Indeed, I did 200/40, my mistake. That does bring it into the realm of
practical thrust for a fixed wing UAV, but then the tight thrust band
doesn't make sense as the acceleration would be constantly increasing.
On Fri, Mar 5, 2021 at 6:53 PM roxanna Mason <rocketmaster.ken@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
40/200= 0.2Lb/sec X 600 = 120Lb of propellant, but yes a liquid bi or mono
prop sounds good.
k
On Fri, Mar 5, 2021 at 5:07 AM Ben Brockert <wikkit@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Fundamentally; why? This is a good application for a liquid rocket if
it has to be a rocket. But at 200s Isp that's 3000 lb of propellant,
so 40 lbf thrust isn't very useful if it's a propulsion application.
If it doesn't have to be a rocket and it's operating in air then this
is what jet engines are for. Much higher Isp and a 50lbf engine is
COTS hardware a lot cheaper than the development cost of any rocket.
On Tue, Mar 2, 2021 at 6:07 AM Dr Edward Jones <RocketPioneer@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Suppose you were assigned to design a long-burn, low-thrust solid
propellant motor with these characteristics, what would be your grain
configuration, case type, and general formulation:
Burn time 10-min (600 sec)
Nominal thrust 40-lbf at sea level
Operational use <10,000-ft elevation
Would your grain design keep thrust within +/- 10% of nominal?