[AR] Re: Regarding Univerity solid rockets for cube-sat launch to orbit

  • From: Henry Vanderbilt <hvanderbilt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: arocket@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Sat, 3 Mar 2018 15:42:02 -0700

On 3/3/2018 3:20 PM, John Schilling wrote:

On 3/3/2018 12:44 PM, Henry Spencer wrote:
(If you look at a photo of a Titan IIIC on the pad, you'll see a slim cylinder nestled in the groove between the core and one SRB -- that's the N2O4 tank for that SRB.)

A subtlety of LITVC is that you want the injectant tank pretty much empty at the end of the burn, since unused injectant is dead weight that hurts payload.  This is a little tricky if you're not quite sure how much you'll need for vectoring!  The simplest way would be to dump some occasionally during the burn, getting rid of injectant that you're pretty sure you no longer need.  The Titan III designers decided to be clever instead:  the ring of injection valves is actually dribbling injectant into the exhaust continuously, with vectoring done by sending more flow to one side and less to the opposite side.  Arguably more elegant, but it complicates the valve system and may have contributed to the leak problems.

Henry

If I were doing it today - and the cost and complexity of gimballed solids is such that I'd seriously consider it - I'd use an aqueous HAN solution as the fluid.  Only about half the free oxygen of NTO, but at least an order of magnitude less hassle on the pad.  And yes, run the fluid at constant rate calibrated to run out right after the motor burns out, with steering done by a proportional four-way diverter.  There's no excuse for that causing leakage on the pad; the diverter valve almost by definition can't be leak-tight but it does mean you only need one leak-tight valve upstream of the diverter.

Well, OK, one series-redundant valve train.  And I'll even consider a pyrovalve for this application, since we're going solid anyway.


And, circling right back to where we started (the question of what sort of high-performance solids might be doable by a serious university team) simplified liquid-injection TVC actually sounds like something that might be a worthwhile and achievable enhancement to the current non-professional state of the art.

I'd be tempted to gain experience and work out the bugs on a medium-performance first pass, mind - an off-the-shelf solid, plus a relatively benign albeit low-performance TVC fluid, to develop an initial flight demonstrator. Save aqueous HAN (or maybe peroxide?) TV-fluid and shooting for 100 km for a subsequent iteration.

If it allowed high-performance small solid vehicles to get away from having to launch at very high acceleration off a rail, it would I expect be a very significant advance to the non-pro SOTA.

Henry


Other related posts: