Robert wrote on 250816:
There are several papers that show adding raw peroxide downstream, even atlow percentage flows of the main peroxide stream are detrimental to both the
On Tue, 16 Aug 2016, ignacio belieres wrote:
What do you think about Wernimonts paper saying that catalyst beds are
more reliable and cost less than liquid liquid injectors. I had read
it a long time ago and it struck me as very poor research...
I have dim memories of one or two Wernimont papers that I wasn't too
impressed by, but couldn't say offhand whether that was one of them.
Catalyzed peroxide certainly dodges some potentially-difficult problems
of ignition and combustion stability; it clearly wins on simplicity and
safety. Provided, that is, that your catalyst works consistently and
reliably -- which is often a problem, notably with the high
temperatures of 90%+ peroxide. If you're willing to use permanganate
solutions (or ultra-reactive fuels like triethyl aluminum), or treat
silver as a consumable, it's easy; if you want a reusable, long-lived
solid catalyst, that's not so easy. There are things that might work
adequately, but it's *not* a solved problem.
I think uncatalyzed peroxide is a neglected approach. But making it
work well is not a solved problem either. As with any uncatalyzed
liquid oxidizer, reliable positive ignition is a must for safety, and
for peroxide it may be difficult to achieve. Do not proceed to
larger-scale firings until the ignition problem is definitely licked.
Expect ignition development tests to fail violently sometimes. Avoid
using fuels miscible with peroxide, like alcohols
-- that's just asking for explosions.
Henry
