Upload
audrey-oliver
View
219
Download
2
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Choices: Some Considerations in Configuring Launch Systems
Dr. John M. Jurist
Adjunct Professor of Space Studies, Odegard School of Aerospace Sciences, and
Adjunct Professor of Biophysics and Aviation, Rocky Mountain College
Note: This material was used in various seminars at the above institutions, and is not to be reused without attribution
Target Audience:• People not trained in the physical or
engineering sciences• People with a general interest in why
space launch technology is so complex
2
A Great Resource for Those Who Wish to Dig Deeper:
George Sutton’s books: Rocket Propulsion Elements (multiple editions over 60+ years)
3
Goals:• Give a sense of the kinds of choices
that are made in configuring a launch system.
• Show how choices made early in the process affect later options.
4
Relevant Quote:
“Statements in the first 2 years of the company should be disregarded due to idiocy.”
-- Elon Musk, ISDC 2008 remarks at Capital Hilton in Washington, DC on SpaceX scheduling problems
5
Primary Parameters:
Define payload mass to specified trajectory
Example: 2,000 pounds to 200 km LEO at 23 deg inclination launched to east
Translates to mission velocity change (delta-V)
Orbital velocity plus margins for gravity and aerodynamic losses = mission delta-V 6
The Basic Rocket Equation:
Mo/Mf = e(v/c) or v = c * loge(Mo/Mf)
Mo = GLOW = liftoff mass
Mf = burnout mass
c = g * Isp = exhaust velocity
v = ideal burnout velocity7
Useful Reading Material:
For a narrative of the implications of the rocket equation:
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/station/expeditions/expedition30/tryanny.html
8
Options Narrowed:
Select propellant (solid vs liquid, hydrocarbon vs liquid hydrogen, etc.)
Propellant combination determines specific impulse from rocket equation
C* = g * Isp = exhaust velocity9
Tradeoffs -- 1:
Solid vs Liquid:• Simple vs complex (especially with
pumps)• Reliable vs less reliable ignition• Storable vs less storable• Lower vs higher potential impulse density• Lower vs higher mass efficiency for
larger (pumped) systems10
Tradeoffs -- 2:
Solid vs Liquid:• Toxic components and/or exhaust
products• Ammonium perchlorate • Liquid oxygen • Hydrocarbon• Hydrazine• Liquid hydrogen
11
Tradeoffs -- 3:
Solid vs Liquid:• Handling• Hydrocarbon vs liquid hydrogen
• Lower vs higher specific impulse• Higher vs lower density (tank mass)• Insulation (tank mass)
12
Options Narrowed -- 1:
Selected propellant C* gives required mass ratio from rocket equation for given mission delta-V:
(Mo/Mf), where Mo = GLOW = liftoff mass
and Mf = burnout mass13
Options Narrowed -- 2:
Staging to Ease Mass Ratio Constraints:• More stages = more complexity and less
reliability• No ullage or separation motors required for
solids but required for liquids unless hot-fire staging used
14
Mass Budget -- 1:
Once payload mass, mission delta-v, propellant combination, staging, and mass ratio defined, characterization of each stage can proceed:
• Structural elements• Tankage (and insulation if required)• Attitude control system• GNC (guidance, navigation, and control)
16
Mass Budget -- 2:
• Payload shroud (eject when out of atmosphere)• Interstage assembly (divide between lower and upper)• Ullage systems (stage separation and propellant
settling for upper stage ignition)• Destruct system
17
Mass Budget -- 3:
• Propulsion system:• Motors : Nozzles behave differently at sea level
and in vacuum so compromises needed in design • Pumps• Plumbing• Gimbals
18
Mass Budget -- 4:
• Multiple iterations required• Interactions/relationships• Reusability implies:
More robust (and massive) structure, andThermal fatigue and shock issues for motors
19
Illustrative Interaction -- 1: A new definition: Net structural mass fraction
NFS or NMF = ( Ms - Mm ) / Mp
Ratio of structural mass less motor to propellant mass – also called net mass fraction or NMF
20
Variations:
Multiple motors:• Shut down and drop some motors part way
through burn• Atlas missilePropellant Transfer• Shift propellant from tanks that can be dropped• SpaceX Falcon Heavy? 22
An Alternative to Propellant Transfer:
• Instead of similar core and 2 side boosters with fuel transfer to core, have similar tankage with more motors supplied from side boosters and fewer from central core
• Eject side boosters and motors when fuel depleted 23
Cost Considerations: Dr. Dietrich E. Koelle: Transcost• Statistical-analytical model for cost estimation
and economical optimization of launch vehicles• Parametric cost estimation: Method of
estimating cost per unit mass• See Launch Vehicle Business Workshop .ppt
24