion
chamber and then the reacted gases are expelled through the nozzle.
➢ Oxidizer Feed System
The oxidizer feed system consists of:
❖ Gas supply system: The main function of the gas supply system is to deliver the oxidizer
from storage tank to the run tank.
❖ Gas manifold: To deliver oxidizer from the run tank to the main valve.
❖ Filter: Filter is used to eliminate the impurities from the oxidizer.
❖ SRV: To release pressure in the system in case of an oxidizer over pressurization.
❖ Control valves: To control the flow of oxidizer.
❖ Flowmeter: Flowmeter is used to measure the mass flow rate of the oxidizer flow.
1.1 Working Principle of Hybrid rocket motor
The liquid oxidizer is sprayed at high pressure over the solid fuel grain. When the
composition of solid fuel and liquid oxidizer is such that contact between them leads to
ignition (the propellant combination is hypergolic), the chemical reaction between them at
the interface liberates heat, causing vaporization and decomposition of the solid fuel. The
decomposed fuel vapor moves outward from the solid fuel surface. Oxidizer vapor, from
the vaporization of the oxidizer spray, diffuses towards the fuel vapor. A stoichiometric

6
 mixture of the fuel and oxidizer vapor is formed in the boundary layer over the solid fuel
and combustion is obtained.
When the propellant combination is non-hypergolic, it becomes necessary to have an initial
slug of hypergolic propellant to start the combustion. This is achieved by a coating of a
reactive substance on the solid fuel or by introducing a small quantity of reactive liquid
oxidizer, which is hypergolic with the solid fuel. Once combustion is initiated,
decomposition of the fuel by the convective heat transfer and mixing with the oxidizer
vapor sustains the combustion in the boundary layer.
The mixing process of the vapors’ formed from the solid fuel and liquid oxidizer is poor
in hybrid rockers, considering that the oxidizer concentration decreases along the length
of the chamber. The mixing process is improved by incorporating a turbulence-generating
device in the port volume. These are of different configurations and comprise of elliptic
and petal-shaped grids and blockages. They generate eddies and help in the mixing of fuel
and oxidizer vapor.

Figure 2 Mixing and combustion of solid fuel Figure 3 Linear Regression for solid fuel grain
and oxidizer

1.2 MOTIVATION
Based on design criteria that include mechanical and ballistic qualities, designers of hybrid
rocket motors select the best propellants and fuel grain configurations. Many prototype
propellant tests may be necessary in order to select the best propellant. Although these tests
produce the most precise answers, they can be expensive and typically take a long time. The
goal of this work is to combine reliable models from the literature and, if possible, to develop
them so they can better forecast regression rate. The primary goal of this work is to forecast
the burning rates of the propellants.

7
The fuel/oxidizer include the most popular of the pairs listed in the aforementioned sections,
HTPB/LOX or GO2 or NO2 or H2O2 is the one that industries prefer; hence the primary goal of
this thesis is to develop a reliable model for forecasting a good fuel grain configuration.
Another reason for doing this work is to have the chance to compare the regression rate data of
different grain configured combustion chamber.
1.3 SCOPE OF THE THESIS
To evaluate the regression rate of HTPB/ H2O2 with 20% of Aluminium with a star-segmented
rotation fuel grain and compare it with the star-segmented rotation grain without Aluminium
and with conventional star grain hybrid rocket motor.

8
 CHAPTER 2
COMPUTATIONAL ANALYSIS

2.1 COMPUTATIONAL FLUID DYNAMICS

Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) constitutes a pivotal subfield within fluid mechanics,
employing advanced numerical techniques and algorithmic approaches to tackle intricate
dilemmas associated with fluid dynamics. CFD leverages the computational power of modern
computers to execute myriad calculations essential for the emulation and scrutiny of the
interactions between fluids and gases, particularly in the context of intricate engineering
surfaces. Despite the utilization of simplified governing equations and the formidable
processing capabilities of high-performance supercomputers, it remains challenging to obtain
precise solutions in numerous scenarios. The inherent complexities involved in fluid flow,
especially in cases involving supersonic velocities or turbulent regimes, persistently necessitate
the development of more refined and efficient computational codes. Research endeavors
continue to be devoted to the enhancement of CFD codes, striving to achieve higher levels of
accuracy and computational efficiency in the simulation of these multifaceted fluid dynamic
phenomena.
The physical aspects of any fluid flow are governed by three fundamental principles:
• Conservation of mass
• Conservation of momentum
• Conservation of energy
• Conservation of species
These fundamental principles are expressed in terms of basic mathematical equations, which
generally are either integral equations or partial differential equations. CFD is the art of
replacing the integrals or the partial derivatives in these equations with discretized algebraic
forms, which in turn are solved to obtain numerical values for the flow field at discrete points
in time and/or space.
2.2 DISCRETIZATION METHODS
There are three discretization methods in CFD
➢ Finite difference method (FDM)
The Finite Difference Method (FDM) employs a discretization approach rooted in the
differential form of the partial differential equation under consideration. In this method,
each derivative within the equation is substituted with an approximate difference formula,

