1. Introduction
Nowadays, modern advanced aircraft suffer from severe thermal management issues caused by the reduction in the cooling ability of traditional heat sinks and the increase in the head load of the aircraft itself [
1,
2]. Due to the increasing flight altitude and Mach number, the cooling ability of traditional heat sinks is reduced significantly [
3]. The increasing Mach number will lead to a rapid rise in the total/stagnation temperature of ambient heat sinks such as ram air (RA) and fuselage skin, and the high altitude will result in rarefied atmosphere which could make the source of the heat sink less available. Besides, the aerodynamic shape and high stealth of the modern advantage aircraft also make it even more difficult to obtain ambient heat sinks, resulting in a serious decrease in their cooling ability [
4]. The decrease in ambient heat sinks’ cooling ability will cause an increasing dependence on the fuel heat sink [
5]. However, the cooling capability of fuel is restrictively limited by its residual mass in tank, which will become very scarce in the later stages of the flight period because of the constant consumption of fuel. The fuel’s increasing temperature affects this too. What’s worse, the heat load level of advanced aircrafts has been enhanced rapidly [
6]. Three primary reasons might be responsible for such vigorous enhancement. Firstly, it is reported that the overall avionics heat load of the fourth generation aircraft such as the Lockheed Martin F22 reaches over 100 kW [
7,
8]. Secondly, the aerodynamic heating of a hypersonic vehicle, as mentioned above, will heat the fuselage structure to an extreme temperature, for example, it can exceed 2200 °C on the surface at 5 Ma [
9,
10], further intensifying the overall heat load. Thirdly, advanced on-board electronic and electrical devices such as the large phased array radar [
11] and laser weapons [
12,
13] are highly integrated and micro-miniaturized [
14], where the instantaneous heat load can be up to MW level [
15]. Therefore, the gap between the cooling capacity of the heat sink and the on-board heat load must be narrowed for the reliable and efficient operation of the aircraft.
The thermal management system (TMS) is one of the subsystems of aircraft, which utilizes various heat sinks to cool the thermal loads, maintaining a safe and efficient working environment for airborne equipment. The main part of the TMS of modern advanced aircraft is the fuel cooling circuit that is known as the fuel TMS [
16,
17,
18]. The fuel collects heat from various thermal loads while flowing through the heat exchangers (HX), then it is burnt in the engine or goes back to the tank. Other heat sinks such as RA, engine fan air (EFA), skin heat exchanger (SHX), can be integrated into the TMS by various layout methods to cool the thermal loads directly or indirectly [
19,
20]. To narrow the gap presented in the first paragraph on the basis of typical TMS in modern advantaged aircraft, two possible methods have been mainly presented by researchers: increasing the cooling ability of the heat sinks and optimizing the TMS for more efficient usage of each available heat sink. These two methods will be described in detail in the following two paragraphs.
First, many efforts have been devoted to increasing the cooling ability of heat sinks. The endothermic process of thermal cracking is an effective way to improve the heat sink capacity of fuel [
21,
22]. Hou et al. [
23] investigated the heat transfer and thermal cracking behavior both experimentally and numerically. Wickham et al [
24] increased the rate of thermal cracking reactions by using a fuel additive which allows a similar chemical endothermic process to be obtained at lower fuel temperatures. Besides, the third bypass stream presented in the adaptive cycle engine for the next generation fighter, is another potential method to solve the problem of a lack of heat sinks [
25,
26], which can provide ample bypass air as heat sink for the TMS [
27]. In recent years, expendable heat sinks (EHSs) such as endothermic chemical reactions and liquid gases which can absorb heat at normal/low temperature (below the water freezing point) have attracted more and more attention. Johnson et al. [
28,
29] developed a controllable expendable TMS, which uses the endothermic chemical reaction of ammonium carbamate and propylene glycol as heat sink. Nuzum et al. [
30,
31] presented a cryogenic-based TMS in which the liquefied natural gas (LNG) was used to thermally manage the high energy pulsed systems under low temperature, and the LNG can also be burned in a power plant to generate power for the aircraft energy system.
