<p>Thermal management systems for tactical aircraft
electronics cooling were studied in this work. The systems consisted of an
HFC-134a based vapor compression cycle (VCC) and an air-based reversed-Brayton
cycle (RBC). The heat loads consisted of aircraft electronics, including
avionics. The system models were built using detailed component-level models. The
models underwent verification and validation to check mass and energy
conservation, as well as ensuring the model’s behavior reflected the actual
system’s behavior. Both models were run through a matrix of boundary conditions
that represented specific segments of two tactical aircraft missions with next
generation thermal loads. These segments included typical tactical aircraft
operating conditions: ground idle, cruise, combat, dash, and loiter. The
resulting system performance of both models was analyzed using a first law
energy-based fuel impact and second law exergy-based irreversibility method to
determine their respective impact to the aircraft. Component level
irreversibilities were also analyzed. </p><p>The VCC cooling system met or exceeded cooling
performance goals, while the RBC fell short during some mission segments. The
VCC also had a lower fuel impact than the RBC from an energy perspective and lower
system and component level irreversibilities from an exergy perspective for
most mission segments. The opposite trend was observed during the ground idle
segment, where the VCC’s fuel impact was larger but irreversibilities were
lower than the RBC’s.</p><p>The VCC’s lower fuel impact was due to the engine
power take-off having less of an impact on engine fuel flow than the RBC’s
bleed air. The VCC’s lower irreversibilities were due to the system’s use of
phase change in the heat exchangers, which tended to be more efficient than the
single-phase heat transfer in the RBC’s heat exchangers. </p><p>Some limitations of the study should be addressed in
future work, including electrical power generation losses and an improved air
humidity model that operates better at low temperatures and incorporates
moisture evaporation. Alternative VCC refrigerants with higher critical
temperatures should also be explored to ensure the system does not limit the
aircraft operationally. New architectures should be explored that combine RBC
cooling and VCC cooling.</p><p>
</p><p>Overall, the VCC cooled the thermal load more
efficiently with a lower overall impact to the aircraft than the RBC from both
energy and exergy based perspectives.</p><br>