Design Methods for Axisymmetric Supersonic Nozzle Contours

Bholanath Behera 1 and K. Srinivasan2

1
Air Breathing Propulsion Project, Vikram Sarabhai Space Centre
Thiruvananthapuram - 695022, India
Email: b_bhola@hotmail.com
2
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Madras,
Chennai – 600036, India
Email: ksri@iitm.ac.in

Abstract: Supersonic nozzles find application in many engineering systems. In several applications,
minimum length nozzles are preferred for space and weight minimization. In this paper, two methods
for design of axisymmetric supersonic nozzles have been compared. The methods examined are based
on method of characteristics, namely, the analytical method, and the second-order method.
Demonstrative results are presented for Mach 2.5 for various parameters. The results indicate that the
nozzle length obtained by the second order accurate method is the least among all. Such methods hold
promise in active nozzle contour control systems.

Keywords: Supersonic Nozzle Design

1. Introduction

Axisymmetric supersonic nozzles are inevitable in rocket nozzles, propulsive systems and mixing
devices. Conventional applications of supersonic nozzles include experimental facilities like
supersonic wind tunnels, missiles, variable area nozzles, gas dynamic lasers, molecular beams, air
guns, re-entry vehicles etc. Challenging endeavours such as reusable launch vehicles require nozzles to
operate in various flow regimes without compromise on their performance like thrust loss. Hypersonic
air breathing vehicles are being vigorously pursued by several countries and space agencies. These
applications would benefit from active modification of nozzle contours, since the aerodynamic range
of operation is vast, and since the computational capabilities and possibilities are enormous. In all
these applications, the shape of the nozzle contour is extremely important (see for instance [1]).

Supersonic nozzles with gently curved expansion sections are normally used in wind tunnels where
high quality uniform flow is desired in the test section. Hence wind tunnel nozzles are long with a
relatively slow expansion. In contrast, in rockets and gas-dynamical lasers, smaller nozzle lengths are
preferred to have rapid expansion and also to minimize weight in case of rocket nozzles. In such cases,
the nozzles are called Minimum Length Nozzles (MLN) in which expansion section is shrunk to a
point and the expansion takes place through a centered Prandtl-Meyer wave emanating from a sharp
corner throat.

Some of the aforementioned applications may demand active modifications to the nozzle contour,
based on closed-loop feedback. Such active modifications would involve real-time computation of the
nozzle contour, and would hence demand efficient nozzle design methods. Therefore, this paper
focuses on design methods for supersonic nozzle contours. In particular, design methods for
axisymmetric nozzles have been analysed using two methods based on the Method Of Characteristics
(MOC). The methods chosen are:(i) Foelsh’s analytical method [2] and (ii) the second order accurate
method outlined by Argrow and Emanuel [3]. The comparison between the two design methods is

1
made using Mach 2.5 nozzle contour obtained by the two methods. The results indicate that the nozzle
length obtained by the second order accurate method is the least. The following section describes the
design procedure for Foelsch’s analytical method.

2. Foelsch’s Analytical Method

Traditionally, the equations for the nozzle contour are derived by integration of the characteristic
equations for axisymmetric flow. Since it is not possible to obtain a closed-form integral of these
equations, the flow in a nozzle is approximated by the flow in a cone. This provides a good
approximation for an analytical solution of the problem. That is, the coordinates of the contour of an
axisymmetric nozzle, as well as the streamlines in the nozzles flow are determined from simple Eq.
(2). The conical source flow emanating from the sonic section is converted into a parallel and uniform
flow by a transition curve, as depicted in Fig. 1. This figure shows a section through the upper
supersonic part of a three dimensional nozzle with axial symmetry. The flow in the nozzle is mainly
divided into three regions.

Region OAB: This is the starting of source flow.

Region ABDC: Radial flow region.
Region CDE: Transition region.
Region EDX: In this region flow is fully parallel and uniform.

Fig. 1. Conversion of radial flow into parallel flow

The computational procedure is as follows: Assuming a design Mach number of 2.5, the semi cone
angle (ω) is taken as half of θmax. The ratio of radius at exit to the radius of critical arc (τ ), and the
radius at throat are calculated as per reference [2]. Then the ν at every point is calculated taking
maximum θpoint as ω. The Mach number at every point is then calculated using Prandtl-Meyer relation.
The co-ordinates of transition curve and parallel flow section are calculated as per the equations given
by Foelsch [2]. Results have been presented in Fig. 2. Figure 2 shows the wall contours obtained for
Mach number 2.5 with semi cone angle = θmax/2 for various θ divisions. It is clear from the Fig. 2 that
the results are almost coincident for θ values less than 2 degrees, confirming the grid independence.

2
 Fig. 2. Wall contour obtained by Foelsch’s analytical method for axisymmetric supersonic
nozzle for Me = 2.5 for semi cone angle = θmax/2 for various θ divisions

3. Second Order Method

For axisymmetric flows, there are two different types of minimum length nozzles (MLN’s). First one
is straight sonic line MLN which has a straight sonic line at the throat and the wall at the throat
generates a centered expansion. The other one is curved sonic line MLN which has a circular arc sonic
line and is followed by a conical flow region with no centered expansion. In this section we discuss
the wall contour of a supersonic, axisymmetric, minimum length nozzle with straight sonic line by
using the second order accurate method of characteristics outlined by Argrow and Emanuel [3].

The computational characteristic grid for the design of a straight sonic line minimum length nozzle is
shown in Fig. 3. The kernel computation starts at point A. For steady, supersonic, irrotational,
axisymmetric flow of a perfect gas, the MOC equations are given by the following equations. For the
right running C− characteristics, the MOC equations are –

(M−1 2
) dM
+ dθ −
tan θ dr
= 0 (1)
⎡ γ −1 2 ⎤
⎢1 + 2 M ⎥
M tan θ (M 2
)
−1 −1 r
⎣ ⎦

and

⎛ dr ⎞ ⎡ ⎛ 1 ⎞⎤
⎜ ⎟ = tan ⎢θ − sin −1 ⎜ ⎟⎥ (2)
⎝ dx ⎠ char ⎣ ⎝M ⎠⎦

For the left running C+ characteristics, the MOC equations are –

(M−1 2
) dM
− dθ −
tan θ dr
= 0 (3)
⎡ γ −1 2 ⎤
⎢1 + 2 M ⎥
M tan θ (M 2
)
−1 +1 r
⎣ ⎦

and

⎛ dr ⎞ ⎡ ⎛ 1 ⎞⎤
⎜ ⎟ = tan ⎢θ + sin −1 ⎜ ⎟⎥ (4)
⎝ dx ⎠ char ⎣ ⎝M ⎠⎦

3
The differenced form of these equations are easily solved for x, r, M and θ variables, as outlined by
Argrow and Emanuel [3].

Fig. 3. Regions in the Design of Minimum Length Nozzle

The sweep procedure for the kernel and transition regions are explained in Argrow and Emanuel [3]
and hence not being repeated here. Whenever the wall contour is poorly represented, it is corrected by
the grid compression scheme i.e., by inserting the characteristics which takes more computational
time. For this, a power law is used which is given as -
M
⎛ c ⎞ c
υc = ⎜ ⎟ ∆υ (5)
⎜N ⎟
⎝ c⎠

where, c represents the characteristic from 1 to Nc i.e. for Nc=5, c = 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5; Nc is total number
of inserted characteristics, and Mc is the fixed integer exponent for the power law. For the same Nc,
when Mc is varied, the wall contours would be different. The greater the Mc, more characteristics start
closer to the sonic line resulting a more satisfactory wall contour. The throat coordinates are x = 0 and
r = 0.1. Assuming 5 characteristics to produce the required acceleration, we get a total of 15 kernel
region points. All the parameters of kernel region points are calculated first. The computations are
based on unit processes 1, 2 and 3 described in [3]. When all the parameters of kernel region points are
calculated, the parameters of transition region points are calculated. Lastly the wall contour points are
determined.

In all the results presented, the exit Mach number is 2.5 and γ= 1.4. Figure 4 shows the variation of
kernel region points, transition region points and wall contour obtained with no grid compression,
moderate grid compression and high grid compression for various characteristics. From these figures,
it is clear that grid compression is more beneficial than introduction of more characteristics. This is
made clear in Fig. 5 wherein the nozzle contours are shown for high grid compression for various
number of characteristics.

4. Conclusions

The wall contours obtained using the various techniques used in the present study and the
computational times have been compared in this paper. Figure 6 compares the nozzle contours

4
obtained using Foelsch’s analytical method and the second order accurate method of Argrow and
Emanuel [3]. The results show that the second order accurate method results in the shortest nozzle.
These computations were performed on a personal computer (Intel Pentium II, 333 MHz) running on
Linux operating system 6.0. The programs were written in ’C’ and the compiler used was EGCS
Version 1.1.2. The results show that the computational time increased by 19%.

No. of characteristics = 18, No. of characteristics = 18,

No grid compression high grid compression

No. of characteristics = 5, No. of characteristics = 5,

Moderate grid compression high grid compression

Fig. 4. Wall contour with kernel and transition region points for Me=2.5 nozzle, for
various number of characteristics and grid compressions

from no grid compression to highest grid compression, for 18 characteristics. Lastly, we can conclude
that methods which use the Prandtl-Meyer function in an indirect form should be preferred to gain
computational advantage and accuracy. In this regard, the second order method holds immense
potential in active nozzle modification applications.

Fig. 5. Wall contour for Me=2.5 for various characteristics with high grid compression (Nc=5 and
Mc=5) when γ=1.4.

5
 Fig. 6. Nozzle length and wall contour of axisymmetric Laval nozzle by analytical method and
axisymmetric MLN by second order accurate method, 1: Axisymmetric Laval nozzle by analytical
method, 2: Axisymmetric MLN by second order accurate method

Nomenclature

x* x co-ordinate of throat
r* r co-ordinate of throat
A throat area
ν Prandtl-Meyer function
νe Prandtl-Meyer function corresponding to exit Mach number
Me exit Mach number or design Mach number
µ Mach angle
µe Mach angle corresponding to exit Mach number
θ deflection angle
β shock angle
θw angle of the duct wall with respect to nozzle axis
θwmax maximum angle of the duct wall with respect to nozzle axis
θmax expansion angle of the wall downstream of the throat
ω semi cone angle
V velocity of the flow
γ specific heat ratio

References

[1] George P. Sutton, “Stepped nozzle,” U.S. Patent 5, 779, 151 July 14, 1998.

[2] Foelsch, K., “The Analytical Design of an Axially Symmetric LavalNozzle for a Parallel and
Uniform Jet,” Journal of the Aeronautical Sciences, Volume 16, 1948, pp.161-166.

[3] Emanuel, G. and Argrow, B. M., “Comparison of Minimum Length Nozzles,” Journal of Fluid
Engineering, Trans. ASME, Volume 110, 1988, pp.283-288.