The second way to optimize the TMS is to improve the thermal management efficiency through more rational structure, more efficient heat transfer method or advanced control strategies/ algorithms. The improvement of HX is one of the effective methods, which cannot only improve the thermal management ability but also reduce the weight of a TMS [
32,
33]. Similarly, the improvement of fuel pumps is another effective method: a “variable speed pump system” has been proposed by Daisuke and Yukinori [
34] which can reduce the energy consumption of the fuel recirculation system. Besides, several advanced heat transfer methods of TMS have also been proposed. Wang et al. [
35,
36,
37] investigated the flash boiling spray cooling under the high altitude condition (low ambient pressure), which shows excellent heat dissipation ability for extreme heat flux devices. Deng [
38] and Ma [
39] have investigated the mini-channel heat sink numerically and experimentally, showing good performance for the application in the cooling of high heat flux microelectronic devices. Phase change materials for the thermal protection of onboard electrical motors have also been investigated numerically and experimentally [
40,
41], indicating that it is a good thermal control method for drastically changing heat loads. In addition, advanced thermal managing strategies and control algorithm are effective research fields. Jain et al. [
42] presented an exergy-based objective function to solve the multi-objective optimal control problems for TMS. Bodie et al. [
43] developed a robust optimization for reducing the effect of uncertainty on TMS, in which three factors are comprehensively considered: EFA temperature, avionics thermal load, and engine thrust. Deppen et al. [
44] proposed a predictive control strategy which utilizes preview of upcoming loads and disturbances to prevent violation of temperature constraints.
Studies presented in the two above paragraphs suggest two ways to improve the TMS: obtaining more available sources of the heat sink and making the TMS more efficient. No matter which way is considered, the heat sink is the key. Typical heat sinks for airborne vehicles can be divided into two main types [
19]: fuel and ambient heat sinks. The latter ones can be divided into RA, EFA, and SHX. In addition, the EHS has attracted more and more attention these years [
45].
There are big differences between various heat sinks in terms of cooling ability/capacity and the performance penalty, both of which are important for optimizing the design of each heat sink in the TMS. Firstly, the cooling ability of each heat sink is different, and different heat sinks have different operating characteristics. For example, the fuel can provide sufficient cooling capacity but it is limited by the upper temperature limit and the EHS can provide low-temperature cooling [
46,
47]. In addition, the cooling ability of one heat sink under different flight conditions will be obviously different. For example, the temperature of the ambient heat sinks generally increases with the increase of Mach number, leading to a decrease in its cooling ability [
48,
49]. Secondly, the performance penalty of each heat sink is also different with each other. Generally, the performance penalty of the ancillary equipment in the TMS should be defined as the fuel mass penalty which is benefit to the early design and optimization of the aircraft. About the determination of fuel mass penalty, the extra mass, extra power extraction and extra drag which are caused by the ancillary equipment should be comprehensively considered, as well as the required quantity of fuel which is used to counteract these three extra items [
50]. Without considering the weight of load HXes which is unavoidable in modern aircraft, the utilization of fuel as heat sink won’t cause any increasing of take-off weight, drag and power extraction, thus it will not bring any exergy penalty to the aircraft. Using SHX [
51] and EHS as heat sink will increase the take-off weight of aircraft due to the mass of HX and expendable liquid, further leading to an exergy penalty. The utilization of RA [
19] and EFA [
45] as heat sinks will not only increase the take-off weight due to extra HXes, but also bring drag to the aircraft due to the momentum loss of cooling airflow, and both items will bring exergy penalty to the aircraft. Since there are great differences among heat sinks, different aircrafts require different designs of their specific TMS. Although the heat sinks mentioned above have attracted many researchers’ attention, the quantitative estimation of their cooling abilities/capacities and performance penalties under different flight conditions, as well as the comparison among heat sinks have never been systematically studied before.
This paper presents a numerical study about the cooling ability/capacity and exergy penalty of five kinds of heat sinks—fuel, RA, EFA, SHX, EHS—in different stages of a supersonic flight profile. In addition, the comparison of the cooling ability/capacity and exergy penalty of each heat sink is also presented in current study. In
Section 2 of this paper, the structure and characteristic of various heat sinks as well as the methods they cool the thermal loads in the typical TMS have been introduced in detail.
Section 3 presents several models for estimating the cooling ability/capacity of various heat sinks as well as the exergy penalty caused by these heat sinks, facilitate the quantification and comparison of various heat sinks. The exergy penalty presented in this paper takes into account the exergy loss of aircraft caused by the extra weight, drag and energy extraction of various heat sinks, but without considering the impact of the extra required fuel quantity caused by heat sinks.
Section 4 elaborates a numerical case study in which the cooling ability/capacity and exergy penalty of each heat sink in different flight stages of a typical supersonic flight profile have been determined. The comparison and analysis also have been illustrated in this section. At last, based on the numerical study results,
Section 5 presents the conclusions.
2. Heat Sinks of Modern Aircraft
This paper discusses five kinds of typical heat sinks of modern aircrafts: fuel, RA, EFA, SHX, and EHS. The distribution of each heat sink in an airborne vehicle is presented in
Figure 1 which directly illustrates the locations of these heat sinks, as well as the basic configuration of each heat sink. First of all, fuel is the most important heat sink in most modern aircraft. It is stored in the fuel tanks around the fuselage and wings. Secondly, the RA is always introduced by protruding ram scoops or flush inlets, and then directly be sent to the equipment racks or separated cooling HXs to take away the heat from thermal loads. Thirdly, the EFA is bled from the external duct of the turbofan engine. There are two ways to utilize the fan air as a heat sink: (1) Duct the fan air to each separated mounted heat exchanger, or (2) go through the fan duct heat exchanger (FDHX) which is embedded inside the engine fan duct. The FDHX belongs to the annular radiator, which has the advantages of low air drag, invisibility, and good aerodynamic. Therefore, this study only considers the usage of the EFA through FDHX. Fourthly, the SHX rejects the heat of thermal loads directly to ambient through aircraft fuselage. There are generally three methods of implementing skin heat sink: (1) air loop, (2) liquid loop, and (3) heat pipe. This study mainly focuses the liquid loop because it has the advantages of strong heat transfer ability (compared with that of the air loop) and easy-to-control property (compared with that of the heat pipe). Using coolant as the heat transfer medium, the liquid loop transfer heat from thermal loads to the skin HX in which there is a series of tubes mounted between the metal plate and insulation layer of the skin which can directly dissipate heat to the ambient. At last, the EHS, which generally utilize the latent heat of liquid or endothermic chemical reaction to cool thermal loads, is stored in the special containers and will be vented to the atmosphere after vaporizing or exhausting. In this study, the liquid natural gas (LNG) and liquid ammonia (LA) are considered as EHS which will be discussed later.
All kinds of heat sinks will realize the goal of cooling thermal loads through the TMS.
Figure 2 illustrates the typical construction of the TMS of the modern aircraft. The typical TMS, shown in
Figure 2, generally consists of a fuel tank or integrated tank system, several cooling HXs for various thermal loads of the environment control system (ECS), electro-mechanical actuation (EMA), and hydraulic system (HYS), and a fuel cooling circuit (marked by the origin line). The fuel cooling circuit can be further divided into two parts: the cooling channel that is upstream of the engine and the backflow channel that is behind the engine. Note that the ECS is a special thermal loads with complex structures which collects heat from avionics and cockpit through the vapor compression system, and then transports the heat to fuel or other heat sinks. In this paper, it can only be treated as a thermal load equipment. Besides, the red and blue line in
Figure 2 refer to the heat flow, and cooling flow respectively. The red and blue square on the fuel flow channel indicate the load HXes (cooling thermal loads) and fuel-cooling HX (cooling reflux hot fuel), respectively.
In the TMS, the fuel is firstly pumped out of the tank and passes through a series of load HXes in the cooling channel to directly cool the thermal loads. After the temperature rises, the required fuel flow is fed into the engine for combustion, and the rest fuel flow will return to the tank through the reflux channel. A fuel-cooled heat exchanger may be installed in the reflux channel, which used to cool the reflux hot fuel. RAHX, FDHX, SHX, EHS can be used to directly cool the thermal loads, or cool the fuel. For example, the RAHX can be used for direct cooling of the ECS, and can also be used for cooling backflow hot fuel, for cooling fuel in the tank. The same with other heat sinks that are EFA, SHX, and EHS. The cooling ability and exergy penalty of various heat sinks in the TMS will be discussed below.
3. Estimation Models
The estimation models of cooling ability/capacity of fuel, RA, EFA, SHX, and EHS will be firstly developed in this section. The cooling ability whose unit is W is defined as the heat sink’s biggest heat transfer rate (HTR) for cooling the thermal loads, which is indicated by q. The cooling capacity whose unit is J is defined as the cooling quantity, which is indicated by Q. Secondly, the exergy penalties of different heat sinks will also be considered in this section. For conveniently comparing the costs when using different heat sinks, the exergy penalties of various heat sinks caused by extra mass, extra drag and power extracting, have also been determined, namely . Note that all of the parameters in this paper are explained in the Nomenclature section, and some of the corresponding explanations will not be repeated.
3.1. Assumptions
Because the cooling ability and cooling capacity defined the largest HTR and cooling quantity of each heat sink, the ideal situation has been supposed in which the cooling capacity of each heat sink can be fully exploited. Several assumptions are presented as follows:
- (1)
Ignoring the heat leakage, all of the HS can be fully utilized.
- (2)
The efficiency of engine and lift-drag ratio of aircraft do not change during the whole flight period—this assumption is used to roughly estimate the fuel consumption and output power of engine.
- (3)
There is always enough heat load to be cooled by various heat sinks, and all the thermal loads are kept at the maximum allowable temperature Tloax,max—this assumption provides an extreme condition for assessing the maximum cooling ability/capacity of various heat sinks, and it also provides the same work condition for different heat sinks for comparing their cooling ability/capacity.
- (4)
The heat transfer efficiency of each HX can be higher than a designed minimum value ηHX,min during the whole flight period—this assumption is used to determine the heat transfer efficiency of HXs under arbitrary conditions, as well as the additional weight caused by these HXs.
3.2. Fuel’s Cooling Ability and Residual Cooling Capacity
3.2.1. Cooling Ability of the Fuel
Fuel’s cooling ability in this study refers to the HTR of fuel consumption flow rate of engine, which can be determined by Equation (1). Using the engine consumption fuel flow as heat sink can avoid the cooling capacity loss caused by hot fuel backflow. The cooling ability of fuel is mainly determined by its flow rate, temperature and threshold temperature. The threshold temperature of fuel is the maximum allowable temperature before it enters the engine:
Firstly, according to assumption 2) above, the fuel mass flow
that equals the engine fuel consumption can be determined by the engine efficiency and the current flight condition, shown as Equation (2). In this equation,
ηc, ηm and
ηt refer to the combustion efficiency, mechanical efficiency and propulsive efficiency of the engine, respectively.
Pm,engine is the total mechanical power the engine supplies, while
Pt,engine is engine’s propulsive power,
indicates the kinetic energy change rate,
is potential energy change rate and
is the energy loss resulting from drag. According to the basic flight theory,
,
and
all can be determined by the weight, flight velocity and altitude of the aircraft, shown as Equations (3)–(5) respectively. The weight of aircraft
ma will decrease with the consumption of fuel, shown as Equation (6):
Secondly, without the hot fuel backflow, the temperature of the fuel mass in tank is determined by the HTR from tank to aircraft skin, shown as Equation (7) where
and
refer to the tank surface’s area and heat transfer coefficient from fuselage skin to tank, respectively. The skin temperature is considered to be equal to the total temperature of ambient air
—also known as stagnation temperature—which can be determined by Equation (8), where the ambient temperature
will be discussed in detail in next
Section 3.3:
3.2.2. Residual Cooling Capacity of Fuel
On the other hand, the cooling capacity of the total fuel mass in tank can be estimated by the difference between fuel’s temperature and threshold temperature, as well as its remaining weight, shown by Equation (9). The cooling capacity of fuel will decrease with the reduced mass and the rising temperature:
3.2.3. Exergy Penalty of Fuel
Different with most of other heat sinks, the using of engine consumption fuel flow will not cause any exergy penalties and even be advantageous to engine combustion efficiency. Thus the exergy penalty of fuel is equal to zero.
3.3. RA’s Cooling Ability and Exergy Penalty Rate
3.3.1. Cooling Ability of RA
RA takes heat away from load coolant through the air-liquid HX which is known as RAHX. The cooling ability of RA refers to the maximum HTR from the heat loads to RA. According to the assumption 3) the temperature of the thermal load is always
, the cooling ability of RA can be determined by Equation (10), where the cooling ability of RA
is directly determined by its mass flow rate
, total temperature
, and the heat transfer efficiency of RAHX
ηRAHX:
Firstly, RA’s total temperature can be estimated by the ambient air temperature and flight Mach number. Suppose that the atmosphere parameters at sea level are as shown in
Table 1, the ambient temperature, pressure and density varied with altitude in the troposphere (0 < h < 11 km) can be established by Equations (11)–(13) where
is the temperature lapse rate. Besides, the ambient temperature in the stratosphere (11 km < h < 20 km) will stay −56.5 °C and during the altitude of 20 km~32 km it will increase 1 K with elevation of sea level per 1 km. Since the Mach number of ram air is equal to the flight Mach number
, the total temperature of RA can also be determined by Equation (8). The atmospheric temperature curve following with altitude is shown in
Figure 3a, and the total temperature curve following with Mach number is shown in
Figure 3b.
Secondly, the RA’s mass flow rate
can be estimated by its inlet area
, inlet Mach number
and total pressure
, shown as Equation (14). In this equation,
is the Mach number at the inlet position of RA, considering the effect of shock wave under supersonic condition, which can be determined by Equation (15). Besides, the RA’s total pressure can be determined by Equation (16):
Finally, the heat transfer coefficient of RAHX only depends on its RA flow rate at the cold end, in the ideal situation, shown by Equation (17). In the equation,
and
represent its total heat transfer coefficient and effective heat transfer area, respectively. Their product
indicates the heat flux transferred through the HX when the average temperature difference is 1K. Since the efficiency
decreased with the increase of the RA flow rate
, the maximum RA flow rate will result in the minimum efficiency
whose valve has been identified according to assumption 4). Therefore, the efficiency of RAHX under arbitrary conditions can be determined by contrasting the RA flow rate with its maximum value, shown in Equation (18):
Based on Equations (14) and (15), the RA flow rate will increase with increasing inlet Mach number
, and the
will reach its maximum value when the RA’s Mach number
. Therefore, the maximum RA flow rate can be approximately determined by Equation (19), where
and
are RA’s total temperature and total pressure respectively when
at cruising altitude:
3.3.2. Exergy Penalty Rate of Ra
The exergy penalty caused by using RA can be divided into drag penalty and the weight penalty of RAHX. Firstly, ignoring the negligible external drag—caused by friction, the resistance penalty of RA mainly comes from internal drag–caused by momentum loss of RA flow—which can be determined by Equation (20) where
is the velocity loss coefficient when RA passes through RAHX:
Secondly, the structure of RAHX will lead to an increase in the take-off weight. HX’s weight can be determined by Equation (21) where the effective heat transfer area
can be determined by Equation (22) based on the Equation (17) mentioned above. It is noteworthy that this method for estimating the weight of HX is universal, and it is also applicable to the weight determination of FDHX and SHX later:
In order to compare the exergy penalties of different heat sinks more conveniently, the drag penalty and weight penalty caused by using RA should be quantified as an exergy penalty. At first the drag penalty directly results in the loss of engine thrust, so its exergy penalty rate can be determined by Equation (23). Secondly, the weight of RAHX essentially brings additional weight to the aircraft. Therefore, by using the same method as Equations (2)–(5), the exergy penalty rate caused by the weight of RAHX can be estimated by Equation (24), where the three items of the numerator are successive kinetic energy change rate, potential energy change rate and drag energy loss caused by the additional weight. At last, the total exergy penalty rate caused by using RA can be determined by Equation (25):
3.4. EFA’s Cooling Ability and Exergy Penalty Rate
3.4.1. Cooling Ability of EFA
Similar to RA, EFA collects heat from thermal loads through the FDHX. The cooling ability of EFA can be estimated by Equation (26), which is influenced by the EFA’s mass flow rate
, total temperature
Tex,EFA and the heat transfer efficient of FDHX
:
Generally, the mass flow rate, total temperature of EFA and the heat transfer efficient of FDHX can be determined in the same way as RA. The only difference is that the EFA has been accelerated by the engine fan, so its Mach number
MaEFA will be bigger than that of RA, resulting in higher total temperature. Two important performance indexes of turbofan engine are bypass ratio
B and power partition coefficient
X who will directly influence the Mach number of EFA. The bypass ratio is the ratio between the mass flow rate of the bypass stream and the mass flow rate when entering the core. And the power partition coefficient is the proportion between available work that engine offers ducted fan and all mechanical work produced by engine. The power provided by the engine to per kilogram bypass stream
can be determined by Equation (27) where
is the efficiency of the duct fan which indicates the ratio of converting mechanical power into the kinetic energy of bypass stream. The
and
in these two equations have been obtained by Equation (2) above:
Suppose that the static pressure of inlet and outlet of duct is equal, the Mach number of EFA—also is denoted as the Mach number of bypass stream in external duct which can be determined by Equation (28) where
is the local sound speed. Then its total temperature
, mass flow rate
and the efficient of FDHX
can be determined by using the same way as RA, shown as Equations (8), (14) and (18). The cooling ability can finally be determined by Equation (26):
3.4.2. Exergy Penalty Rate of EFA
The exergy penalties of EFA can also be divided into drag penalty and weight penalty. Similar to RA, the drag caused by EFA and the weight of FDHX can be estimated by Equations (20) and (21). Then the exergy penalty rate caused by using EFA can be obtained according to Equations (29)–(31):
3.5. SHX’s Cooling Ability and Exergy Penalty Rate
3.5.1. Cooling Ability of SHX
The SHX is also a kind of ambient heat sink. Different from RA and EFA, its cooling ability is limited by the heat transfer of the available skin surface rather than that of the cooling air flow. The cooling ability of SHX can be estimated by Equation (32), where
is the average temperature of the skin which can be determined by the heat transfer efficient of SHX shown as Equation (33), and
is the heat transfer coefficient on the outside skin surface. The heat transfer efficiency of SHX
is a design parameter in this part. Assuming that the outside skin is smooth and the boundary flow layer is laminar, the heat transfer coefficient can be estimated by Equation (34) where
and
are respectively the Reynolds number and Prandtl number:
3.5.2. Exergy Penalty Rate of SHX
There is no drag penalty but weight penalty when using SHX as heat sink. Since only the hot end of SHX has the coolant as heat transfer medium, the efficiency of SHX is determined by the coolant flow rate. Similar with the Equation (20) and Equation (21), the weight of SHX can be determined by Equation (35), where the product
of SHX can be estimated by Equation (36).
is the maximum heat transfer capability of SHX which can be easily estimated. Therefore, the exergy penalty rate caused by SHX can be estimated by the weight penalty shown as Equation (37):
3.6. EHS’s Cooling Capacity and Exergy Penalty Rate
The cooling ability of EHS is meaningless because the HTR of EHS can be easily modified according to demand. Thus in this part author only discusses the cooling capacity of EHS, as well as its penalty.
3.6.1. Cooling Capacity of EHS
The EHS cools the thermal loads mainly depending on the heat absorption when changing phase. Under an ideal condition, the EHS after being used can expand to the ambient pressure and rise to the temperature equal to the heat load, thus its cooling capacity can be determined by Equation (38), where the
is the special enthalpy of EHS before phase change and
is the special enthalpy after phase change.
is the storage temperature of EHS, and
is the storage pressure which is considered as the saturation pressure of the expendable liquid under the storage temperature in this study:
3.6.2. Exergy Penalty Rate of EHS
The penalty caused by EHS belongs to weight penalty. The additional weight caused by EHS includes its own weight and the container’s weight. Generally the container’s weight is in proportion to the weight of EHS and the ratio is
. Therefore, the exergy penalty rate of EHS can be evaluated by Equation (39):
3.7. Cooling Capacity and Exergy Penalty of Heat Sinks
Section 3.2,
Section 3.3,
Section 3.4,
Section 3.5 and
Section 3.6 illustrated the estimation models for the cooling ability of fuel, RA, EFA, SHX, and the exergy penalty rate of RA, EFA, SHX, EHS. On this basis, the cooling capacity and exergy penalty of each heat sink during a target flight period can be determined by integrating the cooling ability and exergy penalty rate in this time range
, as shown in Equations (40) and (41) respectively. For evaluating the advantages and disadvantages of each heat sink more conveniently, the parameter cooling-penalty ratio has also been introduced as Equation (42). The cooling-penalty ratio is the ratio of cooling capacity and exergy penalty. The higher the value, the more cooling quantity the heat sink can offer when consuming unit energy, further indicating that it is more ideal as a heat sink:
3.8. Calculation Procedure
Basically, there are two main purposes to be discussed in this study. The first one is the influence of various design parameters of TMS on the cooling ability/capacity and exergy penalty of each heat sink, which can be used to guide the design and optimization of various heat sink. The second one is the comparison of different heat sinks, which can be used to more reasonably arrange the proportion of various heat sinks according to target flight mission. For these two purposes, calculation procedures are illustrated in
Figure 4.
