2nd International Conference on Thermal Engineering and Management Advances

(ICTEMA2022)
15-16 January, 2022
ICTEMA2022_X

CFD simulation of atmospheric reentry of the FIRE-

II capsule under supersonic conditions
Anik Mandal Nirmal K. Manna Sandip Sarkar
Department of Mechanical Engineering Department of Mechanical Engineering Department of Mechanical Engineering
Jadavpur University Jadavpur University Jadavpur University
Kolkata, India Kolkata, India Kolkata, India

Abstract—Theoretical estimations of the thermal heat flux spacecraft to withstand these high thermal loads. In our
into space ships during their reentry into the atmosphere of present work, we have considered phenolic asbestos as the
some planet have been one of the interesting fields of study in material.
modern day computational fluid dynamics. In our present
work, we have considered the case of Earth. We have simulated II. MODELLING
the entry of the FIRE - II space capsule, which was launched in
Bluff body approximation has been followed in this
the year 1965. It reentered earth with a velocity of 11.36 km/s
at an altitude of 76.42 km, at 1634 seconds from its launch.
simulation study. Some modifications have been put forward
Simulation of its entry has been solved using computational into the geometry of the original FIRE-II spacecraft (Fig. 1).
fluid dynamics. It is a case of compressible flow, and the A three-dimensional view of the modified geometry has
turbulence model has been selected as Spalart Allmaras been shown in Fig. 2. The minor modifications put into the
turbulence model, because it has been found to be showing original geometry helped in simplification of the model.
good results in case of such modern day aerospace problems.
We have simulated this re-entry by using Ansys Fluent solver
to visualize the shock layer formed during this supersonic
travel of the space capsule in the atmosphere of Earth. It is
important to mention that the heat flux into the spaceship for
the forebody stagnation point and the afterbody has been
computed for instances of time starting from time 1634 seconds
to 1640.5 seconds.

Keywords—CFD, Re-entry corridor, heat flux calculation,

Aerodynamics.

I. INTRODUCTION
One of the most challenging aspects in modern day
spaceships is their reentry in the atmosphere of any planet.
There are three basic phases, which need to be taken into
account for this reentry study. These include deceleration,
heating and accuracy of landing (impact). The payload and
structure of the vehicle limit the maximum deceleration it
can withstand. Minimizing the deceleration is not the only
concern of re-entry designers, too little deceleration can also
cause serious problems. It can cause the space shuttle to Fig. 1. FIRE-II dimensions.
bounce off into the atmosphere and back into the cold
reaches of space. During the reentry phase, the atmosphere
presents a dense fluid medium whose physical properties
(like density, ambient temperature, viscosity, and thermal
conductivity) change rapidly with time. Any object entering
the atmosphere also has a huge amount of kinetic energy due
to its speed and potential energy due to its position above
the surface. This energy eventually is converted to heat,
which needs to be dissipated in order to prevent melting of
the spacecraft.
Several researchers [1-3] have suggested the use of
Phenolic Impregnated Carbon Ablator (PICA) and phenolic
asbestos as some ideal material that would enable the Fig. 2. 3D model considered in the present study.

1
 Fig 3 shows the notation followed, namely X and L,
wherefrom we define the axial position of the point of study
in our work. We have conducted the study at an axial
position of X/L = 0.19 in our present work.
properties of air (since these properties vary with altitude
over the surface of a planet), we have modified these in the
material properties for fluid. Also, the material properties of
the wall of the space capsule was entered as per those of
phenolic asbestos. The initialization type was selected as
hybrid initialization. An extract of the solver monitor
showing the convergence of the solution to calculate the
heat transfer rate is given below.

Fig. 5. Converging solutions for calculation of heat transfer rate.

Boundary conditions were applied as per flight data

shown in Table 1. Velocity inlet was selected as inlet
boundary condition and pressure outlet was selected as
outlet boundary condition with reference pressure as 0 Pa.
Wall temperature (Tw), ambient temperature (T ), and
Fig. 3. Various axial positions of the spacecraft body (surface). density were obtained from the data listed in Table 1. Since
Reynolds number is also available and we know the
A. Meshing velocity, density, and spacecraft dimensions, we could easily
Meshing has been done in the AMP environment. The determine the value of dynamic viscosity, which is an
physics preference was set as CFD with a solver preference important input parameter to the solver.
of FLUENT. The inflation option was set as a smooth
transition. The meshing has been performed using elements TABLE I. CONSIDERED DATA FOR THE PRESENT STUDY
of size 0.04 mm. In order to get fair results, it is Time Altitude Red Velocity Density T Tw
recommended that in ANSYS meshing the maximum (s) (km) (km/s) (kg/m3) (K) (K)
skewness should be less than 0.95 with an average value less
1634 76.42 2x104 11.36 3.72e-5 195 615
than 0.33. In our case, the maximum skewness is 0.85 and
the average value is 0.24. Fig. 4 shows the 3D meshing of 1636 71.04 5x10 4
11.31 8.57e-5 210 810
the spacecraft and the surrounding fluid domain. 4
1637.5 67.05 7x10 11.25 1.47e-4 228 1030
5
1639 63.11 1x10 11.14 2.41e-4 242 1325
5
1640.5 59.26 2x10 10.97 3.86e-4 254 1560

C. Validation
We are interested in estimating the heat flux at some
axial position and the forebody stagnation point of the
spacecraft. The simulation was run for 5000 iterations per
Fig. 4. Meshing of spacecraft geometry and surrounding fluid domain. run. The results obtained in the present work have been
validated with the experimental data available from work of
B. Simulation setup other researchers [5]. This can be seen from Fig. 6. Heat flux
at the forebody stagnation point is given in Fig. 7.
The simulation is performed using Ansys Fluent R2021.
3D steady state simulations are performed over a range of TABLE II. VALIDATION USING EXPERIMENTAL HEAT FLUX DATA
velocities, Reynolds number, and free stream temperature (INTO THE SPACECRAFT) AT X/L = 0.19.
conditions. The boundary conditions put forth in the
problem have been obtained from the experimental data Time [s] 1634 1636 1637.5 1639
listed in. Since several studies [4] suggest the use of the
Experimental heat flux [W/cm²] 6 14 15.1 15.1
Spallart Allmaras one equation turbulence model for
Aerospace applications involving compressible flows, this Heat flux from simulation [W/cm²] 4.022 9.79 14.5045 18.1319
has been used in this particular simulation. On intermediate
grids, (1<y4<30), the formulation maintains its integrity and TABLE III. THE PRESENT AND EXPERIMENTAL DATA OF HEAT
provides consistent wall shear stress and heat transfer FLUX INTO SPACE CRAFT AT FOREBODY STAGNATION POINT
coefficients. The solver type was selected as a density-based
solver. In order to incorporate the modifications of the Time [s] 1634 1636 1637.5 1639
 Experimental heat flux [W/cm²] 3.75 6.25 8.7
Heat flux from simulation [W/cm²] 1.37 2.04 2.39
Fig. 6. Heat flux into the spacecraft at an axial position of x/L = 0.19.
In order to calculate the heat flux, we have first
calculated the total heat transfer into the given area of
interest. Then, we calculated the area of this zone. Dividing
the total heat transfer by the area, we have obtained the heat
flux into the region of study. All the calculations have been
performed by the solver.
Fig. 7. Heat flux into the spacecraft at the forebody stagnation point.
III. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
During supersonic flow, when the velocity of an object
exceeds the local acoustic velocity, the Mach number
exceeds 1 and a shock layer is usually formed ahead of the
moving body. The simulation shows this feature clearly.
Given below is Fig. 8 and Fig. 10 which shows extracts of
the post process result which clearly shows the shock layer.
In the present study, we have only considered the basic
model that considers aerothermal properties including
density, thermal conductivity, temperature, heat flux, and
REFERENCES
[1] Suvriti Dhawan , Mohit Vishal and Anmol Taploo , Thermal
Protection for a Re-Entry Vehicle using Heat Ablation Process.
[2] SM Johnson , Thermal Protection Materials and Systems : Past ,
Present and Future.
[3] AR Bahramian , M. Kobaki , Polymer Nanocomposites as ablative
materials.
11.25
2.43
Fig. 8. Pressure variation in the flow field at a velocity of 660 m/s.
Across a shock wave, physical properties of a fluid
change abruptly .The shock layer formed on the forebody
causes heating of the spacecraft, as discussed earlier. Recent
research in this field has predicted several models [6] for
this reentry process, where various other effects like thermal
radiation, catalysis of the surface material of the spacecraft
and chemical transport are taken into consideration.
Fig. 9. Streamlines showing velocity variation over the spacecraft at a
velocity of 660 m/s.
Fig. 10. Diagram showing variation of Mach no. in the flow field.
molar mass of fluid. This study may provide usual data for
providing initial solutions for the more advanced models just
discussed.
[4] Steven R Allmaras , Forrester T Johnson and Philippe R Spalart ,
Modifications and Clarifications for the Implementation of the
Spalart-Allmaras Turbulence Model.
[5] Michael Wright, Mark Loomis, and Periklis Papadopoulos ,
Aerothermal Analysis of the Project Fire II Afterbody Flow.
[6] Michael J. Wright, James L. Brown, Krishnendu Sinha, Graham V.
Candler, Frank S. Milos, Dinesh K. Prabhu , Validation of Afterbody
Aeroheating Predictions for Planetary Probes: Status and Future
Work.
[7] G. Eason, B. Noble, and I. N. Sneddon, “On certain integrals of
Lipschitz-Hankel type involving products of Bessel functions,”Phil.
Trans. Roy. Soc. London, vol. A247, pp. 529–551, April 1955.
(references)
[8] I. S. Jacobs and C. P. Bean, “Fine particles, thin films and exchange
anisotropy,”in Magnetism, vol. III, G. T. Rado and H. Suhl, Eds. New
York: Academic, 1963, pp. 271–350.
[9] K. Elissa, “Title of paper if known,”unpublished.
[10] R. Nicole, “Title of paper with only first word capitalized,”J. Name
Stand. Abbrev., in press.
[11] Y. Yorozu, M. Hirano, K. Oka, and Y. Tagawa, “Electron
spectroscopy studies on magneto-optical media and plastic substrate
interface,”IEEE Transl. J. Magn. Japan, vol. 2, pp. 740–741, August
1987 [Digests 9th Annual Conf. Magnetics Japan, p. 301, 1982].
[12] M. Young, The Technical Writer’s Handbook. Mill Valley, CA:
University Science, 1989.