4.7 Article

Experimental study on ejector-to-ramjet mode transition in a divergent kerosene-fueled RBCC combustor with low total temperature inflow

Journal

AEROSPACE SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
Volume 99, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER FRANCE-EDITIONS SCIENTIFIQUES MEDICALES ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.ast.2020.105734

Keywords

RBCC combustor; Mode transition; Ramjet combustion; Divergent; Kerosene; Low total temperature

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51976171, 51606156]
  2. NSFC

Ask authors/readers for more resources

RBCC engine commonly fulfills the ejector-to-ramjet mode transition at a Mach number far below 4, and thus the divergent kerosene-fueled RBCC combustor will encounter tough technical challenges of completing the mode transition and maintaining sustained subsonic combustion at low total temperature inflow conditions. These important issues were studied by direct-connect tests in a divergent JP-10-fueled RBCC combustor at M-infinity = 3 and T-0 = 630 K, and two different rocket control methods, in terms of stepped (switching off) and progressive (maintaining a significant reduction in the mass flow rate) rocket control method, were validated. As a result: (1) Credible ignition could be obtained when the fuel was directly injected into the high temperature zone comprehensively affected by the rocket plume and its secondary combustion zone. (2) Self-sustained ramjet combustion in the stepped rocket control case required an excellent collaboration among the different combustion enhancement facilities (fuel struts and cavities) in the combustor. (3) Rocket-aided mode transition and ramjet combustion in the progressive rocket control case required less limitation on the combustor configuration, and permitted an improved reliability for the engine operation, although it sacrificed a small part of engine specific impulse. (C) 2020 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available