9
 typically derived from a Taylor series expansion. The computational domain is typically
partitioned into hexahedral cells, constituting a grid, with the solution sought at each nodal
point within this grid.
➢ Finite volume method (FVM)
The Finite Volume Method (FVM) adopts a discretization approach rooted in the integral
formulation of the pertinent partial differential equation, such as those governing the
conservation of mass, momentum, or energy. These equations are cast in a form suitable
for solution within finite volumes or cells. The computational domain is subdivided into
discrete finite volumes, and for each volume, a set of twelve governing equations is solved.
➢ Finite element method (FEM)
The Finite Element Method (FEM) utilizes a discretization approach founded on a
piecewise representation of the solution, employing predetermined basis functions. The
computational domain is subdivided into smaller regions, known as finite elements, where
the solution within each element is constructed using these basis functions. The actual
equations to be solved are typically derived by reformulating the conservation equation into
a weak form: the field variables are expressed in terms of the basic functions, the equation
is multiplied by suitable test functions, and then integrated over an element.
2.3 COMPUTATIONAL FLUID DYNAMICS PROCEDURE
Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) codes are designed based on numerical algorithms
tailored to address fluid-related challenges. In order to provide easy access to their solving
power all commercial CFD packages include sophisticated user interfaces input problem
parameters and to examine the results. Hence all codes contain three main elements:
➢ Pre-processing
➢ Solver
➢ Post-processing
The series of processes CFD will follow to analyses the lid driven cavity flow will be shown
below:

10
 Figure 4 CFD process

The convergence of the equation set is checked, and the entire procedure is repeated until
convergence criteria are met

Figure 5 Algorithm of numerical approach used by simulation software

11
 CHAPTER 3

LITERATURE REVIEW

Hybrid rocket propulsion has recently attracted renewed interest for a prospective manned
space exploration mission. The fuels used in a hybrid propulsion system are both solid and
liquid. Two classifications can be distinguished based on the physical state of the propellant:
The two types of hybrid systems are:
1. Direct hybrid system, which uses fuel in the solid phase and oxidizer in the liquid phase.
2. Reverse hybrid system, which uses an oxidizer in the solid state and fuel in the liquid phase
[1].
The solid oxidizer is more difficult to fabricate and has lower achievable performance, hence
this approach is less useful than the traditional system. A hybrid rocket combines the benefits
of its liquid and solid predecessors and enables a wide range of space applications. Due to
improved safety, insensitivity to cracks and imperfections in fuel grain, reduced plumbing
complexity, thrust modulation, and restart capabilities that are compatible with any oxidizer
combination, as well as the ability to be cast with a variety of additives for purposes like high-
energy missions and tailoring the plume signature for military applications, hybrid propellant
rockets are able to compete in the application areas of liquid and solid propellant rockets.
Given the low cost of storage and transportation, the hybrid propulsion system is affordable to
produce and launch [2]. Due to its low explosive nature, safety is an added benefit.
Furthermore, compared to solid rocket propellants, the exhaust from hybrid rockets is pure for
the environment because hydrogen chloride and oxide are not present.
The hybrid rocket has fewer drawbacks despite the long list of appealing features mentioned
above, which hindered its full development from reaching the technical readiness level (TRL).
limited fuel regression rates, limited volumetric loading, shifts in the fuel-to-oxidizer ratio, and
rather inefficient combustion are the main drawbacks of hybrid rockets. The regression rate [3]
is the rate at which solid fuel transforms into gaseous vapor. Non-uniform diffusion into the
combustion zone is the cause of the low regression rate and poor combustion efficiency.
Because of the inadequate oxidizer and fuel mixing those results, this type of application cannot
last for an extended period of time. Traditional fuels used in hybrid rockets, such as hydroxyl-
terminated polybutadiene (HTPB) and polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA), are known for
having low regression rates [4–9].

12
The problem of poor regression rates has seen a number of developments in recent years. Swirl
oxidizer injection [10–14], multi-port fuel grain [15], metallic additives [5,16–24], and
embedding mechanical devices in the fuel grain [25–29] are examples of physical design
alterations that are frequently used to improve performance. The delayed regression issue with
conventional solid polymeric fuels stands out as a potential solution for the paraffin-based solid
fuel [4,30–32]. It exhibits quick volatilization despite having inadequate mechanical strength
to sustain structural deformation during grain manufacture, casting, handling, and
transportation [33,32,30,31,34]. Furthermore, the low combustion efficiency of paraffin-based
fuels causes unburned paraffin droplets to escape during combustion through the nozzle
exhaust [35]. Various additives can be added to paraffin-based solid fuels to enhance their
mechanical performance [33].
The performance of paraffin-based fuels' regression rate is reviewed and examined along with
a number of other enhancement strategies. To balance the ballistic and mechanical performance
of paraffin-based fuels, a brief analysis of the impact of various additives on the mechanical
performance of paraffin-based fuels and their impact on regression rate is necessary.
The boundary layer over the fuel surface is where the combustion of the fuel and oxidizer
vapors occurs in a hybrid rocket. To depict the burning within the boundary layer thickness
and the associated physical and chemical processes, researchers created a number of
combustion models [36–39]. The first boundary layer combustion model for conventional
polymeric fuel was created by Marxman et al. [36].
A flat plate combustion strategy was used by Marxman and Gilbert to create a regression rate
model in the turbulent boundary layer [36]. The model, which was created in the 1960s, is still
frequently used to research the combustion process of hybrid rockets.
After the oxidizer is introduced into the combustion chamber and ignites, a turbulent boundary
layer that is reacting forms over the solid fuel surface. As the solid fuel travels through the
boundary layer, it pyrolyzes and vaporizes. Through turbulent diffusion, the oxidizer vapor
diffuses from the core flow zone towards the fuel vapor. In the boundary layer, where the fuel-
to-oxidizer stoichiometric conditions are met, a diffusion flame region develops. Marxman
discovered that the flame is located between 10 and 20 percent of the boundary layer thickness
above the fuel surface. The pyrolysis energy is provided for stripping the new fuel from the
solid fuel surface and sustaining the process by the heat transfer from the flame zone to the
solid fuel surface [39]. Convection between the flame and solid fuel surface is primarily
responsible for the heat transfer to the fuel surface. Radiative heat transfer also contributes if

13
the fuel contains a lot of metal additions. The fuel mass diffuses towards the flame zone and
degrades away from the boundary layer's solid surface.
A "conductive blockage" is caused when there is less convective heat transfer from the flame
zone to the fuel surface [40]. The rate of regression is slowed down by the obstruction effect.
Significant progress has been made in the comprehension of radiative heat transfer in a hybrid
rocket engine and its relationship to the regression rate by a research team at Pennsylvania
State University led by Kuo and Chiaverini. According to their claims, the radiative flux from
soot and gas-phase combustion products increases the regression rate and the blocking effect
while decreasing convective heat transfer. Using unconventional grain designs, altering the
flow pattern of oxidizer injection, creating turbulence or eddies in the combustion chamber
(using diaphragms), and adding energetic additives, numerous researchers have attempted to
increase the regression rate of conventional polymeric fuels [12,16,28,29,41,42]. However,
while improving the regression rate, these performance augmentation strategies led to complex
motor production and design.
At the U.S. Air Force Research Laboratory in the 1990s, solid cryogenic fuels were examined
for high regression rates. In comparison to conventional polymeric PMMA fuel, they reported
high regression rates of between 3 and 10 times. The authors neglected to mention the physical
and chemical mechanisms underlying the comparatively large regression rates, though. The
regression rate of conventional polymeric solid fuels is constrained by the convection heat
transfer from the flame zone to the solid fuel surface [46]. Because of this, the net regression
rates of these polymeric fuels (which normally burn at a rate of 1 cm/s) are substantially lower
than those of solid propellant. Later, in order to explain the physics driving the high regression
rates of cryogenic fuels, Karabeyoglu created a combustion model for liquefying solid fuels
[44]. The high regression rate was due to the entrainment mass transfer mechanism [44]. The
entrainment of melted paraffin droplets was due to oxidizer flow over solid fuel surface.
The regression rate was 475% better with the HTPB/GOX propellant system (GOX = 32.63
kg/sm2, 100 kg/sm2) than with axial oxidizer injection. Through numerical simulation, a
regression correlation model was created and validated. The results showed that the strong
convective heat transfer from the flame zone to the solid fuel surface is caused by the rapidly
whirling flow close to the fuel surface. Several studies have also demonstrated that the
turbulence intensity and, thus, the burning surface area may be improved by changing the flow
structures at the combustion port, such as by adopting helical grain design [10,29,46-48]. Their
strategy involved combining both swirl oxidizer infusion and helical grain design to accelerate
fuel regression. PMMA and gaseous O2 as an oxidizer were the subject of experimental and
14
numerical studies by Lee et al. [10]. The helical fuel grains were made with pitches ranging
from 6 to 100. When a strong oxidizer swirl was injected, a lower pitch grain design produced
a higher regression rate. Their numerical outcomes were in strong accord with the outcomes of
the experiment. It was determined that grain with a higher pitch number offers the highest rate
of regression.
Metal hydrides are also taken into account as a source of high energy and low molecular weight
(due to hydrogen component) in hybrid rocket propulsion. Most metal hydrides release a lot of
heat during the exothermic process, which helps the performance of the regression rate. The
release of hydrogen during the thermal dissolution of metal hydrides improves combustion
performance, and the residual base metal aids in improving heat transfer to the fuel surface
[45]. The most often researched metal hydride for use in hybrid rockets is aluminium hydride
(AlH3). Compared to LiH, which is employed in liquid propulsion systems, AlH3 has a higher
density [30]. As a result, the upper-stage motor can use it. The HTPB fuel was loaded for the
ballistic tests.
Other problems include unstable combustion, excessive sliver leftovers, and uneven burning
of each grain of fuel [29]. The O/F varies from port to port as a result of the uneven port
burning, which alters the flight mission profile.
The addition of 4% low-density polyethylene (LDPE) to paraffin wax improved tensile strength
and percentage elongation, according to DeSain et al. [49]. The fuel should have a high specific
impulse and better mechanical qualities than pure paraffin for upper-stage launch vehicle uses.
The mechanical characteristics and combustion efficiency of paraffin wax are improved by the
addition of polymers such EVA, PE, and HTPB, however the regression rate is increased by
metal additions [31,50]. To improve the performance of paraffin-based fuel for hybrid
propulsion, scale-up tests of lab-scale motors, mechanical properties, and ballistics
performance should be dedicated. Therefore, serious attention is required to understand the
couple binder-additive effect of polymer-metal additives.
Numerous research and development projects over the past 20 years have demonstrated hybrid
rocket propulsion as a feasible answer for a variety of space applications. Hybrid propulsion is
distinct from previous chemical propulsion systems due to its enhanced safety feature, thrust
termination, re-ignition capabilities, and less sensitivity to solid fuel imperfections. The solid
fuel's weak mechanical characteristics and low regression rate, however, constrained the
maturity level of the hybrid propulsion system. This study explores numerous methods for
enhancing mechanical performance and solid fuel regression rates. Many of these methods
appeared to be sufficient for achieving the requisite degree of mechanical and ballistic
15
performance, allowing the hybrid technology to take the role of solid rocket boosters and liquid
bipropellant stages.
At low combustion pressure, the pressure-sensitive chemical reaction rates might become low
enough to be rate-limiting, and noted that the regression rate of the Plexiglas was 20% lower
at atmospheric pressure than at 250 psia but was independent of pressure above 250 psia.[51]
The regression rate was controlled by the gas dynamics of the turbulent boundary layer
established on the solid fuel surface. [52] A combustion model for hybrid propellants has been
examined to determine its ability to describe observed combustion behavior in hybrid systems.
It has been compared with various test data and specifically a hybrid fuel consisting of 80%
PB/20% PMM and IRFNA oxidizer. The average regression rate behaviour as a function of the
geometric and operating parameters of a system can be predicted.[53]
The hybrid fuels that burn by forming a liquid layer. Reported that the instabilities will result
in the entrainment of droplets into the gas stream. The extra mass-transfer mechanism can
potentially increase the regression rates an order of magnitude larger than the estimated rates.
This is mainly because of the reduced effective heat of gasification, decreased blocking factor
in the hybrid boundary layer and increased surface roughness.[54]
A star segmented rotation grain and analysed it experimentally and numerically and found that
the star segmented rotation grain gives better regression rate and combustion efficiency than
conventional star grain hybrid rocket engine. And also selected an optimal design which gives
better performance among the other star segmented rotation grain.[55] The solid fuels with
different oxidizers and with aluminium and found that solid fuel with aluminium performs
better than that of other conventional fuel combinations.[56]
Different types of grain configuration with a mid-chamber and concluded that the mid chamber
improves the mixing and combustion process of the hybrid rocket engine. The star-tube
segmented fuel grain effectively increases the performance of hybrid rocket engine than a
conventional hybrid rocket engine.[57]
The combustion characteristics of hybrid rocket motor with multi-swirl injection by simulating
the combustion flow field. It is concluded that the average fuel regression rate is improved by
8.37 times as compared to the conventional hybrid rocket motor and also a 95.73% of increase
in combustion efficiency is acquired.[58] Different rotation angles have no influence on the
regression rate of fore-section. But regression rate at the aft-section is higher than that of base
operation conditions. The combustion efficiency is also higher than that of base condition.[59]
The addition of Al can improve the regression rate. The fuel containing 58% of Al can improve
by 88.8% by compared with the fuel with pure HTPB.[60]
16
 CHAPTER 4
METHODOLOGY
The computational fluid dynamics approach was used for numerical simulations of three-
dimensional star-segmented grain with and without rotation and also for including aluminium
particles into it. In this investigation the geometry of 3D grain is done in SOLIDWORKS 2020
and 2D is done in ANSYS WORKBENCH 19.2 and analysis is carried out in ANSYS
FLUENT 19.2.
4.1 GEOMETRY
The design details of the hybrid rocket engine combustion chamber are given below:

Pre-combustion chamber length 200mm

Pre-combustion chamber diameter 286mm
Total grain length 1000mm
Fuel grain outside diameter 285mm
Fuel grain thickness 25mm
Main combustion chamber diameter 286mm
Post-combustion chamber length 200mm
Post-combustion chamber diameter 286mm
Nozzle throat diameter 58mm
Nozzle exit diameter 129.69mm
Nozzle convergence angle 450
Nozzle divergence angle 150
Mid chamber length 10-70mm

Figure 6 Full scale motor with star-segmented rotation grain

17
 Figure 7 The cross-section in the middle of star Figure 8 The rotation angle of 2 star-
grain segmented grain

Figure 9 Geometry of 3D star-segmented rotation fuel grain

4.2 EQUATIONS
The thickness data were filtered using a Gaussian low-pass filter with a cutoff frequency of 1
KHz, after which the thickness derivative, which is necessary for calculating the regression
rate was obtained using a central formula. The equation was then used to directly obtain the
time-space averaged regression rate.
𝒎̇𝒇 2
𝒓̇ =
̅
𝝅𝑳𝝆𝒇 𝑫

̅ = 𝑫𝟎 +𝑫𝟐
Here, 𝑫 is the time–space average port diameter given by the final fuel mass and
𝟐

‘𝒎̇ 𝒇 ’ is the average fuel mass flow rate, which was calculated by subtracting the fuel mass loss
from the burning time, t. While it is simple to quantify the fuel mass loss, determining the burn
time requires identifying the initial surface regression time and the web burnout time on the

18
pressure-time trace. The time–space averaged mass flux is defined based on the average port
diameter.
𝟒(𝒎̇𝒇 + 𝒎̇𝒐𝒙 ) 3
𝑮=
𝝅𝑫𝟐

For the theoretical calculation the following expression used for the Regression rate of a hybrid
propellant:
𝒓𝒃 = 𝒂𝑮𝒏 4

Where ‘n’ is the mass flux exponent and ‘a’ is the burning rate constant and ‘G’ is the mass
flux.
4.3 MESHING
Save the design as .step or .stp file and then import it into ANSYS FLUENT 19.2 software.
The meshing details are given below:
Number of Elements = 654346

Figure 10 Meshing of 3D star-segmented rotation fuel grain

4.4 ANALYSIS
For numerical analysis the boundary conditions are given by [55]
➢ Mass flow rate of oxidizer = 2kg/s
➢ Mass flow rate of fuel = 0.632kg/s
➢ Temperature of oxidizer = 1024K
➢ Pressure of oxidizer = 1.4MPa
Pseudo code version of UDF’s main operation to calculate the regression rate cell by cell [57]
While not converged do
Select faces f of fuel surface S;
for f in S do
𝑇𝑠 = 𝑇(𝑓)

19
 𝜕𝑇
𝑄𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑣 = −𝐾𝑔 ;
𝜕𝑧
𝑇𝑆𝑜𝑙𝑑 = 𝑇𝑠 ;
while (error > tol) and (iter < max_iter) do
𝑇𝑠
0
𝐻𝑣 = ∆𝐻𝑓,𝑖 − 𝐻𝑓0 + ∫ 𝐶𝑝,𝑖 𝑑𝑇 ;
𝑇𝑟𝑒𝑓

𝑟̇ = 𝑄𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑣 /(𝐻𝑣 𝜌𝑓 ); 𝐾𝑔
𝑇𝑆𝑜𝑙𝑑 = 𝐸𝑎 /(𝑅𝑢 (ln 𝐴 − ln 𝑟̇ ));

Error=||𝑇𝑆𝑛𝑒𝑤 − 𝑇𝑆𝑜𝑙𝑑 || ;

Iter++;
end
𝑇(𝑓) = 𝑇𝑆 + 𝛼(𝑇𝑆𝑛𝑒𝑤 − 𝑇𝑆 );
𝑟̇ = 𝑄𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑣 /(𝐻𝑣 𝜌𝑓 );
𝐺𝑓 = 𝜌𝑓 𝑟̇ ;
end
end

0
Species formulation enthalpy ∆𝐻𝑓,𝑖 : 2033631J/kg

Formulation enthalpy of HTPB 𝐻𝑓0 : -310000 J/kg

Pre-exponential factor 𝐸𝑎 : 55803(T<722K)

Universal gas constant 𝑅𝑢 : 287

Arrhenius constant A : 3.9640(T<722K)

Thermal conductivity of HTPB 𝐾𝑔 : 0.283W/m

Reference temperature 𝑇𝑟𝑒𝑓 : 298.13K

Density of fuel 𝜌𝑓 : 930kg/m3

Specific heat capacity 𝐶𝑝,𝑖 1.535 kJ/kgK

20
 CHAPTER 5
VALIDATION

5.1 GEOMETRY

Figure 11 Geometry of 2D star-segmented fuel grain

5.2 MESHING

Figure 12 Meshing of 2D star-segmented fuel grain

Figure 13 Boundary names of 2D star-segmented fuel grain

5.3 BOUNDARY CONDITIONS

➢ Mass flow rate of oxidizer = 2kg/s
➢ Mass flow rate of fuel = 0.632kg/s
➢ Temperature of oxidizer = 1024K
➢ Pressure of oxidizer = 1.4MPa
5.4 GRID INDEPENDENCE STUDY
➢ NUMBER OF ELEMENTS = 30407
➢ NUMBER OF NODES = 31031

21
 3000

2500

2000
Temperature, K

1500

1000

500

0
10000 15000 20000 25000 30000 35000 40000 45000
No of Elements

22
 CHAPTER 6
RESULTS

6.1 TEMPERATURE DISTRIBUTION

Figure 14 Temperature distribution of 2D star-segmented fuel grain

Figure 15 Temperature distribution of 3D star-segmented fuel grain from journal [55]

6.2 MASS FRACTION OF OXYGEN

Figure 16 Mass fraction of 3D star-segmented fuel grain from journal [55]

23
Figure 17 Mass fraction of oxygen in 2D star-segmented fuel grain

Figure 18 Velocity distribution of 2D star-segmented fuel grain

24
 Figure 19 Pressure distribution of 2D star-segmented fuel grain

Values obtained from simulation Values from journal

𝒓̇ (mm/s) G(kg/m2s) 𝒓̇ 𝒇𝒐𝒓𝒆 𝒓̇ 𝒂𝒇𝒕 𝒓̇ 𝒂𝒗𝒆𝒓𝒂𝒈𝒆

0.4569 3.31883 0.4486 0.4770 0.4628

25
 CONCLUSION
From the simulation the temperature distribution and the mass fraction of oxygen are in almost
same trend and the regression rate is also almost equal to the regression rate in the journal. So
the simulation can be validated with the journal.
FUTURE WORK
➢ Simulation to be carried out using star-segmented rotation grain without Aluminium
particle
➢ Simulation to be carried out using star-segmented rotation grain with 20% Aluminium
particle.
FUTURE SCOPE
➢ CFD simulation and experimental analysis by introducing different fuels for the grains.
➢ CFD simulation by introducing multi-swirl injection in both the fuel grains.
➢ CFD simulation by changing the L/D ratio of both the pre and post combustion chambers.
➢ CFD simulation by changing the geometrical features of pre and post combustion chambers
by keeping the L/D same.

