pistonless rocket engine

8/18/2019 Pistonless Rocket Engine

1/13

PISTONLESS

ROCKET ENGINE


2/13

WHAT IS IT ???For performance, a rocket must have large,

lightweight propellant tanksPressure fed tanks are heavy and/orexpensive and safety margins cost too muchin terms of performance.

Turbopumps are expensive and require a

massive engineering effort.The solution is the The ual PistonlessPump

!imple to design and manufacture and with

performance comparable to a turbopump andcomplexity and reliability comparable to a


3/13

TOPICS

BASIC PUMP DESIGN CONCEPT

LATEST PUMP INNOVATIONS

ADVANTAGES OVER TURBO PUMPS AND

PRESSURE FED SYSTEMS

PRESENT PUMP TEST INCLUDING A STATIC FIRE

TEST

PROVE WEIGHT SAVINGS OVER PRESSURE FED

TANKAGE OF OVER 80%


4/13

FIRST GENERATION

DESIGN:-

". rain the main tank at low

pressure into a small pump

chamber.

#. Pressuri$e the pump chamber

and feed to the engine.

%. &un two in parallel, venting

and filling one faster than the

other is


5/13

SECOND GENERATION DESIGN:-

•'ain chamber vents and fills

quickly through multiple check

valves.

• (ne main chamber and oneauxiliary chamber, less weight

than two chambers of equal si$e

•Pump fits in tank, simplified

plumbing

•)oncentric design maintainsbalance.

•'odel has been built and tested

*patent pending+


6/13

xpensive and

ifficult to esign

and -uild

Turbo pumps

Failure mode

xplosion

)omplex systemFluid ynamics of

rotor/stator

-earings

!eals

)avitations

eat transfer

Thermal shock

&otor dynamics

!tartup 0 !hut

down


7/13

Piston less Pump evelopment

1ssues

)urrently uses slightly more gas than pressure

fed system. )an use less with pressurant heating.

2ot invented here.

2o experience base, must be static tested and

flown.

&equires different system optimi$ation than

pressure fed or turbo pump systems no sample

problems in the book.


8/13

ADVANTAGES

2egligible chance of catastrophic failure.

'uch lighter than pressure fed system at similar cost.

(ne to two orders of magnitude lower engineering, testing andmanufacturing cost than turbo pump.

3ow weight, comparable to turbo pump.

4uick startup, shutdown. 2o fuel used during spool up.

)an be run dry. 2o minimum fuel requirement.

3ess than "5 moving parts. 1nherent reliability.

1nexpensive materials and processes.

'ass producible and scalable, allows for redundant systems.


9/13

6ffordable and &eliable. ual

Piston less Pump

Failure mode Propellant

dump'a7or components

)heck 8alves

3evel !ensors

Pressure vessels

These parts are

available off the shelf

for low cost

)ontrol !ystem

inexpensive

microprocessor


10/13

Pum

PerformancePump performance

close to target of

".9 kg/sec at : 'pa*#5 ;P',


11/13

6nother )alculation. 'ass !avings of Pump and Tank (ver Pressure ed Tank

'ass of pressure fed tank is proportional to volume and

pressure 'ass of pump fed system is the mass of a lighter low

pressure tank plus the mass of the pump

Tank 'ass !avings

#55 =Pa tank is "/"5 the weight of a # 'Pa tank. Pumpsi$e,weight is less than "/"5 of that of pressure fed

tank.

Pump chamber pressure is the same as pressure fed

tank pressure, but the volume is much less.


12/13

'ass !avings over

Pressure ed !ystem

9 second cycle time and %55 =Pa tank pressure

%q95,55 psi fuel pressure

Mass Savings over pressure fed system

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

0 50 100 150 200 250 300

Burn Time (seconds)

M a s s S a v i n g s

2.4 Mpa

4.2 Mpa

6.2 Mpa

Propellant

pressure


13/13

)onclusions/ Future Plans

Pump weight and cost are low and it works as designed.2ext steps

!tatic test and fly pump in student rocket with

Flometric?s rocket technology.6long with latest low )osta engine designs, pumpwill make launch systems more safe, reliable andaffordable.

26!6

Fastrac

T&@

3ow )ost Pintle

ngine

-eal

-6 A"5

'icrocosm

!corpius

pistonless rocket engine

Documents