Comparison of Space Shuttle Hot Gas Manifold analysis to air flow data

This paper summarizes several recent analyses of the Space Shuttle Main Engine Hot Gas Manifold and compares predicted flow environments to air flow data. Codes used in these analyses include INS3D, PAGE, PHOENICS, and VAST. Both laminar (Re = 250, M = 0.30) and turbulent (Re = 1.9 million, M = 0.30) results are discussed, with the latter being compared to data for system losses, outer wall static pressures, and manifold exit Mach number profiles. Comparison of predicted results for the turbulent case to air flow data shows that the analysis using INS3D predicted system losses within 1 percent error, while the PHOENICS, PAGE, and VAST codes erred by 31, 35, and 47 percent, respectively. The INS3D, PHOENICS, and PAGE codes did a reasonable job of predicting outer wall static pressure, while the PHOENICS code predicted exit Mach number profiles with acceptable accuracy. INS3D was approximately an order of magnitude more efficient than the other codes in terms of code speed and memory requirements. In general, it is seen that complex internal flows in manifold-like geometries can be predicted with a limited degree of confidence, and further development is necessary to improve both efficiency and accuracy of codes if they are to be used as design tools for complex three-dimensional geometries.