[AR] Re: KNO3/Sucrose vs Peroxide for gas generation
- From: "Monroe L. King Jr." <monroe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: arocket@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2015 14:44:57 -0700
Llyod
Duh run ProPep I was up late and that didn't occur up me because I
haven't use it in that way before. Yes, the solidus may be an issue in
my use. I'm getting serious about trying an automotive turbocharger as a
turbine for a turbopump.
I'm not too worried about the solids building up on the turbine but it
may build up and close the gaps around the turbine during operation.
It occurs to me that a turbocharger operates at about 30 PSI of turbine
inlet pressure (a mild turbocharger) a centrifugal supercharger running
at about the same speed has about 60 Horsepower parasitic drag so I
would think the turbocharger could produce about that same amount of
horsepower minus say 20% for the reduction gearing.
I want to start off with KNO3/Sucrose and I;m trying to figure out and
end burning propellant charge that will give the proper pressure and
volume of gas.
I know peroxide would be better but I can afford to run some test and
burn up a few used turbochargers if necessary just trying it out.
Using only the hot side and I want to put one of these inertial
dynomometers on the output shaft. The construction of the reduction gear
is much like the centrifugal supercharger design in reverse using just
spur gears instead of the helical's to prevent thrust and I don't care
about the noise.
Monroe
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: [AR] Re: KNO3/Sucrose vs Peroxide for gas generation
> From: Lloyd Droppers <ldroppers@xxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Thu, February 26, 2015 10:01 am
> To: arocket@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>
> Monroe,
> This is a function of many variables, namely pressure, concentration of
> peroxide, and mixture ratio of KNO3/Sucrose. Unfortunately there is not one
> answer with a volume ratio, and you should really learn how to run CEA or
> ProPEP to get your answer.
>
> But, just for fun, lets assume 85% H2O2 at 500 psi and 100% decomposition.
> That is a 1370 kg/m^3 liquid, and from CEA we get 10.1 kg/m^3. So a *136-1
> *ratio.
>
> And for the sugar if I use nakka KNSU 65/35 formulation
> <http://www.nakka-rocketry.net/sucrose.html> I get, 1800 kg/m^3 as cast,
> and from CEA an 10.2 kg/m^3 density. so 176-1 but it is as 1690 K which is
> to hot for a GG. So dropping this down to a 1200K temp, which is still
> quite hot for a gas generator, at a 1.2 O/F gives 11.4 kg/m^3. So*
> 160-1 *assuming
> the same as cast density. But you have a significant amount of K2CO3 and
> some carbon in the exhaust as a liquid or solid.
>
> So KNSU is a little higher, but it is hotter, and has a bunch of Potassium
> Carbonate in the exhaust. But we obviously didn't count pressurization or
> feed systems with the budget, or any grain geometry for the KNSU so these
> are rough numbers only.
>
> And if you don't mind why don't you tell us some more details about your
> work that you might think a KNSU gas generator is a good idea? Because the
> list is good at answering detailed amateur and small professional rocket
> questions, even if as I am sure you are aware, it tends to go off the rails
> occasionally.
>
> Lloyd
> projectearendel.com
>
> On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 11:16 PM, Monroe L. King Jr. <
> monroe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > Guy's
> > I'm looking for data on gas volume generation peroxide vs KNO3/Sucrose
> > I need to know the difference in volume ratio between the 2 propellants
> > by weight.
> >
> > Monroe
> >
> >
Other related posts: