Post on 18-Jul-2018
Validation of Aerothermal Chemistry Models for Re-entry Applications: Theoretical and
Computational Synthesis
N. Joiner, J. Beck, M. Capitelli, M. Fertig, G. Herdrich, A. Laricchiuta, H. Liebhart, M. Lino da Silva,
L. Marraffa, P. Reynier, P. Tran
8th European Symposium on Aerothermodynamics for Space Vehicles Lisbon 2-6 March 2015
Fluid Gravity Engineering Ltd
Introduction
• Synthesis of ESA TRP 2008-2012 • Large multi-institutional team involved
– FGE, ISA, IRS, ADS (then Astrium), LAEPT, MIPT, IST, IMIP, EM2C, IUSTI, CEA
• Highlights of theoretical and numerical effort presented here – Extensive numerical campaigns, multiple codes – Not covered here: Material response codes also validated – P. Reynier et al., Thursday morning in this symposium for
experimental synthesis
Fluid Gravity Engineering Ltd
Introduction
• Aim: to enhance operational software underlying European capability to design an atmospheric entry vehicle
– Support high speed earth return – Support potential high speed Titan entry
• These mission scenarios can include substantial radiative heating
• Multi-temperature CFD models used to anchor heating correlations in TPS design
– Limitation: coupling of excited internal states and chemical non-equilibrium
• State-of-the-art Collisional Radiative (CR) and State-to-State (STS) too computationally expensive for engineering level CFD
– Underlying features of CR/STS must be captured to optimise TPS design – Inputs to CR/STS typically ab initio rate coefficients, cross-sections, etc.
• Potential to employ input data in reduced form to capture physics
Fluid Gravity Engineering Ltd
Objectives • High Speed Entry Vehicle Design Tool Requirements
– Radiation capability • Need N, N2 for Earth entry in VUV and UV-visible
– Identified form earlier Radflight, FIRE II, aero-capture studies » 90% VUV, no significant contribution from other species
– Focus on assimilation and development of data for N and N2
– PARADE 11-species air QSS model developed
• Need CN model for Titan entry – Astrium QSS models available from Huygens studies – General CR capability added to PARADE and CFD codes
– Validation • Require high speed data • Literature ground tests • New ground tests • Existent flight data • Extrapolation to new flight scenarios
Fluid Gravity Engineering Ltd
Air model development • Data assimilation
– 9 band N2 PARADE database (IRS) • VUV bands (previously only Birge-Hopfield II)
– Birge-Hopfield I , Birge-Hopfield II, Lyman-Birge-Hopfield, Worley, Worley-Jenkins, Carroll-Yoshino, e’X
• Others – First positive and second positive
– Survey of electron impact excitation rates compiled for all molecules (IST)
– Consolidated mapping of coalesced states of atomic nitrogen
• Missing data development – Ab initio computations of electron impact excitation data and
predissociation branching ratios (IMIP-CNR) Fluid Gravity Engineering Ltd
Air QSS Model Development • Quasi-Steady-State (QSS)
– Solution of detailed balance of electronic states, assuming that dominant excitation/relaxation rates are fast enough to establish local steady-state (Park)
– Applied as post-process (attractive for rapid assessments)
• PARADE is a NEQAIR85 descendant – Decouple to allow other (new) data to be input – Early PARADE version unstable, or Boltzmann populations
often recovered
• QSS model improvements – Greater stability
• Hierarchical solution method – Saha-Boltzmann equation incorporated into expansion of the
coalesced states – Inclusion of new TRP data
Fluid Gravity Engineering Ltd
N2 Model Improvements • Large reduction in VUV contribution
– Typical high speed simulations VUV accounts 20-30% of total
Fluid Gravity Engineering Ltd
10−4
10−2
100
102
104
0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000 35000 40000
I h(W
/m2 /Å
)
h(Å)
Boltzmann (Original Data)Boltzmann (Improved N2 data)
QSS (Best available data)
10−210−1100101102103104105
800 1200 1600 2000
Air Validation
• Validation of non-equilibrium radiation predictions against NASA EAST shock-tube – At the time no reliable VUV data available – TRP produced VUT-1 data looks CN contaminated – Validate the QSS methodology with non VUV
bands and atomic lines • Cross code verification against flight cases
– Stardust and FIRE II
Fluid Gravity Engineering Ltd
Air Validation
Fluid Gravity Engineering Ltd
700-760nm 760-800nm
800-830nm 850-880nm
• V=10.34km/s P= 40Pa • Nitrogen and oxygen lines
• EAST data: Johnston AIAA 2008-1245, Grinstead et al AIAA 2008-1244
Air Validation • V=9.66km/s, P=13.3Pa • 290-480nm • N2 and N2
+ important in this spectral range
• Much improvement over Boltzmann predictions
Above figure taken from Johnston AIAA 2008-1245
Fire II (Equivalent sphere)
Fluid Gravity Engineering Ltd
• Super Catalytic convective fluxes agree with Johnston et. al JSR 45 pp.1185 (2008) (~300W/cm2 with out carbuncle)
• Reduction of ~30% of radiative flux in agreement with Johnston et. al, although radiative fluxes are ~15% larger
• Convective flux at stagnation often quoted by other authors is ~200W/cm2 (Non-catalytic result in Johnston et al, Hash et. al AIAA 2007-605, fully catalytic result in Greendyke and Hartung JSR 31 pp.986 (1994))
• Total heat flux obtained from flight data is ~290W/cm2
!
!
Air Model Outlook
• Significant improvement over Boltzmann model • Number of recommendations for engineering models
– Availability of non-equilibrium VUV validation data in short supply (very limited in Europe)
– Implementation of new N2 data as a CR model • parameterise QSS region of validity
– Further investigation into chemical kinetics of oxygen ionisation
• An early campaign of the ESTHER shock tube is planned to provide VUV validation data and develop the tools further – New review of most up-to-date CR/STS models and data
required Fluid Gravity Engineering Ltd
Titan Model Development • Astrium-ST developed Huygens QSS model for TPS
sizing – Developed due to margin requirements for Huygens – Implemented in operational codes as a CR model for the TRP – Gockçen chemical kinetics (neglecting ionisation) baseline for TRP
• CR model – Pseudo-species representing excited states computed in CFD code – CN(X),CN(A),CN(B) (data also available for three state N2 model) – Arrhenius rates for production through chemistry and excitation
reactions – Populations input directly to radiation database – Quenching and resonant reaction species approximated by
Boltzmann population where not available in CR model
• Validation and application at high speed – EAST and TRP VUT-1 shock tube data
Fluid Gravity Engineering Ltd
Huygens Validation • EAST v= 5.15km/s P=13.3Pa
data (Bose et al JTHT 2006) • Operational codes brought into
line with other codes • Airbus DS (Astrium) results
top figure – Low Sensitivity to kinetic models
(Chemical and CR) – Review of ionisation reaction
kinetics required
• Vibrationally specific models in literature shown to capture relaxation rate better
• Possible EAST data discrepancy (next slide)
Fluid Gravity Engineering Ltd !
Distance (cm)
PWR(W/cm2.sr)
0 5 10 15
10-2
10-1
100
101
Experimental data EAST CASE 1 - P=13.3 PaCASE 1.1 : AST thermochem. model 1 + TRP CR modelCASE 1.2 : AST thermochem. model 2 + AST CR modelCASE 1.3 : AST thermochem. model 2 + TRP CR modelCASE 1.4 : AST thermochem. model 1 + AST CR modelCASE 1.5 : AST thermochem. model 1 + Boltzmann radiationCASE 1.6 : AST thermochem. model 1 + TRP CR model , activation TCASE 1.7 : AST thermochem. model 2 + AST CR model , activation T
EAST FACILITY - 2% CH4 98% N2 - P=13.3 PaSpec. Range 400 - 430 nm
EAST result 13.3 Pa- TRP Aerochemistry 12 Apr 2011 | | |
Huygens Validation
Fluid Gravity Engineering Ltd
• Brandis et al JTHT 2010 – All conditions reproduced
except this one
• Intensity scaled by 1/3 to fit X2 data
• CR model now more conservative
• Can bring the computation to scaled intensity – Neglect resonant reactions
– Include ionisation and
electron impact excitation in CR model
CN(X)+ N2 (X,v = 4)↔ CN(A)+ N2 (X,v = 0)CN(X)+ N2 (X,v = 11)↔ CN(B)+ N2 (X,v = 0)
!
Huygens Probe
Fluid Gravity Engineering Ltd
• C2, N2, N also included in radiation calculations with a Boltzmann distribution
• Convective and radiative fluxes reduced by radiation coupling – ~15% reduction in total heat flux at stagnation point
• Coupled and uncoupled stagnation point fluxes in excellent agreement with Osawa et al. JTHT 22, 140 (2008)
Titan High Speed Validation
Fluid Gravity Engineering Ltd
• VUT-1 : V=8km/s P=25Pa • Velocity consistent with
peak radiative fluxes on high speed entry
• Intensity in reasonable agreement with experiment
• Collision frequency of CN(X) estimated to be ~6x106s-1
• CN(B) decay rate ~1.5x107s-1
• Boltzmann-like distribution not unlikely
Titan High Speed Validation
• Compare high speed case with EAST high pressure case
• V=5.93km/s P=133Pa • 270-470nm • Collision frequency of CN(X)
estimated to be ~3x107s-1
• CN(B) decay rate ~1.5x107s-1 • Absorption required in
detailed balance to obtain Boltzmann distribution
Fluid Gravity Engineering Ltd
!
Titan High Speed Entry
• Apply high speed condition to Huygens aeroshell
• Boltzmann and CR models computed
• Convective flux larger than radiative flux
• Radiative fluxes lower than expected (~800W/cm2 from Huygens correlations)
• There is still a non-equilbrium effect
– To be confirmed with tighter radiation coupling
Fluid Gravity Engineering Ltd
Titan Model Outlook
• Evidence suggests some disparity in kinetics – Gokçen kinetics for ionisation require review – Vibrationally specific model required?
• Recommended as priorities for ESTHER shock-tube investigation
• Model appears to be conservative for Huygens – But not as conservative as Boltzmann assumption
• High speed Titan mission design – Initial validation encouraging
• Boltzmann or CR may be suitable
– Higher post-shock densities è tighter radiation coupling in operational codes
Fluid Gravity Engineering Ltd
Conclusions • Non-equilibrium radiation models for CN (Collisional Radiative)
and 11-species air (QSS) have been developed for ESA operational engineering tools
• The models have been validated against experimental shock tube data, and are found to provide more accurate assessment of radiative emission than a Boltzmann model.
• The models have been applied to flight cases, with a loosely coupled scheme; the results generally compare well with cases found in the literature
• The validation of the models and successful rebuilding of flight cases suggests that they are currently suitable for mission design and evaluation
Fluid Gravity Engineering Ltd