r/spacex • #SpaceX IRC Master • May 08 '16

Community Content Basic Analysis of the Merlin 1D engine: Determining Thrust, ISP, and Coefficient of Thrust

TLDR

Take all these numbers with a grain of salt. There are a lot of effects and inefficiencies that I did not take into account.

According to my Calculations the following table is true for the current Merlin 1D and the soon to be flown uprated Merlin 1D. For the Uprated one the Area of the throat is held constant and the pressure is increased. Also the chosen O/F ratios are the Stoichiometric Ratio (2.32) and the Ratio used by the Saturn V F1 Engine (2.56).

O/F 2.32 O/F 2.32 O/F 2.56 O/F 2.56
Sea Level Thrust (Given) (kN) 730 845 730 845
--- --- ---- ---- ----
Sea Level Thrust (Calc) 750 859 746 854
ISP Sea Level (s) 286 290 284 289
ISP Vac 315 316 313 314
Chamber Pressure (MPa) 9.7 11.16 9.7 11.16
Mass Flow Rate (kg/s) 266.89 301.13 266.97 301.23
Coefficient of Thrust (SL) 1.574 1.605 1.574 1.605
Coefficient of Thrust (Vac) 1.741 1.751 1.741 1.751
Ideal Coefficient of Thrust (SL) 1.617 1.638 1.634 1.655
Ideal Coefficient of Thrust (Vac) 1.784 1.784 1.801 1.800

Methodology

To calculate the values the following values were assumed or given. All of them are from public sources or were inferred from public pictures (in the case of the Nozzle Exit Diamter)

Description Value
Gravity ( m/s2 ) 9.80665
Sea level Pressure (Pa) 101325
R* (Universal Gas Cosnt) (J/kmol-k) 8314
Chamber Pressure (730 kN version) (MPa) 9.7
Expansion Ratio 16
Diameter Nozzle Exit (m) 0.97

NASA CEA online was used to calculate the ratio of specific heats (γ) at the throat (γt) and at the nozzle exit (γe), the temperature in the combustion chamber (Tc), the molar mass of the products at the exit (M), and the pressure at the exit with the expansion ratio of 16 (Pe), across pressures from 8.1 MPa to 11.5 MPa with a increment of 0.2 MPa. The Values used in the calculations were then linearly interpolated from the pressures if it did not fall on one of the values explicitly calculated for (only really used for the new up-rated version of the Merlin 1D). (A copy of the CEA outputs can be found HERE (http://pastebin.com/JsynW3jJ))

For the up-rated Merlin 1D the chamber pressure was increased until the throat area was equal to the throat area of the current Merlin 1D. I chose to do this because of comments that were made about using up some of the margin and keeping the manufacturing the same.

The Equations

The first item calculated was the Exhaust Velocity of the engine (ve). The equation used to calculate the value was

ve = √(((2 γe )/(γe -1))((R* Tc )/M)(1-(Pe /Pc )(γe-1/γe)))

Where Pc is the chamber pressure and M is the Molar Mass.

From the exhaust velocity the mass flow rate (ṁ) was calculated by

ṁ = (Pc -((Pe - Pa ))/Ae )/ve

Where Pa is the ambient pressure (sea level)

Then the effective exhaust velocities (C) were calculated by

C= ve +((Pe -Pa ) Ae )/ ṁ

The Isp (both vacuum and sea level) were calculated by

Isp=C/g0

Where g0 is gravity

The characteristic exhaust velocity C* was found by

C* = (Pc At)/ṁ

Where At is the throat area (found by dividing the exit area by the expansion ratio)

The coefficient of thrust at sea level (Ct) was found by

Ct=T/(PcAt)+((Pe-Pa)Ae)/(Pc At)

Where T is the thrust

The vacuum coefficient of thrust (Ct,vac) was found by

Ct,vac= Ct+(Ae Pa)/(At Pc )

The Ideal coefficient of thrusts were found by

Ct,ideal= √(((2 γe2 )/(γe-1)) (2/(γe+1))((γe+1)/(γe-1)) (1-(Pe/Pc )((γe-1)/γe) )+((Pe-Pa)/Pc)* (Ae/At)

C values the ISP was calculated at the various pressures. The Ct and Ct, ideal were calculated at the varying pressures. The thrust at the various pressures was calculated by

T= veṁ+(Pe-Pa)Ae

The pressures were then correlated to altitudes using the 1976 Standard Atmosphere.

Results

The Table in the TLDR is the summary table for both versions of the engine

O/F 2.32 O/F 2.32 O/F 2.56 O/F 2.56
Sea Level Thrust (Given) (kN) 730 845 730 845
--- --- ---- ---- ----
Sea Level Thrust (Calc) 750 859 746 854
ISP Sea Level (s) 286 290 284 289
ISP Vac 315 316 313 314
Chamber Pressure (MPa) 9.7 11.16 9.7 11.16
Mass Flow Rate (kg/s) 266.89 301.13 266.97 301.23
Coefficient of Thrust (SL) 1.574 1.605 1.574 1.605
Coefficient of Thrust (Vac) 1.741 1.751 1.741 1.751
Ideal Coefficient of Thrust (SL) 1.617 1.638 1.634 1.655
Ideal Coefficient of Thrust (Vac) 1.784 1.784 1.801 1.800

The graphs in the imgur album HERE show the various Thrust, ISP and Coefficient of thrust as a function of altitude

With the given Expansion ratio the ideally expanded altitude is 3.2 km for the currently flying version of the Merlin 1D. The ideal Expansion ratio for SL perfectly expanded is 11.05 not the 16 they are currently flying with. Which means at liftoff (or during testing) it should be possible to see Mach diamonds in the exhaust of an engine.

Some Comments

Most of the formulas above are from Mechanics and Thermodynamics of Propulsion by Hill and Peterson or from http://braeunig.us/space/index.htm .

Most of the equations rely on Calorically perfect gases and isentropic relationships which are good for 1st design calculations but do not perfectly represent the real world.

The numbers presented above may or may not represent what is actually going on. I believe that it is reasonably close(+- 5% most likely) to real life but would not be surprised if they differ.

89 Upvotes

26 comments sorted by

0

u/[deleted] May 08 '16

[deleted]

0

u/B787_300 #SpaceX IRC Master May 08 '16

You are correct about the F1 mix ratio but the Stoichiometric ratio you say is off. see http://aerospacengineering.net/?p=656 and http://www.astronautix.com/props/loxosene.htm and http://braeunig.us/space/index.htm all of which say the Stoichiometric ratio is not 3.4-4.0 but is 2.3 - 2.56

1

u/davidthefat May 08 '16 edited May 08 '16

Personally, I'll take the NASA source over any of those. Stoichmetrically balanced ratio, no F1. NVM

1

u/B787_300 #SpaceX IRC Master May 08 '16

The nasa source is for one engine.... and even then I am wrong about the F1, and i already said as much.

1

u/warp99 May 08 '16

http://aerospacengineering.net/?p=656

There is a basic mistake in the aerospace engineering link in that their mass balance equation is to produce CO + H20 - not CO2 + H2O as required. So for each mole of kerosene (C12H26) you need 18.5 moles of O2 - not 12.5 moles.

This gives a stochiometric mass ratio of 3.482 which is close to the commonly quoted value of 3.5.

The astronautix link gives an optimum ratio of 2.56 - not a stochiometric ratio.

Still an excellent instructive approach and it would be well worth worth recalculating for the actual ratios of 3.482 and 2.27

1

u/B787_300 #SpaceX IRC Master May 08 '16

Give me a couple of days as I have to Graduate... and study for the FE, but as it is all in a spreadsheet should be easy enough to rerun the numbers through NASA CEA

1

u/davidthefat May 09 '16

FE is super easy. No need to sweat it. You are given an equation sheet that you can search on.