Acta Mechanica Sinica

, Volume 22, Issue 5, pp 409–416 | Cite as

Study on micronozzle flow and propulsion performance using DSMC and continuum methods

  • Minghou Liu
  • Xianfeng Zhang
  • Genxuan Zhang
  • Yiliang Chen
Research Paper

Abstract

In this paper, both DSMC and Navier–Stokes computational approaches were applied to study micronozzle flow. The effects of inlet condition, wall boundary condition, Reynolds number, micronozzle geometry and Knudsen number on the micronozzle flow field and propulsion performance were studied in detail. It is found that within the Knudsen number range under consideration, both the methods work to predict flow characteristics inside micronozzles. The continuum method with slip boundary conditions has shown good performance in simulating the formation of a boundary layer inside the nozzle. However, in the nozzle exit lip region, the DSMC method is better due to gas rapid expansion. It is found that with decreasing the inlet pressure, the difference between the continuum model and DSMC results increases due to the enhanced rarefaction effect. The coefficient of discharge and the thrust efficiency increase with increasing the Reynolds number. Thrust is almost proportional to the nozzle width. With dimension enlarged, the nozzle performance becomes better while the rarefaction effects would be somewhat weakened.

Keywords

Micronozzle DSMC Continuum model Slip boundary condition Thrust efficiency 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Rossi C. (2002). Micropropulsion for space – a survey of mems-based micro thrusters and their solid propellant technology. Sensors Updates 10:257–292CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Lewis D., Janson S., Become R., Antonsson E. (2000). digital micropropulsion. Sensors Actuat. A Phys. 80:143–154CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ketsdever A.D., Clarbough M., Gimelshein S.F., Alexeenko A.A. (2005). Experimental and numerical determination of micropropulsion device efficiencies at low Reynolds numbers. J. AIAA 43(3):633–641CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bayt R.L. (1999). Analysis, fabrication and testing of a MEMS- fabricated micronozzles. PhD Thesis. MIT, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Choudhuri, A.R., Barid, B., Gollahalli, S.R.: Effects geometry and ambient pressure on micronozzle flow. AIAA paper 2001–3331, Salt Lake City, Utah (2001)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Reed, B.: Decomposing solid micropropulsion nozzle performance issues. AIAA paper 2003-0672, Reno, Nevada (2003)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gad-el-Hak M. (1999). The fluid mechanics of microdevices – the freeman scholar lecture. J. Fluids Eng. 121:5–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Alexeenko, A., Collins, R.J., Gimelshein, S.F., Levin, D.A.: Challenges of three-dimensional modeling of microscale propulsion devices with the DSMC method. In: Proceedings of 22nd symposium on rarefied gas dynamics, Sydney, Australia (2000)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Piekos E.S., Breuer K.S. (1996). Numerical modeling of micro-mechanical devices using the direct simulation Monte Carlo method. J. Fluids Eng. 118:464–469CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Markelov G.N., Ivanov M.S. (2001). Numerical study of 2D/3D micronozzle flows. AIP Conf. Proc. 585(1):539–546CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Wang M.R., Li Z.X. (2004). Numerical simulations on performance of MEMS-based nozzles at moderate or low temperatures. Microfluidics Nanofluidics 1:62–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bird G.A. (1994). Molecular Gas Dynamics and the Direct Simulation of Gas Flows. Clarendon Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Shen C. (2005). Rarefied Gas Dynamics. Fundamentals, Simulation and Micro Flows. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New YorkGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ikegawa M., Kobayashi J. (1990). Development of a rarefied flow simulator using the DSMC method. JSME Int. J. 30:463–467Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Nance R.P., Hash D.B., Hassan H.A. (1998). Role of boundary conditions in Monte Carlo simulation of MEMS devices. J. Thermalphys. Heat Transfer 12:447–449CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Liou W.W., Fang Y. (2000). Implicit boundary conditions for direct simulation Monte Carlo method in MEMS flow predictions. Comput. Model. Eng. Sci. 4:119–128Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Zhang G.X., Cai X.D., Liu M.H., Chen Y.L. (2004). Cold flow field and propulsive performance of a micro laval nozzle (in Chinese). J. Propulsion Technol. 25:54–57Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Bayt, R.L., Breuer, K.S.: Viscous effects in supersonic mems-fabricated micronozzles. In: Proceedings of the 1998 ASME International Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exposition, Anaheim (1998)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Minghou Liu
    • 1
  • Xianfeng Zhang
    • 1
  • Genxuan Zhang
    • 1
  • Yiliang Chen
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Thermal Science and Energy EngineeringUniversity of Science and Technology of ChinaHefeiChina

Personalised recommendations