AIAA 2003-4592

39th AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference and Exhibit

20-23 July 2003, Huntsville, Alabama

39th AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint

Propulsion Conference and Exhibit
20 23 July 2003
Huntsville, AL

Instantaneous Regression Rate Determination of a Cylindrical X-Ray Transparent Hybrid

Rocket Motor

Brian Evans*, Grant A. Risha , Nick Favorito , Eric Boyer , Robert B. Wehrman , Natan Libis, and
Kenneth K. Kuo
The Pennsylvania State University
University Park, PA 16802
Abstract
The determination of the solid fuel regression rate is one of the key steps in hybrid rocket combustion studies.
Historically, there is lack of direct regression rate measurements for validation of theoretical models. In practice
most mass-burning rates were determined by the net burned mass divided by the test duration that yields an average
rate. However, this method does not capture the instantaneous regression behavior. To achieve this, a newly
designed X-Ray Transparent Center-perforated (XTC) hybrid rocket motor system has been fabricated and tested to
provide the ability to measure the instantaneous solid fuel regression rate using a high-powered real-time X-ray
radiography system. Tests have been conducted using hydroxyl-terminated polybutadiene (HTPB) as the baseline
solid-fuel formulation. The solid-fuel regression rate can be enhanced by the addition of energetic metal powders.
Tests have been conducted using a 13% Silberline aluminum flakes solid fuel formulation in order to evaluate a
metalized fuel with the X-ray radiography system. The capability of the visual analysis system to capture
instantaneous X-ray radiography images has been demonstrated. Time variations of port dimensions have shown
good comparison with calculated regression results from developed numerical code. Differences in recovered fuel
burning surfaces were observed from SEM photographs. Large surface roughness, exhibited on the burned surfaces
of fuels containing nano-sized aluminum particles, indicates high potential for introducing stronger heat feedback to
substrate of solid-fuel and enhance burning rate.
Introduction
A traditional hybrid rocket motor employs a
solid-fuel grain with a gaseous, liquid or gel oxidizer
injected at the head end of the motor. Hybrid rockets
posses many advantages over conventional solid- or
liquid-propellant engines including on/off capability,
improved operability of motor performance, minimal
environmental impact, and also an inherent safety.1,2
The inherent safety of hybrid rockets is due to the
separation of the fuel and oxidizer physically and also
by phase. For hybrid rockets, the combustion of solid
fuels can be controlled by the supply rate of oxidizer to
the combustion chamber. The rate-limiting process of
the combustion of hybrid rockets is the mixing and
combustion of the fuel grain pyrolysis products with the
oxidizer flowing through the center port of the solidfuel grain.3,4,5 Correlations between the instantaneous
linear regression rate and the instantaneous oxidizer
mass flux are unavailable and most investigations

address the dependency of the averaged linear

regression rates on averaged oxidizer mass fluxes
supplied to the rocket motors. The instantaneous
regression rate of the solid fuel in a hybrid rocket motor
could differ significantly from the averaged value. It is
highly desirable to have the capability for measuring
the instantaneous fuel regression rate as a function of
time and position. One of the objectives for this paper
is to develop an X-Ray Transparent Center-perforated
(XTC) hybrid rocket motor system. Using the XTC
hybrid rocket motor allows correlations to be
established that describe the regression behavior of
various solid fuels burning under different operating
conditions.
One of the disadvantages of the existing HTPBbased solid fuels is the relatively low mass burning rate,
requiring a relatively large fuel burning surface area for

* M.S. Student, AIAA Member

Ph.D. Candidate, AIAA Student Member

Undergraduate Assistant

Visiting Scholar

Distinguished Professor of Mechanical Engineering, Fellow AIAA

1
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

Copyright 2003 by Brian J. Evans, Grant A. Risha, Nick Favorito, Eric Boyer, Robert B. Wehrman, Natan Libis, and Kenneth K. Kuo. . Published by the American Institute of Aeronautics and

