NASA/TM—2005-213803

The GE-NASA RTA Hyperburner

Design and Development
Jinho Lee
Glenn Research Center, Cleveland, Ohio

Ralph Winslow
GE Aircraft Engines, Cincinnati, Ohio

Robert J. Buehrle
Glenn Research Center, Cleveland, Ohio

June 2005
 The NASA STI Program Office . . . in Profile

Since its founding, NASA has been dedicated to • CONFERENCE PUBLICATION. Collected
the advancement of aeronautics and space papers from scientific and technical
science. The NASA Scientific and Technical conferences, symposia, seminars, or other
Information (STI) Program Office plays a key part meetings sponsored or cosponsored by
in helping NASA maintain this important role. NASA.

The NASA STI Program Office is operated by • SPECIAL PUBLICATION. Scientific,

Langley Research Center, the Lead Center for technical, or historical information from
NASA’s scientific and technical information. The NASA programs, projects, and missions,
NASA STI Program Office provides access to the often concerned with subjects having
NASA STI Database, the largest collection of substantial public interest.
aeronautical and space science STI in the world.
The Program Office is also NASA’s institutional • TECHNICAL TRANSLATION. English-
mechanism for disseminating the results of its language translations of foreign scientific
research and development activities. These results and technical material pertinent to NASA’s
are published by NASA in the NASA STI Report mission.
Series, which includes the following report types:
Specialized services that complement the STI
• TECHNICAL PUBLICATION. Reports of Program Office’s diverse offerings include
completed research or a major significant creating custom thesauri, building customized
phase of research that present the results of databases, organizing and publishing research
NASA programs and include extensive data results . . . even providing videos.
or theoretical analysis. Includes compilations
of significant scientific and technical data and For more information about the NASA STI
information deemed to be of continuing Program Office, see the following:
reference value. NASA’s counterpart of peer-
reviewed formal professional papers but • Access the NASA STI Program Home Page
has less stringent limitations on manuscript at http://www.sti.nasa.gov
length and extent of graphic presentations.
• E-mail your question via the Internet to
• TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM. Scientific [email protected]
and technical findings that are preliminary or
of specialized interest, e.g., quick release • Fax your question to the NASA Access
reports, working papers, and bibliographies Help Desk at 301–621–0134
that contain minimal annotation. Does not
contain extensive analysis. • Telephone the NASA Access Help Desk at
301–621–0390
• CONTRACTOR REPORT. Scientific and
technical findings by NASA-sponsored • Write to:
contractors and grantees. NASA Access Help Desk
NASA Center for AeroSpace Information
7121 Standard Drive
Hanover, MD 21076
NASA/TM—2005-213803

The GE-NASA RTA Hyperburner

Design and Development
Jinho Lee
Glenn Research Center, Cleveland, Ohio

Ralph Winslow
GE Aircraft Engines, Cincinnati, Ohio

Robert J. Buehrle
Glenn Research Center, Cleveland, Ohio

Prepared for the

40th Combustion, 28th Airbreathing Propulsion, 22nd Propulsion
Systems Hazards, and 4th Modeling and Simulations Joint Subcommittees Meetings
sponsored by the Joint, Army, Navy, NASA, and Air Force Interagency Committee
Charleston, South Carolina, June 13–17, 2005

National Aeronautics and

Space Administration

Glenn Research Center

June 2005
 Acknowledgments

The authors would like to acknowledge the financial support of the NASA RTA program office. Jinho Lee would like
to acknowledge the numerous technical and real world discussions with R. Lewis, J. Koshoffer, and L. Grammel. The
authors would also acknowledge the technical support of D. Shouse, AFRL, and H. Ebrahimi, AEDC.

This report is a formal draft or working

paper, intended to solicit comments and
ideas from a technical peer group.

This report contains preliminary

findings, subject to revision as
analysis proceeds.

Trade names or manufacturers’ names are used in this report for

identification only. This usage does not constitute an official
endorsement, either expressed or implied, by the National
Aeronautics and Space Administration.

Available from
NASA Center for Aerospace Information National Technical Information Service
7121 Standard Drive 5285 Port Royal Road
Hanover, MD 21076 Springfield, VA 22100

Available electronically at http://gltrs.grc.nasa.gov

 The GE-NASA RTA Hyperburner Design and Development
Jinho Lee and Robert J. Buehrle
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Glenn Research Center
Cleveland, Ohio 44135

Ralph Winslow
GE Aircraft Engines
Cincinnati, Ohio 45125

Abstract
The Revolutionary Turbine Accelerator (RTA) project is a ground demonstration of a Mach 4
Turbine Based Combined Cycle engine. This new combined cycle engine developed for the ground-based
demonstration will use a new type of augmentor called the hyperburner. The technical features of this
new augmenter are introduced in this work. Some of the salient features include a new variable area
bypass injector system and a new flame holder configuration. A summary of the hyperburner
configuration and the supporting evidence obtained during the hyperburner rig experiments show that
hyperburner is a viable burner concept capable of meeting the goals of the RTA ground engine
demonstration project.

Introduction

Reducing the cost of space access and improving safety are key elements of NASA’s aerospace
vision. Through the Next Generation Launch Technology (NGLT) program, significant investments were
made to develop re-usable hypersonic vehicles and propulsion technologies in support of this vision.1 At
the same time, the NGLT program is taking advantage of the significant series of advancements made
over the past few years in developing fully re-usable air breathing hypersonic vehicles.2 This program
focused on two combined cycle propulsion demonstrators, one based on rocket engines and the other on
turbine engines. The Revolutionary Turbine Accelerator (RTA) was the Turbine Based Combined Cycle
(TBCC) demonstration project.4 The Integrated Systems Test of an Airbreathing Rocket (ISTAR) was the
Rocket Based Combined Cycle (RBCC) demonstration project.3
The primary objective of the RTA Turbine Engine Performance demonstration project was to design,
develop, fabricate, and test a ground demonstration engine. Two of most the important objectives of this
ground based engine experiments are: to demonstrate the mode transition from an augmented turbofan to
a ramjet; and to demonstrate the Mach 4 thrust level required to accelerate a conceptual future X-vehicle
to scramjet take over speed. Initially, ground-based testing will to be used to demonstrate a high level of
thrust and Specific Impulse (Isp) at discrete notational trajectory points; at the same time, a database of
relevant engine performance information will be obtained. It is envisioned that the technology and
performance database developed from the ground demonstration experiments can be combined with other
dual mode engine databases to develop a combination engine system for hypersonic aerospace vehicle
applications.
Designated as the GE57 by the General Electric Aircraft Engine Company, the RTA engine
represents a unique variable cycle engine where internal flowpath changes allow for high Isp throughout
the flight trajectory for an accelerator vehicle. Figure 1 shows a cut away view of the RTA engine.
Figure 1 also shows the GE YF120 turbofan engine and a state-of-the-art ramjet engine

NASA/TM—2005-213803 1
Marquart RJ43-MA-3. These two engines have many of the technology features needed by the RTA
engine. The RTA engine features a new augmentor called the hyperburner. From take-off to the region of
transition to supersonic flight, this device will serve as a conventional augmentor boosting the turbine
engine thrust. At high Mach numbers, the augmentor transitions to a ramjet, accelerating the vehicle to
Mach 4. The primary goal of this paper is to summarize the technical characteristics of the new RTA ram
burner. While this paper focuses on the ram burner, the RTA is a variable cycle turbine engine, and as
such, all of the subsystems are essential to engine operation. A detailed description of the overall RTA
engine system features can be found in Shafer4,22 and Suder5.

RTA-GE57 Engine Description

The RTA engine is very different from the famous Pratt and Whitney J58 (JT11D-12) engine6 shown
in figure 2 that powered the SR71/A12 series aircraft. The J58 engine utilized a unique bleed bypass
system to match the core engine performance characteristics to its augmentor. This feature gave the J58
ramjet-like high Mach number thrust capability. In addition, as shown in figure 2, the J58 used an
uncooled circumfrantial ring flame holder configuration in the augmentor. This type of flame holder
configuration is similar to many of the turbojet engines developed during the 1950s and 1960s. In
addition, endothermic JP7 fuel combined with a chemical lubrication additive was used to thermally close
the engine and the airframe. While JP7 has excellent endothermic characteristics, it is a difficult fuel to
ignite. Therefore, a pyrophoric ignition system based on triethylborane (TEB) was used in the J58
(see fig. 2). These were technically innovative features for the 1960’s time, but caused various durability
and maintenance issues for this engine.
Like the J58, the RTA engine is a full variable cycle engine. Some of the durability and maintenance
issues of J58 are eliminated through the use of conventional spark ignition, conventional JP8 fuel, an
internally variable geometry and a fuel-cooled radial flame holder configuration. Furthermore, the RTA
engine is designed and will be built according to the system-level recommendations of the high Mach
turbine engine system studies, Air Force’s High-Speed Propulsion Assessment (HiSPA) and NASA’s
High Mach Turbine Engine (HiMaTE) programs. The RTA engine uses several strategically located
Variable Area Bypass Injectors (VABIs) in the turbine engine to maintain the optimal balance between
the core turbo machinery and the burner components throughout the mission profile. VABIs are
mechanical doors designed to divert airflow from various regions of the engine to another region. In some
ways, the current RTA engine is similar in concept to various GE military turbofan engine products, such
as the F110 and YF120 engines shown in figure 3. Nevertheless, the required RTA engine operating
envelope includes operating points that are well beyond the current engine operating range. The current
state-of-art high speed GE engines include the Mach 2.7 capable GE4 and the Mach 3 capable J93.6,7
Therefore, a number of the technical challenges required careful attention during the RTA engine design
process.
The hyperburner is a subsonic hydrocarbon fueled augmentor designed to meet the RTA mission
requirements. A new hyperburner design and new augmentor hardware are required for the RTA engine
because the operation of this burner is significantly different from a typical military augmentor. The
hyperburner flow schedule is controlled through the use of variable area bypass injectors and a variable
area axisymmetric nozzle. Figure 4 shows the fan bypass flowpath in the RTA engine controlled by the
VABI doors. At takeoff, most of the air delivered to the hyperburner comes through the engine core;
hence, the engine operates very much like a conventional augmented turbofan engine. Here, the
maximum combustion efficiency for the overall engine is maintained by using a separate set of staged
injectors to fuel and to burn the by-pass air and the core flow separately. At Mach 4, most of the air
bypasses the core, coming through the outer region of the fan directly into the afterburner; here, the
engine acts very much like a ramjet engine. A larger portion of the fuel is shifted from the core injectors
to the by-pass injectors to accommodate this ramjet like engine operation. The combination of flow

NASA/TM—2005-213803 2
control and tailored fuel schedule enables this engine to make a smooth and stable burner transition from
an afterburner to a ram burner. A conceptual fueling schedule trend needed to accomplish this transition is
shown in figure 10. Figure 10 only shows the core and the bypass fueling trends are shown for simplicity.
Several key issues like burner transient behavior and the burner thermal environment are also of utmost
interest to the project because of their potential impact on the flight engine design.
In order to reduce financial and technical risk, an existing GE-YF120 asset, shown in figure 3, is used
as the basis for the RTA variable cycle engine. Initially, the RTA program vision was to use the YF120
engine as-is in the ground demonstration engine. Therefore, much of the YF120 core engine was retained
as-is including the main combustor. However, adopting the YF120 core engine for the RTA application
required many more changes than originally envisioned; these changes became evident once the new fan
and the expected operating temperature conditions were combined with the durability requirements. Some
of the changes, like the enlargement of the engine casing size, required rework of the fuel system
components to the main burner. Furthermore, slave cooling systems from the facility are used to
thermally close the ground demonstration engine. This slave cooling is used to achieve thermal closure
for a number of legacy secondary system components and the hyperburner. Limited availability of coolant
at the higher Mach numbers is a major difficulity for this engine and the program. Currently, the slave
cooling is also used to maintain thermal balance for the rear engine structure, majority of the hyperburner
and axsymmetric nozzle. The use of slave cooling enables the RTA project to also maintain room
temperature JP8 as the primary fuel for the engine, enabling the current RTA combustion system to be
designed using proven aero-thermo-mechanical design practices and limitations. Therefore, it is important
to note that additional combustion system analysis may be required to develop fully operational flight
engines from the RTA database. The flight weight and self contained thermal closure requirement for
these applications may require additional heat load into the JP fuel beyond the currently simulated range.
The stability of the new hyperburner configuration was extensively rig tested and analyzed to ensure that
the augmented turbofan to ramjet transition can occur without performance and operability risks.

Hyperburner: A New Kind of Ramjet

A new augmentor design with new flame holder and new fuel injector configuration is needed to meet
the RTA project objective of sustained thrust and durability. At the same time, the goal of the proposed
RTA ground demonstration experiment is to obtain a fan, hyperburner, and ground demonstration engine
system operability and performance database. Therefore, highly instrumented, parametric-capable and
mechanically flexible ground-based demonstration engine components are needed. A new hyperburner
system with these features was designed for the RTA engine to meet these requirements. In addition, the
current state-of-the-art information on screech, rumble, ignition, heat release, and flame spread were used
to match this new afterburner to the core while the new engine components were being designed.
Furthermore, some engine and burner parametric capability are needed because some of the required RTA
engine operation exceeds the limitations of the current operability database. At these conditions, the
parametric capability in the hyperburner can be used to ‘tune’ the system for optimal performance.
Mechanical flexibility was allowed in the design of this burner because thermal closure and flight
weights were not requirements for this ground demonstration engine. This enabled the ground
demonstration engine to use off-the-shelf fuel pumps, controllers, and mechanical parts. Furthermore,
many of the core F110 augmentor parts, built from new material for thermal considerations, are directly
adapted to the RTA engine. The adopted components include the integrated fuel injector flame holder
configuration, some parts of the screech liner, and nozzle components. Figures 5 and 6 show the current
hyperburner configuration along with GE F110 and P&W J58 augmentors for comparison. Figure 6 also
shows the current GE F110 axisymmetric nozzle design, which is similar to the design adopted for RTA
hyperburner application.

NASA/TM—2005-213803 3
 Baseline Hyperburner Design for GE57

Although, highly regarded, the F110-129 augmentor design, shown in figure 3, would not be simple
to implement for the RTA application because of the fixed geometry mixing chutes used to combine the
fan flow to the core flow. Therefore, the RTA hyperburner design is based on a more conservative and
simpler concept of separate streams, where the core flow and the bypass flow are separately fueled and
mixed over a conservative axial length. This design concept enabled the RTA engine to use a much more
practical VABI door mechanical configuration, which was designed using the F110 asymmetric nozzle
mechanical part designs with some unique modifications. In addition, the RTA ram burner was designed
with a full range of modern afterburner features, such as high combustion efficiency, acoustic stability,
low dry losses, and wide fuel-air modulation capability. A typical configuration of the RTA hyperburner
cross section is shown in figure 6. Figure 6 shows the essential features of the current hyperburner design,
such as the VABI door and the highly integrated radial fuel injector flame holder. The internal flame
holder- fuel injector configuration is not shown in this figure because of the proprietary nature of the
design. The VABI door, shown in figure 6, in combination with the dual VABI upstream (shown
previously in figure 4), near the exit of the fan, is used to control the inflow condition to the hyperburner
and vice-versa for the fan backpressure during high Mach number operation. The initial fuel injection and
the control strategy were developed to maintain various design parameters, such as bulk velocity and
static conditions, within the current base of experience. This strategy was used to limit any major
performance and operability risks for the initial RTA engine demonstration. Even with these constraints,
there are significant technical risks at the high Mach number operating point because the required
operating environment exceeds the current base of experience. The conservative nature of the current
ground demonstration engine design can be seen in figure 7, where the heat release rate characteristic of
the hyperburner is compared with other highly successful augmentors. The heat release rate parameter is
defined as the release of the energy content of the fuel per combustor volume and pressure. Therefore,
lower value represents more conservative the burner design and a larger engine. Here, the variability in
predictions shown in figure 7 represents the uncertainty in the performance information available in the
open literature.8,9,10 The Pratt and Whitney TF30 engine data was obtained from McAuly.9 The GE F110-
129 engine data was obtained from Holzman.8 In addition, a good sense of the J58 operating conditions
were obtained from Reithmaier,20 Conner11 and Gunston.10
Using the F110 engine radial flame holder design eliminates the durability issues of the uncooled
flame circumferential holders used in the engines like J58 and GE4. The final configuration of the
hyperburner utilizes the advanced integrated fuel injector flame holder struts. This current configuration
takes into consideration the latest combustor development ideas such as those proposed by Roquemore12
among others. In addition, care was taken to avoid any aeromechanical designs that may cause pressure
oscillations on the order of a couple hundreds of hertz and couple of thousand hertz, where it may lead to
rumble and screech issues affecting the augmentor liner durability.13,14 Liner durability of the F110
engines used in F-16 fighters has been a problem in the past and has been extensively studied at the
Arnolds Engineering Development Center (AEDC)15 by both GE and the US Air force.
The RTA hyperburner is a subsonic hydrocarbon fueled combustor and is not like other high-speed
burners used in ramjet and scramjet engines. Here, variable geometry rather than the thermal choke is
used to maintain the hyperburner at design conditions. Figures 8 through 10 show the expected trend of
the average bulk average velocity, fuel splits, static pressure and temperatures as a function of flight Mach
numbers. The trends in these figures show that fairly constant static conditions can be maintained up to
Mach 3 flight conditions; beyond Mach 3, there is a rapid drop-off in combustor bulk velocity and a rapid
rise in static pressure. Maintaining high performance while avoiding operability issues caused by flow
transients and unloaded core at this region is a key challenge for this and future high Mach turbine
engines. A conceptual hyperburner zonal fueling strategy verified through component test rig experiments
is shown in figure 10. This conceptual fueling strategy clearly shows the current design intent of
maintaining a separate core and bypass streams in the hyperburner.

NASA/TM—2005-213803 4
 Matching the hyperburner with these unique flow features and the core engine required a careful
series of experimental work and supporting analysis to develop the level of confidence needed to develop
a full-scale engine. The assumption that the room temperature JP8 is available throughout the accelerator
mission profile directly leads to the conclusion that many of the hyperburner operation conditions are
very similar to current augmentor operating conditions. Therefore, many of the legacy analytical model
and mechanical design practices are directly applicable and were used to design the hyperburner.
Furthermore, some of the aero-design assumptions and practices were verified using the latest
Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) tools. Here, aerodynamic losses and flow separation issues, heat
transfer issues, blockage effects, and flame holder lip velocity were checked using commercial and
government developed CFD tools. Typical CFD solution obtained using the WIND code16 to study the
effect of flow separation on a generic benchmark augmenter configuration is shown in figure 11. Typical
CFD and heat transfer prediction obtained using the GlennHT17 code for a generic benchmark augmenter
configuration is shown in figure 11. These predictions do not show any significant separation or
significant heat transfer issues that may affect overall performance of the engine. However, these
calculations do show that there is some risk of localized separations in various locations of the
hyperburner, which may lead to local thermal difficulties.
In addition to the CFD analysis, a parametric experimental study was conducted to check the
combustion efficiency of the current zonal fueling scheme, ignition characteristics, and the aero-thermal
environment of the flame holder. In addition, the data obtained from the rig experiment was used to
calibrate the thermal and fluid dynamic tools; some were later used in the design of the hyperburner.
Several CFD predictions of the component test rig were made to gain insight into the component test flow
physics. This analytical effort showed that the modeling complexity, modeling uncertainty and the
computational cost made reacting flow calculation an impractical parametric tool for even this
‘simplified’ rig experiment. However, even though routine detailed predictions were not possible, useful
physical insights into the flame holder flow physics were obtained from the calculations performed. Thus,
both CFD calculations and the rig experiment were used to gain additional confidence and as sanity
checks of the hyperburner design assumptions. Ebrahimi20 using a structured flow solver called GPACT
conducted the reacting flow CFD simulation in support of the component test rig study; a typical solution
obtained is shown in figure 12.
Component test rig and experimental data.—A simple “partial-scale” combustor component rig
experiment was extensively used to build confidence in the current flame holder configuration. This
component test rig is a water-cooled two-dimensional rectangular test section and is capable of simulating
the one atmosphere condition of the hyperburner. In addition, the rig test section has a window so that the
flame can be characterized visually. The component test experiments were conducted in several stages;
from cold flow linear flow calibration experiments to the demonstration of near complete combustion
efficiency of the VABI separated zonal fuel strategy. A typical experiment conducted using the
hyperburner component test rig is graphically shown in figure 12. Figure 12 shows the exit area of the
experiment. The internal flame holder- fuel injector configuration is not shown in these figures because of
the proprietary nature of the design. Most of the combustor rig experimental investigations were
conducted to verify the hyperburner design assumptions. A step-by-step procedure was used to confirm
that the combustion efficiency and wide range of stability required by the RTA mission could be obtained
from the current hyperburner configuration. Here, various flight conditions from sea level static condition
to Mach 4.0 thermal conditions were simulated. The flight conditions simulated in the component tests
are compared with the required flight condition in figures 8 and 9. The stability experiments were
conducted following a routine GE design practice; where separate fuel injectors and flame holders were
used to simulate the integrated configuration to be used in the engine.
The experimental data obtained from these tests showed that this hyperburner configuration is able to
achieve the wide stability range, high combustion efficiency, and acceptable pattern factor and igniter
performance needed by the engine. However, the facility and the mechanical limitations prevented this
component test rig from being used to obtain wider range of operability data on the effects of burner static
pressure change and pressure transients. Furthermore, all tests were conducted using room temperature

