Well, it should theoretically help simplify injector design as the O:F
ratios aren't as important and ditto for deep throttling. It particularly
should assist with hybrid grain design as you're not as restricted to a
tight mixing ratio which enables significant simplification of grain
geometries.
There are virtues both ways though.
Troy.
-----Original Message-----
From: arocket-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:arocket-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of qbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Friday, 26 August 2016 11:14 AM
To: arocket@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [AR] Re: "Direct" Hydrogen Peroxide engines
Makes a really good case for HTP over LOX with the O/F ratio
Robert
At 06:01 PM 8/25/2016, you wrote:
Ballpark chart (attached) for hybrid analysis so I've used Polyethylenereadily-available peroxide.
instead of Kero.
Troy
-----Original Message-----
From: arocket-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:arocket-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Evan Daniel
Sent: Friday, 26 August 2016 9:46 AM
To: arocket@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [AR] Re: "Direct" Hydrogen Peroxide engines
As a general rule, the Isp penalty for X% of inert mass in your
propellants is about 0.5 * X %, for small values of X. (X% of inerts
drops the available energy by X%, but exhaust velocity goes with the
square root of energy.)
Note that you have to include the fuel mass in that approximation as
well. Second-order effects for things like dissociation, nozzle gas
characteristics, and changing heat capacities of exhaust gases are
neglected, and we're assuming that the O:F ratio is held constant when
you measure the ratio of the *non-inert* portions.
Evan Daniel
On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 6:37 PM, <qbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
And how much ISP do you lose in that 3 to 7%?
Robert
At 03:40 PM 8/25/2016, you wrote:
Who needs 87 %? 80-84 % is sufficient for kerosene autoignition.
jd
-----Original Message-----
From: arocket-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:arocket-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On
Behalf Of qbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: donderdag 25 augustus 2016 22:46
To: arocket@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [AR] Re: "Direct" Hydrogen Peroxide engines
Cobalt butyrate seems to be really hard to find in any form and I
can find no MSDS for it however Cobalt Octoate which is also
mentioned is somewhat toxic in close quarters and on prolonged
contact, It supposedly mixes with
JP10 and according to the info I just went through is easy to
acquire. I have no specifics on it's use or results of use with HTP.
In reply to another post, plated silver will start shedding from
nickle even at 87% on longer runs, 45 seconds in our case.
Robert
At 11:01 AM 8/25/2016, you wrote:
On Wed, 24 Aug 2016, David Weinshenker wrote:
I think uncatalyzed peroxide is a neglected approach.
What do you think of solvent/catalyst fuel mixtures...
Promising. Endlessly promising, in fact. :-) Too many promises
and not enough solidly-verified results, especially in the form
that's really wanted: a low-cost non-hazardous catalyst that
works well in small quantities with a good cheap fuel and
(And what's the general situation regarding getting whatever
license is needed to practice an invention on a private basis,
when the Navy owns the patent rights?)
I believe it's the same answer as for any other patent: you have
to get the approval of the rights owner (yes, even for private
non-profit use). Hadn't heard of any streamlined method for doing
this with the US government, although I haven't gone looking.
Wondering how toxic cobalt butyrate is going to be, though...
Organometallics generally aren't good news, nor are cobalt compounds.
But I know nothing about cobalt butyrate in particular.
Henry
