Document Type : Original Article


1 Aerospace Research Institute and Amirkabir University of Technology

2 Assistant Professor, Aerospace Research Institute, Ministry Science, Research and Technology (MSRT)

3 Amirkabir University of Technology


Accurate solving of complex systems such as spacecraft is very costly and time consuming. By building a surrogate model, the solution time and the cost can be reduced. The closer the surrogate model is to the actual model, the more accurate the solution and the lower the error rate. High-precision successor models are called metamodels. The basis of producing a high-precision meta-model is to perform high-precision sensitivity analysis with a suitable method. Sensitivity analysis can show the effect of input variables on output variables and produce a surrogate model by eliminating ineffective input variables. Therefore, sensitivity analysis is highly valuable in solving complex systems. The purpose of this article is to analyze the sensitivity of the multidisciplinary design of a monopropellant liquid propulsion system by the Latin Hypercube Sampling method. In this article, the topics related to the liquid monopropellant propulsion system are divided into six parts: High pressure gas tank, liquid fuel tank, injector, decomposition chamber, catalytic bed and nozzle. By determining the input and output variables of each subject, the results of sensitivity analysis are displayed in two ways: the sensitivity of the input variables to the output and the two-by-two correlation of the parameters with each other. In the results, as can be seen, the specific impulse input variable, in the high-pressure gas tank and the liquid fuel tank, has no effect on the output variables. In the injector, the number of grooves, groove angles and fuel tank pressure do not have a significant effect on the output variables. In the decomposition chamber sensitivity analysis diagram, the radius of the granule and for the catalyst bed, in addition to the radius of the granule, the percentage of ammonia decomposition are also ineffective. Finally, the sensitivity analysis for the nozzle shows that the ratio of specific heat has no effect on the output variables


Main Subjects

[1] O. Morgan, D. Meinhardt, editors. Monopropellant selection criteria-hydrazine and other options. 35th Joint Propulsion Conference and Exhibit; 1995.
[2] D. Mavris, H. Jimenez. Advanced Design Methods.  Architecture and Principles of Systems Engineering: Auerbach Publications; 2016. p. 359-88.
[3] MN. Meibody, H. Naseh, F. Ommi. Sensitivity analysis based on Progressive LHS Applied to Hydrazine Catalyst Bed Design. Journal OF Space Sience and Technology. 2020.
[4] MN. Meibody, H. Naseh, F. Ommi. Progressive Latin Hypercube sampling-based robust design optimisation (PLHS-RDO). Australian Journal of Mechanical Engineering. 2020:1-8.
[5] E. Mehrabi Gohari, H. Mahdavi Talaromi, MH. Qaedsharaf. The comparison of operation and sensitivity of effective parameters in hydrogen peroxide and nitrous oxide thrusters using uncertainty analysis. Journal of Mechanical Engineering. 2020;50(3):233-7.
[6] M. Rath, H. Schmitz, M. Steenborg, editors. Development of a 400 N hydrazine thruster for ESA's Atmospheric Reentry Demonstrator. 32nd Joint Propulsion Conference and Exhibit; 1996.
[7] M. Salimi. Numerical Study of Catalyst Bed Length and Particle Size Effect on the Monopropellant Thruster Specific Impulse and Thrust. 2020.
[8] A. Adami, M. Mortazavi, M. Nosratollahi, M. Taheri, J. Sajadi. Multidisciplinary design optimization and analysis of hydrazine monopropellant propulsion system. International Journal of Aerospace Engineering. 2015;2015.
[9] R. Hermsen, B. Zandbergen, editors. Pressurization system for a cryogenic propellant tank in a pressure-fed high-altitude rocket. 7th European Conference for Aeronautics And Aerospace Sciences (EUCASS); 2017.
[10] TM. Chiasson. Modeling the characteristics of propulsion systems providing less than 10 N thrust: Massachusetts Institute of Technology; 2012.
[11] L. Bayrel, Z. Orzechowski. Liquid Atomization, Combustion: An International Series. Taylor and Francis, London; 1993.
[12] MN. Meibody, H. Naseh, F. Ommi. Developing a Multi-objective Multi-Disciplinary Robust Design Optimization Framework. Scientia Iranica. 2021.
[13] T. Nada, A. Hashem. Geometrical characterization and performance optimization of monopropellant thruster injector. The Egyptian Journal of Remote Sensing and Space Science. 2012;15(2):161-9.
[14] L. Bayvel, Z. Orzechowski. Liquid atomization: Routledge; 2019.
[15] H. Naseh, MN. Meibody, H. Hosseini Anari, F. Ommi. Numerical-parametrical analysis on the hydrogen peroxide catalyst bed for space monopropellant thruster applications. Journal of Applied Research of Chemical-Polymer Engineering. 2018;1(2):15-24.
[16] CH. Hwang, SN. Lee, SW. Baek, CY. Han, SK. Kim, MJ. Yu. Effects of catalyst bed failure on thermochemical phenomena for a hydrazine monopropellant thruster using Ir/Al2O3 catalysts. Industrial & engineering chemistry research. 2012;51(15):5382-93.
[17] J. Chen, G. Li, T. Zhang, M. Wang, Y. Yu. Experimental investigation of the catalytic decomposition and combustion characteristics of a non-toxic ammonium dinitramide (ADN)-based monopropellant thruster. Acta Astronautica. 2016;129:367-73.
[18] A. Makled, H. Belal, editors. Modeling of hydrazine decomposition for monopropellant thrusters. 13th International Conference on Aerospace Sciences & Aviation Technology; 2009.
[19] YM. Timnat. Advanced chemical rocket propulsion: Academic Press; 1987.
[20] G. Sutton, O. Biblarz. Rocket propulsion elements, ISBN-13: 978-1118753651. John Wiley & Sons; 2017.
[21] DK. Huzel, DH. Huang. Modern engineering for design of liquid-propellant rocket engines (Revised and enlarged edition). Progress in astronautics and aeronautics. 1992;147.