NASA/TM—2005-213803 5
JP8 and the impact of additional thermal stressing of the fuel that may occur in the engine system was not
considered in the flame stability rig experiments conducted. Furthermore, the thermal chemical condition
of the core flow was not matched to the flight engine conditions and all of the experiments stayed within
the facility limitations. It is also known that inlet flow distortion into the ramjet combustor section can
have significant impact on the achievable combustion efficiency. However, inlet distortion characteristic
of the hyperburner has not yet been modeled nor simulated in rig experiments. Nevertheless, hyperburner
flame holders, VABI flaps, and the turbine struts were carefully designed to minimize any direct wake
interactions and seal difficulties for the engine.
Advanced flame stabilizer concept: A new flame holder configuration was developed for this engine.
The RTA-GE57 flame holder configuration represents the latest technological evolution of the
technologies used in other high speed engines. Furthermore, the new flame holder configuration promises
to have better ignition and stability performance over the circumferential flame holders used in GE4s or
earlier F110 engines and adds to the current high speed flame holder information base.4 Shafer22
summarized the new flame holder concept. Extensive rig testing was conducted on the new flame holder
design to verify performance in terms of stability range, final configuration, igniter layout, and initial fuel
injection strategy. Here, a three-dimensional non-reacting CFD analysis was valuable in gaining insight
into the flow feature that gives this combustor configuration its unusual stability characteristics. The
current RTA hyperburner flame holder configuration performance, as measured by combustion efficiency
and stability, was verified through a component test rig experiment. The component test testing did not
yield enough quantitative data to fully characterize the new hyperburner operation because of the
differences between the engine and the rig, but was optimized enough to be included in the baseline
hyperburner design.
Combustion efficiency: The chemical combustion efficiency obtained from some of the component
test rig experiments is summarized in figure 10. In this figure, the chemical combustion efficiency trend is
plotted as function of the flight Mach number. Additional lines are plotted to show the range and variation
of the data obtained. This figure shows that high combustion efficiency is achievable with the current
RTA flame holder configuration. It is also important to note that these experiments were conducted using
a fixed geometry flame holder configuration along with a fixed geometry secondary flow system, which
may need additional adjustments on the engine. Therefore, the secondary liner cooling and screech flows
used by the engine’s thermal closure must be carefully considered when the overall combustion efficiency
of the engine is compared with these measurements. The RTA project vision is to reduce the overall
impact of this thermal inefficiency through use of external cooling and thermal management system yet to
be developed.
Flame stability: Characteristics: In addition to the combustion performance data, this rig and the
current hyperburner flame holder configuration were used to obtain flame stability data. Figure 13
compares typical stability characteristics of the current hyperburner flame holder data to the data found in
Ozawa19 and data on other high-speed burners.18 Figure 13 shows that this burner configuration does
indeed provide a wider flame stability range than other more conventional burners. This comparison also
shows that the current advanced combustor configuration can operate almost like a premixed hydrocarbon
fueled burner in terms of stability. Here, both lean and rich sides of the stability limits were explored with
and without the core flow present, and the data obtained showed that current staggered flame holder
configuration is capable of obtaining the high combustion efficiency needed for the RTA engine system.
It is also worthwhile to note that most of the dual mode (high Mach) burners are designed in a much
narrower region located toward the center of the fuel-air ratio. Therefore, it may be possible to trade this
stability with other engine design parameters to improve the overall packaging for future turbo-ramjet
engine designs. A typical convective burner Mach number map of various burners used in hypersonic
applications is summarized in figure 14.
During an injector screening experiment, some coking of the injectors was encountered when a set of
the candidate fuel injector design did not atomize the JP8 as expected. This experience showed that fuel
injector coking is a strong possibility if the injection pressure and or thermodynamic state of the fuel are
pushed beyond the designed state. Therefore, the fuel-coking issue may need to be revisited when the

NASA/TM—2005-213803 6
thermal balance for a flight engine is considered. This is especially true if the heat load into the fuel is
increased, since that can significantly elevate the fuel and fuel line temperatures. Furthermore, sensitivity
to the actual mechanical configuration of the driver hole configurations was seen during rig testing. These
sensitivities, however, were not quantified beyond the baseline points needed for the engine design.
Furthermore, the importance of the proper thermal design was further reinforced to the design team when
the VABI mechanism in the component test rig failed during testing due to a mismatch in component
design conditions.

Summary
The technical features of a new augmenter design for the RTA program has been introduced. Some of
the salient features and the design intent of this new burner, called the hyperburner, are the new variable
area bypass injector (VABI) and the new flame holder configuration. All of supporting evidence obtained
during the partial-scale component rig experiments and design analysis showed that the hyperburner is a
viable burner concept capable of meeting the high performance goals of the RTA engine. Some of the
supporting evidence includes wide stability limits and high chemical combustion efficiencies. The
analysis presented shows that the current burner configuration should be able to achieve the RTA
performance goals. Some work remains in addressing questions relating to the combustor performance as
a function of thermal closure for the future flight engine.

References
1. Hueter U. and McClinton C., “NASA’s Advanced Space Transportation Hypersonic Program,”
AIAA–2002–5175.
2. McClinton. et al., “Airbreathing Hypersonic Technology Vision Vehicle and Development Dreams,”
AIAA–99–4978.
3. Lee J. and Krivanek T., “The NASA Integrated Systems Tests of an Airbreathing Rocket GRC -
Direct Connect Combustor Experiment: Part 1 Design and Fabrication of the Experiment,”
AIAA P 2005–0611.
4. Shafer D.G. and McNellis N.,” Development of a Ground Based Mach 4+ Revolutionary Turbine
Technology Demonstrator (RTATD) for Access to Space, ISOABE 2002.
5. Suder K., et al., “Design and Analysis of a Mach 4 Fan Stage for the RTA Turbine Based Combined
Cycle Engine,” JANNAF 28th APS Meeting; 2005.
6. http://www.geae.com/
7. GE company, Dalquest, L.A. editor, Seven decades of progress: A heritage of aircraft turbine
technology, c 1979.
8. Holzman J.K, et al. “Flight and Static Exhaust Flow Properties of an F110-GE-129 Engine in an F-
16XL Airplane During Acoustic Tests,” NASA TM 104326.
9. McAulay J.E. and Abdelwahab M., Experimental Evaluation of a TF30-P-3 Turbofan engine in an
altitude facility: Afterburner performance and engine afterburner operating limits, NASA TND 6839.
10. Gunston, B., Janes Aero Engine, c 2003.
11. Conners, T., “Predicted Performance of a Thrust Enhanced SR-71 Aircraft with an External Payload,”
NASA TM 104330.
12. Roquemore, et al., “Trapped Vortex Combustor Concept for Gas Turbine Engines,”
AIAA P 2001–0483.
13. Mattingly J.D., et al., Aircraft Engine Design, AIAA Education Series, 1987.
14. Webster F.W., “Ramjet Development Testing: Which is the Right?” AIAA J of Propulsion and Power
Vol 5, No 5, pp. 565–576.

NASA/TM—2005-213803 7
15. http://www.arnold.af.mil/aedc/testhighlights/aeropropulsion/aeropropulsion.htm
16. http://www.arnold.af.mil/nparc/index.html
17. http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/TURBINE/Turbine.htm
18. Gruber M. et al., “Fundamental study of Cavity based Flame holder Concepts for Supersonic
Combustors,” Journal of Propulsion and Power, Vol. 17, No. 1, 2001.
19. Ozawa R.I., “Survey of Flame Propagation and Propagation of High Speed Combustion System,”
AFRL TR 70-81.
20. Reithmaier L., Mach 1 and Beyond, c 1995.
21. Ebrahimi, H.B., Private Communication, 2005.
22. Shafer D., “IHPTET/VAATE Technology Keys to High Speed Propulsion.” AIAA VAATE Briefing
2004.

Figure 1.—RTA-GE 57 Ground Demonstration Engine.

NASA/TM—2005-213803 8
 View into Engine

Figure 2.—PW J58 Engine and Flameholder Configuration.

YF120

F110-129

Figure 3.—GE YF120 and GE F 110 engine and F110 Augmentor Cross Section.

NASA/TM—2005-213803 9
 Figure 4.—Conceptual view of the RTA Fan bypass passage and front VABI configuration.

Figure 5.—Current RTA Hyperburner compared with F110 and J58 augmentor configurations.

NASA/TM—2005-213803 10
 Slave Cooled

Figure 6.—Conceptual View of RTA Hyperburner and related engine hardware.

Greater
Combustor
Volume

Figure 7.—Comparison of the normalized heat release rate of various engines.

NASA/TM—2005-213803 11
 Core Flow

Bypass Flow

Figure 8.—Comparison of the Hyperburner operating conditions to rig simulated conditions.

Bypass Design
Core Flow
Diffusion

Figure 9.—Typical bulk velocity profiles through the

flight envelope of the RTA engine.

NASA/TM—2005-213803 12
 Overall Combustion Efficiency

Figure 10.—Total Fuel flow for the Hyperburner as a function of the flow regions of interest and
Chemical combustion efficiency obtained from the stability rig experiments
shown as a function of the flight conditions simulated.

Figure 11.—Typical Hyperburner CFD solutions to a Benchmark problem similar to RTA.

NASA/TM—2005-213803 13
 Temperature

Figure 12.—Typical component test rig and a view of the experiment

conducted in support of the hyperburner design.

Figure 13.—Typical 2–D view of the Stability Model correlations and Summary
of the stability data obtained through the stability rig experiments.

NASA/TM—2005-213803 14
 Figure 14.—A summary of the burner design conditions for hypersonic flight applications.

NASA/TM—2005-213803 15
 Form Approved
REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE OMB No. 0704-0188
Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources,
gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this
collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson
Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302, and to the Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project (0704-0188), Washington, DC 20503.
1. AGENCY USE ONLY (Leave blank) 2. REPORT DATE 3. REPORT TYPE AND DATES COVERED
June 2005 Technical Memorandum
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE 5. FUNDING NUMBERS

The GE-NASA RTA Hyperburner Design and Development

WBS–22–065–92–43
6. AUTHOR(S)

Jinho Lee, Ralph Winslow, and Robert J. Buehrle

7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION

REPORT NUMBER
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
John H. Glenn Research Center at Lewis Field E–15160
Cleveland, Ohio 44135 – 3191

9. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 10. SPONSORING/MONITORING

AGENCY REPORT NUMBER
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Washington, DC 20546– 0001 NASA TM—2005-213803

11. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES

Prepared for the 40th Combustion, 28th Airbreathing Propulsion, 22nd Propulsion Systems Hazards, and 4th Modeling
and Simulations Joint Subcommittees Meetings sponsored by the Joint Army, Navy, NASA, and Air Force Interagency
Propulsion Committee, Charleston, South Carolina, June 13–17, 2005. Jinho Lee and Robert J. Buehrle, NASA Glenn
Research Center; and Ralph Winslow, GE Aircraft Engines, Cincinnati, Ohio. Responsible person, Jinho Lee, organiza-
tion code RTB, 216–433–5877.
12a. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY STATEMENT 12b. DISTRIBUTION CODE

Unclassified - Unlimited
Subject Categories: 07 and 01
Available electronically at http://gltrs.grc.nasa.gov
This publication is available from the NASA Center for AeroSpace Information, 301–621–0390.
13. ABSTRACT (Maximum 200 words)

The Revolutionary Turbine Accelerator (RTA) project is a ground demonstration of a Mach 4 Turbine Based Combined
Cycle engine. This new combined cycle engine developed for the ground-based demonstration will use a new type of
augmentor called the hyperburner. The technical features of this new augmenter are introduced in this work. Some of the
salient features include a new variable area bypass injector system and a new flame holder configuration. A summary of
the hyperburner configuration and the supporting evidence obtained during the hyperburner rig experiments show that
hyperburner is a viable burner concept capable of meeting the goals of the RTA ground engine demonstration project.

14. SUBJECT TERMS 15. NUMBER OF PAGES

21
High Mach turbine; Augmentor; Ramjet; Combustion; Variable cycle; TBCC; Hypersonic 16. PRICE CODE

17. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION 18. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION 19. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION 20. LIMITATION OF ABSTRACT
OF REPORT OF THIS PAGE OF ABSTRACT
Unclassified Unclassified Unclassified
NSN 7540-01-280-5500 Standard Form 298 (Rev. 2-89)
Prescribed by ANSI Std. Z39-18
298-102