dc.description.abstract | Nowadays intensive studies are carried out on propulsion technologies. Efficiency in propulsion technologies is particularly important for the defense industry and air transport. For example, solid, liquid or hybrid engines used in rockets are trying to obtain different thrust values by using different fuel types. In addition, technologies such as scramjet, turbojet and ramjet are developed for the defense industry. Different concept applications are being tried to save fuel in air transportation. In recent years, detonation engine has been one of the most promising areas of propulsion technologies that have been attracting attention in order to be used at higher speeds and to increase thermal efficiency.The term detonation was first introduced in 1881. Although studies started to be carried out from this date, it took time for new studies to emerge. Detonation provides up to 30% higher thermal efficiency than conventional turbine engines. Detonation engines are explained by the Zeldovich-von Neumann-Döring (ZND) cycle instead of the Brayton cycle. Although the entropy achieved in the ZND cycle was lower compared to the Brayton cycle, the obtained usefull work was higher. However, when the ZND cycle is examined, it is seen that the maximum temperature reached is higher. When the specific impulse is examined, it is seen that detonation engines have higher values than classical turbine engines operating according to Brayton cycle. In particular, Mach finds its use in the range of 0-6. Detonation engines are widely used in two types of engines. One of them is pulse detonation engine and the other is rotating detonation engine. These two detonation engines have different concepts. Pulse detonation engine produces intermittent impulse at lower frequencies. On the other hand, the rotating detonation engine has a working frequency of around 10kHz and is able to generate continuous impulse. The operating logic of the pulse detonation engine is as follows. First, the fuel-oxidant mixture from the injectors is sprayed into the combustion chamber. After a period of time, the fuel-oxidant mixture fills the combustion chamber. Immediately afterwards, a pre-detonator or spark igniter positioned close to an injector initiates the combustion. First, the flame proceeds subsonicly as combustion. Obstacles in the combustion chamber increase the level of turbulence. An increase in the turbulence level causes the combustion to become detonation. This transformation is called deflagration to detonation transition (DDT).The detonation wave then exits the combustion chamber outlet. The burnt gases in the combustion chamber are cleaned using an inert gas. The combustion chamber is ready for the next cycle. Because this cycle takes time, the PDE operates at lower frequencies. In contrast, for the rotating detonation engine, fuel-oxidizing injectors continuously enter the combustion chamber. A pre-detonator or spark igniter fires this mixture. The resulting detonation wave rotates continuously around the annulus combustion chamber. In this way, high frequencies are obtained. The flame speed for these two engines moves at Chapman-Jouguet speed. Although the Chapman-Jouguet principle is one-dimensional, it has produced good results compared to experimental studies using high-frequency sensors. Therefore, it has also been used in 3D numerical solutions. Temperatures around 3500 K can be observed according to the fuel-oxidant combination used in front of detonation. For example, in a solution using H2-Air mixture, temperatures around 3460 K are observed. In the combustion chamber, pressure values are seen above the supply pressure on the detonation front. From this perspective, it is seen that the combustion chamber works under very difficult conditions. However, since the turbulence level is very high, a very high heat flux is seen from the combustion chamber to the walls. In previous studies, 10 MW/m2 heat flux was observed. The melting point of the material can be reached in a very short time. At this point, it is important that the correct cooling system is applied and the heat transfer can be calculated accurately.In this study, the detonation combustion chamber with 14 cm inner diameter, 15 cm outer diameter and 10 cm lenght was modeled to include conjugate heat transfer by applying appropriate boundary conditions. Stainless steel 316 material was defined and walls were placed around the combustion chamber and heat transfer and temperature variations within these walls were observed. The outer wall has an outer diameter of 17cm, an inner diameter of 15 cm, and an inner diameter of 14 cm. H2-Air mixture was used as a fuel and oxidizer in the numerical solution. Fluid properties were instantaneously used to accurately model the heat transfer. The viscosity, thermal conductivity and temperature of the fluid are defined within the boundary conditions. In order to realize this solution, chtMultiRegionFoam, one of OpenFOAM's own resolvers, can be solved with multi-domain in order to make conjugate solution to ddtFoam solver written in OpenFOAM which is open source computational fluid dynamics solver. The fluid throughout the solution was modeled using the k-omega turbulence model. The temperature gradient was based on the values between the cell center and the fluid-solid. By matching the heat transfer on the fluid side and the heat transfer on the solid side, a common temperature value is obtained on the surface between the solid-fluid and this value is expressed in an equation. This equation is used to create the boundary condition. Swak4Foam, a special plug-in for OpenFOAM, has been used as an aid in the special writing of boundary conditions in the numerical solution. Fluid solution is made with 1 mm mesh size and wallfunction is defined as the boundary condition of turbulence in the walls. The mesh size and the thermal boundary layer were checked for compliance with the reference values.Numerical solutions were performed up to 4 seconds due to high calculation costs. The effect of heat transfer from fluid to walls and the effect of heat transfer on detonation was observed in the solution neck. Contrary to expectations, instead of the axial direction in which the detonation wave enters, the highest temperatures were observed at the combustion chamber outlet. This is due to the unburned gases coming from the injector at 293 K. Once the temperature in the walls rises above 293 K, there may be reverse heat transfer from the walls to the fluid. Thus, the temperatures at the inlet of the combustion chamber were lower than those at the outlet of the combustion chamber. At the end of 4 seconds, 693 K temperature was observed in the combustion chamber outlet and 659 K temperature was observed in the outer wall. The temperature difference between the inlet and outlet of the combustion chamber in the outer wall and the inner wall was observed to be approximately 180K. The maximum temperature in the fluid domain when the conjugate heat transfer was applied was about 100 K lower than the adiabatic solution. This difference has remained almost the same throughout the entire solution. There was also an increase in detonation length in conjugate heat transfer model. The detonation length, which was 45 mm in the adiabatic solution, was 51 mm in the conjugate heat transfer model. The highest value of heat transfer to the walls was 2.61 MW/m^2 at the beginning of the simulation. In the second second, the heat flux decreased by 345 kW/m^2 to 2.27 MW/m^2. The temperature in the walls did not reach saturation in 4 seconds. In addition to the adiabatic solution, a constant heat flux was defined outside the walls to test the laboratory environment. In this way, a more realistic solution is aimed. Compared to the adiabatic solution, a temperature difference of about 5 K was observed. This value is expected to increase in longer durations. | en_US |