Designing an Annular Aerospike Engine: Collaborating with Other Groups

[griffin]

I am a part of a student organization that will be atempting to design, machine, and test fire an Annulare Aerospike engine. We are now in the info gathering phase and finding it difficult to locate informative and helpful information on the design part. If anyone has any ideas, please either reply to this or E-mail me.

If there are other groups that are trying to build an annular aerospike then please get intouch so that we can help each other!

thanks in advance for the help!

 

[Arctic Fox]

First, some background for those of us who’ve not information:

Linear aerospike rocket engines have been around for more than thirty years. Based on a concept developed by the Air Force's Propulsion Directorate in the early 1960s, Rocketdyne, now Boeing North American - Rocketdyne, developed the technology for both linear and annular aerospike engines during the mid-1960s, ground testing various designs into the 1970s. Rocketdyne proposed the aerospike engine for use on the Space Shuttle, but the engine was turned down because the technology was considered too immature at the time. Since then, Rocketdyne has accomplished 73 laboratory and ground-test firings, with over 4,000 seconds of operation of this type engine. Rocketdyne has spent over $500 million over the years to test and improve aerospike engine technology. Recent improvements funded by the Air Force in the early 1990s made it possible to improve the manufacturing of aerospike engine thrust cells, while modern performance sensors and monitoring controls enable split-second engine control.

The linear aerospike engine is very similar to normal rocket engines in its plumbing and accessories, utilizing similar components, such as turbopumps. However, one of the major differences, and the most notable, is the absence of a bell-shaped nozzle. The linear aerospike engine uses the atmosphere as part of its nozzle, with the surrounding airflow containing the rocket's exhaust plume. This keeps the engine at optimum performance and efficiency along the entire trajectory of ascent to orbit. Traditional rocket engines cannot compensate for atmospheric changes, from low altitude and high atmospheric pressure, to high altitude and low atmospheric pressure. So, they are designed for a particular performance range in an effort to get the best performance from them.

Another major difference is that linear aerospike engines are 75 percent smaller than normal rocket engines of.comparable thrust. The smaller design means less engine weight and less engine support structure required, which allows for lighter spacecraft . This will result in lower cost to launch a vehicle into orbit.

Links:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aerospike
http://www.csulb.edu/colleges/coe/ae/rockets/aerospike/static_4-28-02.htm
http://www.spaceflightnow.com/news/n0404/19aerospike/
http://www.engineeringatboeing.com/articles/nozzledesign.html
http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/x-33/97-251.htm

Visuals:
Image1: http://www.up-ship.com/AandE/spike1.jpg
Image2: http://www.boeing.com/defense-space/space/propul/images/spot_xrs2200.jpg

 

[griffin]

Thank you very much for the start. I will probably contact Rocketdyne to get more info on what I will need to do.

Thanks again