MSL's Power Source |
MSL's Power Source |
Guest_exobioquest_* |
Nov 27 2005, 04:46 PM
Post
#1
|
Guests |
Hi, new here.
I'm wondering if any news has come down about finalizing what MSL will run on? Will it be 2 Boeing's MMRTG (at ~100 watts?) or Lockheed Martin’s SRG (again ~100watts?), have they decided yet? Willl MSL use the RPS to trickle charge a battery or will MSL run on the RPS only? God I hope solar is not a option is anyone pushing for it? |
|
|
Nov 28 2005, 03:59 PM
Post
#2
|
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 2542 Joined: 13-September 05 Member No.: 497 |
QUOTE (exobioquest @ Nov 27 2005, 08:46 AM) Will it be 2 Boeing's MMRTG (at ~100 watts?) or Lockheed Martin’s SRG (again ~100watts?), have they decided yet? According to http://trs-new.jpl.nasa.gov/dspace/bitstre...6/1/05-0708.pdf MSL will use an MMRTG. I would think that the use of batteries is inevitable, as there's no way the avionics can run directly from RTG output, much less the payload. I'm sure they've done a detailed trade study of alternative RTGs, but I haven't seen those. -------------------- Disclaimer: This post is based on public information only. Any opinions are my own.
|
|
|
Guest_exobioquest_* |
Nov 28 2005, 04:57 PM
Post
#3
|
Guests |
QUOTE (mcaplinger @ Nov 28 2005, 09:59 AM) According to http://trs-new.jpl.nasa.gov/dspace/bitstre...6/1/05-0708.pdf MSL will use an MMRTG. I would think that the use of batteries is inevitable, as there's no way the avionics can run directly from RTG output, much less the payload. I'm sure they've done a detailed trade study of alternative RTGs, but I haven't seen those. Well thats sad, hope they change their mind. By the way who put those notes on the pdf? I did not consider this but because the MMRTG puts out 2000w of heat they need a rather large radiator for the cruise stage, the SRG only puts out 500w. |
|
|
Nov 28 2005, 05:30 PM
Post
#4
|
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 2542 Joined: 13-September 05 Member No.: 497 |
QUOTE (exobioquest @ Nov 28 2005, 08:57 AM) The report I referenced is probably just a baseline; I don't know if the final RTG configuration has been picked. However, I'm not sure that the Stirling RTG is a clear-cut winner. It's more efficient and lighter for a given power output, true, but it's far more mechanically complex and has its own set of problems (vibration, electrical noise, etc.) -------------------- Disclaimer: This post is based on public information only. Any opinions are my own.
|
|
|
Nov 29 2005, 05:22 AM
Post
#5
|
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 2542 Joined: 13-September 05 Member No.: 497 |
QUOTE (mcaplinger @ Nov 28 2005, 09:30 AM) However, I'm not sure that the Stirling RTG is a clear-cut winner. It's more efficient and lighter for a given power output, true... Actually, doing a little more research, the SRTG is even less obviously a win. It saves Pu mass, but the additional mass of the more complex conversion hardware partially kills that advantage. Depending on exactly what mass the MMRTG finally comes in at, it can have a higher energy density than the SRTG. Getting rid of the additional waste heat, while an issue, is a fairly easy problem to solve. Quoted from "Advances in Planetary Aerobots" by Erik Laan et al: "The MMRTG will be designed to generate 110 Watts of electric energy over a minimum lifetime of 14 years (3 years on the Martian Surface) weighing 24-34 kg (218.8 - 309.1 kg/kW) including 4 kg Plutonium-238 (Boeing) Another development is aimed at increasing the efficiency of the conversion process. Current RTGs are capable of converting heat into electricity with an efficiency of ~8%. A number of new conversion processes were proposed recently. The Stirling Radioisotope Power Source is one of them. This SRPS is using a Stirling heat engine, which produces an acoustic pressure wave to drive a piston in a linear alternator producing the electricity. The SRG (Stirling RTG) delivers 93-114 Watt of electric energy, weighing 27 kg (236.8 - 290.3 kg/kW) and contains 1 kg of Plutonium-238 (LMM)." -------------------- Disclaimer: This post is based on public information only. Any opinions are my own.
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 25th September 2024 - 02:07 PM |
RULES AND GUIDELINES Please read the Forum Rules and Guidelines before posting. IMAGE COPYRIGHT |
OPINIONS AND MODERATION Opinions expressed on UnmannedSpaceflight.com are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of UnmannedSpaceflight.com or The Planetary Society. The all-volunteer UnmannedSpaceflight.com moderation team is wholly independent of The Planetary Society. The Planetary Society has no influence over decisions made by the UnmannedSpaceflight.com moderators. |
SUPPORT THE FORUM Unmannedspaceflight.com is funded by the Planetary Society. Please consider supporting our work and many other projects by donating to the Society or becoming a member. |