[AR] Re: New TAN patent: claiming the F-1.

  • From: Henry Spencer <hspencer@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: arocket@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2016 13:07:44 -0400 (EDT)

On Wed, 13 Jul 2016, David Gregory wrote:

Wrt to the expander, seems likely to apply best to an open expander type where you would burn the turbine drive for a little extra ISP

Which is another thing that *ought* to qualify as "obvious to one skilled in the art", since afterburning in the turbine-drive gas stream is not a new idea -- see, e.g., the Manski paper in JP&P Sept/Oct 1998. Although Manski talked about it mostly in the context of a gas-generator cycle, not an expander cycle -- don't remember whether he explicitly mentioned applying it to an expander -- that's not a big leap.

(His conclusion, incidentally, was that gas-generator with afterburning looked competitive with staged combustion, maybe even slightly better if done carefully. Its average Isp is a bit lower, but the pump hardware and gas plumbing are lighter. An optimized system is a little complicated, because you need multi-stage pumps to match pressures to needs.)

Henry

Other related posts: