Can Ion Thrusters with Continuous Iron Expulsion Power Interplanetary Probes?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion explores the feasibility of using ion thrusters with continuous iron expulsion as a means of propulsion for interplanetary probes, particularly focusing on the implications of accelerating iron to 80% of the speed of light. The scope includes theoretical considerations, technical challenges, and the energy requirements involved in such a propulsion system.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that accelerating one ounce of iron to 80% of the speed of light could theoretically provide thrust for an interplanetary probe, while others question the practicality of such an approach due to energy requirements.
  • One participant highlights that using a railgun as a thruster presents challenges, such as the need for sequential loading of projectiles and the difficulty of maintaining electrical connections in space.
  • Concerns are raised about the potential damage to the railgun at near-light speeds and the limitations on aiming projectiles accurately to avoid hazards in space.
  • A participant discusses the relationship between reaction mass and energy source, noting that an external energy source would be required to accelerate the iron, which complicates the design.
  • Another participant presents a mathematical comparison of using different masses of iron as reaction mass, suggesting that a larger mass accelerated to a lower velocity could yield greater ship velocity under the same energy constraints.
  • Some participants note that while the concept of such a thruster exists, achieving 80% of the speed of light would necessitate a particle accelerator and would be highly inefficient compared to current ion thruster technologies.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views, with some agreeing on the theoretical possibility of the concept while others emphasize the significant practical challenges and inefficiencies involved. No consensus is reached regarding the feasibility of the proposed propulsion method.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the dependence on external energy sources, unresolved technical challenges related to the railgun design, and the implications of high-speed projectiles in space.

philip porhammer
Messages
20
Reaction score
2
TL;DR
if one once of Iron was accelerated to 80% of the speed of light, could this be use of as a means of thrust for an interplanetary probe?
if one once of Iron was accelerated to 80% of the speed of light, could this be use of as a means of thrust for an interplanetary probe? where the probe has a continuous expulsion of Iron. and ignoring the need massive amount of power.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Yes, throwing an object in space gives you a reaction force that moves you in the opposite direction.

If you don't care about the weight of the probe or the massive use of power, do you care how many billions of years it takes to get to the destination?
 
If used as a thruster, will it direct the beam of projectiles towards the Earth and satellites?
A railgun must fire a sequence of discrete projectiles, each must be sequentially loaded.
The rails must connect electrically to the projectile or sabot. How will the plasma “brushes” needed to complete the circuit be provided in space without an atmosphere? At near light speed, the damage to the rails will be significant.
 
philip porhammer said:
...80% of the speed of light...
If the release speed is low (below the escape velocity of the solar system) you must aim very accurately to have something big to safely stop them somewhere - this limits the directions available for the acceleration.
If the release speed is (very) high, then you have more freedom (unless somebody from outside comes to complain, of course 😉 ) but you need insane amount of energy provided in very short time - the time spent in the 'gun' will be short (this also means insane wear on the 'gun').

In short - in theory it is possible: in reality there are limits: but still, it is just not practical.
 
philip porhammer said:
if one once of Iron was accelerated to 80% of the speed of light, could this be use of as a means of thrust for an interplanetary probe? where the probe has a continuous expulsion of Iron. and ignoring the need massive amount of power.
If you remove the "r", you're describing a thruster that already exists.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Likes   Reactions: Vanadium 50 and anorlunda
philip porhammer said:
Summary: if one once of Iron was accelerated to 80% of the speed of light, could this be use of as a means of thrust for an interplanetary probe?

if one once of Iron was accelerated to 80% of the speed of light, could this be use of as a means of thrust for an interplanetary probe? where the probe has a continuous expulsion of Iron. and ignoring the need massive amount of power.
In this case, your reaction mass and energy source don't come from the same thing (unlike typical rocket fuel where your fuel provides both, and adding more fuel means adding both reaction mass and energy supply.)

So you need an external energy source to accelerate your iron.
This brings up an interesting issue: Assuming a fixed available amount of energy, you get a "bigger bang" in terms of ship velocity with lower reaction mass velocity.
Simple example: Assume a energy store of 1000 J, and a ship mass of 1000 kg
We will compare two scenarios:
Using a 1 kg hunk of iron as reaction mass
Using a 10 kg hunk of iron as reaction mass

with 1000 J of energy, you can accelerate a 1kg mass up to 44.72 m/s, and a 10 kg mass up to 14.14 m/s

Now we use the rocket equation:

V = ve ln(Mi[\sub]/Mf)
V is the velocity change for our ship
ve = the exhaust velocity ( calculated above)
Mi[\sub] is the total initial mass (ship mass+ reaction mass)
Mf is the final mass (ship mass alone)

In the first scenario we get
V= 44.72m/s * ln(1001 kg/1000 kg) = 0.0447 m/s for our ship velocity.

In the second scenario, we get:
V= 14.14 m/s * (1010 kg/1000 kg) = 0.141 m/s for our ship.

In other words, you get better than 3 times the ship velocity accelerating the larger mass to a lower exhaust velocity with the same energy budget.
 
  • Like
  • Informative
Likes   Reactions: member 656954 and Torbert
russ_watters said:
If you remove the "r", you're describing a thruster that already exists.
Not at 80% the speed of light, however, that would need a big particle accelerator and it would be very inefficient. Ion thrusters have typical exhaust velocities of tens of kilometers per second, or ~0.01%-0.02% the speed of light.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: russ_watters

Similar threads

Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 40 ·
2
Replies
40
Views
4K
  • · Replies 45 ·
2
Replies
45
Views
12K
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 52 ·
2
Replies
52
Views
20K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K