Understanding liquid fueled rocket engines

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around the complexities of pumping fuel to combustion chambers in liquid-fueled rocket engines. A major challenge is that high pressure in the combustion chamber can cause propellant to leak back into the fuel lines, necessitating the use of powerful turbopumps, which can account for a significant portion of launch costs. The energy for these pumps typically comes from combustion engines, not batteries, as they must overcome the high pressures generated during combustion. The Lunar Module (LEM) used a different approach by employing pressurized helium to push propellants into the engine, eliminating the need for pumps, which raises questions about the pressure dynamics involved. Ultimately, understanding the interplay between pressure, fuel dynamics, and combustion is crucial for comprehending rocket propulsion systems.
jostpuur
Messages
2,112
Reaction score
19
I'm troubled by the problem of pumping fuel to a combustion chamber. The big problem is that pressure cannot be directed in some particular direction. So when you see propellant leaving the chamber with a great pressure, it should be kept in mind that the propellant is attempting to leak, with the same pressure, back to the pipes through which the fuel is being injected. I have understood that most of the time the solution to this problem is that the liquid fueled rocket engines simply use extremely powerful pumps. I've found a following joke about this:

Turbopumps in rockets are important and problematic enough that launch vehicles using one have been caustically described as a 'turbopump with a rocket attached'- up to 55% of the total cost has been ascribed to this area.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turbopump

My first question is that where do these pumps get their energy from, like in Saturn V and in Space Shuttle? If you don't think about it much, you might think that perhaps some battery is enough to run the pumps, because it's the combustion chamber from where the real energy to the propulsion comes from, but that wouldn't make sense to me, because the pumps need to fight against the incredible pressure created in the chamber.

Is part of the energy that is generated in the chamber, somehow directed back to the pumps? How could one accomplish that? Or do the pumps have completely own combustion engines, like cylinder engines burning their own fuel?

Another fact which I have found surprising is that the LEM did not use pumps at all. I have the https://www.amazon.com/dp/1844256839/?tag=pfamazon01-20 and it says that

The Bell engineer's approach was to try and eliminate anything which could go wrong with the engine. They started by doing away with the ignition system, instead using hypergolic propellants which would ignite spontaneously when exposed to the vacuum of space. Propellant pumps were discarded by forcing the hypergolic reactants into the engine bell using a pressurised helium system.

By introducing a high-pressure inert gas into the tanks, the two propellants would be forced out evenly and together without the need for unreliable pumps.

I am left puzzled by this, because according to my intuition the helium injected to the tanks would need to be in equally high pressure as the pressure created in the combustion, meaning that equal thrust might as well be achieved by simply shooting out the pressurized helium.

Earlier I had also considered a question that perhaps burning a fuel in the rocket engines is useless, because one might achieve the same propulsion by simply using the pumps to shoot some passive propellant, like water. I have not understood the thermodynamics of this, but I have been left under impression, that if there are two engines, which both create the same pressure at the mouth of the chamber, but other one shoots lighter particles, and other one heavier particles, then the one with lighter particles would create stronger thrust. Although I don't feel like understanding why that would be the case, I believe that that is the way it is, because otherwise, according to my reasoning, the rockets would work just as well by merely shooting passive propellant with pumps.

But I'm still left unable to come up with an answer to how one could avoid the need of the LEM's helium to be in an unreasonably high pressure when released to the fuel tank.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
One possibility is that the LEM had valves which allowed propellant to only enter the chamber, but not leak back to the tanks. I guess this would mean that the burn was not continuous, but consisted of very rapid sequence of discrete explosions, the valves always closing when propellant explodes, and then opening again for new propellant to enter the chamber. I've never heard of such thing, but one cannot debunk such idea by watching videos only.
 
The pressure of the pump might be the same as the pressure of the gas in the combustion chamber, but the volume of the gas in the combustion chamber is much, much higher than the volume of the liquid being injected.
 
I see. That remark solves the biggest trouble.
 
Venus does not have a magnetosphere, so the Galactic Cosmic Rays (GCRs) environment shall be much worse than in a LEO environment. Looking to the std radiation models for Venus, the standard radiation-hard space level electronic component with tested immunity LET = 85 MeV-cm2/mg seems not enough, so, for example, a 1cm2 Si die will suffer considerable flux above this level during a long mission (10 years for example). So, the question is, usually we are not paying attention to latch-up...
Due to the constant never ending supply of "cool stuff" happening in Aerospace these days I'm creating this thread to consolidate posts every time something new comes along. Please feel free to add random information if its relevant. So to start things off here is the SpaceX Dragon launch coming up shortly, I'll be following up afterwards to see how it all goes. :smile: https://blogs.nasa.gov/spacex/
Thread 'SpaceX Starship development: 7th flight January 10'
Watch the progress live This is a fully stacked Starship (top) and Super Heavy (bottom). A couple of too-small-to-see cars near the bottom for scale, I also added a Saturn V and the Statue of Liberty for comparison. 120 meters tall, about 5000 tonnes when fully fueled. Twice the mass and over twice the thrust of Saturn V. The largest rocket ever built by mass, thrust, height, and payload capacity. N1 had the largest diameter.[/size] But its size is not the revolutionary part. It is designed...
Back
Top