Altan Berdan Minaz,Ahmet Meram

  • Ahmet Meram: KTO Karatay Üniversitesi
  •  Year : 2025
  •  Vol : 4
  •  Issue : 1
  •  Page : 49-61
In this study, a uniquely designed aerospike rocket nozzle was developed, and its performance was compared both numerically and experimentally with that of a conventional De Laval rocket nozzle. Nozzles are critical components of rocket engines, responsible for accelerating and directing the high-energy exhaust gases generated in the combustion chamber to produce thrust. The geometry and aerodynamic characteristics of a nozzle significantly influence the overall efficiency, fuel consumption, and mission success of a rocket system. The type of nozzle used in a rocket engine varies depending on the mission profile, atmospheric conditions, and altitude range. Among the most widely used nozzle types are the De Laval and aerospike nozzles. While De Laval nozzles are optimized for specific altitude conditions with fixed geometries, aerospike nozzles can adapt to changing ambient pressures, maintaining high aerodynamic efficiency over a wide range of altitudes. This makes them particularly suitable for Single Stage to Orbit (SSTO) missions. Due to their altitude-compensating nature, aerospike nozzles provide more efficient thrust and reduced fuel consumption, especially at lower altitudes where environmental pressure varies significantly. In this research, both nozzle types were evaluated under identical conditions, including the same combustion chamber and propellant. Numerical analyses were conducted using ANSYS Fluent software to simulate pressure, temperature, and velocity distributions within each nozzle. Mesh structures, boundary conditions, and turbulence models were carefully selected to improve the accuracy of the simulations. Based on the numerical results, performance trends of each nozzle design were assessed, followed by experimental testing in a laboratory environment. Experimental measurements included thrust force, exhaust gas velocity, and temperature, which were then compared with the numerical data. The findings revealed a strong correlation between simulation and experimental results.
Cite this Article As : Minaz, A.B., & Meram, A. (2025). Design and Performance evaluation of a novel aerospike nozzle compared to a conventional de laval nozzle: Numerical and experimental study. Aerospace Research Letters (ASREL), 4(1), 49-61. https://doi.org/10.56753/ASREL.2025.1.4

This article is published under the CC BY-NC 4.0 license.
Asrel Aerospace Research Letters
2025, Vol4, Issue1
E-ISSN: 2980-0064
Received : , Accepted : , Published Online :

References

  1. AÇIKGÖZ Oğuzhan, DEMİR Mehmet,ÇETİN MEHMET EMİN (2023). Design and Simulation of a Model Rocket Prototype. ASREL, 2(2), 78-85., Doi: 10.56753/ASREL.2023.2.3
  2. Anderson, J. D. (2004). Modern compressible flow with historical perspective (3rd ed.). McGraw Hill.
  3. Bazargan, M., Karimi, H. A., & Mohseni, M. (2006). Mass calculation and optimization of pressurizing system of propellant tanks in a liquid fuel rocket.
  4. Dick, E. (2009). Introduction to finite element methods in computational fluid dynamics. In Computational fluid dynamics (pp. 235–274). Springer Berlin Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-85070-9_6
  5. Hagemann, G., Immich, H., Van Nguyen, T., & Dumnov, G. E. (1998). Advanced rocket nozzles. Journal of Propulsion and Power, 14(5), 620–634. https://doi.org/10.2514/2.5355
  6. Kishore, G. B. V., & Akash, K. (2014). CFD Analysis of a Rocket Nozzle with one Inlet at Mach 0.6 (Bachelor’s thesis). Malla Reddy College of Engineering and Technology, Hyderabad, India.
  7. Lash, E. L. (2015). Trajectory analysis and comparison of a linear aerospike nozzle to a conventional bell nozzle for SSTO flight [Master’s thesis or report, if applicable]. (Not published; you may clarify its type for accurate APA citation.)
  8. Lijo, V., Kim, H. D., Setoguchi, T., & Matsuo, S. (2010). Numerical simulation of transient flows in a rocket propulsion nozzle. International Journal of Heat and Fluid Flow, 31(3), 409–417. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheatfluidflow.2010.02.002
  9. Nakka, R. (2024, July 12). Sugar propellant chemistry. https://www.nakka-rocketry.net/succhem.html
  10. Nakka, R. (2024, March 1). Sugar propellant chemistry. https://www.nakka-rocketry.net
  11. Physics Forums. (2024, July 1). Rocket thrust equation: What is velocity V in mass flow rate formula? https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/rocket-thrust-equation-what-is-velocity-v-in-mass-flow-rate-formula.1058107/
  12. Sequeira, C. W., & Sanjay, M. V. (2021). Efficiency analysis of aerospike nozzle by comparison with a de Laval nozzle using computational fluid dynamics. In S. K. Saha, A. M. Roy, & S. Das (Eds.), Advances in fluid and thermal engineering: Select proceedings of FLAME 2020 (pp. 467–476). Springer Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-9901-2_44
  13. Sutton, G. P., & Biblarz, O. (2011). Rocket propulsion elements. John Wiley & Sons.
  14. ŞİŞKOLAR, Ö., GENÇ, H. S. F. H., ÇİFTÇİ, E., & UYANER, M. (2022). Pekiştirilmiş panellerin sanal testi. Aerospace Research Letters (ASREL) Dergisi, 1(2), 84-94.
  15. Uyaner, M., Karadal, K., Merdan, T., & Acar, N. N. (2024). Havacılık Sektöründe Yeşil Kompozitler: NACA 4452 Rib Uygulaması. Necmettin Erbakan Üniversitesi Fen ve Mühendislik Bilimleri Dergisi, 6(2), 272-288.
  16. Wang, C. H., Liu, Y., & Qin, L. Z. (2009). Aerospike nozzle contour design and its performance validation. Acta Astronautica, 64(11–12), 1264–1275. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actaastro.2009.01.023