As shown in
Figure 4, the square and circular frames in the figure indicate the corresponding equations and parameters respectively. The calculation procedures include three steps. Firstly, based on the parameters of each heat sink and the flight profile, the cooling ability of fuel, RA, EFA and SHX at any time can be determined by corresponding equations, i.e.,
,
,
,
. By the same way, the exergy penalty rates of various heat sinks can be obtained, i.e.,
,
,
,
. Note that the cooling ability of EHS is meaningless and the exergy penalty of fuel is 0. Secondly, based on the cooling ability and exergy penalty rate of each heat sink obtained in the first step, the total cooling capacity of each heat sink during a target flight stage
can be determined by corresponding Equation (40), i.e.,
,
,
,
,
. By the same way, the exergy penalty of each heat sink can be determined by Equation (41), i.e., 0,
,
,
,
. Thirdly, based on the cooling capacity and exergy penalty data obtained in step 2, the cooling-penalty ratio of each heat sink in target flight stage can be determined, i.e.,
,
,
,
,
.
Based on the calculation results, the two purposes will be described at the beginning of this part. First, the influence of a target TMS parameter on one heat sink can be evaluated by the calculation results under different cases with different target parameters. Secondly, the comparison of different heat sinks can be further divided into three parts. (1) The comparison of each heat sink’s cooling ability can be carried out by comparing , , , under different flight conditions. (2) The comparison of each heat sink’s cooling capacity can be carried out by comparing , , , and during different flight stages; 3) the comparison of each heat sink’s exergy penalty can be carried out by comparing , , , and during different flight stages. Please note that it is meaningless to directly compare each heat sink’s exergy penalty, since their cooling capacities are obviously different.
5. Conclusions
In order to facilitate the design and optimization of the TMS for the increasingly severe thermal problems of modern advanced aircraft, this paper presents various models for estimating the cooling abilities/capacities of heat sinks and the exergy penalty caused by each heat sink. The target five heat sinks include fuel, RA, EFA, SHX and EHS. A heat sink is more desirable when its cooling ability/capacity is stronger while the exergy penalty is smaller. The cooling ability/capacity of each heat sink is not only related to its design parameters and thermo-physical states, but also varies with the flight condition of aircraft. Therefore, the TMS in different types of aircrafts should be obviously different.
The analysis results and discussion have been elaborated in this paper, that is the influences of design parameters on cooling ability/capacity and exergy penalty of various heat sinks, and the comparison of different heat sinks on the cooling ability/capacity and exergy penalty under different flight conditions. Several conclusions can be obtained: (1) Fuel is the most important heat sink in modern advanced aircrafts with aerodynamic shape and high stealth, but its cooling capacity is restrictively limited by the mass in the tank, making it difficult to satisfy the increasing cooling demand of thermal loads. (2) RA is more suitable for the low-speed aircraft due to its outstanding cooling ability and low temperature in subsonic flight, however, the utilization of RA will inevitably introduce the additional RAHX and lead to an obvious drag penalty. (3) EFA is similar to RA, but its temperature is higher and exergy penalty is smaller. Compared with RA, the advantages of EFA are that it doesn’t affect the aerodynamic and stealth layout and can be used in the parking state. (4) SHX has the smallest exergy penalty as an ambient heat sink, but due to the limitations of the fuselage area, its cooling ability is far from being enough for modern advanced aircraft. (5) EHS’s exergy penalty is huge, but considering that the combustible liquefied gas can provide thrust or power for aircraft when needed, it has great potential in further hypersonic aircraft.
The estimation models and analysis results presented in this paper can be used to design and optimize the TMS. Firstly, it can be used to guide the design of various heat sinks—how to determine the parameters of the heat sinks, so that they can provide more cooling ability/capacity while producing less exergy penalty. Secondly, the optimal heat sink ratio can be determined according to the cooling abilities/capacities and exergy penalties of different heat sinks to minimize the total cooling-penalty ratio (total cooling capacity/total exergy penalty). Thirdly, during the flight, the on-time estimating of the cooling abilities/capacities can be used to dynamically manage various heat sinks, further avoiding the waste of heat sinks and prolonging the working time of TMS. At last, according to the different temperatures and characteristics of heat sinks, the heat transfer path of TMS can be optimized to make the most efficient utilization of each heat sink.