Giant nuclear powered combustion engine

  • Thread starter Antiphon
  • Start date
1,675
3
Has enyone (in the realm of fiction even) proposed making an enourmous
piston engine that would use nuclear weapons instead of atomized
hydrocarbons? (Sure, it would have to be BIG. But its possible, no?)
 
Last edited:
You could consider Project ORION a nuclear-piston engine, without the engine-proper. :tongue:
 

Morbius

Science Advisor
Dearly Missed
1,125
5
Antiphon said:
Has enyone (in the realm of fiction even) proposed making an enourmous
piston engine that would use nuclear weapons instead of atomized
hydrocarbons? (Sure, it would have to be BIG. But its possible, no?)
Antiphon,

With the exception of Project ORION - in which a spacecraft is propelled
by ejecting a nuclear weapon and when the weapon exploded some distance
away and some momentum recovered by a big "pusher plate" - I would say
that a nuclear piston engine is NOT possible.

The problem is that any nuclear explosion; even the smallest that we could
ever make; is much too large and hot to contain with any kind of piston
and cylinder as in an engine.

In ORION, one only recovers a portion of the energy - which saves the ship.

The "first wall" of any type of piston engine is going to be vaporized
when it sees the nuclear device explode. [ It's a tough enough job to
consruct the "first wall" for a BB-sized fusion capsule. ]

Dr. Gregory Greenman
Physicist
 
911
0
Morbius said:
The "first wall" of any type of piston engine is going to be vaporized when it sees the nuclear device explode.
Yet the Orion pusher plate would not be vaporized.
 
911
0
Project Pacer fitted with piston engines instead of turbines

Antiphon said:
Has enyone (in the realm of fiction even) proposed making an enourmous piston engine that would use nuclear weapons instead of atomized hydrocarbons?
I would call it a reciprocating heat engine. I suspect the reason why nuclear-powered reciprocating heat engines have not been theorized is that turbines tend to be more efficient. There are designs for nuclear explosions powering turbines. Richard Garwin described one called Project Pacer in his book https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0375403949. That design involved a large excavated cavern lined with steel and fitted with turbines. Water is injected in-between explosions. This helps keep things cool and provides steam for the turbines. Explosions occur once per day. Fusion bombs are used, instead of fission bombs, for greater efficiency. 365 fusion bombs are used per year.

If you could make a fusion-explosion turbine power plant such as this, there seems to be no reason why you could not make a fusion-explosion reciprocating power plant. There would be a difference, though, in that you are thinking of one giant piston, whereas a truer analog of the Project Pacer power plant would be a steel-lined cavity with many small reciprocating steam engines fitted to it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
what if instead of turbines or pistons couldnt u contain such a blast with an electromagnetic field then as far as heat goes couldnt u use that new metal we discovered called carbon carbon which is supposed to with stand the heat of the sun?
 

QuantumPion

Science Advisor
Gold Member
902
42
Well I suppose you could make a fission-powered piston engine if you use very small amounts of fissile material and an external neutron source to "ignite" it. How to get a very high flux of thermal neutrons that you can turn on and off on demand without using more energy then the engine makes would be a problem though.
 
Even if you could get it to work, wouldn't the amount of energy you'd need to create, move and detonate the nuclear devices severely offset the total efficiency of the whole process?
 
148
0
Yet the Orion pusher plate would not be vaporized.
With Orion they allowed for some ablation of the pusher plate, but even that was minimized by spraying a thin layer of oil on the plate before each shot.

You can read some details here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Orion_(nuclear_propulsion)" [Broken]

There are some nice illustrations here:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/xeni/sets/72157594329917915/" [Broken]

There is also a book: Project Orion: The True Story of the Atomic Spaceship By George Dyson
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Astronuc

Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
18,553
1,682
Orion was problematic for a number of reasons - mass of a huge number of detonators being one.

Please also note that the thread to which robo warrior responded has a last post of Jul15-05. It is 4 years, 4 months old.
 

Related Threads for: Giant nuclear powered combustion engine

Replies
27
Views
6K
  • Posted
2 3
Replies
61
Views
10K
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • Posted
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • Posted
Replies
4
Views
13K
  • Posted
Replies
3
Views
7K
  • Posted
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • Posted
Replies
2
Views
2K

Physics Forums Values

We Value Quality
• Topics based on mainstream science
• Proper English grammar and spelling
We Value Civility
• Positive and compassionate attitudes
• Patience while debating
We Value Productivity
• Disciplined to remain on-topic
• Recognition of own weaknesses
• Solo and co-op problem solving
Top