producing a given thrust level. Using energetic nanosized powder additives, developed by various
manufacturers, this disadvantage can be alleviated.6,7
A previous study conducted by Risha, et al.8,9 has
evaluated 19 different fuel formulations using a LongGrain Center-Perforated (LGCP) hybrid rocket motor.
The energetic additives that have shown the greatest
increase in mass-burning rate performance have been
selected for further study using the XTC hybrid rocket
motor. In addition to continued combustion studies of
energetic additives, a parallel material characterization
study has been conducted in order to further understand
which physical properties of energetic particles are
important to the combustion of solid fuels containing
these energetic additives.
Various techniques have been adopted in recent
studies to deduce the instantaneous regression rate of
solid fuel. Strand, et al.10 used a small low-pressure
slab motor with optical viewing ports to determine both
the instantaneous and also the average regression rates.
Chiaverini, et al.2 used a similar slab configuration but
with a larger rocket motor and higher steady-state
chamber pressure. Both ultrasound pulse-echo system
and a real-time X-ray radiography system were
employed to make instantaneous measurements at
several axial locations along the fuel surface. The
ultrasound technique was also used by Russo Sorge, et
al.11 to determine the regression rate at a single axial
location, but in a cylindrical center perforated grain. A
cylindrical grain has also been utilized in a small motor
in previous studies at PSU by Risha et al.12 to
experimentally find average regression rates of various
solid fuel formulations containing different types of
nano-sized energetic particles. Lengelle, et al.13 and
Risha, et al.14 have used other methods involving a
convective flow to measure the ablation rates of various
solid fuels.
Objective of Research
In the current study, an X-ray transparent lab-scale
hybrid motor has been designed to allow the testing and
characterization of various fuels and additives in a
hybrid rocket system. In order to obtain the maximum
amount of information from limited supplies of
experimental materials, a number of unique features
have been implemented. Specific design objectives for
the motor design include:
1. Cartridge loading of the solid-fuel grain to
facilitate motor assembly and achieve rapid
turn-around for test firings;
2. Center-perforated grain to simplify casting and
simulate real motor port;
3. X-ray transparent case to allow instantaneous
measurements to be made over entire motor
operation;

4.

Flexible oxidizer system to allow the use of

either gaseous or liquid oxidizers; and
5. Capability
for
instantaneous
thrust
measurements for performance evaluation.
The predecessor to the XTC hybrid rocket motor,
known as the Long Grain Center Perforated (LGCP)
hybrid rocket motor, has provided much useful
information as to the effects of various energetic
additives.12 Based on the findings of the LGCP, current
research is focused on understanding the effects of the
addition of energetic particles with two main focuses:
Material characterization to analyze physical
properties (eg. particle size distribution,
percent oxide vs. active content, etc.) and their
effect on combustion.
Experimental combustion research, via
instantaneous
linear
regression
rate
determination, to evaluate the performance
enhancement when energetic particles are used
in solid-fuel formulations.
With the capability of real-time X-ray radiography,
the instantaneous regression rate of the various solidfuel formulations can be measured as a function of time
and axial location. The regression rate can then be
correlated to the instantaneous oxidizer mass flux as a
function of time and position.
In addition to studying the benefits of addition of
various nano-sized energetic particles, research will
also focus on the effect of various oxidizers as well in
hopes of finding an optimum fuel/oxidizer combination.
The test facilities enable the use of various oxidizers
that can be gaseous, liquid, or gelled materials. The test
facility is also capable of heating the gaseous oxidizers
to elevated temperatures for simulating a ramjet
combustion process.
With the XTC and the LGCP hybrid rocket motors
(both capable of being operated with minimal transition
and turn-around time), a comparison of similar fuel
formulations can be made between them. Comparisons
between these two motors with different geometric
sizes can help us to assess any scaling effects that are
present.
Method of Approach
Motor Component Design
The design of the X-Ray Transparent Centerperforated (XTC) hybrid rocket motor was based upon
the design strategies of its predecessor, the LGCP
hybrid rocket motor. Figure 1 shows a photograph of
the XTC test rig installed on the test deck with major
motor components noted. In order to enable X-rays to
pass through the motor without significant attenuation,
the motor casing has been designed from thick walled

2
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

paper phenolic tubing, which is commercially available,

instead of a traditional steel casing for the LGCP motor.

Figure 1. Photograph of the assembled XTC hybrid

rocket motor
Both ease of construction and simplicity of use
were taken into account as part of the design process in
order to allow quick fabrication of the rocket motor and
rapid turn-around between static test firings. The new
design provides several desirable capabilities such as:
1) ability to change injector to swirl, annular, impinging
jet, etc.; 2) various nozzle throat sizes to tailor the
chamber pressure; and 3) potential to install a watercooled nozzle to avoid nozzle erosion. In contrast to
the LGCP motor that employs a stainless steel chamber,
the paper phenolic casing allows direct imaging using a
real-time X-ray radiography system.
Fine-wire
thermocouples and ultrasonic devices can be installed
in any axial locations along the solid fuel grain, using
the newly developed diagnostic assemblies as shown
below in Fig. 2 in the XTC motor layout diagram.
This design also offers a maximum flexibility in
operation and maintenance of the nozzles to be used in
the experiments. After the graphite nozzle is inserted
into the nozzle plug, it is retained in place by a threaded
retainer ring. This design makes it very easy to use
different types of nozzles with little dismantling of the
nozzle assembly. Tungsten or other types of hightemperature metallic nozzles can be used instead of
graphite nozzles. This selection is based upon the
operating conditions of the experiment. An existing
water-cooled nozzle can be directly mounted onto the
XTC motor to provide cooling of the nozzle during the
experiment. The injector face can also be quickly
replaced if a different injection pattern is desired.
The motor is equipped with two Setra pressure
transducers to monitor the pressure near the oxidizer
injector and the exit nozzle. The XTC motor is

mounted on a precision linear guide platform allowing

free axial movement during test firing and the
instantaneous thrust can be measured using a 1000-lbf
load cell.
Since the XTC motor grain is new, each
component was hydrostatically tested. According to the
Environmental, Safety and Health Pressure Vessel and
System Design documentation used by Lawrence
Livermore National Lab (LLNL)15, the components of
any high pressure testing apparatus used in remote
operation must be hydrostatically tested to at least
1.25PMAWP (maximum allowable working pressure).
The design equations for maximum operating pressure,
maximum allowable operating pressure, and the
hydrostatic test pressure are as follows:
Max. Operating Pressure:
PMOP = 1, 850 psig = 12.86 MPa
Max. Allowable Operating Pressure:
PMAWP =

PMOP
0.90

= 2, 050 psig = 14.24 MPa

Hydrostatic Test Pressure:

PHYDRO = 1.32 PMAWP = 2, 700 psig = 18.72 MPa

Both the solid fuel paper phenolic cartridge and the

diagnostic assembly successfully passed the hydrostatic
pressure tests conducted up to 2,700 psig.
In order to study the effects of various liquid
oxidizers on the combustion of solid-fuel formulations,
a liquid-oxidizer feed system was designed and
constructed. The liquid oxidizer feed system was
designed for a 10-second run of the XTC motor with
mass fluxes up to 0.42 kg/s. This time is longer then
the anticipated test time and allows for sufficient
oxidizer to assure steady flow in the feed lines
throughout the test. A volume of approximately 4.2
liters was determined to be sufficient to accommodate
for a 10-second test time. Therefore, based on this
information a piston tubular series reactor from High
Pressure Equipment Company (HiP) was selected that
allowed for the needed volume of the oxidizer and
operating pressure. The tubular reactor has a working
volume greater than needed and a working pressure
rating of 34.6 MPa (5,000 psig). However, the results
covered in this paper are related to hybrid rocket
operation using gaseous oxygen as the oxidizer.

3
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

Head-end Closure
Assembly

Diagnostic Assembly
Graphite
Sleeve

Graphite Sleeve

Nozzle-end Closure
Assembly
Nozzle Assembly

Injector Assembly
Retainer

Nozzle
Retainer

Paper Phenolic Cartridge

Oxidizer
Solid Fuel
Load Cell

Injector
Face
Injector Assembly

Graphite
Nozzle
Injector Face
Retainer

Linear Guide
Deck Support

Linear Bearing

Linear Guide Rod

Support

Figure 2. XTC motor layout with major components noted

XTC Hybrid Rocket Motor Test Setup
The XTC hybrid rocket motor was used to burn
solid-fuel formulations consisting of hydroxylterminated polybutadiene (HTPB) as the baseline solid
fuel (SF1). When Silberline energetic nano-sized
aluminum flakes were added for performance
enhancement, the solid fuel sample is named as SF7.
The HTPB was formulated using R45-M resin with
Isonate 143L methylene diphenyl isocyanate (MDI)
curing agent. The casting process for solid-fuel
formulations for the XTC motor grain is similar to the
predecessor, the LGCP. The solid fuel was mixed
following the same procedure for introducing particles
into the resin and degassing. Also the grains were cast
utilizing a previously developed novel low-melting
point wax mandrel process, in order to create a centerperforated grain. Further information pertaining to the
exact process through which this is completed can be
found in Reference 16. Grains were cast in the paper
phenolic tubes that have an outer diameter of 114.3 mm
(4.5 inches) and an inner diameter of 63.5 mm (2.5
inches) in lengths up to 457.2 mm (18 inches). Typical
test durations for the XTC ranged from 5 to 7 seconds
depending on the fuel formulation and the injected
oxidizer mass flux.
A high capacity variable-throat venturi with
upstream pressure and temperature measurements was
employed in the gaseous oxygen feed system in order to
reach the desired mass flow rates. From previous
experiments using the LGCP motor, the range of
oxidizer mass flux was determined and scaled
accordingly so that the larger scale XTC motor had
similar initial operating conditions. Flow rates of up to
0.42 kg/s can be obtained through the use of this
venturi, which is sufficient for the desired oxidizer
mass fluxes.

In order to compare results obtained from the XTC

motor and the smaller LGCP motor, oxidizer mass
fluxes were controlled to range from approximately 80
to 140 kg/m2-s. In addition to mass fluxes in this range,
the XTC motor has the capability to be operated at
much higher fluxes.
Since hybrid rocket motors have shown that the
oxidizer mass flux is the dominant parameter on the
linear regression rate with no discernable pressure
effect8, the steady-state chamber pressure of the XTC
can be similar to or much greater then that of the LGCP
while still maintaining approximately the same linear
regression rate. Because of this, the chamber pressure
has been selected to range from approximately 2.17 to
4.24 MPa (300 to 600 psig), which is similar to the
range used for the LGCP and will allow for comparison
in performance.
The LGCP motor has been used to evaluate 19
different fuel formulations. A complete list of fuel
formulations with the additive type and percent by
weight addition can be found in References 8 and 9.
From the results obtained from testing various nanosized particles with the LGCP motor a group of frontrunning candidates have been selected for continued
investigation with the XTC motor. The energetic
additive that has shown the most improvement in
performance is the Viton-A coated Alex with an
increase of 120% in mass-burning rate and 123%
increase in the average linear regression rate at an
oxidizer mass flux of 112 kg/m2-s. At this same
oxidizer mass flux, Alex powder without any coating
has also proven to be a leading candidate. Average
mass-burning and linear-regression rates increased by
61% and 105%, respectively. A number of other
candidates exhibited significant performance increase
compared to the baseline solid fuel HTPB. For these
candidates, which include; Silberline aluminum flakes,

