PHASE II FINAL REVIEW

11-07-2013

GUIDED BY,Mr. J.BRUCE RALPHIN ROSE,Asst. Prof, Dept of Aeronautical Engg,Regional Center of Anna University ,Tirunelveli Regional -627007.

PRESENTED BY,A.BHARATHITHASAN,Reg No:950011404004,II Year M.E AERONAUTICAL,Regional Center of Anna University ,Tirunelveli Regional -627007.

DESIGN AND ANALYSIS OF MIXER EJECTOR SYSTEM FOR OPTIMIZED THRUST PERFORMANCE

OBJECTIVE

A mixer ejector nozzle system performance is based on length of the nozzle ,amount of noise reduction and thrust loss.

In this proposed work, Mixer ejector are used for verifying the nozzle thrust output by creating different effects.

One effective way to reduce noise is to decrease the intensity of the turbulent mixing of the jet exhaust with the surrounding air by decreasing the exhaust jet velocity.

The thrust increase is are result of ejector inlet suction forces generated by the secondary flow accelerating around the inlet contour.

PROBLEM IDENTIFIED

Noise reduction during take off and landing Increase in thrust Accelerating the mass flow rate

SL.NO

TITLE AUTHOR INFERENCE YEAR

1 SUPERSONIC NOZZLE MIXER EJECTOR

T. G. Tillman* and R. W. Patersont

Ejectors are a candidate means to reduce jet noise of commercial supersonic aircraft duringtakeoff and landing.

1992

2 NOZZLE THRUST OPTIMIZATION WHILE REDUCING JET NOISE

J. M. Seiner & M. M. Gilinsky

Nozzle design concept is proposed for jet noise reduction with minimal thrust loss or even thrustAugmentation.The thrust calculations also indicated amplitude and increase nozzle parameter.

1996

LITERATURE SURVEY

SL.NO

TITLE AUTHOR INFERENCE YEAR

3 HIGH REYNOLDS NUMBER ANALYSIS OF FLAT PLATE AND SEPARATED AFTERBODY FLOW USING NON-LINEAR TURBULENCE MODEL

SJohn R Carlson

Subsonic flat plate boundary-layer flow parameters such as normalized velocity distributions, local and average skin friction, and shape factor.

1996

4 NUMERICAL SIMULATION OF JET AERODYNAMICS USING THE THREE-DIMENSIONAL NAVIER-STOKES CODE PAB3D

S. Paul Pao& Khaled S. Abdol-Hamid

Jet mixing aerodynamics is vital to several areas of commercial and military aircraft design, such as jet propulsion efficiency, propulsion integration, aero acoustics, and jet interference with aircraft structure

1997

SL.NO

TITLE AUTHOR INFERENCE YEAR

5 Experimental, Theoretical, and Computational Investigation of Separated Nozzle Flows

Craig A. Hunter

Over expanded nozzle flow was dominated by shock induced boundary layer separation, which was divided into two distinct flow regions. Results indicate that with controlled separation, the entire over expanded range of nozzle performance would be within 10% of the peak thrust efficiency.

1998

6 Computational Investigation of Fluidic Counterflow Thrust Vectoring

C.A.Hunter and K.A.Deere

A computational study of fluidic counter flow thrust vectoring has been conducted.

1999

SL.NO

TITLE AUTHOR INFERENCE YEAR

7 THRUST CHARACTERISTICS OF A SUPERSONIC MIXER EJECTOR

T.G.Tillman & W.M.Presz Jr

Mixer ejectors are a candidate means to mix out the high-velocity.mixer ejectors can provide rapid mixing of a supersonic jet for acoustic benefits all while increasing aircraft system static thrust

1999

8 THRUST AUGMENTATION WITH MIXER/EJECTOR SYSTEMS

W. Presz, Jr., G. Reynolds & C. Hunter

Thrust performance predictions, and thrustaugmentation capability of mixer Ejector system.

2002

METHODOLOGY

CATIA ANSYS

CHARACTERISTICS OF MIXER EJECTOR NOZZLE

The performance of such mixer–ejectors is important in aircraft engine

applications for noise suppression and thrust augmentation.

Information on the mixing, pumping, ejector wall pressure distribution,

thrust augmentation and noise suppression characteristics of four simple,

multi-element, jet mixer–ejector configurations is presented.

The four configurations included the effect of ejector area ratio (AR=ejector

cross-sectional area/total primary nozzle area) and the effect of non-parallel

ejector walls.

The ejector is produced the maximum pumping (secondary (induced) flow

normalized by the primary flow) also exhibited the lowest wall pressures in

the inlet region, and the maximum thrust augmentation.

2D-Mixer Ejector model

NOZZLE DESIGN

DESIGNING NOZZLE BY USING CATIA

DESIGNING MIXER/EJECTOR MODEL

OPERATING CONDITION(Mach Number, Pressure, Temperature)

NOZZLE DIMENSION

MIXER/EJECTOR MODEL BY CATIA

RECTANGULAR SHAPE C-SHAPE

TRIANGULAR SHAPE

NOZZLE MESH MODEL

Tetra hetra elements can be used to mesh any volumes. The parameter geometry finite model of mixer in shown above, which consists of 41032 nodes and 206645 elements.

MESHING OF MIXER EJECTOR MODEL

TRI ANGULAR SHAPE C-SHAPE

BOUNDARY CONDITION

S.NO PARAMETER VALUE

1 Vp 32 m/s

2 Vs 17 m/s

3 Ts 350 K

4 Tp 500 k

VELOCITY VARIATION

From the above fig shows that at the C-Shape mixer ejector nozzle ,the was 9.05e+01 at vp = 32m/s,Vs=17 m/s Tp = 500k,Ts =300 k

From the above fig shows that at the rectangualr mixer ejector nozzle,the was 8.63e+01 at vp = 32m/s,Vs=17 m/s Tp = 500k,Ts =300 k

VELOCITY VARIATION

From the fig shows that at the triangular mixer ejector ,the was 8.63e+01 at vp = 32m/s,Vs=17 m/s Tp = 500k,Ts =300 k

THRUST AUGUMENTATION VS MASS FLOW RATE

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.70

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

ms/mp

ɸ

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.70

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

ms/mp

ɸ0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5

-10

-8

-6

-4

-2

0

2

4

ms vs mp

ɸ

Fig(a)RECTANGULAR Fig(b)TRIANGULAR

Fig ( c )C-SHAPE

THRUST AUGUMENTATION VS VELOCITY

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.20

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

va vs vp

ɸ

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.20

2

4

6

8

10

12

va vs vp

ɸ

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.20

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

va vs vp

ɸ

fig (d)C-SHAPE Fig ( e ) TRIANGULAR

fig (f) RECTANGULAR

DISTANCE VS VELOCITY

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 160

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

distance,m

velo

city,

m/s

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 160

20

40

60

80

100

120

distance,m

velo

city,

m/s

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 160

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

distance,m

velo

city,

m/s

Fig (g )C-SHAPE Fig (h)RECTANGUALR

Fig (i) TRIANGULAR

DISCUSSION

Figure (a) to (c )presents ejector thrust augmentation versus pumping. These results predict

that an ejector always increases the static thrust of a nozzle. An ideal augmenter thrust

curve is also presented for comparison purposes. Graph was plotted thrust augmentation

versus various mass flow rate at various shape of the mixer ejector ,like this rectangular ,c

-shape and triangular.

Figure (d) to (f) Thrust augmentation is as a function of the ratio of airplane speed to the

primary jet velocity (i.e. Va/Vp). Ejector thrust gains are seen to be a maximum at static

operation, and to decrease asymptotically to zero as the ejector forward velocity

approaches the primary flow velocity. As the airplane flight speed increases, the ingested

secondary flow momentum increases. This secondary flow momentum has to be subtracted

from the thrust generated by the ejector, and thus results in lower ejector system thrust.

Graph is plotted various shape of mixer ejector ,like this c shape ,rectangular shape and

triangular shape. Fig (g) – (i) presents various velocity versus nozzle length distance. The velocity changed

by the various shape of mixer ejector nozzle .they are C-shape ,rectangular and triangular.

CONCLUSION

The mixer/ejector nozzle is designed and nozzle will be optimized with varying parameters and analyzed.

Mixer/ejector exhaust systems provide a simple means of reducing the jet noise on older aircraft.

Properly designed mixer/ejectors can increase engine bypass ratio while generating an increase in static thrust.

The thrust increase is are result of ejector inlet suction forces generated by the secondary flow accelerating around the inlet contour. The same inlet contour also directs the secondary flow into the ejector for low loss mixing.

The design of the ejector shroud inlet is critical to the performance of a mixer/ejector system. As the airplane speed increases, the secondary flow accelerates less around the inlet lip resulting in lower lip suction forces, and therefore lower thrust augmentation. This loss in thrust is a result of inlet ram drag.

Compared the various type of mixer ejector shape with various velocity. Then found out thrust was increased in exit area.

REFERENCE1.  Heiser, William H., Thrust Augmentation, ASME Paper 66-GT-l 16, 1966.

2. Presz, W., Morin B., and Gousy, R., Forced Mixer Lobes in Ejector Designs,

Paper No. 86-1614, AIAA 22nd Joint Propulsion Conference, June, 1986.

3. Tillman, G., and Presz, W., Thrust Characteristics of a Supersonic Mixer

Ejector, Paper No. 93-4345, 15th AIAA Aeroacoustical Conference, October,

1993.

4. Presz, W., Reynolds, G. and McMormick, D., Thrust Augmentation Using Mixer

/ Ejector / Diffuser Systems, Paper No. 94-0020, AIAA 32- Aerospace Science

Meeting, January 1994.

5. Presz, W., Mixer/Ejector Noise Suppressors, Paper No. 91-2243, AIAA 27th

Joint Propulsion Conference, June, 1991.

6. Presz, W. and Reynolds, G., Alternating Lobed Mixer/Ejector Concept

Suppressor, ALMEC Suppressor, United States Patent 5,884,472, March, 1999

7. Bernstein, A., Heiser, W. and Hevenor, C., Compound Compressible Nozzle

Flow, Paper No. 66-663, AIAA 2nd Propulsion Joint Specialist Conference, June,

1966.

8. Pao, S.P., and Abdol-Hamid, K.S., Numerical Simulation of Jet Aerodynamics

Using a Three Dimensional Navier Stokes Method (PAB3D), NASA TP-3596,

September 1996.

9. Hunter, C.A., Experimental, Theoretical, and Computational Investigation of

Separated Nozzle Flows, AIAA 98-3107, July 1998.

10. Hunter, C.A. and Deere, K.A., Computational Simulation of Fluidic

Counterflow Thrust Vectoring, AIAA 99-2669, June 1999.

Presented a technical paper on “Design and analysis of Mixer Ejector nozzle for a optimized thrust performance” at National level conference on emerging Trends in Mechanical Engineering on 12th april 2013.

Preparing a journal to publish in “journal of mechanical science “.

THANK YOU