Well Ed, from a liquid point of view take the F-1, H-1,etc, their GG's
utilize LOx/Kerosene like the main propulsion system, it generates hot but
not too hot, gas to drive the turbopumps before being discharged overboard
usually to generate a little bit of token thrust. In the case of the H-1 I
believe 1KLbF.
I wouldn't consider thrust or no thrust a criteria to be a GG only that it
does what it says.
So back to the original topic of the long burn, after thinking about it,
not a big deal after all. So my vote is Aerojet designed a GG with the
desired exhaust temp and burn duration and discharged it through a nozzle
and probably has a low c* because of the low temp so the throat wouldn't
erode too much if at all.
Ken
On Thu, Feb 25, 2021 at 5:15 PM Dr Edward Jones <RocketPioneer@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Agreed. Politicians, frijoles, and air-bags are fine gas generators.
And while every reaction motor is also a gas generator, not all are
reaction motors. Or are they?
Edw
On 2/25/21, roxanna Mason <rocketmaster.ken@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Maybe 'Politician' would be a better description, they both generate gas.cylindrical
Do you have a better idea Ed.
Ken
On Thu, Feb 25, 2021 at 2:58 PM Dr Edward Jones <RocketPioneer@xxxxxxxxx
wrote:
K, am I confused in thinking that a solid-propellant thrust chamber
with two nozzles pointing aft is NOT a rocket motor? Is the SRB "just
a gas generator" also? Was the Jetex-50 just a gas generator with a
hole in the aft closure? Grin. I do not know how to define a gas
generator, other than say NM frijoles usually do the trick, unless
epazote is added.
Edward
On 2/25/21, roxanna Mason <rocketmaster.ken@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
It's not a rocket motor in the conventional sense,it's just a gascase
generator, plenty of room in that bulbous fuselage.
K
On Thu, Feb 25, 2021 at 2:37 PM DH Barr <dhbarr@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
US3031347A ?
On Thursday, February 25, 2021, roxanna Mason
<rocketmaster.ken@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
The Jet-X I had as a kid burned double digits seconds with twoabout 1/2" long each so my guess it burn rate was ~0.1"/sec. and the
grains
Radioplanenever even got to red heat. Yes it's GN and left a green ash so not
all
of
the grain was expelled out the nozzle.
Ken - Former Socorro resident and consultant to EMRTC.wrote:
On Thu, Feb 25, 2021 at 1:09 PM Dr Edward Jones
<RocketPioneer@xxxxxxxxx>
The Aerojet 530NS-35 solid motor was designed to propel the
RP-76 target drone. It produced 36-lbf (160N) for about nine
minutes,
empowering the target to fly at Mach 0.95 and up to 60,000-ft.
Twin exhaust nozzles extended from the wastebasket-size
ofamotor. I have seen the motors at Aerojet in 1959, but wasn't then
curious about the propellant or grain. Now I realize that "NS"
referred to a "nitrate-type" oxidized system, and suspect that
guanidine nitrate was the key ingredient. But how, pray tell,
design
solid grain with nine-minutes burn time?
Perhaps an end-burner encased in a spiral tube, with a burn rate
grain. No?millimeters per second?
At 0.1"/sec burn rate, that's a fifty-three inch long end-burning
motor?
I cannot image an end-burn grain of any geometry that gives a
long-term even thrust, no matter the concept. My experience with
end-burn solid grains is they tend to "cone" into concave burn
surfaces that become progressively larger, in brief periods of
time.
What's your notion how they made a 530-sec burn in a wastebasket
size
Exhaust nozzles, white, can be seen in the photos here:
https://www.ewarbirds.org/aircraft/aqm38target.shtml
Edward