STUDY ON METHODS FOR PLUG NOZZLE DESIGN IN TWO-PHASE FLOW

Kan Xie
*
, Yu Liu

, Xiaodong Chen
*
, J unxue Ren

, Yunfei Liao
**

School of Astronautics, Beijing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics,
Beijing, 100191, PRC

Abstract
'

The previous design methods are not proper to
design plug nozzle contours of solid rocket motor
using the compound propellant, for the existence of
metallized particle phase. The flow characters of
plug are changed in the two-phase flow condition,
therefore the particle-phase influence must be
considered in the design. The ideal plug contour is
determined by the expansion waves at the design
altitude, therefore it is a key to understand the
gas-particle interactions in the expansion fan of
plug. The method of characteristic (MOC) was
applied to study the two-phase flow field of plug, in
which the two-phase flow model was Lagrange
model. Based on the computational results of MOC,
the Angelino method and curve method were
improved and extended to be able to design the
plugs contour in two-phase flow conditions. Finally
the performances of the plugs created by the two
improved methods were further examined by CFD,
which can consider viscosity and turbulent with
respect to the MOC. The examined cases indicate
that the plug created by the improved methods can
be shortened in length while their thrust
performances increase at all altitudes, comparing to
the one created by the unimproved methods in the
same two-phase flow parameters.

Nomenclature
a

=stagnation sonic speed
a =local sonic speed
A =area
A
t
=throat area of inner nozzle
AA =radius angle of the arc expansion section of
inner nozzle
AE =expansion angle of inner nozzle
C
D
=drag force coefficient of two-phase flow

m&
*
PH.D. candidate, School of Astronautics, BUAA
**
PH.D., School of Astronautics, BUAA

Professor, School of Astronautics, BUAA

Senior Scientist, School of Astronautics, BUAA

C
g
=specific heat of gas
C
p
=specific heat of particle
d
p
=diameter of particles
e
T
=total expansion ratio of plug nozzle
e
in
=expansion ratio of inner nozzle
F =thrust
f =mass flow rate ratio
h =geometry height of plug nozzle
K =velocity drag coefficient
L =heat drag coefficient
l
i
=length of single expansion wave
=mass flow rate
M =gas Mach number
M =equivalent Mach number
P =pressure
Pr =Prandtl number
Rg =gas constant
t =static temperature
T
c
=chamber temperature
v(M) =Prandtl-Meyer function
v

(M) =improved Prandtl-Meyer function of

two-phase flow
V
g
=gas velocity
V
p
=particle velocity
=equivalent specific heat ratio
=oblique angle of plug nozzle
=Mach angle
=flow deflection angle
=polar angle to x axis for a Mach wave
=gas specific heat ratio
=gas density
=viscosity
Subscripts
b =background
c =chamber parameters
e =exit of inner nozzle
end =end tip of plug nozzle

America Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
1
45th AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference & Exhibit
2 - 5 August 2009, Denver, Colorado
AIAA 2009-5329
Copyright 2009 by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc. All rights reserved.
g =gas
i =Mach line i
in =inner nozzle
p =particle
Stokes =Stokes flow
T =total
Superscripts
* =stagnation properties

Introduction
Aerospike nozzle can enhance rocket motors
performance in the whole flight, owing to its
outstanding advantages: the automatically
compensation ability of altitude performance
1-3
.
Although there have been fully developed design
methods for plug nozzles used in the liquid rocket
motors
4-6
, it is not proper to use previous methods to
design plug nozzles for the solid rocket motors
(SRM) using the compound propellant
7, 8
. For the
existence of metallized particle phase, the flow
characters and performance of plug nozzles are
changed
7
. The existing researches for bell nozzles
have found that the position of sonic line is changed
obviously in two-phase flow conditions; the drag
force between particles and gas leads to two-phase
lost of performance. Improper design probably
decreases the performance of plug nozzle, increases
the collision of particles on plug wall and
deteriorates the ablation. Therefore, the
particle-phase influence and the geometry
restriction of decreasing the particle collision must
be considered in a two-phase flow condition
8
.
For the plug nozzle design in single phase flow,
Angelino put forward an ideal and approximate
contour method early in 1964
4
. The Angelino
method was widely applied in a series of
researches
9-11
and projects
12
. Ref.13 brought up
another curve method using parabola plus cubic
curves, based on the Angelino method. Plugs can
get quite high performance designed by both of
them, validated by a series of experiments
9-12
. But
they are only fit to apply in single phase flow
conditions.
For complexity of two-phase flow, it is hard to
find an academic method for the two-phase plug
design as the conventional maximum trust bell
nozzle
14
. The MOC and CFD were both applied
here to investigate the two-phase flow details and
characters in plugs. Based on the fast calculation
results by MOC, the gas-particle interactions in the
flow field of plug, expressed and summarized as a
velocity drag coefficient, were analyzed. And then
after considering the influence of particles on
expansion wave behavior of plug, the Angelino
method and curve method were improved for
two-phase plug design. Finally the CFD method
was applied to validate performance of plugs
designed by the two improved methods.

Two-phase flow model for MOC and
analysis
NASAs standard program SPP
15, 16
applies such
a method to predict the two-phase nozzle flow of
SRM that CFD is applied in the transonic flow field
and MOC applied in the rest supersonic flow field.
The calculation results by the SPP program can
agree well with the experimental data. Similar
procedure was applied in the MOC program
developed in this paper.
A. Physical model


(a) Discretization of the expansion fan in plug
nozzle


(b) Geometry of inner nozzle
Fig. 1 Presentation of axial plug nozzle



America Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
2
Table 1. Two-phase flow parameters

Rg
/J /(kg.K)
T
c
/K
P
c
/Pa
C
g
/J /(kg.K)
C
p

/J /(kg.K)
1.2 320 3000 5.0e6 1391.2 1430

Fig.1 shows the typical axisymmetric Aerospike
nozzle of whole length studied. For the reason of
symmetry, only one-sided geometry was computed.
Parameter is the oblique angle between the axial
lines of inner nozzle and the plug. P
c
is the chamber
pressure and P
b
is the environmental pressure. P
c
is
set at 5.0MPa and the total temperature T
c
is 3000K
in this study. The particle phase is Al
2
O
3
. The
two-phase flow parameters are listed in Tab.1. In
the program, the diameter of particle has only one
size. In the following cases for MOC program, the
flow fields of particle diameters d
p
=1m and
d
p
=10m were studied individually and compared.
B. The MOC procedure
The particle phase is treated by solving
Lagrangian equations of motion
17, 18
. The model is
based on a dilute particle phase assumption and
particles interaction is neglected. Here NND
scheme is applied to discrete the Euler equations to
compute the transonic flow field of the inner nozzle.
More details about NND scheme is shown in Ref.19.
The supersonic flow field is computed by MOC.
Three main assumptions are adopted in the MOC
program:
1. The gas phase is treated as perfect gas, and has
fixed physical properties. Viscosity of gas is ignored
except when it acts with the particle phase;
2. The particles have only one size. Pressure and
volume of the particle phase is ignored;
3. Only drag force and heat convection are
considered between the two phases. Mass transfer
between the two phases isnt considered. Mass
transfer and energy exchange isnt either considered
at the wall boundary.
The characteristic equations of two-phase flow
and corresponding consistent equations are listed in
Ref.18. 6 kinds of main basic unit-procedures are
applied in the MOC program
20
. In the two-phase
flow region (Region between the up and down
limited particle tracks in Fig.2), the gas-particle
interaction procedures are performed and particles
are tracked in the characteristic units. Single
characteristic procedures are performed for the up
and down limited particle tracks. The single gas
procedures are performed out of the two-phase flow
region. Details of those basic procedures were
presented in Ref.20 and 21. When particle tracks
reach the solid wall or axisymmetric line, it is
assumed that the particles do not reflect, but
continue to move along the boundaries; when
particles reach the free streamline boundary,
particles run out of it, never back to the flow field.
The gas boundary conditions are already embedded
in the unit procedures.
C. Analysis and Discussion

(a) Mesh of inner nozzle for NND

(b)Mesh of plug created by MOC
Fig.2 Mesh in the MOC program
The mesh of transonic flow field in the inner
nozzle is shown in Fig.2 (a), and mesh formed by
interlaced characteristics along space in the plug
shown in Fig.2 (b). The gas-particle interaction can
be expressed as the parameter of velocity drag
coefficient K, defined as:
2
/
g g p
V V V K
r r r
=

America Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
3
When K gets close to the value one, it means the
particle can follow the motion of gas; when K gets
close to the value zero, it means the particle lags
behind the gas motion and will pull down the
velocity of gas, which leads to large two-phase lost
in the nozzle. The Mass flow rate ratio is defined
as:
/
p g
f m m = & &
Fig.3 shows the variation of K in the flow field
of plug, along the mid particle track (see Fig.2 (b))
at the design altitude. The zero of horizontal
ordinate represents the throat of inner nozzle. The
curves indicate that the size of particles fully
determine the variation law. K suddenly falls down
at the point 1 position of plug, where the particles
start to go into the expansion waves generated from
the lip E (see Fig.1 (a)). In the expansion-wave
region, gas velocity increases fast and particle can
not follow it at once, which results in the drop of K
at this position. And then K increases again when
the particles are accelerated by the drag of gas.
Fig.3 (a) shows that 1m particles can quickly
adjust their parameters to follow the gas motion
when they run across the expansion fan of plug, and
Ks value fast stabilizes at about 0.97 at last. Fig.3
(b) shows that 10m particles adjust their
parameters less quickly and K goes up slowly in the
expansion-wave region. The mass weighted
assembly average of K for 10m particles in the
expansion-wave region is about 0.55.

(a) d
p
=1m, f=30%

(b) d
p
=10m, f=30%
Fig.3 Ks variation along the axial line of inner
nozzle
The ideal plug contour is determined by the
expansion waves at the designed altitude. In
two-phase flow conditions the expansion waves are
disturbed by the particles, therefore the two-phase
plug contour can not be design using the previous
methods without considering the disturbance.
Especially at the position near point 1, the
disturbance can not be neglected. The disturbance
on the expansion waves of particles can be
considered using the mass weighted assembly
average of K, which can represent the gas-particle
interaction in a simplified way. And the MOC
program provides a fast way to predict the values of
K in the flow field of plug nozzle.

Improved methods for two-phase plug
design
A. The improved Angelino method
The Angelino method assumes that at the outlet
of the inner nozzle, gas has uniform flow
parameters and velocity vector is parallel to the
axial line of the inner nozzle. At the design altitude,
gas generates a branch of linear, constant properties
expansion waves from the lip E shown in Fig.1.
And after going through the expansion waves,
velocity vector of gas turns to parallel to the plugs
centerline at the tip of plug (point F in Fig.1).
Therefore the solid wall of plug can be treated as a

America Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
4
gas streamline boundary of the linear expansion
waves. The Mach angle
i
for a Mach line i in the
expansion region (See Fig.1 (a)) can be calculated
using the formula (1). Flow deflection angle
i
measured by the Prandtl-Meyer angle of M
e
(See
Fig.1 (a)) is:
i
=v(M
i
)-v(M
e
). v(M
i
) is the
Prandtl-Meyer function listed in formula (2). Then
the polar angle
i
of Mach line i is determined by
i

and
i
. According to mass conservation, the Mach
waves length l
i
is able to be calculated by formula
(3). When all the
i
and l
i
of each Mach line in the
expansion region are calculated, the ideal contour
for the plug can be drawn.
1
sin (1/ )
i i
M

= (1)
( ) ( )
1 2 1
1 1
1
1 1
i i
v M tg M tg M



+
=
+
2
1
i

)

(2)

(
1 2
/ ( ) ( )
i g i i i i
l m M f M f M W = & (3)
The specific expressions of
1
(M
i
),
2
(M
i
) and
W
i
in formula (3) has relation with gas velocity V
g,

gas density and flow area A
i
of each Mach line i.
their expressions are listed in Ref.4.
Here we use an assembly average of K in the
flow field of plug to represent the disturbance of
particles on gas motion. And it is assumed that K is
a constant. Several attached assumptions on
two-phase flow of plug are applied as follows:
1. It is assumed that particles keep the state of
Stokes flow, therefore C
D
+
=Nu
+
=1.0, whose
definitions are as follows:
,
D
D
D Stokes
C
C
C
+

(4)
,
24 24
D Stokes
e p g p
C
R d V V

= =

(5)
2
stokes
Nu N
Nu
Nu
+
= =
u
(6)
C
D
is called drag force coefficient
20, 22
.
2. Particles stay liquid, no phase change is
considered for particles;
3. The specific heats of gas and particles are
constant.
On those assumptions, velocity drag coefficient
K and heat drag coefficient L have one-to-one
correspondence. L is defined as follows:
c p
c g
T t
L
T t

(7)
K and L have a relational expression
20, 22
:
1
1
1 3Pr
pl
p
c
K
L
c K

= +

(8)
For K is a constant, one-dimensional control
equations for such two-phase flow can be simplified
as the same form with the ones for steady isentropic
flow of perfect gas (Note that in one-dimensional
two-phase flow, Ks expression can be simplified as
K=V
p
/V
g
). The only difference is that gas parameters
and M in gas control equations are replaced by
equivalent parameters of two-phase flow andM .
Their definitions are as follows
20, 22
:
1 ( 1)
B
C
= +
(9)
M CM = (10)
, and
2
1
1
pl
p
fK
B
c
f L
c
+
=
+

( ) ( )
2
1 1 1
pl
p
c
C f K K K BL
c


= + + +




Then the similar aerodynamic functions as
single gas phase can be used to resolve one
dimensional two-phase flow with constant velocity
drag coefficient K. The following aerodynamic
functions exist in such two-phase flow:
1
2
1
2
2 2
1 2 1
1
1 2
t
A
M
A M

= +

+

(11)
2
1
1
2
g
T
M
T

= +
(12)
1
1
2
1
1
2
M

= +


(13)

America Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
5
1
2
1
1
2
p
M
p

= +

(14)
To calculate the linear expansion wave length in
the two-phase flow with a constant K, a new
Prandtl-Meyer function need to be derived
considering the particle disturbance. It is different
with the formula (2) of single gas phase.

(a) Two-phase flow over a budge

(b) Gas deflection at Mach line i
Fig.4 Physical process for the two-phase flow over
a budge
Performing a similar progress of deducting the
basic differential equations of flowing over a bulge
for single gas phase, the basic differential equations
for two-phase flow with constant K (See Fig.4) are
attained and given as follows:
( )
2 2
1 1
gi
i i
gi
i i
dV
d Cd d
V
(15)
And from the expression , the
following equation is attained:
a M V
i gi
=
gi
i i
gi i i
dV
dM dM da da
V M a M
= + = +
a
(16)
The relational expression (17) for the stagnation
sonic velocity and the local sonic velocity exists in
the two-phase flow with a constant K:
( ) ( )
2 2 2
1 / 2
i
a a a M

= +
2
(17)
It is an isentropic process when gas flows across
the expansion contour, therefore a
*
=constant.
Making expression (17)s differential form
substitute in equation (16), the following expression
is attained:
2
2 2
1
2 1
2
gi
i
gi
i i
dV
dM
V
M M

=

+


(18)
Substitute expression (18) into (15); we get:

2
2
1
1
2
i
i i
i i
M CdM
d Cd
M M

= =

+


i
, and its
integral form is
( )
1 2 1 2
1 1
1 1
1 1
i i
tg M tg M D

+
i
= +
+
+

(19)
D is an integral constant, and make
( ) ( )
1 2 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
i i
v M tg M tg M



+

2
i
=
+

(20)
2
i
i
M M C C M

= = =


Formula (20) is the new Prandtl-Meyer function
for two-phase flow with a constant K. The
difference between formula (20) and (2) is that the
specific heat ratio of gas is taken place by
equivalent parameter of two-phase flow, but the
Mach number in function (20) is still the gas Mach
number M
i
. The formula (20) indicates that the main
influence of particle phase on gas defection in the
expansion region is changing the specific heat ratio
of mixture. The equivalent specific heat
ratio contains two parts of disturbance of particle
phase: drag force disturbance and heat disturbance
(Expressed as parameters K and L individually in
formula (9)). Then the linear expansion waves in

America Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
6
two-phase flow can be fixed as following: for a
given M
i
, relation expressions (9) and (10) are
applied first to gain equivalent Mach
number
i
M and equivalent specific heat ratio . By
using the new functions (19) and (20) and formula
(1), polar angle
i
for the inclined linear expansion
wave i of two-phase flow can be calculated.
Formulas (11)-(14) are used to resolve the
parameters on expansion wave i. At last, the length
l
i
of expansion wave i after considering the
disturbance of particles can be calculated using the
following mass convection function:
( ) ( ) ( )
1 2
/
i g i i i i
l m M f M f M W = & (21)
When
i
and l
i
are fixed, expansion waves and
ideal plug contour are fixed. Formulas (11)-(14), (1),
(19) and (20) are the final design formulas of the
improved Angelino method. The new design
formulas contain the new parameters K, C
g
/C
p
, f, t
p
,
and
i
M which can represent the disturbance of
particles on the linear expansion waves in some
degree. The new formulas also show different
behaviors of expansion waves in the two-phase flow
conditions. Note that when f=0, formulas (20) and
(21) turn the same as the ones of single gas phase,
and
i i
M M = , = .
B. The improved Parabola plus Cubic Curve
curve Method

Fig. 5 Presentation of curve method
Ref.13 uses curves to approximate the ideal plug
contour generated by the Angelino method. Two
curves are used: the front one is parabola; the back
one is cubic curve (see Fig. 5). At the outlet of the
inner nozzle, the static pressure and Mach number
of gas are noted as P
e
and M
e.
At the design altitude,
gas fully expands until the pressure equals to the
environment pressure P
b
. The Mach number at the
end of plug is noted as M
end
, and the gas flow
deflection angle (see Fig.5) is: =(M
end
)-(M
e
).
Only two expansion wave lines, EF and EG
(See Fig.5), are resolved in the curve method. EF is
the last wave, through which the gas flow direction
turns parallel to the plugs centerline and the static
pressure turns the same as the environment.
Formula (3) is used to calculate the length of EF.
The position of point F is then determined by EFs
length and the angle . The gas flow deflection
angle is /2 when gas flows through the wave EG.
In the same way, EGs length then can be resolved
and the position of point G is determined. In
addition, the position of point D and the tangential
angles at points D, G and F are known. Therefore
the mathematical expressions of the parabolic curve
and cubic curve can be attained.
In the improved curve method, the same curves
are still applied to fit the ideal contour points
generated by the improved Angelino method. The
differences with the unimproved curve method are
that expressions (20) and (21) are used to replace
the expressions (2) and (3), and the aerodynamic
functions are taken place of by functions (11)-(14).
The solution process is the same as the unimproved
method mentioned above.
C. Design results and analysis

Table 2. Basic design conditions for the referenced
two-phase plug
e
T
e
in
A
t
/m
2
AA AE K d
p
/m
30 4.5 5.71e-4 16
o
0
o
0.3 0.55
10

The design conditions for two-phase axial plug
and geometry variables are listed in Tab. 2. In the
design process, it was found that the convergent
angle and radiusof the arc convergence section of
inner nozzle, chamber pressureP
c
, total temperature
T
c
, and Prandtl number Pr (Here is 0.72), have little
influence on physical dimension of the plug. The
main factors of influencing the outline of the plug
obviously are parameters AA, AE, e
in
, e
T
, and K. The

America Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
7
total pressure ratio e
T
(Correspondent to a design
M
end
) are usually set before design. Therefore the
examined design variables are AA, AE (See Fig.1
(b)), e
in
, and K, of which the parameter K
determines the plugs outline chiefly.
When using the improved methods to design
two-phase plugs, K should be known beforehand as
one of design conditions. It can be estimated by the
MOC program developed in this paper. The specific
resolving process is as follows: 1) under the same
design conditions, the unimproved methods is used
first to get an initial plug contour; 2) using the MOC
program the two-phase flow field of initial plug
nozzle can be fast simulated, and an assembly
average value of K is attained; 3) using the initial
value of K, the two-phase plug can be designed
using the improved methods; 4) a new value of K
will be attained by MOC program for the improved
plug. After 2-3 times of iterations, the value of K
can stabilize at a fixed value. And the plug contour
is fixed at the same time. As discussed before, K is
determined chiefly by particle size. The influence of
K on plug outline implies the influence of particle
size. For the examples studied here, the results of
MOC show that the corresponding assembly
average of K for 10m particles with f=30% is
about 0.55.
Fig.6 (a) compares the design results by the
unimproved and improved methods with the same
design parameters listed in Tab.2. The length of
two-phase plugs designed by the improved
Angelino method (Called two-phase ideal face) and
the improved curve method (Called two-phase
curve face) are shortened by 33%, comparing to the
plug contours by unimproved methods (Called pure
gas curve face and pure gas ideal face). The plug of
two-phase idea face in Fig.6 (a) is noted as the
referenced plug nozzle for the following discussion.
Because of heat drag between the gas phase and
particle phase, the temperature of particles is always
higher than the gas in the same position of plug
flow field. The heat convection between the two
phases makes the streamlines of gas divergent
outward. If the plug in two-phase flow condition is
designed using the previous methods of single
phase, no heat influence of particles can be
considered. Then at the design altitude, the free
streamline boundary is no longer parallel to the
centerline of plug nozzle but divergent outward.
The design M
end
(At the design altitude) can either
not be reached for the drag of particles.
Fig.6 (b) gives different plug contours by the
improved Angelino method with different values of
K. As K increases to the value one (Namely the
particle size is smaller), the two-phase flow
approaches a two-phase equilibrium flow and the
two-phase plug turns to have a larger oblique angle
(See the enlarged view of inner nozzle in Fig.6 (b))
and a shorter length. As K changes toward the
opposite end of value zero, two-phase plug turns the
same as the plug of single gas phase (See the view
of whole plug nozzles in Fig.6 (b)). The design
results indicate that the parameter increases in a
two-phase flow condition with considering the heat
disturbance of particles. And Note that the heat
disturbance of particles is related to the velocity
drag coefficient K through the formula (8).