26
 REFERENCES
[1] D. Altman, A. Holzman, Overview and history of hybrid rocket propulsion, in: Fun- dam.
Hybrid Rocket Combust. Propuls., American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 2007,
pp. 1–36.
[2] A. Mazzetti, L. Merotto, G. Pinarello, Paraffin-based hybrid rocket engines applications: A
review and a market perspective, Acta Astronaut 126 (2016) 286–297.
[3] M. Chiaverini, Review of solid-fuel regression rate behavior in classical and non- classical
hybrid rocket motors, in: Fundam. Hybrid Rocket Combust. Propuls, American Institute of
Aeronautics and Astronautics, 2007, pp. 37–126.
[4] L.T. DeLuca, L. Galfetti, F. Maggi, G. Colombo, L. Merotto, M. Boiocchi, C. Paravan, A.
Reina, P. Tadini, L. Fanton, Characterization of HTPB-based solid fuel formulations:
Performance, mechanical properties, and pollution, Acta Astronaut 92 (2013) 150–162.
[5] P. George, S. Krishnan, P.M. Varkey, M. Ravindran, L. Ramachandran, Fuel regression
rate in hydroxyl-terminated-polybutadiene/gaseous-oxygen hybrid rocket motors, J. Propuls.
Power. 17 (2001) 35–42.
[6] F. Maggi, G. Gariani, L. Galfetti, L.T. DeLuca, Theoretical analysis of hydrides in solid
and hybrid rocket propulsion, Int. J. Hydrog. Energy. 37 (2012) 1760–1769.
[7] A. Sossi, E. Duranti, M. Manzoni, C. Paravan, L.T. DeLuca, A.B. Vorozhtsov, M.I. Lerner,
N.G. Rodkevich, A.A. Gromov, N. Savin, Combustion of HTPB-Based Solid Fuels Loaded
with Coated Nano-aluminum, Combust. Sci. Technol. 185 (2013) 17–36.
[8] L. Strand, M. Jones, R. Ray, N. Cohen, Characterization of hybrid rocket internal heat flux
and HTPB fuel pyrolysis, 30th Jt. Propuls. Conf. Exhib., American Institute of Aeronautics and
Astronautics, 1994 AIAA-1994-2876.
[9] G. Young, C.A. Stoltz, D.H. Mayo, C.W. Roberts, C.L. Milby, Combustion behavior of
solid fuels based on PTFE/boron mixtures, Combust. Sci. Technol. 185 (2013) 1261–1280.
[10] C. Lee, Y. Na, J.-W. Lee, Y.-H. Byun, effect of induced swirl flow on regression rate of
hybrid rocket fuel by helical grain configuration, Aerosp. Sci. Technol. 11 (2007) 68–76.
[11] S. Oyama, Y. Hirata, K. Araki, K. Ohe, S. Aso, Y. Tani, T. Shimada, Effects of multi–
section swirl injection method on fuel regression rate of high-density polyethylene fueled
hybrid rocket engine, in: 49th AIAAASMESAEASEE Jt. Propuls. Conf, American Institute of
Aeronautics and Astronautics, 2013 AIAA-2013-4040.
[12] E. Paccagnella, F. Barato, D. Pavarin, A. Karabeyoglu, Scaling parameters of swirling
oxidizer injection in hybrid rocket motors, J. Propuls. Power. 33 (2017) 1378–1394.

27
[13] D. Saito, Y. Saburo, K. Hirata, T. Sakurai, N. Shiraishi, Combustion characteristics of
paraffin-fueled swirling oxidizer-flow-type hybrid rocket engines, 48th AIAAASME-
SAEASEE Jt. Propuls. Conf. Exhib., American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 2012
AIAA-2012-3904.
[14] S. Yuasa, K. Yamamoto, H. Hachiya, K. Kitagawa, Y. Oowada, Development of a small
sounding hybrid rocket with a swirling-oxidizer-type engine, 37th Jt. Propuls. Conf. Exhib.,
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 2001 AIAA-2001-3537.
[15] H. Tian, X. Li, P. Zeng, N. Yu, G. Cai, Numerical and experimental studies of the hybrid
rocket motor with multi-port fuel grain, Acta Astronaut 96 (2014) 261–268.
[16] B. Evans, N. Favorito, G. Risha, E. Boyer, R. Wehrman, K. Kuo, Characterization of nano-
sized energetic particle enhancement of solid-fuel burning rates in an X-ray transparent hybrid
rocket engine, 40th AIAAASMESAEASEE Jt. Propuls. Conf. Exhib, American Institute of
Aeronautics and Astronautics, 2004 AIAA-2004-3821.
[17] D. Gramer, W. Knuth, E. Rice, C. St. Clair, Experimental investigation of a metalized
cryogenic hybrid rocket engine, 34th AIAAASMESAEASEE Jt. Propuls. Conf. Exhib,
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 1998 AIAA-1998-3509.
[18] D. Larson, E. Boyer, T. Wachs, K. Kuo, J. DeSain, T. Curtiss, B. Brady, Characterization
of the performance of paraffin /LiAlH4 solid fuels in a hybrid rocket system, 47th
AIAAASMESAEASEE Jt. Propuls. Conf. Exhib, American Institute of Aeronautics and
Astronautics, 2011 AIAA-2011-5822.
[19] Y. Pal, V.R. Kumar, Regression rate studies of hybrid rocket fuel on a lab scale rocket
motor, in: Robot. Autom. Control Embed. Syst. RACE 2015 Int. Conf. On, IEEE, 2015, pp. 1–
5.
[20] Y. Pal, V.R. Kumar, Thermal decomposition study of paraffin-based hybrid rocket fuel
containing Aluminum and Boron additives, Thermochim. Acta. 655 (2017) 63–75.
[21] Y. Pal, V.R. Kumar, Physical and ballistic characterization of aluminum-loaded paraffin
hybrid rocket fuels, Energy Fuels 31 (2017) 10133–10143.
[22] G. Risha, E. Boyer, R. Wehrman, B. Evans, K. Kuo, Nano-sized aluminum and boron-
based solid fuel characterization in a hybrid rocket engine, 39th AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Jt.
Propuls. Conf. Exhib, 2003 AIAA-2003-4593.
[23] G.A. Risha, B.J. Evans, E. Boyer, Metals, energetic additives, and special binders used in
solid fuels for hybrid rockets, in: Fundam. Hybrid Rocket Combust. Propuls., American
Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 2007, pp. 413–456.

28
[24] J.C. Thomas, E.L. Petersen, J.D. Desain, B. Brady, Hybrid Rocket Enhancement by
Micro- and Nano-Scale Additives in HTPB Fuel Grains, American Institute of Aeronautics and
Astronautics, 2015 AIAA-2015-4041.
[25] N. Bellomo, M. Lazzarin, F. Barato, A. Bettella, D. Pavarin, M. Grosse, Investigation of
effect of diaphragms on the efficiency of hybrid rockets, J. Propuls. Power. 30 (2014) 175–
185.
[26] R. Kumar, P.A. Ramakrishna, Effect of protrusion on the enhancement of regression rate,
Aerosp. Sci. Technol. 39 (2014) 169–178.
[27] K. Mon, C. Park, C. Lee, Modification of flow characteristics on the blowing surface by
inserting a diaphragm, J. Propuls. Power. 30 (2014) 1683–1691.
[28] X. Sun, H. Tian, G. Cai, Diameter and position effect determination of diaphragm on
hybrid rocket motor, Acta Astronaut 126 (2016) 325–333.
[29] S.A. Whitmore, S.D. Walker, D.P. Merkley, M. Sobbi, High regression rate hybrid rocket
fuel grains with helical port structures, J. Propuls. Power. 31 (2015) 1727–1738.
[30] L. Galfetti, L. Merotto, M. Boiocchi, F. Maggi, L.T. DeLuca, Experimental investigation
of paraffin-based fuels for hybrid rocket propulsion, EUCASS Proc. Ser. –Adv. Aerosp. Sci. 4
(2013) 59–74.
[31] R. Kumar, P.A. Ramakrishna, Studies on EVA-based wax fuel for launch vehicle
applications, Propellants Explos. Pyrotech. 41 (2016) 295–303.
[32] Y. Tang, S. Chen, W. Zhang, R. Shen, L.T. DeLuca, Y. Ye, Mechanical modifications of
paraffin-based fuels and the effects on combustion performance, Propellants Explos. Pyrotech.
42 (2017) 1268–1277.
[33] K. Veale, S. Adali, J. Pitot, M. Brooks, A review of the performance and structural
considerations of paraffin wax hybrid rocket fuels with additives, Acta Astronaut 141 (2017)
196–208.
[34] S. Ryu, S. Han, J. Kim, H. Moon, J. Kim, S.W. Ko, Tensile and compressive strength
characteristics of aluminized paraffin wax fuel for various particle size and con- tents, J.
Korean Soc. Propuls. Eng. 20 (2016) 70–76.
[35] S. Kim, H. Moon, J. Kim, J. Cho, Evaluation of paraffin–polyethylene blends as novel
solid fuel for hybrid rockets, J. Propuls. Power. 31 (2015) 1750–1760.
[36] G. Marxman, R. Muzzy, C. Wooldridge, Fundamentals of hybrid boundary layer
combustion, Heterog. Combust. Conf., American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics,
1963 AIAA-1963-505.
[37] E. MILLER, Hybrid rocket combustion regression rate model, AIAA J 4 (1966) 752–753.
29
[38] R. MUZZY, Applied hybrid combustion theory, 8th Jt. Propuls. Spec. Conf., American
Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 1972 AIAA-1972-1143.
[39] G.A. Marxman, Boundary-layer combustion in propulsion, Symp. Int. Combust. 11 (1967)
269–289.
[40] A. Karabeyoglu, G. Zilliac, B.J. Cantwell, S. DeZilwa, P. Castellucci, Scale-up tests of
high regression rate paraffin-based hybrid rocket fuels, J. Propuls. Power. 20 (2004) 1037–
1045.
[41] W.H. Knuth, M.J. Chiaverini, J.A. Sauer, D.J. Gramer, Solid-fuel regression rate behavior
of vortex hybrid rocket engines, J. Propuls. Power. 18 (2002) 600–609.
[42] C. Li, G. Cai, H. Tian, Numerical analysis of combustion characteristics of hybrid rocket
motor with multi-section swirl injection, Spec. Sect. Sel. Pap. Int. Workshop Satell. Constell.
Form. Fly. 123 (2016) 26–36 2015.
[43] G.A. Marxman, M. Gilbert, Turbulent boundary layer combustion in the hybrid rocket,
Symp. Int. Combust. 9 (1963) 371–383.
[44] M.A. Karabeyoglu, D. Altman, B.J. Cantwell, Combustion of liquefying hybrid
propellants: part 1, general theory, J. Propuls. Power. 18 (2002) 610–620.
[45] S.C. Shark, T.L. Pourpoint, S.F. Son, S.D. Heister, Performance of dicyclopentadiene/H
2 O 2 -based hybrid rocket motors with metal hydride additives, J. Propuls. Power. 29 (2013)
1122–1129.
[46] H. Tian, Y. Li, C. Li, X. Sun, Regression rate characteristics of hybrid rocket motor with
helical grain, Aerosp. Sci. Technol. 68 (2017) 90–103.
[47] Z. Wang, X. Lin, F. Li, X. Yu, Combustion performance of a novel hybrid rocket fuel
grain with a nested helical structure, Aerosp. Sci. Technol. 97 (2020) 105613.
[48] S.A. Whitmore, S.D. Walker, Engineering model for hybrid fuel regression rate
amplification using helical ports, J. Propuls. Power. 33 (2017) 398–407.
[49] J. DeSain, B. Brady, K. Metzler, T. Curtiss, T. Albright, Tensile tests of paraffin wax for
hybrid rocket fuel grains, 45th AIAAASMESAEASEE Jt. Propuls. Conf. Amp Exhib,
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 2009 AIAA-2009-5115.
[50] Y. Pal, V. Ravikumar, Mechanical characterization of paraffin-based hybrid rocket fuels,
mater, Today Proc 16 (2019) 939–948.
[51] Hui Tian, Xianzhu Jiang, Yudong Lu, Yu Liang, Hao Zhu, Guobiao Cai (2022)
“Numerical investigation on hybrid rocket motor with star segmented rotation grain”,
aerospace, 9, 585, https://doi.org/10.3390/aerospace910585.

30
[52] Sachin Srivastava, Lovi Raj Gupta, Amit Thakur, Anita Gehlot (2023) “Numerical
modelling of hybrid rocket engine”, shanghai jiao tong university,
https://doi.org/10.007/s42401-023-00241-6
[53] Chengen Li, Zongwei Wang, Jin Yang, Jin Peng Jiang, Fan Gong, Zhu Liu, Yu Sun (2023)
“Numerical analysis on combustion characteristics of hybrid rocket motor with star-tube
segmented grain” CSAA, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cja.2023.07.020.
[54] Chengen Li, Guobiao Cai, Hui Tian (2016) “Numerical analysis of combustion
characteristics of hybrid rocket motor with multi-section swirl injections”,
[55] Tian Hui, He Lingfei, Zhu Hao, Wang Pengfei, Xu Xu (2019) “Numerical and
experimental investigation on hybrid rocket motor with two hole segmented rotation grain’’,
school of astronautics, Elsevier, 2019.
[56] Kanami Aoki, Akiyo Takahashi, Kenichi Takahashi, (2022), “Numerical analysis of
combustion of hybrid rocket engine with Al powder added to solid fuel”, Sci. Technology
energy material, vol.83, No 3.
[57] Alessandro Rampazzo, Francesco Barato (2023), “Modelling and CFD simulation of
regression rate in hybrid rocket motors”, Fire MDPI, https://doi.org/10.3390/fire6030100.
[58] Marxman, G. A., Wooldridge, C. E., and Muzzy, R. J., "Fundamentals of hybrid boundary-
layer combustion," AIAA Progress in Astronautics and Rocketry: Heterogeneous Combustion,
edited by H. G. Wolfhard, I. Glassman and L. Green Jr. (Academic Press Inc., New York,
1964), Vol. 15, pp. 485-522.
[59] Green, L., Jr., "Introductory considerations on hybrid rocket combustion," AIAA Progress
in Astronautics and Rocketry: Heterogeneous Combustion, edited by H. G. Wolfhard, I.
Glassman arid L. Green Jr. (Academic Press Inc., New York, 1964), Vol. 15, pp. 451-484.
[60] M.A. Karabeyoglu, D. Altman, B.J. Cantwell, Combustion of liquefying hybrid
propellants: part 1, general theory, J. Propuls. Power. 18 (2002) 610–620.

31