My Assistant
Phoenix - hypergolic propellant? |
| Guest_Zvezdichko_* |
Mar 3 2007, 09:32 PM
Post
#1
|
|
Guests |
Hmmm... the braking engines are said to be "hydrazine engine", but what does it mean? Is the oxidiser dinitrogen tetroxide and is the fuel hypergolic?
|
|
|
|
![]() |
Mar 3 2007, 10:03 PM
Post
#2
|
|
|
Senior Member ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 2558 Joined: 13-September 05 Member No.: 497 |
Hmmm... the braking engines are said to be "hydrazine engine", but what does it mean? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopropellant_rocket -------------------- Disclaimer: This post is based on public information only. Any opinions are my own.
|
|
|
|
Mar 4 2007, 08:30 AM
Post
#3
|
|
|
Senior Member ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 1870 Joined: 20-February 05 Member No.: 174 |
Hydrazine (whichever one... there are different varieties, as there are different "alcohols") in this context is a chemically unstable monopropellant. Like hydrogen-peroxide, it semi-violently breaks down when exposed to something it doesn't like (catalyst), forming superheated vapors. You feed it into the center of a "catalyst bed" though some kind of injection system under pressure that I'd presume is equal to that of the rocket chamber, it decomposes and comes out screaming out of the catalyst bed into the engine chamber and then out the nozzle.
Monopropellants are not very efficient. Their specific-impulse (bounce-per-ounce) is sucky, but ... THEY'RE SIMPLE. Mars landings ... you need to slow from a few hundred miles-per-hour, not thousands. Atmosphere, heat shields, and parachutes do that. You can afford some modest hover time, too, at a not horrendous expense in propellant mass. The K.I.S.S. principle holds here very nicely. KEEP IT SIMPLE, STUPID!!! |
|
|
|
| Guest_Zvezdichko_* |
Mar 4 2007, 09:24 AM
Post
#4
|
|
Guests |
edstrik: you made it looking like a steam engine
|
|
|
|
Mar 4 2007, 10:35 AM
Post
#5
|
|
|
Founder ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Chairman Posts: 14457 Joined: 8-February 04 Member No.: 1 |
On principle, hydrazine thrusters ARE simpler than a steam engine
Heat the cat, open the valve...bingo. Doug |
|
|
|
![]() ![]() |
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 13th December 2024 - 05:22 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. |
|