(a) Plug contours created by three methods

View of whole plug nozzles

America Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
8

The enlarged view of inner nozzle
(b)Plug contours vs. K

(c) Plug contours with different inner nozzles
Fig.6 Results for two-phase plug design
Fig.6 (c) shows the plug contours by the
improved Angelino method as the inner nozzles
variables change comparing to the referenced
parameters listed in Tab.2. As AA decreases, the
inner nozzle tends to have a longer length, and its
appearance is more like an elongated cone nozzle;
the plug tends to have a larger and a larger height
h. As AE increases, the inner nozzle tends to have a
shorter length, a smaller , and a smaller h, but
there is little change on the shape of the whole plug.
As e
in
increases, the plug has a smaller , whileh is
almost the same with the referenced plug.
In general, the most sensitive variables for
two-phase plug design are AA, e
in
, and K. It is noted
that, for the referenced plug, the particles will be
unavoidable to collide on the plug wall. That is
because the outlet of inner nozzle points to the front
part of plug wall. A basic and direct design rule is
that: the farmer the down limited particle track gets
away from the plug (see Fig.2 (b)), the smaller
probability there is for particles to collide on the
wall. Therefore to decrease the probability and
frequency of particle collision, the design geometry
parameters AA, AE and e
in
, should be chosen
carefully. And a larger but pertinent e
in
, a smaller
AA, and a larger AE comparing to the reference
geometry parameters are recommended in practical
design. This is called geometry restriction with
considering the probability of knocking on the plug
wall for the down limited particle track.

Performance validation and discussion
A. CFD model and mesh

Fig. 7 Two-phase flow phenomena in the plug
nozzle

Fig.8 Mesh of plugs flow field for CFD
Fig.7 is a sketch of the flow phenomenon in a
two-phase plugs flow field. Although the MOC
program developed by this paper can calculate the
performances of two-phase plugs, the control
equations of gas for MOC are Euler equations.
Therefore the MOC model cant calculate the lost
caused by viscosity and consider the turbulent effect.
To review the combined effects of all factors, CFD
method is applied to resolve the two-phase flow.
The model of particle phase is the Lagrange model.
The turbulence model applied is S-A model with a

America Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
9
logarithmic law of the wall
23
. All the calculation is
performed in FLUENT (V6.3). In the following
examples, the particles have only one size and
d
p
=10mis chosen to review. Fig.8 is the region of
calculation and the mesh for FLUENT.
B. Flow field analysis
The flow fields and performances of four
two-phase plugs were calculated to compare, which
are two two-phase ideal plugs 1 and 2 (By the
improved Angelino method), a two-phase curve
plug 3 (By the improved curve method), and a pure
gas ideal plug 4 (By the unimproved Angelino
method). Their design total expansion ratio e
T
is 30.
The geometry variables of expansion section for the
four inner nozzles are listed in Tab. 3. The other
design conditions are the same with the ones listed
in Tab.1 and 2. The oblique angle was calculated
after designing the plugs. The two-phase ideal plug
2 was designed after considering the geometry
limitation of decreasing the possibility of particles
collision on the plug based on the flow field
analysis of plug 1.

Table 3. The geometry parameters of four plugs
AA AE e
in

Two-phase ideal plug 1 16
o
0
o
4.5 33.89
o
Two-phase ideal plug 2 10
o
6
o
8 16.15
o
Two-phase curve plug 3 16
o
0
o
4.5 33.89
o
Pure gas ideal plug 4 16
0
0
o
4.5 32.73
o

Fig.9 compares the results of two-phase plugs 1
and 2 predicted by CFD at the design altitude.
Influenced by the heat transfer from particles, the
gas stream lines of plug 1 are divergent away from
the axial line of the plug, which leads to divergence
loss (see Fig.9 (a)). The gas free streamline
boundary in plug 2s flow field is approximately
parallel to the center line of the plug, which has less
divergent loss than the plug 1(See Fig.9 (b)). Fig.9
(c) and (d) show the initial knocking point of the
down limited particle track on the plug wall. The
initial knocking point of plug 2 moves backward
comparing to the initial one of plug 1 and the
numbers of particles knocking tracks in plug 2 are
smaller than those in plug 1. It implies that the
probability of particles knocking on the wall of
plug 2 is smaller than that of plug 1. Therefore it is
truly effective for lightening the scouring of
particles on plug wall by considering the geometry
restriction of the down limited particles track. And
the particles in the plug 2s flow field have a
uniform distribution which is favorable for energy
exchange of two phases and full expansion of gas.
The flow field analysis above indicates the
importance of choosing geometry parameters of AA,
AE and e
in
and necessity of considering the
geometry limitation of decreasing the possibility of
particles collision in two-phase plug design.

(a) (b)

(c) (d)
Fig.9 Parameters contours of plug 1 and 2: (a)
Mach number and total pressure contour of plug 1;
Mach number and total pressure contour of plug 2;
(c) Particles tracks of plug 1; (d) particles tracks of
plug 2.
Fig.10 gives the results of two-phase curve plug
3 at the design altitude. The oval region noted in
Fig.10 (a) is corresponding to the one in Fig.10 (b).
There exists catastrophic deposit of particles in the
oval region; therefore there is distortion in the flow
field which results in a wake at the end of plug. The
Mach number contours approximately have a
laminated distribution in the oval region, but no
separation of gas happens there (see Fig.10 (b)). In
practical application, this oval region can be cut off

America Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
10
and the plug turns a shortened form.

(a) (b)
Fig.10 Parameters contours of plug 3: (a) Mach
number and total pressure contour; (b) particles
tracks and gass stream line


Fig.11 Mach number and total pressure contour of
plug 4
For the particles drag, the gas total pressure
falls down. The total pressure contour can illustrate
the distribution of intensive action between gas and
particles. The lower parts in Fig.9 (a), 10 (a) and 11
show the total pressure contours. The results show
that there is a large region of energy exchange
between particles and gas for the two-phase plugs
created by the improved methods. But there exist
apparent energy exchange only in the region near
the solid wall for plug 4 by unimproved Angelino
method (See Fig.11).
C. Performance and further discussion
The thrust performance of examined plugs is
calculated using the following formula:
, x g g x a
inlet inlet inlet
x
F pdA V V dA p dA = +


x w x
wall wall
pdA dA

(22)
In formula (22), F is total thrust of the plug
nozzle; the first term and the second term in
right-hand side together represent the gass force on
the chamber head (The inlet in Fig.8); the third term
is the force of environmental pressure on the
chamber head. The fourth term is the integration of
gass pressure on the wall. The final term is the
friction force of gas on the wall.

Fig.12 Comparison of thrust performance

Table 4. Work conditions and trusts of the four
plugs
Work conditions
/pa
101325 50000 15244 5000 1000
Thrust of Plug 1
(N)
4698.6 4943.0 5316.3 5475.5 5553.4
Thrust of Plug 2
(N)
4918.6 4943.2 5289.2 5394.8 5776.0
Thrust of Plug 3
(N)
4828.4 5096.9 5527.1 5710.3 5774.9
Thrust of Plug 4
(N)
4629.7 4853.2 5219.8 5379.1 5444.2
Notes: 15244 Pa is the pressure of the design altitude;

Fig.12 gives trusts variation curves as the
environmental pressure changes for the four
examined plugs. The symbol of background

America Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
11
pressures value is negative in the graph. The curves
show that two-phase ideal plugs 1 and 2, and
two-phase curve plug 3, which are all created by the
improved methods of considering the particle-phase
influence, have better thrust performances at all
altitudes than the pure gas plug 4 created by the
unimproved Angelino method, under the same
design conditions. Especially the trust of plug 3 is
increased by 4% comparing to plug 1 (See Tab. 4).
Plug 2 has better performance especially in lower
and in higher altitudes than plug 1, but at around the
designed altitude it has a worse performance.
Therefore the performance of the plug nozzle and
geometry limitation of decreasing the probability of
particle collision should be balanced in the practical
plug nozzle design. As mentioned before, the length
of plugs created by the improved methods is
shortened by 33% comparing to the ones created by
the unimproved methods. In general, after
considering the disturbance of particle phase, a
shorter length and better performance can be
attained for plug nozzle design in two-phase flow
conditions. The improved methods can consider the
particle-phase influence on gas motion at some
degree as to increase the performance of plug in
two-phase conditions, comparing to the unimproved
ones.

Conclusion
The computation results by MOC program
indicate that the disturbance of particle phase on the
expansion waves is mainly related with the particle
size in a dilute two-phase flow of the plug. An
approximate assumption of constant velocity drag
coefficient K in the two-phase flow of plugs was
brought up to simply the analysis. By introducing
the summarized parameter K for gas-particle
interaction, the Angelino method and curve method
were improved and extended for the plug design in
two-phase flow conditions. The new design
formulas can consider the velocity and heat
disturbance of particles on expansion wave behavior.
Meanwhile the down limited particle track is
considered as an additional geometry restriction in
the design. In the two phase flow condition with a
fixed mass flow rate ratio, the main parameters to
influence the plugs outline are AA, AE, e
in
, and K.
K is the most important parameter to influence the
plugs outline obviously. Its value can be fast
estimated by the MOC program developed in this
paper. As the particle size increases, the two-phase
plugs tend to have a larger and a shorter length.
The examined cases by CFD prediction indicate that
the plug created by the improved methods can be
shortened in length, while their performances
increase at all altitudes, comparing to the one
created by the unimproved methods in the same
two-phase flow parameters.

Acknowledgement
This work has been carried out at the support of
National Natural Science Foundation of China
(General Program 50476002). The authors are
grateful to Dr Wuye Dai and Dr Lizi Qin for their
help.

Reference
1
Ruf, J . H., McConnaughey, P. K., The Plume
Physics Behind Aerospike Nozzle Altitude
Compensation and Slipstream Effect, AIAA Paper
97-3218, J uly 6-9, 1997.
2
Muss, J . A., and Nguyen, T.V., Evaluation of
Altitude Compensating Nozzle Concepts for RLV,
AIAA Paper 97-3222, J uly 1997.
3
Angelino, G., Theoretical and Experimental
Investigation of the Design and Performance of a
Plug-type Nozzle, Training Center For
Experimental Aerodynamics, Technical Note 12,
J uly 1963. Rhode-Saint Genese, Belgium.
4
Angelino, G., Approximate Method for Plug
Nozzle Design, AIAA Journal, Vol. 2, No. 10, 1964,
pp. 1934-1835.
5
Humphreys, R. P., Thompson, H. D. and
Hoffmann, J . D., Design of Maximum Thrust Plug
Nozzles for Fixed Inlet Geometry, AIAA Journal,
Vol.9, No. 8, Aug. 1971, pp. 1581-1587.
6
Greer, H., Rapid Method for Plug Nozzle
Design, ARS Journal, Vol. 31, No. 4, 1961, pp.
560-561.
7
Ren, J . X., Numerical Simulation of Two-phase
Flow in Two-dimensional Plug Nozzle, 2005
International Autumn Seminar on Propellants,
Explosive and Pyrotechnics. Beijing, China, Oct.
2005.
8
Hoffman, J . D., A General Method for

America Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
12

America Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
13
Determining Optimum Thrust Nozzle Contours for
Gas-Particle Flows, AIAA Journal, Vol. 5, No. 4,
April 1967, pp. 670-676.
9
Dai W. Y., Liu Y. and Cheng X. C., Simulated
Tests of Aerospike Nozzle and Data Acquisition
System, Journal of Propulsion Technology, Vol. 21,
No. 4, April 2000, pp. 85-88.
10
Dai, W. Y., Liu, Y., Cheng, X. C., and Ma, B.,
Analytical and Experimental Studies of
Tile-Shaped Aerospike Nozzles, Journal of
Propulsion and Power, Vol. 19, No. 4, J uly 2003,
pp. 640-645.
11
Liu, Y., Zhang G. Z., Dai W. Y., Ma, B., Cheng,
X. C., Wang, Y. B., Qin, L. Z., Wang, C. H., and Li,
J . W., Experimental Investigation on Aerospike
Nozzle in Different Structures and Working
Conditions, AIAA 2001-3704, J uly 2001.
12
Rocketdyne Inc., Final Report, Advanced
Aerodynamic Spike Configurations. Report No.
AFPRL-TR-67-246, September 1967.
13
Qin, L. Z., Contour Design and Optimization
of Aerospike Nozzles, Ph.D. Thesis, Beijing
University of Aeronautics and Astronautics, PRC,
May 2002.
14
Rao, G. V. R., Exhaust Nozzle Contour for
Optimum Thrust, Jet Propulsion, Vol. 28, No. 2,
1958, pp. 377-382.
15
Coats, D. E., French, J . C. and Dunn, S. S.,
Improvement to the Solid Performance Program
(SPP), AIAA Paper 2003-4504, J uly 2003.
16
Coats, D. E., Solid Performance Program
(SPP), AIAA paper 87-1701, 1987.

17
Marc, B., Olivier, S., On the Prediction of
Gas-solid Flows with Two-way Coupling Using
Large Eddy Simulation, Phys. Fluids, Vol. 12, No.
8, 2000, pp. 2080-2090.
18
Hwang, C. J ., Numerical Study of Gas-Particle
Flow in a Solid Rocket Nozzle, AIAA Journal, Vol.
26, No. 6, 1987, pp. 682-689.

19
Zhang, H. X., Non-Oscillatory and Non-Free-
Parameter Dissipation Difference Scheme, ACTA
Aerodynamica Sinica, Vol. 6, No. 2, 1988, pp.
143-165.
20
Zucrow, M. J ., Hoffman, J. D., Gas
Dynamics, Beijing, National Defense Press, 1984,
pp. 83-187.
21
Dai, W. Y., and Liu, Y., Applications of
Method of Characteristics on Aerospike Nozzle,
Journal of Aerospace Power, Vol. 15, No. 4, Oct.
2000, pp. 371-37.
22
Kliegel, J . R., Gas Particle Nozzle Flows,
Ninth International Symposium on Combustion,
New York: Academic Press, 1963, pp. 811-826.
23
Spalart, P., and Allmaras, S., A One-equation
Turbulence Model for Aerodynamic Flows, AIAA
Paper 92-0439, 1992.