4
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

Viton-A coated Silberline aluminum flakes,

Technanogies aluminum, an average increase in linear
regression rate of 60-70% was seen. The addition of
Viton-A has proven to be beneficial in increasing the
average mass burning and linear regression rates as
cited by Reference 16.
Due to the fact that more (~3 to 4 times) energetic
powder mass is needed to cast an XTC grain than the
LGCP grain with the same percentage of additive
loading, the LGCP motor has been used to evaluate the
effectiveness of the nano-sized energetic additive.
Based on the LGCP motor results, the larger XTC
motor grains were prepared for studying the
combustion behavior in larger motor with detailed
diagnostics.
Instantaneous Regression Rate Measurement Method
The main feature of the XTC hybrid rocket motor
is the capability to image the instantaneous surface of
the regressing fuel grain using a real-time X-ray
radiography system. During test firings, the regression
of the surface can be determined at any instant in time
and at any axial position. The experimental setup of the
XTC motor with the real-time X-ray radiography
system in place is shown in Fig. 3 below.
X-ray
Source

Blast Shield

Image
Intensifier

power to the X-ray tube. The X-rays are detected by a

Hamamatsu 9/6 image intensifier and captured by
camera and recorded.
For X-ray cinematography, an X-ray source is
positioned adjacent to the XTC motor with an image
intensifier on the opposite side of the test setup, as close
to the motor as possible. Keeping the image intensifier
as close to the motor as possible reduces the amount of
X-ray scatter, which allows as sharp an image as
possible. Attached to the image intensifier is a rightangle adapter that reflects the output image from the
image intensifier. A video camera is setup off to the
side of the image intensifier to capture the image while
not being in line with the high-power X-ray beam to
protect the camera electronics.
Images obtained from the X-ray system were
analyzed to determine the location of the surface of the
solid fuel as a function of time. Initial imaging was
taken on a calibration grain (having a 13% Silberline
aluminum flake composition) that was machined with
precision steps cut into the solid fuel at known
diameters (see Fig. 4). Imaging the calibration grain
with the X-ray system allowed the determination of the
surface clarity from the image density gradient at the
surface. An alumunized fuel formulation was chosen
since it would attenuate the largest amount of the
signal. It was found that the gradient in image density
at the surface was sufficient to distinguish the port from
the surface of the fuel grain as shown in the calibration
grain.

Solid Fuel Surface

Figure 3. X-ray imaging setup used with XTC hybrid

rocket motor
The X-ray radiography system employed in this
study uses a Phillips 320 kV X-ray tube in conjunction
with MGC 03 controller. The X-ray system has the
capability to be operated in any one of three test cells
within the lab. In order to assure safe operation of the
X-ray system an interlock system has been
implemented. When the interlock system is armed no
one may enter the test cell in which the X-ray is being
operated or into the fenced area surrounding the test
cell. If someone does breech this perimeter the X-ray
system power supply will automatically cut off the

Figure 4. Calibration grain image with surface of fuel

noted.
Discussion of Results
Six XTC hybrid rocket motor test firings were
conducted with two different fuel formulations, pure
HTPB (tests XTC-01, XTC-03, XTC-04, XTC-06) and
13% Silberline aluminum flakes (tests XTC-02, XTC05). Two of the six test firings were run using the realtime X-ray radiography system to image the surface of

5
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

O Flow Off
2

1.5

150

100

Ignition

0.5

O Flow On
2

0
-5

N Purge On

560

480

Thrust [lb ]

100
f

400
320
240

50

Ignition

160

O Flow On
2

80

0
0

10

Time [s]
N Purge On

200

50

O Flow Off

250

640

-5

Chamber Pressure [MPa]

Chamber Pressure [psig]

300

150

10

Time [s]

Figure 5. Typical pressure-time profile using XTC

rocket motor (XTC-02-SILBAL-13)
The pressure decreases throughout the steady burn
time of the grain, which is caused by the increase in
port area that creates a decrease in oxidizer mass flux.
For test XTC-02, the initial oxidizer mass flux was 341
kg/m2-s with a final oxidizer mass flux of
approximately 113 kg/m2-s yielding an average oxidizer
mass flux of approximately 170 kg/m2-s based upon the
time-averaged port area at the nozzle-end of the grain.
The thrust trace for this test is given below in Fig. 6
including specific times corresponding to motor
operating condition changes as given in Fig. 5. Test
XTC-02 produced a consistent thrust level trace for the
pressure-time profile that was obtained. A gradual
decrease in the thrust is seen as the pressure decreases
due to the increase in port area. A maximum thrust
level of this test was approximately 120 lbf (534 N) and
the average thrust level was approximately 100 lbf (445
N).

Figure 6. Typical thrust-time profile using XTC rocket

motor (XTC-02-SILBAL-13)
Burning Rate Comparisons to LGCP Results
One of the objectives of the XTC hybrid rocket
motor was to study the effects of geometric scaling
between the XTC and the smaller LGCP grain.
Geometric scaling effects arise since the XTC fuel
grains are approximately 3-times the size of its
predecessor the LGCP grain. Initial average burning
rate results show that a power-law curve fit with very
close values of exponents (0.647 vs. 0.698) fits both
sets of data as seen in Fig. 7. Comparison between the
two sets of data shows agreement to within 6%. From a
simplistic qualitative point of view, the larger XTC
motor will demonstrate a smaller ratio of surface
roughness to diameter (/D) assuming similar surface
roughness between the LGCP and XTC motor. From
Moodys chart for pipe flows, it can be deduced that
there will be a lower friction coefficient (f) and
therefore a lower heat-transfer coefficient hc according
to Reynolds analogy shown below:

f
2

= St Pr

where

Nu
Pr Re

Pr

hc

u cp

Pr

u = Gtot = Gox + G fuel

The resultant decrease in heat-transfer coefficient

causes a slight decrease in solid-fuel regression rate that
is seen with the XTC motor when compared to the data
of the LGCP motor. Thorough investigation into the
detailed cause of the regression rate difference will be
required to facilitate an in-depth understanding of the
physical phenomena involved. These will include:
curvature effects, heat loss to inert motor components,
as well as the influence of surface roughness and port
geometry on turbulent kinetic energies distribution.

6
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

Thrust [N]

the solid-fuel grain. All tests have been conducted

using gaseous oxygen as the oxidizer with varying
average oxidizer mass fluxes from 100 to 150 kg/m2-s.
The pressure-time trace from XTC-02-SILBAL-13
(SF7) is given in Fig. 5. Noted on the plot are the
specific times corresponding to the initiation of oxidizer
flow, onset of ignition, oxidizer flow cutoff, and
initiation of nitrogen purge. On this plot, the time t=0
corresponds to the onset of ignition. The oxidizer flow
began approximately 2 seconds prior to ignition in
order to assure a steady flow in the feed line. Shortly
after the small pyrotechnic igniter is energized, the
chamber pressure raised sharply indicating successful
ignition followed with gradual pressure decay.

Average Linear Regression Rate, r [mm/s]

understanding into the regression behavior at different

locations of the grain. Figure 8 shows an image
captured from XTC-05-SILBAL-13 test firing.
Specific features are labeled in the image such as the
diagnostic assembly feedthrough screw that housed a
25 m fine-wire thermocouple.

2
r [mm/s] = 0.0541*(G
b

1
0.9
0.8

ox,ave

[kg/m2-s])0.647

r [mm/s] = 0.0401*(G
b

0.7

[kg/m -s])

0.698

LGCP Hybrid Rocket Motor

0.6
0.5

ox,ave

XTC Hybrid Rocket Motor

70

80

90 100

Measurement Location

200

Average Oxidizer Mass Flux, G

OX

[kg/m -s]

Diagnostic Assembly
Feedthrough Screw

Figure 7. Comparison of average regression rates for

pure HTPB (SF1) grains in XTC and LGCP motors

Oxidizer Flow

Nozzle End of
XTC Motor

Instantaneous Regression Rate Determination

Tests XTC-05-SILBAL-13 and XTC-06-HTPB100, which used SF7 and SF1 formulations
respectively, were the first two tests to utilize the realtime X-ray radiography system. Both tests obtained
successful visual data allowing the determination of the
instantaneous fuel surface. A location near the nozzle
was chosen for the measurement of the instantaneous
regression rate, since the average linear regression rate
is determined by the average of the port area at the
nozzle end of the grain. With continued testing other
axial locations will be imaged to gain further

Figure 8. Captured image of the viewing section from

XTC-05-SILBAL-13 test firing using a real-time X-ray
radiography system

Solid Fuel Port Radius [mm]

20.0

18.0

16.0

14.0
12.0
10.0
8.0
6.0

Deduced From Measured P-t Trace

Calculated Port Radius Variation Prediction

Final Port Radius-After Testing

Adapted LGCP Code, Deduced From P-t Trace

X-ray Image Data

4.0
0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

9.0

10.0

Time [s]
Figure 9. Comparison of measured and calculated time variations of port radius at nozzle-end of solid fuel grain

7
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

In-Situ Cast Fine-Wire Thermocouples

The ability to cast fine-wire thermocouples in the
solid-fuel grain allows a subsurface temperature
measurement of the fuel as the surface regresses.
Information into the surface temperature behavior for
various fuel formulations in combination with material
property research on fuel samples allows the
understanding of what is happening in the sub-surface
and surface regions of the fuel. Figure 10 shows a
typical temperature-time trace obtained from an

aluminized solid-fuel grain. It appears that there are

three distinct regions. First is the small plateau that is
seen before the sharp increase in temperature.
Although the exact cause of the flat region is unknown
at this time it is believed that a melt layer on the surface
of the fuel could cause this. Approximating the linear
regression rate of the fuel as 1.4 mm/s during this time
and noting that the plateau region lasts for
approximately 60 milliseconds it can be determined that
the melt layer has a thickness of approximately 85 m.
The nearly constant surface temperature of this zone
could be caused by the absorption of the energy being
fed back from the flame zone by the aluminum particles
that are at the fuel surface. A significant increase in the
temperature is not evident until about 916 K, which is
slightly below the melting temperature of aluminum
(933 K). The other two noticeable features on the
thermocouple trace are the two peaks followed by two
temperature decreases. The first peak that is seen
causes a temperature swing of approximately 75 K
while the second fluctuates a little bit more and is
approximately 100 K. The cause of these peaks is
unknown but it is speculated that the thermocouple may
be moving in the hot gases due to the flow in the shear
layer and this is causing a fluctuation in the measured
temperature. The thermocouples are self-supporting
and not covered by a rigid probe.
2000

Temperature Peaks
1500

Temperature [K]

An XTC motor test using SF1 fuel grain was

conducted at an average oxidizer mass flux level around
100 kg/m2-s to directly compare linear regression rate
data with those obtained from the LGCP motor. At this
oxidizer flux level almost zero throat erosion was
noticed in the nozzle. Under such condition, C*
predictions are more accurate when throat erosion
effect is absent.
The measured instantaneous port radius data at
nozzle-end of the solid fuel grain from the analysis of
X-ray images are plotted on Fig. 9. These data were
compared to the predicted results from several different
analysis codes developed by this research team. Curve
1 represents the deduced time variation of port radius
using the pressure-time trace obtained from the test
firing. Curve 2 shows the predicted results using data
from NASA-CEA code (C* curve fit, chamber gas
temperature curve fit) as input and solved the
conservation of mass equation as a function of time.
The output of this analysis is the time variations of
chamber pressure, O/F ratio, etc. Curve 3 shows the
measured final port radius after the test firing. Curve 4
shows the deduced radius variations with respect to
time by solving both conservation of mass and energy
equations (based upon the adapted LGCP code). As
shown in Fig. 9, the predicted or deduced results are
generally in good agreement with the X-ray image data.
Time, t=0, corresponds to energizing the igniter
leads. A rapid increase in the port radius is observed in
this short time period that the chamber pressure surged
abruptly due to the onset of combustion.
The
compression of the fuel corresponding to the chamber
pressure surge from 0.5 to 1.0 second is due to the
viscoelastic nature of HTPB, which causes non-linear
deformations. Similar effects were seen in previous
hybrid studies conducted with a slab motor utilizing Xray radiography for imaging and ultrasonic transducers
for point measurements of the regression rate. Serin, et
al.17 conducted tests and developed a correlation for
describing a correction term, which was specific for the
test setup and material. After this filling period, a
quasi-steady pressure is seen in the rocket motor and
the agreement of the measured data is within 10% of
the predicted radius.

Surface Temperature:
916 K
1000

Plateau Region

500

0
-1500

-1000

-500

500

Distance [m]

Figure 10. A typical temperature-time trace measured

by a 25 m thermocouples cast in solid fuel grain
(Test Number XTC-05-SILBAL-13)

8
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

Particle Analysis and Material Characterization

Characterization of physical properties of energetic
additives was performed to gain deeper understanding
of the mechanisms leading to improved performance of
solid fuels containing these additives. Much of the
characterization of particles physical properties was
conducted during research on the LGCP motor. Further
information including specific surface area, active
aluminum content, and average diameter can be found
in References 8 and 9.
Figure 11 (a), (b), and (c) gives SEM photographs
of burned surfaces of HTPB fuel, HTPB with 13%
Alex fuel, and HTPB with 13% Al-325 fuel,
respectively. The Al-325 powder contains aluminum
particles sieved through a 325 mesh and yields micronsized particles. All three images were photographed
under 250x magnification.
The recovered HTPB burned fuel surface show
very uniform structure with regular-sized voids and
protruded surfaces. The protruded materials at the
surface could represent some carbonaceous residues
and partially burned polymer. Comparing Fig. 11(b)
with 11(a), there are substantial amounts of deep caves
generated on the surface of recovered HTPB fuel with
13% Alex particles. The corresponding surface
roughness for the aluminized fuel is much higher than
that of the pure HTPB fuel. The higher surface
roughness corresponds to higher energy transfer
between the hot gas and the fuel surface. This implies a
higher regression rate of the fuel sample. This effect
was observed experimentally.
By comparing the SEM of HTPB fuel (Fig. 11(a))
with Fig. 11(c), it is quite obvious that the recovered
fuel sample surface with large sized aluminum particles
is covered by molten material which are believed to be
the Al2O3 and some aluminum. The large-sized
aluminum particles when they reach the fuel surface
will have a greater chance to melt and agglomerate.
The molten material during the combustion process
could transfer greater amounts of heat to the substrate
material and cause the regression rate to enhance. This
effect was also observed experimentally.
Some clear differences can be noted between SEM
(b) and SEM (c). From Fig. 11(b) it is noticeable right
away that the surface is not smooth but appears to
contain caverns that go quite deep into the surface of
the fuel. However in Fig. 11(c), for the Al-325 fuel
formulation, the recovered surface appears to be
relatively smooth in most places and displays only a
few deep holes. The texture of the surface of the fuels
is another noticeable difference between the two
formulations. An almost coral-like texture is seen on
the surface of the Alex fuel while the Al-325 fuel
surface appears smooth and molten in structure.
Further analysis to determine the composition of the

surface of these fuel samples is being conducted to

determine the extent that accumulation and
agglomeration is occurring on the surface of the fuel
during combustion.

(a) HTPB baseline fuel

(b) HTPB with 13% Alex fuel

(c) HTPB with 13% Al-325 fuel

Figure 11. SEM photographs of burned fuel surfaces
All images under 250x magnification

9
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

CONCLUSIONS
1.

2.

3.

4.

Successful testing of the XTC hybrid rocket

motor has proven the concept of the real-time Xray radiography measurement method for
cylindrical grains. Recorded X-ray images
allowed the determination of the instantaneous
port radius. Results obtained from the X-ray
video agreed well with the calculated
instantaneous port radius from the data reduction
code.
The diagnostic feedthroughs have demonstrated
the ability to pass 25 m fine-wire
thermocouples to be cast in-situ. The subsurface temperature profiles were obtained and
SF7 had a surface temperature of 916 K. With
more tests, an Arrhenius plot can be constructed.
Pure HTPB solid fuel grains have been tested at
varying average oxidizer mass flux conditions in
the XTC motor, including low mass fluxes that
are in the same range of the LGCP motor.
Results show slight differences in power law
correlations. Difference in relative roughness
could contribute to their difference in final
correlation.
SEM photographs of recovered fuel surfaces
were obtained for baseline HTPB fuel and
aluminized HTPB fuels. Baseline HTPB fuels
demonstrated regularly structured surface with
evenly spaced voids and protrusions. Addition
of Alex powders into HTPB fuel makes the
burning surface to be highly non-uniform with
deep caves and strong protrusions. These
structures lead to greater surface roughness
which enhances heat transfer rates between the
hot gas and pyrolyzing fuel surface. Addition of
micron-sized aluminum particles into HTPB fuel
causes the recovered surface to be covered by
the molten Al2O3 and unburned aluminum. The
molten material also increases the heat feedback
rate to the unburned solid fuel and resulting in
higher regression rate. However the aluminum
burning is less complete for micron-sized
aluminum particles.
FUTURE WORK

Continued research with the XTC hybrid rocket

motor using the real-time X-ray radiography
system will collect more data describing the
regression process of the fuel surface for various
solid-fuel formulations. Establish correlations
for the instantaneous regression rate based on
test operating conditions and fuel properties.
Conduct material analysis on the burned and the
unburned fuel surfaces of various fuels to

determine trends that are common within a fuel

formulation.
Study the effect of various energetic additives,
high-energy oxidizers, and binders to obtain an
optimum
fuel/oxidizer
combination
that
produces the desired performance.
Investigate the difference between the XTC and
LGCP in burning rate power-law correlations
including geometrical differences, heat loss, and
turbulent kinetic energies.
Additional instrumentation including ultrasonic
transducers, resistance sensors, etc. will be
utilized to obtain data for comparison with visual
data.
Examination of the viscoelastic nature of the fuel
formulations and to develop a correction term for
cylindrical grain geometry.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The authors would like to acknowledge Mr. Carl

Gotzmer and Mrs. Nancy Johnson of the Naval Surface
Warfare Center-Indian Head division for their
sponsorship of this research project through CPBT
corporation (under contract number N00174-02-C0024) with a subcontract to PSU. The authors would
also like to thank Mr. Peter J. Ferrara for his help with
the fabrication of graphite nozzles and mandrel plugs
and Prof. Baoqi Zhang for his help with the fine-wire
thermocouple construction.
REFERENCES
1

Kuo, K. K., Importance and Challenges of Hybrid

Rocket Propulsion Beyond Year 2000, Invited von
Krmn Lecture in the Proceedings of the 37th Israel
Annual Conference on Aerospace Sciences, pp. II-1 to
II-31, February 26-28, 1997.
2
Chiaverini, M. J., Serin, N., Johnson, D., Lu, Y. C.,
Kuo, K. K., and Risha, G. A., "Regression Rate
Behavior of Hybrid Rocket Solid Fuels," Journal of
Propulsion and Power, Vol 16, No. 1, pp. 125-132,
2000.
3
Strand, L. D., Ray, R. L., and Cohen, N. S., Hybrid
Rocket Combustion Study, AIAA Paper 93-2412, June
1993 and Strand, L. D., Ray, R. L., Anderson, F. A.,
and Cohen, N. S., Hybrid Rocket Fuel Combustion
and Regression Rate Study, AIAA Paper 92-3302,
June 1992.
4
Teague, W., Wright, A., Balkanli, D., and Hybl, L,
Effect of Energetic Fuel Additives on the Temperature
of Hybrid Rocket Combustion, AIAA 99-2138, June
1999.
5
Risha, G. A., Harting, G. C., Kuo, K. K., Peretz, A.,
Koch, D. E., Jones, H. S., and Arves, J. P., Surface

10
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

Heat Release of HTPB-Based Fuels in Oxygen Rich

Environments, Combustion of Energetic Materials,
Eds. K. K. Kuo, L. T. DeLuca, Begell House, Inc., pp.
101-115, 2002.
6
Pranda P., Prandova K. and Hlavacek V., Particle
Size and Reactivity of Aluminum Powders,
Combustion Science and Technology, Vol 156, pp 8196, 2000.
7
Ivanov, G., Uniformity of Burning and Detonation of
Pyrotechnic Mixtures Based on Activated Aluminum,
1995 JANNAF Propulsion Meeting CPIA Pub. 630,
Vol. 1, 1995, pp. 89-95.
8
Risha, G. A., Evans, B., Boyer, E., Wehrman, R. B.,
and Kuo, K. K., Nano-Sized Aluminum- and BoronBased Solid-Fuel Characterization in a Hybrid Rocket
Engine, AIAA 2003-4593, AIAA/SAE/ASME/ASEE
39th Joint Propulsion Conference and Exhibit 20 23
Huntsville, AL, July 2003
9
Risha, G. A. Enhancement of Hybrid Rocket
Combustion Performance Using Nano-Sized Energetic
Particles, Ph.D. Dissertation, August 2003
10
Strand, L., Ray, R., Anderson, F., and Cohen, N.,
Hybrid Rocket Fuel Combustion and Regression Rate
Study, AIAA 92-3302, AIAA/SAE/ASME/ASEE 28th
Joint Propulsion Conference, Nashville, TN, 1992.
11
Russo Sorge, A., Carmicino, C., Ferrazzano, L, and
Capasso, C., Experimental Tests on a Lab-Scale
Hybrid Rocket, 4th Green Propellants International
Conference, Norolwijk, Netherlands, June 19-21, 2001.
12
Risha, G.A., Boyer, E. B., Wehrman, R. B., and Kuo,
K. K., Performance Comparison of HTPB-Based Solid
Fuels Containing Nano-Sized Energetic Powder in a
Cylindrical Hybrid Rocket Motor, AIAA 2002-3576,
AIAA/SAE/ASME 28th Joint Propulsion Conference,
Indianapolis, IN, July 7-10, 2002.
13
Lengelle, G., Fourest, B, Godon, J. C., and Guin, C.,
Condensed Phase Behavior and Ablation Rate of Fuels
for
Hybrid
Propulsion,
AIAA
93-2413,
AIAA/SAE/ASME/ASEE 29th Joint Propulsion
Conference, Monterey, CA, June 28-30, 1993.
14
Risha, G. A., Harting, G. C., Kuo, K. K., Peretz, A.,
Koch, D. E., Jones, H. S., and Arves, J. P., Pyrolysis
and Combustion of Solid Fuels in Various Oxidizing
Environments,
AIAA
98-3184,
AIAA/SAE/ASME/ASEE 34th Joint Propulsion
Conference, Cleveland, OH, July13-15, 1998.
15
Environmental, Safety and Health, Pressure Vessel
and
System
Design,
http://www.llnl.gov/es_and_h/hsm/doc_18.02/doc1802.html
16
Risha, G. A, Ulas, A., Boyer, E. B., Kumar, S., and
Kuo, K. K., Combustion of HTPB-Based Solid Fuels
Containing Nano-sized Energetic Powder in a Hybrid
Rocket
Motor,
AIAA
2001-3535,
AIAA/SAE/ASME/ASEE 37th Joint Propulsion

Conference and Exhibit 8 11 July 2001 Salt Lake

City, Utah
17
Serin, N., Chiaverini, M., Harting, G., Hori, K., and
Kuo, K. K., "Pressure Correction of Ultrasonic
Regression Rate Measurements of a Hybrid Slab
Motor,"
AIAA
Paper
99-2319,
35th
AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference,
Los Angeles, CA, 20-24 June, 1999.

11
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics