A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Space Science » Technology
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Aerospikes



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old May 26th 04, 01:50 PM
Proponent
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Aerospikes

Bono's aerospike designs from the 60s feature toroidal comubstion
chambers, whereas recent designs like the X-33's linear aerospike
usually have several small, distinct chambers. Why the change? Is it
just easier to manufacture distinct chambers? Would the toroidal
design tend to suffer from any nasty combustion instabilities?

Speaking of the X-33, wouldn't a linear aerospike tend to be much less
efficient than a cylindrical design, because the aerospike effect
occurs fully only in one dimension?
  #2  
Old May 29th 04, 05:55 AM
Henry Spencer
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Aerospikes

In article ,
Proponent wrote:
Bono's aerospike designs from the 60s feature toroidal comubstion
chambers, whereas recent designs like the X-33's linear aerospike
usually have several small, distinct chambers. Why the change? Is it
just easier to manufacture distinct chambers? Would the toroidal
design tend to suffer from any nasty combustion instabilities?


The toroidal design does have "racetrack" instabilities to add to the
usual instability worries, and it is structurally and thermally really a
pain. Chamber pressure puts the inside of the torus in compression, which
is much harder to deal with structurally than tension. The fact that the
contraction to the throat happens in only one dimension rather than two
means that the throat has to be quite narrow, and the need to accurately
control that narrow gap aggravates the structural problems. Finally, that
contraction in only one dimension means that the engine has a lot of
throat area (relative to chamber volume) compared to conventional designs,
and the throat is the area where cooling problems are really nasty.

Conventional chambers, perhaps with a circular-to-square transition in a
short divergent section of nozzle (after the throat), are a *whole lot*
easier to build and don't seem to incur a significant performance penalty.
Toroidal chambers are conceptually elegant but probably a bad idea.

Speaking of the X-33, wouldn't a linear aerospike tend to be much less
efficient than a cylindrical design, because the aerospike effect
occurs fully only in one dimension?


In principle, they can be just as good, although there are some questions
about what happens at the ends.
--
"Think outside the box -- the box isn't our friend." | Henry Spencer
-- George Herbert |
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:44 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.